The Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Shooting

[Quick Ben]

I don't think there would be that much of a decrease to be honest. Most of these shootings tend to end with the person committing suicide. They aren't very caring about facing resistance.

How would we know that?

[Oniya]

How would we know that?

By talking to them.

So, when I was sifting through the links on Glyph's earlier Cracked article on 'when the NRA lost its shit', I spotted another article where the author had reached out to an ex IRA-bomber, as well as a person who was stopped from becoming a school shooter.  It was - quite thought provoking, as it addresses not only the usual assumptions people make about these individuals, but comes up with an actual thing that they have in common.

Humiliation.

People who perceive this as their last option to 'be someone' - even if it's a 'bad someone'.

[Quick Ben]

By talking to them.

I'm not against health-screenings or the possibilities of intervention and proactivity in developmental psychology that might allow us to recognize warning signs and provide help for disturbed individuals.

The article mentioned makes a lot of broad claims that the author assumes as popular myths. What makes them myths? Who said they were myths? Who made these particular claims that Cracked.com considers a myth in the first place?

There's a lot of hypothetical elements in the article's premise without much more to go on outside of quotes from transparently mentally disturbed individuals. A mentally deranged individual isn't exactly what I'd call a reliable source of information. Granted, I'm not of the belief that you have to be mentally ill to commit murder or a mass shooting. However, there's something not exactly ideal going on in that sort of mental process.

What we still haven't addressed is that almost all of these school shootings occur in places where guns are not allowed. We have no idea how actions and thoughts may change if it were a regular thing for shooters to be immediately shot back at. There's insufficient data in the United States regarding this point.

[Flower]

That's fair. I can see the logic and even agree with it.


Gonna make schools feel even more like prison but it has to be down. Although it presents the problem of someone just using a 3d printed plastic gun to sneak it past the detectors but we are 50 years from having to worry about that.

There is also the issue of privacy. If bags need to an inspected it can lead to students feeling a loss of control.

We had metal detectors and security guards in my high school (I can't recall if they were armed or not). Searches (both with trained dogs and sometimes a quick pat down) happen from time to time as well.

You get used to it.

If a loss of control prevents massacres, I'm all for it.

That solution could help schools but I know there would be resistance. What works in a poor area of Chicago might not be accepted in a more upper class area.

[Avis habilis]

What we still haven't addressed is that almost all of these school shootings occur in places where guns are not allowed. We have no idea how actions and thoughts may change if it were a regular thing for shooters to be immediately shot back at.

Except we have. The locations are chosen because that's where the shooters experienced their perceived slights, at least in the case of school shooters. (Yet again, we know this from interviewing the ones that survived to be questioned.) Their actions wouldn't change, first because the location is what it is regardless of whether weapons are permitted there, & second because as has already been pointed out they don't go into this intending to survive.

[Quick Ben]

So you'd rather have everyone, including people with even less training be given full access to firearms?

I wasn't suggesting any sort of standard for what would constitute sufficient training with a gun.  I was saying that NO amount of training can prepare ANYONE for an active shooter situation that is very likely to turn into kill or be killed.

Psychological testing of the teacher has been mentioned, but you also have to find teachers who are going to be willing and able to put a bullet into another human being.  Even in self-defense that isn't easy for a lot of people to do.

I proposed a two part solution previously, but I'll repeat it now: make school areas gun-free zones enforced with metal detectors, and start working on longer-term solutions regarding mental health screening / treatment and reduced access to guns. If armed shooters can't get onto the campus in the first place there's no need to worry about dissuading them psychologically with teachers who may or may not be armed.

Yes. I'm generally not worried about the people who legally go about the process of acquiring a gun.

Also, the GFZA was enacted in 1990, and updated in 1996. Most of the countries school shootings have occurred after this measure. Enough for a correlation? Hard to say. I don't see how a metal detector would work either, especially if it's on a gun-free zone then there would be nothing to stop said shooter from just opening fire on everyone waiting in line.

[Quick Ben]

Except we have. The locations are chosen because that's where the shooters experienced their perceived slights, at least in the case of school shooters. (Yet again, we know this from interviewing the ones that survived to be questioned.) Their actions wouldn't change, first because the location is what it is regardless of whether weapons are permitted there, & second because as has already been pointed out they don't go into this intending to survive.

Interviewing a mentally deranged individual isn't exactly the strongest piece of evidence. If we're going to play the psychology game, we can say most of them are going in to avenge those slights and grant themselves a measure of power and glory by establishing dominance over their unarmed peers who slighted them.

I want to take away that power by turning the barrel of the gun toward their direction.

[Lustful Bride]

Interviewing a mentally deranged individual isn't exactly the strongest piece of evidence. If we're going to play the psychology game, we can say most of them are going in to avenge those slights and grant themselves a measure of power and glory by establishing dominance over their unarmed peers who slighted them.

To defeat anything, we must first understand it.

[SweetSerenade]

Interviewing a mentally deranged individual isn't exactly the strongest piece of evidence. If we're going to play the psychology game, we can say most of them are going in to avenge those slights and grant themselves a measure of power and glory by establishing dominance over their unarmed peers who slighted them.

I want to take away that power by turning the barrel of the gun toward their direction.

I don't usually jump in on stuff like this, but I want to make it known that interviewing and classifying a wide range of individuals is literally what Psychology is about. Through repeated sessions of discussion on situations, a Psychologist is capable of gathering the information they need for studies to be done about different issues within the human psyche. If we are playing the Psychology game, asking these school shooters (the ones that survived) why they did it is actually a very valid and acceptable reaction. Just because you consider someone to be 'mentally deranged' doesn't discount that they had a very real reason for doing what they did.

I have grown up in a day and age with multiple school shootings, I went to High School not long after Columbine, and yes there is a common thread. The perceived slights against several of the individuals weren't actually perceived, there are several school shootings that happened as a direct relation to repeated (often years long) bullying that was not being taking care of by administration.

The issue that needs to be addressed here is not whether or not the information is 'valid' or accurate, because while you might personally feel that such interviews are invalid for your own reasons - as someone that is Majoring in Psychology and might very well be Specializing in Criminal Psychology... (Basically I want to become a Profiler) - the information presented cannot be ignored.

Someone else mentioned that the common thread between most School Shooters - those interviewed that survived - was Humiliation. These are often people who are swept under the rug by their schools, who are repeatedly ignored in their attempts to seek help to get passed the people who are hurting them. Sometimes the mind fractures and someone has an extremely aggressive reaction to repeatedly being ignored when seeking help from adults, when the adults fail you sometimes the developing teen mind only has one thing in mind "Someone has to suffer as much as I have"

So there is multiple issues in this situation.
1.) The easy access to guns by people who shouldn't have access to them. (Personally I love the way Japan handles Gun ownership)
2.) The fact that we need a better standing Mental Health care system.
3.) In the instance where Bullies ARE the reason why a school shooting happens we need to make sure that the BULLIES (if alive) are punished as well, because it was their repeated actions - after being made aware that they were not welcome to do what they were - that caused the situation to happen. In my mind the Bullies of School Shooters should be held just as much as responsible. Mind you this is running on the assumption that the School Shooter who did because of their bullies - wouldn't have done it if they weren't being bullied.

[Quick Ben]

To defeat anything, we must first understand it.

Agreed, but restricting my means or anyone else's means of defense in the face of threat is not the answer.

[Valerian]

Yes. I'm generally not worried about the people who legally go about the process of acquiring a gun.

Except over 80% of weapons used in mass shootings were legally obtained.

[Quick Ben]

I don't usually jump in on stuff like this, but I want to make it known that interviewing and classifying a wide range of individuals is literally what Psychology is about. Through repeated sessions of discussion on situations, a Psychologist is capable of gathering the information they need for studies to be done about different issues within the human psyche. If we are playing the Psychology game, asking these school shooters (the ones that survived) why they did it is actually a very valid and acceptable reaction. Just because you consider someone to be 'mentally deranged' doesn't discount that they had a very real reason for doing what they did.

I have grown up in a day and age with multiple school shootings, I went to High School not long after Columbine, and yes there is a common thread. The perceived slights against several of the individuals weren't actually perceived, there are several school shootings that happened as a direct relation to repeated (often years long) bullying that was not being taking care of by administration.

The issue that needs to be addressed here is not whether or not the information is 'valid' or accurate, because while you might personally feel that such interviews are invalid for your own reasons - as someone that is Majoring in Psychology and might very well be Specializing in Criminal Psychology... (Basically I want to become a Profiler) - the information presented cannot be ignored.

Someone else mentioned that the common thread between most School Shooters - those interviewed that survived - was Humiliation. These are often people who are swept under the rug by their schools, who are repeatedly ignored in their attempts to seek help to get passed the people who are hurting them. Sometimes the mind fractures and someone has an extremely aggressive reaction to repeatedly being ignored when seeking help from adults, when the adults fail you sometimes the developing teen mind only has one thing in mind "Someone has to suffer as much as I have"

So there is multiple issues in this situation.
1.) The easy access to guns by people who shouldn't have access to them. (Personally I love the way Japan handles Gun ownership)
2.) The fact that we need a better standing Mental Health care system.
3.) In the instance where Bullies ARE the reason why a school shooting happens we need to make sure that the BULLIES (if alive) are punished as well, because it was their repeated actions - after being made aware that they were not welcome to do what they were - that caused the situation to happen. In my mind the Bullies of School Shooters should be held just as much as responsible. Mind you this is running on the assumption that the School Shooter who did because of their bullies - wouldn't have done it if they weren't being bullied.

It's of the utmost importance that everything anyone says be investigated for validity and accuracy. I'm not advocating that we take statements from shooters and ignore, I'm for taking what they say and what anyone else says with a grain of salt. Skepticism should always be within our arsenal when making crucial judgment calls.

I'd also like to point out that there's a great number of people who have suffered, been bullied, and never resorted to murder or a mass shooting to express their rage. What makes up for the difference in reaction?

And I cannot at all get behind that final statement. What bullying amounts to is different depending on who you ask, and if we're going to draw an equivalence between a person who repeatedly makes a mean-spirited comment to someone who murders people then count me out.

[SweetSerenade]

That's fine, you don't have to get behind what I believe. But I truly believe, after being subjected to multiple forms of bullying, that the bully is just as responsible for what results as the person who does the damage. Because that individual may never have stepped down that pathway without the influence of the bully in their lives.

Furthermore, you pointed out the great number of people who have suffered who have not resulted in school shootings - that is correct, but that is also because you aren't taking suicide statistics into account. There are varying factors to reactions to bullying. The propensity to survive from bullying, without turning to those factors, is the support network around an individual. There are those who can survive bullying because they have good support or a good way to cope with what is happening. Then again, there are those who go the attack route and lash out at those who have hurt them and those that lash out at themselves because their bullies have pushed them to the point of suicide.

You are looking at a narrowed field of data, and the fact of the matter is the sample of data we have is inconclusive as it is very difficult to do the kind of studies needed to find out the true ramifications (whether violent outburst, self-harm (as victims of bullying often do)/Suicide, or people capable of pushing it off and moving on) of the situation that has happened. So a lot of what we are working with has to be conjecture, or piecing together based off of personal views. In my eyes the bullies are just as at fault as those who lashed out against the people who were hurting them.

[Sebile]

I've noticed the 'guns vs no guns' as far as teachers carrying but there hasn't been any mention (from what I've read) of other alternatives to combat a person with a gun. The US Army uses Combatives training to counter a person with a knife or a gun, and there's also taser guns with a reach of 15 feet that could be used. Granted I understand some teachers may not be able to undergo such training for one reason or another. Not to mention funding, which leads me to my next comment.

A lot of schools are lacking not just in supplies and their teachers underpaid but the buildings themselves are not equipped to handle these situations. Someone mentioned that schools may feel like a prison? I went to public schools, and personally, it felt like prison even then. We had cameras throughout the building and security guards at the doors. You couldn't carry a backpack anywhere but to your locker, so a lot of times you had to carry all your books throughout the day because of the lack of time between classes to return to the locker and still make it to class on time. Certain attire wasn't permitted as it could hide larger weapons. Not to mention the food was garbage but still food, if you could even afford to buy it for 2.50 (now 3.00 USD). This was on top of paying for your public classes and any other after school activities because the school was (and is) so poorly funded, and if you couldn't pay? No graduating. It is a prison and prisons at least have procedures to contain situations. The school building wouldn't be able to handle a shooter situation, which would leave kids and teachers as sitting ducks behind locked, wood by-product doors. There was also no alert system to let the student body and staff know of the situation like a number of college campuses do. Some of the first-floor classrooms that are larger (like the art rooms) have exit doors but the second floor? No way to get out besides entering the hallway, marching down the stairs, and out the fire exit doors. Hell, some schools in the US didn't have heat during the winter or AC in the hot summers, yet the kids are still made to go to school and endure. It's disgusting.

Also, I think more counseling is needed in schools and not just the ones that ask you what your next step toward the future is in terms of colleges or work. Which circles back to funding. The US spends a fortune on its military but if you are worried about the future, we damn sure are leaving our kids to fend for themselves. Like does anyone know if these survivors are going to get any sort of professional counseling or are they going to be forced to just 'suck it up and drive on' as if they are soldiers in war? It's a scarring experience.

As for 'punishing' the bullies of school shooters, why not punish the parents? These are children, after all, and some of these shooters are not 18.

[Quick Ben]

Except over 80% of weapons used in mass shootings were legally obtained.

And yet most gun crimes are not committed by the original purchaser. Focusing on the school shootings and only the school shootings doesn't make for a wholly accurate picture on the conversation of gun ownership.

I'm all for criticizing loopholes and lapses on background checks and mental screening. Faulty enforcement is an issue. Also, it's interesting to point out that the San Bernandino case was a straw purchase which isn't legal. So, following on this line of logic that it's more difficult to lie on background check sheets and mental health screenings - what is to stop the straw purchase? They're already illegal and practically impossible to track and prevent from happening.

[Quick Ben]

I've noticed the 'guns vs no guns' as far as teachers carrying but there hasn't been any mention (from what I've read) of other alternatives to combat a person with a gun. The US Army uses Combatives training to counter a person with a knife or a gun, and there's also taser guns with a reach of 15 feet that could be used. Granted I understand some teachers may not be able to undergo such training for one reason or another. Not to mention funding, which leads me to my next comment.

A lot of schools are lacking not just in supplies and their teachers underpaid but the buildings themselves are not equipped to handle these situations. Someone mentioned that schools may feel like a prison? I went to public schools, and personally, it felt like prison even then. We had cameras throughout the building and security guards at the doors. You couldn't carry a backpack anywhere but to your locker, so a lot of times you had to carry all your books throughout the day because of the lack of time between classes to return to the locker and still make it to class on time. Certain attire wasn't permitted as it could hide larger weapons. Not to mention the food was garbage but still food, if you could even afford to buy it for 2.50 (now 3.00 USD). This was on top of paying for your public classes and any other after school activities because the school was (and is) so poorly funded, and if you couldn't pay? No graduating. It is a prison and prisons at least have procedures to contain situations. The school building wouldn't be able to handle a shooter situation, which would leave kids and teachers as sitting ducks behind locked, wood by-product doors. There was also no alert system to let the student body and staff know of the situation like a number of college campuses do. Some of the first-floor classrooms that are larger (like the art rooms) have exit doors but the second floor? No way to get out besides entering the hallway, marching down the stairs, and out the fire exit doors. Hell, some schools in the US didn't have heat during the winter or AC in the hot summers, yet the kids are still made to go to school and endure. It's disgusting.

Also, I think more counseling is needed in schools and not just the ones that ask you what your next step toward the future is in terms of colleges or work. Which circles back to funding. The US spends a fortune on its military but if you are worried about the future, we damn sure are leaving our kids to fend for themselves. Like does anyone know if these survivors are going to get any sort of professional counseling or are they going to be forced to just 'suck it up and drive on' as if they are soldiers in war? It's a scarring experience.

As for 'punishing' the bullies of school shooters, why not punish the parents? These are children, after all, and some of these shooters are not 18.

How do you even begin to propose going about with such an action?

The parents did not pull that trigger; what then, would their crime supposedly be?

[SweetSerenade]

I've noticed the 'guns vs no guns' as far as teachers carrying but there hasn't been any mention (from what I've read) of other alternatives to combat a person with a gun. The US Army uses Combatives training to counter a person with a knife or a gun, and there's also taser guns with a reach of 15 feet that could be used. Granted I understand some teachers may not be able to undergo such training for one reason or another. Not to mention funding, which leads me to my next comment.

A lot of schools are lacking not just in supplies and their teachers underpaid but the buildings themselves are not equipped to handle these situations. Someone mentioned that schools may feel like a prison? I went to public schools, and personally, it felt like prison even then. We had cameras throughout the building and security guards at the doors. You couldn't carry a backpack anywhere but to your locker, so a lot of times you had to carry all your books throughout the day because of the lack of time between classes to return to the locker and still make it to class on time. Certain attire wasn't permitted as it could hide larger weapons. Not to mention the food was garbage but still food, if you could even afford to buy it for 2.50 (now 3.00 USD). This was on top of paying for your public classes and any other after school activities because the school was (and is) so poorly funded, and if you couldn't pay? No graduating. It is a prison and prisons at least have procedures to contain situations. The school building wouldn't be able to handle a shooter situation, which would leave kids and teachers as sitting ducks behind locked, wood by-product doors. There was also no alert system to let the student body and staff know of the situation like a number of college campuses do. Some of the first-floor classrooms that are larger (like the art rooms) have exit doors but the second floor? No way to get out besides entering the hallway, marching down the stairs, and out the fire exit doors. Hell, some schools in the US didn't have heat during the winter or AC in the hot summers, yet the kids are still made to go to school and endure. It's disgusting.

Also, I think more counseling is needed in schools and not just the ones that ask you what your next step toward the future is in terms of colleges or work. Which circles back to funding. The US spends a fortune on its military but if you are worried about the future, we damn sure are leaving our kids to fend for themselves. Like does anyone know if these survivors are going to get any sort of professional counseling or are they going to be forced to just 'suck it up and drive on' as if they are soldiers in war? It's a scarring experience.

As for 'punishing' the bullies of school shooters, why not punish the parents? These are children, after all, and some of these shooters are not 18.

I can wholly agree that most Public schools are like prisons. I attended one such location in North Portland, where police presence on campus was very common due to it being in a 'troubled' neighborhood.

I also wholly agree that the counseling available at schools is lacking, but the biggest issue in increasing appropriate counseling is appropriate funding for such things. If the US as a whole decided to value education above other endeavors (Do we really need all those expensive Jets and Tanks?) that would be the best way to shift the focus and help produce a healthier environment.

The only thing I disagree with is the fact that if the children who do turn into School Shooters can be charged as adults, why do we not punish those that pushed them to those points? I might be misreading what you said, but that's what I'm taking from it based on what you wrote. To be honest I think parents should be held more accountable for their children's inability to be functioning adults.

We are supposed to be responsible for the generations that are coming after us, but with the major mix of parenting styles - or just completely lack therof - we end up with a variety of High Schoolers who are in varying degrees of mental facilities. Because of my courses I do understand that the High School Years can be very difficult, especially when adequate applications of support systems - or a functioning home life - are not present. The generations that need the most protecting, the most help, are being left to flounder on their own. As a whole the way things are handled in schools is deplorable, and better applications of protection for all students need to be applied. It's not kids will be kids, or anything like that. It's helping them understand that they are in a formative time of their lives, and what they do will have major impacts on their life as adults.

[Oniya]

As with most situations, there's unlikely to be a single aspect that 'fixes' the problem.  We've got numerous factors here.

1) Accessible modifications that turn a reasonable piece of sporting or self-defense equipment into something close to full-auto.
2) The nearly inescapable reach of bullies (at least when I was in school, you could come home and be away from your school tormentors) through social media.
3) Inaccessibility of counseling and/or psychiatric help for many people in dealing with these and other issues.

And there are probably others.

[Sebile]

How do you even begin to propose going about with such an action?

The parents did not pull that trigger; what then, would their crime supposedly be?

It could be any number of things that have their child killing other children, but if it was bullying by other children, where have the parents (of the shooters) been all this time? There is negligence. I've known a number of kids that have complained of being bullied and the parents have taken action and contacted the school, some even moved or removed from public schooling, but there are some that have done nothing and even ridiculed the child. That can lead to other issues that compound matters. If they don't have parents? What is the state doing to ensure this child is healthy, wholly? The minor is the parents' responsibility, shouldn't they be held accountable?

As for the legalities of carrying out such, I'm not quite sure but I don't think any of these kids (bullies, the bullied, bystander) are fully to blame.

@Sweet - No, you got it and I apologize that my wording wasn't clear enough.  I think the parents, as you've said, should be held more accountable.

[SweetSerenade]

It could be any number of things that have their child killing other children, but if it was bullying by other children, where have the parents (of the shooters) been all this time? There is negligence. I've known a number of kids that have complained of being bullied and the parents have taken action and contacted the school, some even moved or removed from public schooling, but there are some that have done nothing and even ridiculed the child. That can lead to other issues that compound matters. If they don't have parents? What is the state doing to ensure this child is healthy, wholly? The minor is the parents' responsibility, shouldn't they be held accountable?

As for the legalities of carrying out such, I'm not quite sure but I don't think any of these kids (bullies, the bullied, bystander) are fully to blame.

@Sweet - No, you got it and I apologize that my wording wasn't clear enough.  I think the parents, as you've said, should be held more accountable.

I think the parents of both the bullied and bullies should be held more accountable. As a student that was bullied I can tell you that telling the adults did little to nothing especially after I was in my second senior year and 18. My mother and stepfather couldn't do anything to get the bullies to stop, we'd been trying for years to get the bullying to stop. The problem was the parents of the bullies weren't holding their precious little 'children' responsible for actions that if commited as an adult would result in jail time.

If there is a pattern of neglect from the shooters parents, that's one thing - but in the instances of parents working hard to do what they can (moving schools is a REALLY hard thing to do if you are low income, and getting into a situation where you may have to move an entire family because bullies just won't stop, is not a pleasant situation). I think the only time that the bullying every stopped was when I threatened to press charges against the schools Quarterback for pressing me into a locker and asking me if I liked being fucked rough - mind you, I was at the time in full belief I was a Lesbian (and he knew this). It was only at that point did the Principal step in and take matters 'into hand'. The guy was suspended for a week, and I was given ISS for wearing 'innapropriate clothing' that drew the attention upon me(Mind you my outfit was fully within school conduct! White button up with rolled up sleeves, only two buttons undone due to the heat - and a pair of shorts that touched my knees.).

Our school systems as a whole are bereft with situations like this. Now mind you, I get what I am saying is annecdotal evidence, it's just my situations and the things I've experienced and seen first hand. But the biggest problem with trying to address the bullying issue is that the victims don't feel like anyone is truly listening to them. They ask for help and are told a varying degree of 'suck it up' or 'that's not really what's happening'. The only time schools really step up their game is if charges are threatened, and often the victim is pressured into not pressing charges.

[Sebile]

@Sweet- What you wore shouldn't have even been an issue, he was completely out of line, not to mention appalling. A week is like a slap on the wrist, though to not get off topic, cause I could certainly rant on, I agree. Granted I know money is an issue and healthcare an even bigger one - so what would happen if a child does come forward needing help but the parent(s) can't afford it or doesn't know what to do? By no means is there an easy or instant fix. I think even if guns were banned, they are just a tool in a toolbox. If a child (or anyone for that matter) wants to inflict harm on others and has full intention to do so, there are other tools, even with one less.

[Oniya]

@Sweet- What you wore shouldn't have even been an issue, he was completely out of line, not to mention appalling. A week is like a slap on the wrist, though to not get off topic, cause I could certainly rant on, I agree. Granted I know money is an issue and healthcare an even bigger one - so what would happen if a child does come forward needing help but the parent(s) can't afford it or doesn't know what to do? By no means is there an easy or instant fix. I think even if guns were banned, they are just a tool in a toolbox. If a child (or anyone for that matter) wants to inflict harm on others and has full intention to do so, there are other tools, even with one less.

Our high school actually has a social worker on call that was able to help us.  We're in a Title I district, so they're used to seeing situations like this, but we didn't know until one of the guidance counselors told us one was available.

[TheGlyphstone]

Thinking off a comment from one of my co-workers - what if teachers were given Tasers instead of guns? A less-lethal incapacitating option seems like it would mitigate, though not eliminate, some of the risks of an armed campus, but that is purely an off-the-cuff reaction.

[HairyHeretic]

http://time.com/5174139/delta-united-airlines-nra-boycott/

I hadn't heard about a boycott, but it will be interesting to see what happens.

On the subject of armed teachers, I saw a post on facebook yesterday along the lines of "Would you want to be a (young) black teacher with a gun when the police arrive?"

[Lustful Bride]

Thinking off a comment from one of my co-workers - what if teachers were given Tasers instead of guns? A less-lethal incapacitating option seems like it would mitigate, though not eliminate, some of the risks of an armed campus, but that is purely an off-the-cuff reaction.

Hmm...I think I could like that more. It seems more reasonable and I feel that a less lethal option also removes some of the risk of dangers in class.