Critics have strong, passionate arguments that guns have no place in an educational setting. Their rebuttals are emotionally charged and driven by their moral belief systems. Some of their concerns are fear-based, that too many guns and bullets would be flying across classroom halls causing injury or fatalities. Some who lobby for responsible gun control have had the unfortunate experience of being a victim of gun violence.
Yes, it is true, guns in the wrong hands can harm or end a life. Likewise, in the right hands they can protect and save lives.
The challenge is in identifying and distinguishing between those individuals.
As an early childhood teacher with 23 years of experience, I struggle with the mixed responses to enhancing classroom security. The perspectives and solutions oppose one another. It is unfortunate how quickly we become entrenched in our positions to the point that an open, honest discussion cannot take place because the environment becomes hostile.
The voice of those most directly affected is not sufficiently represented in brainstorming solutions.
Initially, we must acknowledge how the teachers are feeling about the safety and security of their classrooms. I have 18 young children and two other adults who require my immediate, calm direction and protection should a shooter threaten our utopian environment. This responsibility is humbling, and overwhelming. The decisions required are significantly different than if I were in another public space where I could focus on protecting myself. Like all schools across the country, we are evaluating our current lock-down procedures. For now, those conversations exclude the possibility of concealed carry permits for staff.
Defining responsible gun ownership is paramount. With such freedom comes great responsibility. Our society has put blind trust in the individual who purchases a firearm. The result is a lack of trust toward gun owners. This is where legislation has an important role.
As we address the gaps regarding gun ownership — education, certification, registration and background checks — to the point where the public has faith that those with guns are going to act responsibly, then the fear that they will use firearms improperly will diminish.
Addressing mental health is complicated. We are no more able to control guns than we can rein in the dysfunction of the human mind. The first step in addressing mental illness is by identifying factors in our society that perpetuate instability in an already fragile individual. Educators should be utilized as a great resource in addressing this critical mental health piece known as social and emotional literacy.
Most of our shooters are young men who are unstable. They have poor self esteem compounded by an awareness that they do not fit in socially. They are smart and savvy yet lack the internal moral compass that keeps bad behavior in check.
One could theorize that the demographics of random shooters is an outcome of not placing a higher priority on social and emotional literacy throughout a child’s educational years.
Statistics show that schools are the No. 1 target for random shooters. As difficult as it is, the time has come to fully explore armed staff on school grounds. Parents hold teachers accountable for nurturing positive outcomes in their children, especially a safe environment.
Preventing a teacher from the ability to carry a concealed weapon magnifies the vulnerability of themselves and the children in their care. We must ask ourselves how our current or developing legislation is going to save our students and faculty from harm.
Until we find realistic ways to protect our classrooms all we can do is duck and pray. I ask you: Is that the best we can do for our children and their educators?
Teacher Laurie Landers lives and works in northern Colorado.
