One of my motivations in starting this blog was to counteract the seemingly continual flood of anti-gun (and generally anti-liberty) information flooding the media. I didn't give much thought to the state of the school system, mostly because I had already graduated by the time I started to become politically active.
But the author of the Learning About Guns blog has posted an article highlighting an all-too-common problem: schools which function as indoctrination centers rather than learning institutions.
If you only present one side of the issue, what will your students take away from the class? Particularly if your students are still learning to think critically, and haven't had any significant opportunity to correct their ignorance on a specific topic? Obviously, as students under 18 in Illinois, buying a firearm and learning to shoot outside of a family of shooters or hunters is unusual if not illegal.
It doesn't help much to have a teacher try to learn the other side of the issue in a few days to try to counter the arguments of an experienced speaker. It may be better than nothing, but it might also serve to convince students that the gun rights arguments aren't compelling. A particular risk is that an inexperienced pro-gun speaker might not be able to effectively challenge the lies and misrepresentations that are common practice from the (so-called) Million Moms.