If administrators, teachers and janitors are packing guns into schools,
it's inevitable that mistakes will be made and young students will
unintentionally gain access to some of these guns. With the large number of
schools and students in the country, even with a small rate of mistakes, there
could be a large number of accidental shootings. So instead of 20
kindergartners murdered by a single shooter, you get 50 kindergartners killed in
accidental shootings. Not a very practical solution.
This is a great letter. Teachers should not be forced to, but if they want to
be armed, are judged mentally sound, and go through extensive training, they
should be supported and allowed to do so.
Mike Richards,Perhaps the Mayan Calendar really did fortell the end of the
world, because you and I agree quite strongly on this issue. It's a brave
Thank you Mike Richards.
Can anyone actually envision a teacher shooting an intruder IN FRONT of his or
her 1st grade students? Is that what is being proposed? Has everyone lost his
mind? Why not demand that the Bishop or the Priest or other religious leader
carry a gun, just in case someone enters their place of worship. Why not insist
that they kill someone in front of their congregation?A madman, A
MADMAN, broke the law. He violated every law possible when he, a twenty-year
old, had possession of firearms, entered a gun-free zone and then killed all of
those students. There were LAWS in place that were ignored, yet some people
demand that more laws be written to stop madmen like him from acting.Now equally foolish ideas are being circulated to REQUIRE us to bear arms. Can't people read? We have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. We
are not required to keep and bear arms. We are not required to shoot intruders.
We have the choice. Forcing anyone to bear arms is just as bad as forcing
anyone to NOT bear arms.
If you are indeed speaking as a former police officer, then you surely should
know how difficult it can be to react in a calm manner when crisis has hit you
and others around you. You surely know how difficult it is to
remain qualified in marksmanship. You surely know how important it
is to be able to accurately and properly assess a situation before making the
decision whether to pull the trigger or not. Such things as "background
targets" -- children or others who might be in the line of fire behind the
bad guy. Or "clearing the fire field" to be sure you won't cause a
friendly fire tragedy.If you know those things and the rest of the
requirements, both physical and psychological, that required to become a
qualified gun carrying officer, how can you expect a teacher or custodian who
has other responsibilities to become and remain fully qualified to react
properly and effectively in a life or death situation without making it much
A great question was asked above? Will teachers get paid more to carry this
extra burden of now being an armed security force? Or will teachers have to pay
for their own training on their own like everything else with the expectation
coming down the road that they have this training and perhaps even be forced to
A 4 hour class which involves a video and filling out some paperwork isn't
even close to the training that folks need to carry a concealed weapon. Folks
leave these meetings never even having loaded, shot, or learned how to truly
properly use this "tool."If the gun lovers really hope to
bring guns into school then they really need to admit that huge reform needs to
be done to obtain a weapon and obtain a concealed weapons permit. The current
system is a joke and does not even come close to preparing people.
Correction. My earlier post should have read that Scalia said ABOUT a 1939
case.... Sorry for the error.
A DN poser in an earlier gun article basically said that even responsible gun
owners cant keep guns out of the hands of children. They lamented that it would
always happen now and then. It could not be avoided.I dont buy that
argument.I know many CCP holders. Some, I would completely trust to
carry in a classroom and be happy knowing that they did. Others, I really
don't want to be around them because they lack the judgement. I cringe at
the thought of them with a gun around children.It is impossible to
create laws to allow my sane friend to carry in a classroom, but prohibit the
"crazy" one.That is the problem.
A former police officer who thinks more guns in schools are the answer to gun
violence? Well, its probably good that he is a former police officer. If
trained armed guards is a bad deal, what about inexperienced teachers. The
author argues that it would be less expensive. Perhaps, but there are hidden
costs. And how many teachers would have to be armed and trained?But, if you really want to be cost effective, just ban the assault weapons
that create to most danger. There should be a government program to buy assault
weapons back from owners as several cities are currently doing, and make their
manufacturing, distribution and possession a felony. Quic hiding behind the 2nd
Amendment, it won't be violated if this kind of assault weapons control is
implemented. Scalia said in a 1939 Supreme Court case, United States v.
Miller,that the law allows for limitations on the right to bear arms, supported
by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual
weapons. In my opinion there is no question that assault weapons are at once,
"dangerous and unusual".
Are these same promoters of armed teachers willing to pay them more for the
added responsibility? When a teacher eventually shoots the wrong
person like police do occasionally are you going to think it's a mistake or
double down that more guns are safer?If a teacher ends up shooting a
bunch of kids is the answer going to be to arm a few of the kids? You can see
where this logic is going.
Equip more people to kill people to prevent people from killing more people. Got