Posted on 05/28/2018 4:09:08 AM PDT by marktwain
The New York Times seemed to think it was bitterly ironic that some of the students at Santa Fe High School, site of the recent mass shooting, had staged a walkout last month in support of the Parkland, Florida, students. But now, only a month later, one of the students who participated in the walkout is in the hospital from yet another school shooting.
I suppose we could revel in the irony, but, as a more results-oriented person, what I take from that vignette is that school walkouts are not effective deterrents to school shootings. I’m not sure the poems did much either.
These are hideous events that require serious proposals, not the self-indulgent mawkishness our media keep serving up.
Here are some news items that might help us figure out how to reduce the number of school shooting victims.
— May 3, 2017, Arlington, Texas: James Jones went to the Zona Caliente sports bar and began yelling incoherently. When the manager, Cesar Perez, went to talk to him and calm him down, Jones pulled out a gun and shot Perez dead, then started shooting wildly at patrons. Luckily, a concealed carry holder happened to be having dinner at Zona Caliente with his wife that night. He shot Jones dead before anyone else was hurt.
— Aug. 7, 2016, Linndale, Ohio: Two men getting into their car in a Dollar Store parking lot were held up by a masked armed robber. As the gunman, Varshaun Stephen Dukes, was rifling through one of the men’s pockets, the other pulled out his concealed handgun and told him to stop. The robber fired at the man but missed. The concealed carry permit holder shot back, putting a .45 bullet in the robber’s brain.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
“Deterrents” is not what it’s about...it’s to pressure officials to BAN GUNS.
Let’m walk, then fine the schools for low attendance.
Walk outs are good for one thing. A day off.
If enough parents find that their lives are disrupted by walkouts, teacher strikes, phoned-in threats, etc., maybe they’ll decide the “free” state daycare is too expensive.
Except that some of us, unlike the NYT and Coulter, know the definition of "irony", so we won't.
“The Doomsday Scenario: What If School Walkouts Don’t Work?”
Obviously walkouts won’t work, nor will any of the other ‘solutions’ offered by the Left.
There are two things that would work:
1) Effective, door-to-door confiscation of all firearms. Needless to say that is a non-starter, and not just for the owners of the firearms, but the people expected to go door-to-door (they have families too).
2) Armed people who can fight back. They have to be concealed, so that the shooters never know just who will be able to respond.
So, let’s get to the bottom line: There is only ONE Congressman directly calling for confiscation, and while many, possibly most, Democrats want the same - they’re not stupid enough to push it, yet. As to armed school personnel, perhaps some Democrats support that, but I haven’t yet to see anyone saying just that.
Thus, based on “1” (above) the ONLY conclusion that we conservatives can come up with is that the Dems are planning (and trying to do) a slow-motion confiscation...by continually driving up the costs and risks of ownership, while driving-down the benefit (such as fighting to end castle doctrines).
The problem is that the public, as a whole, doesn’t see the need for any of the above, at least when things are peaceful. So some fuel is needed, such as Parkland. And so if you do allow people to be armed in schools, much fewer Parklands - and thus little are no fuel. Not good for Democrats, so they keep the schools disarmed, and wait for the inevitable outcomes, where they get their chance to move their agenda a bit at a time.
Marx didn't like that idea:
But, you will say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations when we replace home education by social.
And your education! Is not that also social and determined by the social conditions under which you educate, by the intervention, direct or indirect, of society, by means of schools? The Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class.
The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parent and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour.
Marx would be happy today. Within public education, the state stands in loco parentis during school hours. That means there is an implicit - if not fully-understood - sanctioning of government pouring into kids' heads whatever they want. Some parents are OK with this because, well, that worked for their parents and prior generations. Besides, mom and dad gotta both work, right?
But that's a trap. People seem oblivious to public school serving a troika of societal needs such as training, day care, and indoctrination. The issue isn't that we have the wrong types of people teaching or the schools lack discipline or we need more money in schools or we need "pay for performance" or armed guards roaming the halls.
THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM is that parents have surrendered their rights.
The objective is to punish gun owners for politically incorrect thinking. If they cared about safety, thr discussion would be about guarding our schools.
THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM is that parents have surrendered their rights.
You are correct. Schools started by parents banding together, building a school and hiring a teacher. My grandparents did that, and my older children went to such a one-roomed school.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.