Should teachers carry guns?

Guns in a school environment will only invite trouble

Question: Should teachers carry guns?
Position1 of 2›: No, teachers should not carry guns
Argument‹5 of 5: Guns in a school environment will only invite trouble

The presence of guns at school increases the likelihood that a student will get their hands on the gun and cause a tragic accident, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

The argument

Guns in a school environment would only invite trouble for both teachers and students. Gun-related violence has decreased in K-12 schools that have federal laws that restrict guns within 1,000 feet of the school property. About 25,000 people die each year from firearms-related deaths in the United States.Teachers, and students are not trained in law enforcement, and there is no way to prove that they will handle the situation the right way. Additionally, there is a high probability that having guns in a school environment will mean that the gun will end up in the wrong hands.

Premises

[P1]Gun-related violence has fallen in K-12 schools covered by federal laws restricting firearms within 1,000 feet, while around 25,000 Americans die from firearms each year—evidence that more guns invite more danger. [P2] Teachers and students are not trained in law enforcement, there is no guarantee they would handle an armed situation correctly, and a gun in school has a high probability of ending up in the wrong hands. [C] Therefore, because guns in a school environment will only invite trouble, teachers should not carry guns.

Counter-arguments

Schools should have access to guns to be ready for any attack. Shooters are more likely to target a place if they know that no one will stop them. The weapon they carry will be no match for the absence of one. There is a need for a defense to stop active shootings, and relying on police officers may be too late.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] A national annual firearms death figure, most of it unconnected to schools, does not bear on what happens when school staff are armed; and the fall in violence under gun-free-zone laws is reported with no comparison, so it does not establish that the laws caused it. [Rejecting P2] Lack of law-enforcement training is a serious objection, but the premise states it as a certainty — "no way to prove" and "high probability" are asserted with no evidence from the districts that have armed staff, which is where the answer would actually be found.