Back in the old days of my elementary school attendance, which was a mix of parochial and public schools, Officer Friendly would make annual visits to foster a relationship between kids and cops. Later, the D.A.R.E. Program sought to do likewise. In fact, when I was a very young lad my uncle would frequently drop me off at school on his way to work as an officer with NOPD. Police, while not permanently stationed at any school I attended, were a fixture in the curriculum. Why then, in light of the horrific event at Sandy Hook Elementary, is the idea of an armed police officer at schools being so vigorously attacked? Why is this idea so inane and, therefore, completely off the table? What, exactly, am I missing?
Sidwell Friends Select in Washington, D.C., educates the children of D.C. area power brokers for an annual pittance of $38,000. Sasha and Malia Obama made news when they were initially enrolled there and we have once again seen them on front pages of newspapers because their school employs 11 armed guards as a matter of course. It should be noted that these are NOT guards hired since the two young ladies enrolled. Nope, Sasha and Malia have their own Secret Service detail, as they should. The 11 armed guards are there permanently to protect the students and staff.
The Friends Select website proudly states: Members of the Friends Select community believe in the Quaker values of respect for all, simplicity, “the peaceful resolution to conflict” (my emphasis), and a constant search for truth. Umm, peaceful resolution versus 11 armed guards? Doesn’t that seem excessive, even histrionic, despite the fact that these are the children of the rich and famous? I would suggest that it is even more than that. It is completely and utterly hypocritical for an organization that preaches “War Is Not the Answer,” while making money on t-shirts and bumper stickers emblazoned with that creed. Those bumper stickers mostly festoon Volvo station wagons and Subaru Outbacks and the t-shirts are most often worn by Birkenstock clad hippie re-enactors, but nonetheless that IS the Quakers publicly stated position, which is undeniably at odds with 11 armed guards roaming their hallowed halls.
I am completely comfortable suggesting that no matter what political view the parents of Sandy Hook Elementary previously held concerning guns, they now ALL wish there had been someone, anyone, armed and trained in the use of a firearm when evil incarnate broke a window and rained death and destruction onto the innocent boys and girls in school that day, as do I. I also have no doubt that more than a few of those parent’s cars had those blue and white, War Is Not the Answer bumper stickers. War may not ALWAYS be the answer, but when evil intrudes upon the safety of children it is, in my view, most definitely the answer. If you disagree with my assertion, then let me ask: if not war, what IS the answer? Please stick to real world solutions and pragmatic responses and not some juvenile, kumbaya version of how you wish life would shake out.
On a recent front page of The Philadelphia Inquirer is a story wherein our potty-mouthed mayor, Michael Nutter, went on national television last week, looked into the camera and said the NRA's proposal to staff schools with armed guards was "a completely dumbass idea from the start.” He has used various versions of ass profanity to hammer home points in the past. I am not against anyone cursing, including public servants, but our august mayor uses tame profanity to appear tougher and more inner city than his lily background would suggest. It is part of his “I’m a tough guy when it come to this stuff” persona, which, as any Philly resident will tell you, is absolutely ridiculous.
The commercials of Mayor Nutter and his daughter Olivia are credited with swaying the electorate in his first run for mayor. I admit that I found those commercials heart-warming, but did not vote for him for reasons that matter not here. There was much fanfare when Mayor Nutter and his security entourage, (two cars and three uniformed cops according toPhilly.com) dropped Olivia off at Masterman School, which is the top ranked public school in Philadelphia. There is, of course, a uniformed member of the Philadelphia School Police stationed there now. Unlike when Olivia attended though, the officer at Masterman, like all other Philadelphia school cops, is unarmed. Why Sasha and Malia Obama and Olivia Nutter are possible targets I understand. Why they are more precious than my princess I do not know.
At the beginning of this school year I noticed my daughter’s school officer was not on duty. When I questioned the principal, an educator par excellence whom I absolutely adore, I was told, “City Council removed the officers from ‘some’ schools due to budget cuts.” A subsequent call to a councilman found me hearing that my daughter’s school was deemed less at risk than others, so another school would have the protection afforded by an unarmed cop. An unarmed cop is better than no cop, but not by a huge amount. An unarmed cop breaks up a schoolyard fracas. An “armed” cop is a deterrent, which says to any, would be evil doer, “at this school you WILL be met with force and you WILL have to take a defensive posture. The loathsome bastard at Sandy Hook had to contend with neither of those things, as we all too well know.
The School District of Philadelphia’s Office of School Safety oversees the school police who, according to the district website, must complete 4 weeks of initial training and 24 hours of staff development annually, but they carry no firearms. For that, each school in Philadelphia has a Law Enforcement Liaison with the Philadelphia Police Department. This provides for 2-3 uniformed PPD who are tasked with responding to emergencies at assigned schools. Unfortunately, as the saying goes, when seconds count those assigned cops are only minutes away.
All of this leads me back to my thesis statement. Why is the idea of schools having armed officers, private or public, uniformed or not, so abhorrent to the same people who consistently make use of such guards? The day after the Newtown shooting, I offered to teach the principal I so adamantly support, to shoot and was told no thanks. She was concerned about the” message” it would send to her kids if she was packing, even though she stated unequivocally that she would have done as the principal in Sandy Hook did and run to the guns. I also unequivocally believe that she would seek to protect all her kids, but unfortunately an unarmed Good Samaritan versus a maniac intent on mayhem rarely winds up with a W in the good guy’s column.
What I simply do not understand is why this is an either or proposition. Why CAN’T someone trained to shoot dead any threat to our children be part of our school’s operations? All we very smart people can find a way to make him/her unobtrusive and indeed un-noticed by the children if we wish, or part of the larger program like Officer Friendly if we prefer. Even if we were to completely outlaw ALL firearms tomorrow, something I do not support, there would still be hundreds of millions of weapons available to those bent on evil. Were it a utopian society where none of our children need fear any harm in their day to day lives, this would all be moot. It’s not a utopian society, though it is an exceptional one, and evil men (it’s mostly men who do these vile things) will commit evil acts. Shouldn’t the angel on the shoulder have 15 rounds of S&W .40 or 10 rounds of .45 ACP with which to defend the position of spirit and light? Or is that just not worth the cost to the world view of those wherein Peace Is the Answer?
No comments:
Post a Comment