Guest Post by Nick Dahlberg, National Carry Academy
USA – -(Ammoland.com)- In the aftermath of the Parkland shooting, there’s been a fierce debate on how to best protect our schools. This conversation often arises after school shootings, and undoubtedly, gun control comes up as one of the “solutions” for protecting our schools. Other measures are of course brought up; The ideas of hardening our school with things like metal detectors, more secure entrances, etc. but more often than not the proposal for gun control often takes center stage.
Unfortunately, when these gun control measures are brought up, they are often marketed as “common sense” or “reasonable.”
I wouldn’t blame those who don’t know much about firearms for thinking that these gun control measures they hear about seem reasonable; they’re meant to sound reasonable. But despite the amount of coverage the topic of gun control gets from the media, rarely do they ever go into detail on what the specific gun control legislation or bills actually say.
In my home state of Minnesota, where we have seen gun control bills proposed and pushed into committee hearings in the aftermath of Parkland, the media often gives there one minute sound bite on the legislation being proposed with little detail on what the bill actually says and does. I get it; their viewership probably doesn’t want to see a half hour piece on proposed gun legislation going line by line through bills.
But again, the issue this creates is that for most who don’t know much about firearms or gun laws, these proposed changes seem reasonable. It’s only once you dive into these proposed bills themselves (many of which are very similar from state to state) where you find the issues. And these issues could be a blatant violation of Second Amendment rights, complete disregard for due process, or a back channel for gun registration.
Besides all these issues, too often it seems like there’s another important element being completely overlooked in the conversation on gun control and school safety: Efficacy.
Does the proposed solution have some evidence supporting its effectiveness? If we look at many of these shootings, we usually find that the gun control proposed in the aftermath would have done very little to stop the shooting or minimize the casualties.
However, as I mentioned, in the wake of the Parkland shooting, other strategies have been proposed as well. While there are plenty who have criticized the idea, the Parkland shooting seems to have brought up the conversation of allowing those in schools to be armed more than any other previous school shooting.
I’m not going to try to dive into all the different ways that this could happen. There have been many ideas proposed, some good, and some bad. Rather I would like to look at the efficacy of armed presence in general.
Armed Resistance, Any…
Long have we known that the most effective way of stopping an active shooter is to meet him with resistance as quickly as possible. This has been understood clearly since the Columbine shooting. And yes, Parkland did have an armed officer on campus, but knowing what the most effective strategy is and actually executing it are two different things. The tactics need to be carried out for the strategy to be effective, and we know now that there were MANY failures at MANY levels in Parkland.
We have a perfect example of armed resistance very likely cutting short a shooters rampage and greatly reducing casualties just recently in Maryland.
So instead of talking about teachers carrying guns, or specially trained officers armed in schools, why not take the most efficient way possible to the solution that we know will be effective; Allowing those who are licensed, (whether they be teachers, parents, staff, etc.) to carry their guns on school grounds, just as they can most everywhere else.
This places no undue financial burden on school districts, wouldn’t force anyone who is not comfortable carrying a gun to do so, and doesn’t rely on the manpower of armed volunteers. Instead it simply removes another place from the list of completely ineffective gun free zones.
About Nick Dahlberg
Nick Dahlberg is the co-owner of National Carry Academy, the nation’s largest training resource for those that decide to carry a gun as a part of their lifestyle.
Very informative and wonderful bodily structure of content material, now that’s user genial (:.
make schools safe again, eliminate Biden (gun-free) death-zones
Liberals will never let FACTS change their minds.
the media often gives there one minute sound bite
I think you mean “their”?
Way too much common sense folks. Politicians and school boards can’t handle it. Quote one retired teacher.
Your lead in scenario is faulty. You assme her classrooom will be suddenly breached with no warning, no opportunity to be ready. Columbine, Virgina Tech, Sandy Hook, Douglass (Florida), and now the new Maryland incident all did not play per your script Let’s take Sandy Hook… the shooter had made his presence well known long before he entered that first classroom. Shots fired to breach the front door, more at thefront desk, more as he walked down the hall to that first room. Training for classroom settings COULD have had all the kids against the wall where the door is,… Read more »
@Tionico Thanks for your response. You make good points. The thrust of my proposal is to get us engaged in the debate. At present, we are summarily dismissed with the retort: “If the only tool you have is a gun then everything looks like a target”. I.e., PotG are “one-trick-ponies” who have nothing to contribute since the Elites have summarily dismissed “more guns” as any answer at all. If we can contribute a 2’nd, 3’rd, possibly 4’th non-gun proposal then we can’t be summarily dismissed. I’ve read of FASTER and ALICE and other training programs. Seem very appropriate and useful.… Read more »
For the sake of argument, let’s presuppose that the idea presented below could NEVER be implemented. Suppose that this idea is ONLY a DEBATE tactic. That said, kindly hold all your practical criticisms in abeyance for just a couple of minutes. Observe that the defense-of-schools debate is one-sided. The faculty counter with all sorts of arguments against arming schools. They suck-up all the oxygen in the debate hall. We People of the Gun confine our response to: The only thing . . . is a good-guy with a gun. Isn’t it clear why we are failing to get traction in… Read more »
“When a gunman bursts into a classroom the first thing on his mind will be: Who, if anyone, in this room MIGHT have a gun?”
If he knows that some, even just a few, people at the school are armed…
I counter that the gunman will be asking that question even before he considers entering the school, thereby stopping him before he does anything at all.
Thank you for taking the time to comment. However, valid your point is, it is incidental to the thrust of my argument. We PotG are naturally inclined to emphasize the point “The only thing . . . good guy with a gun!”. But, if that’s the ONLY thing that we can contribute to the discussion we can be summarily dismissed by those who are reluctant to consider armed teachers, administrators or more “resource” officers. The thrust of MY point is for gun-guys to enter the debate with A DIFFERENT contribution. A new idea that the non-gun people haven’t offered; and… Read more »
As ad as it is to admit, dead teachers and children is the best outcome that the anti-gun politicians could ever want. It’s really easy to push draconian and utterly useless gun restrictions when you’re waving the bloody shirt of a murdered child. They’re not interested in the slightest in having a discussion on how to stop these things from happening. Their only objective for discussion is how to capitalize on the horror of it. Your scenario, while incredibly well thought out and, in my opinion, probably very effective, does nothing for the other side since it does not in… Read more »
@AJ: “. . . incredibly well thought out and, in my opinion, probably very effective, . . .” Thank you for your kind comment. “does nothing for the other side” I’m not interested in doing anything for the other side. I contemplate no negotiation in the fight over the 2A. Kindly re-read my OP. In what context are we arguing? Who is our audience? The decisive fraction of voters want some solution to the school shooting problem. The Antis are sucking up all the oxigen in the conversation which the MSM are only too helpful in supporting. We gun people… Read more »
Pepper spray in the hands of students?
Sorry young people with any Sprays would be dangerous, every day there would be a SPRAY WAR.
JUST MAKE SURE THE SHERIFF DEPT. AND THE FBI DO THEIR FREAKING JOBS. WE DONT NEED SWAT TEAMS AFTER THE FACT!
Put sensors at the entrances with Armed guards or officers. I think the kids can take to see an armed officer, or not??
@David German: I agree that kids can “take” seeing an armed officer. Be clear about my proposal. I am NOT saying that pepper spray is mutually-exclusive with guns in schools. Pepper spray alone would be better than cowering in a huddle in a corner; Pepper spray plus flying lead would be better still. Getting government-employed police to do their jobs would be helpful, the chalk-marks will be made much faster. Maybe some cases such as the FL school shooter would be stopped before they happen. Nevertheless, we have to also acknowledge that this approach is not enough without on-site measures.… Read more »
One in the head with no preliminary conversation. The shooter may be wearing body armor.
My Doctor told me that the ‘NO WEAPONS” sign on the door was all the protection needed, then he showed me his new Kimber 45 and said he wasn’t counting on the sign to be safe! I also ask him how to draw the line when it comes to who is mentally unstable for a gun. He made a very good point that we cannot give into the other side. He explained that many migraine sufferers used antidepressants to control migraines. But the other side want to claim that if you take antidepressants you are a danger and should not… Read more »
Why do they reverse images for these articles like the HOT chick pointing the pistol above.
@col
That’s a Very Good Question !
Not the First time I’ve seen it Done .
There are more teachers charged with sex crimes against students every year than school shooting incidents where is all the outrage over that.
Maybe schools need to do better backround checks like what a concealed carry license person goes through.
Put professional security people in the schools. Remove local law enforcement from the schools and let them write traffic tickets. That is the only thing they can do half way correctly.
profesioinal security people have been proven to be only hirelings time after time,,,, Parkland being the most disgusing such example. Not even full LEO quitted themselves well in that instance. Train and arm the adults who are already AT the schools all day every day, then allow them to carry their own personal defense weapons at school just lke they do everywhere else………. read about the FASTER saves lives programme in Ohio. In all the years that has been in place, there has not been ONE incident in any Ohio school And the best part? The programme costs taxpayers NOTHING.… Read more »
The LEO at Parkland was told NOT to enter the building or to engage the purp! Who told him? His boss….. the disgusting Sheriff.
End Gun Free Zones, and make National Reciprocity the law of the land. I can drive in all 50 states but I had to have a background check in order to conceal carry in 1 state.
Article 8 (IIRC) of the Constitution (the SUPREME law of the land (you stupid black robed bench warmers) REQUIRES the individual states to give “full faith and credit” to the acts of the other states. We need no further reciprocity laws, and the “laws” that are on the books now are null, void and without force or effect just as are any other unconstitutional laws. (Are you awake, Moonbeam Jerry Brown?) Nobody is proposing that anyone be FORCED to be armed so why do traitors to their oath want to FORCE those of us who choose to be armed to… Read more »
You hit the Nail on the Head .
Gun Free Zones are Killing Zones !
Two in the chest and one in the head?
Just two in the head.