Another school shooting results in another senseless death. In this case, the shooter is too young to even be called a gunman.

Last Monday, a deadly school shooting occurred in Sparks, Nevada, when a 12-year-old boy allegedly killed a teacher, wounded two boys and then took his own life, according to an article by CNN.

Granting licensed and trained teachers the right to arm themselves on school property would not only deter future school shootings from happening, but also provide a means of defense if a shooting was to take place on school grounds.

One name that has been tied with the story is Michael Landsberry, a popular math teacher at the school, who was killed in the shooting. Witnesses claim they saw Landsberry approach the shooter in an attempt to talk the student into putting the weapon down, according to the Reno Gazette-Journal. Unfortunately, he was unsuccessful. Landsberry is considered a hero by many as the teacher’s courageous act allowed time for nearby students to run away.

This is not the first time a teacher has approached an armed and desperate student with the intent of talking them into putting down their weapon. Some have been successful while others – like Landsberry – have not. It is interesting to consider how this story might have concluded differently had Landsberry, or another teacher, been armed themselves.

The idea of armed teachers is not a new concept. Utah is among the few states that let people carry licensed concealed weapons into public schools without exception, according to an article by the Oakland Press.

School shootings can have devastating results in a matter of minutes. More often than not, police officials arrive on the scene after the deadly damage is already done. Teachers can act more quickly than law enforcement in the critical first few minutes to protect students from a deadly shooting.

Opponents to the idea of arming teachers often try to make the argument that an impatient teacher might display or fire a gun. This assertion is ridiculous. Even if teachers lose their patience with students, there is a world of difference between hurling an eraser out of frustration at a disobedient student versus shooting them.

Opposition also argues that arming teachers creates the potentially dangerous situation where a student might overpower the teacher and take their firearm from them.

This problem is easily solved by not making it public knowledge as to which teachers are and which are not armed at school. No one knows exactly how many Utah teachers are packing. As concealed-firearm permit holders, they’re not required to tell parents, school police officers or their principals, according to the Salt Lake Tribune. Students have no idea which teacher may or may not be in possession of a gun, and therefore they do not make any attempt to steal it.

The majority of active shooter events usually conclude with the shooter taking their own life the moment they are challenged by an officer on the scene. How many lives might have been saved in past school shootings if the shooter had been challenged earlier by another armed individual?

In contrast to Utah, most other states, including Nevada and Connecticut, designate schools as “gun-free” zones. Within the parameter of these zones, innocent occupants are deprived of any reasonable means of self-defense.

It is time for other states to follow Utah’s lead and allow licensed teachers to carry firearms on school property.

This would transform teachers from sitting ducks to efficient defenders. We cannot afford to sit back any longer while students and teachers continue to be maimed and murdered by their peers or by violent outsiders.

If we cannot disarm the attacker, we must arm the defender.

-Ashley Lynn Fisher is a junior English major from Gig Harbor. She can be contacted at 335-2290 or by [email protected]. The opinions expressed in this Column are not necessarily those of the staff of The Daily Evergreen or those of Student Publications.