After a tragedy such as the Parkland school shooting in Florida, it is natural to experience intense sorrow followed by incorrect conclusions.
To more clearly understand the concept of incorrect conclusions lets follow the thought process of a medical school professor. The professor was researching cancer causes. She considered three elements, gum chewing, smoking, and lung cancer. The point made from her analysis was that while smokers may be more likely to chew gum to cover smoker’s bad breath, concluding that gum chewing causes lung cancer would be an erroneous conclusion.
The same kind of erroneous logic focuses on semi-automatic rifles after mass shootings.
Chewing gum does not cause cancer. Assault rifles do not cause mass shootings. Forks do not cause American obesity.
During WWII the Japanese penetrated both our Hawaiian Islands and our West Coast. The Germans penetrated US waters on the East Coast around New Jersey. Aside from the bombing of Pearl Harbor, our wartime enemies were not successful in bringing much of the fight to our soil, but they did in fact make it onto our land and into our US waters. In spite of what we might think, it is still possible an enemy of the US could successfully attack us in our own country.
History tells us we have already fought wars on US soil such as the American Revolution, the Civil War, and the War of 1812. The 911 Twin Towers disaster is a modern day example of coming under attack on American soil.
Think about this. If North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong-Un sends some of his armed fighters marching into your neighborhood, you will probably be happy to gather your family around the one neighbor who owns an assault rifle.
If you are a citizen who wishes to kill the Second Amendment including an American’s right to possess assault rifles, your neighbor may give you a free yard sign and send you and your family on your way.
The sign will read, “I favor outlawing guns, especially assault rifles, so our home is a Gun Free Zone.” The North Koreans will use English interpreters to read your sign to find you.
While I am not a member of the National Rifle Association (NRA), the reason the NRA refuses to give an inch is that the NRA fears if the NRA gives an inch, Gun Haters (GH) will take a mile.
In my opinion, the NRA and the GH both demonstrate extreme views, and that is too bad. While I appreciate what the NRA does to support my Second Amendment Rights, the NRA was too extreme for me to be comfortable in maintaining a membership beyond my trial membership. That was long ago.
The GH are pushing me towards joining the NRA because the GH are so intense about destroying my Second Amendment Rights.
If both sides would become reasonable, I could support raising the minimum age for purchasing, owning, and possessing assault rifles from 18 to 21.
I would be willing to support background checks and waiting periods (cooling off periods) for gun sales. To be reasonable, sales, loans, gifts, and trades between bonafide family, friends, and relatives should be an exception.
Bump stocks are out. I vote NO on bump stocks. Currently, we are not allowed to have, nor do we need fully automatic weapons. That being the case, I submit we do not need bump stocks which allows a semi-automatic rifle to become like a fully automatic rifle.
When I was a police officer, I was not authorized nor allowed to carry a fully automatic assault rifle. Whats more, I did not need a fully automatic weapon. Members of SWAT trained and carried fully automatic weapons and that makes sense. Bump stocks for civilians are out.
Based on my background as a hunter, target shooter, member of the military, a law enforcement officer and a proponent of self-defense target hardening, I am the kind of individual who would be an ideal candidate to serve as an armed school teacher or administrator.
Mass shooters seek weak environments that are not threatening to them or their mission. Why do we rarely hear of mass shooters with assault rifles shooting up police stations or gun ranges? Because most mass shooters are bullies and bullies, do not like to attack anyone who is able to fight back. Have you ever heard of a mass shooter attacking a Hell’s Angels Clubhouse? No. Why? Because Hell’s Angels shoot back.
Marking a school, GUN FREE ZONE is the same as marking a school KILL KIDS FREE ZONE. Arming some teachers on each school campus would serve as a deterrent. There are at least some teachers who would be ideal candidates to possess firearms in schools, and some schools in our nation are doing just that. With an inside waste band holster (IWB), the students normally would not be aware their teacher possessed a gun.
Funding fully commissioned law enforcement officers who can serve as School Resource Officers in each school is an excellent alternative for numerous reasons. Cops can bond positively with kids. Kids with a good relationship with school police officers can SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING. Cops on campus can discourage mass shooters from attacking a school. If the evil doer does attack a school, the school cop can disrupt the attack.
While we continue to host school fire drills, we have not had one single child die in a school fire in 50 years. Hundreds of kids have died in active shooter incidents, and yet many schools do not hold active shooter drills for the safety of students and teachers. Many take the position of not wanting to alarm students with the idea that a killer might visit their school.
When I attended high school, students brought 22 rifles to school for the rifle team. Times were different back then. While I am not suggesting students carry guns to school, indeed qualified and trained teachers and administrators should be considered as a defense against mass shooters if those staff members are willing to take a life to save a life. I acknowledge not everyone with a gun is ready to use it even to protect their own life.
According to Lieutenant Colonel Dave Grossman, who is an expert on the subject of killing there are three kinds of people on our planet. #1. Sheep. #2. Sheepdogs. #3. Wolves.
The sheep are the students, teachers, parents,, and school administrators going about their lives as soft targets for mass shooters. They are like the school of fish in one of those tiny U-Fish Trout Ponds.
The sheepdog is the teacher, administrator, or the school resource officer who is armed or the armed police officer who arrives at the school because of a 911 call about an active school shooter.
The wolf is the mass school shooter.
Kids and teachers might not like cops, guns, and lethal force, but when the wolf enters the schoolhouse, the sheep want the sheepdog to come to their rescue NOW!
While we have not had a mass school shooting in Pierce County, that does not mean it will not happen in Pierce County. In fact as I write this article, I just learned local police arrested three students in Pierce County because they threatened to “shoot up” three different schools. Good work Tacoma Police Department. Everyone who loves kids, teachers and school administrators should be seriously thinking and talking about this issue.
I say, let’s talk, think, and then take action before we have another school mass shooting and the victims turn out to be our kids.
To help you get started, let me share an important idea with you. Check out a valuable life-saving website by clicking my handy link JESUS VILLAHERMOSA – CRISIS REALITY TRAINING.
Jesus and I have crossed paths multiple times during the last 34 years, both inside the Pierce County Sheriff’s Department and outside law enforcement.
It took me 2 minutes, 16.54 seconds to read the opening one-page description titled, About Crisis Reality Training – Jesus Villahermosa. If you love kids and teachers, then reading the page will leave you wanting to learn more. Invest 3 minutes. I am confident; you will be glad you did.
I should disclose I have no financial relationship or interest in Crisis Reality Training. Additionally, the opinions expressed above are mine and mine alone. Jesus may or may not agree with my views other than of course my idea that Jesus Villahermosa has information kids and teachers need to help keep them safe.
I will end this writing by quoting one paragraph from the Crisis Reality Training website. “His thought-provoking ideas are given with a humorous note and will surely inspire those in attendance in believing that they can help to make our schools and workplaces a safer place to learn, teach, and work!”
If this area were invaded by North Koreans, I don’t think they would get all the way down to Tacoma, Olympia, Centralia, etc….We all know Seattle is Ground Zero for an attack, most likely because missiles headed for Bangor would over fly. Tacoma would take a hit because of JBLM….and enough of my neighbors are current/former military I don’t need to worry about someone not knowing what to do in the event of an invasion.
On the other hand, I cannot think of any reason why anyone would need a semi-automatic weapon (deer don’t shoot back, last time I hunted). Gun Haters don’t hate guns, generally, they just want some reasonable restraints on who, where, what, when in terms of weapons. I think everyone who wants a semi-automatic weapon should have to meet a panel and explain why his/her life is incomplete without such a weapon and what he/she plans to do with that weapon. I’m former military myself, with service in a combat zone, and have never fired a weapon under threat. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand the need for self-protection…I just don’t understand the need for semi/fully automatic weapons in private hands.
I don’t want to take away all guns…I would even allow semi-automatic weapons to be range fired under controlled conditions (which is how I got my experience with them) but all the scare talk about how bad something might possibly, no matter how remote, happen doesn’t serve as an argument against common sense and careful regulations regarding the sale of semi-automatic weapons to the general public.
Agreed. At some point, common sense controls on access must be part of the conversation.
I consider myself a left-leaning centrist. I am not a gun hater, and I support basic second amendment rights. But like A G Toth, I can’t see the need for the average citizen to own even a semi-automatic weapon, especially with a 30-round magazine. I’m really baffled by the argument that a semi-automatic AR-15 is needed for “hunting”. If someone is that bad of a shot, they shouldn’t even own a pellet gun. The problem is semi-automatic weapons are already out there, so there is a somewhat valid argument that “I need a semi-automatic gun to protect myself from the bad guys who also have one.” It reminds me of the “mutually assured destruction” argument for countries to possess nuclear weapons, except with guns the bad guys aren’t afraid to pull the trigger.
Which brings me to arming teachers, or posting armed guards in schools. This concerns me for several reasons. First, what kind of qualifications will such people have? I don’t want Mr. Jones, the shop teacher who served in the Marines 20 years ago, to be able to pack in class unless he has a LOT of additional training. Second, we don’t know how these guards will react. We saw in the Parkland (FL) shootings at least one armed deputy who did nothing. So what good was he? Lastly, what are these people going to be armed with? Most likely a handgun. So a gunman enters with an AR-15, or and AK-47, with a 30-round clip. And he’s got the element of surprise. And he might well be on a suicide mission, so knowing there are armed guards doesn’t really deter him. With a little luck our guard might take him out early, so at best he can limit the damage. But he won’t eliminate it. However, if he couldn’t get the AR-15 in the first place……
I don’t have an easy answer to any of this. But since the Parkland incident I’ve come to believe it won’t be solved by my generation, in my lifetime (I’m 63). There are too many opposing views, and too many guns out there. But the kids will solve it. Eventually, over several decades, it’ll go in one of two directions. One, only basic firearms (single shot hunting rifles, small capacity handguns) will be legal and all others will have been confiscated (as was done in the UK, Australia). Or two, every manner of gun will be legal, anyone can own one. and we’ll be like the wild west – everyone for themselves. Personally, I’m hoping for the former.
Oh yeah, and the mention of North Koreans knocking on my door is pretty basic fear-mongering. My confidence in our military makes that the very least of my concerns. .
The average citizen does not need a military grade gun — period. These weapons can be fired for practice at a gun range, as another writer suggested. They can also be securely stored there. Hey, here’s a business opportunity for someone.
I do not own a gun, nor do I have a problem with any responsible gun owner. I do have a problem with easy acquisition of guns.
Guns should not be sold to anyone under age 21. Background checks should be mandatory. Bump stocks must be banned in every state.
Most important, gun owners must secure their guns in their homes to the degree that works for them. This means that they must be careful about lending weapons to others and also be aware of who might be visiting their teenage child or grandchild. Relatives of teenagers need to lock up the guns when they are out of the house, and keep the key on them. Parents and grandparents of young children need to keep the guns locked up at all times. If one is kept in the nightstand for defense against burglars, it must be locked up during the day (if there are young people of any age in the house).
I’ve outlined what I would do if I owned a gun, and I’m sure most gun owners take these and other precautions I’ve not even thought of.
The state can, and must, enact stricter gun laws. But gun owners must do their part in keeping guns out of the hands of those who have no business having them — children, teenagers, unstable relatives….
So, I have no problem with responsible gun owners. But I do have a problem with those who knowingly or unknowingly share their guns.
I know guns are a touchy subject. Few Americans change their position regardless of the evidence presented. That being said, I would like to offer a variety of items for the reader to consider.
While all weapons can kill people, some weapons were purpose designed for the job. The ammunition is designed in a way that causes the bullet to tumble when it hits flesh. This insures maximum damage.
Large magazines are not needed for hunting or target shooting, but they do minimize the need to reload when killing many people.
Regardless of arguments to the contrary, there are examples of gun control working to reduce or eliminate mass shooting events.
The idea that arming teachers would prevent mass school shootings seems difficult to accept when you consider events such as the Fort Hood shooting or the wounding of President Reagan.
The idea that the second amendment protects individuals right to bear arms is fairly modern. Throughout most of our history it was believed that the second amendment protected state militias.
Before anyone responds, please be aware I am a gun owner and I hope to enjoy shooting sports for many years to come. That being said I do not fear more stringent gun controls than those that exist today.