Alabama, Florida, North Carolina Look to Arm Teachers After Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Shooting

Alabama – Rep. Will Ainsworth of Guntersville, candidate for Lieutenant Governor, is lobbying for arming [willing] teachers in the state’s public school system. “Our children are sitting ducks in gun-free schools, and as the parent of three public school students,” Ainsworth said in a press release, “I believe we must act now in order to prevent another tragedy,”

Florida – Sen. Dennis Baxley has refiled a bill that would give teachers and staff the opportunity to be armed. Sen. Baxley stated to WESH 2 News in Orlando“You’re going to have incidents. It’s empowering people to act so they have responsibility for the safety of these children.” [In Florida, the chances of Campus Carry for Teachers and Staff has been an uphill battle due to Republican Turncoats like Sen. Anitere Flores and Sen. Rene Garcia.]

North Carolina – Rep. Larry Pittman is currently drafting a bill that would allow teachers to be armed on campus. “We have to get over this useless hysteria about guns and allow school personnel to have a chance to defend their lives and those of their students,” Pittman told The Charlotte News and Observer.

Meanwhile in New Mexico, teachers are taking things into their own hands.



  1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    “We have to get over this useless hysteria about guns.” – It all boils down to this.

    1. avatar Craig in IA says:

      Arming willing and trained staff members is the only solution to this. The firearms would have to be on-person (no purses, etc) and totally concealed at all times. Exactly who is armed would have to be kept secret and if students discovered a teacher with a firearm the teacher would have to leave the program.

      We have to admit we already have a problem with guns making it into gun-free zones and always will. I taught public education for 40 years and understand both kids and adults- the vast majority of adults trying to solve the problem are treating kids like adults, which they’re not, and many are willing to give up personal liberty for supposed security in the name of “doing it for the children”.

      Were I armed and in a class room during an active shooter event, I’d lock the door and turn off the lights (if possible, that wasn’t possible in the last place I taught), hustle my students into a corner with the furthest visibility of the door way, put my desk and lots of barricade materials around it in clear view of the door and steady my Glock 43 on the door way on top of my coat or other material as was available. If someone broke through the door with a firearm it would be fairly simple to put some rounds through the center of the doorway and center of mass and things would likely be over. The shooter certainly wouldn’t be expecting it, and when word got around things would slacken off fairly quickly. Sadly, we may never give this a try, but other than confiscate every privately owned firearm, which still wouldn’t work, most everything else has failed miserably. The most difficult part of training staff, especially teachers, would be to convince them that they would actually have to shoot, that there would be no other choice.

  2. avatar AFGus says:

    I live in North Carolina and support Rep. Pittman’s legislation 1000%! Gun Free Zones are a travesty and State sponsored Killing Fields. They need to go away, and the Teachers and Administrators in our schools need to be trained to protect our kids. I have no doubts that many of them are already trained in firearms use and have personal CCW permits just like I do. This is “real common sense” legislation. Not the liberal so-called common sense legislation that’s full of “Feelz”, that will prevent absolutely nothing!

  3. avatar Ranger Rick says:

    Tbe Florida legislation needs to prohibit school districts like Broward from not reporting criminal violations (drug & violence) like Cruz’s to local law enforcement. That’s how Criz was expelled, but had no criminal record.

  4. avatar Shire-man says:

    But the feels! Wont somebody think of the feels!

  5. avatar Gman says:

    Take it to the next step. Require, for employment, all teachers be qualified to carry. That way we might get rid of at least some of their liberal indoctrination of our kids.

  6. Your opening a can of worms doing this,

    Not to mention it didn’t work and never worked in the first place.

    There were armed guards already at school and they did nothing. Just like the “good guys with guns” that ran away from the Vegas spree killer. Or the “good guy with a gun” that surrendered when some NRA nut attacked a college back in October of 2015. And the “good guy” that failed to save 26 people when another gun “rights” nut attacked a church.

    There have been NO CASES of “good guys” ever stopping a mass shooting let averting one.

    Australia, Europe, Canada let alone Japan does not have these attacks on a constant daily basis.

    We get it, You people value your guns more than the lives of children, So we have to give up more of our freedoms so you paranoid bats can carry guns that won’t do jack squat to stop a mass shooter combine with turning schools into correctional facilities and treating innocent students as if they were convicts.

    1. avatar txJM says:

      You don’t get it, at all.

    2. avatar Joe says:

      Facing reality is not paranoia. Good guys stop mass killing sprees all the time but don’t make the headlines because when the killer is stopped it no longer qualifies as a “mass shooting”. All of the left’s solutions to this problem have not worked, “gun free zones”?
      You don’t really want a solution you just want to confiscate guns.

    3. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      You are the worst kind of liar. The blood of these innocent kids are on your hands. You belong on the gallows next to cruz. You enable him and his kind. In a just world you would share his punishment.

      I’m working for a just world.

    4. avatar bobo says:

      you must be nuts??

      please seek help?

      ahhh the Texas church—the good guy…was nearby and does not run at ‘flash’ speeds??

      one than one guard in florida?? NEVER heard that one?
      But did hear there was one on the campus that COVERS 48 ACRES! we are not talking a one room school house on the prairie here –nutter boy!

      how anyone can watch or read the media and still get it all this wrong is amazing!

    5. avatar uncommon_sense says:


      First of all, absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence. The fact that you are not aware of examples where an armed defender stopped a spree-killer does NOT mean that it does not happen.

      Second of all, the overwhelming majority of venues where spree-killers attack are “gun-free zones” (by local/state law or company policy) where defenders who would normally be armed are unarmed. Thus it should be no surprise that very few armed defenders are ever in “gun-free zones” and almost never stop spree-killers.

      Third, “gun-free zones” are abject failures at stopping spree-killers and yet your side says that is no reason to prohibit the practice. Well, even if armed defenders are abject failures at stopping spree-killers, that is no reason to prohibit that practice.

    6. avatar Chris T from KY says:

      Don’t you Miss your glory hole???

      I know that you would receive much more pleasure there or give much more pleasure there, than coming to TTAG.
      Just please go away.

      1. avatar Casey says:

        Hey now – we don’t want crazy people at the glory holes, either. That’s how you get your junk sliced off.

    7. avatar Chip in Florida says:

      “…There have been NO CASES of “good guys” ever stopping a mass shooting let averting one.”

      [citation needed]

      Back up your claim or it’s a lie.

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        It’s a complete lie. Even if you don’t count police or armed security as “good guys with guns,” there have been numerous cases of armed citizens stopping mass shooters. One of the earliest modern school shootings was 1997 Pearl, MS shooting where a vice principal, Joel Myrick, retrieved a Colt 1911 from his truck and detained the shooter. Do we get to count the 2007 New Life Church shooting where an armed church member fired on the shooter?

        Of course, most of these incidents occur in gun free zones where civilians without a badge aren’t allowed to even have the opportunity to use guns. If there are armed guards or police on the scene when the shooting starts, there tend to be few available, or they are often stationed at specific locations on large campuses with long response times. There are exceptions, like 2013’s Arapahoe High School where the shooter only fired 5 shots before the on site deputy closed in and the shooter suicided. Locations where the victims are disarmed by law obviously are going to be few cases of armed resistance. This even includes the Fort Hood shootings, Chattanooga recruiting office shootings, and Washington Navy Yard shooting where ordinary soldiers, marines, and sailors weren’t allowed to be armed.

  7. “There have been NO REPORTS OF CASES of “good guys” ever stopping a mass shooting let alone averting one.” There, fixed it for you

    1. avatar Casey says:

      Oregon mall? Concealed carrier confronts killer, killer immediately retreats and offs himself.

      Followup: Any DGU where the newly-ventilated subject was no longer in any position to continue their aggression. I know, it can’t be a mass shooting if the shooter is stopped before they hit critical mass. Convenient, that.

  8. avatar rudukai13 says:

    Colorado state Rep. Patrick Neville will be presenting his bill to allow CCW licensees to carry on school grounds tomorrow (Wednesday, 2/21) in the State Affairs committee, along with two other pro-gun bills;

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    I’m skeptical. Not because arming adults in schools wouldn’t work — I think it would. I’m skeptical because of what I know about teachers. They aren’t part of the solution; they are a major part of the problem, and most of them would rather curl up in a ball than arm up for personal safety and the safety of the kids.

    1. avatar BlazinTheAmazin says:

      This will probably be effective in areas with a strong gun culture already and will do very little in areas that don’t value gun rights as strongly. Hopefully it saves lives and it is certainly a step in the right direction.

      1. avatar bryan1980 says:

        Kind of the point I was going to make. Most of these incidents occur at big schools in big school districts; just the kind of people that would never turn loose of their precious “gun-free zone”.

        Small town America gets it.

    2. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      The shooter should never make it to the classroom. There are plenty of retired vets out here that would be happy and willing to patrol their local schools at no charge.

      Do away with target rich zones and tweak liability laws just a little and we would provide our own guns and ammo.

      1. avatar roger says:

        I’d sign up today, if they opened up that kind of thing in Virginia.

    3. avatar Chip in Florida says:

      “…and most of them would rather curl up in a ball than arm u”


      But that is still no reason to prevent the few others who are willing from doing so.

    4. avatar Higgs says:


      I hear what your saying. However if only 1 in ten school staff was armed, it would make an effective deterrent because the criminal would not know who of the ten people had a gun.

  10. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Even if it never stopped a single spree shooting, but only succeeded in dissuading liberal teachers from continuing a teaching career or taking one up in the first place, I’m all for it.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “…but only succeeded in dissuading liberal teachers from continuing a teaching career or taking one up in the first place, I’m all for it.”

      *Snicker* 😉

  11. avatar DrSchmancy says:

    What if a teacher gets stressed out and snaps? Any thoughts on that?

    1. avatar Mas Cool Arrow says:

      What’s stopping them now? A sign on the door saying you can’t bring a gun in does nothing to deter someone that is intent on inflicting pain and suffering. Classrooms are full of improvised weapons according to the run, hide, fight bullschit training I had to sit through.

    2. avatar DrSchmancy says:

      You’re bringing shame to the name, bro.

      That was such a stupid statement I’ll have to tell mom.

    3. avatar Chip in Florida says:

      “..What if a teacher gets stressed out and snaps? Any thoughts on that?”

      So you are saying you don’t trust the teachers now? And yet you still put your kids in their care for up to nine hours a day?

  12. avatar Kendahl says:

    At least some people have the right idea although the chances of its getting through are negligible in Florida.

    Someone should ask the anti-gun kids who have been on TV news this question: Had you been standing behind Cruz with a weapon (not necessarily a firearm) that would have terminated his attack by seriously injuring or killing him, would you have used it? (I suspect they would not.)

  13. avatar million says:

    i’m a big fan of the Israeli Model of hardening the soft targets by arming the teachers and new/remodel construction designed to mitigate threats.

  14. avatar MamaLiberty says:

    An entirely viable alternative is almost never mentioned…

    The real danger to children every single day, across the entire country, is the socialist mind destroying indoctrination in government “schools,” of all kinds. Get your children out of these killing fields. Parents are responsible for the education and safety of their children. If you leave your children in those schools, you are part of the problem… not the solution.

    1. avatar Chris T from KY says:

      I have read estimates of at least 1 million students homeschooled in America. And they left because of falling standards. If the safety is not improved dramatically with armed guards concealed carry then I would expect at least a million more parents will pull their children out of the public school system for safety reasons that I think would have great benefits in many ways in for our country.

  15. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    It was Wayne LaPierre in his speech “the only way to stop a bad guy is, with a good guy with a gun” after the Sandy Hook massacre he said there should be armed guards in schools.

    And everyone laughed at him. And here we are in 2018 and how many dozens more children have been killed in school massacres and now finally people woken up.
    Perhaps we’ll have armed guards soon.

  16. avatar Don says:

    Without qualified immunity you’re only going to encourage wrongful death suits against teachers who are not qualified for an armed encounter of the type you’re expecting. Only a thoroughly trained, equipped and supported law enforcement officer will work. Otherwise all you have is a teacher with a gun in his pocket. Perhaps we could have roving patrolles by designated officers, who cover a whole district and are connected with state and county police by radio spending hours of patrols at various schools on a random basis. This would hold down cost while creating a police presence. Private will not do, they all need qualified immunity.

    1. avatar Steve K says:

      We already have those. It’s called the Good Samaritan law.

  17. avatar Jim Bullock says:


    Now, there’s a better answer to “Something must be done!”

    Cool, you can allow guns to protect kids at school in close to no time, just like those guys did. BTW, just like Lurch LaPierre of the NRA said years ago. I blame this round of deaths on you, and frankly, your blind hatred of the NRA stopping you from considering things that actually work. That is, of course, unless you want kids to die?

  18. avatar sound awake says:

    lets get this straight right now

    its not arming teachers

    nor is it allowing concealed carry in schools

    its restoring teachers NATURAL RIGHT to defend themselves

    gun free zones always have been a particularly egregious and despicable violation of human rights

    no more

  19. avatar Mister Fleas says:

    An article about what the Israelis have done to stop mass murders:

    It is a good read.

  20. avatar don foster says:

    I will accept that guns and access to them aren’t the problem when anybody can explain to me the difference in per-capita gun deaths between the U.S. and any developed western country with strict gun control. e.g UK – 2% of US percapita gun deaths, Canada – 20% of US percapita gun deaths, Australia 10% of US per capita gun deaths, and on, and on. Even within the US, states that have stricter gun control laws have far fewer percapita gun deaths.…/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps… And one cannot claim that people just use other means to murder in other countries, as the US general murder rate is still 4X what it is in most western countries. You can say guns themselves aren’t the problem, but only if you can explain the overwhelming difference surrounding levels of gun control in western countries.. And this is not a rhetorical question. Explain.

    1. avatar Owen says:

      There you go.

      Or are going to continue to cherry pick statistics right? Right?

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Here is a better source to answer your question:

      It turns out counting is not so simple. Different countries count differently. For example, America counts all known homicides as homicides while England and Wales only count homicides in which a conviction has taken place.

      If access to guns is the “cause” we are trying to investigate, this is often counted wrong too. Many countries study gun per person. If the “super owner” is an actual thing, then access in America is much lower than reported. In Israel and Switzerland, households with at least a gun are very high, but technically the government owns the guns, so they are often not counted, making it appear as if there is a low rate of households with a firearm.

      Furthermore, the rate of gun deaths is irrelevant, whether talking about suicides, murders, or accidental homicides. I believe lawful intentional homicides (self defense/defense of others/defense of property) should not be counted. (We count those, usually only once, but as many as four times in one study with ties to a gun control group). The total number of deaths in the category of interest should be counted. Anything else is just an deceptive argument against guns.

      There are a number of problems with cross-sectional studies. The link above discusses some of them.

      One problem with comparing “guns” with “crime death” is that you are ignoring other factors like “big cities.” Big cities have a drastically higher murder rate than the country and smaller and average sized cities. The country usually has a vastly higher ownership rate of firearms as well. Going back to how England and Wales count homicides, the information in the link reveals that they have a vastly higher homicide conviction rate than America does. I’d be willing to bet that has a much greater effect on crime than any gun laws. When determining the causal relationship of two things in society (here guns and murder), one must control for all the other things that contribute to the thing being caused (murder).

      The comparison is better done with smaller units and larger sample sizes. It is also better done with those same things over time before and after the causal relationship being studied (here that would be a change in “guns,” “access to guns,” and/or “gun control”).

      If you take just some of the things I mentioned into account, the correlative (not even causal) relationship disappears. For example, if you count homicides the same in America as is done in England and Wales, then America’s homicide rate is cut in half. Take into account a couple more factors (especially hand picked ones), and the correlative relationship will (definitely) reverse.

      I hope this was helpful.

  21. avatar Libertarian says:

    any state should folow utah

  22. avatar luigi says:

    I didn’t know the Charlotte Observer and the Raleigh News & Observer combined to form one super newspaper 🙂

    Hopefully all these bills will pass

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email