I recently received an interesting email from a dear friend who gre up Republican. He happens to be a collge professor and has some interesting perspectives in the light of the Virginia Tech shootings;
Ted,
Forgive me for a moment -- I do not write these emails often, but this is a part of my grieving process.
School shootings, notably the 1999 Columbine shootings, have changed K-12 education forever. How K-12 principals and superintendents think about school safety has changed at a fundamental. I imagine that the same will be true for colleges and universities following the shootings at Virginia Tech last week, but what this will look like is yet to be seen. In high schools, the most significant changes have occurred in the forms of securing the high school campus (most city schools are now "caged" -- surrounded by fences with strategically located entry points) and the development of more sophisticated crisis response plans. In higher education, I'm sure that most colleges and universities across the country will take another look at their crisis management plans, but the idea of "caging" colleges and universities is impractical.
Since Columbine, there has also been an increased discussion from some about the role of guns in U.S. society. Unfortunately, the most vocal attack came from the far left in Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Any impact that this film might have had on public policy was lost when Moore used his oscar acceptance speech to attack the Bush presidency with a rant, thus placing Moore and his work into the societal margins of "leftist" thinking. The culture of guns (and of killing) in the U.S. has not changed; if anything, it continues to get worse. Let me provide one example.
A growing industry in the United States is the "canned hunt" industry. Animals are placed in private, fenced "preserves" where they are easy targets for hunters -- there is literally no escape. The animals, raised in captivity, may not be "tame," but neither are they wild. "Hunters," if they can still claim this title, then pay to kill the animals. In some cases, they are exotic animals (zebras, leopards, tigers, giraffes), but there are also hunting preserves for deer, quail, ducks, etc. The hunters may pay for time or pay per animal. In the most extreme cases, hunters do not even have to come to the preserves -- they can hunt online using remotely powered guns to target their prey.
If the mere existence of these hunting preserves is not statement enough on the culture of guns and killing in the United States, then maybe a word on who has used them and how. Those who have participated include presidents Clinton and Bush, presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Dick Cheney, along with nine friends (and GOP donors) participated in a canned hunt in which the 10 of them killed 417 ring-neck pheasants in a single day, and that was only one part of their "hunt" for the day. Indeed, Cheney himself was "credited" with killing about 70 of the birds.
While I am personally not a hunter, I would not suggest getting rid of all guns in the U.S. Further, I would politically (though maybe not personally) oppose any effort to extend gun control laws to the point that would limit honest hunting efforts. However, I would gladly vote to eliminate anything that turns the sport of hunting into a simple game of killing (even the NRA has condemned the canned hunt industry). But I would gladly go one step further and vote to eliminate the sale of any gun designed to kill humans.
At Virginia Tech, the shooter killed 32 innocent people. What's more, he shot over 170 rounds in 9 minutes -- that's about one shot every 3 seconds without accounting for time to reload or move from classroom to classroom. I'm sorry, but I cannot understand the mind of anyone who would vote to make the kinds of weapons used in this shooting available to the public. The "best" argument is that people who want these guns would simply go underground to get them. That may be true, but limiting their sale would limit the number produced; further, if it takes us 20 years to get these weapons off our streets, then let's start now -- for the sake of our grandchildren.
Lastly, note that this is not a partisan issue -- it does not break down along party lines. So, while I usually think of the current rhetoric of developing a "common sense" approach to public policy as coded language for a "dumbed down approach," I say here that I'll vote for either method, just so long as it gets guns designed to kill humans off the streets and out of our schools.
--
John L. Hoffman, Ph.D.
www.john-hoffman.com
"An education that teaches you to understand something about the world has done only half of the assignment. The other half is to teach you to do something about making the world a better place."
- Johnnetta B. Cole
John,
When I was say 8 years old my Dad took us fishing. We always rented boats and fished from the middle of small mountain lakes. That day none of us, me, my dad or my brother had any luck. I whined and moaned out of disappointment, so to placate me, Dad took us to a hatchery where you could pay to fish. Lemme tell ya, that was some easy fishin'. Not only are those hunting preserves you mentioned perverse and non-sportsmanlike, but so are automatic and semi-automatic weapons. For that matter, what about handguns? They aren't designed for hunting any game animal, their sole prey are human beings.
So often conservatives argue that they want "strict constructionist" jurists who won't over interpret the Constitution. Perhaps we need a strict interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. The first few words are, "a well-regulated militia being necessary..." Well-regulated... wouldn't that be the state and national guard and reserves? Well-regulated...Is it possible that the founding fathers intended that we regulate gun ownership? I don't want to deny hunters or farmers a rifle or shotgun, but I do not see why a 23 year old with a history of potentially violent mental illness should be able to purchase weapons so easily without a waiting period or a background check. How many 23 year olds purchase over $500 in ammunition at one time?
I have to show an ID at the pharmacist's window to purchase one box of decongestant. I have to wait a set amount of time before I'll be permitted to buy more. If we can regulate sales of Sudafed to discourage meth production, why can't we regulate arms sales? Why is that so unreasonable? Is the NRA really that powerful of a lobby that no lawmakers in either party has the political courage to propose any kind of limits or restrictions whatsoever?
Good writing. I hope you submit it to some publications, newspapers, or journals. Would you permit me to post it on my personal blog (giving credit, not pretending I wrote it obviously)? Will you at least post it on your own website?
Omaha Central HS was closed yesterday after bomb threats.
Hope your family is all well.
_______________________________
Pirate Prayers at:
http://malloryprayer.blogspot.com
Ted's cartoons, artworks, photos, and commentary at:
http://tmal.multiply.com
"The gospel is meant to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." ~Garrison Keillor
No comments:
Post a Comment