Thats because Ed and Dwight are not in the schools everyday for 8 hours.

So the brilliant idea to combat guns in schools is to add more guns in schools? This may be the most stupid idea ever. What's going to be the solution when an armed person attempts to break up a fight by shooting a student or a student grabs a gun from an armed teacher/administrator? Even more guns?

What has this country come to when it's children have to attend school as though they live in a combat zone? I guess as long as the NRA and gun freaks are happy that's all that matters. God forbid we do something REASONABLE about gun control such as testing/training/licensing gun owners and stricter policies about who can own a gun and the steps people must take to get a gun, schools full of people with guns is much better.

Angie, if one teacher had a gun some lives would have been saved up there. FACT.

William, that's not a fact, that's just wild speculation. If someone was properly trained on how to handle a gun PLUS how to approach an armed suspect AND they reacted well under pressure, IN ADDITION to being in the right place at the right time, then maybe one life would have been saved by a teacher with a gun. MAYBE. I would say there's about a 1% chance an armed person would have saved a life that day. There's also an equal chance that person would have accidentally shot another innocent person.

Now, are we going to raise taxes so we can train teachers on how to properly operate a gun and how to approach an armed person who is gunning down children plus keep their training up to date year after year? Or are we going to raise taxes to pay for more armed guards at our schools? Or are we going to raise taxes to put in more metal detectors? Or are we going to strip officers off the streets to protect schools? All of these seem like a Republican nightmare, but then again, why consider the consequences when you can just do what FEELS good at the time?

If our children are not safe at school then they shouldn't be there. Legally we have to send our children to school so someone has to be responsible to keep our children safe or not have them there at all. We live in a very scary world and it isn't going to get much better than this. As long as we exist there will be violence. So sad.

Angie k and A......It would be way more interesting to hear your suggestions for a solution than to read your worthless bitching and moaning about everyone else's.....

AngieK and A have never had more than one thought at a time in their little heads.

If they would have thought about the shooters actions had he known someone at the school was armed, would he have still gone there. As she stated, wild speculation, but I'll bet he would have not been there to begin with. Would this have saved his mother, probably not but it could possibly saved 26 others.

Michael Moore recently pointed out that these gunmen stop murdering only when another gun is pointed at them. It is for that reason that the carnage continues unabated until other guns arrive. The public is not well served by seeking a collective solution to an individual problem as is the case with Adam Lanza. Safety, like morality, cannot be legislated.

Alot of this frankly lacks common sense. We are talking about protecting children's lives. You either have to put law enforcement in every school, or you will have to arm a principal or assistant principal. Speculating on this forum about what percent, maybe it would, what if, raising taxes are arguments to not protect the children. In Morgan county, there are 2 SRO officers. RIDICLOUS! The superintendent here is more interested in building new buildings. When asked about additional SRO officers he complains of the cost. Where as, smaller Limestone County has 8 SRO officers, and is now exploring ways to add more. There are alot of mentally ill people walking the streets, and some will go to a school and kill. It does cost money to protect our kids. So, would we rather have spent our tax money on new playgrounds and buildings for our kids? Or for protection of our kids in school? We have to change our priorities with the times. I say to Mr. Hopkins,find the money, expand the SRO program in Morgan County, take lessons from Limestone County, then build your new buildings. For the sake of repeating myself, either SRO officers in every school, or arm the principals and assistan principals. It has to be one or the other, but we do not need to talk it to death about MONEY. Action needs to be taken to make the schools safer, talking delays that. The children deserve it.

All I'm saying is jumping to wild conclusions isn't the answer. If X(teacher had a gun) then Y(lives would have been saved) doesn't answer all the variables. If the shooter knew the teacher had a gun (new variable), then what's to say he wouldn't have boarded a school bus (yet another variable)? Then we have to arm all bus drivers?

Safety has to be responsibly done and that costs money. "Find the money" is a great directive, until there's none there and then you have to talk about taxes or cutting other things (do we cut a tornado safe building program to hire more SROs? Are there more tornadoes in Alabama than school shootings?). Like it or not, you can't just say "Mr. Principal, start carrying a gun to school." He or she has to be trained on what to do with the weapon in a situation. Of course, Most don't want to answer questions about the how or why, they just wants action. However, it's not that simple.

Here is the real story:

http://www.washingtonguardian.com/washingtons-school-security-failure

Timeline of U.S. school shootings:

http://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2008/02/15/timeline-of-school-shootings?page=3

This is just pathetic:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-orders-raise-biden-members-congress-federal-workers_692223.html

A., listen...listen close..of course they have to be trained..DUH!! And of course it costs money...what is more important than safety for children?? Stop making excuses and just do it..because it can be done.

My solution, which of course the NRA would despise, would be to make it much more difficult for people such as the Sandy Hook shooter to get their hands on firearms in the first place

1. All gun owners (every kind of gun, including shotguns and rifles) should be required to go through a safety course AND a psychiatric evaluation-both of which they pay for out of their own pocket. In addition, each member of their household should be required to do the same. They should also be required to re-test every 2 or 4 years.

2. Heavy taxation on ammo and gun purchases, with limits on how much ammo can be purchased at one time.

3. Liability insurance for each firearm.

4. And everyone's favorite, the assault weapon ban!

Look At The Girl That Did That Shooting In Huntsville College,,,AMY BISHOP,,,SHE WAS A TEACHER,,I Don:t Thinks Guns In The Schools Is The Answer,,,,,,,, I Think The Answer Is To GO Back Like It Used To Be A Long Time Ago,,,,,,,EVERY MORING HAVE BIBBLE READING AND PRAYER,,,,,,, Back In Thoes Day You DIDN't HAVE ALL THOESE PROBLEMS

For those saying we should not have armed personnel in schools, I want to hear a good solution. Right now many schools, such as Sandy Hook, has the best security available outside of armed personnel, yet that has proven to not be enough. To say that an armed staff member would have saved students at Sandy Hook is speculation, however it sure would have increased the odds of children being saved that day.

I have been saying for years....either hire armed professional security or allow for a few teachers to be armed....not every teacher. The principal knows his staff best and knows who is best capable of handing that burden. Also, regardless of previous training, any teacher selected must go through certified tactical firearms training by a certifying agency chosen by the school system. This will ensure all armed staff receives the same training.

As far as some concerns that a student will pull a handgun from a teacher, the handgun is actually do stay in safe in the teacher's room. As somebody that has a carry permit and prefers to keep my weapon on my body, given the surroundings, I think in this case it best to keep the gun inside a safe in the teacher's rooms.

Linda, the college was a "gun-free zone." In other words, the Bishop woman (44 years old is hardly a girl) knew no one else would have a gun. She could commit multiple murders without fear of those who obey the law having guns to fight back.

First of of my comment will be How? do you defend against Intelligence? These murders are well thought and planned.

The second portion of my comment would be. I think the most cost effective solution is more simple and it's being over looked. I personally would be satisfied if there were layers of protection in place such as LOCKED doors. Now I know some of you are going to same well that guy at sandyhook broke in and yes he did through 1 door that gave access to all the hallways to the class rooms. Why not create more layers such as doors Engineered that if the glass is shot out and you reach in you still could not reach the locking mechanism, Then also have same such doors on each class room locked from the inside, With teachers being required to shut and lock these doors. These locks could be keyed or perhaps like the ones you use in Hotels.

These other knee jerk reactions of $500. Weapons issued to each educator and then the training of such and I'm certain the teachers would and should recieve hazard pay, Or this hiring persons to patrol the hall as if we are under martial law is too far expensive at $75,000. per year plus all compensations including retirement. Which I would not be against If I'm Hired! Yeah I think there is a better solution maybe not this one but it's something to build on.

No matter what is done in the wake of this tragedy to further "protect" schools, those who want to hurt teachers, administrators, children, will find a way to do so. Remember that the guns didn't belong to the shooter, so more/stricter gun laws will not prevent similar events. The school was protected/locked, but he broke a window and entered anyway. He could have just waited until they broke for recess, or as they exited the school in the PM.

The ultimate answer is right in front of us, but I haven't heard it yet. NO MORE CHILDREN. If we make it illegal to have children, there will be no need for schools. Problem solved.

wow, "s" too bad your parents didnt think of that before you, that is the most "S"TUPID response ive ever heard, & not only that, 'illegal' means absolutely nothing in this part of the country. My opionion, & I have experienced losing a small child in my family unexpectedly, you can not & I WILL NOT put a price on protecting my child, there is no reason why we could not afford to pay for extra law enforcement in our schools etc, let me ask A SIMPLE YES OR NO QUESTION,,,,,,,, is a childs life &/or safety more important than the 'fancy new' vehicles some of society feel they need to 'flaunt' around in with a $4,5,6 hundred dollar a month payment. i would rather pay $4,5,6 thousand cash for a vehicle that ran just as well as a $30,40k (looks dont get you back & forth) & put that extra wasted payment on that "pretty" car into our law enforcement, to extend training, mental evaluations, hiring etc. that extra night of eating out & spending $100 on a family of 4, fund the local law enforcement or mental hospital & make homemade pizza with your kids/grandkids, you all get my point, there is no reason other than society has learned they want to look rich or expensive rather than LIVE normal, & safe. my main & only concern IS my family, thier health, their safety, & their happiness. fortunately i was raised therefore i raised my family to know material things willl not make you a better person or happy, maybe its oldfashioned but we have not ever done without, & we have so much fun together

There is no simple solution to random gun violence. We can't confiscate every gun out there and outlawing them would only increase traffic in the already existing illegal weapons market. I'm a senior education major, I have spent a lot of time in the classroom and plan on spending the rest of my life teaching. I believe that arming teachers would do nothing to solve the problem at hand, it would never work and only serves to distract us from a productive discussion, preventing us from coming up with a feasible answer to school shootings. if this law is passed, you would see national outrage, and most likely federal legislation that would keep it from ever becoming a reality. Furthermore, I guarantee that thousands of teachers would strike and refuse to go along with such a measure. This is a quick, poorly planned, and ill-conceived proposal. Get real so we can get some work done. No guns in school, not ever, not for any reason. If you want to place a police officer outside then fine, but don't think for one second that adding weapons training to the teacher's curriculum will actually make anyone safer. At most, it will create the illusion of security and will no doubt backfire in a tragic way.

DANITA - Too bad your parents didn't help you grasp the concept of sarcasm or teach you good manners. Unfortunately, it appears that you developed martyr syndrome instead. Here's a hint, expecting to be rewarded for your sacrifices and belittling those who make different choices isn't virtuous. You are not a better parent because you don't have a "fancy new" car or an "extra night of eating out" and carrying on about how superior you are will have a lasting, negative psychological effect on your children. If your "main and only concern" is your family, you'll knock it off.