[HTML1]

Agreed. It’s time to talk about allowing teachers to carry a concealed weapon at school, should they have a concealed carry license and so desire. Or removing the “gun free” zone regulations that prevent parents from carrying lawfully. No? Oh, OK. What’s on the New York Times‘ mind then? “Is it possible that the right question — about guns, about friends, about fears — from the right parent of another teenager at the right time might help prevent some school shootings, even if that might not have been the case this time around?” I guess. “Maybe it doesn’t matter what we ask our children, or whether we even try to have conversations among ourselves, as adults, about how easily our teenagers can arm themselves. Some tragedies aren’t preventable, and sometimes our children aren’t ready to talk. But that’s no reason we shouldn’t try.” It’s amazing how far the mainstream media’s come from knee jerk post-school shooting anti-gun hysteria. Or is it? We shall see . . .

Recommended For You

16 Responses to NYT: “Shootings in Ohio School Provide Another Opening to Talk About Guns”

  1. Wait a day and tune into MSNBC and tge Huffington post, they are udually the first ones to start the anti gun push after tragedyd

  2. Do you think a good aproach for this would be to held the parents responsible for allowing acces to their guns if that was the case. If not what do you think is the best aproach for this type of scene.

  3. Robert, thanks for the link to the Motherlode blog on the NYTimes.

    If the posters actually read what I think is a thoughtful, well-reasoned piece and determined that its author is a NH woman who was once a criminal prosecutor, they might offer a different opinion. While I agree that having a skilled firearm user on campus to protect students might be a good thing, it is still addressing the problem after it has already happened. I think the author was “wondering aloud” if there weren’t strategies for dealing with school shootings while they are still in the potential stage. As she quotes from the Secret Service study of school shootings, usually someone knows about them before they happen. As such, and as responsible gun owners, I think it is something we should be talking about. I think it represents a vested interest for us to actively try to prevent these senseless acts.

    Last, Robert, your continued use of the phrase “mainstream media” is curious to me. I know it is a buzz phrase of Fox News and right-wing talk radio and I know that a steady diet of the vitriol of those media can be deleterious to your objectivity, and probably to your intellect. Please, don’t stray from your Tufts roots, where I know somewhere there they must discuss open inquiry and reason.

      • I’d say just “the media.” (BTW, of which you are a part, no?) Also, if the “others’ are MSM, does that mean that you are the fringe? Sounds a little funny to identify yourself as fringe if almost half of the US homes contain guns and we spend a lot of time discussing prudent safety measures and other responsible topics. I’d say leave the fringe to the guys who print their own money.

        Re Jumbo: I sent the equivalent of two Benz AMGs to Tufts (my son). He got a good education, though.

        • I know better than to try to discuss things with a self identified leftist, but the MSM are the ones that are watched in the majority of home spouting the same opinions as “facts” and telling people which opinions are the correct ones to have. That’s very different from a blog that talks about inanimate objects and only rarely has anything political mentioned in it.

        • Totenglocke,

          I use LeftShooter because I shoot from the left hand. Be careful not to jump to conclusions–or opinions.

          And, I love Glocks, if that’s what your handle is all about.

        • Awe, come on Totenglock. I’m here talking, and taking a fair amount of abuse, sometimes. The “I’m not going to talk to you because we disagree” thing is lame, regardless of who’s doing it. Nobody has a monopoly on the Truth. About guns or anything else.

        • One you have one group that goes above and beyond when it comes to ignoring facts, it’s stupid to waste your time trying to explain things to them because they don’t give a damn about facts – they just want to get their way.

  4. What an easy out on the part of the NYT! No, this is an occasion to start talking about why we ignore the bullies and the bullied in our schools, why faculty and students turn their heads away from such dysfunction. This is a time to start talking about why colleges at all levels don’t provide means to get kids into counseling in an effective low-key way the minute faculty spot a problem. It shouldn’t be a stigmatizing process. Every kid should have a counselor contact. When trouble is spotted, the counselor can just step up the interaction. The means of explosive venting of anger are many. The problem is the festering growth of the bully and outcast ecology. Ban one destructive means (guns) and another is turned to (arson, explosives, etc.) Head straight for the problem, instead: What good is knowing calculus if the student has become a monster in either of those polar directions? [And if Kozak wants his daughter to be safe, re his post today, then ask her if she knows of any bullies and outcasts in her school. If so, pass on the information to the school, anonymously if necessary. It would be a start. They come, on average, in pairs: bullies and outcasts. They feed on each other.]

    • Well said. It pisses me off that so many of my fellow lefties want to talk about guns when this stuff happens, when it’s an excellent opportunity to talk about mental health care. Kids can get drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, guns, whatever on the black market. Often what they can’t get is decent mental health care. Often schools have one part-time social worker or psychologist for hundreds or even thousands of students.

  5. Do you really think it will help if they let school teachers pack heat? I don’t necessarily disagree that they should be allowed to but teachers are usually pretty much joined at the hip with the anti-gun crowd (at least around here) so I don’t think many of them would carry even if they were allowed to. Maybe it’s just teachers around me that are like that (I’d believe it). In terms of campus carry, I completely support that. There are plenty of students who should be able to defend themselves and I think some of them would.

  6. I remember the exact moment I realized I was solidly in the gun rights camp. I was watching the news after a spree shooting (long before I carried a gun myself). The news anchor something along the lines of “this would be a good time to reexamine current gun control laws” and my first thought was “and how would that help?”

    • Yeah me too. My realization was the VT shootings which hit close to home. I was reading the comments section of the Washington Post and someone posted the usual “… if one kid had been armed…”. My first thought was that that was kind of crazy. My second thought was, well maybe not.

      Since then I have become very involved in 2A rights. Wherever possible I try to spread the word to non-gun family, friends, and acquaintances. Surpringly there are a lot of fence-sitters out there who are open to facts and reason.

      This is probably not the “… opening to talk about guns…” that the lefties have in mind, but is one that we should encourage wherever possible.

  7. My middle school (early 1980s) had a full-time security guy who was actually a Houston Police employee, Mr. Roberts. He always wore a three-piece suit (usually brown), and everyone knew he had a .45 auto in a shoulder holster. He was pretty much a nice guy, as I recall, probably got in trouble with the department to get that job. Not sure if one armed guy in a school of 1400 kids could make much difference, unless he happened to be in the right place at the right time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *