Few of us think very well, and sadly, that weakness applies to judges too. Two Ohio judges recently rendered a decision. They told the three thousand school staff members who were trained as first responders that they can no longer bring their firearms to school unless they pass police officer training. I’m not sure what problem this ruling was trying to solve. We have many thousands of school-years of experience with volunteer armed school staff in Ohio. So why, now, would judges reverse the standing interpretation of the state attorney general?
People excuse their emotional decisions. Part of the law says that an armed security guard must meet the standard of a law enforcement officer. That section of the law is titled- “109.78 Certification of special police, security guards, or persons otherwise privately employed in a police capacity.” (emphasis provided by the author) The state attorney general wrote a formal letter saying that armed volunteer teachers are not acting in a police capacity. The judges didn’t believe him.
What does it mean to act in a police capacity? The police perform routinely scheduled security patrols, but armed school staff don’t do that. Teachers are not required to move toward someone who is breaking Ohio’s laws, but the police have to. Police make arrests and secure suspects, but armed school staff don’t do that, and shouldn’t do that. Armed school volunteers don’t preserve evidence and transport suspects for processing. School volunteers are not required to appear in court during a suspect’s trial. That is what the police do. So why would a judge of obvious intelligence confuse the two situations? .....