Mobile Website | Login | Register
Staff Directory | Advertise | Subscribe | About Us
Business Government Politics Region Crime/Public Safety Education People E-edition Ashburn Hamilton Hillsboro Lansdowne Leesburg Lovettsville Middleburg Purcellville River Creek Round Hill Sterling
Basketball Football Youth Wrestling Gymnastics Swimming Volleyball Baseball Track Golf Cheer Cross Country Schedule Scores
Brambleton Community of Faith Hangin in the Nosebleeds Journal Entry Loudoun Essence Made in Loudoun Odd Angles River Creek & Lansdowne South Riding Sterling, Cascades & CountrySide
This Week's Slideshow Browse All Galleries Your Best Dish Featured Video The Virginians
  • Announcements
  • Autos
  • Jobs
  • Legals
  • Homes
  • YardSales
  • Submit an Ad
  • Newspaper Advertising Online Advertising
    Classified listings Homes section

    School Board member floats idea of guns in elementary schools

    Prove to me why keeping a gun in each Loudoun County elementary school wouldn’t be a cheap and effective school shooting deterrent, asked School Board member Bill Fox (Leesburg), in the comment section of a TooConservative.com blog post titled “Since Nothing Else Works, Arm the Principals.”

    The post and Fox’s comments come after a shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Sandy Hook, Conn. left 26 children and adults dead.

    Fox estimates it would cost $100,000 to buy a gun safe with a fingerprint lock, a tactical firearm (he suggests a semi-automatic shotgun as an example) and provide initial training for three school staff members.

    He says the cost would be $50,000 a year annually to keep training employees to use the firearms.

    “For the sake of argument ... I would like to hear what people perceive to be the realistic worst and best case scenarios of such an action, as well as a cost/benefit analysis based on the numbers above and likely outcomes,” Fox says in his comment, dated 11:22 p.m. Dec. 19. “Now, I understand that many think the mere suggestion is insane, and I get that ... I would invite those who believe this is the worst idea in the history of public schools to construct likely scenarios which indicate the wrongheadedness of this approach. Likewise, a mere vote of support is not particularly helpful either.”

    Fox said Thursday afternoon that he has no plans to propose what he outlined on TooConservative.com be used in Loudoun County schools and he was instead hoping for an open dialogue on the issue. He reiterated that he not arguing for what he posted, but looking for dialogue on the issue.

    “When it comes to protecting our children, no solution should be off the table,” Fox said. “All I’m suggesting is at this point we have a discussion with both the community and experts in security policy.”

    He said he occasionally reads the site and he hoped his comment would generate meaningful responses. He said discussion of the topic in the larger public sphere was usually met with a knee-jerk reaction.

    “You’re called crazy without any offering of what this would really look like,” Fox said.

    He hoped that wouldn’t happen on the site because the story he commented on suggested arming principals.

    The poster of the story, “Lloyd the Idiot,” said that allowing, not requiring school administrators to have weapons on school campuses was what was needed to deter potential school shooters.

    “I propose that the General Assembly clear the way for school boards to allow administrators to have guns on campus,” Lloyd said. “At minimum, it should commission a study on the topic.”

    Currently, Virginia law prohibits anyone who isn’t a law enforcement officer from carrying a loaded gun on public school property.

    Citizens with concealed carry permits may possess a weapon on school property as long as they don’t exit their vehicle, according to Virginia state law.

    Several of those who responded were decidedly against the idea. One poster, Ed Meyers, suggested that schools instead use stun or taser guns.

    “That way when the kids accidentally get ahold of the principal’s gun they can’t kill themselves or others,” he said.

    Fox considered a stun gun completely inadequate for safety purposes.

    “But no cop in the history of law enforcement has responded to an assailant with a semiautomatic weapon by attempting to disable him with a friggan’ taser,” Fox said.

    Fox again repeated at 1:39 a.m. that no posters had offered him statistics or concrete scenarios disproving or proving the idea.

    “I would like to know the basis of your contention that a gun in the context I have described above is likely to be used improperly,” Fox said. “I am talking about a gun kept in a safe that will never come out of said safe unless there is an armed intruder, or for training purposes under the supervision of an expert.”

    He continued that he was looking for statements based on evidence.

    “Again, I am asking for realistic scenarios supporting your contention that this is a ‘bad, bad idea’ or that ‘someone innocent will get hurt,’” Fox said. “Unsupported conclusory statements like these just don’t advance the analysis.”

    He also said that since firearms account for less than one percent of accidental deaths and roughly half of American households have them, he said it was an overstatement that a gun would likely be misused.

    Fox said in an earlier post that he wasn’t taking any solution off the table.

    “So I don’t think any solution, including having some sort of tactical firearm in every school, should simply be brushed aside because it conflicts with a certain worldview or sentiments about guns,” Fox said. “Now, we might decide that arming our schools is not practical. … But I can tell you one thing for sure: such determinations should be made by safety and security experts who have carefully considered the issue, not by bloggers who are so afraid of guns that they don’t know which end the projectile comes out.”

    School Board Chairman Eric Hornberger (Ashburn) said Thursday afternoon he hadn’t talked with Fox, but that there were no plans to bring up what Fox posted online at any future school board meeting.

    He called the idea “logistically impossible,” and said he had received emails from constituents concerned about school safety, most of whom suggested metal detectors or shatterproof windows.

    “I highly doubt Loudoun County is ready for that,” Hornberger said of the idea.

    Fox isn’t the first to float the idea, Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) addressed the possibility of allowing school officials to carry firearms on campus.

    “I know there is a knee-jerk reaction against that, but I think we should have a discussion about it,” McDonnell told radio station WTOP Tuesday.

    Loudoun County Democratic Chairman Evan Macbeth issued a statement Thursday afternoon stating he opposed efforts by State Sen. Dick Black (R-4th) and Del. Bob Marshall (R-13th) to require gun training for at least one employee of every Virginia public school.

    “The fact that Senator Black supports such wrong-headed and nonsensical legislation is offensive. In the aftermath of the Newtown tragedy we require serious solutions to address gun violence in our
    country,” Macbeth said. “In a nation where guns have been the second-leading cause of death of children aged 10 to 19, requiring that guns be present in our schools makes the problem worse, not better.”

    Comments

    Oranges869…..it’s not the initial training of staff you have to worry about…it would be continuous training.  What are the costs for that?  I’d rather they spend the money on a panic button than train a principal who may or may not be in the school at the time of an incident.  Anyone can push a panic button…not everyone can be trained to shoot an intruder (many of whom are wearing body armor) in such a public setting.


    @ Oranges
    “aberrations”? 20 kids get shot and killed, some of whom were shot 11 times and you call this an “aberration”? Not a horrific preventable tragedy… nope.. just an aberration. I’d like to see you explain that to one of the kids parents.
    “oh hey, sorry to hear your kid got shot and killed, but it was just an aberration, don’t worry about it”
    The logic of throwing more guns at the problem is the equivalent of throwing more gasoline on a fire to put it out.


    That’s up to the movie theater owner. We have gun free zones and guess what they are all protected by armed gaurds, Congress, Senators offices, hospitals even DMV’s. Yet the tree huggers like Frank are willing to let aberrations like Lanza a unguarded killing zone.


    @ Oranges
    Please also include cost for providing armed security at each and every movie theater in Loudoun. Using NRA logic, this must also be factored in.


    You can buy safes, guns and provide training for armed resistence at 53 elementary schools here in Loudoun County for 2.65 million dollars. That’s a better way to spend money then for 8 turf football fields at a cost of a million dollars a pop wouldn’t you say Mr. Kevin Kuesters? Gun free zones are protected by armed law enforcement officers except the schools where the most vulnerable of us go to learn.


    The NRA is an incredibly anti-American organization.  It would be perfectly happy to turn our country into an armed camp. 

    Someday, perhaps those who embrace the goals of the NRA will come to realize they’ve been played as fools by the gun lobby.  The NRA exists to sell guns and tear down any of society’s protective measures if they conflict with the goal of selling more guns. 

    SImple as that.  If they ever, EVER have an idea or position that conflicts with the prime directive (sell more guns) then that would indeed be worthy of dicussion.

    Virginia politicans that pander to the NRA (like McDonnell who floated their “arm the teachers” nonsense a few days before the NRA came out with it) do so because their headquarters is here in Virginia.  That is our states shame.


    @ NRA Gun Nuts
    Quite a tragic turn of today in Upstate NY. Yet another shooting, this time by a deranged man whom set a fire to lure in his Firefighter victims.
    Please comment. Is it your stance that we now place armed security guards at all of our nation’s fires to prevent further bloodshed?


    Well I am sure the NRA would say the armed security guard and deputy involved in Columbine were not trained adequately….or too concerned about hitting other students instead of the two gunman…why they should have just gone charging in there with their guns blazing…..more guns are always the answer when it comes to the NRA.


    My guess is that most faculty and staff would prefer for resource officers to handle security.  NRA lobbyists and gun sale profiteers should pay for all additional costs to secure schools, not our local taxes.


    @waya: Less guns does not apply to criminals and crazy people. They will obtain all the guns they need one way or another. All your proposal ends up doing is restricting guns to good honest and responsible people while the criminals and crazy people are the only armed people roaming around. Just look at Mexican Drug Gangs. They have more guns than the police and Mexico has some of the toughest gun-control laws in the world.


    The answer isn’t more guns. .it is LESS guns.  There was an armed security guard at Columbine.  Guess the NRA crazies conveniently forgot about that.


    Ed said: Ever since we allowed Pilots to carry a firearm, we have not had a hijacking.

    There were only two hijacking involving US planes between 1978 and 2001 - one of which was a private FedEx plane, so suggesting that we can attribute the lack of hijackings to pilots carrying (who, by the way, have had their share of “accidental discharges”) is ridiculous.


    First of all, there was an armed guard at Columbine. Both he AND a police officer in the area exchanged gunfire with the boys - neither hit and both stopped when the shooters entered the school because of the chance of hitting the wrong person.

    Second - if you look at the ACTUAL rate of school shootings, there is a 1 in 10,000 chance of a school being targeted and a 1 in one MILLION chance of any given child being shot to death in a mass school shooting.  The odds of a high school athlete dropping dead during a sporting event due to an unknown heart condition are higher - yet no one suggests that we require cardiac stress tests for anyone signing up for a sport.

    This is a knee-jerk reaction that would do nothing but make some people feel better - but not the kids.  There is research that shows that kids feel LESS safe in schools where they add armed guards (the “it must not be safe if we need them” idea).


    Consequences of guns in school:  deaths due to unintended discharges.  Mortality rates is on average .3 deaths per 100,000 people but could be 5 times that for high school populations. Is it acceptable to have a gun-related death every few years because some think guns in schools will reduce the risk of a tragedy like Sandy Hook?


    If we put guns in schools, it ought to be in the holster of a sworn deputy, not the music teacher.


    Is Bill Fox or any of the other gun nuts commenting here aware that there was an armed guard on duty at Columbine at the time of the massacre? Who shot at and missed Eric Harris?


    More guns in the school won’t stop this….it did not stop Columbine…where there was an armed deputy on duty at the time.


    Mr Fox….please tell me how fast the principal is going to be able to get the gun from the safe and then with that adrenaline rush be able to shoot with any degree of accuracy….will the school district pay for all the shooting time necessary for the principal to reach marksmanship level?  How about having panic buttons installed in each office that is directly wired to the local authorities along with sounding an all school alarm?  Next, let’s get bullet proof glass in all the classroom windows as well as bullet proof doors.  Since the schools have cinder block walls in the classroom, the kids would be safely contained if the teacher locks the door from the inside.


    Mr. Fox, lets keep educators doing what they do best.  I assume that LCPS has some kind of security plans?  I do know from going to my childs elemenatary school they do not have a “resource office”.  How about a private security guard similar to one you see at DMV?  Cops need to do cop stuff, not baby sit a building.  This will also help the economy by creating more jobs.  Health care should be the next issue.  School counslers need to be empowered to send troubled kids for help.  Then fix the health care system so they get the help, not a pill.  The big issue is as a society are we ready to look into the mirror? Gun control does not fix poor parenting or broken homes.  Violence on tv or video games that promote killing need to change as much as regulations on fire arms.  Banning guns will not stop those that want a particular gun from obtaining one.  We can not stop drugs.  So tax the crap out of a 30 round magizine, $100 a round?  I do not think many will be sold.  A sensable form to purchase a fire arm, not the joke that is in place now.  I am a parent of two children, conceled carry permit holder, and member of the NRA.  Not all gun owners are gun nuts.


    Got a liberal automated call yesterday lying about Senator Black’s stand on guns.  I called his office and found that no one is trying to force anyone to carry a gun.  If a teacher is properly trained and qualifies for a concealed carry permit, they can voluntarily carry concealed if they want to. 

    Like it or not, these “gun free zones” aren’t working - they may make you feel better but the reality is that it makes people a sitting duck because murders know the people there are defenseless.


    An idea is an idea.  Bill Fox opened up the idea for discussion.  Good for him.  We want innnovation and new ideas from elected officials…and then wail when the throw around ideas.  Cut the guy some slack for THINKING outside the box.

    Whether good or not, the IDEA is worth THINKING about and debating.


    When the sh*t hits the fan, who do you call? A teacher with a gun? You call the sheriff. If a gun in the school is the answer, put it in the hands of someone who knows how to use it as safely as possible.


    Mr. Fox should ask the County’s liability insurers what they think about the idea. They’re experts in risk assessment and this isn’t the first time this has been considered.

    They’ll explain why the risk to life and limb is greater with all of those guns in inexperienced hands than it is without them.


    I have over 21 years in the military, and I can tell you, we DO NOT want more people with guns. I have seen Soldiers from all levels and all different backgrounds of military training, and a lot of times I shake my head at the things I see.  The people are supposed to be highly trained shooters. Sorry, but no matter how hard you try and teach someone, they just will not get it. So sending someone out with a gun, that has taken a course by someone who is basically checking the blocks to say it was done, sorry, but that is not the answer.
    Everyone having a gun does not prevent mass murders and crimes with weapons, CO has a Concealed Carry Law, that did not prevent the movie theater shooting.
    AZ has a Concealed Carry Law, and you do not even have to have a permit to carry the weapon, but that did not stop the mass shooting and a congress woman from being shot
    The recent Mall shooting, they have a Concealed Weapons carry law, the mall was a gun free zone, the shooter killed two people and then himself, an individual had his concealed weapon with him in the mall (claims he did not know it was a gun free zone), and did not fire a single shot, he did not prevent anything.
    Current laws need to be enforced and loopholes closed first, try that before all these knee jerk reactions. Taking weapons from people is not the answer either, want a gun, buy a gun, don’t want a gun don’t buy one.
    Do things need to change, yes they do, but stop with the knee jerk reactions, look at what we have a see where it is broken first, tighten that up first, and then look at alternatives.


    See my latest post on LoudounProgress.org.


    The tyrannical country of Great Britain, from that which we escaped from in the first place, has a murder rate per capita, of 0.04 people per 100,000.  Our murder rate is 3.70 per 100,000.  Britain allows certain types of guns, but also has regulation and restrictions.  These numbers do not include suicides.  It would appear, that the price of our current interpretation of the 2nd Amendment - is costing many thousands of lives each year.  Somewhere in the neighborhood of 11 or 12 thousand deaths by firearms (not including suicides).  Are those statistics satisfactory for this nation ?


    The numbers seem to be way inflated concerning costs, but I have an alternate idea that costs nothing. BAN GUN FREE MURDER ZONES. GFZs only affect the law abiding therefore they are an abject public safety policy by definition on their face. Citizens with concealed handgun permits have proven to be trustworthy. Allow parents and teachers and the general public to carry in schools just as they do everywhere else that children can be found.


    solve the gun problem.  we have a gun problem.  stop trying to make this about putting more guns in our environment.


    I am glad to see Mr. Fox is thinking. His ideas so far are the only different ideas that are a determent. The rest are revenue enhancement for the government. You may not like the idea of armed educators but you have to applaud Mr. Fox for thinking and thinking outside the box. Our middle school and high schools have the sheriffs presence with 51 elementary it would be much smarter at 50k per school to train educators and supply safes with weapons then to assign full time officers. Is there a way to put out of work service veterans to works as guardians, don’t know!


    We need to board up all school windows, provide students with kevlar & only have one way into & out of schools with reinforced doors only opened for people that have been searched outside first.  We can man the entrances with our excellent TSA personnel.


    Perhaps I was too hasty when I called for people to ignore “Too Conservative.”

    www.loudounprogress.org/?p=4334

    This article confirms the shift to the dark side, and also shows that the blog provides needed transparency that we may not see in a less spontaneous setting.

    Question for our educational leaders and the greater community. What myths do we want to teach our children; that Moses said “let my people go,” that Jesus said “you don’t have to bow down to Caesar,” that Rosa Parks said “I can sit where I please?” Isn’t that the lesson we want our children to hear - that we all have personal power to confront evil? That power comes from what’s inside us, not from the barrel of a gun.


    Sorry to say this, guys and gals, but there is already in place a prevention of the problem.  It is called resource officers.  They are already in Loudoun county schools.  What is a resource officer?  It is a cop.  With a gun.  A trained police officer.  So, why is it that Mr. Fox does not know that?  I guess, once again, we see an uninformed politician trying to make a name for himself, in order to, it appears, run for higher offices.


    Why stop with the principal?  Arm the students.  What chance would a crazy shooter have against a couple of hundred kids shooting back?

    It would also swell the membership of NRA.


    One way to disprove this would be to send a survey to all our Loudoun elementary administrators asking if they’d like to take yearly firearms training and have a semi-automatic long gun in their office. Any guesses to the results?

    Since Mr. Fox said, “When it comes to protecting our children, no solution should be off the table,” here’s another suggestion: Why doesn’t the School Board purchase bulletproof vests for every student, like the shooter in Newtown reportedly had, so it makes them more safe? Wait, I think I know the answer to that one.

    Increased gun regulation, better requirements for safe gun storage by their owners, easier and more encouraged access to mental healthcare, and working to reduce our culture of violence are all potential solutions I’d be happy to support.


    Arming our teachers/school officials is a great idea and quite frankly I don’t know why it hasn’t been done yet. A shooter is easily going to be deterred when he realizes he can’t prey on unarmed civilians and students. As we all know these shootings have taken place in firearm prohibited areas. So the suspect already has the advantage and the element of surprise. Which leads to catastrophic results, An armed properly trained teacher would be able to quickly subdue the subject. I’m not saying force teachers to carry, but I know many already own guns it should be there choice for personal safety if they want to carry a firearm or not.  Properly train the teachers that choose to be armed, test them yearly and certify them and no accidents will happen. I don’t care how much it cost the “county” to do this. If it prevents an active shooter in our schools it is priceless. With a well planned lock down drill and properly armed teachers these attacks will be much more avoidable. Keep in mind I’m not saying arm teachers with high powered rifles but a simple concealed handgun or tactical shotgun. Also take our tax dollars and place a resource officer in EVERY school. I am all for these bulletproof backpacks for the students as well. I agree it sucks that it has come to this but in my opinion it is the only option to increase the greater safety of our schools. Take our guns away you leave people defenseless against evil. Police response is not instantaneous. An armed, accurate teacher is.


    Next November, GET RID OF THESE REPUBLICANS. They don’t represent us. They only represent gun nuts.


    Listen to me, folks. Nothing else works? Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. The countries with lower murder rates–just about every developed country in the world–do not have teachers and principals packing firearms. They have GUN CONTROL. Do you finally see the road these gun nuts have been taking us down? More guns! More massacres!Between the gun nuts and the rest of us, Bill Fox is siding with the gun nuts.  DON’T SIDE WITH THE GUN NUTS. They don’t give a damn about you. They don’t give a damn about me. They don’t give a damn about dead children in the schools. All they care about is their “solution,” having guns to kill with.


    Ever since we allowed Pilots to carry a firearm, we have not had a hijacking. You don’t have to FORCE teachers to carry.  Many I know are already trained and own firearms.. and have a permit.  You don’t even have to change the law. § 18.2-308.1 states you can’t carry on school property except for access and egress;  and the provisions also shall not apply to (i) persons who possess such weapon or weapons as a part of the school’s curriculum or activities;  So.. if protection is a school sponsored activity, then they are covered under existing law.


    TheOp - I agree with you that we should first consider posting law enforcement and re-mapping the ‘funnel’ areas, at least from a cost and training perspective. However, I am of the theory that more guns = less crime, considering how each and every one of these mass shootings happens in ‘gun-free zones’, assuring the criminals zero initial resistance. When a criminal knows there’s an elevated chance that he’ll be met with immediate resistance (whether in the form of a law enforcement officer or an armed teacher/administrator), he’s naturally going to seek out an easier target, where his vindictive message will be more clearly heard.

    I also HIGHLY disagree with your definition of a ‘first responder’. We ARE our only first responders. Police, fire, medical - they are SECONDARY responders. When something bad happens, we are ALWAYS the first on the scene and WE have a much stronger ability to control the outcome than a secondary responder. The Supreme Court has ruled that it is not the legal obligation of a law enforcement officer to prevent or stop a crime in progress, their only legal obligation is to deter, enforce, and investigate broken laws. I shall continue to consider myself my first line of defense, and encourage the defeat of ‘gun-free zones’ unless each and every citizen is assigned personal protection. Until then, mine assigned personal protection shall be named “Glock”.


    If having a “Gun” at schools with trained personnel is needed, why don’t we hire additional Sheriff’s Deputies so (1) can be posted at every school in Loudoun?  Duh!!!


    I’m embarrassed for Mr. Fox. He’s either clueless on this issue, or delusional. In either case, he’s not qualified to provide leadership in this area. I suggest that if he can’t understand why this is a bad idea, he should test his theory in a simulated environment. I’m sure Quantico could proabably set something up for him, and maybe he could even give it a go, himself, and see how an amateur with a semi-auto shotgun does against a determined, heavily armed, armoured killer in a school full of panicked children. Easy, right?


    Bill Fox, with all due respect you are off your rocker!


    Arming Principals is not a step towards a modern, civilized society.  In fact, it’s a step back towards the Wild West.  What’s next - arming Clerics in the church ?  While I don’t agree personally with the above idea of arming school officials, I do agree that everything should be on the table, and a lot of dialogue from both sides needs to take place, and soon.  I don’t ever want to see 6-year olds pay the price again,  for the interpretation of a document.


    BOS member Fox must be taking lessons from Del. Marshall, Sen. Black, and Gov. McDonnell.  Aren’t these the same guys who voted for extreme trans-vaginal ultrasound legislation last year?


    Principals & Teachers are not first responders. They have enough on their plate to provide world class education in our Institution of Public Education.  It would be wise to assign Sheriff SROs to elementary schools and reconfigure the entry foot print or “funnel” of each of our schools. Further by arming the very person or persons that students should trust, it sends a very confusing message to elementary school students.  Either a Sheriff Deputy or SRO is the appropriate solution, but “arming” our teachers & principals feeds in the theory more guns,less crime.


    While I am completely unopposed to providing teachers with their right carry, I feel that at the moment it’s an unlikely option due to the 50/50 support/opposition. I think that allowing each school to have a ‘school gun’, and spending my tax dollars to provide such training to teachers and administrators is an acceptable compromise and a step in the right direction. While on the topic of school safety, I would like to bring up another point; I am a substitute teacher with Loudoun County and I consistently observe flaws in the security of schools. For example, the first thing teachers are told to do is to lock their doors and move students away from windows. Almost 100% of classroom doors lock from the OUTSIDE ONLY and all require a key - something that I’m not provided as a substitute teacher. While I’m thankful we’re looking at new and additional security options, I think there’s a lot that we can address internally to assist in providing extra safety to our students.

    Get Our Headlines Via Email
    Tuesdays:  
    Thursdays:

    StayConnected

    Follow Us
    on Twitter

    News | Sports

    Like Us
    on Facebook

    News & Sports

    Join Our
    Email List

    Sign up for
    weekly updates
    The Loudoun Times-Mirror

    is an interactive, digital replica
    of the printed newspaper.
    Open the e-edition now.

    Loudoun Business Journal - Summer 2014

    Loudoun Business Journal - Spring 2014