Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Nicholas Bergman
English 1201
Prof. Richardson
14 April 2019
Taking Back Our Schools: Arming Teachers and Other School Personnel
Imagine being at work and a co-worker turns on the television. Immediately, everyone
realizes there is another school shooting occurring, but this time it is happening in their
community. After watching for a moment, they see the name of the school scroll across the
bottom of the television screen and they suddenly become painfully aware that the elementary
school under attack is the same school their children attend. As they watch the scene unfold,
would they want their child’s teacher to be hiding helplessly in the corner of the classroom along
with the students hoping for the best, or would they want him or her to be armed with a gun,
ready to defend the life of their child? In high schools across the country, students practice
lockdown drills so they will be prepared in case a school shooting were to happen. Teachers lock
their doors and instruct the students to hide, but the expressions on the faces of the teachers and
students reveal the anxiety they both feel about what would happen if the shooting were real.
Some teachers verbally express the helplessness they feel because there is not much they can do
to protect themselves or their students, other than locking doors and hiding. The debate over
whether to arm school personnel is very controversial, but this topic is important because school
shootings are a reality that is becoming more common. Arming America’s school teachers and
other school personnel will make our schools safer because armed personnel will act as a
deterrent to potential shooters, will provide a reliable method to reduce the loss of life in an
Bergman 2
active shooter situation, and will provide peace of mind to parents, students and school
personnel.
In the past, schools were safe places for our children, but that is no longer true. School
massacres happen in this country because our society has established gun-free schools, which
means that no one is allowed to have a gun on school property. However, this is where the
problem lies. The school shooter doesn’t follow the rules and therefore is the only person on
school grounds with a gun unless the school has an armed resource officer or security guard.
Unfortunately, shooters often target these officers first, because once the officers are removed
from the scenario, the shooter has complete control of the situation. In 1995, a federal law passed
which prohibited guns from being allowed on school property. Before its passage, teachers and
other school personnel with conceal-carry permits could bring a gun onto school grounds in most
states (Lott). After the passing of the federal law in 1995, which banned handguns on school
property, school shootings in the United States began to increase and escalated beginning in
October of 1997 (Lott). Before 1997, school shootings, in which 5 or more people were injured
or killed, occurred about once a decade beginning in the 1970s until the 1990s. The gun-free
school policy in this country is not working, and the arming of school personnel in our schools
needs to happen sooner than later to provide the best protection possible for our children.
Arming school personnel will make our schools safer for students and teachers. One way
this will make our schools safer is that having armed school personnel will provide a deterrent to
potential school shooters. Imagine a person being threatened by a violent criminal and the
criminal finding out where they live. Would they want a sign in their front yard advertising that
their home is a gun-free zone? Probably not, yet that is what is advertised outside of the majority
of schools in this country every day. If school teachers and other staff members are armed, this
Bergman 3
will act as a deterrent to most potential school shooters. Teachers and other school personnel may
never even have to use their guns because the fact that they are armed will discourage most
shooters from even attempting to enter the school to harm anyone because they know they will
encounter opposition by the school staff. (Blanchette 88). Most individuals entering a school
with the intent of harming others do not want to encounter armed staff that will quickly put an
end to their reign of terror. Resident scholars at the American Enterprise Institute for Public
Policy have studied the effectiveness of deterrents. According to one researcher, John Lott,
deterrents work because they control a criminal’s actions. Deterrents work in a school shooting
situation because they take away control of the situation from the shooter and place it in the
hands of the teachers and staff. Most shooters are suicidal, but they have planned how they want
and expect their attack on a school to play out, so they have no desire to encounter armed staff
that can put a stop to their plan (Lott). Our national laws against various crimes and our prison
system act as deterrents to most individuals considering committing a crime. “Just as the threat
of arrest and prison can deter criminals, so can the fact that victims can defend themselves”
(Lott). When teachers and school staff are known to be armed, it will be a deterrent to most
individuals considering attacking a school. One good example that demonstrates how effective a
deterrent can be is the airline industry. Before the 911 terror attacks, airline pilots were forbidden
to fly with guns in the cockpit. After terrorists stormed the cockpits of airplanes on 911 and took
control of the planes and used them as weapons, Congress passed a law that allowed pilots to be
armed in the cockpit to prevent another similar attack (Darling). Today, if an individual decides
to storm the cockpit of a plane, the individual could face an armed pilot. Lawmakers felt that
arming pilots would deter an individual from storming an airplane cockpit again and would
provide the best protection from future attacks. The same principle could apply to schools.
Bergman 4
Armed school personnel would deter a school shooter in the same way an armed pilot would
discourage an individual from trying to enter an airplane cockpit. Deterrents have proven to be
an effective method for reducing crime and violence and would have the same effect if used to
Fig. 1. This image shows that armed school personnel are a greater deterrent to a potential
Similarly, school safety would also increase if teachers and school personnel are armed
because it would reduce the number of lives lost in an active shooter situation by reducing the
response time needed to stop the shooter. By making our schools gun-free zones, they have
become the perfect environment for a violent individual to enter the school and have total control
over the lives of the children and staff of the school. It is naïve to think that a person who has
decided to commit murder is going to change their mind because of a sign in front of the school
telling them that no guns are allowed on the premises. The only people that are going to follow
that rule are those that have no intention of harming anyone. As a result, the very people who
should be armed to defend themselves and the children in the school are left unarmed. In a CBC
documentary, former police officer Brian Proctor trains school personnel. Proctor says, “If
you’ve called 911, the killing has already started. You need to have someone on the premises
Bergman 5
when it starts to mitigate the loss of life” (Training teachers to carry guns in school 1:30-1:38). In
spite of objections by lawmakers and some citizens, many school districts across the country are
already arming school personnel in preparation for an active shooter situation. Although most
armed districts have decided to arm teachers because they feel it is the only way to stop a shooter
effectively, many school districts have made this decision because of their isolated rural
locations. Many rural schools are so isolated that it would take a very long time for law
enforcement to arrive and by then the number of dead or injured could be extremely high. In his
article entitled, “Is arming teachers a good idea? Depends on where you live.” Washington Post
reporter Gary Abernathy spoke with superintendents regarding their decision to arm school
personnel. For example, in the Bright Local School District in Highland County, Ohio, a school
district which has made the decision to arm their teachers and staff, the superintendent says,
“there is no local law enforcement within an 18-mile radius that we know will be on duty full-
time during the school day” (Abernathy). CNN reporter Nicole Chavez spoke with
superintendents from around the country, in her article entitled “These schools say arming
teachers ‘can be done right’.” The Northwestern Area School District in South Dakota also
decided to arm school personnel due to the distance between the district and law enforcement.
The superintendent of the district says that they trust law enforcement but they are over 20
minutes away. With armed school personnel, if a shooting takes place, they will have a fighting
chance (Chavez). Two school districts in Idaho have also chosen to arm school personnel. The
Mountain View School District is an hour and 45 minutes away from police, while the Garden
Valley School District is 45 minutes over the mountain from the sheriff’s office (Chavez). The
response time to help these school districts, should an active shooter situation occur, would be
extremely long and considerable loss of life would occur. Once an attack starts, the longer it
Bergman 6
takes for someone with a gun to arrive to stop the attack, the more injured and dead there will be.
New York Times reporters Erica Green and Manny Fernandez quote Shelby County, Ohio sheriff
John Lenhart in their 2018 article entitled, “Trump Wants to Arm Teachers, These Schools
Already Do.” According to Sheriff Lenhart, who supports the Sidney City Schools’ decision to
arm their teachers, “Every 17 seconds after the first shots are fired and the first 911 call is made,
somebody gets hurt or dies. Even in the best case scenario, we could get there in four to five
minutes, you do the math” (Green and Fernandez). In his book, Safe Schools Now Arming
America’s Teachers, the author Vern Blanchette discusses the negative effects of having to wait
for the police to arrive during a mass shooting. Even in the best scenario, police are not close
enough to schools to prevent the large number of injuries and deaths that occur during a school
shooting.
Studies have been made of the times required for the first patrol car to arrive on scene
after a high priority 911 call in several of our cities. A good number for a prompt
response time is about eight minutes. So the question becomes: How many children can a
Once the police do arrive, they can’t just race into the school. They have to set up a perimeter
and evaluate the situation. By the time they determine the number of shooters, call in SWAT
teams if needed and find the safest way to enter the building, many more lives will have been
lost. Armed teachers and staff in a school provide an immediate response time to the situation,
and the shooter will be stopped more quickly resulting in fewer deaths.
Also, armed teachers and school personnel will make schools safer by allowing the
wounded to receive life-saving medical care much more quickly than it occurs in unarmed
schools. During an active shooter situation, many adults and children die from wounds they
Bergman 7
received during the attack. Medical personnel are not able to enter a school until police have
secured the building and captured the shooter. This takes a lot of time and the result of this
additional time is the loss of life due to untreated wounds. Paramedics and first responders have
If the teachers have control, medical help will come quickly. If the good-gun is not in the
school, then the killer-damaged children, the ones that manage to survive several gunshot
wounds, will lie on the floor bleeding to death with no chance of medical help reaching
If schools have armed teachers and staff, then the school will be secured much faster, and as a
result, medical personnel will be able to enter the school and start helping those who are injured,
and will save many more lives. Christopher Burrows, who is the superintendent for Georgetown
Exempted Village Schools in Ohio, agrees. Burrows had his staff attend the Joe Eaton “Faster
Saves Lives” training. This specialized training provides more than just training in gun use. It
also provides training in medical, crisis and emergency management skills. The program director
Joe Eaton says, “The sooner that you stop the killing and start rendering medical aid, the more
lives which are saved. The way that you save lives is by first stopping the killing as soon as
possible and the second is by providing medical aid as soon as possible” (Ingram). Paramedic
Greg Friese who wrote about his experience after the Parkland, Florida shooting in his article
entitled, “Rapid response: School shooting EMS, police response has to be faster” reinforces the
idea that faster response time in reaching the injured and dying is vital for their survival.
Severe hemorrhage control is a race against the clock. Minutes and seconds matter.
Tenths of seconds might matter as well. Police, security officers and teachers who carry a
Bergman 8
firearm need to control the scene fast and stop the killing so paramedics can enter and
take over bleeding control and stop the dying from severe bleeding. (Friese)
After the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, the American College of Surgeons
and the FBI gathered a group of surgery and emergency medical specialists to discuss how to
increase the survival rate of victims in mass school shootings. The result of this effort was the
Hartford Consensus which concluded that they could not save victims who received immediate
lethal wounds, but the rapid control of hemorrhaging has a significant impact on the number of
lives saved (Fabbri). Armed teachers and school staff are necessary to bring a mass school
shooting situation under control quickly so that the needed medical help can get to the injured in
Armed school personnel will provide peace of mind for parents. Many parents do not like
the idea of guns in their children’s schools, but school shootings are a reality and the odds of one
happening where their children attend school is a very real possibility. A Washington Post poll
recently found that 44 percent of Americans support teachers and other school personnel carrying
guns on school grounds (Sargent). Parents take their children to school every day in this country
and trust that those in charge of them will take care of them. Parents should be able to feel good
about their child’s school and their education. Instead many parents are nervous and anxious
until their child steps off the school bus each day. Parents can be put at ease and have peace of
mind by arming school personnel. Many school districts like the Bright Local School District in
Highland County, Ohio decided to arm their teachers, and parents and the community supported
the decision. The superintendent of the district said, “Community response has been nothing but
held meetings” (Abernathy). Nicki New who is the parent of three students in the Sidney City
Bergman 9
School District in Ohio, which began arming staff in 2012, said she felt safer dropping off her
children knowing there were staff members equipped to respond to a parent’s worst nightmare.
“God forbid, if something would happen, knowing that not only a law enforcement officer is
there, but there are teachers in that building who can give my child a fighting chance, is even
more reassuring” (Green and Fernandez). Fox 13 News reporter John Cascio spoke with parents
of children shot in the Parkland, Florida massacre in his article entitled, “Many Florida schools
reject arming teachers, despite Parkland Commission recommendation.” Support is coming from
parents who have lost children in a school shooting. Andrew Pollack, who lost his daughter in the
shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, disagrees with those
that oppose arming school personnel. “They’re making a huge mistake. The training is so
intense, I’d be ok if the lunch lady could pass” (Cascio). Pollack strongly believes that arming
school staff would have saved numerous lives that day. Kevin Hansen of Sioux Falls, South
Dakota, who has three children in the school district, supports the arming of school personnel
and does not worry about any safety issues on the part of the staff. “I trust that the teachers and
the faculty all have our children’s best interest at heart. They’re from the community…it doesn’t
concern me at all” (Chavez). Armed school staff can provide the peace of mind that parents need
when leaving their children at school despite their concern over school shootings.
Likewise, arming school personnel will give them the ability to defend themselves and
give their students peace of mind in an active shooter situation. The results from school
shootings over the last few decades have shown that not arming teachers and school personnel
has resulted in greater loss of life. During the recent Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School
shooting, several teachers and a football coach named Aaron Feis threw themselves in the way of
flying bullets to save their students. The coach was rushed to the hospital where he died from his
Bergman 10
wounds. He did not have to lose his life, and if he had been armed with a gun, he probably would
have lived (Mitchell). Teachers should not have to sacrifice their own lives to protect their
students. More and more teachers across the nation are pushing lawmakers to allow them to carry
guns on school grounds and they are also willing to take the necessary training courses on proper
gun use and safety. In a CBC documentary, librarian Jaycee Dailey receives active shooter
training and feels it is her right and responsibility to protect herself and the students in her care.
“I believe in the second amendment and I believe we have a right to defend ourselves. I believe
if someone is attacking us we don’t just sit and huddle. We have skills and we can defend
ourselves. I would like to know that my own child’s teacher was carrying a gun” (Training
teachers to carry guns in schools 2:00-2:35). Many teachers and school personnel across the
country are deciding to receive training to carry a handgun on school property. NPR researchers
Annie Wu and David Derosches investigate handgun training in their article entitled, “Educators
Fear And Embrace Calls For Concealed Carry In The Classroom.” Chris Cerino is a former
police officer who trains teachers and staff to prepare for an active shooter situation. Cerino says,
“We give them good marksmanship skills. We talk to them about closing the distances and using
cover, and we also talk to them about not shooting when they shouldn’t or can’t” (Wu and
Desroches). Colorado early childhood teacher Laurie Landers is frustrated with lawmakers and
I have 18 young children and two other adults who require my immediate, calm direction
and protection should a shooter threaten our utopian environment. Preventing a teacher
from the ability to carry a concealed weapon magnifies the vulnerability of themselves
and the children in their care. Until we find realistic ways to protect our classrooms all
we can do is duck and pray. (Is arming teachers in classrooms a good idea? Yes)
Bergman 11
In the article entitled, “Teachers With Guns Will Strengthen School Security,” reporter Kim
Spaulding uses statistical information to help show how arming administrators could save lives.
Oren Shemtov, CEO of Israel’s Academy of Security and Investigation says, “if the two
administrators at Sandy Hook Elementary had concealed handguns, the teachers could have
delayed the shooter for 45 minutes each, potentially saving numerous lives if not stopping the
I don’t like the idea of having guns in our schools, but I am also aware that in an active
shooter situation simply locking my classroom door and hiding is equivalent to doing
nothing. Being able to carry a handgun at school would relieve the anxiety I feel about
how I would defend myself and my students should a shooter threaten the school. I would
find peace in knowing I could actively protect the students and myself. (Witzerman)
Teachers have enough responsibility to deal with each day. Most feel a tremendous
responsibility to protect the children in their care. Having a handgun would give many teachers
and staff peace of mind and reduce the anxiety they feel over not being able to provide the
needed protection.
Similarly, students would also find relief from the anxiety and concern they feel about
school shootings if teachers and staff were armed. Children should be able to go to school
without feeling afraid or anxious. They should be free to learn and enjoy being with friends
without worrying about what would happen to them if a school shooter were to attack their
school. Armed teachers would make students feel safer. Currently, students spend a great deal of
time practicing active shooter drills which only reminds them of the possibility of a real shooting
Bergman 12
situation which negatively affects them and causes anxiety. According to Connecticut school
administrators,
Currently, in the case of an intruder, the only way school districts can react is by shelter-
in-place drills in which students and administration lock their doors and stay out of sight
from the hallways. If a trespasser has a gun, the only thing stopping them is a locked
door, a door that can only withstand so much. The only way to stop a gun is a gun.
(Spaulding)
Texas is one of many states across the country that has been arming their teachers and staff for
several years. Students in the Callisburg Independent School District in Texas say they feel better
knowing their teachers can protect them if the unthinkable happens’ (Chavez). A student at
Callisburg High School says, “I feel really safe knowing that, I can come to school and if there is
an incident that does happen, that they’ll be able to protect us” (Chavez). Arming teachers and
staff can help to lessen any fear and anxiety that children may have and they will feel more
Many people believe it would be dangerous to arm teachers and other school personnel
because of the potential risks it could pose to students and staff. A potential risk in arming school
personnel is that the school staff will not have the proper skills and training to handle a gun in an
active shooter situation. Students and staff would be in more danger of being hit by a bullet from
a staff member’s gun in addition to the shooter’s gun. Many lawmakers find it challenging to
determine the amount of training that would be necessary for teachers to have so they would be
ready in a crisis. In an article for the American Public Health Association entitled, “Arming
Schoolteachers: What Do We Know? Where Do We Go From Here?”, Drs. Sonali Rajan and
Charles C. Branas, doctors in cultural and behavioral studies at Columbia University, researched
Bergman 13
the effects that guns in schools have on staff and students. “Although teachers are conceivably
develop the necessary training for teachers and continued instruction is needed to maintain their
preparedness so that they would be ready when a crisis strikes.” Some people wonder if students
will be safer with armed school personnel in an active shooter situation. In active shooter
training, police officers hit their targets less than 20 percent of the time, and many fear school
personnel will have even lower accuracy. Police officers wonder what targets the stray bullets
may hit. (Hansen). At this point, it is unclear how much training school personnel would need to
be safely armed. Another concern is that having armed school personnel will make the students
feel anxious and interfere in their relationship with their teachers. It’s shown that having an
armed resource officer in a school can cause a negative relationship between the students and the
officer. However, having a resource officer “with nonlethal force capabilities might be helpful in
deterring violent crimes in schools...the same positive relationship was not found with school
resource officers armed with a firearm” (Rajan and Branas). In their studies, Dr. Rajan and Dr.
Branas have observed that having an armed officer in a school has a negative effect on the
students at the school. There was also a study done in 2002 that showed most students prefer not
to have more security measures at school. “…heightened policing and intrusive security efforts
within public spaces decrease a student’s sense of safety” (Rajan and Branas). Students don’t feel
as safe when more security is implemented into their school. Another problem could be that
schools may have to face opposition from parents who do not want guns in their children’s
schools. “...a recent study that used a national sample found that more than half of the parents of
school-aged children oppose school personnel carrying firearms” (Rajan and Branas). Many
parents and lawmakers favor reducing access to guns and providing mental health services for
Bergman 14
youth rather than arming school personnel. Many individuals believe that arming school
personnel will result in more risk to the safety of students by providing easy access to guns for
students. Melanie Rogers, a registered nurse, writes about the safety of students and the
psychological effects on teachers having guns for the American Public Health Association in an
article entitled, “Is Arming Teachers Our Nation’s Best Response to Gun Violence? The
Firearms in a classroom present enormous risk to life, limb, and mental well-being…the
could be their student and injuring or killing students other than the shooter are all
Rogers also emphasizes that the improper storage of guns could result in a student having access
to a gun and also the risk of theft. If teachers were to be armed, it could have a different outcome
than what many think. “...increased gun access and gun presence are not associated with
protection from violence, which suggests that increasing the presence of guns in the hands of
civilians in schools, no matter how well intentioned, may backfire” (Rajan and Branas). Even
though school personnel may have the best intentions, having guns in schools could result in
What this argument overlooks is that the teachers that are armed in this country are
making their own decision to arm themselves along with the approval of their school
superintendents and state lawmakers. They are not being forced to carry or use a gun if they are
not comfortable with one. No one is suggesting that school personnel be forced to carry a gun.
Also, teachers that are being allowed to carry a gun on school property are being made to attend
special training that instructs them not only on proper gun usage but also on controlling the
Bergman 15
emotions and fear that come with an active shooter situation. In most cases, these teachers are
receiving more training than many police officers and to maintain their skills, teachers are
required to fire more rounds monthly than police officers are required to fire each month. Also,
they are required to have a higher percentage rate of accurate target hits to pass the training
courses (Green and Fernandez). The risk to students’ lives is not increased by armed school
personnel when guns are secured in lockboxes which are in hidden locations with school staff
being the only ones able to access the boxes. Those school districts that decide to allow their
teachers to carry guns are not a risk to students unless there is a student with criminal intentions
that tries to overpower a staff member to get their gun. If they are successful in their attempt,
they need to know that they will be labeled as an active shooter and the school personnel will
shoot them to stop the attack. It is important to remember that even in this scenario the loss of
life would still be less than if an active shooter situation occurred in a school with no armed
personnel and the shooter was able to shoot unimpeded until finally stopped by law enforcement
several minutes or hours later. The same is true if a teacher decided to open fire on their students.
They would become the active shooter and the armed staff would stop them. In these scenarios, it
is important to remember that nothing is stopping a teacher or student from bringing a gun to
school in our present gun-free schools and opening fire on the students. The difference is that an
armed staff would be able to stop the student or teacher faster than the shooting would have been
stopped waiting for law enforcement to arrive. As mentioned above, there is approximately a
50/50 split in this country on whether parents want school personnel armed, so it is just as likely
that the presence of guns will make the students feel anxious and it will interfere with their
relationship with the school staff. As mentioned earlier, many students have stated that they feel
Bergman 16
safer and less anxious when they know school personnel are armed and will be able to stop a
school shooting immediately. Their concern is eliminated as to what they will do or where they
will hide to escape the shooter by the presence of an armed protector in their classroom ready to
defend them. A significant number of parents, teachers and students are comfortable and feel
Terrible people exist in this world who want to hurt people and take innocent lives. The
current environment in this country allows a shooter to keep firing at students and teachers for an
infinite amount of time before law enforcement stops them. The time has come to arm our
teachers and school personnel. In virtually every other area, protection is provided when there is
a perceived threat to safety. Airline pilots, TSA agents in our airports, and even our politicians
have armed guards to protect them. Why then, do lawmakers hesitate to arm and protect the most
important thing of all; the children in our schools who are being threatened by an unseen
predator who strikes without warning and takes the lives of our most precious citizens. Armed
teachers and school personnel would be a significant deterrent to a potential shooter by impeding
the shooter’s original plan. If the shooter decides to attack a school, armed school personnel
would bring a faster end to a school shooting which would save lives and allow the
administration of lifesaving medical care to the wounded. Arming school personnel eliminates
anxiety and worry for parents, teachers, and students. The time for action is now before another
life is lost. Lawmakers, parents and school personnel need to step up and do what is right and
take back our schools from these violent offenders and restore peace and safety to our schools.
Bergman 17
Works Cited
Abernathy, Gary. “Is Arming Teachers a Good Idea? Depends on Where You Live.” The
arming-teachers-a-good-idea-depends-on-where-you-live/2018/12/20/bfb3637e-047f-
11e9-9122-82e98f91ee6f_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.17eece7b5221.
Cascio, Josh. “Many Florida Schools Reject Arming Teachers, despite Parkland Commission
news/many-florida-schools-reject-arming-teachers-despite-parkland-commission-
recommendation.
Chavez, Nicole. “These Schools Say Arming Teachers 'Can Be Done Right'.” CNN, Cable News
trnd/index.html.
Darling, Brian. “Armed Pilots Program Provides a Good Model for Arming Teachers.” Townhall,
arming-teachers-is-a-good-idea-n2452857.
DeBroux, Louis. “Arming Teachers Has a Lot of Merit.” The Patriot Post, 28 Feb.
2018, patriotpost.us/articles/54444-arming-teachers-has-a-lot-of-merit.
Fabbri, William P. “FBI's View to Improving Survival in Active Shooter Events.” Journal of
www.jems.com/articles/supplements/special-topics/when-time-matters-most/fbi-s-view-
improving-survival-active-sho.html.
Friese, Greg. “Rapid Response: School Shooting EMS, Police Response Has to Be
mci/articles/375558048-Rapid-response-School-shooting-EMS-police-response-has-to-
be-faster/.
Green, Erica L., and Manny Fernandez. “Trump Wants to Arm Teachers. These Schools Already
Do.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Mar. 2018,
www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/us/armed-teachers-guns-schools.html.
Hansen, Michael. “There Are Ways to Make Schools Safer and Teachers Stronger-but They Don't
www.brookings.edu/blog/brown-center-chalkboard/2018/02/27/there-are-ways-to-make-
schools-safer-and-teachers-stronger-but-they-dont-involve-guns/.
Ingram, Angela. “Local School District Hoping Armed Teachers Can Prevent Tragedy.” WKRC,
local12.com/news/local/local-school-district-hoping-armed-teachers-can-prevent-tragedy.
“Is Arming Teachers in Classrooms a Good Idea? Yes.” The Denver Post, The Denver Post, 30
idea-yes/.
Lott, John R. "Teachers Should Be Armed to Prevent School Violence." Juvenile Crime, edited
Viewpoints in Context,
Bergman 19
http://link.galegroup.com.sinclair.ohionet.org/apps/doc/EJ3010149284/OVIC?
"Letting Teachers Pack Guns Will Make America's Schools Safer," Los Angeles Times, 13
July 2003.
teachers-carry-guns-in-school/.
Rajan, Sanali, and Charles C. Branas. “Arming Schoolteachers: What Do We Know? Where Do
/articles/PMC5993409/.
Rogers, Melanie, et al. “Is Arming Teachers Our Nation’s Best Response to Gun Violence? The
Perspective of Public Health Students.” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 108, no.
Sargent, Greg. “A Frighteningly Large Number of Americans Support Arming Teachers.” The
line/wp/2018/02/23/a-frighteningly-large-number-of-americans-support-giving-more-
teachers-guns/?utm_term=.2c231a398e46.
Spaulding, Kim. “OPINION: Teachers With Guns Will Strengthen School Security.” The Rider
opinion/2013/02/21/teachers-with-guns-will-strengthen-school-security-staffer-says/.
v=PIJzparow48.
Bergman 20
www.npr.org/2018/02/24/588279548/educators-fear-and-embrace-calls-for-concealed-
carry-in-the-classroom.