Subscribe now to get the latest news on guns, gear, gun rights, and personal defense delivered straight to your inbox daily!

Required fields are bold...

Email Address:
First Name:
Zip Code:

The Stupidest “No Guns In Schools” Comment Ever. Until the Next One . . .

Garden Valley School, Idaho (courtesy

“It takes at least 45 minutes for officers to reach the Garden Valley School District — a district made up of less than 300 students all taught under the same building,” the AP reports. “As a result, the school board approved this month purchasing guns to remain locked inside the school and trained six employees to use the weapons in an emergency.” Cost? $3500, plus equipment donated by the community. What could possibly be wrong with this picture? I know! Let’s ask Allison Anderman, a staff attorney with Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence! Because no pro-gun AP story could possibly end without a quote from an anti . . .

Even with training, it’s no guarantee teachers and staff will prevent fatalities in a high-stakes situation, said Allison Anderman, a staff attorney with Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a nonprofit opposed to arming teachers.

She added that housing guns in schools could create a chilling effect for students who may be less inclined to speak out knowing that the teacher could be armed.

“Just having people armed doesn’t make a school safer,” Anderman said.

Does that mean that just having people disarmed does? I don’t think so. Nor does anyone who cares about the safety of our children.


  1. avatar Hoplopfheil says:

    Wearing a seatbelt doesn’t make you invulnerable.

    And yet I wear one every time I’m in a car. That’s weird. I must be crazy.

    1. avatar 277Volt says:

      I know two people that survived because they weren’t wearing seat belts and got thrown clear before the vehicle was crushed. Still wear mine every time.

      1. avatar NJ2AZ says:

        aye. many many years ago my grandma was tboned and they speculated not wearing her seatbelt allowed her to be displaced instead of held in place and squished.

        still wear mine too!

      2. avatar Aerindel says:

        I wonder. I’ve heard that story my entire life but I’m an EMT and have responded to hundreds of car wrecks and dozens of fatalities and I have never once seen a dead person who would have been saved by not having a seatbelt. In fact, the only dead person I ever pulled from a car who was wearing a seatbelt died of a heart attack before crashing.

        There have been a couple fatalities I responded to where it was unknown if they where belted or not but those where all catastrophic wrecks with the car torn into multiple pieces.

        1. avatar JoshuaS says:

          I had a friend who stupidly drove drunk and was saved because he was thrown to the other side of the vehicle. The driver’s side was completely crushed.

          But it is the exception that proves the rule. One must plan for the more usual danger first and must not sacrifice that for the rared scenarios.

          Unfortunately people like to latch on to the unusual rather what is for the most part scenarios. More cops die in traffic accidents than anything else, but they rationalize not buckling up so that they can draw more quickly exiting the car (or at least that is what I have been told by several)

          There are 300+ millions guns. A handful get found by a child and tragedy ensues. While it too is rare, it is less rare to have to use the gun to defend self-family.

          And so on.

        2. avatar MacBeth 51 says:

          I was rolled my car and hit a power pole while it was on its side. The pole crushed the roof down below what had be the bottom edge of the window. If I had been wearing my belt, the shoulder harness would have held me against the seat back, the top of which was crushed down over a foot, and I would have been killed. That said, I regard it as a freak occurrence, and always wear my belt. I am a former EMT, and have seen many wreks where the only reason the people survived was their seatbelts

      3. avatar Sian says:

        For every one of those, there’s probably 1000 that wouldn’t have died if they just had their seatbelt on.

        Always know the odds when you’re playing for high stakes.

  2. avatar drav says:

    I love how the anti’s reasoning is if it doesn’t work 100% of the time (doesn’t prevent every school death ever) it’s a failure of an idea.
    It won’t prevent every school shooting therefore we should not prevent any!

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      As long as they aren’t hypocrites and are willing to apply that same standard to the passage of every anti gun bill…

    2. avatar General Zod says:

      Hey, if it saves the life of one child murdering piece of trash…

    3. avatar Phil LA says:

      We’ll said.

    4. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      “I love how the anti’s reasoning is if it doesn’t work 100% of the time (doesn’t prevent every school death ever) it’s a failure of an idea.”

      Except for the idea of “gun free zones”.

      1. avatar Ha says:

        Liberal logic:

        If your idea doesn’t succeed 100% of the time, then it is invalid.

        If my idea doesn’t fail 100% of the time, then it is valid.

    5. avatar Evil Bob says:

      By the same logic, if a school fails to graduate 100% of the students 100% of the time, the whole public education system should be shut down.

  3. avatar Russ Bixby says:

    Neither do armed police guaranty the the safety of students in “a high stakes situation,” but tney do improve the odds rather better than unarmed police.

    Same with armed staff. Jeeze Louise.

    Also, “under the same building…?” Hmmm. I s’pose that’s better’n “in the same roof.”

  4. This is the most insane reverse logic I have ever read. With 45 minutes before the possibility of police showing up, to not arm the staff would be a crime. Someone could go in and spend 30 minutes killing everyone, even with and edged instrument, and still have 15 minutes to get away.

  5. avatar DrVino says:

    They’re Baghdad Bobing it…

  6. Yeah what’s so great about armed teachers making things better when in reality they will make things worse not just against themselves. But towards other teachers/staff and students.

    1. avatar JWM says:

      Tubesteak, see my comment about Allison. Full retard, you went there.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        If one gun-grabbing teacher shoots another gun-grabbing teacher that’s a win in my book..

        One gun-grabbing teacher dead, the other in prison.


      2. avatar Chadwick P. says:

        Tubesteak haha that’s perfect for this idiot. Is it Bloomturd himself? Hey Billy Tubesteak, You do know you will always fail right? I mean us backwards, freedom loving, rednecks, have all the scary guns. Haha irrational fear is so funny to watch and brother the left’s irrational fear business is a boomin.

    2. avatar Excedrine says:

      @Tubesteak — ** Yeah, what’s so great about armed teachers making things better is that, contrary to thoroughly disconnected delusions of hoplophobes, in reality they won’t make things worse for anyone except prospective psychopaths.

      Fixed that for you. Now, go away.

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      Yeah what’s so great about armed teachers making things better when in reality they will make things worse not just against themselves. But towards other teachers/staff and students.

      It’s easy to dismiss other people’s solutions – especially when you don’t offer one to defend. Please elaborate for us why defensive preparation is unwise.

    4. avatar K-Bizz says:

      Gr8 b8 m8. No deb8, they’re ir8. I r8 8/8.


    5. avatar Daily Beatings says:

      First the article said six employees, not six teachers. Second is it reasonable to believe that some of those employees have either military training or are familiar with firearms, otherwise they wouldn’t have volunteered for the training. And finally a plan of action to combat an attack on the school and its students is much better than your plan of hiding under a desk pissing in your pants and praying the attacker doesn’t find you.

      If your retort is going to be if we didn’t have guns this wouldn’t happen may I remind you of the Charlie Hebdo attack where in a country with very strict gun control laws two individuals went on a murderous rampage with almost no resistance.

    6. avatar Hillary for Prison says:

      Hey, did you know that by commenting on TTAG, you’re supporting the “gun lobby” (over 100 million Americans btw), the NRA, the GOP, and worst of all: Israel! I bet that really irks a racist anti-Semitic hoplophobe like yourself. So by all means, keep trolling and bringing in the revenue for them. Sleep on that.

    7. avatar Defens says:

      You bet! “Do your homework, Tommy. Or eat lead!” That sort of thing happens ALL the time!

    8. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

      Bill Maher, is that you?

  7. avatar Hoplopfheil says:

    Also: “She added that housing guns in schools could create a chilling effect for students who may be less inclined to speak out knowing that the teacher could be armed.”

    Are you kidding me? Your fear is psychopath teachers? Is everybody out to get you now?

    1. avatar Rokurota says:

      Yup. The ol’ “anyone with a gun is itchin’ to shoot you at the slightest provocation” shtick.

      I think we know what chills diverse opinions, and it isn’t guns. It’s intolerant anti-free speech attitudes that demand the silence of “microaggressors” and “trigger warnings.”

      Did I just type “trigger warnings?” Oh, the irony.

      1. avatar Hoplopfheil says:

        My favorite kind of trigger warning.


        1. avatar Ha says:


          Gun goes “bang” if you pull it!

    2. avatar Michael Walker says:

      Trust teachers with the teaching and well being of your children every day.

      Give that teacher a gun, and they suddenly become a raging psychopath, willing to kill anyone who disagrees or asks a question after class.

      I certainly have a lot more respect and faith in teachers than that. You would think that the Teachers Unions would make the same point. I guess not.

      Regardless, I think this goes back to liberals biggest fear: that if they were given a gun, they couldn’t trust themselves with it. They know they are absolutely unqualified to own or even handle a firearm. Therefore, they transfer that innate fear onto everyone else

      1. avatar Royal Tony says:

        No wonder they’ve summarily done away with woodshop.

    3. avatar Bob says:

      You don’t understand, you see guns, ALL BY THEMSELVES make people want to just lose control and go kill somebody.

      This REALLY IS the way lefties feel (notice I didn’t say ‘think’ , they don’t do that).

      … and yes, I am shouting.

    4. avatar Aerindel says:

      I dunno, when I was in school I would have trusted my fellow students with a gun before I would trust a teacher with one.

    5. avatar Wiregrass says:

      When I was a child, I never felt threatened or lost my trust in someone I previously trusted because I found out they owned or had access to a gun. Actually found it kind of odd if they didn’t. My grandma had a sweet little .410 single shot. Killed my first squirrel with it.

  8. avatar JWM says:

    You never go full retard. Allison Anderman went full retard.

    1. avatar Russ Bixby says:

      Rather than going full retard, she started there and then went into overdrive retard.

      1. avatar Jeffro says:

        full potato, she went full potato……….just sayin

      2. avatar JWM says:

        Plaid drive. She went plaid drive.

        1. avatar Excedrine says:

          Which is a step even beyond… Ludicrous Speed.

        2. avatar JWM says:

          It’s all about the merchandising. May the swartz be with you.

        3. avatar LIberty2Alpha says:

          Well, she’s clearly related to Major A$$hole.

  9. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    I fear Ms. Anderman actually believes what she spouts.
    Of course if she has kids, I’m sure it would be different.

    1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      what do they call a lawyer who graduates last in her class, at the worst law school in the country, but who managed to pass the bar exam (eventually)? “Ms. Anderman, the Court will now hear your arguments.. . . .”

      some of us went to top schools and were on law review. others went to work at a non-profit good for serving up silly quotes. just sayin

      EDIT: Damn – I hate being right. again.

      Univ of San Francisco law school? Hmmm. . . Let’s see, US News ranked them 138th.

      Here is here LinkedIn Profile:

      Your Honor, the Defense moves for a directed verdict

      1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

        this is like taking candy from a baby. . .. .

      2. avatar Royal Tony says:

        Stop it you’re killin me here.

  10. avatar Ken says:

    The kids might not speak up in school?

    Does that mean that they will listen to their teachers and treat them with more respect?

    1. avatar Pieslapper says:

      They’re afraid if they don’t they’ll find out what’s worse than being under the building.

  11. avatar outwardhound says:

    “Just having people armed doesn’t make a school safer,” Anderman said.

    Soooo, the School Resource Officer in my school doesn’t make us safer either-who’d a thunk it? But I bet she don’t mind having an armed authority figure of the state wandering the halls and getting involved in routine school discipline incidents because he doesn’t have anything better to do. Talk about a chilling effect on education.

  12. avatar Scrubula says:

    Even with training, it’s no guarantee police and FBI hostage rescue will prevent fatalities in a high-stakes situation, said Allison Anderman, a staff attorney with Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a nonprofit opposed to arming police.

    She added that housing guns outside of the military could create a chilling effect for the government which may be less inclined to violate human rights knowing that the local authorities could be armed.

  13. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

    This Anderman idiot sounds like he’s really grasping for it. The comments and points made were ridiculous.
    I’d be embarrassed to have said something so obtuse.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Well, as Dirk noted above, she looks like you’d expect…


      1. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

        @ Geoff PR

        Groan. I went and looked at her picture and yes, all I could think was………gawd, another ignorant clueless twit.
        Honestly, when are these hens going to learn to STFU?

        On a personal note:
        I’m cognizant that my demeanor which was directed towards the female gender in this matter could be viewed as inflammatory, demeaning, and unflattering. It’s supposed to be inflammatory, demeaning, and unflattering!

      2. avatar John L. says:

        Who cares what she looks like?

        She has an ugly brain.

        1. avatar Layne says:

          Agreed. But TTAG regularly posts the photos of the people they are quoting, and most of the time I can accurately guess which side of the issue they are on by looking at them. There’s something about the eyes of a person that has no capacity for rational thought. This goes for men and women. I can’t see any need to mock the women that you don’t find appealing, or the men that don’t appear manly enough though, as often happens here.

  14. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    Who wants to bet the teachers packing heat at this school probably train more with their firearms than the local PD does?

    I say, likely.

    1. avatar rogerthat says:

      They’d have to, cause there IS no local PD!

  15. avatar BlueBronco says:

    I guess this ignorant wonk Anderman doesn’t grasp that doing nothing definitely won’t work.

  16. avatar Mk10108 says:

    Epic failure of logic. Interesting to ask the author if he’ll guarantee the safety of the children? If not then who…considering school administration thought about the 30 minutes go law to get there, well reasoned, course of action and implemented.

  17. avatar CM says:

    It’s not a stupid comment. It’s their agenda. Repeat a lie as often as possible, even if it’s outrageous, as loudly and widely as possible and you know your winning when the low information voters start parroting it as fact. She knows it’s bullshit. She’s paid to repeat the party line. The “press” printed it, so achievement unlocked. That’s the goal. Get the lie in print, get it in the minds of the sheep, get the sheep bleating it as fact.

    They are way better at this than we give them credit for.

    1. avatar Hillary for Prison says:

      Make the lie big, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe you. Uncle Adolf.

      1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

        Love the name…I favor HILDEBEAST for prison. he he…

    2. avatar Gatha58 says:

      CM: The lawyer’s comments are still stupid and illogical. Anyone would have to be a VERY dumb sheep to believe that they are not. Anyone that voiced that argument to me or anyone that knows anything about guns would be shut down immediately. There are so many ways that his comments are ridiculous it is amazing that he is willing to admit he is a lawyer and let the article be printed.

  18. avatar Richard A says:

    I want to say something, but I’ve been scared to stay quiet by all you people with guns.

  19. avatar Chris says:

    The mere fact that the school has guns abs trained responders makes it less of a target for a psychopath in the planning phases. That’s why most avoid banks, people with body guards etc. And to addlemen there is no risk free way to solve this problem. But I’ll choose dangerous liberty over peaceful slavery anyday.

  20. avatar SAMSON says:

    Did they really just trot out the old ” The teachers might shoot the kids for saying the wrong thing!” line??

    Cmon now. Please.

    1. avatar Jay-El says:

      Indeed they did. But really, why so surprised?

      if Brady or MDA or Bloomberg DBA Everytown or any of the other usual suspects had any brains at all, they’d make a point to agree with some reasonable defensive or recreational use of guns every once in awhile.

      You know, so it wouldn’t be so incredibly obvious that they just want the damned things banned already.

  21. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    100% of the “employees” at my girls’ school are armed. That number would consist of my wife, and me. Couldn’t tell you what’s under the building, though. Our house has no basement.

    1. avatar JJ48 says:

      Ancient Indian burial ground.

      It’s ALWAYS an ancient Indian burial ground…

  22. avatar Bob says:

    The gun-grabbers are getting desperate. Their arguments have become so ridiculous, so badly flawed, that everyone can see that the arguments just don’t work anymore. Sometimes they should just admit defeat on a particular news item, and just refuse to comment. It is better to say nothing than say something so stupid that you prove your opponents are correct.

  23. avatar Dev says:

    What’s worse than the comments is that a school system that has only 300 students is worried about mass shootings.

  24. avatar gsnyder says:

    Cops are 45 minutes away. Even when they are a few minutes away lots of people can end up dead, and have. So this simple logic is going to upset the students? That is one dumb attorney.

  25. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    So to recap, we cannot let college students carry firearms, because they may get a bad grade and decide to murder the professor. Likewise, we cannot let school teachers carry, because they may get asked a tough question and decide to murder the students. Got it. Quick question, though.

    With all of these people turning suddenly savage because they’re armed with a firearm, and the supposed chilling effect that has on free speech and fair dealings, what exactly do the antis expect is the impact on the citizenry and democracy when only the government may possess firearms?

    1. avatar Wiregrass says:

      A sweet compliant utopia, for your own good. Their worldview is based on John Lennon song lyrics and not much else.

  26. avatar Royal Tony says:

    So some do-nothing, know-nothing San Fransiscan knows how a remote district in Idaho should conduct its business? Rather, she feels she knows how they should not conduct their business, but hasn’t a clue to any alternative solution. “Hey the cops in my upscale neighborhood in SF are great, why would anyone need to defend themselves.” Is what I gather.

  27. avatar LIberty2Alpha says:

    “Just having Police armed doesn’t make People safer.”

    Just ask France.

  28. avatar JJ48 says:

    “Even with training, it’s no guarantee teachers and staff will prevent fatalities in a high-stakes situation”

    Wait…I thought training was what made the police more equal than the rest of us, and now you’re saying training ISN’T a reason to trust someone with a firearm? You’re sending mixed signals, gun-haters!

    …also, of COURSE there’s no “guarantee” of safety, but if someone has no firearm, you CAN guarantee that they will be unable to return fire.

    1. avatar Will P. says:

      The “antis” are racist and LEO haters, if you have ever read any of thier comments on things half of them deal with “well if they were black the cops would just shoot them”. Thier hypocrisy is really just baffling. Only cops should have guns, but we think all cops are race shooting thugs.

  29. avatar Yngvar says:

    Cost? $3500, plus equipment donated by the community.

    I think the dollars also came from the community, by way of a detour.

    Man, think the more ‘adventurous’ kids at that school are drooling over the prospect of getting to that gun cabinet one long weekend?

  30. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    In answer to the question, “What could possibly be wrong with this picture?”….I ask the following question.

    Are the people trained in the use of the locked up rifles packing pistols in case they have to fight their way to the gun cabinet? If not, here’s what could be wrong with this picture. Heaven forbid a shooting event actually happens and they are not able to get to the gun cabinet in time to stop much of anything. Now we have dead people and we have anti’s gleefully dancing in the blood of innocents pointing out that “see, there were guns in the school and they didn’t stop anything!!! This is the NRA’s fault!”

    The other problem I see is how are you going to prevent the after hours theft of the rifles? All things considered, I’d suggest on body concealed carry would be a better compromise than locked up rifles.

    1. avatar Gatha58 says:

      Probably what you say is true. Maybe this can be a first step to get CC for the trained staff, hopefully. Hope those gun lockers are high quality, bolted down and yet easy to access by the right people when and if they are needed, for now. Would also be great if they have some after hours drills by the trained staff and time how long it takes to access the firearms in an emergency. Like a fire drill. Do it when the students are not there, of course. When the students are there perhaps a few drills about what they should do in an emergency situation. That is, if that can be done in a way that does not freak them out too much.

  31. avatar Gatha58 says:

    The lawyer’s comments in the main article are just “spin”. And he did a very poor job of that. His thoughts on this matter are far from logical. So far that they border on criminal. I mean “if it saves just one child” right ? Why does their rhetoric make sense when they cite it to take away guns but not when arming responsible adults as a defense ? Sorry Antis you really need a better spin doctor. This article proves just how hypocritical your arguments really are. Also reveals your real purpose. Which, by the way, is not about protecting anyone.

  32. avatar Will P. says:

    Do they think because the teachers have guns they will magically loose their education and become ruthless thugs threatening children? “Ok class everyone turn to page 200 in your books. NO SUSIE YOU CAN’T ASK A QUESTION, IF YOU DO IMMA BUST A CAP IN YO A$$!!!” That is the picture I just got painted in my head? Hell maybe it’ll get some of the hellians to settle down knowing the teacher is armed. But them being locked in a central location won’t do much good, then the theoretical shooter will just know where to go first.

    1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      They’re simply projecting, as they are wont to do.

  33. avatar Sian says:

    Adding ‘chilling effect’ to the Everytown Buzzword Bingo. I must have heard it 10 times in the last 3 weeks.

  34. avatar Another Robert says:

    You know, in total fairness, Allison didn’t say SHE believed the teachers would go postal at an impertinent question. She just implied that some of the students might believe so and thus be discouraged from asking such. Given the intellectual firepower of some of the students my daughter the teacher has to deal with, I’m not sure that conclusion is entirely implausible. OTOH, given the kinds of “questions” such students might feel reluctant to ask, I’m not sure that’s a bad thing ( Do we have a “half-sarcastic” tag?) Seriously, between the “teacher’s aren’t competent to handle guns” stuff and the “teachers will start shooting obnoxious students” stuff we are hearing from the education-industry “leaders”, you have to wonder why teachers allow themselves to be “led” by those people. Don’t they have any, well, self-esteem?

  35. avatar BDub says:

    “She added that housing guns in schools could create a chilling effect for students who may be less inclined to speak out knowing that the teacher could be armed.”

    Is she really trying to make this a free–speech issue? Are teachers really shooting critical students? This woman is a moron.

  36. avatar Roymond says:

    Calling the police is guaranteed NOT to work, for at least 45 minutes, anyway. So in the gap, something not guaranteed to work is better than nothing.

    But this occurs to me: these freaks, er folks are all worried because there are guns in the school. But in case of trouble, they want the police to be called. Now, why would someone call the police? Well, because the police have guns!
    So ‘we’ don’t want guns, but when there’s trouble we call people with guns — people lately highlighted nationally as shooting the wrong people too often. So why wouldn’t it be better to have guns yourself, and trust yourself to not shoot the wrong people, and to be there in 45 seconds instead of 45 minutes?

  37. avatar Lone Ranger says:

    The hypocrisy is lip-smacking.

    Students at a regular public school are going to be nervous and frightened that someone in authority might be armed and yet students come into contact with armed officers and civilians all the time.

    Even better yet …. kids that go to private high-end schools (you know, important people’s children) are literally surrounded by armed security…. but that’s okay, right?

  38. avatar Silver says:

    Just having a fire extinguisher and smoke alarms doesn’t make your building any safer.

    Man, it’s exhausting trying to think this stupidly. How do antis do it every day?

  39. avatar MontieR says:

    “She added that housing guns in schools could create a chilling effect for students who may be less inclined to speak out knowing that the teacher could be armed”.
    It could also foster a sense of safety armed resistance to criminals brings.
    I almost pity someone so dainty the mere thought of a gun in the same vicinity will cause a chilling effect.
    I said almost. These people are mentally impaired and need treatment for severe psychological problems
    it is NOT normal for ANY human being to live in that kind of fear over an inanimate object.
    It is an actual mental condition called hoplophobia the fear of weapons primarily guns. And is being treated by psychiatrists in today’s society.

  40. avatar IdahoPete says:

    As a bit of fact-based background, Garden Valley is a small town in the mountains of Idaho, and it is a LONG twisty two-lane drive from the sheriff’s office to Garden Valley. A local article on this story mentioned that they district also purchased “4 slings and extra magazines”, so my guess is there are at least a few ARs in the lock boxes. They also put a sign up advising the wanna-be mass killers that the school was NOT a victim disarmament zone. Way to go, GC!

  41. avatar Daniel says:

    Having fire extinguishers does not guarantee that nothing will catch fire either, but it sure does improve the chances of survival if a fire does break out somewhere on campus.

    That county has firemen, why do they need fire extinguishers? Shouldn’t they leave that to the professionals?

    What? They need the fire extinguishers to respond to the immediate threat until the firemen can get there? It saves lives?

    Yeah, the exact same argument goes for guns too!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email