Steele,

"You are the one who wants to put a loaded weapon in every classroom."

Did I say that or is it just more of your clairvoyant suppositions?

I don't advocate smart guns at all, but they are out there and overcome your objection that the gun could be taken off the teacher,
no one has ever suggested that all teachers be armed and in the schools that have armed teachers most people don't know who they are.
That's part of the deterrence.
Have you worked out yet how a teacher could stop an armed murderer?

Contemplate this,
"Dec 15, 2014 - At least 132 students and nine staff members were killed on Tuesday when Taliban gunmen broke into a school in the Pakistani city of Peshawar and opened fire".
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=132+school+students+shot+in+afghanistan&rlz=1C1CAFB_enAU718AU718&oq=132+school+students+shot+in+afghanistan&aqs=chrome..69i57.35379j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

and remember that it was mainly by their own incompetence that our local terrorists have been caught.

//That's part of the deterrence.//

The deterrence? Come off it, Is Mise. Surely you have more sense than to just parrot daft NRA propaganda like that without thinking about it first?

Mass shootings end in one three ways: the perpetrator kills himself, the perpetrator is killed by the police, or the perpetrator is arrested, tried and given a life or death sentence depending on their state.

Now to normal, rational people these seem like obvious and significant deterrents. But the type of people who shoot up schools are clearly not normal or rational... and they don't seem to be deterred in the slightest by the fact that there is a high probability that their rampage will end with them being shot by police.

If they've never been deterred by the prospect of being shot in the past, what makes you think these nutters will suddenly start being deterred by the prospect of being shot just because teachers might be packing heat?

Toni,

"If they've never been deterred by the prospect of being shot in the past, what makes you think these nutters will suddenly start being deterred by the prospect of being shot just because teachers might be packing heat?"

Because an armed teacher would be a threat not only to them but to their intended purpose, the killing of innocent people.
The police, and being caught are not a threat because the police will not be there but an armed teacher could be.

Have you thought of a way that a teacher could immediately protect self and students in an attack?

This should not be beyond your mental capacity, or don't you believe that a teacher should be given a chance at defending themselves?

SR,

"And I was pointing out that shooters were highly likely to be whites at rates far in excess of their representation in the general community.

Where is the quibble?"

The quibble is that there isn't any real data to support your claim. I know for some, the lack of data is a mere detail. But I rather think its important.

As to arming teachers, it ought to be noted that almost all mass shootings take place in so-called gun-free zones. For some reason the bad guys are drawn to such locations..can't imagine why.

When the bad guys decide to work outside gun-free zones, things don't work out too well for them....http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/draw-muhammad-shooting-who-was-behind-cartoon-contest-n353081

As to banning guns, why don't the left in the USA just get on with it. If, as they claim, they represent majority opinion, then start the process to repeal the 2nd amendment. They don't because they know they can't. Even when they controlled the house, Senate and Presidency, they wimped it. Their current outrage isn't about solving the problem but about stirring up their left wing base. But just watch how they'll dodge the issue in the mid-terms.

Gun control and gun rights are so heated and divided in the US, that no action is going to be taken nation wide. And that is the issue with either solution proposed for gun violence. Since it can't be agreed on as a culture to have more guns and be a deterrent, or have no guns and end the access of mass shootings. Without full support nation wide on either solution, the areas that are "gun free zones" are not protected from guns coming in. Therefore gun free means nothing and doesn't help anyone.

Because of this, I think something still needs to be done. Arming teachers seems like a good choice. Better then the current choice of squabble, get nothing done, pander gun or anti-gun philosophy to voters and gain their support, and watch murders and mass shooting continually increase.

Personally I am soundly against the "sit on our hand and watch the world go to hell" aproach.