Ore. lawmaker says teachers should be allowed guns
MEDFORD, Ore. (AP) - An Oregon lawmaker contends the massacre that left more than two dozen people dead at a Connecticut elementary school is another "heartbreaking failure" of school personnel to ensure protection, and is a reminder that teachers should be allowed to carry guns in the classroom.
State Rep. Dennis Richardson, a Central Point Republican, wrote in an email to three southern Oregon school superintendents that gun bans on school property must be overturned, the Mail Tribune newspaper reported Saturday.
"If I had been a teacher or the principal at the Sandy Hook Elementary School and if the school district did not preclude me from having access to a firearm, either by concealed carry or locked in my desk, most of the murdered children would still be alive, and the gunman would still be dead, and not by suicide," he wrote.
When contacted by phone, Richardson added that he believes at least three officials in every school should be trained in the use of firearms.
In 2009, the Medford School District barred a South Medford High School teacher from bringing her gun to school. The teacher later lost a court appeal case.
"We need to ensure that our children are safe, and we can't do that by disarming those who are on the scene," Richardson said.
Medford police Chief Tim George disagreed with Richardson, saying that it's not the responsibility of teachers to make deadly force decisions on the job.
"Teachers don't go into teaching to be police officers, they want to teach kids," George said. "In crisis situations there are a lot of very complex things happening all at once and you have to constantly train for deadly force incidents."
Medford schools Superintendent Phil Long, who received the email from Richardson, said he believes it's best if teachers focus on getting children to safety if a shooting occurs. The district trains its staff in lockdown procedures meant to protect children from violence on school grounds.
Long said the district called attention to those safety procedures in the wake of the Connecticut tragedy. Employees were reminded of where to go and what to do should such a situation occur in Medford.
"I know (Richardson) is well-intentioned when he says this," Long said. "But we can't jump to conclusions immediately after a tragedy like this occurs."
State Rep. Dennis Richardson, a Central Point Republican, wrote in an email to three southern Oregon school superintendents that gun bans on school property must be overturned, the Mail Tribune newspaper reported Saturday.
"If I had been a teacher or the principal at the Sandy Hook Elementary School and if the school district did not preclude me from having access to a firearm, either by concealed carry or locked in my desk, most of the murdered children would still be alive, and the gunman would still be dead, and not by suicide," he wrote.
When contacted by phone, Richardson added that he believes at least three officials in every school should be trained in the use of firearms.
In 2009, the Medford School District barred a South Medford High School teacher from bringing her gun to school. The teacher later lost a court appeal case.
"We need to ensure that our children are safe, and we can't do that by disarming those who are on the scene," Richardson said.
Medford police Chief Tim George disagreed with Richardson, saying that it's not the responsibility of teachers to make deadly force decisions on the job.
"Teachers don't go into teaching to be police officers, they want to teach kids," George said. "In crisis situations there are a lot of very complex things happening all at once and you have to constantly train for deadly force incidents."
Medford schools Superintendent Phil Long, who received the email from Richardson, said he believes it's best if teachers focus on getting children to safety if a shooting occurs. The district trains its staff in lockdown procedures meant to protect children from violence on school grounds.
Long said the district called attention to those safety procedures in the wake of the Connecticut tragedy. Employees were reminded of where to go and what to do should such a situation occur in Medford.
"I know (Richardson) is well-intentioned when he says this," Long said. "But we can't jump to conclusions immediately after a tragedy like this occurs."
"Medford police Chief Tim George disagreed with Richardson, saying that it's not the responsibility of teachers to make deadly force decisions on the job."
Â
The teachers responsibility, as is all of ours, is to our personal safety and in part to the safety of those around us. It is NOT the police officers jobs to insure that we are safe. Nor do they have a legal responsibility to provide any of us with protection (See Warren Vs. DC)
Â
Teachers should have the option to carry a firearm as long as they are trained and practice regularly. A deadly force decision isn't very difficult to make if there is an active shooter.
Â
Â
To add to my post below, how about we look at some numbers. There are 98,817 public schools in the US. Let's say for the sake of argument there are 12 school shootings per year in the US, or one every month (much higher than the average number). In fact, for an entire 10 year period between 2000 and 2010 there were 13 total school shootings in the US. So 12 per year is extremely exaggerated. Divide 12/98817. It's a number so small that my calculator can only display the number in an exponential format.Â
Â
Now, let's look at some numbers on guns. I can only find numbers on household ownership, but according to a 2004 Duke University study, statistics show that there is one additional gun related death each year for every 10,000 people who bring guns into their home. In another study by Charles Branas of the University of Pennsylvania, it was found that just the act of carrying a gun increases the chance of gun related injury or death. According to the study, people who carry are "4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher."Â When more guns are present, more gun deaths occur, even in defense scenarios.Â
Â
So what do we do to keep this from happening if throwing guns at the problem wouldn't help? Well, in some "deprived" areas of Chicago and Baltimore, they have instituted public awareness programs that treat gun (and all) violence the same way that we treat diseases as public safety concerns. Due to these programs, shootings have plummeted in those areas between 41 and 73 percent.Â
Â
The bottom line is that firearms can be an effective defensive tool, but their presence alone increases the risk of death. In the school setting, we can't increase risk of shooting injury or death simply so that there might be a chance a shooter can be defended against in the astronomically small chance of a shooter entering a school. Public awareness, violence prevention programs, and increased gun safety education are the keys to keeping our children safe from gun violence. Throwing guns at the problem just won't work.
 @jowsuf Utah has a policy to allow teachers to carry concealed weapons. They have only had 1 school shooting, which was a suicide that happened last month. They have had NO school shootings where a shooter was aiming at other people. There are also no accidental or negligent discharges recorded in the Utah school system. When properly trained it can be an effective deterrent against mass shooters. The people that do something like this are cowards just intent on making a name for themselves before they die. If they knew there was a chance of some armed resistance I'm sure it would deter some of them.
 @jowsuf Brother I hear your passion. Those who want to overreact so soon after a tragedy may later regret their actions. Allow communities to heal first, as we retreat from being guided by that first wave of anger.
Â
Look at the laws that were rushed and passed right after 9/11. We have allowed our government to erode our civil liberties. Shame on us. We have now become just like one of those countries (Russia, E Germany, Cuba) that I learned about in 50's/60's school that monitors and restricts citizen travel, wiretaps, secret prisons, searches without warrants etc.
Â
As Jowsuf said, "Throwing guns at the problem just won't work."
I posted this once and I'll post it again:
Â
For those touting the absurd idea that teachers should have guns and that schools shouldn't be "gun free zones," according to the National School Safety Center, students have a .000000017218543% chance of being killed by gun violence at school. This does not justify bringing guns into schools. School shootings are a freak occurrence, just like airplane crashes. Don't let the media hype overwhelm your sensibilities. The media is very irresponsible when it comes to these tragedies. The benefit does not even come close to outweighing the risk. This is a complete knee-jerk panic reaction.
 @jowsuf If the odds of a school shooting are so small, why is there such an uproar to pass a bunch of new gun laws?
 @jowsuf As I read the initial comments here, I was disgusted. To give guns against gun violence is just ridiculous. Give teachers training? Psych evals ?  Conceal carry ? OMG !! That whole scenario makes no sense at all. What if the teacher(s) do not wish to participate...would they be fired? If I had a child I would take him/her out of any school where the teachers had weapons. It is not the answer.Â
 @jowsuf What is that I hear "jowsuf"?  Of yes, that's the voice of reason. You got it right, bro.
While you fools stick around and play with your guns, me and the other evolving folks will have made it through Ascension (look it up), and then you gun lovers can sit around talking about who to shoot first. Inform yourselves and wake up!
 @I AM CATALYST5 I AM Oo. Someone acts all high and mighty and better than everyone else and they think this is going to get someone to take them seriously.  Sure, go with that. And given how you have acted you might want to rethink whether or not you "made it through Ascension" or are evolving.
Interesting; I've seen an elementary teacher and a high school teacher forcibly discipline their student. Â If they had guns, I think those teachers would be serving time right now and those students wouldn't be around. Â
Â
I wonder what percentage of people were carrying guns during past mall and other public area mass-shootings. Â I am sure there is some statistic stating that 1 in # of Americans carries a gun. Â With that said, how does those numbers help in the past mall and public area mass-shootings? Â I don't think I have ever heard a story where a citizen saved people, because they were carrying a gun during public area shootings (i.e not schools and gun free zone areas). Â Usually, innocent people get killed, and then the killer kills himself or herself.
 @31F Citizens stopped two shootings in Wisconsin in the last year.
 @31F There are plenty of incidents stopped by law abiding citizens who are carrying firearms. There was a shooter in a church in Colorado Springs not too long ago that was stopped before too much could happen. The problem is the media doesn't make a big deal about those cases, it doesn't play onto our fears. There was also an individual in Salt Lake this year who stopped a guy who was stabbing people in a mall with his legally carried pistol. There have been reports that the recent shooting in the Oregon mall was stopped because a citizen drew his firearm and aimed it at the assailant, who then killed himself.
Â
We can postulate all we want but the fact is those states, like Utah, that has allowed conceal carry into schools hasn't had any incidents of teachers using the guns on students in order to discipline them. How many mass school shootings have they had in Utah? 0...
Â
The gun topic aside this really is a mental health crisis, the gun is just a tool. If it wasn't around these people would use other objects such as the bath school disaster which took a lot more lives WITHOUT a firearm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
 @31F The stories are there and easy to find. Typically though the situations are someone threatening someone with a gun not a mass shooting.
If I were a teacher in this day and age of mass mental disorders and prescription pills for every possible malady I sure as hell would have a gun on me. I do anyway.
and when these kids start getting a hold of the teachers guns, will they realize this was not a good idea ! hmmm did that not just happen?
 @maggie112 Yes,it is possible there could be incidents if some teachers are armed how ever it is fact that there are twenty dead children in Connecticut largely because there was no one in the school who could shoot back.  Think how different it could have been if the brave Principle had a gun instead of facing down thew shooter bare handed.
 @maggie112 Like any gun handling you have to secure the weapon. While its possible this could happen, don't you think just one teeny tiny little moment that this would be taken into account and that steps would be taken to help ensure that doesn't happen.
This comment has been deleted
 @Komo Dragon While I have no problem with guns I'm not terribly happy with the idea of a lot of the people out there packing. Given what I witness in human interactions on a daily basis I wouldn't want a lot of these jokers armed. I am for more people carrying though.
 @SeattleJoe  @Komo Dragon I think for the most part carrying a gun tends to calm people down and become less confrontational, it has for me. The gun owners I know who actively carry take their responsibility very seriously. It's not like legal conceal or open carry is a new thing, we have a lot of people doing it and they aren't gunning anyone down for looking at them wrong.
Enough is enough. The Federal government should mandate and fund metal detectors for the front entrance to every public school.
 @Honest_Abe A metal detector would NOT have stopped the shooting last week. They already had new procedures to keep out people who didn't belong and he fought his way inside. Metal detectors would do as much good as a sign that says, "No weapons".
@Honest_Abe What will stop the armed crazy from going past the metal detector with his gun? Unless sufficient force is right therfe to stop someone they will not abide by any rule.
This comment has been deleted
What do you write on a sign for an open invitation for mayhem?...Answer..."No Guns Allowed"
The law abiding folks will comply...Do you really think the crooks and murderers will? If you do, I am surely worried about You!!! Keep away from me!!!
Absolutely! these emotional people calling for gun bans, really? That's like saying "barn doors should be made to never be allowed to opened to prevent horses getting out" - stop being ridiculous!!
Â
Arm the teachers, solve the problem!!
What we really need is the return to a ban on assault rifles. They serve no purpose other than killing people. The gun he chose to use has about 950 to 1000 rounds per minute in automatic and 30 t0 90 rounds in semi automatic mode. Who needs that many rounds to hunt? They are killing machines manufactured for legalized murder known as wars.
 @jcman he wasn't using an assault rife, he was using a semi-automatic rifle. Production for true assault rifles has been banned for civilian use since 1986. Some states have allowed grandfathered weapons to still be owned by "normal" people and guess what? They aren't used in any of these shootings. Semi-automatic rifles are widely used in hunting, the AR-15 is a great platform for deer.
 @Scott According to what I read he was using a 223 Bushmaster. Something that holds 30 rounds and in various forms was developed for military use. Granted it was semi but if you have a fast trigger finger you can go through that many rounds in less than a minute. I have heard, not sure it is true, that if you know what you are doing you can make a minor modification and have an illegal automatic rifle. Personally I used to hunt until I came to Western Washington and was working in a gas station late Sunday afternoon and a couple guys came by who had been hunting. I asked them if they got anything and they replied, "We got a couple 'sound' shots." When asked what that was they said, "You know, you hear a deer going through the brush and take a shot at it." In my experience you seldom hear deer. Anyway, I gave up hunting as I valued my life too much.
 @jcman Pretty much any gun was originally developed for military use, from revolvers to pistols to rifles. Yes, you can run through rounds very quickly even in a semi-automatic and it doesn't make much modification to turn one into fully automatic. I haven't heard of a single mass shooter making that modification though. Yes, there have been occasional accidental deaths by hunters. I don't see any real stats on it but accidental deaths overall are much lower than accidental deaths by cars, doctors, falls, etc. It would lead me to believe that you had more of a chance dying in a fall while hunting, or dying in a car accident to where you are going hunting than to actually die from being accidentally shot hunting.
Â
 @jcman Um wow. You really have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I see RN1 and JFR are covering most of the bases. As to the " They serve no purpose other than killing people." What a load crappola. If you look at the number of rounds fired every year from an AR type rifle there are hardly any used to kill someone but literally millions used for non-killing. This idea that they are only for killing is quite a load.
@jcman and you do realize that it is illegal for anyone to own a fully automatic rifle in the U.S. unless they have an NFA licence which is both costly and time consuming to get. Every single one of these event's has been a semi-automatic weapon. Which simply means that each trigger pull equals one round is discharged and another round is "automatically" loaded into the chamber to be discharged with the next trigger pull.
Â
I love you anti gun idiot's because you spout off with the largest amount of mis-information and uneducated trolling. Try educating yourself in something before you go spouting off about how against it you are.
Â
BTW the maximum rate of fire for a FULLY automatic AR15 is 800 RD's a minute, like I said educate yourself otherwise you only look like the idiot you obviously are!
 @JFR  @jcman In some states such as Oregon, Idaho, Louisiana, you don't need a NFA license, you only need the $200 ATF tax stamp which isn't hard to get.
Â
Fully automatics are great for the movies and turret mounted weapons, not so great for carrying around and using. When I was in the military my M16 spent MUCH more time in semi-automatic mode than the 3 round burst I had.
 @jcman HAHAHAHA... My AR must be defective, then. Thousands of rounds fired, never hit a single person. But your ignorance is showing: the cyclic rate of fire is meaningless. He was using (according to any reports I've heard so far) a SEMI-AUTO AR15, which uses 30-rnd magazines. At MOST, if he's not really aiming, he could get ~100 rounds/min. Hunting has nothing to do with it. It's about being armed comparable to troops, or the most a criminal is likely to have. rifles are rarely used in crimes, because they are too big co carry and conceal. There was no significant effect on the crime or homicide rate before, during, and after the AW ban - it had ZERO net effect. OTOH, they (AR15s) are the weapon of choice for a friend of mine, who because of an auto accident has a bad shoulder and bum hand, so using most handguns, or high-recoil rifles or shotguns. A large mag means she doesn't have to stop and fumble to reload as often. the pistol grip allows it to be used well with only one good hand. It's a perfect "disabled person's" gun.
Â
And, you know what you call people who refuse to fight in wars? Slaves, or dhimmis, or dead, or subjects, or second-class minorities, etc.
Teachers having guns at school is the best idea I've ever thought about or heard mentioned. Just because someone is a teacher does not mean they are incapable of protecting kids from nutjobs as a last resort. Nobody wants to see teachers toting guns around, nor do we want to see kids terrified by these. The key is education. Once kids learn that a firearm is nothing more than a tool, it can't be equated to something scary. It is a tool that carries with it a great responsibility.Â
Â
But none of that will bring those kids back to their parents. Too long we have gone back and forth over "Gun Control", which is just another word for gun confiscation. If we could just knock all this stupid, detrimental crap off things like this might not happen so much. Criminals like this are basically cowards. And more importantly, CRIMINALS who don't give a rip about law. A teacher, law abiding and trained in basic firearms use and self defense, is worth a whole police department in deterring this sort of activity. Police tend to never actually PREVENT most crime as they are nearly always reacting after the fact. It's just the way it is. By the times Police arrived to this school 20 students and 7 adults, including the gunman, were dead. This is no fault of Police. It's no fault of the school staff. The blame stands squarely on the shoulders of the anti-gun crowd, and unfortunately for Police and every single parent, school staff member, and living student at that school, the scars they bear will last a lifetime.Â
Â
For me, it's for those living that I pray. Their ordeal has only begun. For those dead, well those Angels are real ones now. They will never again have to suffer.Â
This guy is a "law maker"? smh
How about schools having cops on duty or security guards ha
 @Cody Crawford A properly trained teacher would be just as effective without the expense...
Amazing idea, I wonder if he's even awake
Gun free zones keep law abiding people from carrying. I'm a former Marine who now works in IT for a school district. Drives me nuts knowing that I'll be unarmed if/when a child/staff member/parent/nut job/.... decides to start the shooting.
Â
I agree it's not the job of a teacher to make deadly force decisions. Why restrict the right to carry such that only the criminal has the firearm?
Â
 @USMCLSS Yes because the career field IT is so dangerous LOL
 @Larry*X*K  @USMCLSS Oh please. You can never know when something bad could happen. In fact I'd bet there was an IT person at that school. Looks like IT could be pretty dangerous. Never the less, what the heck does profession have to do with this?Â
can't they just enact a LAW that bans MURDER? ..............oh, yeah, nevermind, that one worked out well....
Â
It may be worth the money to put metal detectors in ALL schools. At least they could catch those parents coming in w/ guns and knives. Yes, it happens. Some parents are bad tempered individuals and don't give a hoot who they threaten or kill.
 @Koawoodplayer No, I don't agree. They can't even keep weapons out of *prisons*. Passive security must always work, perfectly, and have total access control. offense only has to find a small hole, once. It's not cost-effective. It *also* sends a message that security and protection is the job of someone else, and "outside" is rife with dangerous criminals. Further, it sends the message that it is *the tool*, not *the person*, that is dangerous. It fosters paranoia and fear. THOSE are horrible messages for them to take home, and they will, not just that it's "safe inside." Teaching *active defense*, meaning when bad stuff happens you react rapidly to stop the threat is a MUCH more effective method, AND it's much better for mental health. It fosters the idea that YOU are responsible for getting things done.
Â
BUT, you respond, THESE ARE ONLY FIRST-GRADERS!. Yes. Some of them can carry good flashlights, ALL of them can throw stuff, and the teachers can do primary offense. It's hard to aim when you can't see because there are a dozen 250 lumen flashlights shining in your eyes, and stuff is bouncing off your face. It gives the teacher time to close in with some sort of pre-planned improvised weapon (shovel, 3-hole punch, or whatever suits them) to stop the threat in a more violent way. Is it perfect? Will it keep anyone from getting hurt, ever? No, of course not. BUT gives them a fighting chance, where today they have none.
 @RN1  @Koawoodplayer Your crazy/dangerous ideas would turn a helpless child into a target. Stop bad man or I'll throw my glue stick at you!
 @Grunged  @RN1  @Koawoodplayer So you would rather they stand there and be shot without doing anything? Man I don't want you near my kids ever.
 @Grunged  @Koawoodplayer Um, dude? They WERE ALREADY TARGETS. How much deader do you think they could be made? How much worse off would they be if they blinded the attacker, slowed him down, and bounced a bunch of stuff off his face? Ever tried shooting a moving target with things being thrown at you? Some of the local shooting instructors do just that - toss tennis balls at you while you are shooting, to simulate the stress of an actual violent encounter. It makes hitting the targets a LOT harder. Try it some time.
Not a bad idea ! Let the public decide/vote for it.
Wow, I am very much pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment, but there is no way I'd want my kids in the classroom with armed teachers. If we do that, the next shooting will be from within. Why risk it?
 @Bianca There is merit to what you say. A lot of the teachers I know should not be near a firearm ever. Of course frankly they shouldn't be near children either but that a whole different topic.
@SeattleJoe -- Thank you. That was kind of my point. However, since posting last, I read about The Guardian Plan out of Texas, and I must say it sounds like a well thought out plan, that could work in other states/districts.
 @Bianca why risk it? when was the last time you had a teacher go ballastic and attacked students? what did the teacher use as a weapon? was the teacher trying to kill the students?
Â
one doesnt go to a university for 4+ years just to shoot school aged children. if they wanted to shoot young people they would do it BEFORE they wasted their life going to school not after. and sure there's things that happen later in life but i'll tell ya, it's hard to make someone SO WEAK to commit an act such as this if they were strong enough to go to school to do what they wanted to do with their lives, enrich their community through education.
@DylanJ @Bianca yeah well when was the last time you had a mentally disturbed man gun down 20 kids? i think a teacher going ape squeeze mad is less likely to happen.
 @DylanJ -- Say what? What does ones education have to do with anything? Seung-Hui Cho, the Virginia Tech shooter, was a senior English major. He'd nearly finished his degree, and he went on a rampage and killed 32 people and wounded 17. Under your argument people don't waste their life going to school and then kill young people. But clearly they do. My point was simply arming teachers is not the solution. What the solution is, I do not know, but putting firearms in the hands of our educators is not. I'd rather see school police officers on staff before I see teachers with packing heat.Â
@Bianca @DylanJ So you have a cop and he goes down. then what hold hands and sign Kumbaya? No the more fire arms that are available the better. let that next wack job try and get through a wall of flying lead.
 @Bianca what does an education have to do with anything?? don't be ridiculous!
Â
a quick story on my old high school, it spans 3 square blocks with 5 different buildings and all of them having multiple stories. I believe at the school (like most all schools in at least the everett area) there's a police officer stationed there. NOW if the police officer was there and about, how long would it take him to get to the location? AT LEAST 30 seconds if he was nearby and several minutes if if was maybe on the third floor of one building running down 3 flights of stairs then running 3 blocks then down another flight of stairs THEN trying to find the offender without getting shot and killed himself. be realistic about it please. think before you speak! haven't you seen the walking dead. come on Carl! you're grounded!
 @Bianca Because we HAVE tried the "gun-free zone" signs, and it *failed*. Repeatedly. So, next up...
 @RN1 -- I agree these "gun-free-zones" don't work. They only keep responsible gun owners out, but is the next step really arming our educators? I just don't think it is.Â
@RN1 -- This article out of Texas has changed my mind. I think, under their Guardian Plan, maybe arming a certain number of teachers or volunteers guardians wouldn't be that bad an idea.Â
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/18/stop-school-shootings-by-letting-teachers-fire-back-say-texas-officials/
 @Bianca  @RN1 It has happened in other states with no incidents of "shooting from within". We can theorize what will happen all we want but in real world scenarios the fear has turned to be unfounded.
@Bianca @RN1 and what would your answer be? hold hands and sing Kumbaya?
 @Grunged  @Bianca You would rather they passively lay there and die? Well, that's nice of you. not very effective, but very polite, I suppose.
Â
Ever looked into the beam of a 200 lumen flashlight? Try it. You'll understand better then. Right now, I *have* a child in first grade. If someone comes in shooting, cowering helpless makes him an easy target, and I do NOT want him doing that. I've seen him throw stuff. Get a dozen kids like him heaving stuff with wild abandon at a shooter, and the girls shining lights into the intruders eyes, and I can pretty much guarantee that they won't be shooting well. That gives everyone a better chance, including the teacher, to stop the shooting more evvectivly. No, in first grade they can't do a lot, but teaching them that they are helpless is the worst possible message we tan tell them. But by the time they are in MS or HS, they CAN do a lot more, and the attitude is ingrained.
Â
Teaching them to take charge is a GREAT life lesson. Talk to any self-defense teacher or rape councilor: the best way to recover from the mental trauma of a violent encounter is to be sure that you did everything you possibly could have done to prevent or stop the attack. Being compliant greatly increases the PTSD of the event.
 @RN1  @Bianca You would want your grade school child to stand in front of an armed murder and throw stuff at him or shine a flashlight in his face? Really? I agree we need to come together to work on solutions but your idea is completely ridiculous.Â
 @Bianca Other than the basic idea I outlines above and elsewhere (flashlights, throwing stuff, improvised weapons) I have yet to see any alternatives that are even remotely cost-effective, and pretty much ALL the suggestions have negative side-effects (in addition to cost).
Â
I'm all ears if you have a better idea, other than "bigger NO GUNS! signs".