IPFS News Link • Gun Rights
Schools Seeking to Arm Employees Hit Hurdle on Insurance
• New York TimesAs more schools consider arming their employees, some districts are encountering a daunting economic hurdle: insurance carriers threatening to raise their premiums or revoke coverage entirely.
During legislative sessions this year, seven states enacted laws permitting teachers or administrators to carry guns in schools. Three of the measures — in Kansas, South Dakota and Tennessee — took effect last week.
But already, EMC Insurance Companies, the liability insurance provider for about 90 percent of Kansas school districts, has sent a letter to its agents saying that schools permitting employees to carry concealed handguns would be declined coverage. ...
During legislative sessions this year, seven states enacted laws permitting teachers or administrators to carry guns in schools. Three of the measures — in Kansas, South Dakota and Tennessee — took effect last week.
But already, EMC Insurance Companies, the liability insurance provider for about 90 percent of Kansas school districts, has sent a letter to its agents saying that schools permitting employees to carry concealed handguns would be declined coverage. ...
The Oregon School Boards Association, which manages liability coverage
for all but a handful of the state’s school districts, recently
announced a new pricing structure that would make districts pay an extra
$2,500 annual premium for every staff member carrying a weapon on the
job....
Watch Streaming Broadcast Live:
LRN.fm
DLive
Live Chat
Telegram
Telegram
2 Comments in Response to Schools Seeking to Arm Employees Hit Hurdle on Insurance
On the outside of it, you would think that the insurance companies would give better rates if the teachers were well armed, and taught in the use of the firearms.
The police are a big enough threat to murderers and assassins of school children. But when you station an armed teacher in every classroom, think of what a deterrent that is! So what's with the insurance companies. You would think that they would be out to make money by receiving payments where they would never have to make payments.
How very typical of the NYT. Nearly the entire article argues that insurers rationally calculate that armed teachers constitute substantially increased risk of claims. Only deep into the article do we find that that is merely the opinion of ONE insurer.
Further down in the article the truth slowly, grudgingly, emerges. The district in question ultimately finds a willing insurer, in a cooperative purchase with other customers, at a LOWER COST.
Reliably licking the anus of Leviathan. Good newspaper.