News & Politics

Armed School Employee Took on Maryland School Shooter

A law enforcement officer walks in front of Great Mills High School, the scene of a shooting, Tuesday, March 20, 2018, in Great Mills. A student with a handgun shot two classmates inside the school before he was fatally wounded during a confrontation with a school resource officer, a sheriff said. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

I don’t know if teachers should be armed, but armed guards at schools? No-brainer.

The Daily Caller:

The Great Mills High School student who injured two others Tuesday morning was stopped by the school’s armed resource officer.

According to St. Mary’s County Sheriff Tim Cameron, the school resource officer (SRO) fired a round at the shooter, who fired a round in return. The shooter is now dead, Cameron confirmed Tuesday morning, and an investigation will determine whether the SRO’s bullet struck the shooter.

The incident is now over, though the shooter managed to injure two students. One of them is in critical condition in the hospital, Cameron said. The SRO was not injured during the incident.

“When the shooting took place, our school resource officer who was stationed inside the school was alerted to the event and the shots being fired,” Cameron said. “He pursued the shooter, engaged the shooter, during which that engagement he fired a round at the shooter.”

“Simultaneously, the shooter fired a round as well.”

Following the horrific tragedy in Parkland, Florida, President Trump has repeatedly called for arming up to 20 percent of school staff members as a means to safeguard students and prevent future mass shootings.

Some arguments against arming school employees are inane and weak.

Vox:

There is no good research on the effect of arming teachers or the effect of putting more armed police or security in schools — which by itself should raise red flags, given that policy should be evidence-based. But based on the evidence we do have, there’s enough to suggest that putting more guns in schools could actually make gun violence worse.

The fundamental problem in the US is there are so many guns already in circulation. This makes it easier for any conflict to quickly escalate into a form of gun violence — and, as a result, the US has more shootings than its developed peers. So if more guns are added into circulation, it would very likely lead to more gun violence.

The “evidence”? Lotsa guns=more violence because, as night follows day and peanut butter follows jelly, when you’re carrying, conflicts can “quickly escalate” much easier into violence. Because people who carry guns are cavemen who just can’t control their anger.

The guy wants “evidence based” policies and then offers up a completely unsupported, idiotic, fact-free observation.

The main objection to arming school employees appears to me to be that liberal administrators don’t like guns, are scared of them, are politically opposed to the Second Amendment, and, most importantly, stubbornly refuse to admit they’re wrong.