When I started working in financial services 24 years ago, I was fingerprinted.

There were armed guards at Columbine on the day of the massacre, it didn't help there. I think that people are too quick to perceive this as a good safety measure for schools; it can too easily go wrong.

Security Worked, These are the words of Congressman Barney Frank after the United States Capitol Shooting Incident of 1998. The doctor’s didn’t protect the public. The killer had been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic six years before but was released after testing as being of no danger to himself or anyone else. Furthermore, it was not the uniformed arm guards that stopped the murderer, it was a plain closed officer assigned to the dignitary protection detail that wounded the murderer. After the murder walked around the metal detector just inside of the entrance of the building and shooting one guard in the head killing him instantly and wounding the other. He was stopped, by the Massachusetts resident who was assigned to executive protection group for congressman, as the murder entered the outer office of a group of offices. They shoot at each other. Although the officer died from his wounds, he wounded the murderer enough to stop the carnage any further. Congressman Barney Frank was correct, Security Worked.

Why didn’t government officials throughout the country put in a plan to protect our children?

Why was a paranoid schizophrenic allowed to buy a gun in the first place? Why was a suburban CT women storing her "fun to shoot" guns in her son's bedroom? Why not deal with the root cause of this problem instead of trying to stop the shooters once they are already on school property?

I'm all for more school security. I am an avowed liberal and I do not oppose armed guards in schools. Everything helps. Even if the shooter kills the guard, that slows him down slightly. But I want people trained in combat for those jobs -- not some random physics teacher who happens to have an LTC / CCL and who is also trying to teach his class.

I also want a comprehensive approach to our problem. Hoping that the guard kills the shooter before the shooter kills the guard is not what I call a comprehensive strategy.

SDK
(1) “Why was a paranoid schizophrenic allowed to buy a gun in the first place?” Doctors gave the paranoid schizophrenic a clean bill of health; and, they are not help civil or criminal responsible.

(2) “Why was a suburban CT women storing her "fun to shoot" guns in her son's bedroom?” Where did you hear the guns were stored in the son’s bedroom?

Why did the ACLU stop the law that would have allowed the mother to put her son in a locked up hospital?

(3) “Why not deal with the root cause of this problem instead of trying to stop the shooters once they are already on school property?” What is you view of the root of the problem?

By the way have you had firearm instruction for safety and performance?

It won't. But like a lot of legislation, something else will get better even though this problem may not get addressed. We have a lot of licensed daycares in MA. I don't see the need for parents to use unlicensed centers. However, our daycare is very expensive and the price might be driving parents to make these kinds of unsafe choices. We're not going to require every person who babysits for a friend to get fingerprinted and the line between babysitting and an unlicensed daycare is pretty thin.