BLOG #4
Like clockwork (assuming your clock is broken), the hog blog returns. This time, we take a swinely look at one of many controversies swirling around our educational system: the growing drumbeat for arming schoolteachers. But the Hog leaves aside the usual blather about safety, making killers out of teachers, and the possibility that if little Snavely is clever enough to place an unnoticed tack on a teacher’s chair, he might conceivably get his grubby little hands on Mr. Fiordinoorts’s Smith & Wesson. No, with all the electrons and newsprint being wasted on these facets of the issue, the Hog focuses on the one thing none of the political yahoos mentions: the cost.
Let’s be clear: the Hog is neither pro nor anti-firearm. A gun is a tool, and a darn useful one in the right hands. But the right hands are guided by a brain that understands the responsibilities, training, practice, and expense involved in firearms ownership. To hear your local legislators talk, you would think that all we need is to do a little screening and a little training of teachers, and they’ll be ready to go all Rambo on the next Charles Whitman, Adam Lanza, Harris and Klebold, Seung-Hui Cho, etc. And, like most politicians, they seem not to have considered the cost of this little endeavor, let alone who will bear it. So let’s look at some numbers: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11… OK, some relevant numbers.
First, each teacher involved will need to acquire, or be furnished with, an appropriate sidearm for defense. The U.S. Army has chosen for its new standard issue pistol the Sig Sauer 320 in the 9mm configuration, replacing the Beretta M9. And in a live fire situation, most authorities would agree that a semiautomatic pistol is preferable to, say, a revolver. While there are many choices, a reasonable possibility for “educational” purposes would be the Glock 17, a light, reliable 9mm weapon that has the added advantage of simplicity. It retails for between $499 and $726. Although bulk discounts would likely be available, á la U.S. Army, for entire states equipping all their school districts. Problem here being, not every handgun is right for every hand. The choice of a sidearm is highly personal, and you must be comfortable with a gun to be effective with it.
But one doesn’t just lay down five C-Notes for a naked, ahem, gun. Proper use requires accessories (“gear”, in the male argot) such as holster, hearing and eye protection, extra magazines (or “mags”), a good case, a lock, a safe (an absolute necessity), and supplies. All told, the initial expense would be around $1000, possibly much more, depending upon the safe.
Next, we have training. The typical expense for an hour of handgun training in the private sector is roughly $75. Your mileage may vary. However, we are talking about a situational training course for someone who is likely a novice. For any such course to be worth its salt would require a seasoned instructor and a goodly number of hours. Not to mention significant immersion in simulated live-fire situations (oops, mentioned it). Proper reactions require force-on-force training (Google it). Even considering bulk discounts, $500 per teacher seems reasonable.
So now we have the gun, the gear, and we are all trained-up. Anyone who has tried to hit the broad side of a barn door with a bigger pistol than a .22 knows that it requires practice. To hit the bull’s-eye consistently at any distance, lots of practice. One soldier of the Hog’s acquaintance says it requires 16,000 rounds of practice to become consistently accurate. These rounds aren’t cheap. The least expensive online bulk 9mm ammo is over $0.30. Per. Round. That’s over $4,800 worth of practice ammo. You can save money by reloading, but that requires an additional initial investment in the equipment, ongoing cost of supplies, and even more time invested in the enterprise.
BTW, if you’ve ever actually fired one of these beauties, you know that they kick. Hard. So, between the kick and the expense, most practice sessions are limited to between 100 and 200 rounds. Let’s say 150 rounds per practice session, that’s a cool $45 up in smoke.
Ah, but you need a place to practice. Most spouses, not to mention neighbors and local authorities, frown upon the installation of an improvised firing range in the basement. (“But Honey, think of the money we’ll save…”). While it is still possible during the warm months to drive far enough out in the country to find a mound of dirt suitable for a backstop (“Look, Forksnort, there’s one!” “Dude, that’s a cow.”), the time involved makes it impractical, and there are still the winter months to consider. So what’s left is membership in a local shooting range, at an initial cost of roughly $250-$350, with an attendant monthly nut of $30-$35. (Or you could choose $25 per session).
And now that you have the gun, ammo, gear, training, and place to practice, now all you need is a spare couple of hours per week to develop and keep up your proficiency. The Hog doesn’t know about you, but two hours per week is but a drop in his proverbial trough. Perhaps not so much for teachers who actually have lessons to prepare, homework to grade, and other educational activities peripheral to their newfound soldierly duties.
Speaking of time, a handgun is a machine, and requires periodic maintenance and repair. This is typically performed by the owner, who must become familiar with the procedures involved in disassembly, cleaning, lubrication, and reassembly. If regular maintenance is not performed, the gun will become unreliable (and useless for defense), if not downright dangerous to its owner. Some tools and supplies are also required, at an additional expense. A reasonable estimate would be $100 to get started.
We would be remiss not to note the additional expense to the schools and the states of the inevitable litigation that will result from thousands of guns (in hands of amateurs of varying expertise and temperament) roaming the halls of academia. Whether the schools are self-insuring or have to purchase insurance, increased expense is foreseeable, if not immediately quantifiable.
A quick tally:
Gun: $500.
Accessories: $500.
Training: $500 (conservatively).
Ammo for proficiency: $4,800.
Range membership: $350.
Annual range dues @ $32.50/mo.: $390.
Maintenance tools and supplies: $100 (up to unlimited for gearheads).
Additional insurance and litigation costs: best addressed by lawyers and actuaries, preferably in a padded room.
“Grand” total: $9,900, plus $390 a year in monthly expense. $10,000 of expense, per teacher. The next question, then: who will pay for this munificence?
Well, this is where the proverbial substance hits the well-known appliance. You see none of these sultans of safety adding to their pontifications, “of course we’ll need a tax increase to fund the $10,000 per teacher expense.” Better yet, “sorry, but we’ll need to lower the thermostats to 50° to fit teacher peacekeeping implementation (bureaucratese for strappin’ up schoolmarms) into the budget.” No, in typical American fashion, the soundbites fly thick and fast, making considerable political hay, not to mention the byproducts thereof after digestion by bulls. But with no mention of expense.
The decision to own a gun entails considerable changes in lifestyle. It is not something one picks up as easily as a frozen dinner at the supermarket. So, the proposal to arm teachers carries with it all sorts of expenditure of time and money. Before anybody buys into this trumpery, so to speak, make the bastards tell you how much, and who will pay. Let’s see them soundbite their way around that.
Next time: trumpery?
Maybe our new education secretary, Betsy whatever, a billionaire, would be kind enough to fund this much needed educational resource — after she finds out where the pencils are.
Someone ought to tell the poor gal that pencils don’t come with the job, teachers and students must provide their own! After all, handouts are reserved for the wealthy.