The guns being used to protect “government officials, banks, airports, goverment buildings” are in the hands of law enforcement or certified private security who have received at least what is deemed the minimial amount of training and oversight. Very few celebrities actually employ armed guards unless they are under personal threat because of the expense and difficulty of travelling; you’ll find that private armed security is more often employed to protect corporate executives and their families, journalists outside of embedded military assignments, and NGO workers, predominately when travelling to parts of the world where kidnapping for profit is a frequent concern. These security people are largely drawn from retired special forces with logistical, political, and legal support to permit them to transport and carry the same type of weapons that are used in military service.
Teachers are, by and large, not drawn from any group with prior experience with firearms or tactical shooting, have many other duties aside from this assumed responsibility to protect their students from mass shooters, and if the collection of teachers including a PTSD-afflicted tool-flinging shop teacher are a representive example, are not vetted for emotional stability. If it is the conclusion that the only way to stop school shootings is to have more armed people in schools, those people should be law enforcement or qualified private security (the latter rarely actually being qualfied to do more than operate metal detectors and walk around dimly aware of their surroundings). Other nations have managed to avoid regular school shootings without arming teachers or turning schools into fortresses. Perhaps we should examine their methods to find out their secret?
Stranger