and above all, we still have this:
1) So-called "assault weapons", which are just rifles with dumb useless features tacked onto them to make them look scary, are not deadlier than handguns at close range. In fact, they are arguably less deadly, especially compared to .45 handguns.
2) We will never (at least not for the next 100 years) ban .45 handguns
3) We will never (at least not for the next 100 years), ban semiautomatics and force people to switch to revolvers.
4) We will never, ever for any forseeable period in the future at all, try to confiscate the current 300MM guns in the USA.
5) Reducing magazine sizes to a level the people would tolerate (maybe 15) will not significantly reduce gun violence.
6) Other ideas which may have some merit and which we may want to implement anyway, like tighter requirements to get a gun, lock a gun up, etc, will not significantly reduce gun violence.
Those are all pretty much given facts. If we don't like armed guards, the alternative (presuming we don't do both) is increased funding and support for mental health.
If that doesn't work, we're out of solutions. At that point, we then shrug and accept school shootings. Armed guards work at the airport, they work at the courthouse, and they are just about the only effective possible solution we have.
<ptp> how many emo kids does it take to change a lightbulb?
<Willy> HOW MANY?!
<ptp> none they just sit in the dark and cry