By JIm Campbell
February 28, 2018
The lefties in the video below who can’t imagine teachers in the classroom carrying a pistol would probably feel more comfortable is they used an eraser when a crazy person bust on to the campus firing as many students as possible.
A New York Times editorial offered the following argument against having any armed teachers:
“Nationwide statistics on police shooting accuracy are not to be found.
But if New York is typical, analyses show that its officers hit their targets only one-third of the time.
And during gunfights, when the adrenaline is really pumping, that accuracy can drop to as low as 13 percent.”
Obvious solution train the police to become better shooters using moving targets while at the same time, requiring more range time.
But if that is an argument against armed teachers, why isn’t it an argument against armed police?
And that argument was Aristotelian compared to this one from a Los Angeles Times editorial:
“If a pistol-strapping chemistry teacher had grabbed her .45 and unloaded on today’s gunman after he killed, what, one student? Three? Five? That would be good news?”
So what the problem?
Of course, no murder is “good news.”
But to most of us, one or three or five as compared with 17 murdered is good news.
Only those who think it isn’t good news think permitting some teachers and other school staff to be armed is a bad idea.
Beyond such arguments, the left rarely, if ever, explains why allowing some teachers and other adults in a school to be armed is a crazy idea.
They merely assert it as a self-evident truth.
But, of course, it’s not a self-evident truth.
On the contrary, having some adults who work at schools be trained in the responsible use of guns makes so much sense that the left’s blanket opposition seems puzzling.
It shouldn’t be.
On the question of taking up arms against evil, the left is very consistent.
*This Kentucky school district just voted to let teachers carry concealed guns – (Source)