BBKristopher.com
(Insert Exploding Spaceship Here)
NavigationSearch |
Someone's Political Bias is ShowingThe Washington Post recently announced it's list of Idiots of the Year. The winner is Laura Mallory, who tried to get Gwinnett county Georgia to ban the Harry Potter books from school libraries, despite the fact that she's never read them, because they promote witchcraft. Third Place goes to a guy in the UK who, on Guy Fawkes Night, stuck a rocket up his butt and tried to launch it. Fourth Place goes to the cops in Muzaffarpur, India who tried to arrest a 3-month-old baby for robbing a bus. A bunch of idiots deserving of the title. But... Second place goes to Bob Beers, a Nevada state senator who wants to let teachers who base a course which is even more demanding than the police firearms training course, carry concealed weapons in the classroom. The fact is, Bob Beers is doing what any responsible politician should do. He's attempting to carry out one of the basic functions of government. That is, to provide for the common defense. In this case, he's doing by making an attempt to place the tools necessary for teachers to defend their charges available to them when they need them. But the Washington post labels him an "Idiot of the Year". So much for unbiased journalism.
|
User login |
For a minute there, I thought I was on the wrong blog. ;)
I have mixed feelings about this. My impression wasn't so much that he wanted the teachers to defend their innocent ickle charges against armed intruders, but that he wanted the teachers to defend themselves against their ickle charges.
On the one had, what a sad comment on society that he wants to arm teachers. On the other hand, I don't think I would have wanted my sixth grade teacher to have a gun. I don't think I'd be here today. ;)
Right blog, but the way drupal cuts posts is kind of annoying
The thing about it is, Beers isn't proposing arming all teachers. He's proposing a voluntary program where teachers would go through an extended version of Nevada police fire arms training course and then have the right to carry in the classroom if they wanted.
I hate it when people beat the Columbine drum, but an armed police officer on campus could have saved a lot of lives there. Same with almost any school shooting. If schools can't afford to pay the sheriff's office to station an officer on campus, I don't see why allowing trained teachers to provide the same protection at their schools that the more affluent schools get is a bad thing.
I don't know. Maybe it's just the high school I went to. After all, while I was attending there was a situation where one student stuck a gun to another students head, and the presense of a pair of sheriff's deputies with drawn guns stopped him cold. Sheriff's deputies who were hired after the former Vice Principal shot the Principle to death back during my uncle's day at the school.
True confession.
When I read the Washington Post article earlier, I rolled my eyes at number two myself. As you know, I'm a bad liberal who still likes the second amendment. ;)
I went to four different high schools in four years. There are some teachers I'd trust with a gun, and some that would be dangerous armed. In a bad way. And I still think my sixth grade teacher would have rather blown my head off than looked at me some days.
There's a lot more to conflict resolution than just having a weapon. I'm sorry, I don't think the guy deserves mention on "Idiot of the Year," but I do think angry armed adolescents may be a job for trained law enforcement.
I think we're arguing over semantics
You know, I think we agree on most points here, because what ticked me off was the WP's assumption that anyone who supports the use of firearms in any way is obviously an idiot. Whether you agree with Beers' idea or not, the guy is trying to do his job. That is, he's trying to enact legislation which he believes benefits those he represents. I've got no problem calling a politician an idiot when he/she is being an idiot. This ain't one of those times.
Put simply, Trying to ban books you've never read is stupid. Sticking a bottle rocket up your butt and lighting the fuse is stupid. Trying to arrest a 3 month old baby for armed robbery is stupid. Trying to pass a law isn't stupid just because the editors of the Washington Post don't like it.
It's not even like Nevada would be the only state in the US to let its teachers carry. Beers specifically cites an incident in Russia where terrorists seized a school as his motivation for pushing for the legislation. While I'm no more a fan of the 'the terrorists are coming' politcal drum than I am the 'OMG Columbine' drum, in this case, he does kind of have a point. One demonstrated fairly well by the incident at the Amish school not to long back. While a law like this wouldn't have helped in that case, because well, Amish and all, it would help if something similar happened at a public school.
I'm not saying I don't see the other side of the argument. I'm just annoyed at the way the WP is treating the debate.
I think I've got dualling button-pushing, actually.
Beers: COLUMBINE! TERRORISTS IN RUSSIA!
Washington Post: Guns = stupidity.
Me: *facepalm*
LOL
Yeah.
Post new comment