PDA

View Full Version : School Shootings And Zero-Tolerance For Self-Defense



thedrifter
03-30-05, 05:53 AM
School Shootings And Zero-Tolerance For Self-Defense.

In light of the most recent school shootings, there is cry from both sides. The Left argues that only the Military and Law Enforcement should have guns. Yet when shootings come from stealing weapons from police officers, the Left makes a slight adjustment and wants to ban guns due to their ‘easy availability’, now adding police officers to the list of the indictable. Blame anyone but the criminal.

The Right wants to arm teachers on campus.

I have a better suggestion. I think in terms of existing resources.

The key is that murderers tend to visit their rampages on locations where they know there will be no armed resistance. In concealed carry states where businesses stubbornly post a No Guns Policy, they’re hit hardest in numbers of holdups where law-abiding obligingly leave their weapons in the car and the hold-up men know it. Similarly, the school shooters move in fast before police can arrive, and they move out fast, sometimes short-circuiting due process and justice by committing suicide. Not much of a dis-incentive in permitting that outcome when they determine when they're finished.

How do you put a stop to it before they decide when they're finished?

In states such as California, gun owners may not carry their weapons in their vehicles within 1,000 feet of a school. This is posting another No Guns Policy, with all its foreseeable consequences, school shootings included.

On the other hand, any individual may come to the aid of another by the doctrine of standing in the shoes of the victim. This is not taking the law into one’s own hands, but acting within the law in accord with established public policy and interest. This is no loophole, this is compliance. You might say that it’s the equivalent of the Good Samaritan law for first-aid.

I’ve always advocated repealing laws that exempt lawful carry from airports, public buildings, schools and churches (as if crime doesn’t visit these places!). Crime does visit these places, and the criminals know no one is there to shoot back. Including police.

Have I stated the problem?

Part of further understanding the problem is this: if I know anything about the minds of educators and other bureaucrats, it is that once they’re sold on an idea by some so-called expert, it’s hard to get them off it, whether that idea is right or wrong. Conflict, anger and violence are among these concepts where educators believe they have a real understanding.

They do not.

The educators and other bureaucrats are positively sold on the idea of zero-tolerance for anger and violence, and if resistance to menace inescapably means any measure of violence at all, then there is a discord between rational thought and their own blind indoctrination. To their way of thinking, the range of solutions must somehow fit into their paradigm of non-violence. And when it cannot fit, this bars truly effective solutions from the table, as it has stalled resolution of this problem for decades.

Some teachers and students, though, don’t have such a discord, and they would be those teachers or students who came to the aid of students and who put a stop to the rampage, undoubtedly, according to the record, with force.

This spirit of resistance to menace needs to be taken a step further.

Educators need to appreciate a fact of life, or legal reality: the parent is the supreme legal authority of the teachers, the district and even the Board of Education. Even the State. Like the authority we exercise over law enforcement, where the people can add or delete directives on the subject of choke-holds or rubber flashlights to name a few, so the parents can direct the Board of Education if we so choose.

What if we so choose?

My suggestion is that laws restricting the carrying of weapons on public property, churches, airports and schools be repealed immediately. Educators have to rescind their silly zero-tolerance for parental authority, and permit rational, productive thought to prevail.

1) One such rational, productive thought is to permit inter-state reciprocity for the legal concealed carry permits of other states, so that someone already authorized to carry a concealed weapon in one state [by way of background check, completed training and other requirements] may legally do so anywhere in the country. That sort of bill is under consideration at this time, and needs to be passed in recognition of the sovereign authority of the individual, not to mention having a free hand to stop murder or mayhem.

2) To round it out, those persons authorized to carry concealed weapons must be permitted to carry onto school property whenever they choose without harassment, legal hassle or punitive measures.

Any outside person who wants to hurt a child will think twice once they believe they may encounter someone who might shoot back – they are certainly thinking of it now when they target announced helpless, no-guns allowed locations.

The bureaucratic apprehension that violence may occur simply has to be taken out of the thinking of bureaucrats who would argue with parents and community. In opposition to what they may have been taught, not all violence is bad.

Resistance to menace saves innocent lives.

In right to carry states, the individual who chooses not to be a victim is not viewed with suspicion, but as the first line of defense. That attitude - that truth - needs to be recognized nationally.

The policy of suspecting everyone – including parents – of potential danger or the silly notion of discouraging resistance is so out of touch with reality and so far from legal observance of parental authority that it is putting our children at risk, and is part of the problem. They fail to see how they have an ally in parents, not an enemy, and they fail to see a CCW parent as a resource without expense.

The same would be true for permitting CCW on civil aircraft and in airports instead of arming pilots. And, of course, it is a Civil Right.

Whether the bureaucrats agree or not, they don’t tell us – we tell them. It’s time to utilize the same authority we have with law enforcement’s choke-holds and aluminum flashlights to legally compel educators to delete the zero-tolerance for parental authority.

It’s good for the country.


Ellie