There's a big difference between challenging a home invader and challenging a crazy student, though - collateral damage.  What if our hypothetical gunslinger teacher whips out his .357 to defend himself against a crazed attacker - and ends up missing and shooting some other student in the back as she's running out the door to get away. I just don't think teachers should be put in this position of being asked to / expected to exert violent authority over students.

Police officers make the same decision on a regular basis. I have heard very few arguments for removing guns from them even though they have shown themselves to be wildly inaccurate marksmen when the situation takes a turn for the worst. And who is asking the teachers to do anything? All the proposal is stating is that teachers, if they are already licensed and trained, may carry a firearm if they feel the need to so. No Smith and Wesson press gangs are going around putting weapons in the hands of reluctant blue haired English teachers.

In the classroom, a gun isn't just a matter of self defense - it's also a method of enforcing authority.  This is what I find problematic - to my mind the state is the only authority that should have the option of enforcing that authority with lethal force (and as you know, I'm very skeptical of the state having that authority as well).

Make it a rule that if a teacher brandishes a weapon inappropriately that they lose their job. Zero tolerance and all that. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

The way I see it is that it this is all hypothetical anyway. We could argue various situations in which it may be a good idea to carry a gun and when it would not be. I'd rather leave the question (and the corresponding assumption of risk) to the conscience and judgement of each individual person.

Police officers make the same decision on a regular basis. I have heard very few arguments for removing guns from them even though they have shown themselves to be wildly inaccurate marksmen when the situation takes a turn for the worst.

Well, I'll at least be consistent by saying that I'm made uncomfortable about the idea of average police patrolmen having guns as well.  Perhaps if the police weren't regularly armed with lethal weapons they would feel a bit less willing to abuse their power (an issues we've discussed many times here on TnT).

I'd rather leave the question (and the corresponding assumption of risk) to the conscience and judgement of each individual person.

The issue here is that we're not just talking about the individual right to carry a gun.  We're moving beyond that into educational policy.  For better or worse, teachers are public employees and education is a matter of public policy, decided through the political process.  By becoming a public school teacher, a person becomes a public servant, and in that process gives up certain rights (for example, in many states, the right to keep one's salary private).  The question here, then, isn't just about a teacher's individual rights, but rather about what makes for the best educational experience (this is, I would say, part of the problem with public employee's unions of all sorts - they take public policy out of the political process and put it, at least partially, in the hands of the bureaucracy).  If that's a problem, then maybe the solution is to privatize the educational system and live with the consequences of that decision.  

There's a big difference between challenging a home invader and challenging a crazy student, though - collateral damage.  What if our hypothetical gunslinger teacher whips out his .357 to defend himself against a crazed attacker - and ends up missing and shooting some other student in the back as she's running out the door to get away.  I just don't think teachers should be put in this position of being asked to / expected to exert violent authority over students.  There are too many conflicts of interest, in a sense.  How can a student develop a level of trust with a teacher who may be carrying a gun?  The big difference is that in the home a gun or (most of the time) on the street a gun is just a method of self defense.  In the classroom, a gun isn't just a matter of self defense - it's also a method of enforcing authority.  This is what I find problematic - to my mind the state is the only authority that should have the option of enforcing that authority with lethal force (and as you know, I'm very skeptical of the state having that authority as well).

I'm afraid we'll have to have a disagreement over this. You state that you don't want teachers being asked to exert violent authority over students. But in the case of a kid pulling a piece in class or otherwise violently attacking others, what is the teacher supposed to do? Bake him/her a pie? Tell them to take it outside? Teachers are currently asked to break up and separate fights. They already have this authority.

Finally, how will the kids even know the teacher is packing? If they are told to keep it concealed then isn't it likely that few will ever know?

Teachers are currently asked to break up and separate fights. They already have this authority.

In my high school, at least, the assistant principal was the disciplinarian and was called in to deal with most of that stuff.  Teachers provided immediate crisis control if needed and dealt with the low level stuff, but anything really serious went up the chain to the administration.  I realize that this is no longer a realistic way to handle things in many schools, but that brings me back to my previous point, that if the system is that badly broken, maybe we need to just scrap it and figure something else out.  

It's sad to me that we are okay with the fact that in many schools teachers need to be more skilled at classroom management than they are in their actual field of study.  Teachers that know their stuff are forced out because they can't handle the crap.  The ones that stay are either dedicated saints (who I respect tremendously) or people who deal with it by finding a way to tune the student problems out in one way or another (which I really doubt leads to a quality education) because they value the job too much to quit.

"Finally, how will the kids even know the teacher is packing?"

Here's a thought...  How about if the teachers openly-carry, in an external holster, so a kid would know right up front that their ass is grass right from the get-go.  

I'm not advocating that all teachers turn into Annie Oakley, or the wild west, but maybe the visible presence of a gun would stop something before it started.  

I'm just thinking out loud.  I do that sometimes.

there's only one way to find out...

so a kid would know right up front that their ass is grass right from the get-go.

I assume that the kid would know his ass was grass because he himself was packing and not for say chewing gum?

-But but...I'll put it on my nose!
-Too late, sucker.  Hasta la vista, baby.

This does remind me of something one of my professors said.  He informed us that if we wanted perfect behavior throughout the year, all we had to do was shoot and kill a student at random at the beginning of the year.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

"Finally, how will the kids even know the teacher is packing?"

Keep the little buggers guessing. The uncertainty of whether kindly old Mrs. Caruthers or curmudgeonly Mr. Kraut are packing heat and ready to ventilate you at a moment's notice should cut down on snoozing in class and focus the students' attention on what's being taught.

Illegitimi non carborundum.