Wednesday - April 18, 2007
Guns in School - with post post script
When did guns become illegal in school? I
remember when I was in elementary school that kids brought BB guns in all the
time. Well, not exactly "all" the time, but from time to time. It never
occurred to me that doing so was illegal. Maybe the principal didn't like it,
but that wasn't entirely clear. I only recall one kid getting in trouble
because he shot his BB gun and the BB ricocheted off a tree and hit another kid
in the eye.
Okay, I admit that I never
learned if that was true. I didn't know the kid but he was famous in our
school. I wish I could remember his name.
I remember everyone talking about John what's his
name, saying his name over and over, and repeating the story of how he
ricocheted his BB gun and blinded someone else. Or was it himself? I forget.
The point I'm making is that he brought a BB gun to school and it wasn't that
big of a deal except that he hurt someone.
More than that, I often brought my
cubscout jack knife to school. Other kids regularly brought knives, big and
small (well, perhaps there was a size limit), to school. It's not like we lived
in the country, but back then kids were expected to carry knives every day. And
I'm not that old. It's just what kids
do.Nowadays I read absurd stories
about kids being expelled for bringing knives to school. Not hunting knives,
not jack knives, but steak knives. I don't understand how you're supposed to
cut birthday cakes without
knives.Nowadays I read absurd stories
about kids drawing pictures of guns and being
expelled.Nowadays I read absurd
stories about all sorts of craziness that has been too well documented in other
forums.I don't remember massacres in
schools when I was young. Perhaps they happened, but I don't think so. I don't
know if there is a correlation between these developments, but I suspect they
are related somehow.I'm reluctant to
find fault with the victims of the most recent massacre at Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, but I'm amazed that some students allowed
themselves to be lined up against a wall and shot. This has happened to people
for a few hundred years now, so there's no reason to think that Virginians would
be different. But at a school, there are plenty of books to throw at a shooter,
there are chairs to throw, there were young men who could have done something.
Have we so emasculated our young men that they no longer think to protect
women?The reason terrorism works is
the same reason that a lone assassin can be so effective in Blacksburg. One man
might want to fight back, but he is doomed unless others act with him. Without
prior planning or training, no individual can be sure that others will join him
in fighting. Without the pack, the lone wolf is sure to be the next victim with
no chance of being effective. It's easy to see why people are reluctant to
fight back.There will be a lot of talk
about gun control, but it won't go anywhere, Michael
Eisner notwithstanding. Politicians have learned that this is a loser
strategy. The only real solution is
not more guns in schools, though I'm not opposed to that. The answer is to have
a cultural change to encourage men to fight the bad guy. I don't mean vigilante
actions, I mean that when confronted with immediate dangers, they fight back.
Throw books, distract the shooter. Tackle him. Do whatever it takes to stop
him.One gunman can't stand up to a
dozen men attacking him simultaneously, no matter how many guns he has. One
dictator can't stand up to tens of thousands of determined citizens, no matter
how many tanks he has. We need to
relearn how to stay free from tyranny. It's the same lesson on how to be free
from terrorism. It's the same lesson on how to be free from deranged
shooters.Post script:
I've learned now that several students did
fight back to protect themselves by barricading their classroom door, though not
to stop the shooter. I suppose that is the best we can hope for until we
develop a social pact to fight and stop maniacs like this. I propose that at
freshman orientation, that all students, particularly the men, be instructed
that they are expected to fight in such a situation. Just the expectation is
probably sufficient to spur
action.Post post
script: It's come to my attention that my
best friend in the world, my brother has taken umbrance with this rant. I want
to re-iterate that I am not finding fault with the victims of this shooting.
Because we do not have a culture that expects people to act against maniacs, no
individual would have been justified in believing that if he acted that others
would also act. Acting alone against an armed maniac is suicide. The tragedy
is that the expectation in our culture is not to fight, it is to submit or flee.
He further points out that the problem
is not that the victims had any blame, which I agree with, but that society
picked on the poor maniac, creating his insane state. I reject this completely.
Yes, people should not pick on others or tease them, but this is human behavior
that will not change. I encourage him and all others to teach your children to
not pick on those that are different or deficient, but someone will pick on
them. We cannot help it if someone retreats when picked on, provoking more
behavior for being picked on.My
brother didn't say, but likely would say, that society needs to find a way to
find these nutjobs before they become maniacal killers. With this I agree. But
as I read in Donald Sensing's blog today, One
Hand Clapping, quoting Aesop and the mouse's suggestion of belling the
cat, it's easy to propose impossible solutions. Donald's subsequent blog
entries discuss other issues concerning this topic, and summarizes correctly
that there are no easy answers here.My
brother and best friend, and I am at pains to ensure I stay thus in his esteem,
also points out that it's not wrong for people to comply with the orders of a
man with a gun in his hand, nor is it wrong to want your child to be among those
that survive. He tells me that he will always want his son to jump to safety
rather than confront the maniac to stop him. To this, I say he is correct. It
is not wrong to flee to safety. I will never second guess anyone who does that.
They are in the situation, they know their own capabilities and are the best
judge for how they should act. It is certainly not wrong to want your child to
survive such an attack. However, saving your own skin to allow a maniac to kill
others is not wrong, but it is not worthy of praise, either. I wonder how many
of those that jumped out the windows to safety will think back for the rest of
their lives how they allowed a 76 year old man to sacrifice himself without help
so that they could live. How many others were killed after they escaped instead
of helping the 76 year old man fight the maniac? There is no fault in what they
did. But there is nothing honorable, either. They lived. I have no regard for
their feelings, they suffered no wrong other than being put in fear. For those
that died or were wounded, I feel nothing but immense sorrow. In the case of
the few that acted to help others,
admiration.My rant here is not to
blame anyone at Virginia Tech. My point is that there is no blame except for
the maniac. If people picked on him, that was no excuse to murder others. He
is without question the only guilty party in this tragedy. My other point is
that if people want to do something to help minimize future maniacal attacks, we
should change the culture of compliance with maniacs. I think it is generally
expected that an airplane hijacker's demands will no longer be agreed to by
ovine passengers. We need to expand that expectation to attacks such as this
one, too.A more scholarly approach to
the same thing I've been saying, ridiculing the "education" of the maniac can be
found on the website of The
American Thinker. He writes what I would have loved to have said. My
approach is simpler, his is more thorough in explaining why we no longer have a
culture of people who fight to stop evil.
Go Back to the Start, Do Not Collect $200 Send me your two cents
|
|