RALEIGH – Many sensible people that wish to find better ways to protect children from mass shooting events after the Parkland, Florida high school massacre have suggested “arming teachers” as a way to discourage, prevent, or stop school shootings in which all students and faculty are relegated to defenseless victims of evil.
Of course, not many of these people have actually suggested arming all teachers, whether they like it or not. That is merely the twist the Left has given the suggestion in order to demonize it, and Republican superintendent of the N.C. Department of Public Instruction Mark Johnson has taken the bait.
There are many conversations surrounding school safety happening in our state. Below is my statement on arming teachers in NC’s public schools: pic.twitter.com/uqLd7Wbnk0
— NC Sup. Mark Johnson (@MarkRJohnsonNC) February 26, 2018
The Left is really good at owning the narrative, especially when it comes to the gun control debate. The conflation of “arming all teachers” with “allowing teachers to be armed” is purposeful and damaging to real security solutions for high concentrations of our State’s and nation’s most precious loved ones.
There has not been a single state lawmaker suggest that we arm all teachers, as Johnson refers to as an extra burden on teachers that already have so much responsibility.
Instead, reasonable arguments are being made for allowing teachers with concealed carry permits, extra crisis response training, and a willingness to provide that extra layer of protection should a horrific event occur, to be armed or have access to their firearm while on school grounds.
Rep. Larry Pittman spelled out a lot of common sense approaches to making schools safer in his interview with First in Freedom Daily.
What Johnson is doing is adding fuel to the Left’s gun control fire by opposing a suggestion that doesn’t exist, and demonizing guns as the source of violence, when individuals are the only source of violence.
Opponents of allowing teachers or other hired security (retired police, veterans) to have firearms on school campuses often argue that more guns on school grounds make gun violence more likely.
‘What if the children get a hold of it?!’ ‘What if the teacher has a bad day and uses the gun inappropriately?!’ etc., etc.
This is a non sequitur. Disturbed students are already getting a hold of guns, obviously. Teachers can already act inappropriately, obviously.
This is about giving teachers or other personnel a chance to defend children and themselves in the event of an attack, if they so choose to take on the responsibility. Nothing more.
Johnson should recognize the difference in the Left’s narrative and the real solutions being offered, instead of taking the bait and hindering common sense protections in the process.