No one is saying the killings have been or will be stopped. What you so blissfully ignore is they are saying the carnage in Columbine was limited to thirteen but would have been (not “could” have been) much, much worse had the armed guard not been there and willing to engage the shooters.

Or haven’t you noticed that nearly every other school shooting has happened in “gun free zones” where the shooters were not stopped until armed response was available and on-site? THAT’S the willful ignorance I’m talking about.

There’s no perfect solution here- to name one, I’m sure in some parts of the country you won’t find a single teacher willing to undergo weapon training (perhaps there they could look at hiring vets to do the job for them). However, an imperfect plan is better than no plan at all.

So what is the answer?

Last year, I got assaulted when a boy came into my classroom in a rage. I had locked my door, but the door was defective and hadn’t closed totally. I tried to stop him from attacking a girl in my room, but he threw me into a metal support pole and beat her up.

So what is the answer?

Perhaps if all schools had at least a safety advocate (unarmed) so that incidents of potential violence could be monitored and authorities called. Would an unarmed safety advocate have been able to stop the slaughter of 26 children and staff in Sandy HooK?

Perhaps we should arm all school principals and train them to protect and preserve life? If dear Dawn had had access to a gun, I think she just may have killed the assailant. She was a fierce and mighty educator.

I do not know a logical answer. This is a spiritual issue and evil appears to be overcoming good.

I am so sad and so confused and so glad to be on vacation for 11 days. I never knew I had so many tears in me.

But, again, I ask – what is the answer?

….one of the things that nobody seems to have mentioned is that by “allowing” teachers to be armed in schools, you are creating a “target rich environment” for Shysters ‘R Us should there be an event such as Columbine. Think about it.

Good point. There would need to be some sort of “safe harbor” legislation. Though they might already be covered under the idea that the police are not obligated to protect you.

The other issue that comes to mind (if the federales get involved in this) would be they’d almost certainly try to create another big government boondoggle like the TSA.

Yep. Foster criticizes a federal approach, too, and I agree. Along with education in general, the level and means of protection should be a state or local matter.

I mean, look at what an excellent job the feds have done creating fools for their indoctrination corps. Or corpse, if you’re the Smarter-than-the-rest-of-the-world prez.

The other issue that comes to mind (if the federales get involved in this) would be they’d almost certainly try to create another big government boondoggle like the TSA.

Wouldn’t that be just dandy?

Lord knows, the LSM surely wouldn’t want that kind of information to make it out to the public because, miracle of miracles, such information just might influence people to want protection in “gun-free zones” and we couldn’t have that now, could we? Not even “for the children.