By S. Suresh*

It is not easy to write about gun violence and gun-related deaths in America. Even before the ink is dry, more shootings will bring more deaths somewhere in the country. As I wrote this article, the nation had to contend with the heartbreaking loss of the lives of three women at the hands of a gunman in the small town of Yountville, California.

Presenting a frightful perspective on gun deaths in America, The New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof asserted in 2015 that, “More Americans have died from guns in the United States since 1968 than on battlefields of all the wars in American history.” &nbspThis statistic has been verified more than once by PolitiFact.

The Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit organization that keeps track of gun violence in America, not only provides a sad commentary on the senseless loss of lives from gun violence, but its records also demonstrate why Kristof’s astute observation will stay true for the foreseeable future in America. Studies show a direct correlation between gun ownership and gun-related injuries and deaths. In an analysis of gun ownership across 50 US states, those with more guns tend to have more gun-related deaths. In a similar study of developed countries, America, which has 42% of civilian-owned guns in the world, stands in a league of its own when it comes to gun-related deaths in comparison with countries like Japan, UK and the Netherlands, where gun ownership is low.

I have unequivocally stated that guns have no place in a civilized society, and that America has to engage in a debate on the relevance of the Second Amendment rather than gun control. In the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, it is alarming to see the dialogue shift toward the arming of teachers and school staff.

Armed Teachers? 

During the Republican primaries, President Donald Trump opined that the country’s response to gun violence ought to be more civilians with guns. “I am a Second Amendment person,” Trump said. “If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn’t have 14 or 15 people dead right now. If even in Paris, if they had guns on the other side going in the opposite direction, you wouldn’t have 130 people plus dead.”

America’s delusional president wants to turn the entire country into a war zone, including schools, which are a gun-free zone today. Despite strong evidence that more guns would mean more gun-related deaths, Trump loves the idea of “bullets going in the other direction” and believes in the myth that more good guys with guns ought to be the nation’s answer to mass shootings. At a White House meeting on school safety, Trump stated that “certain highly adept people, people who understand weaponry and guns,” ought to be allowed to carry guns inside schools. He is not talking about soldiers or mercenaries, but about teachers. The president went as far as to suggest that teachers willing to carry guns should be paid bonuses.

Not surprisingly, Trump’s repeated call to arm teachers drew mixed reactions after the shooting in Parkland, Florida. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and some teachers are in favor of Trump’s call to arms, while many teachers’ unions, parents and educators have overwhelmingly rejected the idea. As with any aspect of the gun debate, the nation is polarized on the topic of arming schoolteachers. The strong divide was amply evident in Florida lawmakers’ knee-jerk response to the Parkland shooting.&nbsp

Reacting to the school shooting, Florida passed a bill on March 7 that has a provision for additional funding for arming school staff. While the bill has positive aspects, including raising the minimum age to purchase firearms, a three-day waiting period and restrictions on the sale of assault-style weapons, it also includes the provision to arm school teachers. Florida’s Senate narrowly passed a modified version of the bill to create a school marshal program with the additional funding earmarked for arming non-teaching school staff. Defying the NRA, Florida Governor Rick Scott, a self-professed proponent of common-sense gun laws, signed the bill into law on March 9. The final scene will play out in the federal court where the NRA has filed a lawsuit contesting that the new Florida law violates the Second Amendment constitutional rights of people under the age of 21 to bear arms.

Watershed Moment

Taking the step of arming school staff will, unfortunately, negate the benefits of other aspects of Florida’s rnew law. Schools are a place of learning. They are sacred institutions that impart knowledge to students. Nelson Mandela believed that “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Teachers have the unenviable job of shaping the next generation of responsible citizens, creating in them a desire to learn and equipping them with the skills needed to change the world for the better.

Teachers are referred to in Sanskrit as gurus. A guru is a revered mentor who enlightens the minds of students and molds their values. A guru dispels the darkness that is ignorance by guiding students to the path of knowledge and wisdom. It is inconceivable that the very fabric of what a place of learning ought to be is getting ripped apart by the ill-conceived ideas of the most pedestrian president America has seen in recent times. With school marshals, armed school staff and teachers, America will create an indelible image in the impressionable minds of its young learners that guns and violence they bring are a normal way of life. In the process of making violence the norm in society, America is failing in its duties as a nation to nurture its next generation.

The year 2018 has the potential to be a watershed moment in the war against guns in America. Drawing the wrath of the NRA, retailers like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Walmart and Kroger have taken a stand and stoped selling assault-style rifles and guns to anyone under the age of 21, federal and state laws notwithstanding. Students are taking to the streets and staging protests against gun violence. Even a Republican governor with an A+ rating in the NRA’s grading system took the unexpected step of signing into law a gun-control bill that might improve Florida’s standing with the Giffords Law Center.

With the midterm elections looming in November 2018 can and should become a referendum on where America stands on guns today and how much power the NRA wields in American politics.&nbsp

*S. Suresh is a product executive with more than 25 years of experience in enterprise software.&nbsp

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By arming teachers, America will cause lasting damage in a society already rife with gun violence

By S. Suresh* It is not easy to write about gun violence and gun-related deaths in America. Even before the ink is dry, more shootings will bring more deaths somewhere in the country. As I wrote this article, the nation had to contend with the heartbreaking loss of the lives of three women at the hands of a gunman in the small town of Yountville, California. Presenting a frightful perspective on gun deaths in America, The New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof asserted in 2015 that, “More Americans have died from guns in the United States since 1968 than on battlefields of all the wars in American history.” &nbspThis statistic has been verified more than once by PolitiFact. The Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit organization that keeps track of gun violence in America, not only provides a sad commentary on the senseless loss of lives from gun violence, but its records also demonstrate why Kristof’s astute observation will stay true for the foreseeable future in America. Studies show a direct correlation between gun ownership and gun-related injuries and deaths. In an analysis of gun ownership across 50 US states, those with more guns tend to have more gun-related deaths. In a similar study of developed countries, America, which has 42% of civilian-owned guns in the world, stands in a league of its own when it comes to gun-related deaths in comparison with countries like Japan, UK and the Netherlands, where gun ownership is low. I have unequivocally stated that guns have no place in a civilized society, and that America has to engage in a debate on the relevance of the Second Amendment rather than gun control. In the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, it is alarming to see the dialogue shift toward the arming of teachers and school staff. Armed Teachers? During the Republican primaries, President Donald Trump opined that the country’s response to gun violence ought to be more civilians with guns. “I am a Second Amendment person,” Trump said. “If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn’t have 14 or 15 people dead right now. If even in Paris, if they had guns on the other side going in the opposite direction, you wouldn’t have 130 people plus dead.” America’s delusional president wants to turn the entire country into a war zone, including schools, which are a gun-free zone today. Despite strong evidence that more guns would mean more gun-related deaths, Trump loves the idea of “bullets going in the other direction” and believes in the myth that more good guys with guns ought to be the nation’s answer to mass shootings. At a White House meeting on school safety, Trump stated that “certain highly adept people, people who understand weaponry and guns,” ought to be allowed to carry guns inside schools. He is not talking about soldiers or mercenaries, but about teachers. The president went as far as to suggest that teachers willing to carry guns should be paid bonuses. Not surprisingly, Trump’s repeated call to arm teachers drew mixed reactions after the shooting in Parkland, Florida. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and some teachers are in favor of Trump’s call to arms, while many teachers’ unions, parents and educators have overwhelmingly rejected the idea. As with any aspect of the gun debate, the nation is polarized on the topic of arming schoolteachers. The strong divide was amply evident in Florida lawmakers’ knee-jerk response to the Parkland shooting. Reacting to the school shooting, Florida passed a bill on March 7 that has a provision for additional funding for arming school staff. While the bill has positive aspects, including raising the minimum age to purchase firearms, a three-day waiting period and restrictions on the sale of assault-style weapons, it also includes the provision to arm school teachers. Florida’s Senate narrowly passed a modified version of the bill to create a school marshal program with the additional funding earmarked for arming non-teaching school staff. Defying the NRA, Florida Governor Rick Scott, a self-professed proponent of common-sense gun laws, signed the bill into law on March 9. The final scene will play out in the federal court where the NRA has filed a lawsuit contesting that the new Florida law violates the Second Amendment constitutional rights of people under the age of 21 to bear arms. Watershed Moment Taking the step of arming school staff will, unfortunately, negate the benefits of other aspects of Florida’s rnew law. Schools are a place of learning. They are sacred institutions that impart knowledge to students. Nelson Mandela believed that “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Teachers have the unenviable job of shaping the next generation of responsible citizens, creating in them a desire to learn and equipping them with the skills needed to change the world for the better. Teachers are referred to in Sanskrit as gurus. A guru is a revered mentor who enlightens the minds of students and molds their values. A guru dispels the darkness that is ignorance by guiding students to the path of knowledge and wisdom. It is inconceivable that the very fabric of what a place of learning ought to be is getting ripped apart by the ill-conceived ideas of the most pedestrian president America has seen in recent times. With school marshals, armed school staff and teachers, America will create an indelible image in the impressionable minds of its young learners that guns and violence they bring are a normal way of life. In the process of making violence the norm in society, America is failing in its duties as a nation to nurture its next generation. The year 2018 has the potential to be a watershed moment in the war against guns in America. Drawing the wrath of the NRA, retailers like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Walmart and Kroger have taken a stand and stoped selling assault-style rifles and guns to anyone under the age of 21, federal and state laws notwithstanding. Students are taking to the streets and staging protests against gun violence. Even a Republican governor with an A+ rating in the NRA’s grading system took the unexpected step of signing into law a gun-control bill that might improve Florida’s standing with the Giffords Law Center. With the midterm elections looming in November 2018 can and should become a referendum on where America stands on guns today and how much power the NRA wields in American politics. *S. Suresh is a product executive with more than 25 years of experience in enterprise software. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Teachers are educators, not mercenaries

By S. Suresh*

It is not easy to write about gun violence and gun-related deaths in America. Even before the ink is dry, more shootings will bring more deaths somewhere in the country. As I wrote this article, the nation had to contend with the heartbreaking loss of the lives of three women at the hands of a gunman in the small town of Yountville, California.

Presenting a frightful perspective on gun deaths in America, The New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof asserted in 2015 that, &ldquo;More Americans have died from guns in the United States since 1968 than on battlefields of all the wars in American history.&rdquo; &nbsp;This statistic has been verified more than once by PolitiFact.

The Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit organization that keeps track of gun violence in America, not only provides a sad commentary on the senseless loss of lives from gun violence, but its records also demonstrate why Kristof&rsquo;s astute observation will stay true for the foreseeable future in America. Studies show a direct correlation between gun ownership and gun-related injuries and deaths. In an analysis of gun ownership across 50 US states, those with more guns tend to have more gun-related deaths. In a similar study of developed countries, America, which has 42% of civilian-owned guns in the world, stands in a league of its own when it comes to gun-related deaths in comparison with countries like Japan, UK and the Netherlands, where gun ownership is low.

I have unequivocally stated that guns have no place in a civilized society, and that America has to engage in a debate on the relevance of the Second Amendment rather than gun control. In the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, it is alarming to see the dialogue shift toward the arming of teachers and school staff.

Armed Teachers? 

During the Republican primaries, President Donald Trump opined that the country&rsquo;s response to gun violence ought to be more civilians with guns. &ldquo;I am a Second Amendment person,&rdquo; Trump said. &ldquo;If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn&rsquo;t have 14 or 15 people dead right now. If even in Paris, if they had guns on the other side going in the opposite direction, you wouldn&rsquo;t have 130 people plus dead.&rdquo;

America&rsquo;s delusional president wants to turn the entire country into a war zone, including schools, which are a gun-free zone today. Despite strong evidence that more guns would mean more gun-related deaths, Trump loves the idea of &ldquo;bullets going in the other direction&rdquo; and believes in the myth that more good guys with guns ought to be the nation&rsquo;s answer to mass shootings. At a White House meeting on school safety, Trump stated that &ldquo;certain highly adept people, people who understand weaponry and guns,&rdquo; ought to be allowed to carry guns inside schools. He is not talking about soldiers or mercenaries, but about teachers. The president went as far as to suggest that teachers willing to carry guns should be paid bonuses.

Not surprisingly, Trump&rsquo;s repeated call to arm teachers drew mixed reactions after the shooting in Parkland, Florida. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and some teachers are in favor of Trump&rsquo;s call to arms, while many teachers&rsquo; unions, parents and educators have overwhelmingly rejected the idea. As with any aspect of the gun debate, the nation is polarized on the topic of arming schoolteachers. The strong divide was amply evident in Florida lawmakers&rsquo; knee-jerk response to the Parkland shooting.&nbsp;

Reacting to the school shooting, Florida passed a bill on March 7 that has a provision for additional funding for arming school staff. While the bill has positive aspects, including raising the minimum age to purchase firearms, a three-day waiting period and restrictions on the sale of assault-style weapons, it also includes the provision to arm school teachers. Florida&rsquo;s Senate narrowly passed a modified version of the bill to create a school marshal program with the additional funding earmarked for arming non-teaching school staff. Defying the NRA, Florida Governor Rick Scott, a self-professed proponent of common-sense gun laws, signed the bill into law on March 9. The final scene will play out in the federal court where the NRA has filed a lawsuit contesting that the new Florida law violates the Second Amendment constitutional rights of people under the age of 21 to bear arms.

Watershed Moment

Taking the step of arming school staff will, unfortunately, negate the benefits of other aspects of Florida&rsquo;s rnew law. Schools are a place of learning. They are sacred institutions that impart knowledge to students. Nelson Mandela believed that &ldquo;Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.&rdquo; Teachers have the unenviable job of shaping the next generation of responsible citizens, creating in them a desire to learn and equipping them with the skills needed to change the world for the better.

Teachers are referred to in Sanskrit as gurus. A guru is a revered mentor who enlightens the minds of students and molds their values. A guru dispels the darkness that is ignorance by guiding students to the path of knowledge and wisdom. It is inconceivable that the very fabric of what a place of learning ought to be is getting ripped apart by the ill-conceived ideas of the most pedestrian president America has seen in recent times. With school marshals, armed school staff and teachers, America will create an indelible image in the impressionable minds of its young learners that guns and violence they bring are a normal way of life. In the process of making violence the norm in society, America is failing in its duties as a nation to nurture its next generation.

The year 2018 has the potential to be a watershed moment in the war against guns in America. Drawing the wrath of the NRA, retailers like Dick&rsquo;s Sporting Goods, Walmart and Kroger have taken a stand and stoped selling assault-style rifles and guns to anyone under the age of 21, federal and state laws notwithstanding. Students are taking to the streets and staging protests against gun violence. Even a Republican governor with an A+ rating in the NRA&rsquo;s grading system took the unexpected step of signing into law a gun-control bill that might improve Florida&rsquo;s standing with the Giffords Law Center.

With the midterm elections looming in November, 2018 can and should become a referendum on where America stands on guns today and how much power the NRA wields in American politics.&nbsp;

*S. Suresh is a product executive with more than 25 years of experience in enterprise software.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By arming teachers, America will cause lasting damage in a society already rife with gun violence.

By S. Suresh* It is not easy to write about gun violence and gun-related deaths in America. Even before the ink is dry, more shootings will bring more deaths somewhere in the country. As I wrote this article, the nation had to contend with the heartbreaking loss of the lives of three women at the hands of a gunman in the small town of Yountville, California. Presenting a frightful perspective on gun deaths in America, The New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof asserted in 2015 that, “More Americans have died from guns in the United States since 1968 than on battlefields of all the wars in American history.” This statistic has been verified more than once by PolitiFact. The Gun Violence Archive, a non-profit organization that keeps track of gun violence in America, not only provides a sad commentary on the senseless loss of lives from gun violence, but its records also demonstrate why Kristof’s astute observation will stay true for the foreseeable future in America. Studies show a direct correlation between gun ownership and gun-related injuries and deaths. In an analysis of gun ownership across 50 US states, those with more guns tend to have more gun-related deaths. In a similar study of developed countries, America, which has 42% of civilian-owned guns in the world, stands in a league of its own when it comes to gun-related deaths in comparison with countries like Japan, UK and the Netherlands, where gun ownership is low. I have unequivocally stated that guns have no place in a civilized society, and that America has to engage in a debate on the relevance of the Second Amendment rather than gun control. In the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, it is alarming to see the dialogue shift toward the arming of teachers and school staff. Armed Teachers? During the Republican primaries, President Donald Trump opined that the country’s response to gun violence ought to be more civilians with guns. “I am a Second Amendment person,” Trump said. “If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn’t have 14 or 15 people dead right now. If even in Paris, if they had guns on the other side going in the opposite direction, you wouldn’t have 130 people plus dead.” America’s delusional president wants to turn the entire country into a war zone, including schools, which are a gun-free zone today. Despite strong evidence that more guns would mean more gun-related deaths, Trump loves the idea of “bullets going in the other direction” and believes in the myth that more good guys with guns ought to be the nation’s answer to mass shootings. At a White House meeting on school safety, Trump stated that “certain highly adept people, people who understand weaponry and guns,” ought to be allowed to carry guns inside schools. He is not talking about soldiers or mercenaries, but about teachers. The president went as far as to suggest that teachers willing to carry guns should be paid bonuses. Not surprisingly, Trump’s repeated call to arm teachers drew mixed reactions after the shooting in Parkland, Florida. The National Rifle Association (NRA) and some teachers are in favor of Trump’s call to arms, while many teachers’ unions, parents and educators have overwhelmingly rejected the idea. As with any aspect of the gun debate, the nation is polarized on the topic of arming schoolteachers. The strong divide was amply evident in Florida lawmakers’ knee-jerk response to the Parkland shooting. Reacting to the school shooting, Florida passed a bill on March 7 that has a provision for additional funding for arming school staff. While the bill has positive aspects, including raising the minimum age to purchase firearms, a three-day waiting period and restrictions on the sale of assault-style weapons, it also includes the provision to arm school teachers. Florida’s Senate narrowly passed a modified version of the bill to create a school marshal program with the additional funding earmarked for arming non-teaching school staff. Defying the NRA, Florida Governor Rick Scott, a self-professed proponent of common-sense gun laws, signed the bill into law on March 9. The final scene will play out in the federal court where the NRA has filed a lawsuit contesting that the new Florida law violates the Second Amendment constitutional rights of people under the age of 21 to bear arms. Watershed Moment Taking the step of arming school staff will, unfortunately, negate the benefits of other aspects of Florida’s rnew law. Schools are a place of learning. They are sacred institutions that impart knowledge to students. Nelson Mandela believed that “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.” Teachers have the unenviable job of shaping the next generation of responsible citizens, creating in them a desire to learn and equipping them with the skills needed to change the world for the better. Teachers are referred to in Sanskrit as gurus. A guru is a revered mentor who enlightens the minds of students and molds their values. A guru dispels the darkness that is ignorance by guiding students to the path of knowledge and wisdom. It is inconceivable that the very fabric of what a place of learning ought to be is getting ripped apart by the ill-conceived ideas of the most pedestrian president America has seen in recent times. With school marshals, armed school staff and teachers, America will create an indelible image in the impressionable minds of its young learners that guns and violence they bring are a normal way of life. In the process of making violence the norm in society, America is failing in its duties as a nation to nurture its next generation. The year 2018 has the potential to be a watershed moment in the war against guns in America. Drawing the wrath of the NRA, retailers like Dick’s Sporting Goods, Walmart and Kroger have taken a stand and stoped selling assault-style rifles and guns to anyone under the age of 21, federal and state laws notwithstanding. Students are taking to the streets and staging protests against gun violence. Even a Republican governor with an A+ rating in the NRA’s grading system took the unexpected step of signing into law a gun-control bill that might improve Florida’s standing with the Giffords Law Center. With the midterm elections looming in November, 2018 can and should become a referendum on where America stands on guns today and how much power the NRA wields in American politics. *S. Suresh is a product executive with more than 25 years of experience in enterprise software. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

By Aimee Huff, Michelle Barnhart*&nbsp;

President Donald Trump&rsquo;s proposal to arm teachers has sparked substantial public debate.

As researchers of consumer culture and lead authors of a recent study of how Americans use and view firearms for self-defense, we argue that while carrying a gun may reduce the risk of being powerless during an attack, it also introduces substantial and overlooked risks to the carrier and others.

Where bullets land

One of the biggest risks involved with arming teachers would be missing the target &ndash; literally. Despite the fact that police must undergo extensive professional training, particularly for high-pressure situations, one study notes that police involved in gunfights shoot with an accuracy rate of just 18 percent.

Assuming teachers can achieve the same level of accuracy as police, and that an armed teacher were able to get into position to fire, just one in five or six bullets would hit the shooter. The other four or five bullets would hit something or someone else. While an armed and trained teacher may be able to stop a shooter, the teacher may also shoot an innocent person.

Why might they miss the target?

Our recent study about people who keep and use handguns for self-defense can help to explain why someone using a gun against an attacker has difficulty hitting their target.

Over 24 months, the research team monitored 6,879 threads in four online discussion forums focused on armed self-defense. One author completed concealed handgun license training. Two contributing authors attended the annual NRA convention. The lead authors attended two gun shows, and interviewed two police officers and nine civilians who keep and/or carry handguns for self-defense.

Individuals in our study expressed concern about effectively using their training during an actual event. They spoke of the possibility of &ldquo;freezing up&rdquo; or clumsily drawing their weapons. Many, including police and military personnel, acknowledge that the fear and chaos caused by a threatening situation produce involuntary physical responses, such as a racing heart and loss of fine motor skills. They believe these responses could impede their ability to accurately fire and could expose themselves and bystanders to the risk of being shot. They engaged in regular rehearsals in an attempt to address these concerns.

Individuals in our study note other risks of using a gun for self-defense, such as mistaking an innocent person for an assailant or being targeted by an assailant who sees that you are armed. Indeed, if arming teachers becomes commonplace, shooters may target teachers first, further decreasing teachers&rsquo; firing ability and accuracy.

We contend that other factors could inhibit teachers from effectively using their firearms training. The majority of shooters at high school and middle school incidents are current students. Recognizing the shooter as a student could emotionally inhibit a well-intentioned teacher from rapidly and accurately firing at him. Individuals in our study describe their reluctance to respond with firepower because they worry about being mistaken for assailants by law enforcement who respond to the scene. In the case of teachers, this fear could further inhibit them from engaging in a firefight.&nbsp;

The day-to-day risks of arming teachers

Our findings show that handgun owners perceive a host of other physical, legal, psychological and moral risks associated with day-to-day preparedness for armed self-defense. These risks include unnecessarily drawing or firing in a moment of fear or someone taking their gun to injure others. However, handgun owners express a willingness to accept these risks as a trade-off for decreasing their risk of being victimized.

Teachers who carry firearms would assume a variety of similar day-to-day risks. For instance, armed teachers could unintentionally discharge their firearm or have their guns taken by an angry student while trying to break-up a fight. The potential for having their gun taken is very real. Research on shootings that took place in hospital emergency departments shows that 23 percent involve a gun that is taken from an armed security guard.

Reducing these day-to-day risks is taxing on individuals. Our data show that carrying a firearm responsibly involves continuous awareness of the weapon and the situation, understanding complex laws around self-defense, and mental preparedness to end a human life if necessary. More than half of the concealed carry license holders we interviewed and dozens of online discussants stated that they sometimes leave their firearms at home to avoid the burden of having to maintain this mindset.

Based on this finding, we assert that carrying a firearm would be equally taxing on teachers, if not more since they also must engage in the duties of their profession.&nbsp;

Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

Despite the widespread news coverage of mass shootings at schools, the reality is that school shootings are still a rare occurrence. In an FBI study of 160 active shooter incidents that FBI identified between 2000 and 2013, 27 &ndash; or about 17 percent &ndash; occurred at elementary, middle and high schools. Given that rarity, the challenges of effectively using a gun to neutralize a shooter without taking additional lives and added day-to-day risks, we argue that Trump&rsquo;s proposal would not be effective in making schools safer overall for teachers or students.

It is difficult to address the question of whether, in the moment of a school shooting, the presence of an armed teacher is preferable to an unarmed one.

At least eight states currently permit teachers and school staff to carry firearms. However, the small percentage of schools with armed personnel combined with the small percentage of schools experiencing mass shootings limits the opportunity for a quantitative study of the risks and benefits of arming teachers. A recent review of the available data on the effectiveness of armed security and school resource officers in deterring or responding to a school shooting was inconclusive.

One of the most compelling findings comes from the same FBI report that found between 2000 and 2013, it was unarmed civilians that stopped more active shooter events than armed civilians &ndash; 13.1 percent versus 3.1 percent, respectively. &ldquo;Of note, 11 of the incidents involved unarmed principals, teachers, other school staff and students who confronted shooters to end the threat (9 of those shooters were students),&rdquo; the report states.

This shows arming teachers isn&rsquo;t the only way to stop active shooters at schools. Often active school shooters are stopped by unarmed educators with the will to act.

* Michelle Barnhart is an Associate Professor of Marketing, Oregon State University

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

While an armed and trained teacher may be able to stop a shooter, the teacher may also shoot an innocent person.

By Aimee Huff, Michelle Barnhart* President Donald Trump’s proposal to arm teachers has sparked substantial public debate. As researchers of consumer culture and lead authors of a recent study of how Americans use and view firearms for self-defense, we argue that while carrying a gun may reduce the risk of being powerless during an attack, it also introduces substantial and overlooked risks to the carrier and others. Where bullets land One of the biggest risks involved with arming teachers would be missing the target – literally. Despite the fact that police must undergo extensive professional training, particularly for high-pressure situations, one study notes that police involved in gunfights shoot with an accuracy rate of just 18 percent. Assuming teachers can achieve the same level of accuracy as police, and that an armed teacher were able to get into position to fire, just one in five or six bullets would hit the shooter. The other four or five bullets would hit something or someone else. While an armed and trained teacher may be able to stop a shooter, the teacher may also shoot an innocent person. Why might they miss the target? Our recent study about people who keep and use handguns for self-defense can help to explain why someone using a gun against an attacker has difficulty hitting their target. Over 24 months, the research team monitored 6,879 threads in four online discussion forums focused on armed self-defense. One author completed concealed handgun license training. Two contributing authors attended the annual NRA convention. The lead authors attended two gun shows, and interviewed two police officers and nine civilians who keep and/or carry handguns for self-defense. Individuals in our study expressed concern about effectively using their training during an actual event. They spoke of the possibility of “freezing up” or clumsily drawing their weapons. Many, including police and military personnel, acknowledge that the fear and chaos caused by a threatening situation produce involuntary physical responses, such as a racing heart and loss of fine motor skills. They believe these responses could impede their ability to accurately fire and could expose themselves and bystanders to the risk of being shot. They engaged in regular rehearsals in an attempt to address these concerns. Individuals in our study note other risks of using a gun for self-defense, such as mistaking an innocent person for an assailant or being targeted by an assailant who sees that you are armed. Indeed, if arming teachers becomes commonplace, shooters may target teachers first, further decreasing teachers’ firing ability and accuracy. We contend that other factors could inhibit teachers from effectively using their firearms training. The majority of shooters at high school and middle school incidents are current students. Recognizing the shooter as a student could emotionally inhibit a well-intentioned teacher from rapidly and accurately firing at him. Individuals in our study describe their reluctance to respond with firepower because they worry about being mistaken for assailants by law enforcement who respond to the scene. In the case of teachers, this fear could further inhibit them from engaging in a firefight. The day-to-day risks of arming teachers Our findings show that handgun owners perceive a host of other physical, legal, psychological and moral risks associated with day-to-day preparedness for armed self-defense. These risks include unnecessarily drawing or firing in a moment of fear or someone taking their gun to injure others. However, handgun owners express a willingness to accept these risks as a trade-off for decreasing their risk of being victimized. Teachers who carry firearms would assume a variety of similar day-to-day risks. For instance, armed teachers could unintentionally discharge their firearm or have their guns taken by an angry student while trying to break-up a fight. The potential for having their gun taken is very real. Research on shootings that took place in hospital emergency departments shows that 23 percent involve a gun that is taken from an armed security guard. Reducing these day-to-day risks is taxing on individuals. Our data show that carrying a firearm responsibly involves continuous awareness of the weapon and the situation, understanding complex laws around self-defense, and mental preparedness to end a human life if necessary. More than half of the concealed carry license holders we interviewed and dozens of online discussants stated that they sometimes leave their firearms at home to avoid the burden of having to maintain this mindset. Based on this finding, we assert that carrying a firearm would be equally taxing on teachers, if not more since they also must engage in the duties of their profession. Do the benefits outweigh the risks? Despite the widespread news coverage of mass shootings at schools, the reality is that school shootings are still a rare occurrence. In an FBI study of 160 active shooter incidents that FBI identified between 2000 and 2013, 27 – or about 17 percent – occurred at elementary, middle and high schools. Given that rarity, the challenges of effectively using a gun to neutralize a shooter without taking additional lives and added day-to-day risks, we argue that Trump’s proposal would not be effective in making schools safer overall for teachers or students. It is difficult to address the question of whether, in the moment of a school shooting, the presence of an armed teacher is preferable to an unarmed one. At least eight states currently permit teachers and school staff to carry firearms. However, the small percentage of schools with armed personnel combined with the small percentage of schools experiencing mass shootings limits the opportunity for a quantitative study of the risks and benefits of arming teachers. A recent review of the available data on the effectiveness of armed security and school resource officers in deterring or responding to a school shooting was inconclusive. One of the most compelling findings comes from the same FBI report that found between 2000 and 2013, it was unarmed civilians that stopped more active shooter events than armed civilians – 13.1 percent versus 3.1 percent, respectively. “Of note, 11 of the incidents involved unarmed principals, teachers, other school staff and students who confronted shooters to end the threat (9 of those shooters were students),” the report states. This shows arming teachers isn’t the only way to stop active shooters at schools. Often active school shooters are stopped by unarmed educators with the will to act. * Michelle Barnhart is an Associate Professor of Marketing, Oregon State University (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Why Trump's idea to arm teachers may miss the mark?

Madras High Court today upheld the decision of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/elections-commission-calls-off-polls-in-tamil-nadus-vellore-over-cash-haul-210961">Election Commission of India to cancel</a> the election to Vellore Lok Sabha constituency.

The Lok Sabha election to the Vellore constituency was cancelled on Tuesday by the EC following the recovery of a huge amount of cash allegedly from an associate of a DMK leader.

The EC took the decision after the district police had filed a complaint against the accused, Kathir Anand, as well as two party functionaries on the basis of a report from the Income Tax department on April 10. Polling in Vellore was scheduled on April 18.

Anand was charged under the Representation of the People Act for giving "wrong information" in his election affidavit filed along with his nomination papers, the police said. The other two, identified as Srinivasan and Damodaran, were booked under bribery charges.

The recommendation was sent to the legislative department of the law ministry Tuesday which issued the notification.

On March 30, Income Tax officials had conducted searches at the residence of Anand's father Durai Murugan over suspected use of unaccounted money for electioneering, and seized Rs 10.50 lakh in alleged "excess" cash.

Two days later, they claimed to have seized Rs 11.53 crore from a cement godown belonging to a DMK leader's associate in the same district.

(Inputs: ANI, PTI)

25th school massacre in Florida calls for a debate on armed staff in schools

Madras High Court today upheld the decision of Election Commission of India to cancel the election to Vellore Lok Sabha constituency. The Lok Sabha election to the Vellore constituency was cancelled on Tuesday by the EC following the recovery of a huge amount of cash allegedly from an associate of a DMK leader. The EC took the decision after the district police had filed a complaint against the accused, Kathir Anand, as well as two party functionaries on the basis of a report from the Income Tax department on April 10. Polling in Vellore was scheduled on April 18. Anand was charged under the Representation of the People Act for giving "wrong information" in his election affidavit filed along with his nomination papers, the police said. The other two, identified as Srinivasan and Damodaran, were booked under bribery charges. The recommendation was sent to the legislative department of the law ministry Tuesday which issued the notification. On March 30, Income Tax officials had conducted searches at the residence of Anand's father Durai Murugan over suspected use of unaccounted money for electioneering, and seized Rs 10.50 lakh in alleged "excess" cash. Two days later, they claimed to have seized Rs 11.53 crore from a cement godown belonging to a DMK leader's associate in the same district. (Inputs: ANI, PTI)

Opinion: School security in Florida after 18 shootings in 2018

President Donald Trump declared Tuesday in his State of the Union address to Congress that what he calls America&#39;s &quot;open borders&quot; had allowed drug gangs to pour into US communities.

Pointing out a guest &mdash; a mother who lost two daughters to murder &mdash; Trump urged Congress to come together to &quot;close the loopholes&quot; that he said allow in groups like El Salvador&#39;s MS-13.

&quot;Many of these gang members took advantage of glaring loopholes and our laws to enter the country as illegal, unaccompanied, alien minors,&quot; Trump claimed, laying out his immigration plan.

If the president wins congressional backing for his immigration plans they will include four pillars tightening what he and his populist supporters see as weak links in current law.

The first pillar, and one that might not find immediate support with the most vocal members of Trump&#39;s anti-immigrant base, is a &quot;path to citizenship&quot; for undocumented migrants who arrived at a young age.

The second pillar, Trump said, &quot;fully secures the border&quot; by building a huge wall on the Mexican frontier and hiring more immigration agents.

The third pillar would end America&#39;s Green Card lottery, and replace it with a so-called merit-based system for migrants with skills needed by US businesses.

And the fourth pillar &mdash; an idea that drew protests from Democrat lawmakers during the speech, would end &quot;chain migration&quot; policies that allow migrants to bring in family members.

Trump urged Congress to come together to "close the loopholes" that he said allow in groups like El Salvador's MS-13

President Donald Trump declared Tuesday in his State of the Union address to Congress that what he calls America's "open borders" had allowed drug gangs to pour into US communities. Pointing out a guest — a mother who lost two daughters to murder — Trump urged Congress to come together to "close the loopholes" that he said allow in groups like El Salvador's MS-13. "Many of these gang members took advantage of glaring loopholes and our laws to enter the country as illegal, unaccompanied, alien minors," Trump claimed, laying out his immigration plan. If the president wins congressional backing for his immigration plans they will include four pillars tightening what he and his populist supporters see as weak links in current law. The first pillar, and one that might not find immediate support with the most vocal members of Trump's anti-immigrant base, is a "path to citizenship" for undocumented migrants who arrived at a young age. The second pillar, Trump said, "fully secures the border" by building a huge wall on the Mexican frontier and hiring more immigration agents. The third pillar would end America's Green Card lottery, and replace it with a so-called merit-based system for migrants with skills needed by US businesses. And the fourth pillar — an idea that drew protests from Democrat lawmakers during the speech, would end "chain migration" policies that allow migrants to bring in family members.

'Open borders' promote guns, gangs and cost lives: Donald Trump

A rash of gun-toting Americans visiting Canada prompted its border agency to launch a public awareness campaign, reminding Americans about their northern neighbours&#39; relatively strict firearms laws. 
 
&quot;Canadian laws are different than US ones,&quot; the Canada Border Services Agency said in a statement yesterday. 
 
&quot;Non-restricted firearms can be used for hunting purposes and protection against wildlife in remote areas.&quot; 
 
But, it added, the &quot;use of firearms for personal protection, or protection of property is not deemed a valid purpose to import firearms into Canada.&quot; 
 
Switchblades, nunchucks, crossbows, blowguns and brass knuckles are also banned in Canada, it noted. 
 
The announcement comes on the heels of two separate incidents in which Texas retirees were stopped from carrying weapons into the country at a border checkpoint in Saint Stephen, New Brunswick. 
 
A search of their vehicles uncovered several handguns, a shotgun and loose ammunition, which were seized. 
 
The two tourists were also fined more than 1,000 Canadian dollar (USD 775) and kicked out of Canada, along with their wives. 
In the first six months of this year, 413 guns were seized at the border - both from smugglers and gun lovers. The figure is up from 386 guns seized during the same period in 2015, according to government figures. 
 
Authorities have linked recent spikes in violent crimes to the smuggling of handguns and other prohibited weapons from the United States. 
 
US gun culture is also a source of derision in Canada. 
 
Canada only began arming its border guards in 2006. 
 
South of the border, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump provoked fresh debate this month over gun rights when he appeared to suggest that &quot;Second Amendment people,&quot; who view gun ownership as a constitutional right, could take dislike for his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton into their own hands. 
 
(AFP)

The announcement came after Texas retirees were stopped from carrying weapons into the country at a border checkpoint

A rash of gun-toting Americans visiting Canada prompted its border agency to launch a public awareness campaign, reminding Americans about their northern neighbours' relatively strict firearms laws. "Canadian laws are different than US ones," the Canada Border Services Agency said in a statement yesterday. "Non-restricted firearms can be used for hunting purposes and protection against wildlife in remote areas." But, it added, the "use of firearms for personal protection, or protection of property is not deemed a valid purpose to import firearms into Canada." Switchblades, nunchucks, crossbows, blowguns and brass knuckles are also banned in Canada, it noted. The announcement comes on the heels of two separate incidents in which Texas retirees were stopped from carrying weapons into the country at a border checkpoint in Saint Stephen, New Brunswick. A search of their vehicles uncovered several handguns, a shotgun and loose ammunition, which were seized. The two tourists were also fined more than 1,000 Canadian dollar (USD 775) and kicked out of Canada, along with their wives. In the first six months of this year, 413 guns were seized at the border - both from smugglers and gun lovers. The figure is up from 386 guns seized during the same period in 2015, according to government figures. Authorities have linked recent spikes in violent crimes to the smuggling of handguns and other prohibited weapons from the United States. US gun culture is also a source of derision in Canada. Canada only began arming its border guards in 2006. South of the border, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump provoked fresh debate this month over gun rights when he appeared to suggest that "Second Amendment people," who view gun ownership as a constitutional right, could take dislike for his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton into their own hands. (AFP)

Canada to US tourists: Leave your guns at home

A US army soldier who participated in a scheme to buy guns and send them to a security detail for the president and vice president of Indonesia plead guilty to several charges in federal court. 
 
Audi Sumilat pleaded guilty Tuesday and will be sentenced in October, the US attorney&#39;s office in New Hampshire said yesterday. 
The 36-year-old faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a fine of $250,000. 
 
One of Sumilat&#39;s co-conspirators also has been charged and is scheduled to be tried on July 19.&nbsp;Assistant US Attorney Bill Morse said there have been cases in New Hampshire and other states involving international firearms trafficking to countries including Ghana, Canada and Mexico.&nbsp;&quot;But this is the first case that I&#39;m aware of in which the intended beneficiaries of the trafficking were representatives of a foreign government,&quot; Morse said. 
 
Authorities said Sumilat joined a conspiracy to buy guns in Texas and New Hampshire for members of the Indonesian Presidential Guard, who are tasked with providing security to the president and vice president but could not lawfully buy the weapons themselves. 
Sumilat admitted he and three guard members came up with a plan in 2014, when they were stationed together for training in Fort Benning, Georgia. 
 
Sumilat said he bought guns in Texas and shipped them to a co-conspirator in New Hampshire, who delivered them to guard members on visits to Washington DC, and to the UN General Assembly in New York. The guns were to be smuggled out of the United States. 
Sumilat pleaded guilty to making false statements in records required to be kept by federal firearms dealers for telling gun dealers the weapons were for him and for smuggling firearms from the US. 
 
To have legally exported the guns, Sumilat was required to get an exporter&#39;s license and a license covering the specific guns exported. No licenses were issued. 
 
New Hampshire US Attorney Emily Gray Rice said the consequences of international gun trafficking can be grave.&nbsp;&quot;Firearms exported overseas illegally can easily end up in the wrong hands,&quot; she said in a statement.&nbsp;&quot;International gun trafficking will be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible to protect innocent individuals, both American and foreign, from the criminal use of US weapons abroad.&quot; 
 
(AP)

Sumilat pleaded guilty in federal court, and faces a sentence of five years in jail and a $250,000 fine

A US army soldier who participated in a scheme to buy guns and send them to a security detail for the president and vice president of Indonesia plead guilty to several charges in federal court. Audi Sumilat pleaded guilty Tuesday and will be sentenced in October, the US attorney's office in New Hampshire said yesterday. The 36-year-old faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a fine of $250,000. One of Sumilat's co-conspirators also has been charged and is scheduled to be tried on July 19. Assistant US Attorney Bill Morse said there have been cases in New Hampshire and other states involving international firearms trafficking to countries including Ghana, Canada and Mexico. "But this is the first case that I'm aware of in which the intended beneficiaries of the trafficking were representatives of a foreign government," Morse said. Authorities said Sumilat joined a conspiracy to buy guns in Texas and New Hampshire for members of the Indonesian Presidential Guard, who are tasked with providing security to the president and vice president but could not lawfully buy the weapons themselves. Sumilat admitted he and three guard members came up with a plan in 2014, when they were stationed together for training in Fort Benning, Georgia. Sumilat said he bought guns in Texas and shipped them to a co-conspirator in New Hampshire, who delivered them to guard members on visits to Washington DC, and to the UN General Assembly in New York. The guns were to be smuggled out of the United States. Sumilat pleaded guilty to making false statements in records required to be kept by federal firearms dealers for telling gun dealers the weapons were for him and for smuggling firearms from the US. To have legally exported the guns, Sumilat was required to get an exporter's license and a license covering the specific guns exported. No licenses were issued. New Hampshire US Attorney Emily Gray Rice said the consequences of international gun trafficking can be grave. "Firearms exported overseas illegally can easily end up in the wrong hands," she said in a statement. "International gun trafficking will be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible to protect innocent individuals, both American and foreign, from the criminal use of US weapons abroad." (AP)

US soldier smuggles guns for Indonesian President's security detail

guns

Guns, News on Guns, stories on Guns, articles on Guns, Guns stories at Wion, Guns news, Guns latest news