opi.HENRY. (3/13)

Guns near schools and classrooms would take attention away from teaching and the students, and could even be a constant reminder to students that their school is unsafe. Columnist Katie Henry argues that gun laws should be left to individual states instead of national legislators.

In light of recent tragedies and gun control debates, aspiring teachers are beginning to rethink their desire to become an educator. However, it’s not the fear of experiencing tragedies such as Sandy Hook that is holding them back. It’s the fear of being required to carry a firearm while on the job. Public opinion on the topic is almost evenly divided: 58 percent support teachers being able to have guns in the classroom and 42 percent do not. 

Several states, including Mississippi, are working on legislation that would require a certain number of teachers to carry a concealed weapon. The bill in Mississippi will require two teachers or staff members in schools to carry guns. Current Mississippi code states that possession of a gun on school property, whether or not it’s concealed, is a felony. New legislation will allow schools to designate two school workers to carry weapons on school grounds, provided they pass firearm safety measures. 

On March 8, 2013, South Dakota became to first state to pass a law authorizing school employees to carry concealed guns into the classroom.

Legislation in other states such as South Dakota will be placing armed guards in schools or give teachers the right to carry weapons. Rep. Lester Carpenter, who introduced this new legislation, says that this will allow school districts to protect themselves. His opposition, Sen. Jeff Flake, criticizes this legislation and said that decisions on school security should be made at the local level and should not be part of national legislation.

The NRA has repeatedly proposed placing a guard in every school to prevent shootings. However, Columbine High School had armed guards, and despite crossfire in exchange with the shooter, it did not prevent that school shooting. That’s why the debate around heightening school security has been such a heated debate. Is putting the lives of students at risk worth adding more security?

Legislation should be more focused on creating adequate training for teachers instead of requiring them to possess firearms on the job. Along with that, teachers don’t feel comfortable compromising the classroom atmosphere or creating potentially dangerous situations for their students. This isn’t to put blame on a teacher’s shoulders by any means, but regardless of the situation, having firearms in the classroom takes away from the learning environment and puts students’ lives at risk.

There’s only so much that can be done to train and prepare for events such as the school shooting. Even if teachers carrying guns are meant for protection, it would be an ever-present reminder to students that they aren’t in a safe environment. But then again, there’s also a risk that someone could even accidentally shoot themselves during training. It’s an issue that schools and legislatures need to be extremely careful deciding upon.

This matter is less focused on the topic of actual gun control and more of the issue of where you must draw the line when it comes to protecting students. Sensible gun owners that have young children take extreme precautions to conceal their weapons from their children. State legislatures need to be extremely meticulous when combining weapons and education.

Some states, such as South Dakota, have a culture where children start hunting at a young age. Children learn how to use BB guns at age 8, skeet shooting at age 14, and target shoot with semiautomatic rifles. Although this is a culture that is used to the presence of guns, that culture is still completely separate from education.

The likelihood of gun crimes happening is higher in urban areas than rural. That’s why umbrella legislation over the entire country wouldn’t be effective if states already have lower gun crime rates than others. These types of legislation need to be decided by state governments since each state has a completely different culture and gun crime rate.

All in all, gun control laws concerning education should be left to the states. Umbrella legislations are ineffective if each state has different demographics, crime rates, and the like. 

It’s understandable if schools who have been faced with tragedy in the past amp up security with armed guards, but putting students’ lives at risk when it’s not necessary is detrimental to their education. Leave this decision making to the respective state politicians who know exactly what their state needs.


Katie Henry is a senior in journalism and political science from Pella, Iowa.

Opinion Policies

Editorials are longer opinion pieces that are written by a group of community members recruited across campus who address relevant issues on a local, national and international level. Editorials are research-based. The purpose of the Editorial Board is to promote discussion concerning relevant issues in the community while advising on possible solutions. Topics are chosen via relevancy and interests of the members, which are then discussed by the Editorial Board in order to reach a general consensus concerning the topic or issue.

Feedback policy

If you have a grievance concerning the content or argument of the Editorial Board, please contact either Opinion Editor Peyton Hamel (peyton.hamel@iowastatedaily.com) or the Editorial Board as a whole (editorialboard@iowastatedaily.com). Those wanting to respond to editorials can also submit a letter to the editor through the Iowa State Daily website or by emailing the letter to Opinion Editor Peyton Hamel (peyton.hamel@iowastatedaily.com) or Editor-in-Chief Sage Smith (sage.smith@iowastatedaily.com).

Column Policy

Columns are hyper-specific to opinion and are written by only columnists employed by the Iowa State Daily. Columnists are unique because they have a specific writing day and only publish on those writing days. Each column undergoes a thorough editing process ensuring the integrity of the writer, and their claim is maintained while remaining research-based and respectful. Columns may be submitted from community members. These are labelled as “Guest Columns.” These contain similar research-based content and need to be at least 400 words in length. The following requirements should be met: first and last name, email and relation or position to Iowa State. Emails must be tied to the submitted guest column or it will not be accepted or published. Pseudonyms are prohibited and the writer will be banned from submissions.

Read our full Opinion Policies here. Updated on 10/7/2020

(2) comments

Jonathon Laudner

I would just like to point out two things:

1.) The picture is of a woman with a pistol using "open-carry" which is legal in Iowa, but not very supported, even amongst gun owners. Responsible right-to-carry permit holders do not open carry, therefore, nobody knows that the person has the gun, so no attention would be brought to that person. Also, I don't see my principal open-carrying a gun in the school, I see him or her also being responsible and concealing the gun.

2.) The caption of the picture states that having firearms allowed on campus would remind students that their campus is unsafe. I am reminded that every time a mass-murder happens, especially ones like the Aurora Theater shooting or the Newton, Connecticut shooting. These scare me even more because I have one more thing in common with those shootings when I'm on campus because they both happened on "gun-free zones" which is right where I am when I cross onto campus. No criminal will look at a sign that says "gun-free zone" and think to themselves, "Oh, it's illegal to have a gun here. I guess I'll go shoot somebody somewhere else." No criminal thinks like that, and it's been proven over and over again. The one thing criminals are afraid of more than jail, is someone they're trying to shoot, shoot back at them. It's plain and simple common sense.

I do agree with the majority of your article though. Gun laws cannot be blanket regulation. These rules need to be made at the local level. People here in Iowa know how to control gun violence in Iowa more than the 535 people in D.C. do, especially since only 6 of the 535 are from Iowa. If gun control is necessary in some states, then those states should be responsible for themselves, and keep the federal government out of it.

Peyton Barnes

The picture is of a woman with a pistol using "open-carry" which is legal in Iowa, but not very supported, even amongst gun owners. Responsible right-to-carry permit ccw jacket holders do not open carry, therefore, nobody knows that the person has the gun, so no attention would be brought to that person. Also, I don't see my principal open-carrying a gun in the school, I see him or her also being responsible and concealing the gun.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.