In a March 20 editorial, the Herald criticizes Rep. Greg Steube's HB 753, allowing qualified teachers and staff to carry concealed firearms on campus to protect our children.
Your rhetorical questions and inflated answers not only oversimplify but posit falsely or recklessly on every point. Consider these answers to your questions.
1. What kind of message does this send to the students? HB 753 reassures students they are as important as government officials, celebrities, financial assets, or any other person or thing worth protecting.
2. That weapons provide the ultimate safe environment? Yes, in fact they do. Name anything or anyone worth absolute protection where firearms aren't integral to the defense plan.
Never miss a local story.
3. That they too should carry weapons outside school grounds or inside? Using straw man here. No one is arguing for arming students or children anywhere. Florida Statute 790.06 requires CC applicants to be 21 years of age or older.
4. Are teachers expected to dash out of classrooms to confront a shooter? Straw man No. 2! No one is arguing for teachers to "confront" anyone. CC holders know the difference between offense and defense.
5. What happens when a high school student overpowers and disarms a gun-toting classroom instructor? Do you think they can't try to disarm an SRO whose gun is in plain view? Second, concealed carry means the firearm is concealed. No one should ever know you have it.
6. Or will this create a false sense of security? There is nothing false about a sense of security when you have a firearm. LEO's and others carry them precisely for true security.
SRO's contribute to government growth, armed teachers don't. One or two SRO's can't possibly provide as much protection as 8-10 armed teachers, period. We can never do better than arming our teachers.