How do you think we can prevent more incidents like 'Columbine'?
To be brutally honest, I don't think we can. The key word in that question is "prevent".
Here's the thing....even before that fateful day, April 20, 1999, these kinds of incidents happened.
Mental illness,
Easy access to weapons used,
Mostly committed by young males,
"Bullying",
And the list goes on....
Sound familiar? It should because it's a common refrain especially following mass school shootings.
Because mass school shootings in particular were, at one time, few and pretty far between, you'd think that we'd learn how to effectively address them. I mean, we had plenty of time in between, right? RIGHT? I mean, there were final reports voluminous with findings and recommendations that were there for the asking. All that was necessary was for someone in a position of authority to decide to read those reports and then implement recommendations applicable to their own situations, right?
But I digress...
Time was whenever I wrote about these kind of incidents, I'd try to approach things from a 'calm down' perspective. They don't happen that often. In fact, the reality was the likelihood something like that could or would happen was small...actually very small, rare even.
That isn't applicable any longer.
I repeat: That...isn't...applicable...any...longer!!!
'Calm down' doesn't cut it anymore. There are several reasons for that not the least of which is because things seem to 'calm down' faster today than they did following Columbine....WAY too fast, in fact.
Want proof?
Ok, how long do mass school shootings stay in the headlines anymore? One news cycle? Two? How long? Think about that. Take all the time you need.
Following Columbine, there simply was no rest for the weary. The spotlight was on Littleton almost non-stop for days, weeks, months, and even years. In fact, Columbine is still referenced as kind of a bellwether baseline/comparison incident for other school mass shootings. How many events since then have commanded that kind of coverage? All of them? Some of them? C'mon....I dare you to try and name even ten mass school shooting incidents and to recall where they occurred in the years after Columbine. Granted, a few come to mind, but far too many do not.
Granted, these are aggregate totals of every mass shooting including mass school shootings. But the numbers are simply staggering! At least they are to me.
There simply is no panacea....something that will magically 'prevent' them from happening again.
We might be able to do some things to help prevent them, to perhaps reduce the likelihood of their occurrence, but 100% guarantee they will be prevented? That is simply an impossibility. And that is a sad and stark reality.
* Comments on this blog are moderated.
Time was whenever I wrote about these kind of incidents, I'd try to approach things from a 'calm down' perspective. They don't happen that often. In fact, the reality was the likelihood something like that could or would happen was small...actually very small, rare even.
That isn't applicable any longer.
I repeat: That...isn't...applicable...any...longer!!!
'Calm down' doesn't cut it anymore. There are several reasons for that not the least of which is because things seem to 'calm down' faster today than they did following Columbine....WAY too fast, in fact.
Want proof?
Ok, how long do mass school shootings stay in the headlines anymore? One news cycle? Two? How long? Think about that. Take all the time you need.
Following Columbine, there simply was no rest for the weary. The spotlight was on Littleton almost non-stop for days, weeks, months, and even years. In fact, Columbine is still referenced as kind of a bellwether baseline/comparison incident for other school mass shootings. How many events since then have commanded that kind of coverage? All of them? Some of them? C'mon....I dare you to try and name even ten mass school shooting incidents and to recall where they occurred in the years after Columbine. Granted, a few come to mind, but far too many do not.
How about the number of fatalities? Number of injured? Names of fatalities? Names of injured?
Names of shooters? Sorry....that one's a 'gotcha'. Too many folks remember the names of the shooters, but can't remember the names of those murdered and injured.
Can you do it from memory?
Do you need to do a Google search?
Truth is, I'd be willing to wager we've forgotten more mass school shootings than we can actually remember.
Names of shooters? Sorry....that one's a 'gotcha'. Too many folks remember the names of the shooters, but can't remember the names of those murdered and injured.
Can you do it from memory?
Do you need to do a Google search?
Truth is, I'd be willing to wager we've forgotten more mass school shootings than we can actually remember.
Full disclosure....I'm in this group. Yup! Even though Columbine directly affected my own family, I can't begin to list every single mass school shooting incident since then without doing a Google search. Nor can I list all those killed or injured. Heck, I can't even list the names of many of the shooters, not that I would anyway.
I know this won't sit well with some folks, but I gotta ask if it's really necessary that we commit to our memories the names of every mass school shooting, the names of every person killed in mass school shootings, the names of every person injured in mass school shootings?
Is...it...really...necessary...?
I mean no disrespect. Truly I do not. I just know there are too many shootings, too many killed, and too many injured to be able to remember them all with total recall. We can memorialize them all and recognize them all on their tragiversaries. To me, that should be enough.
These days, when the Columbine tragiversary comes around, the names of those murdered are remembered. That's as it should be. The names of those injured are rarely listed any longer. The number is provided, but the names usually aren't. So, it should surprise no one when I say there are many who don't recognize my name when I converse with them unless I reveal my personal experience with Columbine. That doesn't bother me because I don't put who I am or my personal experience out there unless I feel during the course of a discussion that it's necessary to do so. That's a rare occurrence these days because I'd rather discuss what can be done to enhance school safety and to address the ongoing and ever increasing uptick in mass shootings in general in this country. My personal experiences related to the Columbine massacre are irrelevant to those discussions. In fact, I wrote about 'Single Incident Experts' in a blog post just last month. I'd rather people accept me for my knowledge of, and experience in, emergency management.
But I digress....
As of July 6, 2021 there have been 339 mass shooting incidents according to the Gun Violence Archive. Kinda sobering, isn't it? Sorry, rhetorical question.
Bottom line is that since that day, April 20, 1999, these type of incidents have been happening more and more frequently. That fact, in and of itself, that these events are happening more frequently, should tell us we simply cannot prevent them from happening. We should be able to reduce their frequency of occurrence, but stop them entirely? If we haven't done that so far, it's highly unlikely we'll be able to totally prevent their occurrence any time soon.
There simply is no panacea....something that will magically 'prevent' them from happening again.
We might be able to do some things to help prevent them, to perhaps reduce the likelihood of their occurrence, but 100% guarantee they will be prevented? That is simply an impossibility. And that is a sad and stark reality.
Cynical? You bet!
I'm frustrated.
I'm angry.
Frankly, I'm exhausted.
And that's why I'm cynical.
What?
What's that you ask?
What does he have to do with any of this?
Patience, Grasshopper....patience and I will explain it to you.
During the Presidential campaign of 2016, one of the things that struck me about TFG was his willingness to buy into the rhetoric of the NRA regarding gun free zones. The link provided is on Facebook and is actual video footage of him saying the following:
Not too long after, a site I follow called The Trace said Trump Vowed to Eliminate Gun-Free Zones on His First Day. It’s Not Nearly That Easy.
Truth is, it isn't that easy, and this organization spells it out in pretty good detail.
There is one detail they left out, though: The fact....yes, the fact....that gun free zones were never intended to be physical barriers to someone carrying a gun within the zone's boundaries. And that....that right there....is where I take issue with TFG and his vow to do away with gun free zones.
Gun free zones are not the bogeyman when it comes to mass shooting prevention.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: When someone tells me that guns don't kill people, I immediately go to the very same argument to illustrate why a gun free zone sign is not intended to physically stop anyone from bringing a gun into the zone, itself, and I really shouldn't have to explain this to anyone, but I do....more often than anyone might realize.
Guns and signs are both inanimate objects. Yes, indeed, they are.
The difference between a gun and a sign, however, lies in their intended use. A gun is designed and intended for one use and one use only....to kill something or someone, possible injuries to same notwithstanding.
A sign, on the other hand, is designed and intended to let people know there will be consequences for their actions.
No shirt, no shoes, no service....ring a bell?
A business that puts up a no shirt, no shoes, no service sign is merely letting people know there will be consequences for violating that store policy....that they will not get served.
And then there's former President Donald Trump, or, as I refer to him 'the Former Guy (TFG)'.
What?
What's that you ask?
What does he have to do with any of this?
Patience, Grasshopper....patience and I will explain it to you.
During the Presidential campaign of 2016, one of the things that struck me about TFG was his willingness to buy into the rhetoric of the NRA regarding gun free zones. The link provided is on Facebook and is actual video footage of him saying the following:
First day in Office.....gone! Gun free zones....gone! First...day...in...office!
Not too long after, a site I follow called The Trace said Trump Vowed to Eliminate Gun-Free Zones on His First Day. It’s Not Nearly That Easy.
Truth is, it isn't that easy, and this organization spells it out in pretty good detail.
There is one detail they left out, though: The fact....yes, the fact....that gun free zones were never intended to be physical barriers to someone carrying a gun within the zone's boundaries. And that....that right there....is where I take issue with TFG and his vow to do away with gun free zones.
Gun free zones are not the bogeyman when it comes to mass shooting prevention.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: When someone tells me that guns don't kill people, I immediately go to the very same argument to illustrate why a gun free zone sign is not intended to physically stop anyone from bringing a gun into the zone, itself, and I really shouldn't have to explain this to anyone, but I do....more often than anyone might realize.
Guns and signs are both inanimate objects. Yes, indeed, they are.
The difference between a gun and a sign, however, lies in their intended use. A gun is designed and intended for one use and one use only....to kill something or someone, possible injuries to same notwithstanding.
A sign, on the other hand, is designed and intended to let people know there will be consequences for their actions.
No shirt, no shoes, no service....ring a bell?
A business that puts up a no shirt, no shoes, no service sign is merely letting people know there will be consequences for violating that store policy....that they will not get served.
The very same thing applies with gun free zones signs.
Any level of discomfort patrons of a business might feel seeing someone violate a no shirt, no shoes, no service sign should give us all pause to think about the level of discomfort we would feel if we were to see someone entering a school, which is a learning environment....not a wild west shootout tableau, with a holstered gun or, for that matter, an assault style weapon slung over their shoulder. If gun free zones are eliminated, this scenario won't be out of the realm of possibility by any stretch of the imagination.
As it stands now, there are supposed to be consequences, and rightfully so, for carrying a gun, without express permission to do so, in a gun free zone.
Oh, yes....yes, indeed. Gun free zones are not actually gun free. Law enforcement personnel are allowed to carry in gun free zones. In fact, average folks like you and me can carry in a gun free zone....as long as we have permission from proper authorities to do so.
So why the kerfuffle about gun free zones? Why did TFG say he would do away with them his first day in office? I believe it's because he, along with so many others, aren't willing to do the work necessary to help make gun free zones as effective a deterrent as they could be.
And that....that right there....could be one of the most relevant and prescient means by which we prevent more incidents like Columbine.
Where there is a will, there is also invariably a way. Gun free zones are only a part of the way, but they are an integral, necessary part of that way.
But I digress....
So, what can we do to help prevent more events like Columbine?
There's already a whole lot of stuff that's been done and that is being done even as we speak.
I've even compiled a fairly comprehensive list of School Safety Resources anyone can access that has a bunch of info on how to help address the issue of school safety and active shooter incidents (along with a whole lot of other stuff, too).
Bottom line, though, is there must be a "will" to do something. All the resources in the world, all the expertise in the world means nothing....nothing at all....if we keep on buying into the apathy and opposition to doing anything at all to address the issue before it manifests.
A long time ago in what now seems like another lifetime for me, a group of students in some adult education training classes I was instructing in gave me a plaque at the end of the seminar that said:
That one stuck with me over the years, especially since Columbine, simply because more HAS been said than HAS been done when it comes to actually using what is available to help prevent these mass shooting massacres from recurring.
Cynical? You bet!
A realistic assessment? I dare anyone to explain to me how it isn't!
Any level of discomfort patrons of a business might feel seeing someone violate a no shirt, no shoes, no service sign should give us all pause to think about the level of discomfort we would feel if we were to see someone entering a school, which is a learning environment....not a wild west shootout tableau, with a holstered gun or, for that matter, an assault style weapon slung over their shoulder. If gun free zones are eliminated, this scenario won't be out of the realm of possibility by any stretch of the imagination.
As it stands now, there are supposed to be consequences, and rightfully so, for carrying a gun, without express permission to do so, in a gun free zone.
Oh, yes....yes, indeed. Gun free zones are not actually gun free. Law enforcement personnel are allowed to carry in gun free zones. In fact, average folks like you and me can carry in a gun free zone....as long as we have permission from proper authorities to do so.
So why the kerfuffle about gun free zones? Why did TFG say he would do away with them his first day in office? I believe it's because he, along with so many others, aren't willing to do the work necessary to help make gun free zones as effective a deterrent as they could be.
And that....that right there....could be one of the most relevant and prescient means by which we prevent more incidents like Columbine.
Where there is a will, there is also invariably a way. Gun free zones are only a part of the way, but they are an integral, necessary part of that way.
But I digress....
So, what can we do to help prevent more events like Columbine?
There's already a whole lot of stuff that's been done and that is being done even as we speak.
I've even compiled a fairly comprehensive list of School Safety Resources anyone can access that has a bunch of info on how to help address the issue of school safety and active shooter incidents (along with a whole lot of other stuff, too).
Bottom line, though, is there must be a "will" to do something. All the resources in the world, all the expertise in the world means nothing....nothing at all....if we keep on buying into the apathy and opposition to doing anything at all to address the issue before it manifests.
A long time ago in what now seems like another lifetime for me, a group of students in some adult education training classes I was instructing in gave me a plaque at the end of the seminar that said:
When all is said and done, more will be said than done.
That one stuck with me over the years, especially since Columbine, simply because more HAS been said than HAS been done when it comes to actually using what is available to help prevent these mass shooting massacres from recurring.
Cynical? You bet!
A realistic assessment? I dare anyone to explain to me how it isn't!
My two cents....
* Comments on this blog are moderated.
No comments:
Post a Comment