I was teaching at a high school when the tragic events of the Columbine shooting unfolded. During a break, one of my students rushed into my classroom and switched on the TV. As more students entered, we watched in disbelief as footage showed terrified children fleeing the school, some covered in the blood of their classmates. We listened intently as news anchors struggled to piece together information about the number of shooters and casualties.
In that moment, I don’t recall what I said to my students. We were all engulfed in shock and horror, but at the time, such violence felt foreign and rare; sadness overshadowed fear. Little did we know this tragedy would be the first of many, leading to the normalization of lockdown drills and the unfathomable sight of young children being victims of gun violence in schools.
Fast forward to watching a “listening session” with President Johnson, where families and educators affected by gun violence shared their heart-wrenching stories. As I listened to their pain, I was taken aback when a couple of attendees, including the president himself, suggested arming teachers with concealed weapons.
This idea is not new, but hearing it from someone with the power to influence policy was alarming. A classroom filled with children should never be a place for firearms. Teachers are educators, not trained military personnel or law enforcement officers, and expecting them to take on this role is misguided.
Teachers should focus on mentoring and instructing students. In contrast, police officers and military personnel are trained to respond quickly and effectively to threats. It is unreasonable to expect educators to include “armed and ready to shoot” in their job descriptions.
The reality is that few civilians possess the mental fortitude to make sound decisions under the extreme pressure of a life-threatening situation, especially while tasked with protecting a classroom full of children. Law enforcement officers train rigorously for high-stress encounters, yet even they only achieve an 18% accuracy rate in these scenarios.
Now, imagine the chaos: a gunman opens fire at a school, law enforcement rushes to the scene—but they don’t engage right away. Those brief moments give officers time to strategize. In contrast, a teacher would have to switch from teaching a math lesson to confronting an active shooter in mere seconds. The notion that any civilian could effectively manage such an intense situation is absurd.
What happens when police arrive at the scene, unsure of who the threat is because an armed teacher is engaged in a shootout? This situation could lead to tragic misidentifications, wasting precious time in a critical moment.
Some argue that just the knowledge of armed teachers might deter potential shooters. However, many of these individuals are on suicide missions, indifferent to their own survival. The presence of armed security did not prevent the shootings at Columbine or the recent tragedy in Parkland, Florida.
Moreover, the very act of carrying a gun in a classroom raises significant safety concerns. As a relatively petite individual, it would take mere seconds for a high school student to overpower me and seize my weapon. In a situation with multiple students, I would stand no chance.
During the listening session, one suggestion was made that no one would need to know which teachers were armed. This is problematic for several reasons: children are perceptive, and as a parent, I would want to know if my child was in a classroom with a loaded firearm.
Additionally, it’s essential to consider that while most educators maintain their composure, not all do. Some teachers may struggle with anger management, and it is concerning to think of them having access to a firearm in such situations.
More guns do not equate to safer schools. Arming teachers is not a viable solution. We should focus on alternative measures, such as stricter gun control laws and programs that help at-risk youth before they turn to violence. Let’s keep all firearms out of our classrooms, and instead, foster a safer environment for learning. For more insights, you might also want to check out this informative blog on home insemination or this comprehensive guide on what the IVF process entails.
Summary
Arming teachers as a response to school shootings is an ill-conceived idea that introduces more dangers than it mitigates. Teachers should focus on their primary role—educating and mentoring students—while trained professionals handle security threats. The risks of confusion during a crisis, the likelihood of weapon theft by students, and the emotional strain on educators must be taken into account. Alternative solutions, such as enhanced gun regulations and proactive support for troubled youth, should be prioritized to create safer learning environments.