• Yes, this will protect our children.

    Shooters stop shooting when faced with someone else who is armed! Why not have armed guards in schools. Our children deserve to be protected and laws are not going to protect them. If a criminal wants a gun they will get one. If the criminal knows the school is not protected it becomes an easy target.

  • Armed Guards will do the trick

    Armed guards will help children know they are safe and that they don't have to walk around worrying that a deranged psycho is hunting them down. Most movies don't support this but those are movies and this is real life. Adam Lanza was one guy and he was quite young, so if you put at least 3 to 6 armed guards in a school that are trained and professional the kids should be secure and safe and won't have to worry about being gunned down.

  • Yes, safety would be increased largely

    Yes, this will be useful to the safety of the staff and students. Being terrified is a state of mind. When the children get used to it, it won't be a problem at all. If someone wo was suicidal came, there is little to no chance they would beat a trained guard at their own game, which is stopping the other person. If we put armed guards in schools, The kids will be safer, and so will everyone else.

  • To some extent having armed guards will be helpful.

    Having armed guards at schools could help with some violence. It will make it harder for unstable people to enter a school and cause mass damage when there are armed guards there already. Even though armed guards will be available there are still people who may be able to still commit crimes by somehow sneaking past these guards.

  • Rapid response to crime.

    Many schools, especially in rural areas have a long wait for a police response. It is critical to have a highly trained armed guard or school resource officer to help deter and stop serious threats to student safety. In one of the school districts that I work, there is a 40 minute ETA before the first law enforcement officer can respond! This is unacceptable and guards MUST be placed in the school to prevent an even worse massacre.

  • Parkland FL proves this thought process false

    In Parkland FL, the school had two on duty armed and trained police officers assigned to the campus. High School campuses today can be very large, and the officers may not be physically in a place to intervene before a gunman kills someone. It would be better, to have trained teachers and administrators who have access to a weapon to use in the event a gunmen does enter the school and start shooting. While I do believe it's true that school shootings will continue until several attempts have been foiled by shooting the shooter before he kills other people. Human nature is, If I can get away with it with little risk I'll do it. Which is our current situation. If potential shooters saw others being killed without reaching their objective the option of shooting up a school becomes less attractive. However the best option is to take a multifaceted approach. The federal government threw in the towel on mental health treatment funding 30 years ago. We need to fund mental health initiatives. Make it a mandatory part of healthcare plans. We need to identify people who want to harm themselves or others and get them treatment or isolate them from society if their illness is severe. We need to have a much more robust process of obtaining a license for the purchase of assault guns. Think about it, our kids need to prove their competency for a year to get a drivers license because screwing up can kill other people. Then they have a graduated license for 2-5 years. Isn't the potential to misuse a gun at least as severe as the misuse of a car? Considering where we are at in the outcomes of public shootings cant we agree that a mental health check, and vetting should be employed to determine if an individual is fit to own an assault rifle or even a firearm? In Parkland, a simple check of social media would have told a reasonable examiner that the gunman wasn't fit to purchase a firearm. The constitution guarantees the right to bear arms for citizens but it does not stipulate how that process is conducted by the government. Also gun owners should have to complete training on safely storing their weapons. Two weeks ago in California a 12 year old girl brought a gun to school which went off shooting two of her classmates when she set her backpack down? Why did she have that gun? Her families irresponsibility injured two other families. If you own assault rifles they should be stored in a manner that your children do not have access. We aren't a fledgling nation, sparsely populated and worried about imminent foreign military invasion. We are a highly populated country in which people should have the freedom to live their normal life routine without being slaughtered by mentally ill people who can gain access to automatic weapons far too easily.

  • No, never have, and never will.

    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.

  • Of Course Not. Think about all of the possible options of what is going happen afterwards that hasn't happened already.

    Armed guards are armed with a pistol, maybe a shotgun, and maybe a bulletproof vest. This type of gear doesn't stand a chance against a terrorist or a psycho with automatic rifles, full body armor, and probably a couple of explosives. Even some of the deranged students may try to "jack" the guard's weapon and create further problems.

  • It would be a gun-buying mayhem.

    A quantity of students will start to buy guns when they are older, thinking it is alright to do so. This will lead to more gun exposure and lives at risk. Even at schools armed guards wouldn't help since criminals want to take them out first. Isn’t violence the fixation we are trying to avoid? -Z.E

  • Never

    The armed guards that are supposed to protect schools are armed with a pistol, maybe a shotgun, and maybe a bulletproof vest. This array of combat gear doesn't stand a chance against a terrorist or a psycho with automatic rifles, full body armor, and probably a couple explosives. Plus, if the attacker is smart he will come with many terrorists which would simply outmatch the armed guards in numbers and weapons. The NRA is just saying we need armed guards so they can make more money. There are hundreds of thousands of schools across America, plus an average of 3 armed guards per school (one is not enough, their are multiple entrance gates for most schools) which equals tens of millions of dollars more to flow into the NRA's pockets, which would be okay, if the solution actually worked.

  • Because Most Gun Violence Is Outside of Schools

    Schools are 100 times safer for kids than other places. Shall we put armed guards in churches? Every neighborhood block? In private homes? This question confuses the issue. The issue is NOT gun violence in schools, the issue is gun violence, period. A death is just as tragic if it doesn't happen to occur in a school or is not part of a mass shooting the media just doesn't cover it as intensely.

  • Arm the Teachers

    We entrust our children's minds to them. They are the primary protectors and should have the capacity to defend them with deadly force. As we have seen they have and will do whatever it takes to defend them, up to laying down their lives. Gun free zones do not work. An armed guard is far to visible and would be the first to be removed so that the attacker would have a free hand to do whatever they wish to do. If they do not know who has a means of deadly force, they will not be so apt to attack.

  • It Will Not Stop It

    Armed guards in schools will not stop violence. Violence will happen no matter what. I think it would make people more conscious of what they are doing, but if someone is going to use a gun, I doubt an armed guard is going to stop them from making that decision.

  • No!

    While I believe the presence of armed guards in school will deter violence, I am also relastic that if a person is intent on shooting up a school, they will plan on taking the guards out. It is a sad day when we have to even consider putting armed guards into schools.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-02-25T03:17:01.680
Hi i am a 13 year old girl in 7th grade.And my school is MS2.I agree with the people that said that they agree on the need of armed guards in school and im actually writting an argumentitive essay for it.But i would love to know your names because i need supporting details to support my argument and i need to tell who i got it from.hah what to do too much actually thinking of writing about too much homework if i had another argumentitive essay!