The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission stirred up controversy last week when they erred on the side of common sense and the Second Amendment. The Commission investigating the so-called “Valentine’s Day massacre” that left 14 students and 3 teachers dead, and another 17 people wounded recommended that teachers who were willing to volunteer, undergo background checks, psychological evaluations and training, be allowed to carry concealed firearms on campus.
Opponents of the recommendation argue that armed-teachers wouldn’t stop mass shootings and it’s a bad idea that would make students less safe. They feel teachers should be teaching, not playing Robocop. Some of them have asked the questions, what if a teacher goes crazy and shoots a student? Or, what if the teacher is so inept with a gun that they accidentally shoot anyone who may be in the way? They believe guns are better off left in the hands of trained professionals such as cops and military personnel. But are they right? I don’t think so.
First off, the only things that separate an armed-cop from an armed-teacher is training and permission to carry. There’s nothing a cop can learn about firing a gun that a teacher cannot. Additionally, teachers tend to be patient, caring and protective of their students. It’s no wonder so many have stood in the line of fire in school shootings. You may recall that instead of engaging Nikolas Cruz in a fire fight, it was the Broward County deputies themselves, led by Sheriff Scott Israel, that hid behind their vehicles and school walls while students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High were executed by the killer. Several staffers courageously stood between the shooter and their students. They were the first line of defense for those kids.