HANCOCK COUNTY — State officials are inching ever closer to paying for firearm training for educators. Indiana lawmakers advanced a House bill earlier this month that would provide state-funded firearms training for school personnel — including teachers.
While school resource officers (SROs) are usually responsible for school safety in most districts, under current Indiana law, school districts can designate people, including teachers, to carry guns in schools, even though most school boards have not passed that measure.
Republican House Bill 1177 proposes to add state funding for gun training, and the measure passed 71 -24, predominantly on party lines recently.
Local educators and law enforcement admit there are mixed views on the proposed idea as many on the administrative side are not sure they want educators tasked with such a monumental responsibility.
“This is a very difficult topic,” Eastern Hancock Superintendent George Philhower said.
Indiana is one of several states that already allow teachers and other school employees to be armed, but there has never been state financial support behind the idea. Indiana passed a law giving school boards discretion to set policies allowing firearms on school grounds back in 2013. Up until now, the state has not funded teacher training.
Bill author Rep. Jim Lucas, R-Seymour, said in a release that the proposal serves as a response to deadly mass shootings in schools.
“When faced with a life-or-death situation, simple drills and basic training can make all the difference,” Lucas said in a release. “With this legislation, schools have the option to send their teachers through a state-certified course designed to teach them how to respond to a threat like an active-shooter situation.”
Hancock County Sheriff Brad Burkhart likes the idea of having a highly trained armed person in every county school and said that if districts or local law enforcement can’t afford to pay for an SRO in every school building, then the next best thing is an armed, trained educator.
“If a school district allows it, I would think most people would be happy that there would at least be some money going towards training,” Burkhart said.
He noted, while some teachers won’t even think about picking up a gun, he’s certain others will.
“If you have a teacher in a school who has prior military training or has weapons and is proficient and confident with a gun, I’m not opposed to them carrying that weapon,” Burkhart said.
Kent Gish represents teachers in the Community School Corporation of Southern Hancock County. He noted that, in a sampling of SH educators, some teachers were in favor of the state offering paid handgun training with the thought an armed teacher would make the schools safer simply as a deterrent.
Others were completely against the district approving a trained teacher with a gun in schools, saying it doesn’t fix the problem, but puts more pressure on teachers. Gish noted many educators are already asked to do everything from teach subject matter to monitoring students’ mental health to running extra-curricular activities.
Gish said that some educators questioned the state proposal since the Indiana legislature doesn’t seem to completely trust public schools to teach. He noted that, with the access to vouchers and so much control over classrooms, it seems odd that the state would trust teachers to have guns and pay for their training.
Many teachers, Gish said, see the whole idea of funding training a bit insulting because it makes no mention of raising teacher salaries, yet there is an expectation for educators to take on a massive responsibility.
Greenfield-Central Superintendent Harold Olin brought up the fact that his district has added a number of security staff members to their corporation in the last few years, and he likes the idea of SROs rather than armed teachers.
“I would prefer to limit handguns in our schools to these trained professionals,” Olin said.
The better solution Olin noted might be for the state to bolster security funding for schools district’s — enough to allow for an SRO in every building, including elementary schools.
Philhower noted all the schools in Eastern Hancock are on the same campus, in one massive building, and they already have an SRO, so he sees no reason to arm teachers.
“Teachers already have quite a bit on their plate,” Philhower said. “I do not think we will be recommending this training for our teachers.”
He also noted the armed professionals already on campus receive ongoing training that appears to be more extensive than what is being proposed for teachers.
Eastern Hancock school board president Jim Jackson agreed with Philhower’s view and said they’ve already added additional security, and he doesn’t think paying for teacher gun training is a good thing.
“I’m not thrilled about this idea,” Jackson said. “We’ve got a full-time armed person in the school and our advantage is our schools are all together and really, I just don’t know if we’d have a lot of teachers who would have a high level of interested in getting trained and doing this.”
Officials with Mt. Vernon say they are continually evaluating their safety protocols through the county crisis teams, the district crisis team, school safety specialist training, and school crisis teams.
“Our educators and all our staff want the safest building to work in, and we continually reiterate that the safety of our students and staff is our number one priority,” director of communications Maria Bond said.
“We support the ability for any decision to be made by locally elected school boards based on the values of the communities they represent. Through the support of our community through the passing of our operating referendum, Mt. Vernon has already chosen to ensure that each of our schools have at least one armed school resource officer in each building with two at the high school.”
If the measure passes the Senate and becomes law, it will once again be up to each school district’s board as to weather or not they’ll approve the training and allow a teacher or administrator to carry or have access to a loaded gun on campus.
Burkhart noted that any educator who carries a firearm or had access to one would be anonymous and there would need to be cooperation amongst law enforcement and school district SROs so everyone would be on the same page knowing who has a gun going into any situation.
“I’m not opposed to this at all,” Burkhart said. “In the civilian world, the law-abiding, gun-carrying citizen is the first responder and I’ve taught that for years.”
House bills will be heard in the Senate starting Monday, March 6. Officials note that it’s hard to know the exact day this particular measure will come up as bills must first go through the committee process before they are heard on the floor.
State Sen. Michael Crider (R-Greenfield) represents Senate District 28, which includes Hancock County and portions of Shelby and Marion counties. Crider noted he’s in favor of the measure if the state has the funding.
“If a school system chooses to allow a teacher to possess a firearm on campus, that teacher should be well-trained,” Crider said in a release. “Law enforcement training programs include hours of scenario-based decision-making lessons and subjects like handgun retention and control. I believe the suggested training is appropriate. However, I am unsure how fiscal leaders in the Senate will view the financial impact.”
