Kasey Hansen is a twenty six year old teacher who works with elementary, middle, and high school students with hearing impairments in the Granite School District. Hansen also brings someone, or should I say something called Lucy. Now Lucy is Hansen’s pink handgun that she carries with her everyday, to the fourteen schools she works with. She got her concealed-carry permit after the Shady Hook shooting. The shooting upset her too the point that she decided that she needed to “protect” her students from anything like the Shady Hook shooting. Hansen advocates that every teacher should carry a gun to the their class room.
How is this possible? In twenty eight states it is legal for adults to bring a legally owned firearm to a schools hallways. It is also legal for the school not to tell anybody about who has a gun in the school. If one were to ask about that kind of information most schools will not comment.
Should teachers be allowed to carry concealed firearms to classes? If you were to ask Hansen she would say, “of course!” Me on the other hand I would disagree with her. I have personal experience with firearms from growing up with guns and teaching other people how to properly shoot a gun, and I have to say that some people can not handle a firearm safely. Shooting a gun is not as easy as it seems in the movies. A firearm, a handgun especially, are difficult to aim accurately even when not your not under any stress. The kickback from some guns is enough to make someone lose their balance and it takes practice not to flinch at a gunshot. The gunshot itself is deafening without proper ear protection. All of these factors can make one emotionally distressed which is the last thing you want to be while handling a firearm. If a teacher can’t handle that kind of stress, he or she should not have a gun. The teacher in mind would must also be emotionally and mentally stable at all times, especially when working with kids that could provoke a teacher to be on their bad side. If teachers did not carry guns a certain incident could have been avoided. The dean, Shaun Harrison, of a Boston High School shot a teenager (name has not been released) in the head. The dean was running a marijuana distribution ring and the teenager had been hired by him. This shows even teachers and other factuality can be just dangerous with a gun like a criminal.
Criminals don’t follow the rules. What is the point of implementing strict gun control laws if criminals find ways around them? If that were the case gun control laws would take away the only tool civilians have to defend themselves from armed criminals. This idea is similar to the years of prohibition in the United States. Alcohol was prohibited all across America, but did the law stop alcohol distribution and consumption? Well it did not. This is an interesting argument mentioned by many gun enthusiasts but the reality is that, as we have seen in previous posts and data, it is not a valid point. Further more, if we take prohibition as a reference for not implementing gun laws, we can see that regulations do help our society to better handle alcohol consumption.
Another argument that gun advocates use is the fact that guns don’t kill people, people kill people; the issue is rooted in the person using the gun. This is a valid point as well but if the NRA and other organizations believe this, why don’t they allow to background check control laws to be passed?
Bottom line, we can agree that even if we implement gun control laws criminals might find their way around and get guns, but, lets make it at least more difficult for them to do so. Lets implement background checks so only the “good guys” can get guns and also lets so regulate the type of weapons that can be sold. Even Rambo thinks that we shouldn’t have assault weapon type of power on the streets! After the Newton massacre, this is what he had to say: “Who…needs an assault weapon? Like really, unless you’re carrying out an assault…You can’t hunt with it…Who’s going to attack your house, a fucking army?”
For this time, let’s agree with the guy from the Expendables
David Thweatt allows teachers to carry concealed weapons. Can teachers replace law enforcement in the schools?
Good Guys, Bad Guys, and The Guns
One of the main positions the gun advocates take when there is a debate about guns is that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” In theory, this may sound as a valid statement but, as with everything, it should be use in an specific context and along with facts to back it up.
Lets take for example the Sandy Hook shooting that took place in Connecticut where 20 children were murdered. A few days after the tragic event, as it was expected, this catchphrase was present in the public appearance of the Executive Vice President of the National Riffle Association that addressed the incident. In his speech, Mr Wayne LaPierre reacts to the incident blaming video games, films, and music for this kind of violence explaining that these industries “sells and stows violence against its own people.” It is true that nowadays violence can be found in movies, music, and video games but this is not what is killing people, guns is what is killing people. And the idea that those industries are selling and stowing violence against its own people… well, lets ask NRA members and pro gun advocates Chuck Norris and Clint Eastwood what do they think about it.
Another interesting point made by Mr. LaPierre is the one about how society cherishes more banks, celebrities, and stadiums than our kids. His point is that there are armed guards protecting the previous ones and that we have ignored the security of our kids, even to the point of banning guns in schools. Lets break this down. Yes, there are armed guards in banks because money is storage in banks and thieves, since humans came up with the concept of money and decided to keep it in these institutions, have always tried break into the banks and steal it. This is not the case of schools and children. Yes, also there are some celebrities and sports stadiums that are protected by armed guards but those cases have their own reason such as being continuos threatened and being terrorist targets. The point is that you can not compare them as equal. It is true that sadly the Sandy Hook tragedy is not the first one but the argument should not be focus on why there are not armed guards in schools but why do we have high capacity machine guns on the streets and why people can access them so easily.
Mr. LaPierre believes that having guns in schools will reduce or even completely avoid tragedies such as the Sandy Hook shooting to happen again because at “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” Well, who can determine who is the good guy and who is the bad guy? What if the “good guys” can not do their job as it is the case of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives because people and organizations such as the NRA are stopping them to do so? Can good guys be trusted to keep the weapons in a safe place to avoid accidents or, worst, that the weapon ends up in the hands of bad guys?
As we can see, catchy phrases can sound valid but we need to understand the context and the facts to consider them as that, as valid. The one about “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” is a valid one, if we use it in the context of a cheesy movie or a video game, so it is the case of “don’t fight fire with fire”
There are many reasons why some may think arming a teacher in a school setting will provide more protection toward themselves and their students. The fact of the matter is that if a teacher were to be armed, would they know how to shoot a weapon in a critical situation? Last time I checked, I never heard of teachers practicing firearm techniques. The experience, accuracy, and psychology of shooting a gun at a target takes time to foster. I’m arguing against the fact that arming a teacher is safer. Lets understand the increased dangers this present to the students and teachers. Firstly, what if the teacher lost the key to the guns vault in a situation, or if a curious and determined student got a hold of it. Then we’d possibly have a child thinking the gun is a toy and an unintentional disaster can present itself. Second, what if the teacher has no prior shooting experience? Then you have the opportunity for said teacher to hurt themselves or a student in the defending process against an armed intruder. Guns aren’t easy to shoot at targets, especially when your caught off guard in a situation your not prepared to face, which most teachers are subjected to in these crisis situations. The policy of allowing teachers the permission to hold guns in a school setting in my opinion is unnecessary. We have police and security personable that are trained for situations like a school shooting. Its very easy to say, oh having a gun in the class is safer, but are you as a teacher prepared enough, skilled enough to operate a weapon in a situation quickly and appropriately to mitigate a disaster? Guns need to stay at home or on trained personnel in my opinion, not with educators.
As of this time, group 2 is arguing against the use of firearms in schools by teachers and professors. One primary reason is that police are designated to protect in serve, not teachers and professors. As academic leaders of society, educations shouldn’t have to worry about defending themselves in crisis situations. The allowance for teachers and professors to have access and use of firearms at anytime is seemingly unnerving. Having more guns in the school also allows students the higher chance of handling the weapon if misplaced or not lucked up appropriately. This is group 2’s current stance on the issue of gun control in relevance to teacher and professor possession.