Schools nationwide are boldly marked as gun-free zones. There are signs stating guns, weapons, and drugs are not allowed on school grounds. Many school officials tout the importance of being gun free, and an understanding that school grounds mean zero guns is deeply ingrained.
There is a problem with that, though. Do criminals follow laws?
Do average Bad Guys care about sauntering past a sign prohibiting weapons? No, they don’t. That’s why schools have become soft targets, and it’s past time something was done about it.
What’s a gun free zone?
Basically, a gun free school zone is an area where guns are not allowed. These are typically posted with signs that say no guns are allowed, and there is no required uniformity in those signs.
From a legal standpoint, gun free zones came about back in 1990. The Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 stated, in part:
To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit the possession or discharge of a firearm in a school zone.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990′.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITIONS AGAINST POSSESSION OR DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM IN A
SCHOOL ZONE.
(a) IN GENERAL- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(q)(1)(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
Then, in 1995, the Supreme Court was brought in to rule on a case concerning the aforementioned Act. The case in question was United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995). According to the Bill of Rights Institute, the Lopez case can be summarized as follows:
High school senior Alfonso Lopez walked into his San Antonio high school carrying a concealed weapon. He was charged with violating a Texas law that banned firearms in schools. The next day, the state charges against him were dismissed after he was charged with violating a federal law: the Gun Free School Zones Act. This Act made it a federal offense “for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm [in] a school zone.” Lopez was indicted by a grand jury and later found guilty. He was sentenced to six months in prison followed by two years probation.
Lopez challenged his conviction, arguing that the Gun Free School Zones Act was an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s power. Schools were controlled by state and local governments and were not under the authority of the federal government. The federal government claimed that it had the authority to ban guns in schools under its commerce power. The Commerce Clause of the Constitution gives Congress the power to “regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.”
In the end, the Supreme Court ruled that the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 was unconstitutional and clearly overstepped the boundaries of the Commerce Clause. That resulted in the Act in question being rewritten with an interstate-commerce “hook” requiring prosecutors to prove the gun somehow affected interstate or foreign commerce.
The law is still in effect and people have been successfully prosecuted under it since the Lopez case. Something not everyone understands is that this law doesn’t only have to do with prohibiting firearms on school grounds. It also applies to people walking or driving by within 1,000 feet of school grounds. That means if you’re driving by a school with your legally owned firearms and get pulled over for speeding, and the officer notices the guns, you could be charged. This is just one reason it is extremely important to know the gun laws.
What’s a soft target?
A soft target is a target that is considered undefended and much easier for a violent person to attack with little to no resistance. As an extreme contrast, a gun-free school is a far simpler target than a police station or other protected location. Taking it a step further, because schools are specifically gun-free zones, they are even considered “better” to target for violence than a supermarket, because the number of armed shoppers at the supermarket is unknown (but odds are quite high there are more than a few in most states).
According to the United States Department of Justice, a “soft target attack” is:
“Soft” targets are facilities and locations that are difficult to secure and which are either used by the public in large numbers or have the potential to have a widespread adverse impact on large numbers of people if they are destroyed or disabled. Soft targets include malls, hospitals, schools, colleges, sports facilities, entertainment venues, food-service facilities, chemical plants, oil and gas facilities, and mass transit systems. The list of soft targets will vary from location to location, depending on the size of the community, types of industries, and number of potential targets. Because of their knowledge of the city and its facilities and events, police and firefighters are especially important in identifying soft targets. Once a list of soft targets has been composed and the relative priority of sites established, a contingency plan should be developed for the provision of additional security measures to prevent an attack and minimize the damage should an attack occur.
The problem is that there has been no fortifying or securing of schools. There are now security doors at the entrances of many schools—but the doors aren’t consistently used—and even when doors are locked, they’re usually glass and easy to break through. At best, the doors cause a brief delay in the attack.
Having a school resource or peace officer, or public safety officer, on school grounds has also proven largely pointless. That is not to discount the bravery or worth of some officers but only to state that recent history has shown that simply having a resource officer on the grounds has done nothing to stop active killers.
Should we arm teachers?
So what do we do? Should teachers be armed? That’s the question on many minds, and the answer is somewhat complex.
Realistically, there are a great many factors involved in arming willing, qualified teachers. If this decision were made on a federal level, to begin with, there would be lengthy debates and decisions regarding what type of training and certification would be required. Then there would be the issue of whether they’d be issued the equivalent of a duty gun and holster or allowed to choose their own. How often would they be required to participate in training? What kind of work would it take to maintain their certification? How much money would it cost to make this all happen?
In some states, teachers are already armed. A good example is Texas, where many schools allow qualified staff members to be armed. At the school my own daughter attended in North Texas, teachers and other staff members were and are armed. Some schools—but not the one local to me—post signs alerting would-be killers they’re armed and ready to defend their students with whatever use of force is necessary.
Is that an effective deterrent?
The schools that have been targeted have not had armed teachers. Instead, they’re staffed with people who follow the spirit and letter of the law by not arming themselves, even if they’re gun owners. It’s a logical conclusion that arming qualified teachers who are willing and able to carry is worth considering.
What should you tell your kids?
As a mother, I’ve had more active killer discussions with my kids than I care to remember. Although the desire to shelter and protect your kids from the horrors of the outside world is understandable, you’re not doing them any favors by not talking about it. Find an age-appropriate way to talk to them, so they have a plan in place before anything happens. Consider the following issues:
- Running away instead of sheltering in place
- Running away even if the teacher says to just get on the floor
- Breaking windows to escape
- Leaving without waiting for friends or going back for them
- Having as safe a meeting place as possible near the school where they can wait for you if they flee
- Having a safe word to indicate an adult was authorized by you to pick them up
- Understanding there are bad people in the world who intend them harm
- Listening to and trusting their instincts (if something seems wrong, odds are it’s wrong)
- Having the halls and doors of their school memorized at all ages
- Knowing a direct route out of the school as well as a backway
- Being familiar with firearms safety and how guns work
- Knowing the difference between cover and concealment
- Having an idea of how to effectively take a firearm away (this is only for older kids in desperate, last-ditch situations when they absolutely cannot get away)
- How to stop bleeding (first aid skills, as well as gunshot-wound-specific skills, should be taught to all ages)
- How to do CPR
- How and when to physically fight back, and with what
Do not sacrifice a child’s life on the altar of perceived innocence. Obviously, all kids are different and require varied approaches as they grow older, but ignoring a potential problem is not the answer.
How to stop school shootings?
As long as there is evil in the world, violence will occur. It isn’t about the weapon, it’s about the person wielding it. There is no easy solution, but there are many steps that could be taken to stop schools from being soft targets.
What do you think should be done about active killers targeting schools? Tell us what you think in the comments section.
