I totally think we should have armed guards in schools because although teachers do keep a lot of kids in line, there are those who won't listen when they get detention or talked to by the principal. Having more armed guards would minimize the crimes in schools around the nation and help kids feel safer.
There have been too many incidents and close calls with people, kids and adults, meeting hurt or killed. And how could we have stopped all this? The answer is quick and simple, armed guards in our schools. It is quite obvious that armed guards are needed in our schools if we plan on staying safe.
If there were more armed guards present the students and teachers would feel better. This would be especially helpful if someone was to show up with a weapon. There should be more than one person in a school because one guard cannot be everywhere at the same time if something were to happen.
If there are more armed guards at schools, then the criminal would be less likely to cause a massacre. The school systems across America need to educate there teachers and students on what to do in case of an attack. Also, they need to educate the guards on what to look for and what to do in case of an attack.
Yes, I personally think that there should be armed guards at all schools in America. There should be some sort of system put in place in all schools to prevent something happening like what happened in Newtown, CT. If someone there had a gun like a security guard, so many of those children would still have been alive for Christmas this year.
Nobody wants their kid to end up being just one of the statistics. Although theres a heck of a lot of reasons why schools shouldn't have guards. I think that it's just safer for kids to have a guard. Only 2 school shootings have happened when there was a guard. Theres been a lot more than 2 school shootings in the history of shootings..
Lock down drills do not work- Sandy Hook. Gun laws do not work, Aurora and Columbine were in Colorado, a very strict state when it comes to gun laws. The state could accept applications from military veterans and retired police officers, that are at a reasonable age, with good physical health and mental health; the veterans and retirees are trained in active shooter situations and using a firearm when there are targets and innocent bystanders near by. I do not believe a fit veteran or retired police officer will be overpowered by a 15 year old kid. Mass shootings happen in gun free zones, not at gun stores, ranges, etc. If schools become heavily guarded, the "success" that the shooter may gain can be decreased substantially; limiting the amount of deaths in shootings and even stopping them before they happen. Also, who says a gun fight is more dangerous? It makes more sense to have a good guy returning fire or stopping the shooter before they start shooting then just having a bad guy shooting at a bunch of sitting ducks.
Criminals are less inclined to kill if there is resistance. That is why all of these mass shootings occur at places like schools, movie theaters, etc. Because there are no armed officials there to prevent the tragedy. No one commits murders at baseball games or any other public events because there are usually armed police there to potect the spectators. As long as there is someone to defend the otherwise defenseless then they cannot and will not be safe
If someone tried to shoot up a school, and an armed guard was present, the disaster would have been avoided. Plus most cops are nice and helpful when it come to just face to face interactions. Not to mention that drug problems at school would go down as well as fights
The first problem is at a GOVERNMENT school, no guns are allowed, so if anyone with a firearm that is cruel enough to kill wants to, all they have to do is walk in and start shooting people. And you say that more security will help, but unless you are putting in bullet proof glass in every window and reinforcing the metal on the locks, stopping a shooter will be almost point less. Then when the shooter gets in the building, who will stop him. The police? Sure. Twenty minutes after someone realizes that a shooter is killing people. For someone with a gun, attacking kids in a government school is like shooting fish in a barrel. A armed guard at least gives YOUR kids a chance to survive something like that. And don't think it can't happen to your school. Do you think the columbine kids knew that shooters were coming. Just think what you would do if your kids were killed because they had no way to defend themselves.
1. More and better improved security system is a more practical solution to school setting, not more weapons.
2. Wrong teaching to our young minds-prepare more violence to end violence.
3. Unrealistic to assume armed guards will have proper weapons to handle crazy gunman at the right time and right place.
4. Greater chance for unfortunate things to happen. Armed staffs, teachers, guards may be equally dangerous if they have an issue (family, relationships, jobs) that triggers them to turn against the school and students.
Lets take the example of most East Asian countries, where they have little to no guns and they have under .1% murder/suicide rate. How is an armed guard supposed to protect kids? Its not like they have x-ray vision to see concealed weapons. Not only that but lets take a look at the costs of a proposal such as this. I'm not saying that economy>safety. But when we aren't actually making things safer, what are we doing? We turn schools from peace to a place of fear and hate. Eventual outcome: harming of the educational system and a loss of money/
More guns won't solve this is issue if its what started all of this. We should all be focusing on mental health. Not guns. And we don't need armed security standing at the door of every classroom, let alone let teachers armed... What if that teacher or security guard were to have a psychotic episode, or a nervous breakdown?....
In my view, the greatest issue with having armed guards is the regular presence of a person with a gun in front of young children. From my own experience in grade school, police officers by practice did not even carry guns when they were on school property. In addition, it is unrealistic to assume that one or two people with a gun will always be at the right place at the right time. It is also unrealistic to assume that an officer could stop someone when a gunman has weapons that can overpower what he or she is equipped with.
I don't think it would be healthy for young children to be exposed to armed guards on a daily basis. I understand that there are safety concerns in schools these days and that safety is a top priority for today's youth, but there are other ways to accomplish this. Instead, let's increase security in schools with alarm systems and locked doors throughout the day. These options can improve security without over exposing young children to harsh armed forces.
Placing armed guards in schools are ridiculously unrealistic. There are at least 100,000 schools in the United States, meaning about 150,000 guards will be placed. Meanwhile, there are at least 75 MILLION STUDENTS. Do people really think that by letting 150,000 people carrying a gun in educational institutions are going to stop the violence rampage in the country? This is not solving the "root" of the problem. You're cutting the end of the thread, but if the yarn keeps rolling, there's going to be more thread anyway; cutting it won't help. To solve the problem, you have to stop the yarn from rolling, meaning LEGALIZING GUN CONTROL. THAT will end gun violence. Placing armed guards in schools is a defensive strategy, not an offensive one. But when you CAN use an offensive strategy, why in the world would you choose the defensive? The answer to this problem is very clear: not placing armed guards in schools to end gun violence, but stop the selling of guns to every freaking person who walks into a gun shop.
I'd just like to add on to many of the answers already given here, which I also agree with. If a student is committing the crime, trust between the school and the students will go down hill when one of the guards misunderstands something and shoots a kid in the name of "safety." A harmless prank that just seems dangerous to an outsider could quickly be perceived as a threat in that fashion.
If we were to have armed guards in schools, the students would feel very uncomfortable being around adults that could go crazy just as fast as any kid. If we have people coming back from war, seeing people die can mess you up, and that could make them go crazy and kill a bunch of people. Plus if people really had their killing spree palnned out they could easily take out a guard or two.
I am 17 and stand 6 foot, 5 inches. If I were to have some kind of a mental breakdown and wanted to shoot someone, I'm pretty sure I could overpower a guard if I caught him or her by surprise. That puts a gun in my hands that I otherwise wouldn't have been able to access. I am not the only. My school has some very strong, physically fit wrestlers and football players. If they wanted to overpower a guard to get a gun, I don't think they'd have much difficultly. It's too risky.
It's difficult to find examples where armed guards prevented a mass shooting. For example, at the Columbine and Virginia Tech school shootings, there were armed guards, but they weren't able to prevent those tragedies.
Some examples for deadly incidents would be: Armed guards misreading student behavior, like a student mistakenly shot while playing with a toy gun, Student fights where a student grabs the guard's gun, A mass shooting scenario where students are killed in crossfire, or a nightmare scenario where a psychotic guard kills the STUDENTS.