Surely this is a bad idea

[Starter]

What happens if said teacher just flips out one day? They already have to work in a stressful environment with 20 or more sprogs. Letting them take a gun to school could help them to even out those numbers.

I'd look at it as a good thing. Those "problem" kids won't be bothering anyone again and taxes can be reduced as there are fewer students to pay for. A win, win all around.

[Gregor-y]

It's not a big deal since there are no people in South Dakota. Just Wall Drug, Mount Rushmore and the Corn Palace.

[Rudy Tamasz]

Here's how arms work with kids. Yesterday my little one declared he was the boss in the family. I took up my sword (a drumstick, actually), challenged him to a sword fight, defeated him soundly (yet harmlessly) and showed him who's the real boss. In the U.S. kids are tougher, so carrying guns to discipline students must be perfectly okay.

[Knock-on]

And allowing ever more guns into schools isn't equally as bad, if not worse? Certainly, it does nothing to work towards a long-term solution to gun violence in schools. It's a bit like seeking to tackle paedophilia by giving every school its own child sex offender.

Ben, I'm being a bit tongue in cheek in this thread as having guns round kids seems obscene to me but while you have such an ingrained gun culture, it seems folly to say schools should be a no gun area where only the law abiding people will comply.

There is no logical answer apart from finding a way of removing guns from the population and tht's not going to happen so whats the point of trying to limit one specific area? Rather than your analogy about Pedophiles, I suggest it's more like sticking a finger in a Dyke.

[BDunnell]

There is no logical answer apart from finding a way of removing guns from the population and tht's not going to happen so whats the point of trying to limit one specific area?

Because the cumulative effect can only be negative. How does this proposal do anything to solve the problem, as opposed to further normalise it?

[Starter]

Because the cumulative effect can only be negative. How does this proposal do anything to solve the problem, as opposed to further normalise it?

As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

[henners88]

I'm to the point in this debate where I have to ask myself if I care or not? I'm never going to move to America and hopefully British schools won't introduce a 'teachers with guns' program to protect them. Unless our government introduce a system that changes the whole dynamic of our society by insisting we all own guns, this sort of thing has no impact on us whatsoever. Our opinions aren't going to change laws across the pond as there isn't a problem there in their opinion anyway. If this story hadn't been highlighted by this forum I probably would have skipped past it on the BBC news site much like I do when gun massacres are reported. Nothing really shocks anymore and we should be grateful we live in a society where we all feel safe.

[BDunnell]

As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

'Here we go', I might say. It is simply untrue that 'no-one wants to tackle' the issue of mentally disturbed people. Just because we don't say it doesn't mean we don't want it to happen. The lazier approach is merely to accept the status quo regarding firearms.

[EuroTroll]

As usual, you are going after the wrong problem - if it is even a problem. Once again all the left leaning people are talking about banning guns in some, or all, situations (schools in this case). Guns are NOT the problem. Mentally disturbed people ARE the problem. Yet no one wants to tackle that issue. Stop taking the lazy person's approach and start addressing the real issue.

I don't think there is any way to "tackle" the issue of mentally disturbed people. They will always be around - end of story IMO.

But done properly such as with cops, is any idiot going to go into a school knowing how many armed people they might face? When has a nutter gone to a police station, military barracks or other more likely to be armed location and started shooting it up... and did the damage done against unarmed people?

Give the good guys a fighting chance, eh? I do approve of the principle. Now, this whole thing might be a bad idea, but America is about good principles, isn't it, even if they cause tremendous problems. So, why not indeed?

[schmenke]

Who are we to judge that this is a bad idea? Publically elected officials, who are supposedly best suited to evaluate the situation, have proposed this as the ideal solution within the parameters of U.S. society and their legislation. Surely then this is a good idea.