National news by now, the shooting of two administrators at Denver’s East High School last week raises a number of questions.
What is a “safety plan” that allows a student to be expelled from one school district and yet allowed to attend a school in another district?
Why is a student put on any plan where he has to be physically-searched every day to make sure he doesn’t bring any weapons into the school?
Why wasn’t a student who had already been charged in other weapons cases not caught up in the “red flag” law in Colorado that’s supposed to be so helpful?
There are others I have as a retired high school teacher, but they will wait for now.
I’m seeing on the Internet right now a large group of teachers, parents, and students protesting violence in the schools at the State Capital where, yes, the legislators are considering a number of anti-gun laws that will set Second Amendment rights back several paces. Politicians will see the crowds, hear the pleas for fewer guns and more safety, and will willingly go along with any limits they can put on guns.
At the same time, Denver Public Schools and the Denver Police Department have just reversed a decision from 2020 (following the George Floyd demonstrations) that removed armed police from the schools for a variety of reasons that didn’t make much sense to me. Schools are “Gun Free Zones” and, by their very nature, are prone to attracting those who would do harm, just as they will at shopping malls, office buildings, and other locations that think a sign will prevent problems.
Putting guns back into schools in the hands of law enforcement personnel is, to me, a perfect argument for maintaining gun ownership by the 99%+ of lawful people who want to exercise their Second Amendment rights. However, just the opposite may occur.
All of the anti-gun bills being considered this session have seemingly breezed through their affirmative votes so far and, as they move to the other chamber, in each case they seem to be destined for approval there, as well.
The moral of the story is this – you simply can’t have it both ways. We know that taking away the guns of the law-abiding will not reduce crime, because those who don’t follow the laws and commit the crimes will continue to do so. If you want true protection from the bad guys, you have to have good guys who are allowed to do what is necessary to protect themselves, their families, and others. An unencumbered Second Amendment would allow exactly that, free from the limits of politically-based legislation that have been shown to have no effect on the bad guys and their use of weapons, guns or otherwise.