"Why do teachers ( I include all staff) give up Their right to self defense? Why do teachers Not have the right to protect themselves and the kids?"

 They don't.  

 They have the right to defend themselves, but there are restrictions in some cases.  Saying people give up their rights to defend themselves if they can't have a gun on them is intentionally misleading.  If I punch someone on a plane they have to let me?  They give up their right to stop me from punching them?



Who believes the schools our elite send their children to are unprotected??
The people who will write the law to take your guns send THEIR children where they can be protected.

 We would have to define what you consider "Elite" but I can name multiple politicians that have children in schools in NY and CA for instance that are not "protected" specifically by guns.  They have their kids in no-gun-zone schools with no evidence that secret bodyguards are secretly there with secret guns at the ready.


 As for arming teachers, that is not as simple as going out to the range for a week and tossing a gun in a teachers hand.  Learning to acquire a target and successfully impact it while under fire takes a lot of specialized training.   I agree that it would reduce the murder rate per-minute in school shootings.  
 
 I would think hiring security details with individuals who choose to be armed, choose to take the training and can dedicate time to would be better, but the cost would be high.  Its a trade-off: arming teachers means more firearms dispersed at lower cost, but considerably poor outcomes when tasked to use the weapon.  Trained staff have better outcomes, but much higher cost.
 

 Yeah if a town has 10 schools and one is no-gun-zone then that school should typically be the primary target.

 Arming teachers should be a deterrent, but from a practical defense standpoint they would not be, statistically, very useful.  

 I imagine if all schools were armed, then shooters would go to hospital childbirth centers, daycares, YMCA with kids programs or other after-school activities like football games etc.  

Why is America the only country in the world that needs to arm teachers?
While we're at it,... should we arm the teens that work at the mall?

"So, because bad guys would just go somewhere else, meh..
Why do you seem against protecting the children? "

 I'm not.  This is just you over-reacting to my assessment.  Just because I think a shooter will go somewhere else doesn't mean I am pro-gun-free-zone.

 It means I think a shooter will go somewhere else.  That's it.  Everything else is you making stuff up that I never said.



"Why are you against teachers being able to protect themselves? You tried to pretend that because they wouldn't likely be as good at it as trained people, then it would be inefective."

 I'm not.  This is you over-reacting to my assessment based off decades of work in this specific field.  Just because I think statistically teachers will not perform well under fire does not mean I think no teacher should be armed.

 You are fabricating the idea that I ever said anything along the lines that teachers should not be armed.  I never said anything like that.

 

"I don't think I would prefer to be defenseless even if I believed my best efforts would prove to be innefective. Every fight I got into I gave it my best, even when I thought my best was going to prove insufficient.
Why deny anyone that opportunity?"

 I never said we should deny anything.  This is you over reacting to my assessment.  By using my actual words, not ones you make up that I never said, please provide any statement that I think teachers should be defenseless.

 This is another example of me stating my opinion on a section of a large topic, and since it is not exactly like yours, you pretend I am saying things I never did.  Saying teachers consistently perform poorly under pressure is not equal to saying we should have gun free zones.  

The only thing that is going to stop a bad guy with a gun is a oood guy with a gun.  PERIOD.....    With that said the only meaningful solution that is lawful will be to remove gun free zones, have key staff that are trained, licensed, and of course armed.  

Best regards,

"The only thing that is going to stop a bad guy with a gun is a oood guy with a gun.  PERIOD..... "

 I think the general idea is to not have guns a bad guy can get.  if a bad guy doesn't have a gun, you don't need a good guy with a gun.

 Unrealistic, but that seems to be the argument.

19 good guys with guns standing behind a door listening to children be shot just feet away for 40 minutes.

Those good guys??????

You could have a thousand guys behind that door,... but one... has to be the one to go through that door first.
Good guys with guns has proven useless.

Little children were looking that gunman in the eye... men with guns were hiding.

Your bumper sticker is outdated.

I'm disgusted.
Something has to change.
This is a last straw.