They say it's so teachers can protect themselves and their students (from the consequences of failed gun laws) but really, it's just because they have to say something -- and it can't be the truth.

At a civilian level, most of them simply don't care. They're confident it will never be their kids and they consider a stranger's children less important than their own easy access to firearms.

But they can't say that, so they make flowery comments about freedom, defending their family and how they're the ones keeping America out of the hands of tyrants, even though they staunchly support tyrants and wouldn't even wear a mask to protect other people, let alone fight and die for them.

On the corporate and political level, there's good money and easy votes in guns. It's no different to tobacco, asbestos and everything else they fought to profit from even as it killed people.

But they can't say that either. So instead, they coordinate what today's scapegoat is going to be. Computer games? Too many doors? Timid police? Whatever keeps the money flowing.

The important part for all of them is demanding other solutions are tried before gun control. They know they won't work, but it will buy them more time and the more time they waste, the better.

That's why their current solution is "free, universal healthcare for everybody in America, including 5 year olds and people who don't want treatment, done to a standard far beyond even the most cutting edge of medicine, completely and permanently curing people in less time than it takes to buy a gun".

Which they then block anyway, because it's important their conditions for supporting gun control are never met.

Not just teachers: this obviously wouldn't have happened, if all the other students had been armed, too.

The only thing that can stop a bad 6-year-old with a gun is a good 6-year-old with a gun.

They want armed teachers because the alternative is gun control. They don’t want gun control, so apparently throwing fire on a burning house is now the way to put out fires.

Yes but they seem to be forgetting the very obvious thing that will happen (and has already happened) when you have more guns being brought into schools, even by those you (misguidedly) trust.

For some reason they don't seem to be able to get that not having guns in or anywhere near a school is the best way not to have shootings at schools.

That article highlights just one obvious problem. Here are others:

• We can't even rely on our cops to shoot only the people who need to be shot. Now we're going to trust that teachers will be able to perform better under those stresses - which may include the need to shoot one of their own students - than cops do? How on earth does that track?

• Legal gun owners go on shooting sprees too. Really easy for you when you are already whitelisted to be showing up to school armed.

• A variation on the article I linked: Careless teacher with a gun leaves it in the bathroom and kid finds it and shoots themselves and/or others with it instead of turning it in.

Bringing whole new level to "Kindergarten Cop" I don't think Arny could have predicted this

No, no, no, you’ve gotten it all wrong. We need armed teachers to shoot dangerous books.

There’s no way we can ban all of the dangerous books, so we need teachers to shoot them out of the hands of our precious youth.