Pro: Arm our educators

RICHARD ESPINOZA Reporter @EspinozaReport

Gun free zones are death traps that invite trouble. Criminals become the wolf, while an unarmed victim becomes a slaughtered lamb.

The only way you can protect schools from wolves is to allow teachers and principals to evolve from lambs into armed sheep dogs. If faculty were allowed to carry guns at school, it could result in saving lives.

According to The Texas Association of School Boards, 172 school districts in Texas allow staff and board members to carry firearms onto school premises.

ABC News’ Nightline reported that Harrold Independent School District in Harrold Texas voted unanimously to allow faculty to carry guns on school property. This decision was made after the mass shooting at Virginia Tech University in April 2007.

When you see a sign that says “Gun Free Zone,” do you honestly think that it will save lives? The answer is, no it will not. Gun Free Zones are such a joke, that it makes a criminal laugh its head off.

Criminals are notorious for not not obeying laws. If a criminal sees a sign showing the words, “Gun Free Zone,” all it is doing is inviting more trouble to harm unarmed people.

In an article by The University of Chicago Press, John R. Lott Jr., a gun rights advocate, economics professor and author of More Guns, Less Crime explains why armed citizens are less likely to become victims.

“Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons,” Lott said. “First they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.”

We all know that members of law enforcement cannot be in two places at once. In the situation of a mass shooting, by the time someone calls “911” and the police show up, most people are already harmed, or dead.

In the Policemag.com article, “Quicker Response to Active Shooters,” author Amaury Murgado wrote that sometimes law enforcement are a little too late.

“Department of Homeland Security research reveals that the average duration of an active shooter incident at a school is 12.5 minutes,” Murgado wrote. “In contrast, the average response time for law enforcement is 18 minutes.”

If our legislators and school district board members cannot trust teachers or principals with guns, then they should at least consider hiring retired police officers to protect our schools.

The President of the United States gets armed security by the Secret Service. Police officers protect the mass crowds at sporting events and concerts. Banks are overseen by armed guards. So, why can we not give this security to our own children, by arming America’s teachers?

Photographers: station to work with the established one, there could be a great increase in security.

In the present climate faculty and students are being faced with the threat of mass shootings.

A way Pierce could decrease the chances of violence with the second sheriff’s station manned by additional deputies and cadets.

Some Americans have suggested that teachers should be armed. Arming teachers is a controversial idea.

According to an ABC News poll in Feb. 2018, 42 percent of people surveyed say the Parkland shooting could have

RANDI LOVE Editor-in-Chief @randi_love29

The safety of students should not lie in the hands of armed instructors. This poses as much a threat as a person coming onto campus and opening fire.

Having weapons in possession of professors gives the opportunity to disgruntled faculty to use those guns because of accessibility.

A student could become upset, angry or feel fed up with the way a teacher or classmate may have treated the person and disarm or steal the gun to open fire.

An active shooter scenario doesn’t tell you if the person is a student, teacher or faculty member. Having the weapon garnishes the opportunity for both purposeful and accidental discharges that can result in unnecessary fatalities.

Bouts of anger, even in the slightest, could cause someone on campus with the intent to commit a violent act, to grab a gun they know is there, and use it. The second amendment states “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, th e right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

But why do those weapons need to be allowed on a school campus?

A militia is a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency. Nothing above states that

Cartoonist: been prevented if teachers carried guns. individuals need, nor deserve to bear arms and more to the point, they aren’t necessary to have at a school. The only people on campus that should have firearms should be the sheriff deputies. They are there to protect the school and those on the grounds.

That leaves 58 percent of Americans that are indifferent or do not think arming teachers would have helped.

Most teachers do not want to be first responders. More guns on campus can lead to more accidental shootings.

When more police are available on campus it would be a safer option because they are trained professionals and understand how to better use guns in situations such as school shootings.

An instance where an armed teacher stopped or shot a mass shooter on any campus hasn’t showed up during any shooting thus far, even in open carry states, so why start now?

Also, most mass shooters use semi-automatic weapons. A hand gun would be the most likely gun for a professor to have, if armed. There’s not much a handgun can do when faced against a semi-automatic weapon. That would leave an armed instructor in more danger with an increased likelihood of being injured or killed.

The fact that most people that own a weapon are not properly trained to use them is another reason for guns not to be on school grounds.

An article on vox.com titled “The case against arming teachers,” wrote “Multiple simulations have demonstrated that most people, if placed in an active shooter situation while armed, will not be able to stop the situation, and may in fact do little more than get themselves killed in the process.” including any opinions expressed, are the responsibility of the student newspaper staff. Under appropriate state and federal court decisions, these materials are free from prior restraint by the virtue of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. Accordingly, materials published herein, including any opinions expressed, should not be interpreted as the position of the L.A. Community College District, the college or any officer or employee thereof.

Just because a person may go to a shooting range occasionally doesn’t mean they should walk around a school campus with a firearm.