Dear Fellow Survivalist;
Part of the gun debate that is going on in the US today is driven by the school shootings that have occurred in the last few years. These tragic events are part of the horror of mass shootings which are being at least partially motivated by the massive amount of news coverage these criminals receive.
These killers pick schools for two basic reasons. First of all, they’re looking for shock value. There’s nothing like shooting up a bunch of kids to provide a shocking event, sure to gain a lot of media attention. The second reason is that schools are gun-free zones. Statistically, almost all mass shootings happen in gun-free zones, as the criminals know that there will be nobody shooting back at them.
Another important statistic is that almost all of these shooters are on the political left. While the media tries to paint them as conservative crackpots who are members of the NRA, the reality is that they are either registered Democrats, or in the case of those too young to vote, the children of registered Democrats. Perhaps the leftist argument about how dangerous guns are is true… when those guns are in the hands of leftists.
Of course, the left’s constantly pushed solution to the problem is more and more gun control. But mankind has been killing each other since long before guns were ever invented. Eliminating guns or greatly reducing the availability of guns to citizens is merely going to create more victims; not eliminate guns in the hands of criminals. Those criminals still manage to get their hands on guns in countries where law-abiding citizens can’t.
One solution which has been used with varying success, is to have a school resource officer, an armed policeman physically present in each school. But even a school resource officer isn’t enough to protect our children. That was proven fairly well in the Parkland shooting, where the officer stood outside, rather than going in to confront the shooter. Regardless of his reasoning or department policy, he didn’t accomplish the mission and protect those kids. Ultimately, that’s the bottom line in that case.
Hence those on the political right have proposed the idea of allowing teachers to be armed, carrying concealed. This stands in stark contrast to the “weapons” proposed by those on the left, who want to arm teachers with small baseball bats and buckets of rocks to throw at the criminals.
I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want to go up against an active shooter with nothing more than rocks or books. No matter how good a throwing arm you’ve got, he’s got the advantage. If I am ever forced to get into a fight, I believe in the military adage of having more firepower than your enemy.
The left-leaning media is painting the idea of arming teachers in a very deceptive light. I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised by this, as they do that with just about everything that Republicans say and do. The thinking of those on the right and the left is so different, on a fundamental level, that the two groups can’t understand how each other think.
In this case, the specific deception is to claim that Republicans want to force teachers to be armed with firearms. However, that’s not the idea at all. What has been proposed is to merely eliminate the “gun-free” designation on schools, allowing teachers who have a concealed carry license to carry. In some cases, school districts are requiring extra training for these teachers, which probably isn’t a bad idea, as most probably don’t already have enough tactical training for dealing effectively with an active shooter.
The big question is whether or not this idea will work. There are two major parts to answering that question. First of all, there is sufficient data to show that this particular class of criminal seeks out gun free zones to perpetuate their crimes. They’re trying to rack up a score, before dying themselves and realize that they will get a higher score if there’s nobody shooting back.
Of course, eliminating gun-free zones to reduce this crime is merely a theory at this point, as it hasn’t been tried enough to prove the effectiveness of such action. The criminals could just adapt to that, as they often do. But there’s another important part to this answer, which we must take into effect. That is the experience of countries who have armed teachers in the classrooms.
The best example of this is Israel. Surrounded by enemies, Israel suffers constant terrorist attacks, as well as the constant threat of war. This has caused Israel to adopt a policy of conscripting most of their citizens over the age of 18. In other words, just about every Israeli citizen is part of the military or military reserve.
What this means is that everyone is trained in the use of firearms and keeps fully-automatic firearms in the home. This includes teachers, most of whom bring their guns to work with them. This allows them to protect the children under their care.
Because of this, school shootings don’t happen in Israel. A country which is known for suffering constant terrorist attacks doesn’t have a problem with terrorist attacks in the schools, even though in any other place, those schools would be considered a prime terror target. Why? Because teachers are armed; not just armed with concealed pistols, but openly carrying fully-automatic infantry rifles, slung over their backs, while they watch the children on the playground.
So, does arming teachers work? Yes, it does. Israel has proven that. We just need to accept the lesson and apply it to our schools here. Some school districts are doing this, but the shift away from gun-free schools has been slow. You and I need to push our local school boards to adopt this change, for the protection of our children.
And in the mean time, we should do our part to protect our own families. That means carrying concealed, as well as keeping our powder dry and our survival gear close at hand.