Armed resistance an option at schools
To the editor:
After the recent terrible school massacre in Connecticut, a presidential committee has been formed to develop solutions to the problem. In addition to tougher gun laws — the usual government solution — they are discussing new ways of dealing with disturbed people and more safety in school buildings. These are all worthwhile ideas but they still lack any measures that would deal with the immediate problem of what to do what a deranged shooter is already in the building.
In the case of the Sandy Hook killings, even though brave people tried to stop him, the shooter simply gunned them down because they had no means of defending themselves. It does little good for the police to show up after the carnage is over. The killer committed suicide when he heard the police coming, but it was too late.
It seems to me that if the principal or any of the teachers had been armed, they might have stopped the maniac before he could complete his horrible mission. Rather than take guns away from responsible citizens, perhaps it would be more effective if all schools were required to have at least one person who was armed and had weapons training. Not only would the school personnel have a chance to defend themselves, but knowing that an armed invader would be faced with armed resistance, such a person would think over his plan of action and perhaps be deterred.
— William Hellkamp, Fairfield