Is it really possible to get any stupider?

I am happy to inform you, dear cyber-readers, that the Conservatives in America have finally allowed their crazy feminine side to show!  Yes, folks, the crazy, nut bag idiotic statements made by right wing male idiots has been topped - not simply equalled, but topped - by a woman!

National Review, whose in-house editorial suggested Newtown was the price of the Second Amendment, published a piece on Wednesday from anti-feminist Charlotte Allen suggesting the reason the shooter was able to kill so many students was because Newtown was a “feminized setting:” 

There was not a single adult male on the school premises when the shooting occurred. In this school of 450 students, a sizeable number of whom were undoubtedly 11- and 12-year-old boys (it was a K–6 school), all the personnel — the teachers, the principal, the assistant principal, the school psychologist, the “reading specialist” — were female. There didn’t even seem to be a male janitor to heave his bucket at Adam Lanza’s knees. Women and small children are sitting ducks for mass-murderers. The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, seemed to have performed bravely. According to reports, she activated the school’s public-address system and also lunged at Lanza, before he shot her to death. Some of the teachers managed to save all or some of their charges by rushing them into closets or bathrooms. But in general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm. Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.

(emphasis mine)

So, of course, to make up for their slip at allowing a woman to publish anything of note, it had to be an anti-female screed.

Regardless, this is simply beyond ridiculous.  In shooting after shooting, males died as quickly and as easily as women.  They were, quite honestly, unarmed.  Even if they had been armed, they likely would never have been able to have gotten to their firearms in time.  What school teacher, in today's atmosphere, would walk around in school with a loaded piece on his/her belt?

Ignoring the stupidly obvious bad example it would set in inner city classrooms, or in any classroom, why would you want to carry a weapon that could be taken from you and used against you or anyone else in your classroom?  Statistically, weapons bought for protection are more likely to be used against the owner than against an intruder.  Teachers are not trained security guards.  They have other, more pressing duties which would distract them from being able to use that weapon in an emergency.

If you absolutely, positively must have an armed guard in your school, PAY FOR A POLICE OFFICER TO BE THERE FULL TIME!!  Don't be chintzy, don't be cheap, if you are that alarmed by the danger to your kids, do it right.  Stop this crap about teaching teachers to handle guns and making them carry in class.

You'd simply be giving the next mass murderer free access to his tool.