Comments about ‘Letters: Parents' right to know’

An excellent letter. One with some actual thought behind it.

When my children were younger, my wife and I would refuse to allow them to play at a friend's house if we knew or found out that house contained a handgun. If my child and that friend wanted to play, it had to be at our house. We did this because we knew that the odds of an intruder harming our children in our house was miniscule compared to the odds of my child being harmed by an improperly secured handgun in their house.

Arming teachers is a ridiculous idea. Teachers are role models to our sons and daughters. They are not placed in a classroom to kill intruders. What irreparable harm would occur if a teacher shot and killed an intruder in front of his young students?

The solution is to keep unauthorized people out of the schools. How hard is it to have a single entrance into a school and to use an electronic lock controlled by an official inside the school to control the lock on that single door?

How hard is it to have as many teachers as required to stand at that door when the students arrive in the morning to monitor who is entering?

We don't need armed teachers. We need people to think logically about how an intruder enters a building and we need people to think logically about how to limit access to that building.

We can't enter the ICU at the hospital until someone "pushes the button". The technology is available. Why not use it?

To "Mike Richards" the problem is simple. We are not arming teachers to kill intruders. We are allowing teachers to be armed to protect themselves.

Just look at the mass murders that have occurred. The murderer has typically gone to locations where guns are not allowed. Why would they do that?

Look at the Trolley Square incident. The murderer would have gone around the mall for a long time killing many people if it wasn't for an off duty officer and his wife's concealed weapons.

Using the "push the button" system works until the criminal says "I am Johnny's uncle and am taking care of him while his parents are on vacation and need to deliver his lunch."

There are many cases where there were people prepared to commit mass murders, but were stopped by the first person with a gun. We never hear those statistics because it goes against the anti-gun liberal ideas.

If a person who wanted to commit a mass murder knew that a school had multiple teachers with weapons, they would be less likely to hit that target.

The common factor in each of the massacres is this: they were in gun-free zones. The Holmes case is unveiling evidence that he scoped out gun-free zones in the area to establish his "safest" target.

The common factor in each of the massacres we have seen is this: they were in gun-free zones. The Holmes case is unveiling evidence that he scoped out gun-free zones to establish his target.

Teachers have the right to protect themselves, if they desire. Utah law allows them to get a concealed weapon carrier permit.

If parents want their children to attend a school in a gun-free zone, let them do it, but given the statistics, it will be at their own peril and risk.

However, if parents want to place their children in a public place less likely to become the scene of a mass-shooting, they should also have the right to choose a school with neon signs showing they are in a gun-protected zone.

Churches are also gun-free zones. That’s another concern.

It's just another way to destroy the public school system. Republican government knows no bounds to incompetence.

The shooter broke into the school yet there is no talk about better doors?

If a shooter gets into a school we have failed to keep the kids safe. That is the first priority. Safe rooms inside the school is second. Guns are last on a very long list of more effective measures.

It's a one trick pony around here with talk about guns, guns, guns.

Active Denial System - look it up.

Hallelujah! Finally a day when Red Shirt and Mike Richards take different sides in a discussion. MR shows a bit of subtly on the subject of guns at school...i.e. quite likely that they would cause more problems than they solve. Red however, puts on the same old record for the hundredth time as if it will sell to anyone who doesn't have "gun" as their middle name.

To "Screwdriver" just look at what your liberal buddies have done. They post "gun free zone" in front of schools and other public places. Now, think what this says. It tells crazy people that desire to commit mass murders that schools have no way to resist. They will be able to go on a rampage with little to no resistance. That is like putting a sign in your yard that says, "no alarm, no guns, and no big dogs here."

Here is the kicker about the liberals. Just look at who and what protects them. They have people with guns around them. If guns are good enough to protect the President, are they good enough to protect you and your kids?

There are already armed teachers. I know of at leasts two at my school that have concealed weapons permits and bring their guns to school.

It isn't against the law and it is already happening.