Discover more from Libertarian Prepper
Guns in Schools and the Freedom of Choice
When this piece of news was posted on Google+, the replies were largely from people who were outraged. The first reply was, "Let the stupidest lead the way, that's pretty normal for the USA". And it only got worse from there. I replied as any libertarian might:
As I read it, the original article says that the school district will *allow*, not *force*, teachers to carry guns.
In that case, it is up to the parents and the students to decide whether they want to attend a school where teachers are armed, or one where they are disarmed. And, in time, we will have data on which are in fact the safer environment for children.
I don't understand the willful disregard that some people display towards others' freedom of choice.
Personally? If I had kids going to a school in a country where psychotropic drugs are so over-prescribed as in the United States, I would definitely want some adults at that school equipped to protect my children.
Of course, I would probably never send any kids of mine to a State indoctrination camp to be brainwashed into the cult of Statism in the first place, but the point remains: why do some people protest so vociferously against freedom of competition?
If having armed teachers at a school is indeed such a terrible thing, this would quickly come to light, and parents would opt to send their children to schools with unarmed teachers. This is up to the parents and the students to decide, not for the government. In fact, it's none of the government's business.
I would likewise advocate that airline companies not be forced to use the TSA and other such examples of security theater. Without being forced to use security measures, airline companies would still want to use them - since all things considered, customers would give preference to a safer flight. Except now, different types of security measures would compete between one another, and I suspect it would be quickly revealed that the draconian measures enforced by government are effective only at wasting everyone's time.
The point is - give people a choice, and let alternative systems compete.
If the ideas of Statists are so good, why do they feel the need to outlaw every competing idea? Perhaps precisely because the ideas would be revealed as silly the moment they faced some competition.
This picture comes to mind:
Maybe it's time for more people to realize that good ideas aren't arrived at at the point of a gun.