Violence at schools can’t be solved with more guns

I read with alarm the editorial “Arm the Officers: City School Police Should Be Able to Carry Guns” (March 24).

Where is the reasonable analysis, public comment and parental and student input?

As a Pittsburgh school board member, I share the concern for ensuring school safety. But are more guns really the solution to school violence? An armed community resource officer was on duty at Columbine when two students shot 12 other students and one teacher.

“Critical Examinations of School Violence and Disturbance in K-12 Education” edited by Gordon A. Crews (2002) cites a Secret Service study suggesting that “the focus needed to be on pre-attack behaviors” and that “physical security measures, zero tolerance policies, even SROs [school resource officers] are likely to be less than helpful in preventing an incident.” According to the study, most incidents were rarely sudden, impulsive acts. Most attackers had engaged in behavior that caused others concern or indicated a need for help. Most felt injured, persecuted or bullied. Most had experienced significant losses or failures. Most had access to guns.

As I work in schools with today’s youth, I see firsthand that the problems that foster school violence cannot be solved with more guns.

Students need role models, help completing high school and employment to get out of poverty and to avoid the criminal justice system.

If the resources spent on developing and implementing gun policies would be directed toward addressing the root causes of school violence, our students would be far better served. Otherwise, another gun is just a “Band-Aid.” KEVIN CARTER

CEO Adonai Center

North Side

We welcome your opinion

called them, would always support him.

He may be right — Russia isn’t finished, in this year of the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution. And the Democrats are now so far left that JFK and Truman wouldn’t recognize the party today. STEPHEN M. SOKOL

Mt. Lebanon

Congress just voted to allow internet service providers to sell our web browsing information without our permission. Mr. President, now that you have signed this bill, by your own “standard,” doesn’t that appear to be quite hypocritical of you? You have opened up our lives, including our Social Security numbers, to the world for no good reason other than the almighty dollar. Hackers will have a field day!

President Trump, how about opening up your tax returns to the American public? Doing that will give us a sense of calm with regard to believing that you have no ties to Russia or any other conflicts of interest that could have a bearing on your decision-making. Let’s see now ... How would you feel if the IRS could sell your tax returns for profit?

This shows, Mr. President, that you have no interest in doing anything to protect average American people. Instead, you continue to line the pockets of the wealthy. MARK I. SIMON

O’Hara

Regarding telecommunications companies now being allowed to harvest our personal goings-on, it behooves us to move fast to take away the most egregious freedom we have already provided to those companies and not to Google and others: permission to require us to provide our Social Security numbers just to have a telephone or other “utility” account.

We should not have to give our SSNs to companies of which we are simple customers buying their services and paying every month. This invasion of our privacy was already clear before this bill was enacted.

We have given Big Brother the keys to our homes and access to our lives. And now they are free to monetize it all. Legislators, please act. AUDREY N. GLICKMAN

Greenfield