Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Beckys_Mom

Ohio School Janitors To Carry Handguns

189 posts in this topic

I do NOT accept militarizing our schools, sir. Let people handle it. Let people decide.

If this was about keeping the kids safe, wouldn't you want the people carrying guns to be professionals, not janitors with a 2 day course? Or is this not really about kids safety...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Professional yes. Cash strapped schools are gonna have hard time making that happen. Our education system is already lower then most 1st World Nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what's being overlooked here is that there is an extreme lack of details about the 4 men carrying the guns.... There is nothing to indicate either way if they are qualified or not based on anyone's criteria, unless you're on the fence of 'only people who were in the military, police force, or armed security' can effectively defend against a threat. Even then, there's nothing to indicate that these janitors didn't serve in one of those capacities at some point in their lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we have a saying here, penny wise and pound foolish. that is about our gvmnt, federal and local.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was about keeping the kids safe, wouldn't you want the people carrying guns to be professionals, not janitors with a 2 day course? Or is this not really about kids safety...

Well if it's what I believe personally, it's that the janitors of this country who get the job done right and genuinely care about our kids, are some of our country's finest citizens. If I was a principal and had a janitor in my school like that, I would love to pay for his two-day training course and allow him greater responsibility if he personally agreed to it. Oh and I'd give him a damn raise too.

I believe two days of training is adequate so long as it's continuous training, every couple of years or so. I think a basic level of proficiency should be maintained, much like pilots and to lesser extent drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what's being overlooked here is that there is an extreme lack of details about the 4 men carrying the guns.... There is nothing to indicate either way if they are qualified or not based on anyone's criteria, unless you're on the fence of 'only people who were in the military, police force, or armed security' can effectively defend against a threat. Even then, there's nothing to indicate that these janitors didn't serve in one of those capacities at some point in their lives.

Well, qualifications mean things to people. If I'm hiring someone to be a biologist, I'm going to hire someone with a degree in biology. That janitor down the road might know a lot about biology because it's his hobby, but do you expect me to hire him? Who would you hire?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, qualifications mean things to people. If I'm hiring someone to be a biologist, I'm going to hire someone with a degree in biology. That janitor down the road might know a lot about biology because it's his hobby, but do you expect me to hire him? Who would you hire?

My point was you don't know if they are or are not qualified based on this article. They could be retired scout snipers that took up janitor positions to fill their time in retirement.

Now I'll switch gears and address your question; I would hire anyone who I deemed could get the job done... doesn't have to be a former military, police, or armed security officer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?

Thats the most absurd idea ive ever heard.

"Lets give random people a 2 day saftey course and give them live fire arms then put them in place full of children"

Ok, lets look at some scenarios.

1. Gun is left or mislaid on school grounds and a kid picks it up. People forget things all the time its a logical outcome.

2. Kids steal gun off care taker, we pranked the hell out of our school care taker at primary school, we stole/hid his keys, his tools, everything it was fun. Most care takers havea hard enough time with unruley kids, add a gun to the mix seems like a terrible idea.

3. In response to a possible stranger on school grounds (a very common occurance, its usually nothing, hell we had a totally harmless down syndrome man wander into the playground once having got seperated from his carer) were gonna go for a "shoot em" policy are we? Firing live rounds into an environment PACKED with children. Even if your a dam good shot, there is a high chance your gonna hit or wing a child, seeing as it takes hundreds and hundreds of hours on the range to get "good" certianly to the point of hitting moving targets reliably this is almost a certainty.

4. Bullets go through things, doors, dividing walls, glass, pepople, collarateral damage espechially in a densely popiulated place is almost certain.

5. Wrongly identifying "dangerous" people, as the example i gave above, shootings at schools are pretty rare all things considered, having non aurthourised people on school grounds is not.

6. What kind of screening with the care takers have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shootings in schools are rare, but unfortunately it's a school shooting that people want to react to about guns. They're already gun-free zones. Guns are already highly regulated. But the real paranoids think that more of the same is going to solve our problems. Punish the assault rifles, they whine! Because facts like handguns being used in nearly all gun crime doesn't deter them from their emotional bowel movements against whatever is politically correct to blab about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was you don't know if they are or are not qualified based on this article. They could be retired scout snipers that took up janitor positions to fill their time in retirement.

Now I'll switch gears and address your question; I would hire anyone who I deemed could get the job done... doesn't have to be a former military, police, or armed security officer.

retired scout snipers? do scouts have snipers in the US? They could also be just a regular guy doing a regular job and not wanting the hassle...but we can speculate all night on what their past is.

When you say deemed fit, do you mean able to carry a gun, do the cleaning, as well as be on guard and ready to protect all the children on his own with his firearm?

This is sounding more and more like a job for James Bond, wonder if he would take up the position of janitor/armed and ready security guard?

Edited by freetoroam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

retired scout snipers? do scouts have snipers in the US? They could also be just a regular guy doing a regular job and not wanting the hassle...but we can speculate all night on what their past is.

When you say deemed fit, do you mean able to carry a gun, do the cleaning, as well as be on guard and ready to protect all the children on his own with his firearm?

This is sounding more and more like a job for James Bond, wonder if he would take up the position of janitor/armed and ready security guard?

Actually, yeah, the Marines have scout snipers.

But you are right, this whole thing has taken on a rather secret agent kind of flavor. Kind of silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, the reading comprehension is getting questionable. I'll spell it out.

The article simply states that 4 janitors in a school who will buy their own service weapon, and attend a 2 day training course designed for this purpose. The only other detail about the 4 is the fact that they are men. We don't know if they're 20 years old, or 80 years old. We don't know if they are mentally challenged, or a retired Navy Seal. We don't know what previous training they have had. We don't know where they previously worked before becoming janitors. We don't know if they have 2 arms.

So, my point yet again, is since we don't know anything about the 4, making assumptions that they are or are not qualified are moot, because we don't know.

Really?

Thats the most absurd idea ive ever heard.

"Lets give random people a 2 day saftey course and give them live fire arms then put them in place full of children"

Ok, lets look at some scenarios.

1. Gun is left or mislaid on school grounds and a kid picks it up. People forget things all the time its a logical outcome.

2. Kids steal gun off care taker, we pranked the hell out of our school care taker at primary school, we stole/hid his keys, his tools, everything it was fun. Most care takers havea hard enough time with unruley kids, add a gun to the mix seems like a terrible idea.

3. In response to a possible stranger on school grounds (a very common occurance, its usually nothing, hell we had a totally harmless down syndrome man wander into the playground once having got seperated from his carer) were gonna go for a "shoot em" policy are we? Firing live rounds into an environment PACKED with children. Even if your a dam good shot, there is a high chance your gonna hit or wing a child, seeing as it takes hundreds and hundreds of hours on the range to get "good" certianly to the point of hitting moving targets reliably this is almost a certainty.

4. Bullets go through things, doors, dividing walls, glass, pepople, collarateral damage espechially in a densely popiulated place is almost certain.

5. Wrongly identifying "dangerous" people, as the example i gave above, shootings at schools are pretty rare all things considered, having non aurthourised people on school grounds is not.

6. What kind of screening with the care takers have?

What exactly do you think this training is going to entail? Or better question, why do you think these things would be left out of a training course geared for people to defend a school in a crisis? I can see that you have not taken a gun safety course, I can fill you in; they will cover these issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly do you think this training is going to entail? Or better question, why do you think these things would be left out of a training course geared for people to defend a school in a crisis? I can see that you have not taken a gun safety course, I can fill you in; they will cover these issues.

A 2 day training course. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 2 day training course. lol

Since you seem to be well versed in matters like these, what is your suggestion?

I'm assuming (and I'm sure it's gonna bite me in the rear this time) since you're scoffing at this school district's idea, you have a better alternate solution.

Of course, you'll take into account all the budget and legal limitations like the school has, correct?

Or maybe you're of the idea that we'll just only let the school murderers have the guns, we'll wait the 5 minutes it takes the police to arrive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe you're of the idea that we'll just only let the school murderers have the guns, we'll wait the 5 minutes it takes the police to arrive.

And during that 5 minutes we have the school janitor who has had 2 days training taking control of the situation??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most US citizens want gun control. A majority do.

"Lastly, just try and take our rights from Americans and see just what happens".

When I read comments like this and hear Alex Jones freak out and say the same thing, I think to myself. "Thank God I'm not living in the US"....comments like that are not democratic but dictorial and threatening. These are the very people that need gun controls put on them.

It's a sensitive subject...that and health care. Both issues which are changing whether some of you like it or not.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two day course is for the CCH license. They also have to pass a background check, mental evaluation, and submit their fingerprints to the database. Same as everyone else in Ohio that holds CCH licenses, and that's roughly a quarter of the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank God I'm not living in the US&

youi right, thanks god you don't live in usa, we have enough of ours here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two day course is for the CCH license. They also have to pass a background check, mental evaluation, and submit their fingerprints to the database. Same as everyone else in Ohio that holds CCH licenses, and that's roughly a quarter of the state.

Apart from the 2 day gun training, do they not have this system for all those employed at schools anyway, be it teacher, janitor? they are working with children!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And during that 5 minutes we have the school janitor who has had 2 days training taking control of the situation??

Not take control, but deter the shooters from having free reign.

At this time, if we have any, will someone who has been in a shootout situation explain how much more difficult it is to hit a target when you know bullets can/are coming your way.

Here's a little something to read http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/, not exhaustive, and probably did cherry pick some of his instances to demonstrate his point, but I did notice that it didn't list one civilian hit by another defending against a shooter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not take control, but deter the shooters from having free reign.

At this time, if we have any, will someone who has been in a shootout situation explain how much more difficult it is to hit a target when you know bullets can/are coming your way.

Here's a little something to read http://dailyanarchis...age-statistics/, not exhaustive, and probably did cherry pick some of his instances to demonstrate his point, but I did notice that it didn't list one civilian hit by another defending against a shooter.

Deter the shooter....how? I would imagine you mean by shooting him first, because I very much doubt the shooter is going to wait for the cleaner to put down his mop, get out his gun and start trying to reason with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from the 2 day gun training, do they not have this system for all those employed at schools anyway, be it teacher, janitor? they are working with children!

I'm not entirely sure. I know there is a background check for both. I'm pretty sure a teacher submits fingerprints for the teaching license, but I don't think janitors have to. Or at least I couldn't find anything about it being a requirement. I couldn't find any firm proof of a mental evaluation requirement for either position. I don't know if that's because it does not exist, or if it's in places I didn't look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deter the shooter....how? I would imagine you mean by shooting him first, because I very much doubt the shooter is going to wait for the cleaner to put down his mop, get out his gun and start trying to reason with him.

I want to start with a question: Did you even read any of the link provided?

There are several deterents to having an armed person at a location. To start, knowing there is someone with the means to shoot back at a location, an intruder has to take that into account. They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective. Funny thing, because of this, the guys with the guns are at the highest risk of being shot. Which is the second deterent; the shooters primary target is no longer unarmed people, but the armed people. There's 2 deterents without any shots being fired.

Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction. The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air. An added deterent is shots being fired in the direction of the shooter, making his accuracy and confidence drop. The final deterent is actual shots hitting the shooter, with a hopeful added bonus of a fatality to save the taxpayers in the area money from a costly court proceeding and keeping the shooter locked up for x years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to start with a question: Did you even read any of the link provided?

There are several deterents to having an armed person at a location. To start, knowing there is someone with the means to shoot back at a location, an intruder has to take that into account. They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective. Funny thing, because of this, the guys with the guns are at the highest risk of being shot. Which is the second deterent; the shooters primary target is no longer unarmed people, but the armed people. There's 2 deterents without any shots being fired.

Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction. The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air. An added deterent is shots being fired in the direction of the shooter, making his accuracy and confidence drop. The final deterent is actual shots hitting the shooter, with a hopeful added bonus of a fatality to save the taxpayers in the area money from a costly court proceeding and keeping the shooter locked up for x years.

Do you not read any of the previous posts?

Deterrent 1: do you honestly think an armed nutter on a mission is going to give a s****? he is more likely to thrive on a shootout situation!

As for the shots being fired by the 2 day trained janitor actually hitting the target as a deterrent.....hope is most definitely the right word there.

"Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction. The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air."

I assume this is after the janitor has spotted the shooter, got all the children to safety and then taken up position?

if your list of deterrents are the key to keeping people safe, then God help us all....and i am not even religious!!!

one more question: "They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective" .....does this mean that the school has 4 janitors working daily together? just asking, because it sounds like a lot of cleaners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you not read any of the previous posts?

Deterrent 1: do you honestly think an armed nutter on a mission is going to give a s****? he is more likely to thrive on a shootout situation!

As for the shots being fired by the 2 day trained janitor actually hitting the target as a deterrent.....hope is most definitely the right word there.

"Once it starts, the third deterent is actual shots being fired, and not necessarily in any direction. The sound of a gun going off inside a building is awfully unnerving to most people, not to mention the smoke and smell of gunpowder in the air."

I assume this is after the janitor has spotted the shooter, got all the children to safety and then taken up position?

if your list of deterrents are the key to keeping people safe, then God help us all....and i am not even religious!!!

one more question: "They'll need to know where all 4 janitors are if they are going to be successful in their objective" .....does this mean that the school has 4 janitors working daily together? just asking, because it sounds like a lot of cleaners.

I've read everyone's posts in this topic, what do you think I missed? Actually, I think I've done a terrific job of responding to everyone's points directed at mine.

Anyone on a mission is going to care, if they are trying to complete an objective. If they want a high kill count, they need to not go down before then. If they have a specific target, they need to get to that target. Not to mention, if it's a 'nutter', the flash coming from the end of a gun and the sonic boom it creates sometimes snaps 'nutters' back to reality. I'm still not sure why you think these guys try to get into a shootout situation, considering a lot of them shoot themselves or surrender once police arrive. (you would have seen this last point in the data my link provided)

And you keep saying 'the 2 day trained janitor.' Because of the lack of information about the janitors, you can't keep saying that like he's unqualified, as he could be a retired scout sniper, an ex seal, etc.

The janitors will be trained to be a deterrent, the teachers will be trained to gather students and get them to a safe spot. One thing they learned from Columbine is to not sit and wait, but aggressively pursue the shooter.

As far as the school having 4 janitors working, I don't know, and that helps the point. If a shooter is planning something, they still need to account for all 4, whether they are in the janitors office, at home, in the parking lot, at your mom's house, etc.

The 'hope' was added as a bonus to a situation of the shooter being hit, but you are correct in that any plan that is designed to prevent death, we always hope it works, even if it's a fool proof plan, we still hope for a good result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.