A United States-based company called Omnilter has created software which uses artificial intelligence to monitor security cameras to spot an active shooter for potential gun violence before the trigger is pulled. The military-inspired AI technology reportedly works on real-time target recognition and threat classification.&nbsp;

In 2021, the US witnessed at least 61 active shooter incidents, said the FBI, which was the highest in the last two decades. Earlier this year at least two teachers and 19 children were killed when a shooter opened fire in a school in Uvalde, Texas, making the incident one of the deadliest school shootings that the country has seen in the last 10 years.&nbsp;

According to the company’s CEO, Dave Fraser, the AI-monitored security cameras can help detect a potential gun violence threat which would give people some time to prepare and take action by locking the doors and contacting the police with “rich information”, he said in an interview with Reuters.&nbsp;

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/in-us-gun-violence-kills-more-children-than-vehicular-accidents-causes-109-deaths-everyday-473362">In US, gun violence kills more children than vehicular accidents, causes 109 deaths everyday</a>

He noted how in a number of active shooter situations the assailants are visible on security cameras for seconds or even minutes. Fraser also gave the example of the Parkland high school shooting, where 17 people were killed in 2018 and said that the shooter was seen preparing for the attack near one of the stairwells.&nbsp;

According to the US bureau of labour statistics, there are more than 70 million security cameras across the country. However, less than one per cent are actively monitored, said Fraser, therefore, the software does the monitoring 24 hours, seven days a week and is always on alert. According to the company’s website, the software uses a “multi-dimensional process” to assess, detect, and analyse an active shooter in “fractions of a second”.&nbsp;

ALSO WATCH |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/parkland-shooting-verdict-florida-jury-spares-capital-punishment-525290">Parkland Shooting Verdict: Florida jury spares capital punishment</a>

The AI detects “handguns and rifles by essentially taking the place of a human being. By watching the video feeds,” said the Omnilert CEO to NBC’s News4. He added that subsequently, the information is passed on to an assigned operator who confirms the threat and initiates a safety plan.&nbsp;

Notably, he also claims that the AI can identify the difference between a potential shooter and an officer who is walking in with a weapon and said that the technology is not simply recognising guns but, “it actually needs to identify that there's a threat,” said the media report. Once the threat is detected the system sends images of the shooter as well as their exact location.&nbsp;

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/americas-gun-culture-kills-hundreds-every-day-is-2nd-amendment-worth-the-lives-lost-heres-the-data-482632">America's gun culture kills hundreds every day. Is 2nd amendment worth the lives lost? Here's the data</a>

However, the President of National School Safety and Security Services, Kenneth Trump, told Reuters that while technology could be useful their first and best line of defence in active shooter situations should be well-trained teachers and students.&nbsp;

He added that there is a skewed focus on “target hardening” and people investing more in technology as opposed to staff training, prevention, and recognising the warning signs, and unless that happens problems will continue.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

A United States-based company called Omnilter has created software which uses artificial intelligence to monitor security cameras to spot an active shooter for potential gun violence before the trigger is pulled.

A United States-based company called Omnilter has created software which uses artificial intelligence to monitor security cameras to spot an active shooter for potential gun violence before the trigger is pulled. The military-inspired AI technology reportedly works on real-time target recognition and threat classification. In 2021, the US witnessed at least 61 active shooter incidents, said the FBI, which was the highest in the last two decades. Earlier this year at least two teachers and 19 children were killed when a shooter opened fire in a school in Uvalde, Texas, making the incident one of the deadliest school shootings that the country has seen in the last 10 years. According to the company’s CEO, Dave Fraser, the AI-monitored security cameras can help detect a potential gun violence threat which would give people some time to prepare and take action by locking the doors and contacting the police with “rich information”, he said in an interview with Reuters. ALSO READ | In US, gun violence kills more children than vehicular accidents, causes 109 deaths everyday He noted how in a number of active shooter situations the assailants are visible on security cameras for seconds or even minutes. Fraser also gave the example of the Parkland high school shooting, where 17 people were killed in 2018 and said that the shooter was seen preparing for the attack near one of the stairwells. According to the US bureau of labour statistics, there are more than 70 million security cameras across the country. However, less than one per cent are actively monitored, said Fraser, therefore, the software does the monitoring 24 hours, seven days a week and is always on alert. According to the company’s website, the software uses a “multi-dimensional process” to assess, detect, and analyse an active shooter in “fractions of a second”. ALSO WATCH | Parkland Shooting Verdict: Florida jury spares capital punishment The AI detects “handguns and rifles by essentially taking the place of a human being. By watching the video feeds,” said the Omnilert CEO to NBC’s News4. He added that subsequently, the information is passed on to an assigned operator who confirms the threat and initiates a safety plan. Notably, he also claims that the AI can identify the difference between a potential shooter and an officer who is walking in with a weapon and said that the technology is not simply recognising guns but, “it actually needs to identify that there's a threat,” said the media report. Once the threat is detected the system sends images of the shooter as well as their exact location. ALSO READ | America's gun culture kills hundreds every day. Is 2nd amendment worth the lives lost? Here's the data However, the President of National School Safety and Security Services, Kenneth Trump, told Reuters that while technology could be useful their first and best line of defence in active shooter situations should be well-trained teachers and students. He added that there is a skewed focus on “target hardening” and people investing more in technology as opposed to staff training, prevention, and recognising the warning signs, and unless that happens problems will continue. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

US-based company creates AI to detect potential gun violence, spot active shooters

On Wednesday, Nikolas Cruz, the gunman accused of the mass shooting in the US high school in Parkland, Florida back in 2018 which killed at least 17 students and the staff was formally sentenced to life in prison.&nbsp;

The 24-year-old Cruz, responsible for one of the deadliest mass shootings in US history was sentenced by Broward County Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer after hours of testimonies by the family members of the victims.&nbsp;

The former Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland student had pleaded guilty to the attack last year following the defence’s argument that his mother’s use of drugs and alcohol had permanently damaged his brain. According to reports, Cruz had fired more than 140 shots from an AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle for nearly seven minutes in the school.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;Parkland shooter gets life imprisonment, jury spares capital punishment

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/parkland-shooter-gets-life-imprisonment-jury-spares-capital-punishment-525277/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

The sentence is also after the jury could not unanimously vote last month if the gunman was 19 years old at the time of the attack and deserved the death penalty or not with a 9-3 vote on October 13. The judge had also agreed to the prosecutor’s request to allow the family members of the victims to speak in court before the sentence, many of whom criticised the state law which requires all 12 jurors to be unanimous for a convicted person to be executed.&nbsp;

“He has escaped this punishment because a minority of the jury was given the power to overturn the majority decision made by people who were able to see him for what he is…a remorseless monster who deserves no mercy,” said Meghan Petty, who lost her 14-year-old sister Alaina. This hearing marked the end of a trial that went on for more than four years.&nbsp;

ALSO READ:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/burn-in-hell-family-members-of-victims-of-parkland-shooting-confront-nikolas-cruz-at-sentencing-530341">'Burn in hell': Family members of Parkland shooting victims confront Nikolas Cruz at sentencing</a>

Cruz barely spoke during the hearing and only addressed the judge when asked questions pertaining to the proceedings. During the two-day hearing, he sat wearing red prison overalls and handcuffs as well as a Covid-19 mask which he later removed when one of the victims’ mothers said it was disrespectful.&nbsp;

The judge did not interact with Cruz beyond what was required while calling the victims’ families and the wounded strong, graceful and patient. She added, “I know you are going to be OK because you have each other.”

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

On Wednesday, Nikolas Cruz, the gunman accused of the mass shooting in the US high school in Parkland, Florida back in 2018 which killed at least 17 students and the staff was formally sentenced to life in prison.

On Wednesday, Nikolas Cruz, the gunman accused of the mass shooting in the US high school in Parkland, Florida back in 2018 which killed at least 17 students and the staff was formally sentenced to life in prison. The 24-year-old Cruz, responsible for one of the deadliest mass shootings in US history was sentenced by Broward County Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer after hours of testimonies by the family members of the victims. The former Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland student had pleaded guilty to the attack last year following the defence’s argument that his mother’s use of drugs and alcohol had permanently damaged his brain. According to reports, Cruz had fired more than 140 shots from an AR-15-style semi-automatic rifle for nearly seven minutes in the school. Watch | Parkland shooter gets life imprisonment, jury spares capital punishment × The sentence is also after the jury could not unanimously vote last month if the gunman was 19 years old at the time of the attack and deserved the death penalty or not with a 9-3 vote on October 13. The judge had also agreed to the prosecutor’s request to allow the family members of the victims to speak in court before the sentence, many of whom criticised the state law which requires all 12 jurors to be unanimous for a convicted person to be executed. “He has escaped this punishment because a minority of the jury was given the power to overturn the majority decision made by people who were able to see him for what he is…a remorseless monster who deserves no mercy,” said Meghan Petty, who lost her 14-year-old sister Alaina. This hearing marked the end of a trial that went on for more than four years. ALSO READ: 'Burn in hell': Family members of Parkland shooting victims confront Nikolas Cruz at sentencing Cruz barely spoke during the hearing and only addressed the judge when asked questions pertaining to the proceedings. During the two-day hearing, he sat wearing red prison overalls and handcuffs as well as a Covid-19 mask which he later removed when one of the victims’ mothers said it was disrespectful. The judge did not interact with Cruz beyond what was required while calling the victims’ families and the wounded strong, graceful and patient. She added, “I know you are going to be OK because you have each other.” (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

US: Parkland school mass shooter sentenced to life in prison without parole

A jury spared Florida school shooter Nikolas Cruz from the death penalty for killing 17 people at a Parkland high school in 2018. The jury of seven men and five women returned their verdict after seven and a half hours of deliberations, following a 60-day trial.

Parkland shooter gets life imprisonment, jury spares capital punishment

The Justice Department will pay about $130 million to 40 survivors and families of victims of the 2018 massacre at a high school in Parkland, Florida, over the FBI’s failure to properly investigate two tips in the months before the shooting that suggested the gunman might open fire at a school.

One of the tips, six weeks before the shooting, detailed how the gunman, Nikolas Cruz, was posting on Instagram about amassing weapons and ammunition. “I know he’s going to explode,” the woman said on the FBI’s tip line, adding that she feared Cruz, then 19, “was going to slip into a school and start shooting the place up.”

Forty days later, Cruz did just that, killing 17 people and injuring 17 others at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where he had previously been a student.

The FBI acknowledged two days after the Feb. 14, 2018, shooting that it had received the tips about Cruz but had not investigated them in accordance with its protocols. Cruz, now 23, pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder last month. He is scheduled to go on trial early next year. A jury will decide if he faces capital punishment or life imprisonment.

The Justice Department said in court papers that it was in the process of completing a settlement, without disclosing the amount. Two people familiar with the case said it would total about $130 million, though the precise number could change before the final agreement.

The revelation that the FBI had received information about the gunman ahead of the shooting devastated victims’ families and the Parkland community in the days immediately following the shooting. Fred Guttenberg was picking out a casket for his 14-year-old daughter, Jaime, two days after the shooting when he got an urgent call from an FBI agent working with the families. The agent delivered the difficult news.

“Are you telling me that if the FBI did not make a mistake and did their job a month sooner, my daughter would still be alive today?” Guttenberg asked the agent, according to the lawsuit Guttenberg and the 39 other families eventually filed against the bureau.

“I’m afraid so, sir,” the agent replied, according to Guttenberg.

Guttenberg and his wife, Jennifer Guttenberg, sued the FBI for negligence in November 2018 and were eventually joined by 39 other families. They argued that the shooting had been “completely preventable.”

The Justice Department will pay about $130 million to 40 survivors and families of victims of the 2018 massacre at a high school in Parkland, Florida, over the FBI’s failure to properly investigate two tips in the months before the shooting that suggested the gunman might open fire at a school.

The Justice Department will pay about $130 million to 40 survivors and families of victims of the 2018 massacre at a high school in Parkland, Florida, over the FBI’s failure to properly investigate two tips in the months before the shooting that suggested the gunman might open fire at a school. One of the tips, six weeks before the shooting, detailed how the gunman, Nikolas Cruz, was posting on Instagram about amassing weapons and ammunition. “I know he’s going to explode,” the woman said on the FBI’s tip line, adding that she feared Cruz, then 19, “was going to slip into a school and start shooting the place up.” Forty days later, Cruz did just that, killing 17 people and injuring 17 others at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, where he had previously been a student. The FBI acknowledged two days after the Feb. 14, 2018, shooting that it had received the tips about Cruz but had not investigated them in accordance with its protocols. Cruz, now 23, pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder and 17 counts of attempted murder last month. He is scheduled to go on trial early next year. A jury will decide if he faces capital punishment or life imprisonment. The Justice Department said in court papers that it was in the process of completing a settlement, without disclosing the amount. Two people familiar with the case said it would total about $130 million, though the precise number could change before the final agreement. The revelation that the FBI had received information about the gunman ahead of the shooting devastated victims’ families and the Parkland community in the days immediately following the shooting. Fred Guttenberg was picking out a casket for his 14-year-old daughter, Jaime, two days after the shooting when he got an urgent call from an FBI agent working with the families. The agent delivered the difficult news. “Are you telling me that if the FBI did not make a mistake and did their job a month sooner, my daughter would still be alive today?” Guttenberg asked the agent, according to the lawsuit Guttenberg and the 39 other families eventually filed against the bureau. “I’m afraid so, sir,” the agent replied, according to Guttenberg. Guttenberg and his wife, Jennifer Guttenberg, sued the FBI for negligence in November 2018 and were eventually joined by 39 other families. They argued that the shooting had been “completely preventable.”

Justice Department to pay about $130 million to Parkland shooting victims

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?