Thank you for reading the MtDemocrat.com digital edition. In order to continue reading this story please choose one of the following options.
If you are a current subscriber and wish to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com, please select the Subscriber Verification option below. If you already have a login, please select "Login" at the lower right corner of this box.
Special Introductory Offer
For a short time we will be offering a discount to those who call us in order to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your print subscription. Our customer support team will be standing by Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm to assist you.
If you are not a current subscriber and wish not to take advantage of our special introductory offer, please select the $12 monthly option below to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your online subscription
Wendy Schultz, in her column, “Something To Think About,” wrote about South Dakota arming their teachers as “sentinels” and gave many arguments why this was not a good idea. Her approach was based on a fallacious assumption, that the firearm would be unloaded, separated from the ammunition and in a safe place. This is about as clear thinking as having empty fire extinguishers in case of a fire.
The firearm should be on the person of the sentinel and loaded, ready to use. Not in the desk, not in a locked box, not in a “safe” place, not in a purse but instantly ready to use. Of course, the teacher would be trained and be proficient in the use of the firearm. This would provide safety for the wards of the teacher that is not provided by an armed officer outside the school or a sign proclaiming the school to be a gun free zone. I think that Wendy should rethink her position based on realities and not fuzzy thinking.