This is the picture that ended school shootings in the year 2001.

In mid-March of 2001, something extraordinary happened. Following a school shooting incident where two students were killed, the nation was in the midst of a rash of copycat shootings that seemed like it would never end. Then, a shooting took place that was unlike any other. The young man in the photo attacked a school in Granite Hills, California with a shotgun. He was shot and stopped by an armed officer, who by good fortune, was on the premises. While there have been other shootings where the shooters were confronted and stopped by armed officers or faculty, (usually after already killing or wounding several people,) never before had one actually been shot and paraded before the cameras like this. The result has been nothing less than astonishing.

This image, which was broadcast nationwide that evening, provided would-be shooters across the country with a spectacular "this could be you" image. There were no school shootings at all for the entire remainder of 2001. What saved the victims at this school, and all others that would have been attacked that year, was armed defense of the school. Only God knows how many lives in all have been saved by that armed officer.

Armed defense has proven irrefutably to stop attackers swiftly and effectively in many school shooting incidents. Since the Granite Hills incident, the immediate and long-term cessation of school shootings has proven the deterrent effect of armed defense as well. But the effect of this incident has now worn off, the shootings have begun anew, and swift action is needed to head them off again.

Thankfully, many states and school districts are beginning to move, if slowly, in the direction of providing armed defense for schools. Most of those that have already done so did it by hiring a single armed officer. While this certainly helps, there are problems with this approach. One, full time officers cost money. Lots of it. Most schools cannot afford the yearly salary of a full time officer. Two, the cost of this salary only provides a minimal level of protection. While a single officer sufficed in the Granite Hills case shown above, it should be noted that there was also a single officer at Columbine, who failed to stop the two better-armed attackers, though he did slow their advance, buying time for police to arrive and still saving lives. There is but one realistic solution, and that is to restore the right of school faculty and officials to lawfully carry concealed weapons. The School Protection Act of 2002 was written to facilitate this, while addressing all the major safety concerns at the same time. Government agencies prefer the idea of "armed professionals," meaning uniformed, paid government officers. The main reason is that it keeps more of them employed, and more funding flowing into their agencies. The fact however is that the training and marksmanship requirements of an officer are not difficult to achieve, and most people can be qualified to the same standards in a short time with training. Training and practice is what determines qualifications, not the act of donning an official looking uniform. Three armed teachers can provide triple the protection of a single paid officer at no cost whatsoever to the taxpayers. The more who choose to carry, the more ground that is defended and the swifter and surer the response to an attack will be.

As for concerns of teachers hitting bystanders, which poses the greater threat? Bullets fired by a teacher who is doing all he or she can to avoid children while stopping the attacker, or bullets fired by the attacker who is deliberately aiming at the children? Remember the case in Jonesboro, Arkansas, where a teacher by the name of Shannon Wright shielded children with her body, and died doing so. It is insulting to suggest that people like her would indiscriminately spray bullets in the direction of young bystanders.

Anti-gun organizations will do whatever it takes to stop this from being enacted. They have had their chance however. Their "gun free school zones" have proven repeatedly to be a security disaster, which has served only to alert potential shooters that should they choose to attack a school, they can do so in complete safety because no one will be allowed to fire back in defense. Had the school in Granite Hills actually been "gun free," the only armed person would have been the attacker, and many would have died, as has been the case in nearly every other shooting. It is interesting to note that since enactment of that law, one hundred percent of all school shootings have taken place inside of "gun free zones." Anti-gun groups like Washington Ceasefire are unconcerned about the high failure rate though. They will stop bills like this however they can regardless of the number of lives it costs, because they don't want people finding out that they can use firearms to protect themselves and others without having to wait for the arrival of government officers to protect them, and without having to pray they are not among those killed in the meantime. Actual safety for children is, regrettably, secondary on their list of concerns.

The time to act is now. The shootings have begun again, and it is only a matter of time before we are having one copycat shooting after another again. We have already had several incidents here in Washington State, including one in Moses Lake in 1996 where two students and one teacher died. There has also been a shotgun fired in the cafeteria at the high school in Issaquah, and many other threatening episodes. We cannot wait for more people to die before taking action. The solution to this threat is now known, proven, and to delay implementation any further would be the height of irresponsibility.

Please, support the School Protection Act of 2002.

For information on how you can help, please contact:

Freedom Restoration Project
P.O. Box 106
Burlington, WA 98233
(360) 757-7122
frpro@mindspring.com.