District to arm teachers?
Tamaqua Area would be the first in the state to let employees carry guns, but some staff members and parents oppose the recently passed policy
A little more than six weeks ago, the Tamaqua Area School Board approved a policy that would allow teachers, administrators and other staff to carry a firearm in school.
The district would be the first in Pennsylvania to take the step that's frequently discussed in the aftermath of school shootings, with advocates saying arming teachers would make schools less of a target.
The board was unanimous, 7-0, in its Sept. 18 vote. Others in the community, including the teachers union president, some teachers and some parents aren't so sure.
Before the measure goes into full effect, the public can make its feelings known at a special meeting at 6 p.m. Wednesday at the Tamaqua Area Middle School.
“For the board, the objective is to listen,” School Board President Larry Wittig said. “We're open. We're not close-minded.
“We don't want to slam this down the public's throat. The public needs to buy into this. Is everyone going to buy in? No. You're not going to please everybody,” Wittig said. “But I want everyone to understand the care and the detail that's going into this.”
Wittig said he found it unlikely that the board would rescind the policy, but might consider other approaches to supplement it.
“We want to know the best way to keep our kids safe. Period,” he said. “But we're not going to do nothing.”
The policy
Policy 705 is the brainchild of board member Nicholas Boyle, a 29-year-old Walker Township resident and chairman of the board's security committee.
Boyle, a Tamaqua graduate, disregards the idea of hiring school resource officers. Tamaqua has never had a uniformed officer, an increasingly popular way for districts to ensure there's an armed presence in each school. Boyle says arming staff is a better way to go.
He said unless there are multiple school resource officers in a building — which he noted would be very costly — he sees little point. As evidence, he pointed to schools where an armed, uniformed presence did little to prevent the carnage during shootings at Columbine, Colo., Virginia Tech and Parkland, Fla.
“They prove to be ineffective. Time and time again, they fail us,” he said. “This gives us a blanket of protection. This gives us multiple people from multiple perspectives.”
The element of surprise is the key, Boyle maintains. Identities of staff members carrying weapons would not be divulged so a shooter wouldn't know who to target and would be unable to neutralize a single armed presence.
Staff who participate in the voluntary program would receive a $2,000 stipend and a $250,000 life insurance policy. The policy allows for districtpurchased firearms, but Boyle said the preference would be for teachers to bring their own.
The weapons would be worn discreetly during the workday. Boyle said this would provide an element of surprise in the event of an attack and ensure that students aren't distracted.
Teachers carrying firearms would have an identifiable mark so law enforcement responding to an incident could identify them, Boyle said.
The participating teachers would need to be authorized to carry a weapon and would undergo Act 235 firearm training, a state requirement for guns at work. Part of that training involves a psychological evaluation, fingerprinting and background checks, according to Boyle.
Wittig said there would also be more intensive training focusing on active shooter protocols. He said this would rival the training of law enforcement — a comment Wittig said has gotten him into hot water.
But he stands by it. One of the programs the district is considering for training is Ohio-based Faster — an acronym that stands for Faculty/Administrator Safety Training and Emergency Response.
Boyle expects costs to be about $1,500 per teacher for the Faster training. Factoring in other costs, he said, the board expects to spend about $40,000 on the training and certifications for 12 volunteers. Ideally, he said, there would be three armed staff in each of the district's four buildings.
Wittig said he'd like even more to be trained so that there could be a rotation in effect to guard against complacency or burnout.
The teachers
But who will volunteer? Frank Wenzel, Tamaqua Education Association president, said discussions with union members exposed deep misgivings about the measure.
“This is not something that people go into teaching thinking they would want to do,” Wenzel said.
He admits that when arming staff was first discussed in 2013, after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., he didn't think it was a bad idea.
“But the more I thought about it and what it would require, the more I realized that I really don't think I'm equipped to do that,” Wenzel said.
The potential for accidents, the liability and the psychological impact of opening fire on a student or students — even if they're engaged in violence against their classmates — are all reasons Wenzel said he changed his mind.
There are staff who would volunteer to carry a firearm. A high school teacher who requested anonymity because he plans to volunteer said he's spoken to colleagues who are interested and want more information.
The teacher said he was in favor of arming staff and was glad to see the measure reemerge.
“When someone wants to do evil in a school building or a synagogue, you can't reason with them,” the teacher said.
The teacher described himself as a “typical Schuylkill County resident,” saying he'd spent the majority of years around firearms for hunting and sport.
He said he believed training for the program, coupled with an insider's knowledge of the school, the staff and its students, would put him at an advantage over law enforcement during an active shooter scenario.
Scarier to him than confronting a shooter was being unarmed and defenseless should the unthinkable happen.
“I would sooner be in a situation where I can protect myself and students with a firearm. I'd feel more confident with that than by throwing things or screaming,” he said. “At least this way I know I could defend myself.”
The parents
The division among parents is fueled with passion.
Jennifer Paisley, the mother of seven daughters in the district, is distressed that the district is completely discounting school resource officers.
“If the safety of our kids is really our priority, then we really need to cough up some extra bucks for it,” she said.
She supports a multifaceted approach that would include law enforcement in the school along with better mental health support — something education experts say could be effective in preventing gun violence in school along with myriad other challenges facing young people.
“I don't want kids to think every problem can be solved with a gun,” Paisley said.
Liz Pinkey of Tamaqua has three children in the district and comes from a family of hunters who are familiar with and respect firearms.
“If we have to go to guns, then they should be in the right hands,” Pinkey said. “And teachers aren't the right hands.”
Charlie Whitehead, a West Penn Township resident who works as a police officer in Salisbury Township, said he was initially fine with the policy. But after attending an October school board meeting and hearing from teachers who weren't comfortable with the program, he began to change his mind.
“They treat a lot of these kids like they're their own kids. You're putting a lot on them to say you're going from a caretaker function to all of a sudden you may have to shoot one of these kids,” Whitehead said.
But then there are plenty of other parents like Matthew Stahler of Rush Township, who believes the policy makes sense.
“I don't know that there are too many other ways to manage it,” Stahler said of the school shootings. “I think this would be a big deterrent. I think it would make people think twice before going in there.”
Peter Langman, an Allentown psychologist who authored the book “School Shooters: Understanding High School, College, and Adult Perpetrators,” said it's important to realize how rare school shootings are.
One-tenth of 1 percent of homicides are committed in schools. Far more common threats to student safety are suicide and opioids, Langman said.
A gunman often goes into a mass shooting with the expectation of being killed or committing suicide, he said. As such, armed staff could serve a useful purpose for a perpetrator, according to Langman. Even very well-trained police have trouble hitting the correct targets under harrowing circumstances such as a mass shooting, Langman noted.
“The tragedy of a teacher trying to do the right thing and [accidentally] killing his or her student and having to live with that is hard to imagine,” he said.
The legal issues
While Tamaqua would be the first in the commonwealth to authorize staff to carry guns, it's far from the first in the nation. As of 2013, when a wave of schools began considering arming teachers as a strategy, 18 states have laws authorizing districts to allow employees to carry firearms.
Pennsylvania tried to join those ranks last year, but Senate Bill 383 never made it to the state House floor for a vote.
Last year, the Pennsylvania Senate narrowly passed Senate Bill 383, which sponsor Sen. Don White, R-Indiana, said would “clear up any uncertainty in the law and establish a framework to serve as guidance” for arming school faculty and staff.
Sen. David Argall, R-Berks/ Schuykill, was among the 28 votes for the measure. Lehigh Valley Sens. Lisa Boscola and Pat Browne were among the 22 opposed.
Once the bill entered the state House's Education Committee June 29, 2017, it never re-emerged. Gov. Tom Wolf vowed to veto it if it makes it to his desk.
Attorney John Freund III, who serves as a solicitor for a handful of districts in the Valley, said Tamaqua's policy “does not, on its face, violate any law of which I am aware.”
Jeffrey Bowe, solicitor for Tamaqua, declined to discuss specifics about the policy and its legality.
“I can tell you I've looked into it. We'll certainly deal with those if and when they are filed,” he said of legal challenges.
“We don’t want to slam this down the public’s throat. The public needs to buy into this. Is everyone going to buy in? No. You’re not going to please everybody.” — Larry Wittig, school board president