By all means, list the reasons why you think armed teachers is "not even close to a real solution." In my state, school districts are permitted to have select, designated teachers on campus who are armed, however they first have to go through extensive training far beyond the normal 'concealed carry permit' 1-day course. A few school districts have been doing this for a while now, and there have been no untoward incidents or accidents (and no armed attacks) at those schools, so now in the wake of Uvalde more districts within our state are considering doing the same. Currently, a school that is known to be firearm-free is basically a potential killing field full of sitting ducks. Whereas a school with signs on the premises warning that staff members are armed and prepared to use the force necessary to protect their students is going to strongly deter a shooter; killers tend to look for soft targets that don't shoot back. I'm not saying that arming teachers is the only solution, but IMO it is the most effective solution. Anyone who says this measure is "not close to a real solution" should be prepared to present cogent reasons why it is not. BTW, a number of members at our church (including myself and one of the deacons) go armed (concealed) to pretty much every service. The rector is fine with this. Churches may be thought of as 'soft targets' also, but anyone who takes a potshot at our rector or congregants will probably come down with a fatal case of lead poisoning.