I never owned one until I was about 31 and my daughter was born. I live in a rural area and there was a break in less than a mile from my house, in the middle

I never owned one until I was about 31 and my daughter was born. I live in a rural area and there was a break in less than a mile from my house, in the middle of the day, while the mom was inside. Some guy strung out on something decided to break in and attacked her. Somehow she managed to hit him hard enough that she got away, locked herself in a room and called the police while the guy ran away. Police arrived about 10 minutes later and luckily she wasn't permanently harmed. When something like that happens and you start running through scenarios in your head of what you would do if somebody had broken into your house while your family was inside? The amount of time it would take to get the kids safely into a room so that we could call the police and wait things out, especially once somebody is potentially already in your house...is very high. At the same time, as soon as somebody realizes you can shoot back...they run away. That's one of the reasons why 12 gauge shotguns that make the extremely loud cocking sound are so popular for home defense. People take for granted the value of an unfired gun because the threat is generally enough of a deterrent. I have never considered myself to be a "gun nut" or "gun obsessed" in any way shape or form. I've spent some time at ranges to make sure I was accurate and I've taken classes in responsible handling because I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing. At the same time, because I 100% view it as a home defense mechanism, the idea of not having it makes me very uncomfortable. Knowing that it is there and it will work in the unlikely event that I need it to work...that I won't have to wonder if batteries have run out or a pepper spray has expired...that is reassuring. Schools are a unique situation in the firearm world because in most locations where firearms are not allowed, government buildings, etc there is some type of security in place. Usually at the doors with armed guards and metal detectors. Schools are the place where that isn't the case, which makes them a prime target for things like this. The part where it's frustrating to have this conversation is that I fully understand the concerns of both teachers and parents about the idea of having armed guards, etc in a school. The problem is that the amount of people who die is directly related to the response time of somebody stopping the shooter. Lock-down procedures that have been implemented are a great step in that direction to buy time for police to arrive. Maybe the solution is metal doors with bullet proof glass to allow classrooms to be secure in the event of an emergency? Beyond that, I can't think of many other ways to cut down response time other than having somebody on site, who is trained by police, authorized to do so. The problem solver in me wants to solve the problem, but there's not an easy answer unfortunately. What I do know is that when police are called, they are arriving at the school to stop the shooter with guns. In my mind it's increasingly difficult in the face of tragedies like this to ignore that fact and insist that the only people able to respond must be people who have to drive to the location to do so. But it's more difficult when the conversation centers on two groups of people who feel threatened. One group is threatened by people who have guns. The other is threatened by not having guns themselves.