An Absolute Contradiction

A Kentucky legislator is trying HARD to enact gun control laws after a major school shooting, and he's doing it while surrounded by ARMED marshals. Doesn't that contradict what he's trying to do? The shooting itself would have been less deadly but for several things. One of them is that the cops took 45 minutes to appear on the scene. During that time the shooter had all the time he needed to leisurely shoot people down. Another factor is that the shooter, being only 15, could not buy a gun legally, anyway, So what law would have stopped him from getting it ILLEGALLY? A UNIFORMED sheriff's "resource officer" was there, but was completely ineffective in stopping the shooting. No one knows where he was, or what he was doing during the shooting. The law the legislator was promoting is smarter than most "gun control laws," in that it was to allow a few "designated" people on the school staff to carry weapons IF they were already "concealed carriers," so they would not be UNIFORMED officers, easy to locate and "neutralize" before the shooting begins. What's wrong with his law is that it would require the guns not be carried on their person, but kept in a "lock box" until used. And the gun could be used ONLY for the protection of a third person, and not him/herself. I guess they must just DIE if PERSONALLY threatened, even with a gun available. (Gun Watch)