Should Teachers Be Armed?

Aaron Flint posted on December 19, 2012 12:09 :: 1194 Views

If we can trust our teachers with our kids, shouldn’t we able to trust at least one of them with a gun? 

The idea of allowing teachers to carry self and student protection was mentioned on Sunday’s Meet The Press by Bill Bennett.  Now, Gary Marbut with the Montana Shooting Sports Association has raised the idea here in Montana.  

Gwen Florio has the story:

Marbut said Tuesday that three issues require focus in the aftermath of the Newtown massacre: Perspective. Armed teachers. And gun-free zones.

He’s strongly in favor of the first two, and just as vehemently opposed to the last.

As for arming teachers – and Marbut stressed that should be on a volunteer basis only – “if we believe that the potential for crazy people to shoot up schools is a genuine risk we need to address, then the rational way to do that … is to allow, through public policy, teachers who are willing to undertake the responsibility” to carry.

Since Florio’s article hit print, at least one liberal blog has already launched a personal attack against Marbut.  Helena teacher and liberal blogger, Don Pogreba of Helena, says Marbut is guilty of “shamelessly exploiting” another gun tragedy.   

From Pogreba’s blog:

POGREBA: It takes a special kind of “human being” to exploit the deaths of 28 people, but Montana’s one man gun show Gary Marbut has always demonstrated a knack for being that kind of special individual.  

Pogreba might be reminded that it was the gun control advocates themselves who immediately and consistently attempt to exploit any tragedy as an excuse to enact their political agenda.  Gary Marbut didn’t throw the first punch here.  Days after gun control advocates and politicians have been punching away at gun owners, Marbut was interviewed by a local reporter, and simply responded with his thoughts. 


Wednesday, December 19, 2012 5:04 PM

Mr Marbut is absolutely correct. If the “human beings” who are pushing for more restrictive gun laws actually cared about children’s safety, as thy claim to, they would be calling for an end to those so-called “Gun Free Zones” that are responsible for so many mass murders, and not for infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens, which only increases these crimes. Clearly, criminals do not obey laws. That *should* be obvious by now. And isn’t it sadly ironic that those who claim to care about children so much that they’d decimate our rights are the same “human beings” that advocate for the mass slaughter of 125,000 innocent children each and every day? They have no credibility on the issue of children’s safety. NONE whatsoever.

The belief that these “gun free zones” will prevent crime relies upon flawed reasoning, namely the belief that criminals will be deterred by these new “gun free zone” laws, even know they are not deterred by longstanding laws against murder, armed robbery, etc.

A person who is willing to commit a serious crime like murder or armed robbery, or a person who is planning to kill themselves, will not even give a second thought the penalty for carrying a gun. They know that if they are caught, the gun possession charge will be the least of their worries, or they are too mentally disturbed to think rationally about and care about the penalties. In short, criminals ignore gun control laws.

On the other hand, the law abiding students, teachers, and shoppers who were unable to defend themselves had a lot to live for, and didn’t want to risk their freedom and futures by facing a gun possession charge. A teacher who unlawfully carried a gun in self defense could lose their job, and face jail time. A college student who illegally carried a gun for self defense could be expelled and face bleak career prospects, in addition to the specter of a prison sentence. A mall shopper who unlawfully carried a gun would face similar prospects. This shows that the gun free zones only disarm the law abiding citizens who we don’t need to fear, and won’t deter the killers.

Those advocating for “Gun Free Zones” and more restrictive gun laws for law abiding citizens are completely ignoring the fact that criminals don’t obey laws (including gun control laws), and that failure to obey laws is what makes them criminals.

We don’t need to spin things. The facts speak for themselves. ore guns equals less crime. Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens is a crime deterrent.

We must ban those “gun free zones”. NOT guns.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:42 PM

I’m confused. Is this a personal attack on me? I get terribly confused about the double standards.

As for Mr. Marbut, her’s a novel idea: he could have said no comment. Instead, after every major gun incident, he’s out calling for fewer restrictions on guns.

He’s not the victim of any attack here. I stand by what I wrote.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *