The world is going through perilous times, we have been facing certain challenges recently that were unimaginable before. The rise of terrorism and a blend of international political factors working for their own interests have made the world unsafe. Colleges, among all the other places, are a soft target for fanatics. It is as easy for radical elements as finding a Dissertation Proposal on some online platforms. Parents send their children to schools and colleges with a hidden fear of losing them because of the growing sense of being unsafe. Students themselves feel vulnerable to the dangers of some kind of attack or chaotic situation. Along with the problematic matter of terrorism, mass shootings by some maniac and other issues also make students feel unsafe. Therefore, it is a need of the hour if we assign the duty of safeguarding the high schools to professional soldiers.
Many people would think of it as an extreme solution to the problem of terrorism. However, we are going to discuss a few things that can be settled with this action. Calling the solution extreme or irrational doesn’t help us get out of the problem. It’s like closing your eyes while facing certain death. It might make you unaware of what happens next but surely doesn’t help in preventing it anyway. Besides, looking into the abyss (as Nietzsche calls it), makes us stronger and capable of coping with the challenge efficiently.
The motivation behind calling soldiers for high school campuses security is strongly driven by a few factors that we are going to discuss in the lines below.
A Good Guy with a gun can stop a Bad Guy with a gun:
The foremost motive behind advocating the safety of schools with armed personnel is that only “a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun”. What happens when there is an attack or some kind of murder attempt happening in a high school? People are panicked and they have no means to stop the murderer as they are unarmed. An unarmed Hulk wouldn’t be able to stop an armed maniac. In these circumstances, a soldier with professional combat training can be helpful more than any other thing. He can cope with the situation and shoot the murderer instantly to prevent the mass killing.
If we look back into the history of mass murdering and public shooting, we find out that armed soldiers have been proven a great help in such dangerous situations. What happens is that if a trained soldier is nearby with a gun, he can engage the shooter in fighting and prevent him from attacking other people. Many times, these shooters are injured by the guns of good guys and it ends the firing. Though in some cases soldiers are unable to control the situation, most of the time they do. The opposite narrative would try to suggest that most of these situations were public places rather than high schools and that the ratio of soldiers handling the situation successfully in high school is way less than the ratio in public. But the question is that if a soldier can handle the circumstances in public, why can he not handle it in high schools?
The National Rifle Association in America has been a strong proponent of placing armed security in high schools. According to them, America has been going through perilous times and mass shooting has been a great problem. In the current state of affairs, it is essential to put security guards so that we can ensure the safety of the most important of our resources – our children. However, the nation of America is divided on the matter as they are on any other matter. While addressing the issue, the Idaho state journal in their editorial article sarcastically comments on the division of American nation by saying, “if LA Pierre offered a viable cure for cancer, a lot of us would not listen.”
If every other place has armed security, why not schools?
Another important question that serves the advocacy of high school armed security is that if all other places can have armed security, why can schools not get that? People feel threatened all the time and the sense of exposure to potential risks leads to strong and impeccable security systems. Banks, business organizations, shopping malls, government buildings, cinemas and important political figures (including their children) have high security with numerous armed guards.
Compared to that, schools are the places we need to make more secure as the future of the nation is fostering there. If students don’t feel safe, our future is definitely not secure as well. Because feeling endangered all the time can lead to severe psychological problems. Therefore, it is significant to provide flawless security and a physical presence of law enforcement around them in order to make them feel secure.
A number of people interpret the demand of having army personnel in school to be a way of giving up the debate of control over guns. By emphasizing the significance of having armed guards in schools we are not trying to enforce NRA or trying to impose the opinion that guns ought to be more widespread and in everyone’s reach. We are simply saying that if all other places are facilitated with trained soldiers or private armed guards, schools should also be provided foolproof security or allowed to hire private security personnel so that we do not leave students to be a soft target for terrorists or mass shooters.
By encouraging schools to hire armed protectors, we do not mean to provide teachers with hidden guns or weapons so that they can use them in times of necessity. This is the stance that gun enthusiasts have been adopting more often. But we do not want guns to be everywhere as we realize the fact that it might make students feel hostile. But adopting what we demand is surely a good way of providing the added security that is an instant need.
Mass shooters and terrorists often target gun-free zones. It is an obvious reality that most of the “successful” mass murdering has been committed in the places where no gunned cops were deployed. Considering the fact, it can be easily deduced that deploying equipped soldiers can make schools a harder target and shooters will not dare attack the places. This is the reasoning President Trump has also used while advocating the need for increasing high school security.
Another important and valid criticism of deploying law enforcement people in schools is the disruption in the discipline. Critics of increased school security say that it is going to create disturbance as law enforcement people have a very different way of handling things from civilians. They think that children and young students should not be exposed to the stern and strict conduct of uniform persons. I find this criticism to be valid and think that the official cops or army can only be deployed if they are given a very small sphere of authority and disciplinary authority is withheld in the school administration’s hands.
It is a good sign that the matter is being debated on social media and among the people’s representatives. Students have been opting for a topic related to this for their dissertations and help from online services is sought in these topics recently just like other dissertations like business or Dissertation Proposal Help.