Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

“If someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it”

Posted in:

Illinois

* From Gov. Rauner’s SJ-R op-ed about his amendatory veto entitled “Comprehensive gun bill would make our schools, cities safer”…

We also propose new funding sources that allow schools to hire mental health professionals and school resource officers to prevent tragedies from happening in the future.

As we’ve already discussed, that “new” funding source is an old funding source: Local sales taxes designated exclusively for school infrastructure spending.

* Santa Fe’s recent experience isn’t promising, however…

The school district had an active-shooter plan, and two armed police officers walked the halls of the high school. School district leaders had even agreed last fall to eventually arm teachers and staff under the state’s school marshal program, one of the country’s most aggressive and controversial policies intended to get more guns into classrooms.

They thought they were a hardened target, part of what’s expected today of the American public high school in an age when school shootings occur with alarming frequency. And so a death toll of 10 was a tragic sign of failure and needing to do more, but also a sign, to some, that it could have been much worse.

“My first indication is that our policies and procedures worked,” J.R. “Rusty” Norman, president of the school district’s board of trustees, said Saturday, standing exhausted at his front door. “Having said that, the way things are, if someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it.”

The House Judiciary - Criminal Committee will meet this afternoon to hear testimony on the governor’s amendatory veto language. Hannah Meisel will be live-tweeting, so you can monitor the action on our live coverage post.

* More background…

* With his death-penalty ploy, Rauner uses an old trick he learned from his enemy: Mike Madigan: C’mon, we all know Rauner’s veto wasn’t about passing the bill so much as putting Democrats in an embarrassing position on the eve of November’s election. Vote with the governor’s veto and the Dems violate their anti-death penalty principles. Vote against it, and they expose themselves to weak-on-crime mailings, financed by Rauner, that they’re probably going to get anyway. Ironically, it’s a trick-bag strategy straight out of house speaker Michael Madigan’s playbook. Madigan essentially did the same thing to Rauner with the HB 40 abortion rights bill, eventually forcing the governor to choose between right-wingers or suburban swing voters.

* Madigan sets up vote on Rauner death penalty plan, creating political minefield: The move provides some political insulation for Madigan, the chief political nemesis of the re-election-seeking governor. It prevents the governor from attacking the veteran House speaker for defending the lives of cop killers by blocking a vote on Rauner’s crime-fighting initiative. … The bill is more complex for Republicans. While reinstating the death penalty has its appeal to Republican voters, Rauner’s plan also would create a 72-hour waiting period for all guns, not just military-style firearms contained in the original bill. An expansion of the waiting period is opposed by the politically powerful National Rifle Association and is at odds with many voters in rural Illinois legislative districts represented by Republicans who champion their support for gun rights.

* Rauner has a new campaign issue — reinstating the death penalty: The real question becomes what the governor will do if he receives a stand-alone bump-stock ban, or a bill requiring a 72-hour waiting period to buy any gun, or a “gun violence restraining order” bill, or legislation to put more mental health workers in schools, or measures to counter interstate gun trafficking. All of those proposals and more were also in the governor’s sweepingly broad and likely unconstitutional amendatory veto. Will Rauner accept half a loaf – or even a couple of slices? Or will he go with his usual all or nothing approach by demanding a “comprehensive” solution and then wind up yet again with nothing except his rhetoric?

* Gov. Bruce Rauner: Comprehensive gun bill would make our schools, cities safer: We call on the General Assembly to act quickly and approve this comprehensive package that tackles gun violence head-on, protects Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners, and empowers communities to keep students safe. We can’t let politics get in the way of good policy. For the safety of all Illinoisans, let’s show that we’re capable of working together and enact these important public safety solutions.

* Rauner dismisses bipartisan gun bill compromise as ‘political grandstanding’: Even after the Democratic sponsor of a gun dealer oversight measure made changes and brought in bipartisan support, Gov. Bruce Rauner on Thursday called a revamped effort “political grandstanding” while also blaming a familiar foe: Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan.

* Sun-Times Editorial: One way to crack down on shops that sell guns used in crimes: Most gun shops in Illinois sell few or no guns that eventually turn up at crime scenes in Chicago. But a handful of shops sold hundreds of such “crime guns” from 2013 through 2016. Why should we let them sell hundreds more? … We can only assume the governor has never read a city of Chicago report released last year showing that just two suburban gun shops sold 1,673 of the guns used in crimes in Chicago from 2013 through 2016. Or, to look at it another way, each of those two shops sells a future crime gun, on average, almost every day and half that they’re open for business.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:23 pm

Comments

“Ya gotta help us, doc. We’ve tried nothing and are all out of ideas”

Comment by Gene Krupa Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:25 pm
–“Having said that, the way things are, if someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it.”–

Then we must seek to change the way things are.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:26 pm
Thoughts and prayers.

Comment by 360 Degree TurnAround Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:34 pm
We have “free speech zones” when someone wants to protest or apprise the public of an issue. Why not “gun zones” way out in the middle of nowhere. That is where you can fire your gun and form militia.

Comment by 360 Degree TurnAround Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:38 pm
I’m ok with “hardening” schools, at least in theory though not all suggestions are a good idea, but I am not okay with hardening schools instead of trying to stop them in the first place. Keeping guns out of the hands of the people who would misuse them should be the goal, not killing them after they’ve already shot up a half dozen kids.

Comment by Perrid Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:42 pm
My son goes to a ‘hardened’ (at least in some ways) HS, they have a general entrance that has to buzz you in and it has people behind glass in it. It can also be closed up so the people in that area can be behind what I suspect is bullet resistant glass.

It might slow someone up, it isn’t going to stop them

Comment by OneMan Monday, May 21, 18 @ 12:49 pm
Schools need to be just like Courthouses. 1 entry, metal detector and armed security. That will stop 99.9% of this and would be a big deterrent for anyone thinking of trying.

Comment by Generation X Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:02 pm
Whatever is done in office buildings should be done in schools. Thankfully polling places have been moved out of schools (I was always terrified of the roamers on voting day, peering into the classrooms). Unfortunately, schools are really hard places to protect. It would seem to be common sense to have all doors leading to the outside locked, but you have students propping them open for their friends to sneak in late from lunch ……situations like that. But we have to keep thinking of ways to make them safer.

Teachers are very well aware of students who are….. off and could be problematic. In this age of political correctness, however, one mustn’t label anyone or identify someone as a problem because that might be picking on them. Trying to refer them for an evaluation or help is either met with crickets from the home or defiantly denied (you’re picking on him/her) So we have what we have.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:08 pm
=“Having said that, the way things are, if someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it.”=

That is the truth. And, although true it does not absolve us of the responsibility of doing our best to prevent the havoc creators from being successful.

Unless you are fortunate enough to be in one of the districts that are economically flush (most are not) resources are limited. over the last 7 years schools have faced some tough choices and have made serious reductions in staffing, put off needed maintenance, and eliminated programs.

For most of us, school provided mental health services are limited to non existent. For schools like ours, this is the first front in the battle against school violence. The professionals to staff the positions are difficult to find in rural areas IF you have the money to pay them.

We all know what the state has done to mental health services so we shouldn’t hold our breath on that one.

We can “harden” our schools but to what length? Go take a look at what architects are designing these days. Also realize the state of school infrastructure these days. I am lucky to be in a district where all of the buildings were built in the 50’s through the early 70’s. Some of our neighbors are in buildings that are 75-100 years old. Security was not even and after thought. Retro fitting (what the CSFST tax money is actually for) is extremely expensive. I can only speak for our district, but we continue to upgrade and improve as fast and as much as we can. The money to do everything just isn’t there, even if we cancel sports and all electives.

The only answer for most of us is to keep doing what we can to keep kids safe, but even if we turned our schools into fortresses, kids are still vulnerable during student drop off and dismissal, and out door events. The opportunities will always be there. You have to keep fighting the good fight.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:10 pm
“Teachers are very well aware of students who are ….. and could be problematic. Listen to those teachers and get the students (and their families) the help they need before they become dangerous.

Comment by Enviro Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:17 pm
“Schools need to be just like Courthouses. 1 entry, metal detector and armed security.”

The building you describe is a prison.

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:20 pm
=The building you describe is a prison.=

Or a courthouse. Or a bank. Or an art museum. Or a lot of businesses.

Everywhere where we keep “important things”, we have armed guards and extra security measures.

Sad that those security measures may be needed. But I struggle with how anyone can believe that the same security measures we give to money, art, politicians, etc should be off-limits for protecting children.

People can have all the debates they want about guns, but there is no excuse to not be doing a much better job of securing schools. That should be an idea all sides can get behind.

Comment by m Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:30 pm
“Or a courthouse. Or a bank. Or an art museum. Or a lot of businesses.”

Or Our Lady of the Angels.

Comment by Cheryl44 Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:34 pm
==if someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it.”==

Yes…but it’s a lot harder to do with a bat or knife. I suspect neither Dimitrios’s dad or Julie Milby (in Dixon) locked up their guns.

Comment by Jocko Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:40 pm
===The building you describe is a prison.=

Or a courthouse. Or a bank. Or an art museum. Or a lot of businesses.

Everywhere where we keep “important things”, we have armed guards and extra security measures.==

Exactly. “We need to make our schools as safe as possible” in one breath, then “We can’t make our schools feel like prisons” (ie screening everyone going in and out).

The Sante Fe shooter, btw, used a shotgun and revolver. None of the proposals currently pushed as assault weapons bans would’ve done anything to stop it. “Treating the school like a prison” would have.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:40 pm
Enviro you are absolutely correct. But often the families of students who have problems are the problem and they cannot be forced to get help–by anyone. It is most definitely one of the biggest problems classrooms face. It’s also one of the reasons why some teachers become angry when people ask……..why didn’t anyone DO anything? Didn’t anyone see this? Um…..yes they did—or might have suspected.

Just as teaching staff cannot force an IEP on parents to get special ed help for a student, so goes this as well. Schools are for Education. These social work issues are referred by classroom educators and then, up to the experts in social work/psychology, etc.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:46 pm
==Didn’t anyone see this? Um…..yes they did—or might have suspected.

Just as teaching staff cannot force an IEP on parents to get special ed help for a student, so goes this as well. Schools are for Education. These social work issues are referred by classroom educators and then, up to the experts in social work/psychology, etc.==

School administrators do have the ability and authority to report someone to law enforcement as a clear and present danger under State law, which would then prohibit legal possession or acquisition of firearms unless and until they can show they are not a danger to themselves or others.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 21, 18 @ 1:55 pm
Maybe if more of the guns were kept locked-up, you wouldn’t have to lock-up the children.

But naw… that’s crazy talk.

– MrJM

Comment by @misterjayem Monday, May 21, 18 @ 2:21 pm
–Everywhere where we keep “important things”, we have armed guards and extra security measures. –

If you had read the post, you’d have seen that Santa Fe had armed guards and had drilled an active shooter plan.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 21, 18 @ 2:30 pm
We live guns more than kids, specifically someone else’s kids. Thoughts and prayers ….

Comment by The Way I See It Monday, May 21, 18 @ 2:33 pm
–Maybe if more of the guns were kept locked-up, you wouldn’t have to lock-up the children.

But naw… that’s crazy talk.–

It would be nice if Criminals followed the law, but unfortunately they don’t. So realist safety precautions need to be taken.

Comment by Generation X Monday, May 21, 18 @ 2:41 pm
==It would be nice if Criminals followed the law, but unfortunately they don’t.==

Does your definition of criminal extend to Jeffrey Reinking (Travis’s dad)?

Comment by Jocko Monday, May 21, 18 @ 2:51 pm
==“Treating the school like a prison” would have. ==

1 entrance and 1 exit might not work so well for 1,000 kids in the case of a fire. Side note, there are about 5,000 school fires a year.

https://www.nfpa.org/Public-Education/By-topic/Property-type-and-vehicles/School-fires

Comment by supplied_demand Monday, May 21, 18 @ 2:59 pm
=Maybe if more of the guns were kept locked-up, you wouldn’t have to lock-up the children.=

I think it would be a little easier and more realistic to put cops in every school than in every home to check and make sure they’re secure, but maybe that’s just me. And I’m all for locking the guns up, but it either isn’t happening or kids know how to unlock them.

=If you had read the post, you’d have seen that Santa Fe had armed guards and had drilled an active shooter plan.=

Yes and it probably saved multiple lives. I don’t know if Dixon had such a plan but the results were better. Banks will still get robbed. No system is perfect. But to do nothing to boost security is inexcusable.

I get it. No one on the gun side wants to take up anything that creates even the slightest momentary discomfort in purchasing guns. No one on the gun control side wants to take up anything than doesn’t involve banning or restricting guns.

There’s no excuse. Lawmakers in Springfield will walk by metal detectors and armed police officers to get to their respective chambers. Anyone heading to catch a pro ball game will walk through a lot of security guards and metal detectors. How many public entrances does your bank have? If it’s less than 20 years old, probably 1 and probably well guarded.

So if armed security officers and things like metal detectors are such bad ideas then why do we use them to protect money, art, athletes, and politicians? Are those things more important than kids?

As noted elsewhere, there’s already plenty of guns out there. Maybe we should take those seriously.

Comment by m Monday, May 21, 18 @ 3:00 pm
–How many public entrances does your bank have? If it’s less than 20 years old, probably 1 and probably well guarded.–

What in the world are you talking about, comparing robbers to those who want to commit mass murder? They’re not similar acts, at all.

And money locked up dormant in a vault isn’t quite the same as children going to and from class.

Is anyone curious as to why no other country on earth has these regular shootings? Are there some best practices we could possibly consider there?

Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 21, 18 @ 3:08 pm
–No one on the gun control side wants to take up anything than doesn’t involve banning or restricting guns.–

“Banning” and “restricting” aren’t remotely the same. “Regulating” is not anything like “banning” either.

The history of the 2nd Amendment and all Supreme Court interpretation of it allow for plenty of regulations and restrictions on guns.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 21, 18 @ 3:11 pm
==No one on the gun control side wants to take up anything than doesn’t involve banning or restricting guns.==

Yet we have all these schools with trained resource officers, metal detectors, active shooter plans and threat assessment teams. None of those things have worked, take your strawman somewhere else.

Comment by supplied_demand Monday, May 21, 18 @ 4:42 pm
===Or Our Lady of the Angels.===

Bingo. Speaking of which, I figure there’s probably enough stuff in the shop area and chemistry lab to start a good fire if you want to.

Comment by Graduated College Student Monday, May 21, 18 @ 5:04 pm
=School administrators do have the ability and authority to report someone to law enforcement as a clear and present danger under State law, which would then prohibit legal possession or acquisition of firearms unless and until they can show they are not a danger to themselves or others.=

Teachers have the same ability, so do custodians, mailmen, crossing guards, hot air balloons pilots, astronauts…

Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 21, 18 @ 5:19 pm
=“Banning” and “restricting” aren’t remotely the same. “Regulating” is not anything like “banning” either.=

At no point did I say they were the same. The only acceptable solutions for the gun control crowd are bans or new restrictions. The only solutions for the gun people involve not even the slightest of restrictions.

Meanwhile there are things that could/should be done.

=Yet we have all these schools with trained resource officers, metal detectors, active shooter plans and threat assessment teams. None of those things have worked, take your strawman somewhere else.=

Tell that to Dixon. Tell that to Maryland. Tell that to the armed officers and security posted at the banks, sporting events, capitols, museums, etc. Please tell them that armed security is a waste of time.

=And money locked up dormant in a vault isn’t quite the same as children going to and from class.=

Would the abundance of police officers at an mlb game be more similar to you? (and all those metal detectors) Protecting a big building or complex from a bad person who wants to kill lots of people is the reason for all the security. That’s why I didn’t have to walk through a metal detector at old Busch on September 10, 2001.

I’m not preaching against any gun control measures. I’m simply saying we need to protect our schools. It’s easy to see what is truly valued in American society (not just what we SAY is valued) because in every case we protect the most valuable stuff and people with trained, armed security. If you think banks, sports arenas, capitols, etc, should dump the guards and metal detectors, then have that opinion. But if you think that that level of security is good for those places but not schools then you are either being very hypocritical or you don’t value kids that much.

This shooter had a pistol and a shotgun not on anyone’s lists for bans or new restrictions. They weren’t bought in the last 72 hours. They weren’t bought by a minor. Is the gun dealer licensing bill the missing link here? Because if so, please tell me how that would have worked. Universal background checks? I could be wrong, but I believe I read these guns were purchased at a gun shop.

I support universal background checks. I support a high capacity magazine ban. I think the state gun dealer licensing an assault weapons bans are a waste but I’m not standing in the way of either and won’t shed a tear if either is passed. But none of them would’ve stopped this. How about Virginia Tech (32 dead, 17 wounded)? He did it with two handguns and no magazines bigger than 10 rounds. So I’m not seeing the answer here in bans and restrictions.

You aren’t going to ban all guns. That isn’t going to happen. It is not realistic to believe that. So short of that, what proposed law would have stopped this?

Sadly, this will probably happen again soon. That shooter probably already has the guns lined up. So how about we get some cops and metal detectors between the shooter and the students. What is so unreasonable about that?

Comment by m Monday, May 21, 18 @ 5:43 pm
m. You make too much sense to ever run for elected office. I appreciate your comments and agree with most.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 21, 18 @ 5:49 pm
m-

Stadia also have a large number of entry/egress points. Which is good, in light of how many people are in them during an event.

I don’t want to ban shotguns or handguns, although intensified background checks would be nice.

I also would like a national registry, and have it so the registered owner of the weapon is held criminally and civilly liable (in addition to the shooter) should some crime be committed with the weapon. That might help encourage parents to do a better job of controlling their kids access to their weapons.

Comment by Graduated College Student Monday, May 21, 18 @ 6:20 pm
Easier and more destructive to “create havoc” with semi-automatic firearms, than with knives or bats.

Comment by walker Monday, May 21, 18 @ 6:31 pm
–This shooter had a pistol and a shotgun not on anyone’s lists for bans or new restrictions–

You took a long time around the barn, but, finally, your actual point: let me keep my AR-15, because I can’t play electric guitar.

And I need, unquestioned, unlimited load from WalMart, for, same reasons.

Or I just can’t be free.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/how-the-ar-15-became-mass-shooters-weapon-of-choice-w451452

Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 21, 18 @ 7:57 pm
Sorry to be so long winded.

It took me 39 years to finish high school and here’s what I learned in my long journey

School 1 suburban 4000 students

built in 1965 with additions in 1960 and 1965 takes up one square city block and has 8 entrances not including the “annex” building which has an additional 6 entrances.

School 2 urban 1500 students

Built in 1940. It also covers 1 city block with 6 entrances and is 4 stories tall.

School 3 Suburban 1300 students

Built in 1965. It had 7 entrances. Additions have increased entrances to 10.

School 4. Suburban/rural 600 students.

Built in 1975 with 7 entrances. Additions have increased entrances to 11.

No one seems to understand the you can close the main entrance to the school. You can lock down the many entrances BUT what do you do about the student that puts a stone in the door jamb so he/she can leave school and return without school personnel knowing. What about PE classes that leave that door open - so they can get to the lockers without waiting for the teacher. I could go on and on but I don’t want to bore the readers.
You CAN NOT lock down a school!!
How much higher are you willing to have your real estate taxes to go cover the costs on police offices? Another $100 per home, another $300 per home?
A three story building covering a city block might require 2 or 3 officers. Are you willing to pay the price for this security?
Sorry for going on and on. This is school reality.

Comment by The Nibbler Monday, May 21, 18 @ 8:25 pm
em is M, can’t abbreviate as much from another computer.

=You took a long time around the barn, but, finally, your actual point: let me keep my AR-15, because I can’t play electric guitar.=

Not sure how anyone could take that from what I wrote. Especially since I specifically saidThat it wouldn’t bother me if you pass an assault weapon ban.
Do you just hear what it is that you want to argue with?
I don’t have an AR, I don’t need an AR. My lack of fervent support for an assault weapon ban is because I would rather spend political capitol on things that would actually help, such as the items I mentioned, including high cap mag ban, universal background checks, better systems to report potential people with issues. I know, how narrow minded of me. I mention the Virginia tech incident because none of your ideas would’ve stopped that. Remember Columbine? That happened DURING the federal assault weapon ban. Oh yeah, and this kid in Santa Fe, with a revolver and pump action. But if an assault weapon ban gets me armed police officers and metal detectors at schools, then I will happily support it.
I would address the Wal Mart part but I have no idea what you were saying.
You however continually dodge the point of why you think politicians, money, art, athletes, etc deserve armed guards but kids don’t.
What happens when there’s a bomb threat? We call in the armed officers. Threat against a battered spouse? Armed officers. When the president goes anywhere? Armed officers.
Were you in Springfield the last time Obama came? Hundreds of armed officers, metal detectors, limited access to the very public Capitol, snipers, etc.
But no, somehow using the same logic we use to protect anything else we value isn’t good enough for kids.

Comment by em Monday, May 21, 18 @ 9:58 pm
–Do you just hear what it is that you want to argue with?–

No. What do you hear?

–You however continually dodge the point of why you think politicians, money, art, athletes, etc deserve armed guards but kids don’t–

You continually lie, as your strawman is ridiculous, and, as I pointed out, the post is clear that there were armed guards and extra security measures at Santa Fe.

Your deal, cousin, is that you’re a “on-the-other-hand-slave,” who can’t make up his mind about anything.

Smart guy like you, aren’t you curious as to why these massacres of children don’t happen in other countries?

Or, on the other hand, do you just want to hank your crank and not worry about it?

Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 21, 18 @ 10:52 pm
m. Some people just like to hear themselves talk. Your plain as mud. Yes indeed. American security measures need to be brought up to snuff.

Comment by BlueDogDem Tuesday, May 22, 18 @ 6:28 am