That's $600 more added on top of $2000 property tax to keep a paid off house and $1200 for being alive (Obamacare mandated minimum insurance or fine for not having it). These are after-tax expenses that keep getting higher every year merely for being alive and owning things. Heaven forbid you lose your job and the government keeps adding these kinds of taxes.
The NRA Finally Responds With Its "Meaningful Contributions"
- Thread starter Formaldehyde
- Start date
That's $600 more added on top of $2000 property tax to keep a paid off house and $1200 for being alive (Obamacare mandated minimum insurance or fine for not having it). These are after-tax expenses that keep getting higher every year merely for being alive and owning things. Heaven forbid you lose your job and the government keeps adding these kinds of taxes.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Before you know it, unemployed people won't be able to afford $4K assault weapons anymore.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
That is nothing, in Poland you have to pay additional fee for each pound of cheese you own, even if that cheese was planted on your property by the government without your knowledge or approval.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Unemployed people aren't supposed to afford a lot of things, but I see them driving nice cars and such all the time. If they really wanted a $4k game weapon, they'd get it.
Besides, if they cant afford it, what makes you think they wouldnt just break the law and take it?
Taking it seems fairly easy these days. Seems like so-called law-abiding gun owners are making it too easy for the criminals.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Its too stiff because it turns a right into a privledge. If the penalty was a penny I'd still be against it.
You already consider it a privilege.
Yeah, no way in hell you get a guard at 20K. The estimate I've seen thrown around at teacher blogs is 60,000, which includes salary, training, benefits and insurance liabilities. Remember, the district cost for an employee is more than just what is paid in salary. An employee that is paid 40,000 probably costs closer to 60,000.
60K for every single building would be an enormous burden on school districts. Either you'd be okay with hiking property taxes to cover the cost, or you take resources away the teacher salary pool for an armed guard. Both are difficult to justify.
GhostWriter16
Deity
Yeah, it is.
There's no solution. Solutions that decrease liberty aren't even worth the time of day.
There's no solution. Solutions that decrease liberty aren't even worth the time of day.
Lets see 180 school days, 8 hours a day, $13.88 an hour if $20,000 set aside, but you are right about the school paying a lot more.
I'm amazed that it would cost $60,000 per year for a 60ish year old retired cop looking to make some extra money whose sole job is to try and counter very rare school shootings. I thought teachers were poor?
I don't think it is possible to talk economics with public teacher unions and have any success.
I will pre-emptively surrender on the the one armed guard per public school point since it is likely to cost double or triple a national gun registry near as I can tell.
So how about that concealed carry for teachers? That's practically a no cost solution! Crazed gunmen will have no idea if 10 people are armed or 0 at public schools, detering their crazed fantasies.
I will pre-emptively surrender on the the one armed guard per public school point since it is likely to cost double or triple a national gun registry near as I can tell.
So how about that concealed carry for teachers? That's practically a no cost solution! Crazed gunmen will have no idea if 10 people are armed or 0 at public schools, detering their crazed fantasies.
Couple of things here:
One, having the entire defense force be 60ish retired cops totally defeats the point. Remember, hundreds of schools in the US already have security guards who do more than just flash a gun...they break up fights and serve as hall monitors. This requires them to have some physical dexterity, so having the entire force be above 60 drastically diminishes their effectiveness. If we're going to pay for armed guards, then we ought to be getting actual GUARDS.
Second, there is no way the existing school security force would allow their wages to be undercut like that. There is already a market for these services, and districts would need to be pay the prevailing market wage. Our security guard where I taught (in Louisiana) made only a little less than I did, so close to 40K.
Third, you probably couldn't get away with only having a 180 day contract, since basically every other school employee, even food service and custodians, are on 200 days +. If teachers or staff members have to be in the building, you'd assume the guards would need to be there too. Do you have guards at sporting events? What about band concerts? Lots of overtime there.
Finally, you have to account for all the non wage expenses (insurance, training, benefits, equipment, etc). HR managers typically add between 25-40% of the salary to the total cost to hire. All of that adds up pretty quickly.
Even if we decided to only use retired Barny Fife types, I don't think we have enough nationwide to guard every single school. Do you have any idea how many schools we have?
GhostWriter16
Deity
You guys seriously have only one security guard? Our school employs like 10 of them. No wonder they constantly need more money and have paper shortages
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Why would retired cops who already have excellent pensions want to hang out in elementary schools where they would hardly ever serve any useful purpose? Are you expecting thousands of these attacks to now occur?
The vast majority of school teachers are adamantly opposed to firearms being anywhere near a school. Do you really expect the few who would have a desire to get concealed carry permits to now risk their lives whenever there might be an armed intruder on campus by directly confronting them, instead of performing the job of trying to keep themselves and their own charges safe until the police arrive?
The vast majority of school teachers are adamantly opposed to firearms being anywhere near a school. Do you really expect the few who would have a desire to get concealed carry permits to now risk their lives whenever there might be an armed intruder on campus by directly confronting them, instead of performing the job of trying to keep themselves and their own charges safe until the police arrive?
I'm pretty sure they are already risking their lives whenever an armed intruder is on campus. Trying to keep themselves and their charges safe until the cops arrived would be a lot easier with a gun than with nothing.
This is a fantasy for some NRA types but has been strenuously opposed by every teachers union, teacher advocacy group, most PTA groups and dozens of university presidents. Basically every group that has any kinds of hands-on education experience. As a former inner city teacher myself, I have to agree that it would be lunacy.
First, I don't think is any evidence that further arming a school would serve as any kind of deterrent for a would be maniac. Most of them kill themselves anyway. The appeal would be in limiting the final bodycount, not in stopping the shooter to begin with.
The concern is safety. Anybody who has ever taught knows that it's almost possible to keep students out of anywhere in the classroom...if there is a locked gun in the desk, cabinet, etc, your kids are going to find a way in there. Plus, if the gun is locked away, it wouldn't stop a shooter unless it was loaded and ready on your person.
If that's the case, what happens if a student attacks you? What happens when kids try to grab it? What if multiple children make a rush for the gun at once? What if an elementary school kid grabs at your legs by accident? It only takes one special needs kid to cause a big commotion, and these sorts of events happen ALL THE TIME (I was attacked multiple times by my 4th graders, and had to press charges once).
There is no doubt in my mind that if I had a loaded gun in my classroom, one of my students would have either shot me or another student.
The risks are simply too great, and the likelyhood of preventing a tragedy are too low. If we must further arm schools, the only way it could be defensible would be by adding actual police officers.
I wish I had more where I taught. Alas, guards are expensive.You guys seriously have only one security guard? Our school employs like 10 of them. No wonder they constantly need more money and have paper shortages
GhostWriter16
Deity
We also have FIVE administrators. If I recall correctly, only about 6K students or so.
And yet we run out of paper halfway through the year
And recently voted to raise property taxes to help the school fix up its labs and such (If I could have voted, I would have voted no, no matter how desperate the need was, my school is incompetent and doesn't deserve a single dime of taxpayer funds more than it already leeches). Keep in mind this is NYS...
And yet we apparently have enough to employ five administrators and ten security guards. I've only heard of them breaking up a fight like once. Normally they're just there to prevent class cutters... what a waste of money
That all sounds very reasonable. I'll concede again for schools that teach kids.
Why do University Presidents oppose concealed carry? At that point all the students are adults aren't they?
GhostWriter16
Deity
I disagreed with that Arizona law (At least if I remember it correctly) that prohibited universities from keeping guns off campus. If it was a public university maybe that would be OK (I don't really care either way) but you should certainly be allowed to keep guns out of a private university that you own if you wish.
