Should public schools be gun-free zones?

Legally registered guns are forbidden at most, but not all, public schools. These so-called “gun free zones” are hotly debated on both sides. Supporters of gun-free zones say they prevent gun violence because they prevent gun owners from accidently injuring themselves or their students. Additionally, they argue that well-meaning but untrained bystanders can accidently shoot the wrong person when trying to intervene during a shooting. On the other hand, opponents of gun-free school zones say that mass shooters will be undeterred by gun-free school zone policies and can only be stopped by armed bystanders. Most mass shootings, they say, have occurred in gun-free zones because the victims there are unable to defend themselves and stop the gunman. What do you think? Should public schools be gun-free zones?

Point:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/03/24/nras-gun-free-zone-myth–column/2015657/

Counterpoint:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425802/gun-free-zones-don’t-save-lives-right-to-carry-laws-do

 

Current Standings:
Yes: 43%
No: 57%
  • Alexander from New York

    There are officers and codes that take care of such problems. Allowing weaponry to be carried in schools freely is a recipe for disaster.

    1
  • Elizabeth from Missouri

    I think it should be a gun-free zone mainly because of the fact that I would still feel afraid. No matter who owns the gun, I would always be on edge knowing that there is a gun in the classroom. I go to a high school, and I don’t think that any of us are mature enough/able to handle a gun in the classroom. The only people I would trust are the teachers, but even they would need to be trained in order to use it properly and at that point, we’re not being taught by teachers, we’re being taught by soldiers. We can’t trust every person in the school with a gun, so why give them one? And sure, outside of school, in their personal homes, they can do/have what they want, but I just know I’d be uncomfortable bringing one to the classroom.

    [read less]

    I think it should be a gun-free zone mainly because of the fact that I would still feel afraid. No matter who owns the gun, I would always be on edge …

    [read more]
    0
  • Lauryn from Wisconsin

    Adolescents’ brains are not fully developed, students often make irrational instantaneous decisions. For example, in my 5th grade class I witnessed a student throw a chair at the instructor. He took the most harmful weapon in his immediate possesion and used it to injure someone, with guns present this injury could have been a mortality instead. I am a gunowner myself, however, I do not see why guns would ever been needed in a school setting. Many people make the argument that “the guns are the only way for the good guys to protect themselves.” This however, is not true. I am not one for going down without a fight but I also do not feel that a gun brawl would be the best option in a school shooting situation (which I assume is what you are reffering to.) Choas and possible injuries are more common when two guns are involved rather than one. With the current divide between citizens of the United States, and the animosity I do not believe a easily accessible weapon should be provided.

    [read less]

    Adolescents’ brains are not fully developed, students often make irrational instantaneous decisions. For example, in my 5th grade class I witnessed a …

    [read more]
    0
  • Angelina from California

    Children should not be carrying guns around school to “protect themselves”. When more people are given the resources to kill people, more people will kill. If to defend themselves, they need to murder someone they shouldn’t have that right. Especially being children, they could play around with it and accidently shoot their friends. Schools have rules and processes to protect the children in case of an emergency. Giving them guns would just cause more emergencies.

    [read less]

    Children should not be carrying guns around school to “protect themselves”. When more people are given the resources to kill people, more people w…

    [read more]
    0
  • Patricia from Hawaii

    Humans are naturally flawed. The flaws of humans could invoke an accident with weapons so easily accessible. The point of school is to learn and educate oneself, this should be a safe harbor where guns are not needed. Although some may say that guns provide protection, this is true to an extent, but the people who cannot afford or cannot hold guns (because of religion or other reasons) are unfairly at a disadvantage.

    [read less]

    Humans are naturally flawed. The flaws of humans could invoke an accident with weapons so easily accessible. The point of school is to learn and educa…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jonathan from North Carolina

    Yes of course they should be gun-free! I don’t want to come to school in fear thinking that someone in my class could have a gun and if someone else makes them mad they will possibly shoot me or them.

    [read less]

    Yes of course they should be gun-free! I don’t want to come to school in fear thinking that someone in my class could have a gun and if someone else m…

    [read more]
    0
  • Justin from New York

    It can easily be taken by a student. There are better ways to combat school violence, such as becoming educated in warning signs and counseling.

    0
  • Malcolm from Ohio

    Look at what happened at Ohio State. I want to go to Ohio State when I get older. I don’t want to be shot. I don’t care who you are, if you are not a cop, you should not have a gun at school.

    [read less]

    Look at what happened at Ohio State. I want to go to Ohio State when I get older. I don’t want to be shot. I don’t care who you are, if you are not…

    [read more]
    0
    • Christa from Montana

      Are you aware that the majority of shootings actually happen at supposed “gun-free zones”? Cops can’t be everywhere all the time and the same thing goes for campus police. And you do know a knife was used in the Ohio State incident, right? NOT a gun. Are you going to go around banning knives now, too? And then eventually baseball bats and frying pans?

      [read less]

      Are you aware that the majority of shootings actually happen at supposed “gun-free zones”? Cops can’t be everywhere all the time and the same thing g…

      [read more]
      0
    • hore'ha from Utah

      i totally aggree wit u

      0
    • morgan from Ohio

      Tell em Malcomb

      0
  • Aide from Florida

    Guns, sometimes used by the persons who commit horrific events, should not used by students and nevertheless given to students during school hours. Guns should not be used by any individual in which the lives of others are at risk,(e.g., movie theaters, schools, or any other public place). Guns need to be used only by those individuals who are experts in providing safety and the well-being of others, such as SROs.

    [read less]

    Guns, sometimes used by the persons who commit horrific events, should not used by students and nevertheless given to students during school hours. Gu…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brittany from Pennsylvania

    Yes, if someone on a campus can carry a firearm, even if they are licensed that doesn’t mean that it won’t get into the hands of someone who could do serious harm with it, I believe that there are better ways to combat violence in schools rather than giving access to a weapon.

    [read less]

    Yes, if someone on a campus can carry a firearm, even if they are licensed that doesn’t mean that it won’t get into the hands of someone who could do…

    [read more]
    0
    • Christa from Montana

      So if a known criminal (who’s recently murdered a dozen people in a school near yours and now has escaped custody) all of a sudden comes running into your classroom and starts waving a knife or a gun or whatever around, do you think your going to be able to just sweet-talk him out of killing your entire class? Sorry, but that won’t work. And going back to that scenario, what if your teacher is ex-military and knows how to handle himself and a gun, but because your school is a gun-free zone, he can’t carry and therefore your whole class is in jeopardy? Yeah, definitely won’t work.

      [read less]

      So if a known criminal (who’s recently murdered a dozen people in a school near yours and now has escaped custody) all of a sudden comes running into …

      [read more]
      0
  • Sabrina from Pennsylvania

    Call me a hippie if you want, but I don’t think anyone should ever have a gun, much less at school (Any type of school). Violence only leads to more violence. I’m not saying you can sweat talk your way out of a situation, but that doesn’t mean to fight back and in turn end someone else’s life. You’re no better than them. Murder is murder, no matter who commits it. Gun free zones don’t completely stop school shootings (And other location shootings), but it does cut down on the levels of people shooting others.

    [read less]

    Call me a hippie if you want, but I don’t think anyone should ever have a gun, much less at school (Any type of school). Violence only leads to more v…

    [read more]
    -1
    • Sabrina from Pennsylvania

      Christa,

      well, no, its not necessary, because you can choose not to fight back. And if no one fought back, there would be no fighting at all, and it starts one person at a time. Like I said, Violence only leads to more violence. Take the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand for example. it was one of the reasons why World War 2 started. People fought back and look where that took us; one of the worst, if not the worst, war in history. And its like that all over history. Now, I’m not saying that all wars and conflicts were started like that, but the majority actually were… Even the American Revolution was started because the British got defensive. They were the ones who started the war, not the Colonists. There was a quote from them (I forget who specifically said it) but it was something like this: “Let the first bullet to fly be not from us.”

      They did not want to be responsible for the start of a war. if you think about it, They, before England got defensive, the Colonists only used peaceful approaches to “fighting” the King. But the violence started by England (Great Britain), was what started the war in the first place, not the Colonists. So being self defensive, and fighting violence with violence is a choice, not a necessity.

      [read less]

      Christa,

      well, no, its not necessary, because you can choose not to fight back. And if no one fought back, there would be no fighting at all, and it…

      [read more]
      0
    • Aide Araceli from Florida

      You state murder is murder and although I am not in favor of students or teachers having control over a firearm, murder does not involve just the killing of another, since murder can also be done in self-defense.

      [read less]

      You state murder is murder and although I am not in favor of students or teachers having control over a firearm, murder does not involve just the kill…

      [read more]
      0
    • Christa from Montana

      You said murder is murder, no matter who commits it. If it doesn’t matter who commits it, it’s always just as bad, then why were prophets in the Old Testament commanded BY GOD to slay people that disobeyed Him? I know it’s kind of a different situation, but the reasoning that you’re using would apply to that as well. The thing is, there’s ALWAYS going to be violence, and self-defense IS necessary. If that wasn’t true, then the whole world would be in complete chaos and destruction and would be controlled by control-happy literal psychopaths. Besides, the Constitution was founded on principals that God gave us like the one above (not necessarily exactly like it, but still something similar), and for a reason. Our Founding Fathers knew what they were doing. The reasoning you’re using would also eventually mean no consequences whatsoever for the bad things people do.

      [read less]

      You said murder is murder, no matter who commits it. If it doesn’t matter who commits it, it’s always just as bad, then why were prophets in the Old …

      [read more]
      0
  • Kate from Pennsylvania

    The statement “This is a gun free zone, you can’t take a gun here” will only be obeyed by law abiding citizens who have guns for protection and will be disregarded by anyone who would do harm with a gun. This makes gun free zones more dangerous because you disarm the people who need to defend themselves while guaranteeing a criminal the ability to harm people without the possibility of being harmed themselves. I don’t believe there should be gun free zones at all because people should always be able to defend themselves and anyone who will do harm with a gun, will do so with or without the zone being gun free.

    [read less]

    The statement “This is a gun free zone, you can’t take a gun here” will only be obeyed by law abiding citizens who have guns for protection and will b…

    [read more]
    3
  • Christa from Montana

    If you take the guns away from the good guys you’re taking away the only chance for law abiding citizens in schools to protect themselves. In case you didn’t know, criminals don’t follow the law anyway, so they will always have a gun. Sure, once in a while accident’s can happen, but the teachers or whoever it is that would have the guns are people who have gone through classes that prepare them for handling a firearm when necessary.
    In the second Amendment it clearly tells us that we have the privilege to bear arms. That principle should be extended to schools as well, for the reasons above.
    Also, did you know that the majority of shootings happed in supposed “gun-free zones”? So much for safety. It’s only common sense to allow teachers and the like to protect themselves.

    [read less]

    If you take the guns away from the good guys you’re taking away the only chance for law abiding citizens in schools to protect themselves. In case yo…

    [read more]
    1
  • Russ from Georgia

    15 of the last 20 worst mass shootings on school campuses in history were AFTER this law was passed.

    0
  • Konnor from North Carolina

    The concept of a “gun-free zone” does not necessarily need to be applied to a school. You should not be carrying guns into a school anyway. Whether a school is or is not a gun free zone will not stop students or any other individual from bringing a firearm on campus. Those who bring guns onto a school campus does so with the intent of discharging it upon the school’s inhabitants. The only exception I can find is if a teacher keeps a gun in his or her desk for self-defense purposes. Overall, “gun-free zones” are not needed in the grand scheme of things.

    [read less]

    The concept of a “gun-free zone” does not necessarily need to be applied to a school. You should not be carrying guns into a school anyway. Whether a …

    [read more]
    0
  • Gideon from Oklahoma

    I go to a school in Tulsa Public Schools and uniforms suck. Everybody hates them and they have no true purpose. It’s just a communist plot to take away our individuality.

    0
  • Clay from Colorado

    Guns in schools like mine are almost a necesitty. My school is located in between for potato fields and is at least twenty five to thirty minutes away from any town or emergency response center. Because of this, it takes at a minimum for authorities to get to, not act, but just get to my school in ten minutes. We have had many school lock downs, some being real. Fortunately the person that threatens our school did not have access to a gun. However what if next we aren’t so lucky and the person has a gun and has more time because of the delayed response time. This is were, I as a student, would feel more comfortable with teachers carrying guns in order to protect us until authorities arrive.

    [read less]

    Guns in schools like mine are almost a necesitty. My school is located in between for potato fields and is at least twenty five to thirty minutes away…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jakub from New Jersey

    I think when encountered with the threat of force it is better to not be a sitting duck, but have the ability to fight back.

    0
  • Tiffany from Maryland

    The 2nd amendment to our constitution states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This claims that as people or as people of the United States of America, we have the right to carry guns and it ought (in a statement of morality) not be taken away. If schools become gun-free zones, this right of the people will be taken away, as guns or “arms” will not be allowed on school grounds. Thus making gun-free zones unconstitutional, due to “infringing of the right of the people to keep and bear Arms.” .I understand some might argue that having a gun-free zone on school premises will ensure the safety of others. However, not being able to have a gun on school grounds takes away the guns of the people and moreover the rights of the people. Taking the rights of the people in a Democratic state does not ensure the safety of the people. The Bill of Rights was added to our constitution to protect the rights of the people. Making schools a gun-free zone goes does not protect the right of the people to bear arms. Thus concluding that gun-free zones should not be implemented. Furthermore, schools should not be a gun-free zone in order to protect the rights of the people.

    [read less]

    The 2nd amendment to our constitution states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This claims that as people or as…

    [read more]
    0
  • Laura from Texas

    A gun is used however the person owning it uses it. Thus if we make it so they are gun free, then that means those areas are free from the guns that would protect them since the guns that would harm people dont follow the rules anyway.

    [read less]

    A gun is used however the person owning it uses it. Thus if we make it so they are gun free, then that means those areas are free from the guns that w…

    [read more]
    0
  • Laura from North Carolina

    If they try and make schools a gun free zone the outcome will most likely be the same as tobacco and drug free schools. Even though these rules are put into place people still bring tobacco and drugs to campus. This is just another rule that is bound to be broken, so why spend the money on this cause?

    [read less]

    If they try and make schools a gun free zone the outcome will most likely be the same as tobacco and drug free schools. Even though these rules are pu…

    [read more]
    0
  • Katelyn from New Hampshire

    If a teacher, who has a license to carry, has a gun with them they can protect students better from harm. They can defend the classroom to an unwanted guest, school shooter or a harmful animal and make students feel safe and protected.

    [read less]

    If a teacher, who has a license to carry, has a gun with them they can protect students better from harm. They can defend the classroom to an unwanted…

    [read more]
    0
    • Patricia from Hawaii

      True, but this could go both ways. Human are naturally flawed, what if the teacher makes an error of judgement and shoots someone. The statistic of people being shot may seem huge, but the population has increased as well. It may make some students feel more protected but as I said it could go both ways and it may make students more uncomfortable. I think this is a very serious conundrum. Perhaps a more humane weapon of choice could be a tranquilizer gun. A gun vs. a tranquilizer gun will not change the outcome of a gunshot wound.

      [read less]

      True, but this could go both ways. Human are naturally flawed, what if the teacher makes an error of judgement and shoots someone. The statistic of pe…

      [read more]
      0
  • Charles from North Carolina

    The constitution is clear: citizens of the United States have the right to gun ownership. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    However, the right to bear arms does not mean the right to bear arms whenever or wherever without restriction. Just as there are limitations on free speech – you can’t yell fire in a theater – there are restrictions on carrying guns. Schools are places of learning, and the safety of students should be the number one priority. At the very least, introducing guns into a school environment would increase the chance for danger through accident.

    Instead of relying on guns for defense at schools, we should rely on our police. At my school, we have multiple law enforcement officers permanently there. This is a far better solution to any potential hazards at schools. The united states constitution defends the right to bear arms, but we should exercise caution before allowing guns into schools.

    [read less]

    The constitution is clear: citizens of the United States have the right to gun ownership. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security o…

    [read more]
    0
    • Charles from North Carolina

      Hit the wrong button. This should be under the yes section

      0
  • Jaky from North Carolina

    Yes, they should have guns because that way they will protect students and themselves and it might lower the number of people hurt in a school shooting.

    0
    • Patricia from Hawaii

      It seems a popular belief is that teachers are there to protect. But unfortunately humans are flawed creatures. We cannot put all our faith in teachers. What if teachers do not feel comfortable with guns? Will people choose classes based on teachers who do or do not own guns. This leads to a closing off, people align themselves with their beliefs and therefore keep learning from a person of similar ideas. the point of school is to expand your horizons. Although it might lower the amount of people hurt, reversely, it can make guns more accesible. And if people say that it will be securely away, how will they reach the gun in time? What if we allow students? The question was not just about teachers but if schools should be allowed to have guns. And then we have to factor in price. Some people cannot afford this protection. This perpetuates the inequality levels that are seen in school. People should be promoting learning. Although there does seem to be more school shootings, if school shootings did not occur, something else equally as bad would occur. We trade one thing for another, that is the flaw of humans.

      [read less]

      It seems a popular belief is that teachers are there to protect. But unfortunately humans are flawed creatures. We cannot put all our faith in teacher…

      [read more]
      0
    • Patricia from Hawaii

      The amount of people killed in school shootings vs people alive is minuscule. The numbers seem huge because of inflation. Articles don’t post about students who weren’t shot. Although guns could prevent those injured. It could also be taken by people to cause more harm. I have met teachers who are not capable of these choices. Humans are born flawed. Perhaps a more humane weapon of choice could be a tranquilizer gun. A gun vs. a tranquilizer gun will not change the outcome of a gunshot wound.

      [read less]

      The amount of people killed in school shootings vs people alive is minuscule. The numbers seem huge because of inflation. Articles don’t post about st…

      [read more]
      0
  • Kat from Virginia

    No, guns held by teachers help protect students.

    0
    • Patricia from Hawaii

      Perhaps a compromise. A tranquilizer gun. This is not a deathly weapon, but can certainly help protect a person. It would be hard to regulate guns in schools. What caliber, what model? What about price inflation? Perhaps a more humane weapon of choice could be a tranquilizer gun. A gun vs. a tranquilizer gun will not change the outcome of a gunshot wound.

      [read less]

      Perhaps a compromise. A tranquilizer gun. This is not a deathly weapon, but can certainly help protect a person. It would be hard to regulate guns in …

      [read more]
      0
    • Claritza from New York

      I do not think that teachers should own guns even if it is to protect their students and themselves. The reason why I feel this way is because of the safety and security of the guns while the teachers are in school. I know teachers that leave their phones out; what if they left a gun out and a student took it? This is a huge risk and not worth it.

      [read less]

      I do not think that teachers should own guns even if it is to protect their students and themselves. The reason why I feel this way is because of the …

      [read more]
      0
  • Fawne from South Carolina

    that is going to stop ppl that want to act senseless and shoot up schools stop because they may not live just across the street!!

    -2
    • Juan from California

      I disagree we can’t force a student to change we need to help them and by making teachers have guns does not guarantee that it will stop I am going to say that it is better for teachers and student to not carry any gun because we can’t put our full trust on teachers maybe a student can take it away somehow.

      [read less]

      I disagree we can’t force a student to change we need to help them and by making teachers have guns does not guarantee that it will stop I am going to…

      [read more]
      0