When the guns were blazing again at Colorado schools not long ago, tragedy was averted because a teacher confronted the shooter, tackled him and took away his rifle.
I wonder what went through the minds of arm-everyone-for-safety gun advocates when they heard the story? Probably something like, “Boy, what a moron! That’s a great way to get yourself killed. If he’d pulled out a 357 a wasted the guy – no problem.”
That could be the way it would have gone down. The shooter would be dead – no need for an expensive trial – and nobody else would have been hurt. Problem is it is very difficult to hit anything, including the side of a barn, with a high caliber handgun. To be even reasonably sure of hitting his target, the teacher would need months of intensive training.
So it is very likely that the teacher would have missed the shooter. He might have hit someone else – a student running from the scene, perhaps, or a neighbor looking out the window to see what was going on. Meanwhile the shooter could have been drawing a bead on the teacher with his rifle.
What if we lived in the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) dream world and all of the adults in the area had been armed. Let’s suppose someone had turned into the school parking lot right after the teacher shot the gunman. He pulls out his trusty Colt 45 rolls out of the car and opens fire on the teacher from behind the open door – just like on TV. The police arrive and seeing the two dead bodies open fire on the good citizen. The rest of the staff pours out of the school firing at will.
I agree, that is much less likely than the NRA’s favored scenario, primarily because very few people choose to carry handguns even where they are permitted to do so. Here in Idaho it is very simple to get an “open carry” permit for a pistol and only somewhat more difficult to obtain one for a concealed weapon. But you never see anyone walking down the street wearing a gun in a holster.
Lots of people could be packing concealed handguns, but I somehow doubt it. People out here don’t like shooting other humans any more than they do in Washington, D.C., New York or Los Angeles. But, just as much, they don’t like being told how to live their lives.
Hunting and target shooting are as much an integral part of conservative Idaho culture as touch football and sailing are of eastern liberalism. When we hear casually dismissive statements like “guns are just penis substitutes”, we are offended. Nobody ever questions a sailor’s manhood even though a motorboat will get you where you are going a lot faster and safer for a lot less money. It’s a sport, they like it; who are we to say it’s stupid and dangerous.
We like guns. We like to shoot deer and elk and birds even though the meat ends up costing us more than beef in the supermarket. In the off-season we like to shoot trap and skeet; it’s fun. We like shooting pistols. It takes skill and we enjoy developing that skill and teaching our children. It’s a bonding experience and part of our culture.
When the argument gets personal, we are just as capable of resorting to hyperbolic taunts as the next guy. So, we come up with stuff like the country would be safer if everyone packed heat; and maybe it would be. We know for sure that everyone is safer when we make an effort to understand and accept each other for what we are.
Comments