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: "[...] Imagine the scenario if the teacher has a taser:1)"He tried either reloading or tried aiming at her."2) Teacher tasered student.3) 911 dispatch arrives in time to prevent any further deaths." Just think about that... "When was the last time we used a taser in battle? Never. A taser and a firearm are no where in the same ball park. A taser is not capable of killing under any normal circumstance, a firearm on the other hand is."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. "The number of this that could and would go wrong far outweigh the good things that could happen. Also, your cherry-picking data. Look at this article" 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."Tasers are not considered arms!"http://www.merriam-webster.com...Arm = a means (as a weapon)http://dictionary.reference.com......There you go..."I thought i proposed mandating gun safes, and you didn't even rebut 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. "By mandating gun safes, and protection on guns, children would be less likely to get a hold of guns. "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."I said this in the beginning:"If teachers were equipped with guns or defensive objects (eg tasers)[...]"And if you look above... You will see the dictionary references."Under the constitution, you are not guaranteed the right to bear tasers."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."Teachers are not qualified to carry arms, so they should not carry arms. Maybe a special unit should be allowed to."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. In conclusion: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...Thank You.