We all understand how this works by now, don’t we?
There was a shooting at a Colorado high school on Friday.
It was headline news for about 43 minutes, then it became a little side story, now, according to the media, it might as well have never happened.
They’ve moved on to other things. And why is that? Well, he was an avowed left wing socialist who hated Republicans and capitalism. Not exactly the sort of profile that a mass shooter is “supposed” to have. I guess that’s why the Denver Post actually edited the word “socialist” out of their report on the incident.
I’m not claiming that his politics necessarily motivated him to commit this crime — it looks like he was driven more by a personal vendetta — but every rational adult in this country knows that this thing would still be in the headlines if only the guy had been described as a “Tea Partier” or a “radical right winger.”
So be it. We get it.
The media doesn’t report truth — they advance narratives. It’s all scripted and plot-driven; it’s a combination of propaganda and entertainment. Propatainment. Entertainaganda. You get the idea. Violent liberals just don’t fit into the story they’re telling, so dudes like Pierson are left on the cutting room floor. If someone in the writer’s room can come up with a clever way to incorporate him into the plot, then maybe we’ll hear about him. Otherwise, crickets.
That’s how it works. We all know it. No reason to harp on the point.
There is something else about that incident on Friday — something important. It’s the reason you should pay attention to this story, and another reason why the media would prefer you don’t.
The carnage was limited. The shooter took his own life after critically wounding one innocent girl and inflicting minor wounds on another bystander. It’s still a tragic situation, as that young girl barely clings to life, but it wasn’t the bloodbath it could have been.
Because Pierson wasn’t the only armed man in the school that day.
He came equipped to slaughter dozens of kids, but ended up murdering only himself. The reason: this school had a resource officer. The armed cop cornered the would-be killer in the library, causing Pierson to give up and take his own life.
If a good guy with a gun hadn’t been there, this tale could have a drastically, horribly, tragically different ending.
I do not bring this up to score a political point. I’m not a politician, and I’m not trying to “win” anything. I bring this up because it is nothing less than cowardly and despicable to ignore it. This, everyone, is the formula for stopping, or at least mitigating the severity of, school shootings. It played out on Friday. There it is. That’s it. Are you paying attention?
If we care about our kids, we will see to it that they are defended. Period.
I cannot tolerate or even stomach one more blabbering fool insisting that we ought to gather our children together in a central location, and then ADVERTISE the fact that they are vulnerable and defenseless. This is beyond mere stupidity. It’s reckless endangerment.
Make sure there are armed good guys in every public school in the country. For all the money we spend on education, and all of the unnecessary frills and thrills we add to the experience, you can not tell me that this is impractical or unachievable. Put resource officers in the schools. If not them, then armed security. If not that, then let capable, trained, and licensed teachers carry firearms. However we do it, it must be done.
Do you know why? Because Arapahoe High School.
Because pure logic, reason, and common sense ought to be enough to bring us to the conclusion that a “gun free” sign has never stopped one shooting or protected one innocent victim from harm.
They put armed security in some post offices. They put them in Social Security offices and court houses. They put them in government buildings to protect bureaucrats and politicians. The politicians who argue that guns can not defend against bad people with bad intentions, still go to work every day in buildings that are heavily guarded by the very guns they abhor. These hypocrites hide behind armed men and then insist that our children aren’t afforded the same protection. They couldn’t care less about your kid’s life, no matter what they say when the cameras are pointing at them.
Protect the schools. This should be done now. Tomorrow. Immediately. Why are we even talking about it? Are we delusional or indifferent? How else can I explain why we actually DEBATE the merits of defending our children against mass murderers?
Are you unconvinced? OK, imagine the worst case scenario. Imagine you turn on the news one afternoon and you see it: there’s an active shooter at your child’s school. Now, imagine the anchor comes on and informs the audience that this school has a resource officer, or armed security, or armed teachers. How would you feel? Would you actually be MORE concerned knowing that your kid isn’t utterly defenseless? Would you think, “Gee, I wish the shooter was the only one with a gun in that building”?
Or would you find some measure of tentative relief, and pray that the good guy with the gun finds the bad guy, and puts a bullet through his head?
Every single sane and loving parent would fall into the latter category. Every single one.
So, that’s it. Enough arguing. Leave your ideology aside. Let’s be rational. Let’s fulfill our obligation to shield our children from harm, to the best of our ability.
Let’s protect the schools. Now.
Find me on Facebook.