Quote Originally Posted by Lacquer Head View Post
Are teachers going to have the gun in their hand at all time? No. They'd have to keep it locked up to prevent a STUDENT from stealing it. This is all assuming every teacher is going to accept that they have to be a trained killer. They're generally thinkers, not fighters. I plan to get a teaching degree and I would NEVER keep a gun in a classroom near children. Most teachers wouldn't either. We already have a shortage of teachers and shit, we can't afford to make it even worse.
I'm a thinker, not a fighter. I own firearms, I am practiced in their use, and if I were ever confronted with a situation requiring usage of a firearm, I would use one without hesitation. One doesn't have to become a hardened assassin to be prepared to defend one's self. You keep a concealed firearm on your person, safety on, not sitting on a counter or some shit where kids are going to play with it. A school is responsible for the safety of its students. Neglecting the ability to defend one's self and other to maintain some foolish air of ethical superiority is selfish and irresponsible. If you go down, you go down. Better to go down fighting, than cowering, hiding, or running and hoping you're one of the few who survives an unopposed massacre.

Not to mention by your logic, if the teachers have guns, the killer is going to come strapped with a bomb or take a hostage or something. There's just too many risks and dangers in this situation.
What logic would there be in taking a hostage if you came to kill people? "Stop right there, drop your weapons! If you don't let me kill everyone in this room without a fight, I'll kill this individual!", really, how much sense does that make? As for bombs, this is why guns are such wonderful weapons. Due to ease of use, range of effectiveness, and relatively high killing power, one stands a reasonable change of taking out somebody using a bigger weapon. So, the comparison is this. Law abiding citizen with a gun versus criminal with a home made bomb, you might lose, you might die. OR, unarmed civilian versus criminal with a firearm; You WILL lose, you WILL die. In the case of this massacre what would a teacher have had to lose? They were all MURDERED. What else could they possibly have to lose here? You're comparing risking your life, to surrendering your life without a fight.

Quote Originally Posted by Rowan
What do I think needs to happen? Well I don’t believe these things can ever be prevented to the point where we can stop someone from doing what they are thinking. What we always have the power to do though, is react. He was only 1 man. If he had tried to attack a military compound or a police station, he would have been dropped very quickly. Instead this cowardly prick decided to kill children. Short of putting security guards in a school or giving teachers weapons, there’s nothing that can be done to stop a homicidal/suicidal maniac. What age are we living in, when teachers need to be armed to protect children from gunmen in elementary schools?
This. You're not going to stop laws from being broken with different laws. Disarming the planet is unreasonable, and not feasible. Expecting everybody to learn to love each other and play nice is naive if not outright moronic. Your options are react, or don't react, fight, or don't fight, risk death, or guarantee death. The world is in a bad way. Ignoring the problem doesn't fix it.