- May 15, 2017
- Reaction score
doesn't make it any easier i wouldn't think.Arm the male teachers who already possess firearms and shoot in their off hours.but they never knew before. the whole "gun free" zone was reactionary and while i agree it didn't work, it also doesn't make it *substantially* more of a target. they target schools because that's where they go every day. that is who they know. if kids still hung out at the food court in shopping malls that would be next.That’s another great point. Data has shown that just having a sign in one’s yard that they have an alarm system reduces break-in’s. It’s just a fact. So simply removing the ban of firearms on school grounds and putting up a sign indicating the staff is armed (even if they really weren’t) is proven to be a major deterrent. Criminals don’t want a fair fight and they don’t like the unknown. They won’t risk it if they don’t know.take a look at all the school shootings pre-1990 and maybe, it's because of what a school represents in our lives it becomes a target moreso than whether or not there's a ghostbuster symbol on a gun on the front door.
they target fellow students due to their "treatment" in life and that makes schools and clubs and so forth targets.
i'm fine with adding police substations and or retired vets into schools and arming them but not the teachers. i just don't think that's right to ask of a teacher to have to potentially kill a student they care a lot about.
Then get them some training. As far as shooting a student they love? That love goes out the window when the kids starts shooting up the place.
i'd rather see us step up real security than ask a teacher to take on even more.