Woman suing Madison school board over plan to arm staff

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Coordinators, Moderators

Woman suing Madison school board over plan to arm staff

Postby M-Quigley » Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:26 am

https://www.whio.com/news/madison-schoo ... k6aNbrUtO/

In 2016, the school was the site of a shooting that saw a student wound three classmates.

Spurred on in part by a board statement released earlier this week, which questioned “why anyone would want to work against our goal of protecting students,” opponents of Madison’s armed security plan tried to convince the board to alter course.

Most — including school parent Erin Gabbard, who with the help of a national, anti-gun advocacy group has joined with some other parents in suing the district to stop the arming program — re-iterated their opposition to letting staffers have guns available to them in school.

“This lawsuit is not about money, it’s about safety,” Gabbard told the board and the more than 70 people at the meeting in the Madison Junior/Senior High School library.

Gabbard and four other parents with children in Madison Schools, are represented by attorneys from Columbus who work in conjunction with the New York City-based Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, a national advocacy group opposed to gun violence.

Madison Twp. resident Pete Trensum said he likes the board’s plan to arm staffers and resents those outside the community trying to influence the school system’s policies.

“Why do we have these outside organizations funding money … and we have attorneys coming in here saying you can’t do this (arm staffers)” as some other school systems in Ohio — and nationwide — have chosen to do, said Trensum.

“They (anti-gun advocates) are here for their organization to make money or to get notoriety, they don’t care about these schools. We (local taxpayers) are funding these schools and so far we have paid for these things (arming staffers) to take place,” said Trensum.

“Why should my tax money go to fighting off (the lawsuit) against something that most of the community is in favor of,” he said of the expanded use of firearms in the schools.
Posts: 3183
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: Woman suing Madison school board over plan to arm staff

Postby M-Quigley » Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:31 am

Update: Madison schools asking judge to dismiss lawsuit, due to the plaintiff reading only what she wanted to of the law and ignored the rest which was inconvenient to her opinion. That's my opinion of course, not the specific legal used obviously.

https://www.whio.com/news/madison-schoo ... cnA4MFxPI/

Attorneys for the Madison school district claim the parents who sued the school board misread state statutes that say gun-carrying teachers must have 70 hours of peace officer training.

The school district has asked Judge Charles Pater to grant summary judgment, effectively ending the case because there is no “genuine issue of material fact.”

A group of parents sued the Board of Education and superintendent in September, alleging the board’s April resolution authorizing armed staff in schools violates an Ohio law requiring that armed school employees be trained and certified as peace officers. The gun program came about after a school shooting there three years ago when four students were injured by a classmate.

The parents are seeking an injunction blocking the district from arming teachers and other staff without the training required by law — 728 hours versus the 26 hours the school has in its policy — and a court order requiring disclosure of policies and procedures for arming staff.

The attorneys for the school district told Judge Charles Pater in a motion Ohio law sanctions school employees carrying concealed firearms to protect the children and doesn’t require lengthy training at the Ohio Peace Officer Training Academy.

“The plain language of R.C. 109.78(D) is clear: it does not apply to those to those staff members authorized to carry a concealed weapon in a school safety zone,” the motion reads. “Instead, the statute requires ‘a special police officer, security guard and other position in which such person goes armed on duty’ to attend OPOTA-approved basic training or otherwise have 20 years experience as a police officer.”
Posts: 3183
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Return to Tweed Ring's Ohio Politics and Legislation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest