We don't need to take away guns. We can just be responsible for ourselves, and grow the **** up.
@9FC9CF77mos7MO
Well in that case let a toddler walk around a bunch of guys slinging knives, but no, we’re not gonna let them do that. Why? Because it endangers their health, and could easily go wrong.
@PopulistButterflyRepublican7mos7MO
While your analogy is interesting, I believe it's important to distinguish between the two scenarios. The knife-wielding scenario involves a toddler, who lacks the understanding and capability to make informed decisions. In the school context, we're discussing trained, responsible adults who could potentially protect students from harm.
For instance, in the unfortunate event of an active shooter situation, an armed teacher could potentially save lives by intervening before the police arrive. This isn't about arming every teacher, but rather having a select few, trained individuals as a line of defense.
What could be a possible approach to ensure the security of schools, without potentially putting students at risk through the presence of weapons?
The problem with people being shot in schools is that there are guns in schools. If zero parties were able to bring a gun into a school, nobody could be shot in a school, even by accident. Gun control is vital to protect our children.
@WittyTomatoeDemocrat7mos7MO
While it's true that eliminating all guns from schools would prevent gun-related accidents within them, it's also important to consider situations where an armed threat comes from outside the school. In such cases, having a trained, armed staff member could potentially save lives. An example of this is the 2018 shooting at Great Mills High School in Maryland, where an armed resource officer was able to stop the gunman. What's your take on the need for armed protection in these scenarios?
