ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

We Must Arm Our Teachers -- Right Wing Solution to Gun Violence in Schools

Updated on March 13, 2013
Perry
Perry | Source
Gohmert
Gohmert | Source
McDonnell
McDonnell | Source
Haslam
Haslam | Source
McCullough
McCullough | Source
Source

Sparked by the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, our nation is searching for answers.
While the NRA has yet stayed silent, until Friday we are told, and as they are wont to do following this type of event wrought with bad publicity - we cannot say the same for some GOP lawmakers;

On Monday December 18, four days after the slaughter of 20 six & seven year-old children in Connecticut, Texas Governor Rick Perry said at a Northeast Tarrant Tea Party gathering in North Richland Hills, Texas - a Forth Worth suburb - that he supports allowing teachers and administrators to carry concealed handguns in the classroom. "You should be able to carry your handgun anywhere in this state.", Perry clarified.

Oregon State Rep. Dennis Richardson, also on Monday in an e-mail obtained by Gawker, proclaimed that, "Most of the murdered children would still be alive", if he were a teacher there at the time and, "the school district did not preclude me from having access to a firearm." He later said on CNN that every school should have "two or three" armed and continually trained, coordinated and administrated through local law enforcement, volunteers to roam school campuses. Rep Richardson added that this could all be done at zero cost.

On a Sunday news show, nearly two whole days after the massacre, Texas Representative Louie Gohmert lamented, "I wish to god the principal would have had an M4 in her hands..."

Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell -- of forced vaginal probe fame -- suggested Tuesday in an "Ask the Governor" appearance that, "if people were armed, not just a police officer but other school officials that were trained and chose to have a weapon, certainly there would be an opportunity to stop an individual trying to get into the school.

Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam said that he would "consider" a proposal by State Sen. Frank Nicely to secretly arm and train some teachers. Nicely, in a phone call with Talking Points Memo, reasoned of a potential gunman "(I)f he doesn't know which teacher has training, the he wouldn't know which one had (a gun)."

Oklahoma State Rep. Mark McCullough plans to file legislation in an effort to bring guns into schools, explaining that "(I)t is incredibly irresponsible to leave our school undefended".

Oklahoma State Senator Ralph Shortey told the Tulsa World that, "Allowing teachers and administrators with concealed-carry permits the ability to have weapons at school events would provide both a measure of security for students and a deterrent against attackers."

Problems

So let's just pretend for a moment that this idea isn't repulsive to the majority of the country.

Let's pretend this is a reasonable conversation to be had.

What an slap in the face to law enforcement! These people are extensively trained, with ongoing proficiency and fitness standards. They are heroes who put their lives on the line daily.

The thought that a single gun safety course can adequately prepare an educator...
Perish the thought, of the aged librarian, with spectacles and hair in a bun; or the 22 year old, 100 pound girl fresh out of community college -- that is who you want responsible for the safety of our children?
Even worse, that's who you expect to be able to defend that firearm from a group of knuckleheads who want to take that gun away and turn it on the teachers?

Imagine how some teachers, you remember the ones, some of the coaches, some would walk around so hard with that Desert Eagle in the holster.

We already have instances of certain abhorrent teachers raping students all over the country, now do we really want the potential for teachers shooting up classrooms all over the country?

Imagine the cost of liability insurance to cover each and every school in every town. Cities would be forced to dissolve or face lawsuits for lack of insurance on their employees. Counties would have to eat the cost of newly unincorporated towns, destroying budgets across the land.
How is the solution to gun violence to inject more tools of violence?

What's next? Shall we arm cashiers in the malls after the Oregon mall shooting? Shall we arm the teenage popcorn kids in the movie theaters after the Dark Knight massacre? Shall we arm our religious leaders after the Sihk temple shooting? Shall we arm the bikini-baristas after the cafe shooting in Seattle? Shall we are the abortion doctors, who are assassinated with frightening regularity?

Will we lock down all of our schools until they prisons... of learning? Is that where we are headed?

Will we lock down all of our children for all hours they are out of our sight, all in an effort to protect the "rights" of crazy people running around with assault rifles?

Really? Reasonable gun safety is so munch anathema that we will put our children at such a great risk?

Is that really the kind of country we have become?

12/20/12

5 out of 5 stars from 1 rating of hub

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Mikeg422 profile image

      Michael Gill 4 years ago from Philadelphia, PA

      I really don't care whether you approve this comment or not it's for you. Name calling is the best you can come up with? I'm the idiot? You do know you live in a country that was founded on rebellion, and violence right? Guess not judging from your comment above. And yes gun owners in America are probably one of the only balances between tyranny, and government today. Aside from that why is it you think that no other country has ever attempted to attack American soil? Yes it is so obvious in how I write, and think that I'm an "impaired idiot", if you can not find the words to debate an issue in a civil manner perhaps you should leave said subject alone. What are you possibly going to gain from trying to antagonise me? You call me an idiot, but how socially blind are you to think there are more Americans like you, than those who would fight the government on this issue? Some of us believe we are quite capable of taking care of ourselves, but obviously you are one of those who loves the nanny state. I don't care enough about what one silly person (you) has to say about me to do anything about it, but I would be careful if I were you, in my short experience on hubpages thus far, the writers, and hub pages don't really respect or put up with those on here who can not express themselves with literacy instead of turning to insults and vague idealistic opinions. You will not see me comment on your hubs again, I will simply agree to disagree and move on. Have a nice day.

    • zenpropix profile image

      zenpropix 4 years ago

      Justin, your quick review of numerous mass shootings offers good insights. Thank you for mentioning the Sikh Temple shooting, which was in our area. In that instance, it was two brave little kids that ran into the building and undoubtedly saved many more lives.

      For some perspective, let's remember that the NRA's membership comprises less than 1.5 % of America's population.

      Appreciate your efforts on this topic. Now following.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      I only allowed the above comment to show an example of how the brain of an imbecile works.

      CIVIL WAR!!!

      Some severely impaired idiots out there really believe than one day... "it's gonna come down to me and my gun against the government tyranny".

      And not only do these mindless conspiracy nuts believe that this scenario is inevitable; they actually believe that they would WIN!!!

      My god, what irrational bunch of paranoid nincumpoops...

    • Mikeg422 profile image

      Michael Gill 4 years ago from Philadelphia, PA

      I mentioned the next civil war because that is just where this will lead. Do you really think gun owners are going to simply surrender their weapons because the mighty and powerful government says to? You can say I'm a tin foil hat wearer, but I'm not the one creating some fantasitical utopian world where everyone is safe and no one has guns. Just the simple logic of saying take away guns, and that will remove violence from society is sheep terminology for "I watch too much TV". Humans are inherently violent animals and will find a way to kill each other regardless of the instrumentation. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a realist.

      Actually if you read my comment, you would have seen I said arm them with non-lethal weapons, but I'm sure there is a problem with that too. The whole liberal mindset in this country right now is ridiculous. We CANNOT create a society where everyone is safe, and taken care of, it is irresponsible, and irrational to think that is even a remote possibility. Clip capacities make no difference at all, against unarmed opponents what difference does it make if the shooter has to take an extra 5 seconds and replace the magazine in their weapon. That is just more main stream media drivel. Wake up chief.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      Arm the teachers?

      So what about the mall shooting? Should we arm all of the teenage girls working the cash registers in the mall then?

      What about the movie theater massacre? You want to arm the 18 year old kid with pimples selling popcorn?

      What about the Sihk temple? You think we should have armed guards at all of the churches?

      What about the cafe shootings in Seattle? Should we arm all the bikini baristas?

      What about the parking lot shootings in Tuscon, and Virginia Tech, and Macy's parking lot in Newport Beach?

      Do we need to have armed guards in all of the parking lots?

      Oh, and how did those armed police and security work out in Columbine? Remember that?

      They traded fire with the shooters... BUT THE SHOOTERS WERE BETTER ARMED!

      That is the whole point. These idiots have easy access to military assault weapons and 30 round magazines, strips and 100 round drums.

      The solution is NOT to arm everyone to the point that there is no safe place left in the country, just a bunch of paranoid Yosemite Sam wussies, shooting first and asking questions later with "Stand your ground" laws as their cover.

      Civil war? What are you speaking of, pray tell?

      Why would any sane person go through their entire life acting like such a shivering paranoid lemming? wearing a tin foil hat while ranting about the police state and dodging the black helicopters and the "jack-booted thugs"?

      Mike -- What if a teacher has no interest in shooting other human beings? Teachers are educators, not marksmen, not patrolmen, and not assassins. You wanna force them to be armed against their will?

    • Mikeg422 profile image

      Michael Gill 4 years ago from Philadelphia, PA

      My suggestion is to arm teachers, but with non-lethal rubber bullet ammunition. I think our teachers should be able to defend themselves and the children they teach, but we don't want school teachers to have to live with the guilt of murder (even in self defense) for te rest of their lives. Banning guns is just a silly liberal idea, and is in fact impossible. God forbid the federal government tries to do that, if you think mass shooting at a school or movie theatre is bad, how will people feel if they start the next civil war, and Americans civilians, and military die in the thousands. Sounds like a really dumb idea to me, and a perfect way to convert our society to a complete police state.

    • zenpropix profile image

      zenpropix 4 years ago

      Some good insights in your hub. Yes, arming teachers is not the answer. In the face of a horrific moment, the mind of the observer naturally gravitates to an encounter with the deranged gunman. How could he have been stopped?, we ask. What would I have done?, one considers. The reality is that, once a gunman is inside the school, or inside a cinema, especially with a semi-automatic assault weapon, it is far too late. Innocents will be lost. Multiple solutions must be pursued, and they must all be pro-active.

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      I trust the Dear Readers to follow the Gallup poll themselves. They can clearly see that you are in the minority on this particular issue. If you want to continue to deny that, go for it.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      All of the polls have specific questions regarding our policy on firearms, don't they?

      And all of them have been conducted since the massacre in Connecticut.

      Makes me wonder why you decided they don't contribute to the question of what we do in the aftermath of Sandy Hook.

      And why did I list the number how I did? Because that's how Gallup has them listed, it's not rocket surgery...

      Just because Brietbart chose to recalibrate the numbers doesn't mean that I am going to do the same.

      Gallup gave six policy options with three effectiveness options. I showed the ACTUAL numbers that Gallup released, not a twisting of the numbers to fit my narrative, which apparently is how you and Breitbart would choose to conduct your business...

      Here's the link again.

      http://www.gallup.com/poll/159422/stop-shootings-a

      Telling that you only respond to the poll that most closely fits your personal view, while ignoring the others that show how marginalized your views really are in this country...

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      Bretbart was quoting Gallup. You have a problem with someone quoting Gallup? Are only selected venues allowed to accurately quote Gallup?

      Your first two cites have nothing to do with the question of arming school officials, do they. Makes me wonder why you cited them when they don't contribute to the question.

      And your third link didn't work. But anyway, as the Gallup poll I noted showed, combine the number of people who said a solution would be 'very effective' and 'somewhat effective', more people favored "arming at least one school official" over "banning the sale of semi-automatic weapons" by 64 to 63. You only gave one half that combo for some strange reason.

    • Justin Earick profile image
      Author

      Justin Earick 4 years ago from Tacoma, WA

      The commenter is welcome to his opinion, but not his own reality.

      Breitbart? Really? Your "evidence" is the right-wing nut job Breitbart? Please, Faux News/AM talk radio world isn't exactly representative of the country...

      New polling shows that 49% value gun control over the 2nd Amendment, while only 42% said it was more important to protect guns.

      http://www.people-press.org/2012/12/20/after-newto

      New CBS polling also shows that 57% WANT MORE STRICT gun laws, 30% think current laws are sufficient, and ONLY NINE PERCENT want less strict gun laws...

      http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57559669/poll-

      New Gallup polling shows that only 34% think a school official with a gun could even be effective, while 42% say assault weapons ban would be more effective, and 53% say increased POLICE presence in schools would be more effective...

      http://www.gallup.com/poll/159422/stop-shootings-a

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 4 years ago from The Midwest

      "repulsive to the majority of the country."

      The hubber is welcome to his own opinion but not his own reality. That's one of the major problems with attempting to discuss guns in America. Far too many people create a fantasy in their head about the way they like things, and then live with that as their perception of the real world. Let's see how well Justin can adjust to facts.

      "A new poll released today by Gallup shows that Americans favor increased security and proactive mental health treatment over gun control. The national poll of a little over 1,000 adults was conducted in the wake of the tragic murders at a Connecticut school last Friday."

      An interesting fact somewhat buried is that when you combine the number of people who said a solution would be 'very effective' and 'somewhat effective', more people favored "arming at least one school official" over "banning the sale of semi-automatic weapons" by 64 to 63.

      http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/12/19...