.

Proposed S.C. Bill Could Arm School Employees

A Florence lawmaker would like to give school employees and districts the option of carrying weapons.

Just four days after 20 children and six employees were killed by a gunman at a Connecticut elementary school, a South Carolina lawmaker has proposed arming Palmetto State school employees.

A S.C. House bill prefiled on Tuesday by Phillip Lowe, R-Florence, would allow employees who had concealed weapons permits and no history of violence to carry weapons on school grounds — if district officials allowed it. Read the entire bill here.

Lowe told The State newspaper that the bill would put doubt in the minds of anyone considering violence at a school. 

What do you think? Is the answer to preventing tragedies like the one in Connecticut to have more people at schools armed? 

Tell us in the comments below.

stanley seigler December 19, 2012 at 06:16 PM
re patently false... kinda doubt it...but, no doubt, examples of guns in hands civilians prevent killings are patently cherry picked and provide no proof. re: Pearl High School believe the shooter was leaving (45 shouted for Woodham to stop. Woodham instead got into a his mother's car) when confronted... re: Appalachia Law School When Odighizuwa left the building where the shooting took place, he was approached by two students with personal firearms... in both instances there is no evidence armed persons prevented any shooting...they did prevent shooters escape which counts fo sumthin... re: That's two of at least 12 that I know of... any ref? maybe the 12 provide better evidence the mother jones (MJ) article is 'patently false'... than pearl hi and appl law... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DDRIGHTS/message/8698 know MJ is a bleeding heart rag and you may disagree w/ their conclusions/opine...but they usually have the facts...and hired fact checkers. another mj clip: 'More Guns, More Mass shootings coincidence? America now has 300 million firearms, a barrage of NRA-backed gun laws and record casualties from mass killers.'
JoSCh December 19, 2012 at 06:21 PM
Was "no taxes" NOT what you were saying when you said you didn't want to pay for salary and benefits for security at schools? Here is why this is about politics: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/12/19/a-story-of-the-nras-influence-in-2-charts/ See how that works. You challenge my position and I defend it. That you don't is telling.
Jeff Davis December 19, 2012 at 06:54 PM
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?
Jerry Stevens December 19, 2012 at 07:10 PM
This bill has no chance of passing. Phillip Lowe is grandstanding and wasting everyone's time. http://www.scstatehouse.gov/member.php?code=1125568047
JoSCh December 19, 2012 at 07:42 PM
A contributing factor to the scariness of the world are these two points: A lot of Americans wouldn't give up their handguns and assault rifles in an effort to prevent or minimize the next slaughter. A lot of these same people wouldn't give up any of their money to prevent or minimize the next slaughter. That said I do agree that they'd gladly shoot at the people that they believed were instigating the next slaughter, and they'd support everybody else shooting at the people they believed were the instigators too. No way anything bad can happen in that scenario.
Patch.com December 19, 2012 at 09:07 PM
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!
stanley seigler December 19, 2012 at 09:17 PM
more FYI stuff [CLIP] ‘Have armed citizens ever successfully intervened to bring down a potential mass shooter? ‘Yes, but it’s rare. Often it’s not clear whether brave actions on the part of armed civilians prevented further death. In 1997, assistant principal Joel Myrick used a handgun to stop fleeing school shooter [not stop killings]...Armed interventions by retired and off-duty police officers, who have been trained to react, are more common...Other armed civilians who have attempted to stop shootings have been left severely injured or have been killed.’ [END CLIP] http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/12/can_armed_citizens_stop_mass_shootings_examples_of_armed_interventions.html ps any luck with link/refs to 12 known shootings where armed civilians saved lives?
Tom Utley December 19, 2012 at 09:58 PM
I say we ban Caps-Lock
Tom Utley December 19, 2012 at 10:00 PM
JoSCh, that is a very insulting and ridiculous comment. Gun shows have no "leaders" and any law abiding person is welcome to attend one. I've seen all sorts of different people at gun shows and it's generally a pleasant, friendly crowd.
JoSCh December 19, 2012 at 10:13 PM
I went to the NRA convention in Charlotte in 2010, and the demographics were what you'd expect, 99% white. The people were friendly but when I suggested to some of the vendors there that there were significantly more "black guns" than I'd seen in years past they quit being so friendly. When I said "What" loudly when Glenn Beck was inciting the crowd with patently false remarks about Marxism and other dog whistles designed to rile them again they became less friendly to me, personally. If a group of young black men showed up wearing bow ties at a gun show they wouldn't be welcome by a large portion of the crowd. Replace black men with Muslim in appearance and you'd get an increasingly unwelcoming response. That I mock insulted your troll isn't the slightest bit satisfying. Try harder.
JoSCh December 19, 2012 at 10:14 PM
I agree with Utley on this.
Tom Utley December 19, 2012 at 10:20 PM
An NRA rally is not a gun show. I've never been to the NRA. The NRA is not a defender of gun rights. GOA is the only organization that I know is any good in that regard. Your assumption about racism is more of a projection than a valid claim. You should try becoming less of a partisan hack and thinking more for yourself.
JoSCh December 19, 2012 at 10:30 PM
The NRA convention most definitely is a gun show, and the NRA is extremely well represented at every gun show I've been to in 5 different states. The racism is a direct response to the racist items, tshirts, flags, etc that are sold in plain sight at gun shows. Seriously Tom, if you aren't going to embrace it at least acknowledge that it's right there. <end /copypasta from libworld.com>
SDR December 19, 2012 at 11:40 PM
Cast out the demons?
Tony December 19, 2012 at 11:54 PM
Sure...any the law that states that schools are "gun free zone" are working as well. Have a little more faith in our teachers.
Robert Kelly December 19, 2012 at 11:54 PM
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.
Tony December 19, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Why is it a bad idea? If that teacher volunteers for this option and takes training such as...defensive handgun, active shooter and situational awareness, what is the problem?
Tony December 19, 2012 at 11:59 PM
Like what? We have laws banning drugs in school. Are they working? If we add armed guards, whose going to pay for them? They are not free. I'd rather spend the money on training willing teachers and faculty that do love our children to protect them and not just teach them to cower and pray nothing happens to them.
JoSCh December 20, 2012 at 12:43 AM
How can you have faith in our teachers given what Rush, Morrissey, Beck, etc have said about them? Aren't all teachers liberal Marxist union members programming our kids for the conversion? You can't reasonably expect any percentage of those hippies to become the stone cold man killers that we truly need in our classrooms.
JoSCh December 20, 2012 at 12:44 AM
lol@SDR
stanley seigler December 20, 2012 at 01:04 AM
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
Robert Kelly December 20, 2012 at 01:09 AM
maizenbluedoc, this whole issue is about politics. In a sane society there would be no conflict over whether or not people should have semi-automatic, large magazine, assault weapons. Why is this controversial? Because some group with a great deal of money and the power that money can buy keep defending it. When the assault gun ban was enacted in 1994 (expired in 2004) the main result was in incredible show of money and power to defeat the legislators who voted for it. The Democrats lost a lot of seats, and the losing candidates were the supporters of the assault rifle ban. With every slaughter there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. Columbine, Aurora, Arizona, the Sikh Temple, etc.. But still, the congress does not make any meaningful attempt to limit the existence of these weapons of mass destruction. Too many legislators have been bought and paid for by the gun lobby. There is no pretense about a "well-regulated militia", so clearly it is not a principled defense of the 2nd Amendment. It is simply the use of money by a group that has a lot of it. to buy power to get what they want. No one needs these weapons for self defense, or to defend their homes. No one needs these weapons for any legitimate, legal, use. They want them. That's all; they want them. You will have to figure out "why?" for yourself.
stanley seigler December 20, 2012 at 01:32 AM
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.
Geneva Lawrence December 20, 2012 at 01:56 AM
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.
JoSCh December 20, 2012 at 03:17 PM
Win/win for the regressives, more guns AND less kids in school.
stanley seigler December 20, 2012 at 04:50 PM
re: more guns a statistic from the TV: USA has 5% world's population and half the world's guns...stat not factchked, but bet it's close.
Robert Kelly December 21, 2012 at 11:14 PM
And by the way, Columbine High School had an armed deputy on patrol at the school as a regular thing, and he was on duty the day of the massacre at the high school.
Mary Grady December 22, 2012 at 03:20 AM
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.
Robert Kelly December 23, 2012 at 04:56 AM
"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.
Jerry Carter December 24, 2012 at 09:31 PM
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????

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »