Monday, February 26, 2018

Guns: the common denominator in mass school shootings


It's been almost two weeks since the school shooting in Parkland, FL. The national conversations about school safety and gun culture have remained front and center as debates and town hall meetings seek answers. Some people have speculated that "this time it's different," as the calls for legislative action have not abated, and the student voices have seemed to be more prevalent than in the past.

I don't know.

Regarding the role that access to guns plays in mass shootings would seem to me to be pretty indisputable. The general consensus of research is that areas that have more guns simply have more shootings. The international comparisons are certainly worth investigating and discussing when seeking solutions to our problem and making policy decisions. Having grown up in an area where gun ownership was not at all unusual, I've had plenty of time to discuss (and at times argue about) whether "guns are the problem." I certainly think they are a significant part of the issue, but I am not the type of person that insistent on banning weapons. I know where I live, and I know the challenges that position poses. That said, I'm also not one to accept that the status quo that gun violence and mass shootings are the new normal that can't change. It can.

I will admit that I simply do not understand the resistance to licensing and registration for guns and ammunition - other than the (IMO) ridiculously radical argument that private citizens must maintain arms to prevent tyranny. Obviously, in the historical and theoretical sense, there would seem to be some logic and precedent for the conspiracy-minded to believe that a government registry could be used to confiscate weapons and oppress people. But I just don't think rational, educated American citizens should buy into such fringe thinking. Of course, I know my wording on that will certainly alienate some rational, educated friends and acquaintances, but I'm not sure how else to frame it. They might ridicule how naive I am about freedom, but I offer equal ridicule how naive they are about gun violence. Regulating guns like we do cars seems a fair compromise, and I'm holding out hope that younger generations will eventually come around to that.

And then there's a few pro-gun solutions to mass shootings that I simply don't ever expect to understand, among them is arming teachers. Here in Colorado, one of our legislators, Republican representative Kevin Neville, introduced his annual bill to allow "conceal and carry" of weapons on school campuses. Thankfully it was defeated in committee. Neville argues that schools are targets of mass shooters precisely because they are "gun free zones." There is no evidence of this argument, and it dismisses the obvious reason kids shoot up their schools - they have an emotional connection to the school which is linked to their rage.

So, anyway, those are some thoughts as the nation seeks answers. I don't see any yet.

3 comments:

Mike Thiac said...

And then there's a few pro-gun solutions to mass shootings that I simply don't ever expect to understand, among them is arming teachers. Here in Colorado, one of our legislators, Republican representative Kevin Neville, introduced his annual bill to allow "conceal and carry" of weapons on school campuses. Thankfully it was defeated in committee...

Actually we've had concealed carry for students and teachers on college campus in Texas for two years (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-texas-law-allows-college-students-carry-guns-campus-n620911). Also, 172 of our school districts allow LTC (License to carry firearms) holders to carry on campus. And there is no list of school shootings around here.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-texas-school-armed-20180222-story.html

Neville argues that schools are targets of mass shooters precisely because they are "gun free zones." There is no evidence of this argument, and it dismisses the obvious reason kids shoot up their schools - they have an emotional connection to the school which is linked to their rage.

He's right. They were "no carry" locations that were shot up (Parkland, Fort Hood, Orlando FL, San Bernandino, Roseburg OR (Umpqua Community College.), Charleston, SC, Santa Barbara CA). Remember the shooting in Paris when there was a Muhammad drawing contest? There were 12 murdered and the cops were unarmed, in a country where private ownership of weapons is basically illegal (https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/paris-magazine-attack/charlie-hebdo-shooting-12-killed-muhammad-cartoons-magazine-paris-n281266). We had a similar issue in Texas, and the suspects were terminated (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/shooting-outside-draw-muhammad-contest-texas-n352996).

A few year ago I was on an unline discussion on PoliceOne.com, the subject was "Where am I aways armed?" One cop made the point he is always armed in church, because that is where you relax, you think you're safe. I am always packing in church now. And I've always packed on campus.

mmazenko said...

1. Colleges and K-12 schools are different environments.
2. No, they didn't choose it because it was "gun free." That is simply an inaccurate and unsupported claim.
3. Correlation to your 172 districts is not causation. Tens of thousands of schools nationwide have no ITC and also have had no shootings.
4. I don't oppose firearms. We have numerous SROs (trained, armed police officers) on the campuses in my neighborhood. I fully support that. I also don't oppose armed security specialists. I support licensing, training, and registering these individuals.
5. I don't support arming teachers, allowing conceal/carry in classrooms or common areas, or believing that the average citizen should indiscriminately be trusted to responsibly handle being armed in schools.
6. I adamantly refuse to allow any teacher of my own children to possess a firearm in the presence of kids.

Mike Thiac said...

1. Colleges and K-12 schools are different environments.

Never knew that, thanks! :<)

No kidding, colleges are more open campuses, you simply park your car and walk to class, no home room, etc. K-12 have, to one degree or another, restricted access, fences, etc.

2. No, they didn't choose it because it was "gun free." That is simply an inaccurate and unsupported claim.

If I made the claim that was the reason they choose those targets, please, point it out. I'm waiting.

They choose it because that is where they wanted to attack. The Tampa shooter scouted the location for months ahead of the attack. The Parkland shooter didn't need to, he knew the location because he attended school there.

3. Correlation to your 172 districts is not causation. Tens of thousands of schools nationwide have no ITC and also have had no shootings.

I'm pointing out the fact our school districts that allow persons to carry do not have mass shooters. You're the one jumping to a conclusion that more firearms mean more shootings. Remember, correlation is not causation.

4. I don't oppose firearms. We have numerous SROs (trained, armed police officers) on the campuses in my neighborhood. I fully support that. I also don't oppose armed security specialists. I support licensing, training, and registering these individuals.

You are comparing apples and oranges, like many a liberal. You say you don't oppose "firearms," but you show that by stating support for persons, e.g. SROs. You're making, indirectly, a point I make often. Guns don't kill. People kill. Yes, guns are a common demoninator in shootings. Water is the common demoninator in drowings, automobiles are the common demoninator in deadly crashes.

5. I don't support arming teachers, allowing conceal/carry in classrooms or common areas, or believing that the average citizen should indiscriminately be trusted to responsibly handle being armed in schools.

I gathered that from this, and previous post. It's also irrelevant.

6. I adamantly refuse to allow any teacher of my own children to possess a firearm in the presence of kids.

More irrelevant to this discussion, but if the school your kids chooses to allow armed teachers (in accordance with local/state law), that decision is out of your hands. Your decision then is to accept the changes at the school, or take your kids out of that school.