Teachers Should Have the Right to Bear Arms

""When was the last time you heard on the news of a school shooting with a taser? Exactly, it's irrelevant." Tasers are not heard of in the news because they aren't allowed yet. That is what I am debating. I gave a logical scenario in my previous argument:" Guns aren't allowed either, yet strangely enough, they are on the news. "Are you saying that a teacher should have a deadly weapon? You must understand what I am proposing: A teacher should be able to disarm the person with the gun, not kill him. Thus, a taser, creates a perfectly safe place for students, if not more safe than it already is? No you think that, you think that teachers housed have the right to bear arms, firearms are included under that. I was stating that to prove that tasers aren't equal to firearms. "How will the bad outweigh the good? The teacher has a way of defending the students. The shooter will be discouraged. The worst that can happen would be a taser miss-fire; but that can be solved by careful screening of teachers. Furthermore, many parents will agree with a better screening of teachers. You only provide one story. There are countless others out there that involved guns." The student also have easy access. All they have to do is reach for your hip while our bent over helping other students. Also, i'll listen to the taser argument, but the argument is arms as a whole. If you include tasers, then you better believe firearms count under that. " I did. That is why I gave those two options: You wanted gun control. I compared it to my argument (arming tasers to teachers). I showed you that arming teachers with tasers would be much more easy and effective. " I stated previously i did not want gun control. I want gun safety to become a priority. If I mandate gun safes, I'm not managing your guns, I'm managing you gun safety. you also never proved it was more effective. You said it was, but that does't mean anything. "It's too late for that. There is something called the 2nd Amendment. I am proposing a 2nd option. "Oh, I understand. You originally were talking about firearms, but now you understand my argument, and you are changing to tasers. No, tasers are not arms, and they are not firearms."" Oh no! Too late? Someone tell Thomas Jefferson he's an idiot for not putting gun safes in the constitution, like he owned one. It's never too late. Amendments are passed to change parts of the constitution. And wither way, it doesn't matter. I am not infringing upon your right to bear arms. Merely your right to expose your children to the accessibility of firearms. Also, you spent an entire argument proving tasers are arms, and not you just say they aren't. "Oh. So you think teachers can't bear tasers but they can bear guns? And I already provided definitions. In addition to that, the Constitution is a "living" document. It can be changed if needed... But that is besides the point. I proposed tasers (for the 3rd time in this debate) because it is safe, effective, and a cheap solution... Try to understand what I am debating before going back to guns." Were not really just talking about guns. Now, were talking about arms as a whole. Proposing tasers is irrelevant because it's only one side to the spectrum. If you thinks teachers should bear arms, then you believe they should believe they bear all arms. "That is why teachers should be screened. Futhermore, a special unit might not respond in time; afterall, it only takes a few seconds to aim, fire, and kill a life. A teacher nearby could respond quicker and might be able to prevent a death. " Only screened? No gun training classes? Nothing that would prevent a bigger disaster? I was at least assuming you planned on gun training, but this changes everything. You want to give a teacher a gun, even if they have never taken a trainer course in their lives. Just as long as they pass a screening. I can guarantee very few teachers would shoot students, its the students and the accidents that could happen that I am worried about. "Teachers should be allowed to have access to a defensive weapon in emergency situations. It is their right and is needed for the protection of students. There is no better way..." You continue to change the topic every time you say it. The topic is, "teachers should have the rights to bear arms". They should not because like I have proven, there are just too many things that could go wrong. You bring up constitutionality . Right now, teachers do not bear arms. If it were unconstitutional, wouldn't the supreme court have done something by now? No, because there are some restrictions to amendments. Similar to how you do not have 100% of your 1st amendment rights in school. Thanks