Northeastern Oregon c. 1905-1910.
First day of class in the one-room school, a male teacher appeared. Most unusual. He wore a three-piece suit, prompting some youthful rowdies to anticipate a fun year.
Without saying anything, the educator walked to the blackboard, drew a three-inch circle in chalk, and paced to the back of the room. He produced a derringer from his vest, took aim, and placed both rounds inside the circle. Without comment he reloaded, returned the gat to his pocket, and took his place up front.
“Good morning, class. I am Mr. Smith (?). Shall we begin?”
Yes indeed. Especially effective when Recess often involved horse races and shooting matches.
Fast-forward five or six decades, same locale. My 120-student high school’s parking lot featured pickups with gun racks in the rear windows, showing rifles and/or shotguns.
Also, I recall that Friday afternoon before deer season was an excused absence, though maybe just for seniors. There was never (ever) a Gun Problem.
But I’ll add a semi-related sidebar:
One year the Girls League unknowingly scheduled The Dance for opening of deer season.
Some boyfriends were disappointed.
so...
Next year Girls League made a significant change...
And hit opening weekend of elk season!
Bird seasons—notably pheasant—posed no conflicts since ample daylight remained after school let out.
So how to explain the difference between Then and Now?
What’s missing from the equations is culture. Or what passes for culture.
Typically U.S. school shootings are perpetrated by “troubled youths” with mental issues and poor parenting, sometimes aggravated by drug use. Add frequent gang connections, and we’re faced with a toxic brew.
Not directly related to school shootings, but still instructive: in the 1980s the NRA developed the “Eddie Eagle” program, a simple process to reduce children’s risks around firearms.
“Stop! Leave the area! “Tell an adult!”
Predictably, the liberal establishment denounced the concept as “a lobbying tool.” By that warped logic, driver’s education could be criticized as a way to advertise automobiles.
We have sex education, but in recent years it’s frequently slanted toward “gender” advocacies, often over parental objections. The double standard hardly could be clearer.
None of the foregoing should surprise anyone. Historically, National Education Association political donations are 80 to 95 percent for Democrats.
NEA critics have noted that “educators” appear far less concerned with protecting students than with advancing an anti-gun political agenda. A journalism adage long has stated, “If it bleeds, it leads.” That’s certainly true with crime reporting.
Over There
In foreign nations, the record of school shootings varies widely.
Wikipedia’s only entry on Israel school shootings occurred in 1956, when six civilians were killed before residents could arm themselves. Other sources cite six incidents without specifics. At any rate, the incidence over so long a period is almost zero.
Meanwhile, apparently there has never been a school shooting in Switzerland, where military arms commonly are held. Sixteen-year-old students compete with adults in rifle matches, and tourists remark on youngsters biking with rifles slung over their shoulders.
Yet in Europe, socialists delight in splitting statistical hairs:
“Compared to the U.S., Israel has only had half a dozen attacks on its schools. Therefore, the claim that there are no shootings isn’t exactly true.”
In Russia in 2004, 330 people were killed in a two-day school attack by thirty-two Chechen-linked terrorists. All but one of the killers was slain. Seven years later Russian courts blamed authorities, police and the military for poor security, also citing irresponsible methods by responders who used explosives and flame throwers.
==
Those opposed to defending schools reflexively dismiss the NRA mantra, “The way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”
That liberal argument clearly is disingenuous BECAUSE TEACHERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CARRY FIREARMS.
Furthermore, few schools have credible security, and the police response record is miserable.
Columbine High, Colorado, 1999. Two “troubled youths” went on a killing spree and ignored the cops gathered outside, pointing guns at the building. Thirteen victims were killed before the murders suicided. Subsequently a SWAT commander admitted on live TV that he delayed entry because of concerns about friendly fire.
Parents sued the sheriff’s office and school district but lost on basis of government immunity. (In other words, zero accountability.) Subsequently survivors successfully sued the killers’ parents.
Uvalde, Texas, 2022. A teenaged sociopath shot nearly 40 people before police killed him almost 90 minutes after the slaughter began. The state’s investigation cited “systemic failures and egregiously poor decision making,” adding that police “failed to adhere to their active shooter training.”
The obvious (?) way to reduce school shootings—and the number of casualties—is to maintain security personnel on campus. But “school resource officers” (perish-forbid they should be called “armed guards”) are not always available, or affordable.
What to do?
Well, I’m glad you asked. Because here’s the answer:
Armed teachers. Or administrators. Or janitors.
The advantages should be obvious. School staffers are present all day, every day, at no extra cost. One may not be enough, depending on school size, so consider two or more in overlapping schedules.
That’s assuming, of course, that enough teachers are willing to enroll in a program. If not, then antigun educators can try hiding or fleeing until men with guns arrive to solve the problem.
Armed teachers should pass a minimal training course, however defined. It would have more to do with awareness and decision-making than purely shooting because usually the marksmanship problem is minimal. Proficiency with the relevant handgun should be demonstrated at least twice a year, if only for liability purposes.
What sidearm to use? It doesn’t matter a lot. A five- or six-shot revolver is adequate, even without extra ammunition. Or carry the ammo separately from the gun, perhaps in a speed loader. That could be advantageous in some cases, lest students or assailants wrestle the gun away from the teacher. If that occurred, the fewer rounds available could be better.
For semiautomatics, one magazine (perhaps downloaded for the above reason) would suffice. Moreover, a semi has the additional advantage of carrying ammunition separately from the pistol, which can be loaded in less than five seconds.
Then there’s The Oops Factor. Inevitably, some school guns will be misplaced.
Here’s a partial list:
In 2016 an FBI truck in was robbed of guns and ammunition in Washington, D.C. This year in San Francisco the FBI lost a van full of gear including hand grenades and ballistic vests.
In 2019 a Capitol Police lieutenant left his pistol in a restroom stall without consequences. Two years later he murdered unarmed January 6 protestor Ashley Babbitt—without consequences.
When guardians neglect to secure their guns, carrying ammunition separately should eliminate fatal consequences if the weapons are discovered and seized by assorted miscreants.
In short: there are options for arming teachers and/or staff that can—and should—override political agendas. If in fact “It’s for the children.”