If it's shown to work - Edit 1
Before modification by TheCrownless at 23/12/2012 12:31:55 AM
cost would be the main one. I don't know how many schools there are in the US, but having at least one armed police officer at every one? You're talking billions at the very least.
Another case where the level of justified public debate about gun violence strongly suggests the cost would be more than worth it.
The evidence based on events like Columbine suggests it wouldn't, if it doesn't then that's quite a waste of 10% of your education budget.
As I noted in response to Novo, the novel appearance of armed police in US high schools coincided suspiciously well with Columbine. So, no, armed police in high schools did not prevent Columbine for the very simple reason armed police were virtually non-existent in US high schools prior to Columbine. They became ubiquitous promptly thereafter, which may be part of why the Newtown shooter attacked an elementary rather than junior or high school.
It is difficult to imagine armed police at schools would not dramatically reduce the incidence of school shootings. The only question is whether the current frequency and mortality of school shootings justifies the expense of greatly reducing or completely preventing them. I believe we are past the point of debating that.
then it will be worth the money obviously, it's if it doesn't that people will question it on a cost basis and it is a hell of a punt on something that has only small amounts of evidence in it's favour.