1st Affirmative Constructive speech:

Were you aware that the United States has a population of 320 million people, in
comparison to its 310 million guns, making it the country with the highest ratio of guns per
citizen? Some want to add more guns to the equation by arming teachers and
administrators in response to recent school shootings.
Contention one: bringing guns into schools raises the alarming possibility that
students may potentially access them. A recent New York Times article by Michael Lou and
Mike McIntire examines the consequences of children encountering guns. Lucas Heagren
found a gun that had been temporarily hidden under the couch by his father. But Lucas
found it and shot himself in the right eye. The same article tells of when a group of youths
found a Glock pistol in an apartment closet while searching for snack money. A 15-year-old
boy was handling the gun when it went off. Alex Whitfield, who had just turned 11, was
struck. These cases are collateral damage of the accessibility of guns in America.
Bringing guns into schools only increases student access to weapons. Lou and McIntire
argue that the answer to preventing dangerous weapons from entering the schools does
not lie in putting the dangerous weapons in the school. Dr. Geoffrey Jackman performed a
study on 10 year old boys to discover if they could find several mock guns hidden in a room
and whether they would fire them. 72 percent discovered the handguns. Of those who found
them, 76 percent handled them, and 48 percent pulled the triggers. The study also found
that more than 90 percent of the boys who handled the gun or pulled the trigger reported
that they had previously received some sort of gun safety instruction.
Contention two: a limited training experience won't be sufficient when it comes to
real life situations. Teachers are already carrying guns in Arkansas, and their training
system is not nearly sufficient. New York Times reporter Kim Stevenson writes that teachers
receive 60 hours of training. Steve Gunter, a retired history teacher, said that no teacher
that I know of could ever receive enough training. Terry Marks, a retired police sergeant
from La Mesa, California, agrees. He argues that Officers sign up for hazardous duty, and
they train continually. Educators cannot be adequately trained to a level where they could
reliably respond to an incident with a gun-wielding suspect intent on destruction. His
argument finds truth with an examination of the New York Police Departments firearm
training. The NYPD is all about safety first, accuracy second, and speed last. The firearm
training begins with a 90-hour course in the Basic School and continues throughout one's
career with semi-annual, in-service Field Firearms Training sessions of five hours each.
The training continues with another 63 hour course and written exam. In total, NYPD
officers receive 153 hours of firearm training, plus another 5 hours every year they are in
service. Thats nearly double the training a teacher would receive in Arkansas.
Contention three: Adequately training and arming teachers would be simply too costly. A
survey performed by the School Improvement Network finds that, 72.4 percent of
educators say they would be unlikely to bring a firearm to school if they were allowed to do
so. Even so, the cost of training and providing guns to the 27.6 percent who would bring a
firearm to school would be more than most school systems could afford. In Maryland, for
example, receiving a permits to carry a weapon can be difficult, and costly if it were to occur
on a school wide measure. The NRA has found that the fees that come with purchasing a
gun total to around 30 dollars. This does not include the cost of a typical handgun, for which
prices range anywhere from around 300 dollars to 1000, depending on the manufacturer.
The NRA has also found that the cost for obtaining a permit to carry a handgun in Maryland
is 85 dollars, and that permit must be renewed every two years for a fee of 60 dollars. In 4
years, the cost of one person owning a gun will total around 1000 dollars, depending on the

price of the gun. If 100 (1/10) of the teachers and administrators at Montgomery Blair High
School were to purchase a gun and a permit, it would cost at least 100,000 dollars. This
doesnt include the fees of adequately training each one of the teachers. According to the
Maryland gun training website, the cost of the average gun course is 200 dollars. If 100
teachers were to take ONE course, it would cost 20,000 dollars.
The extreme risks and financial costs of providing teachers with firearms fully
outweighs any benefits that may arise.

Ist Affirmative Rebuttal Its important to protect our children, but by fighting fire with fire, we
will do just the opposite. My opponents argue that putting more guns in schools will prevent
gun violence. But we argue that risk of mistakes and accidents will only increase it. A recent
article published in the Huffington Post supports this fear, pointing out that the rules that
train and prescribe who holds guns at school will lapse as rules do. A gun will find its way
into a teachers desk, briefcase, or purse. And a child will get his hand on it. My opponents
raised concerns about the financial costs of other alternatives, however while some these
alternatives may be nearly as costly as guns, they are not nearly as risky. A metal detector
in the hands of a child is just a metal detector. A metal detector in the hands of someone
who is mentally unstable is again, just a metal detector. Replacing metal detector with gun
in the previous sentences instantly raises fear. Giving teachers the added responsibility of
protecting their students with a weapon, giving them the knowledge that they may have to
murder someone to protect their kids raises another set of problems. Teachers should
teach. They already discipline, give extra help, grade papers, attend meetings. They should
not have to be security guards as well.