USA TODAY

Just in time for those back-to-school preparations, the federal government was to consider financing firearms for teachers. The Department of Education would act as arms dealer, dispensing cash for guns.

As ludicrous as this might sound, it has not been rejected out of hand by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who once famously suggested some K-12 campuses might need guns to ward off grizzly bear attacks.

Texas educators have asked DeVos to see whether federal Student Support and Academic Enrichment grants could be tapped for arming teachers or other school staff in the wake of America's infamous mass shootings. The state is one of at least nine that explicitly allow school staff to carry guns on campus.

The grant program's goals were broadly drafted by Congress to help pay for a "well-rounded education," improve conditions for learning, and enhance digital literacy. The law doesn't say anything about buying guns. Even so, as supporters of the idea are quick to point out, it doesn't say anything about not buying guns, either. To meet grant standards, the Education Department is apparently looking at how firearms could improve school conditions.

That seems a stretch. The answer to America's gun violence epidemic rests mainly in keeping high-powered weapons out of the hands of deranged people — not introducing more guns into classrooms, or urging students to buy bulletproof backpacks.

The Wild West answer that teachers should pack heat — articulated by President Donald Trump after the killing of 17 students and faculty in February at a high school in Parkland, Florida — has no basis in research or fact.

A Johns Hopkins analysis published in March, citing dozens of law enforcement experts, suggests that in the high-stress moment of a shooting, where even trained police officers fail to stop threats, the consequences of a teacher pulling a gun could be disastrous.

Simulations show armed good Samaritans making split-second decisions that more often result in killing innocent people, getting themselves killed or accomplishing nothing. Moreover, arriving SWAT officers wouldn't be certain about discerning friend from foe.

Then there's this paradox: If stored in highly secure locations, guns might not be reachable in a moment of crisis. If not highly secured, they could be accessed by students, with tragic consequences.

There are certainly prudent steps for protecting schools, such as locking entrances and posting highly trained, armed security personnel. Nonetheless, in an era when so many of the nation's public schools are underfunded and teachers underpaid, tax dollars must be spent wisely. Mass shootings at schools, while well-publicized, are thankfully rare, and secondary schools remain among the safest environments for children.

While more states are allowing districts to arm teachers, educators are not flocking to buy firearms. In Texas, where gun-toting faculty have been permitted since 2007, about 20% of districts have signed on. Since Wyoming approved armed school staff last year, just two of 48 districts have taken up firearms.

In gun-friendly parts of the country where rural schools are too remote to lure full-time security guards or the option is too expensive, training staff to provide security might be viewed as necessary. But the odds are even that won't make students any safer, and might actually place them at more risk.

USA TODAY's editorial opinions are decided by its Editorial Board, separate from the news staff.