GOP candidates address school violence at press conference today

Gregory Thayer, Republican candidate for Lt. Governor, and other statewide Republican candidates will hold a press conference offering solutions to school violence the State House steps in Montpelier today, Friday, June 3, at 2 PM. [Updates expected by mid-afternoon.]

After the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, TX, several of Vermont’s schools closed last week in response to various threats.

On June 1, classes were canceled at Orleans Elementary School. School staff had informed the police that they’d received a report of an alleged threat against the school by a student.

Malletts Bay School in Colchester received a scare when a student found a training hand grenade in the woods and brought it into the classroom. Students, teachers, and administrators were evacuated and police called.

Shooter threats also were made to at least three high schools — in Montpelier, Hinesburg, and (today) in Orleans. Neither Montpelier nor CVU in Hinesburg had school resource officers (SRO) on the premises.

Orleans Elementary School also had no SRO, state police confirmed this week.

At 4 AM this morning, Vermont State Police announced Lake Region Union High School in Orleans will be closed today due to an alleged threat of violence by a student yesterday, June 2.

In the wake of the “Defund the Police” campaigns and public outcries against police brutality, the officers were removed from campuses because “students may be traumatized by their presence,” Thayer said.

How much more will students be traumatized by an actual school shooting, though? Compared to the agony of such an experience, renewed SRO presence seems like a small price to pay, Thayer said.

At the press conference, candidates will discuss practical and feasible solutions to this crisis.

“There is no doubt that measures are needed to keep our children safe,” Thayer said. “But they should be common-sense measures, not the typical gun control grab from the democratic leadership.”

Categories: Crime

8 replies »

  1. the officers were removed from campuses because “students may be traumatized by their presence,”

  2. Oops, “the officers were removed from campuses because “students may be traumatized by their presence,” So I guess that parents (and this is about the “adults”) are less traumatized by active shooters than School Resource Officers ?

  3. There seem to be two “solutions” in discussion concerning school shootings: 1. More control over the implements used in these crimes…guns. The ideas include fewer guns and bullets; maybe even eliminate them all together or at least those with selected characteristics. The argument is that such limitations on guns would stop these tragedies or at least reduce them? Right? 2. The second solution thread is about the doers of the crimes: We would ramp up vigilance to spot folks who are acting suspiciously. Then we’d empower ourselves to restrain them, while we apply mental health treatments with the end being for them to convince us they’ll behave non-violently? Right? Is it likely that these ideas would be sufficiently convincing to generate a consensus among the constituency so that legislation (Local, State, Federal) could be formulated? Not promising I think. So, without that, there would need to be a majority cabal of enlightened legislators to impose these solutions on the unconvinced minority. The hope would be that they’d submit without a seething bubble of resentment…that it would be a softened law-biding acquiescence. I’m not optimistic about such a scenario blooming. The more we forgo “conversion” and force folks to comply with our enlightened insights the more we risk propagating festering discontent. We violate the “…don’t tread on me” rule from our founding. Laws and regulations to manage constituent behavior is a risky undertaking without first doing the missionary work to generate a consensus. Whether we generate a consensus or simple impose these two legislative solutions on our neighbors, It appears to me that evil doers with guns present themselves in a time-restrained situation and the need is to stop them immediately. How else will this happen except by defenders in that situation…with guns? Are school staff likely to just sit by waiting for legislators to solve the problem?

  4. All schools should have armed SRO’s
    Single entry point to school with a man trap
    Many alarmed exits
    Floor plans on file with local police
    Just a few ideas from Dan Bongino retired secret service agent

  5. SRO’s should be mandatory at all public schools, as well as active shooter training.

  6. As children, we used to practice crawling under the school desks for protection from bombs. Many homes had shelter areas to go to during bomb alerts. I remember no one, child or adult, traumatized even when there was no actual substance to these efforts. To the contrary, there are many practices that could protect our children and educators from the very real dangers that are present in schools and gatherings. I would be more concerned were these simple efforts ignored by those responsible for the safety of our children. At present, weapons are prevalent and easily obtained. Even an SRO or an access denied could very well save lives!

  7. There were “resource officers” in several Vermont schools in response to the Sand Hook incident. After the ruckus in Minneapolis, “students demanding action” and their marxist advocates called for them to be removed, as the presence of uniformed authority “could trigger anxiety in students, particularly those of Color”… The democrats, the media and many school officials have conspired to convince youngsters that the police are a bigger threat to their safety than mentally disturbed individuals hell-bent on mass violence.

Leave a Reply