The loosely stated claims that the SRO was ‘elsewhere’ on the campus only popped up a day after the initial statements that the SRO was off campus.
Yet the SRO was wholly absent after the shooting - and I say that given the fact that no one is saying that he was helping to secure the school after the shooting. No one is saying he was on campus immediately after the shooting.
It’s an important question because if the SRO was indeed absent then that makes a serious case for teachers to have the option of concealed carry.
And what if none of the teachers in the area the killer attacked chose not to carry?
H. L. Menken once said that for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. An nowhere is that more obvious than in cases like this one where both sides are throwing out ideas that will do nothing to prevent shootings like this. So here's an idea; instead of coming up with more useless laws why not tighten up the process we have now? Because what everyone is overlooking is the fact that this shooting should not have happened. The warning signs were there. And unlike past shootings, people did not keep those warning signs to themselves. They contacted the police. The school expressed its concerns. The FBI was notified. But still nothing happened. So forget the new laws. Find where the flaws are in the current process - which should have worked - and fix them. Make sure that the law enforcement authorities don't fall down on the job. Then maybe we'll put a dent in the number of shootings. Forget the worthless, feel-good, well-at-least-we-tried-something crap and fix the system. Fix the system...before people start saying "Why bother reporting it? It won't do any good anyway."