The question itself is flawed. What is meant by the majority? There have always been and always will be a tremendous number of students who play video games. There were the arcades of the 70s, the Super Nintendos of the 80s and the PlayStations of the 90s. Gamers have always been a part of the culture. Whether they are the the majority is a moot point. The fact that through gaming Americans can see the way people communicate is the really interesting factor. Americans went from face-to-face contact with their friends with PacMan at an arcade to now communicating via telecommunication to play Halo.

How are schools getting involved in students' personal lives?

The argument about mental illness is a good one. However, shouldn't this be a concern beyond just owning guns?

Would schools just have guns in unlocked desks? IT is highly improbable. When a teacher has money in his or her desk, it is locked up. Guns would not be easily accessible. Teachers have the ability to help. Why would it benefit the country to stop them.

SO, the argument is that a teacher might threaten a student with a gun? That's a ridiculous claim. Has a teacher ever been fired for threatening a student with a scissors? They have weapons close at hand, and they aren't using them. Students are the problem,, not the teachers.

How? An armed teacher with training... how is that horrific? I bet the kids in Columbine or the students at Virginia Tech would have liked a teacher or professor who was armed. Why would a trained person increase the odds of a school shooting?

So, teachers shouldn't do anything they aren't comfortable with? Teachers who have a problem with gay students should be able to kick them out of class then? Teachers are supposed to be the ones to rise above discomfort for the betterment of their students. If it means saving students' lives, teachers shouldn't hesitate.