The Great Debate: Solutions Part 4

I'm almost done with this series.  Already I've provided sound solutions to the problem of protecting our students in schools.  This post will provide several more workable and practical ideas.

To begin, it can't be stressed enough that the number one easiest solution to employ is the rejection of the "gun free zone" policy in schools.  This is without a doubt the most idiotic policy for protecting students in schools, or patrons in, say, theaters showing Batman movies.  It is an invitation, not a prohibition.  The vast majority of publicized mass shootings occurred in "gun free zones", and frankly, that should include towns and cities with the strictest gun control laws...which, by the way, are actually law-abiding people control laws.  As most schools in the nation operate under this nonsensical policy, there is no one to defend students when the shooting starts.

Thus, to allow those school staff members who would be willing, particularly those who are already licensed gun owners with concealed carry permits (should be automatically every law-abiding American), armed personnel is logical, reasonable and common sense policy.  There are schools in the country that have already adopted this policy.  No problems reported so far.

There are two main objections to this idea which are easily resolved:

1.  This would be on a volunteer basis, so no one would be forced to carry a weapon.

2.  Law-abiding gun owners, most of whom already have some training and practice with some regularity, do not abuse their liberty to bear arms.  Few who are convicted of crimes involving guns are NRA members.

Teachers are already concerned with the safety of their charges, with teachers among the dead often  having given their lives protecting their students against attacks.  For most of them, had they been armed and firing back rather than simply blocking bullets from hitting students, death tolls would have been drastically reduced.  Indeed, it is likely that in most cases, merely aiming the gun at the attacker would have ended the assault.

If teachers and/or other staff members are covertly carrying firearms, it would not be necessary that all are carrying.  It would take some great effort to determine which staff member is actually carrying and when as well as how many.  But the policy being made known...and reiterated often...would make a given school less likely to be invaded by an armed thug intent on doing harm and whose purpose is generally the most newsworthy high body count. 

"Gun free zone" policy must end if we're serious about protecting our kids.

In addition to having adults properly trained and outfitted to protect students often referred to more than rhetorically or metaphorically as "my kids" by teachers and administrators, there are numerous other ways to protect kids from armed assaults, which is actually the point.  They range from expensive items such as metal detectors (already utilized in many schools simply because of gang-bangers among the student population), to reducing entry points which would be monitored by both adults and video cameras.  There are also devices that are relatively inexpensive (some incredibly so) that would be far more effective than pretending assailants care about "gun free zones" or laws prohibiting types and quantities of firearms.  Below are links I found to effective ideas for protecting students.  Most people would even rightly refer to them as "common sense"  (in no particular order):

---This link concerns campus and building design and contains links to other articles focusing on specific areas of concern.

---This link features something that is alluded to in the link above, and is one of the first things I saw (on Facebook, actually) that compelled my interest in real and effective solutions to the problem of protecting students, that don't include depriving the law-abiding of their God-given right to determine how best to protect themselves.  It actually takes an existing product and finds that it works especially well for protecting students from active shooters, also.

---This link contains a general overview of identifying students who might be threats, as well as reducing their presence through education.  It breaks it down between what schools, communities and parents can do.

---This link offers two very inexpensive and easy to use products to secure classrooms and prevent entry.

---This link is another product, notable for the inventor of it.  It was a high school student who came up with this and outfitted his entire school with this device.  It shows true ingenuity and a decided degree of intelligence not found in the typical "ban assault weapons" buffoon.  The kid now has a patent on the device and is (or likely has by this point) making them for a second school.  He's making money, too, which is capitalism at its finest...seeing a problem, creating a solution, providing it to all who have need for a reasonable price.

---Finally, this link speaks to things some parents have thought of doing to help keep their kids safe.

Quite frankly, each of the above are true examples of "common sense" solutions to the problem.  While some might be expensive, adults must decide just how badly they want to protect kids, particularly when the next teacher contract expires and they choose to go on strike again.  Or, if towns insist on raising property taxes with the excuse that money is needed for schools, school board meetings should be packed with parents who demand spending priorities be adjusted so as to include, at the very least, some of the less expensive options listed above.  In addition, donating to the cause in one's own neighborhood, should be a no-brainer for anyone who expresses any concern at all with every publicized school shooting incident.  You want solutions?  How badly?  They exist in a variety of forms, none of which require taking away the rights of the law-abiding.