The nation is trying to cope with the devastating shooting in Newtown, CT. Emotions are high. On the left, many are calling for stricter regulations on guns. On the right, the call is often for even more guns. The argument is that if more people are armed, mass shooters would be stopped dead in their tracks. One law-maker in Nevada wants to make sure that there are more guns in volatile situations.
On an appearance on Nevada’s Ralston Report, Nevada assemblywoman, Michele Fiore (R) said she plans to introduce a bill that would allow concealed carry weapons in Nevada colleges. When asked about what she would do in K-12 schools, she suggested that she might require arming school employees.
RALSTON: What measures would you take as an elected official to prevent this from ever happening again?
FIORE: My campus carry bill goes in the higher education, it doesn’t go K-12, so looking at this tragedy that happened with K-12, we might have to have an armed employee at the schools, that’s a measure, that’s a measure.
FADIE: The troubling part of that is that the ultimate conclusion of that argument is that every single American needs to be carrying a gun at all times in order to be safe. If that is the solution that you’re proposing on some level, or that others are proposing, I think that a lot of Americans would find that pretty extreme.
FIORE: Let me ask you a question…Americans…You’re an American, right? Have you shot a gun?
FAIDE: I have not shot a gun.
FIORE: Would you shoot a gun?
FAIDE: I would shoot a gun.
FIORE: Would you allow me to take you to a firearms institute and let you handle a gun?
FAIDE: Yes, I would.
FIORE: So, I would like to do that with you first and then you repeat that statement.
When asked by Ralston what that would have to do with it, Fiore said, “He’s talking out of school.”
RALSTON: Who cares? If you haven’t shot a gun, you can’t take a position on gun control, is that what you’re suggesting? I haven’t had an abortion but I can take a position on abortion.
FIORE: He advocated on it.
Faide then went on to make the point that many gun advocates seem to place blame on the victims when saying the incident wouldn’t have happened if they had been armed.
Here’s the video:
Fiore isn’t alone in her proposed “solution.” A simple Google search of “arm the teachers” shows thousands of results. Larry Pratt of the Gun Owners of America went even further. He is blaming gun control advocates:
“Gun control supporters have the blood of little children on their hands. Federal and state laws combined to insure that no teacher, no administrator, no adult had a gun at the Newtown school where the children were murdered. This tragedy underscores the urgency of getting rid of gun bans in school zones. The only thing accomplished by gun free zones is to insure that mass murderers can slay more before they are finally confronted by someone with a gun.” -
Larry Pratt, head of Gun Owners of America.
The solution of course, would not only prove ineffective, it could easily exacerbate an already tumultuous situation.
Even before Friday’s shooting, the deadliest school shooting in American history, police groups were already calling for some form of gun control. The reason is simple. A heavily armed populace means more opportunities for dead innocents.
The idea of arming teachers is, of course, absurd. Mass shooters don’t give notice. How, in the spur of the moment, would the teacher reach the gun? Would the gun need to be kept on the teacher’s person? What about high school teachers, who could easily be overpowered by an athletic student? In a chaos of bullets flying, how would someone know where to aim? How many more children would die as a result of wayward bullets? More importantly, teachers are already underpaid and overworked. They enter the profession for selfless reasons. It’s highly doubtful that a gun requirement would attract the altruistic type that the profession requires.