This was on the front page of today’s Wall Street Journal:
We were told that Schools did not need anybody armed, that the best solution against violence in school was gun control, that we gun-toting rednecks did not know anything and the great brains would implement what was needed to bring us a world full of happiness.
But there is Chicago where the experiment is in full swing. Cops at school? Safe Passage routes? What went wrong? There shouldn’t be anybody with a gun at school, not even a cop! That would be admitting that the crazy Wayne LaPierre was right!
Of course Chicago is a special case. The present and previous administrations just let the social problems fester by throwing money and not tackling the real issues. A direct attack on the gang problem would bring them immediate accusations of racism which might be a kiss of death for re-elections. It is easier to blame guns, blame the NRA and its members and blame everybody but their special interests and voters. Lets not make waves, let’s not tackle the problem head on. Hell, dead kids make for fine political speeches and campaign contributions.
And then, there is the “unorthodox” common sense approach like the one chosen by the Arkansas Christian Academy:
The message is quite simple: “You try to hurt our kids, you’ll be killed.” It is a basic response from any living animal: The offspring is to be protected by all means up and including deadly force. Mama Bear did not get her reputation by setting up a lemonade stand for the cubs and skipping coffee houses. Mama Bear will trounce you if you screw with her progeny. End of Story.
Miquel, it wasn’t just that they threw money at the problem; it was WHOM and how they threw it. Mayor Emanuel gave CeaseFire ONE MILLION DOLLARS to fund intercessions with the gangs and slow or stop the killings. He might as well have wiped his ass with it. Oh, wait…..
Meanwhile, if you read the Second City Cop blog, they are something like 1,000 officers short of what they need to cover the city.
“Mama Bear did not get her reputation by setting up a lemonade stand for the cubs and skipping coffee houses.”
I’m stealing this. 🙂
LOL… go for it 🙂
Any parent unwilling to use deadly force to protect their own innocent children is unworthy.
Someone threatening one of my kids (even the 18 year old high school senior who’s 6’1, 225lbs) … well. I can say that is one of the situations where I already know what my decision is going to be. And when then person threatening my child is 6 feet under, I’ll sleep better at night, because of it.
Despite much thinking (and discussing it with my wife), there aren’t very many situations where I can honestly say that I will definitely shoot if placed in that position. Someone going after the one of the kids, that’s #2 on the list (right behind the one on someone threatening my wife).
A third party being threatened? I like to think I’m human enough to step up and help defend them. Despite long hours thinking about it, I honestly don’t know which side of the line I’d fall on there. But my kids? My wife? There *is* no line there. The person who threatens any of them has already announced that they’re ready to leave this earth.
“How unfortunate. You just activated your self-destruct sequence.”
-Vegeta, TeamFourStar’s Dragonball Z Abridged
[…] Go to this article […]
The term “Safe Passage Routes” makes me expect the psychos are going to start setting up near those and playing tower defense.
While I generally have more respect for the police than for educational institutions, when it comes to the protection of children, I trust an armed teacher a thousand times more than an armed police officer.
And an armed parent a thousand times more than an armed teacher.
I suspect someone may be stupid enough to go to Arkansas Christian Academy and start shooting, JUST to tempt fate. I also expect anyone who does will be cut down in seconds.
Enjoy the hypocrisy, as a CT resident I assure you I do…
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/27/us/newtown-back-to-school/index.html?c=us&page=1
Thanks…. used it for a post.
My husband and I decided we would no longer allow our 3 Grand-children to go to a “Gun-Free-Zone” school any longer. Being a Retired School Administrator, I cried when I was forced by my uncaring Superintendent to put up a “Gun-Free-Zone” sign.
This year, we decided to help pay (transportation costs) for our Grand-children to attend a school where armed personnel are always on the premises. My husband, a retired Trooper, spoke to the security people at the open House prior to classes beginning. One was also the school’s counselor, he was quite qualified.
Few parents,et al would ever know the ID of the ‘security team’, none of the students would. We only told our children, that we met them and their children (ages 5-9) were in very capable hands.
Because we live in a gun-friendly State, which focuses gun-control on criminals only and NOT good citizens, we live with ‘common-sense’ gun laws.
It is a public school, which has had ‘armed security’ for many years, due to our State’s belief, that students deserve to live in a peaceful environment.
Our Grand-children will never be endangered by a so-called “Gun-Free-Zone” again.
The entry doors to the school will stop anyone who believes the school is a “killing zone” by the little sticker on the door stating “Armed Personnel on Premises”.
Some of us believe our children and grand-children are worth some simple precautions.
This attitude should be more contagious.