There are many in the Education Industrial Complex who are outraged when anyone suggests teachers, other school employees, and carry permit holders have the option to legally carry a defensive firearm on school property. Their theory, “If there are no guns at school, there will be no school shootings.” Quite honestly, that is correct, except 300+ million guns aren’t going away, and criminals don’t follow the law.
Definition of criminal – One who breaks the law (and gets caught).
Keeping schools “gun free,” ensures a prime location for criminals bent toward nihilistic infamy. In most cases, a school shooter will have no armed resistance and can continue actively slaughtering innocents until they run out of ammunition, rage, or patience. Even having a school resource officer (SRO) provides no true insurance.
In one recent school shooting, a SRO very actively did his job, ending the shooting quickly and taking a non-life threatening bullet wound for his trouble. However, in Parkland, FL, the officer was a coward (in my personal opinion) and sheltered in place until well after the shooter left of his own accord. In other cases, the shooter neutralized the SRO as their first action. High death counts are the primary goal of these vain, glorious monsters. Ripe concentrations of the helpless will continue to be their fertile ground.
A recent court ruling in Pennsylvania seems to imply, current PA law allows those who are legally armed in the rest of the state to be armed on school campuses. The gist of the ruling is that, “those with a lawful purpose may be in possession.” Until now, that meant on-duty police officers.
The new ruling comes as a result of a man who was arrested with a knife on campus. The court found that as a carpenter, the knife was a tool of his trade, thus he had a lawful purpose to be in possession. This leads many legal scholars to infer a carry permit creates a lawful purpose for the carry of any weapon that can legally be carried elsewhere. This would include most knives and handguns according to PA law. This is especially important considering PA Governor Tom Wolf has vowed to veto any new laws allowing the arming of teachers or access for anyone with a carry permit, on school campuses.
School employees and parents are directly motivated to defend students in ways a SRO just isn’t. Principles, teachers, janitors, and the admin staff are all just as likely to be shot as the students. This places them in a position of self-defense. On top of that, most who choose school-related professions see themselves as shepherds anyway.
Parents are even more motivated than the school employees. Their child is potentially in the crosshairs. There are many examples of unarmed people attacking the shooter. Unfortunately, although this may buy time for others, it usually ends with the death or serious injury for the heroic actor. These same people are much more likely to quickly end the shooting—and live—if they are armed. Under current law, gun free zones are chosen because the monster with a gun, knows they will be able to rack up mass carnage with no effective resistance.
Allowing the option of carry, takes away the certainty of success and thereby reduces the likelihood of such attacks. It also provides an instant increase in security and survivability for all involved—except the shooter.
This idea returns liberty to the people, creates no new taxes and no new governmental agencies. It provides access for people who have already been demonstrated to be among the most law abiding citizens in our country. States like Oklahoma are already doing this and have not had a school shooting since they passed pro school carry legislation.
It’s almost like people ignore reality they don’t like, at the cost of other people’s lives.
Are you in favor of teachers or anyone in lawful possession being able to carry at a school? Share your answer in the comment section.
Sign up for K-Var’s weekly newsletter and discounts here.
When staff, faculty and students may be legally carrying concealed, the perpetrator looking to kill at a school site suddenly loses the advantage. I am all in favor of permitting arming of staff and faculty who choose to do so, and would not endorse mandatory arming of any school employee. The same uncertainty for the potential shooter has dropped street crime where guns are freely allowed outside the home. This is allegedly America, land of the free, where citizens can choose to or not to carry firearms. Anti-gunners simply don’t understand America’s values.
The liberal left has a hissy fit any time someone suggests the idea of teachers, any other school employee or, basically, anyone else for that matter, being able to carry a firearm on school property. Then, if a shooter shows up, what do they do? They call the cops, who… bring guns.
It seems impossible to be able to tell who might be inclined to go on a killing rampage and who might not. Therefore, it seems logical to have as many impediments as possible to someone who decides to kill as many people as possible for whatever sick reason. Locations where a lot of people are concentrated and are “protected” by GUN-FREE zone signs make the easiest targets since even those honest people who own weapons will honor such signs leaving an open field to those who have no intention of honoring such signs.
This is common sense, but then again WHEN has the left ever been accused of using common sense? In a pie in the sky world weapons of all sorts would be set aside and the left , somehow, believes this. Reality will show us that resistance is the best way to deter such horrid actions because these people are cowards who only want to strike out on an unarmed target ! I don’t say to arm everyone but strategically placed individuals should be effective in keeping criminals at bay!
YES l am a grandparent with grandkids in school. I also have a concield carry permit. I don’t believe open carry should be permitted because they have no background check. Teachers and parents carrying on school grounds should have the training and background check that a concield carry permit provides. I agree 100% that where there is armed resistance the cowards and sickows will go where there is no resistance. This is why the 2nd amendment should be protected from power hungry politicians. Take away our gun rights and only the criminals will have guns.
Absolutely! They should put money into training school staff in the use of firearms instead of putting money into disarming Americans.
I am in favor of concealed carry in schools and other Government buildings by lawful concealed carry citizens. You might have a problem in states like Texas with open carry, it might create suspicion and panic in school staff and students. It would be better to keep the weapon concealed such as in a school pickup lane instead of exposed for anyone to see. It makes too much sense for politicians to grasp and implement.
There are literally thousands and thousands of retired military and law enforcement people throughout this country on pensions from their service. A nominal salary within Social Security and pension requirements which would cover expenses is all that would be required to hire these retirees. These retirees are TRAINED weapons carriers not just people off the streets. I would trust my children to them. Would you?
I have to disagree with this. Unless the military veterans/retirees were part of that small percentage of the military whose job it is to engage in combat with the enemy using small arms, it is unlikely they will be any better trained or experienced to deal with a school shooting than a typical concealed carrier. Qualifying with a rifle at targets on a known distance range every year or so is simply not going to be applicable to fighting with a pistol in a building full of innocents.
As for law enforcement retirees, similar issue on the whole. Some of them have excellent training, while many others receive the bare minimum that will satisfy their department’s lawyers. We’ve all read the horrifying news reports of officers who fired 70-80 rounds at a suspect whom they hit twice, along with eight innocent bystanders. So no real advantage there, either.
Furthermore, our focus should be on removing unconstitutional impediments to the exercise of rights for all law abiding citizens, not the granting of special rights to a select few, such as the vile LEOSA law did.
It used to be that school administrator would look around the country to see what was working in other places and see if they could work with what they found , when we were in school there was no school shooting. But now scool administrator’s seemed to have dropped the ball. What works in one state (thank you Oklahoma) will work in other states.
When I was in High School, no one had heard of school shootings save for 1. There wasn’t even a risk. It was taboo by society and also illegal to shoot another person in the area where I was raised, save for self-defense. All of us good ole boys with pick up trucks usually had a rifle and shotgun mounted in window racks for all to see. There weren’t any thefts either. NO ONE GOT SHOT in my school. So if it takes an armed adult with firearms training to ensure that all students and educators are safe at school and during after school activites, then I am all for hiring former/retired police officers, Spec Ops/Infantry/Military Police to fill those positions.