Is The NRA Right? Should We Have Armed Guards In Every School?
Probably not, but they deserve a lot of credit for suggesting a plausible solution to a problem. Gun control absolutely, unconditionally will not stop another Adam Lanza. In fact, some advocates of gun control are even publicly admitting that.
That being said, the idea put forth most often on the Right since the shooting, arming teachers, isn’t a very good one either. This isn’t Israel, where military service is mandatory. A lot of teachers have no experience with guns, no desire to learn and in all fairness, they signed up to teach, not to be security guards. Yes, getting rid of “gun free school” zones and giving teachers incentives to carry guns isn’t a bad idea, but it’s not a comprehensive solution to the problem.
Putting a security guard in every school wouldn’t be an ideal way to handle the problem either. It would be expensive, killers could target the security guards first or alternately, they could just move on to softer targets like day care centers or playgrounds.
This is why it’s ultimately futile to try to “solve” this problem. The only real fix for it would be to put armed guards EVERYWHERE and it’s just not worth it. Part of being a conservative is realizing that there isn’t a handy solution to every problem that can be fixed by the government passing a new law.
This is one of those problems. That being said, kudos to the NRA for at least making a good faith effort to offer up a real world solution to a difficult issue. There’s not enough of that happening in D.C.
Democrats are salivating at the thought of a Hillary Clinton presidency. And why shouldn’t they? It would be a continuation
When people mention the word “transparency” in the context of the infamously secretive Obama Administration, it is usually in a
The Journal News, which published the names AND addresses of 33,614 registered gun owners in two NY counties, and wanted