Guns in Schools are Saving Lives Overseas
In 1975, Islamist butchers slaughtered students in an Israeli school. After that, their schools have been protected not only by guards, but by armed adults (staff and even parents) as well. Editorialist Vin Suprynowicz of the Las Vegas Review Journal has noted that since Israel began this policy, “terrorist attacks in Israeli schools have dropped to zero.”
In March, 2008, a Muslim terrorist spent some 15 minutes gunning down students (ultimately killing eight) at a yeshiva, a Hebrew seminary, in Jerusalem. When police responded to the scene, they did not enter the building, similar to the police response at Columbine. A part-time student who lives nearby entered the building, and leaning out over a balcony, fired twice, wounding the terrorist in another room.
A second part-time student arrived just after that and finished him off. The second defender had grabbed a policeman’s hat off one of the onlooking officers. He figured that would keep him from being confused as a terrorist by the first defender.
And, as at the New Life Church in Colorado -- where Jeanne Assam mortally wounded a killer who was armed with over 1,000 rounds of ammunition -- the defenders shot no bystanders.
If we are genuinely concerned about defending life and protecting students, which policy has the track record worth emulating? On the one hand we have those advocating gun free zones who have only rivers of blood and piles of bodies to show for their policy. On the other hand, we have those advocating armed self defense who are batting a thousand.
We are told that having students or faculty (with concealed handgun permits) carrying guns scares many students and teachers. Maybe so. What is worse … being scared or being dead?
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
High school students are young. High school students might be in a phase where becoming an adult involves them being exposed to high hormone concentrations, making them rebellious, impulsive and so on, as everyone who ever dealt with teenagers will confirm.
If you want to make schools safer, deploy armed guards. Why do students who inherently are istable (puberty) and are fighting (mostly verbally) among each other suited to carry guns in situations where one impulsive reaction of (we have to recall they are still children) a child could easily get another kid killed!
Think of the impact for parents and students resulting from one situation where the student making a deadly mistake might not be able to grasp the consequences and will ruin his/her and many others' lives!!
Having an armed guard means he will be the first to go. If someone wants to do serious damage, they either do it in a place where they will meet no resistance, or they are doing it in a place where they can control the enviornment by eliminating the only knwon threat. By allowing CCW or CHP holders (usually 21 and older, not students) to carry at school, you do two things. 1 - you eliminate the safe zone that would have otherwise existed FOR the bad guy. 2 - You take his control of the situation away, by eliminating his knowlege of those that could resist and end his rampage earlier than expected.
Although an armed guard is better than nothing, having armed and trained individuals is the better choice.
Who said anything about high school students? Concealed handgun permits require the bearers to be at least 21 years of age.
Here in Arizona, and I'm sure, many other states, most high schools have several police officers assigned to their schools. This is to show a law enforcement presence to protect against gang violence and, possibly, against terrorist attacks.
But what about colleges and universities? Arizona State University, for example, has their own police force; but they can't be everywhere at once. And college students are all, legally, adults. Granted, most are not legally able to bear arms, but those who are are far beyond puberty and (usually) are not subject to impulsive reactions. What also needs to be considered, is that those who are of legal age to carry a gun, are protect by the second amendment. So why should our personal liberties be thrown away?
"[college students] are not subject to impulsive reactions."
this is demonstrably false.
Geekrock said they were "not...impulsive...".
Reckoner said that what geekrock said was false... just by the way.
So, whoever says college students are (in contrast to high school students) not subject to impulsive reactions has lost any touch with reality.
I have seen too many college kids get into fist-fights from one istant to the next (sometimes but not always under the influence) over some bs to know better...
yeah, i reread it afterward and said whoops.
no, but CHL holders recognize that they will be held to a higher legal standard than non-CHL holders, and act accordingly.