Some, of course, call for draconian measures that would strip away Second Amendment freedoms from law-abiding Americans. At the same time, they would do next to nothing to protect citizens from violent criminals.
In other words, they are feel-good measures, at least for anti-gun forces, that fail to offer real solutions.
Others seek practical solutions that will elevate defensive preparations against random attacks. One such measure cleared the Tennessee House Education Administration Committee Wednesday.
Lawmakers advanced legislation that would allow armed teachers as a first line of classroom defense. There was immediate blowback from one elected official.
Tennessee state Rep. Justin Jones tweeted a video showing a group from anti-gun organization Moms Demand Action blasting efforts to arm teachers. In his words, “Our community is still grieving last week’s mass shooting at Covenant elementary that took 6 lives — their solution is more guns. Shameful.”
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Ryan Williams, explained the reasoning behind the measure. “A school teacher, if they so choose to volunteer, has an opportunity to protect its students instead of running head on into harm’s way armed with nothing.”
Williams noted the bill would allow teachers, principals, and school personnel to be armed in defense of the students and staff. Williams called it a similar move to higher education campus carry measures that have been successful recently. He added that previous experience taught experts that this was a solid policy.
“One of the things from the study committee after the Parkland shooting…This is one of the recommendations they had that they felt like they could improve overall school safety in Florida from that shooting,” Williams said.
Shannon Watts of Moms Demand action had a decidedly different opinion. She said her group was “out in force” following the Nashville tragedy to resist the “deadly policy” of arming teachers.
She claimed that “guns in schools don’t make anyone safer…Teachers aren’t sharpshooters; they should never be asked to shoot students.” Statistically, most school shooters are students.
Watts said that legislators need to enact policies that will restrict guns from schools “BEFORE violence occurs.”
Her position ignores the reality that the Nashville shooter pivoted away from another target because that facility had “too much security,” according to police.
It also merely regurgitates what the anti-gun crowd truly believes — that no gun is a good gun. This, of course, flies in the face of evidence across the nation that armed good guys are a solid line of defense against violent acts.
After a recent school shooting in Denver, the superintendent wised up and returned armed resource officers to high schools where they had been removed from earlier. After unanimously voting to banish the police presence less than three years ago, the city’s school board chose to rescind the misguided policy.
It was an acknowledgement that there is no replacement for having an armed individual ready to defend the innocent. Adding more properly trained volunteers is a safety measure that many are now considering.
As Nashville proved, violent criminals prefer soft targets. If they know the intended victim, whether an individual or an institution, is armed and ready, they are highly likely to move on to one that is more vulnerable.
All the demonstrators coming out of the woodwork, though well intentioned, advocate next to nothing that will add to school and overall security. The real world calls for safety measures they may not like, but the children in the classroom will benefit from having properly armed and trained defenders.
