Most good and honest school teachers already have plenty to do. Some teachers could be trusted to carry a gun to class, but I wouldn't expect all of them to do that, and few of them seem to want to do it.
Last week I had a simple and obvious thought about improving school security. Maybe it's a foolish idea, or perhaps it’s a start toward a solution. Consider this: What if every school had a corps of trained, armed, experienced, steady and observant adult volunteers stationed here and there around the building?
If nothing else, imagine the benefits of having a pleasant grandparent on every hall, at every corner, everywhere in the school, all day, every day.
No, I'm not volunteering for such duty; I have enough to keep me busy and out of trouble at home, thank you. But there may be other fit, active, alert and useful retired folks who would enjoy spending a half day at school now and then – serving as extra eyes, ears, and defenders when needed. Of course, they might also become the first sacrificial targets of any bad guy that invades the school; that is a genuine consideration.
Don't give me any baloney about this being an impossible program to set up and administer. Any person worthy of authority has the judgment to determine who is or isn't fit to serve as a volunteer school defender. Information about all of us is out there for review, if only those responsible have the sense and will to use it. In the sad situation in Florida three weeks ago, plenty was known about that evil shooter long before the massacre, but every blamed fool in authority chose to ignore it, allowing 17 defenseless people to be killed in the blink of an eye.
Every teacher on Earth knows a bad apple when he/she sees one. So if no one else will do the job, good teachers should be able to interview and select or reject volunteer defenders. Many may already know someone that they'd trust with their life – and that's really what we're talking about here, isn't it? If nothing else, let every teacher bring a volunteer bodyguard. That would be a start.
Now, please don't let the School Board be in charge of this program. This is something that needs to be done, and done right now, not just committeed and talked to death for the next decade. The Sheriff's department should be able to handle it, as long as they don't demand three years of training and seven years of practical experience; that wouldn't put anybody useful in the schools any time soon, either. Just keep it simple and it could actually work. Treat your volunteer defenders with respect, give them a good lunch every day, and go on about your original business of running a school.
Well, there it is; do as you please with the notion, no charge as always. And remember, you heard it here first.
Oh – have your volunteer defenders dress nicely, in coats and ties, etc., the way all respectable people used to dress; that alone would be educational, wouldn't it?
* * *
Larry, here's another "genuine consideration": What happens when the "good guy" with the gun at school becomes the "bad guy" with the gun at school, without notice? With only a few exceptions here and there, most all mass shooters would have been considered the "good guys with the guns."
Teachers don't want most anyone, fellow teachers and staff included, packing the heat inside schools for a very good reason. Anyone who has spent any unscheduled time inside one understands why.
* * *
There's many reasons why this is one of the worst ideas ever proposed. When police enter a school and they find a teacher has a gun drawn and is shooting, how will they know that the teacher is not the "bad guy"? What if police make a mistake and shoot the teacher instead of the real bad guy? What if other innocent people are killed in that crossfire?
Everything would have to go absolutely perfect for the diseased fantasy of armed teachers to work out without more killing and tragedy. When does anything ever go perfectly according to plan?
Instead of doing all the work of vetting and arming teachers and setting up all the infrastructure and guidelines that would require why don't we just restrict access to military-style weapons designed to kill the maximum amount of people with the minimum amount of effort? No one is asking for handguns and rifles to be banned, just assault weapons. Is that too much to ask?
* * *
When will people realize that the AR15 that is sold to the public is not an assault rifle? When will people realize there will never be an end to crazy people or criminals killing? Take away the gun (which no one ever mentions taking away guns from criminals, only trying to do everything possible to keep law-abiding citizens from owning guns) will only cause them to use something else, such as bombs or knives.
We should never be denied owning any gun because with the way liberals have indoctrinated young people today they think socialism is better than freedom. They think the president is worse than Hitler. They think that illegal immigrants should be able to walk into this country and be provided health insurance, a job and a house. Health insurance is not a right, it’s a privilege. Nothing in the constitution says you should have it.
If the liberals had their way we would be ruled by a one world government.