Proponents of guns as “defense” are always so sure that, if only they had a weapon, they’d take care of a shooter. The fundamental problem with this is that it

Proponents of guns as “defense” are always so sure that, if only they had a weapon, they’d take care of a shooter. The fundamental problem with this is that it is likely to do a lot more damage from added chaos. You probably will not be in a focused frame of mind in a crisis, and you probably will not have the best aim (despite your normal skill). And, if you’re obviously armed, there is a better chance that you’ll look like the perpetrator to any bystander or police trying to make sense of the situation. This will divide resources as people try to figure out exactly who it is they’re trying to take down. And guess what, if your dream comes true and you’re allowed to be an armed civilian, then you probably won’t be the only armed bystander in the next crisis. If there are 3 or more people all pulling out weapons and all looking like The Shooter, what then; will these people become confused and try to shoot each other? And when they miss, will there be even more casualties? And will the police actually figure out who the real shooter is, or just shoot all the armed people to make sure they have control of the situation? There are so many problems kids have that could be addressed before we make society even more militaristic. Poverty? Racism? Bullying? Domestic abuse? Poor investment in education, making schools worse places than they ought to be?