Mac Thompson
After this latest massacre – all those students down in Parkland, Florida – our leaders, President {Donald} Trump and Kansas Gov. {Jeff} Colyer as well, have come out with the idea that we should arm teachers in our schools to better protect the students from sociopathic killers armed with automatic weapons. Hear, hear! That’s the sort of leadership to which we have become accustomed, thank God, and God bless America, too. And I intend to be amoung the first of our teachers to go ahead and pistol on up, yo.
Trump and Colyer’s leadership excellence has been furthered by our Kansas legislature recently deciding that students should be allowed to carry concealed weapons on campus at 18 years of age, as reported in the Butler Lantern. I’m sure that we all feel better knowing that 18-year olds are going to be packing right here at BCC. I know that I sure feel safer now.
Now, some may say that 18-year-olds, who aren’t even trusted with 3.2 beer, should not be trusted to carry concealed weaponry, which can easily kill with the flick of a finger, but they’re obviously over-reacting. After all, these kids will have to go through eight whole hours of training! That’s reassuring. After all, I know from my personal experience that many 18-year-old students, after eight hours in my classroom, can almost identify a verb in a simple sentence! What could possibly go wrong?
I know that some of you are going to say “Hey, Thompson! You’re not even American; you’re a Canuck – is this some sort of trickery? Love it or leave it!” Yeah, and this is right where I find that I, too, have to start packing. Because yes, being Canadian, I am well aware that sensible gun control laws lead to a safe and secure population who doesn’t suffer massacres every week. And that any credible civil state will work to allow free gun ownership for sport and protection while at the same time protecting their civilian population from repeated armed attack with unregulated automatic weapons. But hey – here we are! I’m not up North anymore. And when in Rome….
So, I need to carry too. If teachers are to carry, as Trump and Colyer suggest, I shouldn’t even conceal the weapon; it will serve as a better deterrent if I sport a big old Colt. 45 in a holster – or even better, two! like John Wayne. And I should be supplied with a weapon and ammunition, and money for time down at the range as professional development, and get paid extra for it, too.
And then when a car in the parking lot backfires, and some untrained 18-year-old yahoo hauls out his piece, where upon other panic-stricken and untrained students start to pull guns out of their belts and armpits too, I’ll be prepared, right? Because when I hit the ground and roll, I’d better be able to come up with something in my hand too, right?
As a somewhat older adult student at Butler, I don’t often feel the need to participate in campus culture. I was younger once, and all those things were more important to me then than they are now. I do from time to time read the campus paper, the Lantern, about once a semester as I’m waiting on my advisement appointment. I should have guessed, but alas I was a little taken aback when I saw the blatant political bias in the opinion section of the April 3rd edition. Is it really possible that nobody had anything else to say on the matter of gun control than two ideological progressives? I find that unlikely. However, giving the editorial staff the benefit of the doubt, I thought I’d offer a countering opinion.
First, I’d like to address the letter to the editor from Mac Thompson. While I understand sarcasm as a rhetorical device used to belittle those with opposing opinions, Mac’s article was disturbing for a couple of reasons. First, Mr. Thompson erects a straw man, then proceeds to tear it down. There is nobody calling for a law requiring teachers to be armed, anywhere. There are proposed laws to allow teachers to carry if they choose provided they comply with the requirements. If you can’t trust yourself with a potentially dangerous inanimate object, then leave it to the more responsible members of society and kindly mind your own business.
The second problem is the professor’s attitude towards his students. Is this an English teacher who actually admits to failing to be able to explain what a verb is to a student within an eight hour time limit? This suggests that either Mr. Thompson has little to no regard for the younger students at Butler, or that Mr. Thompson is grossly incompetent. Either way, why should anyone listen to him?
Another problem, which is all too common these days, is that this professor makes demonstrably false claims, and builds on them as if fact. “Being Canadian,” he says, means he knows that “sensible gun control laws lead to a safe and secure population who doesn’t suffer massacres every week.” Really? How are those tough gun laws working out in Chicago? Also, what exactly is meant by sensible? That’s an entirely subjective yardstick to use, so how will it be determined what is sensible? Would the good professor rather the US be like London, outlawing knives?
Gun crimes happen all over the place, and the statistics aren’t really all that easy to make sense of. There are lots of murders in places with strict gun laws, and some places with lax gun laws too. It’s not a clear cut correlation like Mr. Thompson seems to think it is. Frankly, though, it doesn’t really matter because the main reason most people who are “pro gun” don’t care one whit about statistics. Simply put, why should you be allowed to use government force to take away my rights because you are afraid? How do you think those laws are enforced: with pepper spray and padded rooms?
There is literally zero evidence to support the notion that if armed, the freshmen students at Butler will suddenly decide to have shootouts over parking spaces. There is no evidence that young people carrying guns are likely to start shooting because they are startled by loud noises. There are thousands of young people carrying firearms everyday in the military, and while for some reason people still think it should be illegal for them to drink, there doesn’t seem to be all that much of a problem giving them guns to go to Syria to kill people. Accidental shootings are a huge minority of gun deaths, and using them as fear propaganda shows a lack of concern for honesty.
In the end, the gun control debate will continue to be a hot one unless, and until, both sides learn to actually listen to the other side’s argument, and respond to them. For clarity’s sake, here is an argument against gun control that is often unaddressed: enforcing gun laws would require expanding government power, which many people are opposed to for many reasons. Personally, I don’t see very much at all that the government does well. Roads are in pretty poor condition. We’ve been at war with an ideology for more than a decade without any noticeable success, Social Security is failing, trillions of Dollars are unaccounted for, and innocent people routinely get sent to prison. Inviting the government to regulate guns means putting the most inefficient and corrupt organization on the face of the planet in charge everyone in the entire country’s personal safety. I am unwilling to allow that, and so are many others.
So for any out there who are actually open minded, I have a question for you. If you were sitting in class and you heard a shooter going down the hall executing everyone he found, would you want a gun? If not, that’s understandable, but please extend the same curesy to those of us who say, “Yes please.”
LikeLike