We had a shooting in a high-school about 3-block from my home a few years ago. Both of my kids went to that HS. It did not get much national publicity because the killer (a student who was in trouble about illegal drugs and had been suspended) did not kill a bunch of kids. He only shot the Assistant Principals. The killer was actually after the Principal, but he was out. Then the killer had the decency to kill himself.

What I noticed about the reports was that the very first person the killer ran into when he entered the school was a “school resource officer”. The officer was unarmed and took off running as soon as she saw the kid with guns. I learned from the reports that the “resource officer” was a sworn Policeman, paid for through the police department (not the school), and that there was one in each high school in town. Then I learned that EVERY one of the “resource officers” was unarmed.

What the hell good is an police officer who is unarmed? Is this done anywhere else? BTW, the police and the schools looked at the unarmed policy after the shooting and both decided not to change it. The same thing could happen again tomorrow.

police are nice and to work against drugs and gangs. Guns are widely perceived to be encouraging an "us vs them" dynamic with the kids. I don't know why a resource officer couldn't carry concealed.

--
Sincerely,

Hobie

In Northern urban high schools, locally, the officer is in full street gear. It's fine with me. And my retired teacher wife thought is was just fine, too. What the sheeple-teachers thought? Probably more drivel designed to show off their social enlightenment and driving need to control everything in sight, to match their own political visions.

street gear. They mostly went away when the Fed money went away. We need Security EMTs trained to a national standard; volunteers or paid or a mix as the locals see fit.
30 years ago EMTs and paramedics where treated with scorn by the Medical professionals...we know that the program works and saves lives.

--
Of the Troops & For the Troops

armed personnel in the schools - CCW and/or police. They need proper training for the task. We can not assume school safety like we did years ago. In fact, everyone should be aware of surroundings at all times to avoid danger - but to get the majority of people to do that would be hard.

There's too much evil that goes after soft targets - look at the Mooslim crazies Russia has to deal with. Our kids are our most precious commodity.

Our local school district has it's own police force of sworn armed officers as do many Texas public school districts. They tend to be in place at all of the High Schools and to deal with drug issues. We need more of them and in lower grade schools for protection.

It wouldn't be much of a stretch to expand the force and have them at all schools. It would require some funding or a local property tax increase.

We had an issue in one of our Jr. High/Middle schools last year with a kid coming in with a pellet pistol that looked just like a Glock. He was waving it around and making threats. In that case it was the city police who responded and shot the kid grave yard dead. Of course the lawsuits are flying now.

Always a couple of officers walking, most of the time with a dog.

Elementary and middle schools...a locked glass door....

Byron

I think the people armed should be a mix.

Staff, who want to, allowed to carry concealed (AND I MEAN CONCEALED; no one but the staff -no students- knowing it) and 'known' resource officers.

I believe only having uniformed officers gives too much away to anyone intent on shooting a place up. Too easy to ID them and possibly take them out the first thing.

But Oh No!! You'll hear.

School administrators can be odd to say the least. I had a major "discussion" with a friend of a friend at a party once. They had a "bring your daddy to lunch" day at her school. She was highly incensed that the two policeman daddys wore their guns on her campus. She was also upset that officers who were called to her school for students who violated the school's zero tolerance drug policy, read her the riot act for wasting their time. Seems that students who are in possession of tylenol or aspirin are of no interest to the police. Unarmed policemen? Probably a political move by the police chief.

. . . that any right-thinking actual police officer would want to be an UNARMED "guard" at a school. If he's there, in uniform but unarmed, he's just a readily-identifiable target of immediate opportunity to any cretin with homicidal intent.

Were I "selected" for that duty I'm pretty sure I'd have to re-consider my employment with that locality's force. "So essentially you want me to draw fire while others escape, right? Uh, no thanks!"

"Unarmed security" is an oxymoron.

JMHO

I agree with you entirely, but evidently the people who make the decisions here don't. And, they have found enough Policemen (or in this case, a Policewoman) who are willing to be targets.

BTW, we also had a shooting at a shopping center here a while back. A number of people were killed by a drug addled kid with an AD-47 (no, really, it actually was one, not just bad reporting). They had unarmed "guards" there, too. Those guards also turned and ran when they saw the shooter with a gun. I don't blame them as much since they were NOT police. They were probably minimum wage morons who didn't want to die (I worked as one for about three months many years ago when I was between real jobs). On the other hand, I expect the police NOT to run from trouble.