See this poll on: https://poll.fm/7390591/embed
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
Create your own.
Opinions! We all have them. Find out what people really think with polls and surveys from Crowdsignal.
All the schools have to do is place a large placard on the entrances stating this school is armed. It is known that all of the shooting are in no gun facilities. Look at Aurora, CO. that joke went to 4 theaters before he found one that had no guns allowed. Look at plane travel, since 911, the people on the planes take care of it. There have been a few attempts, but no one has gotten the job done. Americans will take care of themselves if idiots would just step away. Be an American and show what made us the greatest nation on earth, not a UK, etc
they should just let the teachers that have a CCP carry on school property .. that is all that needs to be done..
The U.S. guard and reserve units do constant training. Why not us them??? Too simple I guess!
The legislators in the capitol building who make these decisions have armed guards outside the legislative chambers. So, why shouldn't vulnerable school children have the same protection? Because our legislators are hypocrites and elitists who think they know better than we do what rules and laws are best for us. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Taking away or infringing on gun ownership rights of lawful citizens only makes them more vulnerable to gunfire from criminals who do not and will not obey ANY gun laws. What part of the preceding logic is too difficult for our legislators to follow? It appears our current legislators need more schooling, or need to step out of the way and let True Representatives of The People take their place and right their recent wrong-doing regarding gun rights in Connecticut.
Frankly the parents should be a lot more concerned with what the schools are putting in their children's heads.
This could be an argument for parents having "skin in the game", or "a dog in the fight". If parents were to pay a minimum supplimental tuition, say 1 or 2 hundred dollars per child in the school, then each school could take care of certain needs as deemed important by that school. Plus it wouldn't be another whack on the everyday taxpayer who is clearly not being served by the overall poor performance of schools around the country. Whether it is used for security, sports, music etc. It would be the parents choice, not some headline grabbing politician.