| the-pi-guy said: I explained a few posts back: - having people carry guns can cause more shootings. - it's an access point for a gun. A teenager could swipe a gun from an armed guard. - having untrained people, and even trained people could mean more casualties as people get caught in cross fires. I know it's a compelling idea that a gunman breaks down the door, that someone could fire back before anything happens. The issue is that idea is largely a fantasy, hardly ever goes down like that. Don't get me wrong, it has happened, but it's rare. It's an idealized situation. People regularly aren't that aware of what's going on around them. It's pretty easy to sneak up on people. Additionally most people are not that willing to risk their life and they're not that willing to take a life. Again, we had trained police officers standing outside. People that are frequently in intense situations, that should be trained to use a gun, and have equipment like bullet proof vests. They didn't do any better, it's not reasonable to expect a teacher or more security guards to do better. |
More guns also complicates the police response. If you suddenly have multiple shooters and gunshots coming from different directions it becomes a lot more difficult for the police to locate and address the threat while protecting those not involved.
Additionally, more guns increase bad outcomes outside of mass shooters such as accidents, heat of the moment criminality and general intimidation which creates an unhealthy school environment for children. Essentially the "just arm the teachers" "solution" creates a bad outcome for millions of kids in order to prevent the worst outcome for dozens of kids, when the aim should be to create a good outcome for all kids.
