Arming teachers to stop school shooters has been described as fighting fire with fire; it’s been speculated to be hardly effective against shooters and would only worsen situations. I don’t entirely disagree. But if something is to be done about this, we shouldn’t completely trash the idea of having “a good guy with a gun” on campus. The “good guy” doesn’t always have to be a teacher. It can be a police officer or a security guard, or some other person with extensive firearm and active shooter scenario training. Above all, however, we must take into consideration who we are arming if we want to protect our students without accidentally injuring or killing them.

Passing out handguns to teachers and expecting them to save lives when a lone student comes to school one day with an AR-15 and plenty of ammunition in his duffel bag is, at the very least, a foolish idea. School shooters often happen to be students attending the school (or used to attend at some point, like Nikolas Cruz) and happen to be visually indistinguishable from other students. Who would’ve thought? The only difference is that one carries a rifle and the other carries books.

Maxwell Yang
But in the event in which a single gun-toting villain charges into the school and starts lighting the place up, students are no doubt going to head to the nearest classroom for shelter. How will the teacher know who is a student and who is a shooter in such a stressful and fast-paced situation?

In the heat of the moment, it could be hard to differentiate between the two. There is an immense risk that comes with this; if the teacher mistakes an innocent student for the shooter, then it’s game over for the teacher and the student. Likewise, if the shooter is mistaken for a student, then it creates a disaster waiting to unfold. Either way, it places far too much responsibility on the teacher who cannot be trusted to make the right decision and the correct identification.

But even when a shooting is not happening, students’ lives are potentially still in danger. A good majority of teachers are probably unfamiliar with firearms and/or have never handled one, and are probably unfamiliar with the four commandments of firearm operation, respectively:

1. Never point the weapon in the direction of anything that is not intended to be damaged or destroyed
2. Always assume the weapon is loaded, and handle it as such
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target
4. Know your target and everything around (and especially behind) it

Failing to follow these rules can result in unintentional injury or even death.

On March 14, a teacher (who was a former reserve officer for the local police department) accidentally discharged a firearm into the ceiling, and debris struck a nearby student in the neck. Thankfully, the injury was not life-threatening. The teacher was also incredibly lucky; what would have happened if there was a classroom above?

The most common pistol cartridge is the 9mm Parabellum, and full-metal jacket (FMJ) 9mm bullets designed for armor penetration can easily pass through one or even two windows, walls, floors, and ceilings in the case of an intentional or unintentional discharge and still have enough energy to injure or even kill someone. With rifle rounds, the penetration collateral damage increases dramatically.

Additionally, purchasing the extra equipment necessary to arm teachers (including ammunition and safes) wouldn’t be the cheapest thing. Teachers will have to pass background checks before any firearms can be purchased. Let’s assume that the teachers will be armed with handguns for the sake of practicality. One of the most popular handguns in the world, the Glock 19, starts at $499. Purchasing multiple handguns will easily cost a few thousand dollars, and the safes and ammunition will add a few hundred more to the gross expenditures. Practically speaking, it is far too expensive to arm even a portion of our teachers.

I’m not saying that we should completely disregard all ideas of putting firearms in the hands of well-trained staff entrusted to protect students. I am saying, however, that we must strongly consider who we are choosing to arm.

Police officers, security guards, and school resource officers (almost like a blend of a campus supervisor and security guard) on the other hand have the training and equipment necessary to protect our students should someone get the idea of shooting the school up. Not only do they know how to identify threats and distinguish them from non-threats, they are also well-trained in firearm use and are much more knowledgeable about firearm safety than the average teacher. Police officers, security guards, and school resource officers can also maintain constant communication to each other through the use of handheld radio sets, which is vital in an event like a school shooting so targets are not misidentified.

Although police officers, security guards, and school resource officers are the only personnel trusted to carry firearms and use them in a school shooting, there are also a few potential exceptions to arming teachers. Some states have a voluntary School Marshal program that trains teachers in firearm use and prepares them for situations including (but not limited to) school shootings. Texas’s School Marshal program, in particular, requires teachers (who are willing to become a School Marshal) to undergo an 80-hour training course at a law enforcement academy that has specifically been prepared for the School Marshal program. It also covers topics including, but not limited to, “physical security, improving the security of the campus, use of force, active shooter response, and weapon proficiency.” This School Marshal program effectively covers all of the safety issues associated with arming teachers with the intent of preventing a school shooter from inflicting casualties, although the cost is still an issue.

Ideally, the School Marshal program should only be offered to teachers who have had prior experience in law enforcement, security, armed forces, or other related services in order to ensure that the teacher is responsible enough to protect their students. If teachers without prior experience are also to be eligible, then a recertification course would be needed to ensure that all teachers are still responsible enough.

It goes without question that thousands upon millions of students across the nation feel that their education and personal safety is compromised when there are weapons, be they carried by dedicated security officers, well-trained staff, or a soon-to-be mass murderer. Their doubts, as time has shown, again and again, are not unfounded and are completely valid. By ensuring that all police officers, security guards, school resource officers, and School Marshals are thoroughly trained in firearm use and firearm safety, this risk, and fear can be easily negated. This can be taken a step further by requiring School Marshals to store their handguns in safes, only to be taken out when being cleaned (outside of school hours) or when there is an emergency situation happening.

In addition, the types of ammunition used can be restricted to hollow-point ammunition or other types that do not over penetrate and cause collateral damage. Hollow-point ammunition is designed to rapidly expand upon impact, which prevents it from going through walls or other surfaces. While it is ineffective against armor, it will prevent injuries and casualties in the event that a discharged firearm — whether intentional or accidental — causes no harm to anybody.

At the end of the day, students should feel right at home when attending school. It’s been said before, and I’m going to say it again: students should read books and have fun with friends at school, not read obituaries and mourn friends after a shooting has passed at their school. To prevent an active shooter situation from ever gracing our schools again, we must seek a preventative measure, and there’s nothing more preventative to a school shooter than having well-trained and armed opposition standing in the way.