[CorrieUSMC]

Originally Posted by Snufkin

Putting armed people to patrol in high schools is an absolutely terrifying thought and one I would vocally oppose to no end.

I say it in every thread about guns. We had a school shooting in 1996. We changed the law. There have been no more school shootings.

I'm as anti-gun as they come.

No one has said let's have a fully outfitted SWAT team defending the school, there would be nothing wrong with either having a Resource Officer (Or Off-Duty LEO on uniform), or even having a security team who are given the proper training.

Our President gets the best security force in the world, his Daughters also receive this at their school.

Our Courts, State, County, and Federal buildings have armed security.

Our Hospitals have security.

I spend extra money for my Daughters to go to a Private School that offers Security. And we're not talking rent-a-cop Mall Security. Why? Because I know I will never have to turn the radio on and hear that my Daughters' school is under attack and have to wait hours wondering if my Daughters are going to be walking out, or carried out.

As a Man who has been in combat, I hope to god that my Daughters' unless they choose to join the Service, will never have to fear for their life because a 'bad guy with a gun' decided he needs to go let his rage out.

Studies show that "gun-control" will not decrease violent crime or gun-related murders.
(Source: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/b...ence-with-ban/ )

In a active shooter situation, you have a choice, be a victim or protect yourself.

I would rather only need 1 body bag for the Shooter then 14 body bags for the victims plus the shooter.

However, the road to preventing more school shootings can't be reactive, we have to start being pro-active, that doesn't just mean banning a tool used in these situations, but the person holding the gun.