Liberal Thinking In Regards To “Safe Schools” Is Asinine And Ridiculous

Gun Free Zone

Gun Free Zone

Liberalism, or ‘progressivism’ if you prefer, can be for many a very puzzling ideology to understand at times. You couldn’t turn me into a ‘progressive’ if my life depended on it. I’ve studied that particular political philosophy all my life and I used to say that I didn’t understand it. That’s really not particularly true or accurate. In fact, I understand it all too well. It’s the mentality that would embrace it that is so puzzling and the fact that people give it any credence at all is seriously mind boggling and nearly beyond comprehension.

The latest issue where common sense has been suspended for the sake of political expediency is the question as to whether or not armed guards or teachers should be allowed in schools. The premise being that the only true and constitutional way to protect the most vulnerable among us and only effective way to stop a mass shooter would be by armed intervention by another.

The logical mind would say that a trained and armed, law-abiding citizen is the one thing that would effectively stand between a school or other vulnerable place being an attractive target to the most sick and twisted among and a tragedy being prevented. Currently schools full of innocent children are little more than a place full of sitting ducks for those who would wish to turn it into a shooting gallery with there being no hope whatsoever for stopping anyone who would decide to vent their frustration with life and society on helpless children.

It’s a pathetic state of affairs in a society where all concepts of personal responsibility, empathy for others, and the glorification of violence now permeates the culture and all avenues of entertainment from top to bottom.

After the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut the National Rifle Association called for armed security at all schools and many concealed carry advocates pointed out that ‘gun-free’ zones such as movie theaters have proven that they only attract those intent on harming large groups of helpless victims and do absolutely nothing to protect innocents. Since that shooting, there has already been several instances where armed persons have stopped a potential similar tragedy from occurring again because someone was armed and prepared to use force to stop the perpetrator.

The latest unfolded on Friday, February 1st.

Armed Guard Stops School Shooter After He Opened Fire at Atlanta Middle School

www.theblaze.com

ATLANTA (AP) — A student opened fire at his middle school Thursday afternoon, wounding a 14-year-old in the neck before an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away, police said. Multiple shots were fired in the courtyard of Price Middle School just…

I guess our liberal friends are aghast that, once again, their ‘solution’ of gun-free zones has been shown to be fatally flawed. For them, guns are universally evil unless solely in the hands of the military or police, and even then viewed with great suspicion. To ever admit, even for a second, that an armed citizen might be able, available, and encouraged to be called upon or put in a position to save a fellow citizen from death and maiming by a madman is simply not acceptable to them. Even when that person might be trained and responsible, or someone that we otherwise put in a position of trust (pilots, teachers etc.).

In my home state of Colorado, a bill sponsored by my state senator that would have allowed teachers to carry concealed weapons in Colorado schools was recently defeated in a party line vote by Democrats. They would rather retain the status quo that leaves my children completely vulnerable and unprotected every single school day than provide them even a chance of being protected by an armed and trained individual. Explain to me how that is being responsible with the best interests of children in mind.

The typical idiocy of those who oppose the safe school concept was expressed in that particular debate by state Sen. Jesse Ulibarri, D-Commerce City, who asked whether armed teachers might just end up shooting their students, who would be in a crossfire.

“I want to make sure that I’m not allowing something worse to happen.”

Really? Seriously? The idea that Sandy Hook, Aurora theater, or Columbine massacres might have “been worse” because of some mythical “crossfire” that has never before  happened in the history of mass shootings but is trotted out a valid and reasonable excuse to keep unarmed children and citizens completely unprotected is simply asinine.

I told you such thinking is mind boggling. It’s ridiculous, irresponsible, ignorant, dishonest, and ultimately dangerous in practice.

About these ads


Categories: Politics

2 replies

  1. I’m rather confused. The schools in the inner cities with armed guards don’t have mass shootings. Oh, wait. That’s a fact. Never mind.

  2. There is no guarantee of safety anywhere and to expect that any location is impervious from harm is foolish, naive, and dangerous. The Baghdad “green zone” in Iraq was considered impervious and safe for all at one point during that war and yet people still died while inside that protected zone in spite of it being the most heavily fortified space on the planet.,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,306 other followers

%d bloggers like this: