What could possibly go wrong?

This type of thing is what the NRA wants. Anything to increase gun sales and frighten people into buying yet more guns.

Next will be the idea of arming all of the students.

Nice straw man.

An armed action (by police) to a credible attack IS THE CURRENT ACTUAL RESPONSE in school shootings. Is this a mistake? Why would a measure that decreases the arrival time of armed defenders be a bad idea?

Yes, lot's of things could "go wrong", however, is this the only thing to consider?

Imagine if I was trying decide to get out of bed this morning, and I couldn't get past my fear of all the things that "could possibly go wrong" during the course of my day. If I remained in that state of mind - I'd never get out of bed!

You couch this in the language of "frightening people". However, you could just as easily couch this in the language of "preparedness" (not to mention that it is actually your reply that appears to be perpetuating fear - of firearms...).

is the answer to the problem of gun violence?

Your solution to every instance of gun violence seems to be limited to the "more guns everywhere" variety. Australia took a different approach that actually worked, as opposed to your totally unproven (and totally counterintuitive) theory that more guns everywhere is the solution.

Society affirms it every time they send an armed officer to a situation where one is needed.

More guns in the right places is one answer.

Your solution to every instance of gun violence seems to be limited to the "ban them all" variety.

America is not Australia.

I do favor the idea of having a limited number of armed staff.

I'm not aware that Australia has/had the same type of problem we have in the US.
Your assertion that they "solved" anything is unsupported.

"more guns everywhere" is also another straw man or at least serious hyperbole.

there were just as many mass murder by firearms after Port Author and NFA as before. There have been a rash of mass murders by arson since then. Crime and murder rates are about the same, and parts of Sydney like Merrylands still have numerous drive by shootings by gangs.

That seems to be the favorite phrase for people that don't have a frickin' clue.

So far we've heard it from the shrinking number of gun control fans about; concealed carry, on campus carry, constitutional carry, the new Georgia laws, states going shall issue, etc. ad infinitum.

The common thread is; NOTHING BAD HAPPENS.

But gun control supporters are too hypocritical, or intellectually too lazy, to ever recognize that and they never seem to get tired of being wrong and looking silly.

(Meanwhile, violent crime, including crime with guns, continues to fall. But pay no attention to the facts

Carry on whining, but please don't trouble yourself to actually join any dues paying gun control organizations, go to any protest events or do anything in the real world to support your "beliefs".

Actually, the NRA is more interesting in promoting the shooting sports.

What about SROs? If guns around students are a threat to students get rid of the SROs.

Teachers sometimes forget to control their cellphones, maybe because school is sometimes a distracting place. What ensures that the teachers will control their guns, so the students can't get to them?

School shootings are extremely rare. Students messing with teachers' stuff, not so rare.

What's the old saying? Luck favors the PREPARED.

The alternative? The "unlucky" kids whose supposed protectors - are UN-prepared...

Gun control people always prefer that no one ask that one, big rude question about their latest big idea; "How would that prevent the next school/mall/etc. shooting?"

The answer, on further examination, is always; "Well it wouldn't ... but its still a good idea!"

... that and repealing the 2nd and confiscating firearms from the law abiding.

And even with that, it's still all wishful thinking that somehow the criminals might find it harder to find guns ... and Unicorns will crap chocolate sundaes and fart flowers on Michigan Avenue.

But none of them ever seems to want to actually get off the couch and do anything about either of those last 2 "solutions".

Much easier and self satisfying to whine online than actually try and do something.

seems much more doable and provides immediate gratification.

Plus, guns are icky...

responsible gun owners leaving guns on the table, in restaurants, out where children can access them, etc. It is obvious that not every gun owner is careful, or responsible, or accurate when shooting. But the NRA is in the business of promoting gun sales to enrich the gun manufacturers. If children die, the blame can always be shifted to careless people.

Which would be just as reprehensible as blaming those who had nothing to do with it...

Can we shift the blame to you? You claim to see the danger yet you have taken no affirmative steps to actually disarm people.

I mean, as long as we're getting all abstract and tangential and all.

Would you be OK with it?

But I'd hope they keep the gun on them, not in a jacket or purse for the kids to access.

would be OK with that. And on-body carry is definitely the way to go, for multiple reasons, but securing the gun itself from misuse is the biggest one.

FWIW, I'll bet if you offered a carry license that allowed you to carry anywhere a LEO could carry if you passed the same firearms quals (with re-qual) as LE, you'd have a million people sign up as soon as they could get their paperwork in order. I don't think that should be necessary for a regular carry license, but a very high percentage of highly trained/proficient shooters (military/ex-military, former LE, and competitive shooters) have CHL's, and a lot of us would be down for that; most state-police-level firearm quals are pretty basic as far as handgun skills go. I think the Federal armed pilots program had them passing the same quals as Air Marshals, which was actually kind of excessive, but you still had quite a few go through the program.

That's about as "thoughtful" and active as gun control fans ever seem to get.

Cut and paste with the occasional cartoon and bumper sticker piece of philosophy.

And they wonder why they never achieve anything in the real world?

Must be the evil NRA buying legislators, couldn't be because they're dumb, lazy and cheap.

To wit, 'false consensus' and 'Dunning-Kruger'; they believe that their views on guns
are far more popular than they really are, while not quite being smart enough to realize
that they really aren't.

I offer up their religious faith in polls with results that tell them what they want to hear,
while studiously ignoring real-world evidence that points to different conclusions.

I think this would explain the common use of the "NRA-as-Satan (or Emmanuel Goldstein,
for those of a literary bent)" memes in gun control circles.

Dana Carvey's Church Lady lampooned the mindset perfectly...

For them it's; "Well, we can't be that stupid and impotent politically, so it must be that evil NRA" (or a Boogeyman to be named later).

The irony comes from the same people laughing at climate change deniers for not accepting science and being generally stupid.

They do give them a run for their money in the first to reach the stupid finish line.

The good news is they show no signs of actually getting off the couch and doing anything besides whining.

But the primaries have been a nice distraction for some of them and given them whole new groups of people to insult and be condescending to.