Emotion meets pragmatism in heated Florida school safety debate
Excerpt: Rep. Jennifer Sullivan wanted to be clear: “This bill does not require a teacher to be armed.” It would, however, allow school districts to let teachers voluntarily participate in Florida’s armed guardian program if they pass a rigorous background check and complete required training. And it passed the committee along party lines, after nearly two hours of comments and debate.
The Republican majority in House Education noted its bill addressed several areas of school safety, including holding district officials responsible for complying with state security rules and ensuring that student records are promptly delivered after they transfer. It also aimed to add funding to mental health services, among other aspects.
But the part about teachers with guns dominated the conversation.
Bottom Line: Right, because we’re a country filled with a large population of people who choose to be led by emotions rather than facts. There are two sides to stories and one side to facts. Since we’re once again having this debate let me refresh the memories of the emotional and ignorant as to what’s real.
- 18 states allow educators to conceal carry on campus
- 20% of Florida’s teachers surveyed said they would like the ability to do so
I’ve also pointed out on several occasions, that the reason you likely didn’t know that 18 states allow educators to conceal carry is due to how highly effective it’s been. In many rural communities across the country it’s the only possible way for security to be provided. Yet these facts are always omitted from the conversation in news media and with those opposed based on their own biases which aren’t based in any factual reality.
Many schools in those states aren’t soft targets and they haven’t had issues – ever. In most of those states it’s always been legal. Which also leads to another point that I’ve researched and shared with you previously. The average concealed carry permit holder is 50% more likely to not commit a crime according to the Crime Prevention Research Center. Imagine what that figure looks like when you’re specifically discussing only educators?
The fact remains that in most instances the only way to put an end to someone bent on murder with a gun is a good person with a gun. That may make many uncomfortable but it’s the unfortunate reality we live in. In Candyland we didn’t need guns. This isn’t Candyland, its why law enforcement have them. They also can’t be all places at all times. I understand the lack of logic of emotional arguments generally but the absurdity of the arguments in this case are somewhat confounding. For those devoid of information but filled with fear, do you really think the educators who’d like to participate in the program want to harm children?