The Education Wonks
and if the school board did nothing and this kid was murdered while giving a speech, everyone would cry out "Why didn't the school board do anything to prevent this?"
See, this hits close to home, because quite frankly, this takes place right by my home (within a few miles anyway).
Our local schools are overrun with gangs and little has been done about it. A corrections officer came to talk to one of the middle school classes last year, came over to me afterwards and said, "Just walking around the hallways you can tell who's in what gangs." When a *corrections officer* tells you your schools aren't safe ... um ....
Where are the police?
Who let the schools get this bad?
Where's the community that values safety in the schools?
There are many more questions that could and should be asked. But I agree with EdWonk, giving in to criminals (or rogue states, even) is never a winning idea.
Indeed. That common street thugs decide school policy is absolutely unacceptable. But it will not change until we, as Americans and educators, understand that we are all responsible for our collective and individual security.
A few years back, Jeffrey Snyder wrote a prescient essay: "A Nation of Cowards," that basically suggested that crime occurs because we allow it to occur. Not the police, not the government, us. You can read this article at www.rkba.org/comment/cowards.html.
Where are the police? Doing what they are allowed to do. The police have absolutely no moral or legal responsibility to protect any individual. The courts have ruled over and over again (and quite recently too) that the police owe no duty of protection to any individual, nor can they be sued for failing to protect any individual. This is as it should be. There are very, very few police officers in any jurisdiction. Their job is to generally, through patrol and investigating crime AFTER IT OCCURS, deter crime. While they may be financially able (in terms of overtime pay and availability of personnel) to come out in force for the occasional special event (such as a high school graduation?!), they absolutely cannot serve as a school security force.
Unless and until the bad guys--gang bangers, common criminals, child molester and terrorists--know that attacking a school can potentially make them very dead, schools and all within them will remain helpless, soft targets whose "Gun Free School Zone" signs do nothing by provoke ironic laughter from bad guys.
I'll make this prediction: It will take at least two (sadly, probably more) deadly terrorist attacks against American schools before we get serious enough to realize that teachers and administrators may well need to be armed (discretely of course) and trained to protect themselves and their charges.I wish it was otherwise, but in some things, we just don't get it.
Except for armed teachers (I'd be scared to come to work), I agree with pretty much every comment above, but the one that kinda haunts me is Barry's--what if the kid actually got shot?
We're not talking about a politician, or a hero, or a cultural icon with a point to prove. We're talking about a kid.
And if it were my kid, you can bet your life I wouldn't let her set foot out there, and while I don't lay a finger on my kid, I'd forcibly restrain her before I'd let her risk her life to give a graduation speech.
Of course it's about the kid, like Barry says. But it's also about who has the Power.
If the only way we can keep our kids safe is to keep them hidden away in remote locations, the criminals have the Power.
If our society has reached the point where we cannot keep a high school graduation safe for the students who are graduating, then we as society members MUST find a way to MAKE it safe.
Does that involve changing the role of the police force? Arming all citizens? (I don't advocate arming everyone. I don't think 'everyone' has the ability to be responsible or skilled enough to make that a safe situation.) Creating another kind of social security force? (Yes, I see the pun, but it's inadverdent. I'm not going for funny here.) Bring the National Guard home and go to war against home-grown criminals?
I don't have an answer -- I lack the knowledge and legal/logisticl skills to solve such a complex problem. I do know that we have to find an answer or we will lose everything.
The Diastrict needs to simply cancel graduation and mail the diplomas to all students -- and not just for this year, but for all future years.
When pissed-off family graduates, parents, family members, and community members complain, place the blame directly where it belongs -- on the criminals that they allow to operate so freely in the community that they believe they can threaten to do a public execution and get away with it.
Offer to reconsider holding graduations in the future, if community cooperation with law enforcement gets the town cleaned up enough to make it safe to hold them.
I like the last comment.
Graycie: Good comments. A good part of the solution to this is pretty simple, and is already in force in approximately 40 of our 50 states: Concealed carry of handguns. No, it's not for everyone. It's literally deadly serious business, and no one whose sensibilities are so fragile that they shrink from even the thought of violence should carry a handgun. Of course, they're depending on someone else to protect them--someone else who almost certainly won't be there when they're needed.
In every state where concealed carry has been instituted, crime rates have measurably declined, particularly for crimes of violence. Even though only a small proportion of each of those populations will ever be carrying a concealed weapon, every criminal understands that it is likely that someone will be carrying just about anywhere at any time. When criminals have to worry that the next person they're thinking of robbing might very well kill them, that tends to make robbery a great deal less fun.
And for those highly evolved, enlightened states and cities that deny their citizens the ability to protect themselves, criminals go about their business, happy and unmolested, as always. After all, if anti-gun laws worked, wouldn't NYC, Chicago, DC and similar antipgun utopias be utterly crime and violence free?
Imagine that you are a terrorist who wants to hit a school. School district A has publicized the fact that it allows--even encourages--its teachers and principals to carry concealed weapons, but it doesn't make public how many or in which schools they might be. School district B next door proudly displays its all powerful "Gun Free School Zone" signs. Which schools will you be most likely to attack?
I know that many in education feel that guns are horrible and icky, etc. But as with much in life, this is a relative situation. Guns are horrible? More horrible than graduation ceremonies turned into high security prisons? More horrible than scores of children killed by criminals or terrorists? The deterent effect of publicized concealed carry is great, and by itself helps to ensure that the concealed weapons might never be used.
Concealed weapons are like fire extinguishers: When you need one, you need it badly, right now, and nothing else will do. It all depends on how serious we want to be about effectively dealing with very real potential threats, doesn't it?
Mike,
I don't think everyone should be able to drive a car. Too many people now drive legally who lack judgment, physical ability, or good reflexes.
For the same reasons, I don't want everyone to go armed. I am not so "fragile that [I] shrink from even the thought of violence should carry a handgun." I grew up as a military brat -- my father was master sergeant rifleman in the infantry. Guns per se don't frighten me. People with guns do -- unless they are a cadre of trained professionals.
I understand the point you make when you talk about a school system that "allows--even encourages--its teachers and principals to carry concealed weapons." I work with some pretty good people who I trust within their areas of expertise, but I'd rather see a lot more police officers in my schoool than my colleagues with weapons.
Dear Graycie:
Thanks again, for your comments. I wasn't, by the way, belittling you, I was just speaking in general about those sensitive souls who are apparently unable to protect themselves. You know about whom I speak.
You should know that I was a police officer, including being a SWAT troop and firearms instructor, for more than 17 years. Police officers have no magic in the development of firearms skill, tactics, and knowledge of the law. Anyone can learn such things and learn them very well. After all, every single police officer was a civilian before they were a police officer.
It is perhaps a bit unsettling to understand that a large proportion of police officers are only minimally proficient with firearms. Many have little to no interest in them, and many law enforcement agencies require no shooting practice at all, merely a once or twice yearly qualification, often with pretty generous passing scores. Why is this so? Ammunition and training time, particularly if you're having to train an entire force, is very pricey.
Any civilian who is willing to obtain good shooting and tactical training (it is widely available), and who is willing to regularly practice their skills, can reach a level of proficiency that surpasses that of many police officers.
Why won't we see more police officers in schools? It's absolutely impractical. People would be utterly shocked to discover how few officers are actually on duty in a given community at a given time. Probably the fewest are on the street Monday-Friday during school hours.
For perspective, consider this: To put one additional patrol officer on the street 24/7/365, you must hire at least five. One each for each of three shifts, and the remaining two to cover court appearances, vacations, training, sick time, etc. It doesn't cost a community $30,000 to hire one cop, it costs $150,000.
I suppose the primary point I'm making here is that we are all responsible for our own safety. Practically speaking, the police can't protect us. Much as they love catching bad guys in the act, they very rarely have that opportunity. If we're not prepared to protect ourselves and our students, understanding that the police can't, and have no legal liability therein, who will we call? Ghostbusters?
I agree with Mike to some extent. Not everyone on Earth should carry a handgun, but those of us who have proven ourselves proficient enough to earn a concealed weapons liscence or permit should be allowed to carry a weapon. (It takes a lot of education in my state to get it, and soem rigorous testing requirements as well including a background check.)
No it won't eliminate crime. Only eliminating free will could do that, but it might make someone think twice about it.
In all honesty, I had never given much thought to CCW laws, but Mike has made some compelling points. No, you don't give out guns & permits to every teacher that walks through the doors, but if teachers are *encouraged* to get trained and certified, where's the harm?
Playing devil's advocate for a second, if a group of students knew that the physics teacher had a gun, couldn't they simply overtake the teacher in event of a crisis or fight like this?
Dear Barry:
One of the significant responsibilities that anyone carrying a firearm assumes is the responsibility to protect and control that firearm. To do this, one must become tactically aware and rise above the "Condition White" status of most human beings who are utterly unaware of what is going on around them at any given moment, thus, cannot anticipate trouble or effectively respond to it.
With proper training and practice, one can easily indefinately maintain a "Condition Yellow" state of awareness, which will serve to prevent such problems. Properly choosing and concealing a weapon can make that weapon all but invisible as well. For instance, a .44 magnum revolver with a 6" barrel is probably not the best concealed carry choice for a 5'2" 110 pound woman.
You raise a cogent point, but again, the issue is one of priorities. If our priority is effective, potentially life saving response in the face of a worst case scenario, all of the other details can be worked out. In this, the Police have decades of prior experience and much to share.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
