No, just no. I can see someone accidentally leaving their weapon where some kid can get it . This is an idea beyond stupidity.

I can just see it now, a stressed out teacher, tired of his or her unruly class pulls out the gun and fires a warning shot to calm things down. Tell me it can never happen., I wan in a gym class back in the 1970's where the coach did that very thing with the starting pistol.

Wrong and dangerous. An armed, plain clothes officer needs to be assigned to each school. Classrooms need emergency exits and additional emergency training for teachers. Arming more civilians is a very bad idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

re: What do you think?

i think it's unbelievable a campaign by the NRA to increase profits for the firearms mfgs has led to this stupid discussion...

i think it's unbelievable 'we the people' could elect such idiots to a legislative body.

i think NRA members should turn in their 'shooter caps' and pray for forgiveness...

i think christians should ask, 'what would Jesus do?'

Definitely the wrong approach. There are many other avenues we can take.

Im all for it. Everyone thinks all us gun toters are trigger happy rednecks but thats the farthest from the truth. We are simple people that want a fighting chance when some crazy idiot comes knocking

One wondered how long it would take some state politician to opportunistically try to take political advantage of the tragedy at Sandy Hook School. Lowe was probably trying to put together the compound sentences of an initial bill proposal before the first news bulletin ended last Friday morning.

How much thought did he give to it?

Well, the bill "would allow employees who had concealed weapons permits and no history of violence to carry weapons on school grounds---if district officials allowed it."

Good God, did he not consider just how many people could potentially be legally packing heat on the grounds, in the offices and in the classrooms of our public schools if his piece of gratuitous nonsense passes? I'm sorry, but I just don't believe children will either feel or be more secure in a school environment bristling with that kind of firepower.

Clearly, Mr. Lowe is playing to a particular part of his base. Our best hope is that the more moderate, thoughtful and considered voices of the General Assembly will let members like Mr. Lowe screech from the sidelines while they more seriously consider how to appropriately speak to the grave issue of how to ensure the safety of our schoolchildren.

re: Everyone thinks all us gun toters are trigger happy rednecks but that's the farthest from the truth...

ever wonder why 'everyone' (at least most outside SC) thinks that...maybe

cause NRA gun toters are against reasonable/responsible gun control...eg, background checks...

Hire all the well trained unemployed vets from the Marines and Army that are looking for work who would love to protect our precious children! This will create thousands of jobs in this country

Had any one of those teachers, principal, or others had a gun, the out come would have been much different. As it was the only armed person in the school was the criminal. That is why the criminal was there to start with. A "gun free zone" only tells the criminal he has 10 to 20 minutes to do his dirty work. Before the police arrive. They have guns. Principals, coaches, teachers are responsible people to start with. A weapon should be treated as insurance. For that few seconds of horror that could avoid tragedy. Rep. Lowe's bill only makes common sence.

Guns in schools...heck no. If my 7th grade teacher had had a gun I wouldn't be here today. She was a nut and I was a pest. Most high school boys are bigger than their female teachers and could take their gun away in a heart beat.

I am all for it! I think we should mirror the "Guardian" program that is currently in place in TX. I for one would feel much more comfortable knowing my children are not just sitting targets waiting to be taken out. I DO think that those chosen to carry concealed arms in our schools should have to go through an intense background check and interview process. It does not necessarily have to be the teachers that do it. It is our responsibility to protect our children and our current system is not doing that.

As usual the SC legislature is providing a knee-jerk answer that is poorly thought out and based on non-existent investigative results from the latest tragedy. If you are going to do something like this, do it right. Remove all restrictions on permitted carry. Either you are permitted or you are not. This school carry provision, poorly thought out as it is, would only protect schools. Why not extend that protection to all aspects of our society and it would be an added level of protection. Atrocities like this are not committed by permit holders who ARE trained and have had background checks. It is also inherently obvious that an armed victim could and likely would have stopped the carnage earlier rather than waiting until the perp decided to shoot himself. I suggest removing the restrictions on where permitted arms can be carried and I would also recommend requiring recertification at renewal.

After reading the bill, I think it is a very sensible one. If what happened at Sandy Hook happened at MPA, I would want a qualified school administrator to shoot and kill the psycho before he got to my defenseless child.

Any politician who presents such an idea should have his ability to adequately serve his constituents questioned. This is beyond wrong. Teachers don't have time to teach properly now for all the extra tasks that they have to perform and now we want to make them the school security guards as well? These people are not, in general, suited for such a task and the notion that we could have armed teachers in school is such a train wreck that it can't possibly have a positive aspect.

I wish there could be a reasonable, intelligent colloquy on the subject, not a knee-jerk reaction that does more harm than good. Better security measures and systems could be used. If the system in Newtown, CT was effective, the shooter would not have been able to breach the system. If we can devise ways to keep criminals in jail, surely we can devise a workable system to keep criminals out of the schools. I am not averse to having a police officer in the schools, but it would be more cost effective to have a system that does not require a salary and benefits. I am a gun owner, retired military, and pro-gun advocate, yet putting a weapon in the hands of someone with minimal training in the use of a weapon (many who may have never touched a weapon before) is not a cogent idea in most cases.

I do not think adding more weapons to the situation will improve it. I worked in a high school for many years with a Resource Officer who was present and unarmed. It did make an impact for him to be there and he worked hard to build positive relationships with the students and respond quickly to violence that erupted. We all felt safer in his presence. Additionally, there were 4 full time security and 2 part time, plus 3 Assistant Principals and a Principal for an enrollment of about 2,600.

The recent attacks were on places where people gather - malls, churches, movie theatres, schools. The idea of carrying concealed everywhere, even in places like Sunday School and Yoga Class, would be hard to scale back once the flood gates were opened.

I understand the element of surprise and advantage of having an accessible weapon in a crisis when only a gun will defend against a gun. But these murderers are opportunists. They plan in advance, chart their course, discuss it (online, and with friends). For a weapon to be in any school and potentially accessible, to me, would be like tossing lighter fluid on a fire. God knows assigning guns to schools would not remain a secret once the media got hold of it - and in typically poor judgment by insisting that 'society has a right to know', the details would be made public.

This is great news, I hope this bill passes. Gun Free Zones are a death trap.

FYI
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DDRIGHTS/message/8698
[CLIP,26Sep12]
'In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 61 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun...in recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed.'
[END CLIP]

more firearms in the hands of teachers, etal, exacerbate the problem...and is plain dumb.

the first line of defense is to insure existing gun laws are adequate and enforced...eg, ensure background checks are adequate and fully enforced. NOT just winkwink enforcement.

in states where current laws are not adequate, pass proper legislation. further;

require tests to obtain a licence to own any/all firearms; with possible exception of shotguns and hunting rifles.

also pass legislation to make it a criminal offense (jail time) if a gun owner does not ensure his/her guns are not accessible to others(crazies and children).

gun control advocates do not want to take guns away from anyone. they just want common sense gun control. you dont need an ak47 (whatever) to kill a rabbit.

most difficult to understand why gun culture cowboys are opposed to proper background checks, testing and licensing.

FYI
[CLIP,26Sep12]
'In the wake of the slaughters this summer at a Colorado movie theater and a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, we set out to track mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years. We identified and analyzed 61 of them, and one striking pattern in the data is this: In not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun...in recent rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, they not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed.'
[END CLIP]

more firearms in the hands of teachers, etal, exacerbate the problem...and is plain dumb.

the first line of defense is to insure existing gun laws are adequate and enforced...eg, ensure background checks are adequate and fully enforced. NOT just winkwink enforcement.

in states where current laws are not adequate, pass proper legislation. further;

require tests to obtain a licence to own any/all firearms; with possible exception of shotguns and hunting rifles.

also pass legislation to make it a criminal offense (jail time) if a gun owner does not ensure his/her guns are not accessible to others(crazies and children).

gun control advocates do not want to take guns away from anyone. they just want common sense gun control. you dont need an ak47 (whatever) to kill a rabbit.

most difficult to understand why gun culture cowboys are opposed to proper background checks, testing and licensing.

As a former teacher, the idea of anyone but a highly-trained police office or security guard having a gun in a school is deeply disturbing.
One thing everyone agrees on is that access to firearms should be limited to those equipped--mentally and physically--to use them. Putting more guns in a place with hundreds if not thousands of people who are neither mentally or physically equipped to use them is a recipe for disaster and more needless loss of life.

An armed guard at the school's entrance seems like a good discussion to have. I taught in a school with an armed guard and a metal detector and the kids and their parents hated the idea that such things were in their school and the first things they saw when they entered the building. Everyone is immediately put on edge.

Further, is that the kind of society we want? Where children equate a school with a place where can they can be harmed? I think we can do better than that.

JoSCh Why does everything have to be about politics. Code word? BS is a code word for your comment.

The mayor of North Charleston just proposed to hire 21 new police officers to place in their 21 elementary schools. Estimated cost is $2 million year one ($500k for equipment, etc.), then $1.5 million per year thereafter. It is a nice "feel good", but where does this $2 million come from? What about the middle and high schools? There are 1,177 public schools in SC, what about all of those school? What about the thousands of other public and private places where people (and children) gather every day? Recreation centers, pee wee football/baseball games and practices, the public pools, waterfront park, the beach, etc., etc., etc. ... it is frankly impossible to protect every place to the extent necessary to prevent such a horrible event from happening again. No amount of regulation, laws, mental health spending, police, gun wielding teachers, etc. will prevent something like this from happening again. The one thing history has taught us ... it will happen again. As scary as this proposed legislation is, it is at least an economically viable alternative to be discussed. It is a scary world out there folks ... and there is no way around that. Thoughts?

This bill has no chance of passing. Phillip Lowe is grandstanding and wasting everyone's time. http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=1125568047

This comment comes from a reader via email:

i DO NOT THINK IT IS THE ROLE OF TEACHERS TO CARRY, HAVE IN THEIR POSSESSION IN A SCHOOL OR IN THE CLASSROOM ANY WEAPON WHETHER A GUN, KNIFE,CROSSBOW OR WHATEVER. THEY ARE NOT TRAINED, IT IS NOT THEIR ROLE AND IT WOULD ULTIMATELY CAUSE MORE INJURIES AND DEATHS TO OUR CHILDREN AND STUDENTS.
LET THEM TEACH!!! LET THEM BE AWARE OF MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS AND FAMILY VIOLENCE AND ABUSE AND HELP WITH THAT.. LET THEM TEACH , NOT TO BE AFRAID , NOT TO INTIMIDATE OUR KIDS WITH GUNS IN THE CLASSROOM
LET US HAVE LESS VIOLENCE IN OUR GAMES AND MOVIES AND TV!

So how many schools are there in this country? Hiring enough deputies or unemployed veterans to patrol every school is a solution? It's OK with me of course, but I think it might necessitate the entire GOP backing off from their previously given oath of allegiance to Grover Norquist. Since their first allegiance is to Grover, do they need a dispensation from him to execute this plan? Who knows, maybe soldiers with guns in the schoolyard doesn't seem like Norman Rockwell's America, but it might be a solution to schoolyard bullying.
Since the owner of the guns in question in Newtown (the murder's mother) was not a felon, and had not been classified as insane, the guns were legal. It would be great if she could be tried as an accessory before the fact for the multiple murders for providing a troubled youth with access to all these guns, but she got away lucky this time be being the first victim. Her life would have been hell if she weren't already dead.
Guns kill. Guns that can shoot lots of bullets really quickly kill even more people before anyone can even react. No one outside of the well-regulated militia should have access to these multiple murder weapons. You don't need semi-automatic assault weapons in your life unless you are a competitive drug dealer. You don't need huge magazines with tens of bullets to protect your home. Not even to eliminate the small number of small-brained CAPS-LOCK users.

FYI
[CLIP]
The Los Angeles Police Department plans to significantly increase its presence at the city's more than 540 public elementary and middle schools, with Chief Charlie Beck saying the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre has created a "new reality" that his department must address.

In outlining his plan Monday, Beck said his goal is for uniformed officers to visit the public school campuses on a daily basis, a major change in LAPD deployment strategy that will add an additional logistical stress on a police force already stretched thin by the city's fiscal crisis.

"Somebody in a uniform is going to stop by everyday at these schools," Beck said in an interview [END CLIP]
http://articles.latimes.com/print/2012/dec/17/local/la-me-lapd-security-20121218

re: It would be great if she could be tried as an accessory [robert kelly]

as mentioned there should be clearly worded legislation to make it criminal (sustainal jail time) for any gun owner who permits access to his/her guns by children and crazies.

re: Here is why this is about politics [NRA election spending. see josch link]

NRA 'shooter cap' cowboys should be proud of the way their dues are spent...or maybe they (and NRA) should also be tried as accessories...facetious comment? maybe not.

I would not allow any child of mine to go to a school where the teachers or employees, other than a certified police officer carried a gun.

For the account by the armed deputy at Columbine, go here: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/columbine.cd/Pages/DEPUTIES_TEXT.htm

Quite frankly, this doesn't sound like the solution to the problem.

"If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns", and similar bumper sticker slogans are stupid. These recent mass killings were not by criminals, they were by deranged people with access to high power weapons.

Criminals are not a threat to most of us. Real criminals use weapons to rob jewelry stores, liquor stores, banks, etc. where they can get money or valuables. They generally have no interest in killings dozens of people. And they usually work with small firearms for convenience, or try to avoid people altogether.

These mentally damaged people who have committed the mass atrocities had easy access to the kinds of weapons which are designed for mass killings. If these weapons were outlawed, these people would not likely have any way to figure out where and how to acquire them.

Sure, drug gangsters might still have them. Professional assassins might have them. You know, most of us do not have to deal with these kinds of murderers, and certainly elementary schools are not their targets.

Ban the weapons of mass destruction, and the mentally unbalanced people will not have the access to them. Really bad criminals are not the cause of mass school killings.

Would all the advocates of the right to possess these weapons please give the rest of us a good reason for it? Do you really think the president is about to send the army to take away your freedom? And would your weapon make a difference? These weapons of mass destruction kill too many people.

I think it's a bad idea, given the fact that many teachers complain about the issues of discipline in their classrooms that are stessing them. Clearly, there is the potential that one of those teachers might become a perpetrator. From a practical perspective, where does a teacher "conceal" a weapon, especially on a hot, sunny day? If anyone is to carry a weapon in a school, I think it should be someone whose job it is to do the type of enforcement that would require a weapon - someone who is trained, is an expert marksman and who can be expected to act responsibly in any and every emergency situation; someone whose credetials are impeccable and who has to be recertified regularly. Remember, there are issues of liability that must be discussed when even licensed concealed weapons carriers make a mistake. It would seem, therefore, that anyone who is carrying a weapon in a school be of the highest caliber as it relates to weapons and tactics in emergency situations, like that at Newtown, CT. Are we ready to say that teachers are those people????