Friday, December 21, 2012

Thoughts on the NRA presser

First thought is that it's always fun to watch the media get called on the carpet.  Kudos to the NRA for grabbing the beast by the horns and letting them know that the contempt is mutual.  And well done for challenging them that their reporting is dishonest.  I don't think that they used the word but everyone knew what they meant.  This will boost the NRA with their target audience, and it's hard to see how the press could get worse after this.

I'm luke warm to putting cops in every school.  Quite frankly, it smacks of Police Statism, and something in the back of my head is whispering that if the cops are going to be there anyway, and since there's nothing going on (school shootings are quite rare), perhaps Officer Friendly could help out with, say drug searches.  This will not play out well - certainly not an improvement over allowing teachers and administrators to carry.

The part about cracking down on violent films and video games is idiotic.  Quite frankly, it's Junk Science.  AFAIK there are no studies that show a causal effect between games and films on the one hand, and school shootings on the other.  We sneer at the gun banners and their magical thinking.  This is magical thinking from the NRA.  I actually think that LaPierre knows this, but wanted a lightening rod to deflect criticism.  If that's the case, then this is breathlessly cynical.

So overall I score this as a wash.  Too bad.


Bob said...

The theory I heard of why LaPierre mentioned video games is to draw gun grabbers into defending them on 1st Amendment grounds, at which he could accuse them of selectively supporting the Bill of Rights.

knottedprop said...

Too late the police already patrol high schools in Tennessee. They also do drug searches in the kids lockers.
However no school shotings so far.

Kevin said...

I concur with your assessment. Had LaPierre called for armed volunteers, I'd have been happier. Slamming the media I'm fine with. Blaming video games and movies, please. But they didn't fold and surrender, and I count that as a win.

Tango said...

I don't want armed cops in the schools. I want teachers to have the legal ability to be armed, nationwide.

Farmee said...

I am for armed guards in schools, here's why: I love the idea of giving teachers the option of carrying; hell, it's their right...However, I prefer a dedicated resource. I'm also against "police" per se, for the reason you mention. I mean, they can hang around, like they already do, but they are going to be all up in investigating drugs and fights, etc...

No, what every school needs is a dedicated VIP (the kids are pretty damn important) protection specialist. Training would be VERY specific and pretty easy to do I'd think. Detecting threats in or entering the school, and dropping said threat. BONUS if they are private sector or volunteer.

Dave H said...

Having a last line of defense at the school is a good idea, but it shouldn't also be the first line of defense. We need better ways to find the sick ones and divert them to someplace where they're 1) harmless and 2) getting help.

Paladin said...

Agreed on the video game/movie stuff... although I do annoy my liberal friends by scaring them about it when the opportunity arises.

"Did you like that action action movie/video game/picture of a girl with a gun?... Better enjoy it now, 'cuz Your Leader is gonna do away with it because you can't handle it."

I'm easily entertained.

Re: Cops in Schools - I too would prefer volunteers and/or teachers and staff assuming they are properly trained. Using Cops is a close second. Its part of what they are paid to do, after all - patrol areas to fight crime.

If there are privacy/overreach issues then those can be dealt with. An entirely different set of rules exist in regards to school searches anyway, and for good reason IMO. I certainly wouldn't pass on the chance to have a good guy with a gun inside the school over it, if that's the only way it will happen. I've got a feeling that many schools in predominantly liberal areas would never in million years consider letting a civilian inside with a gun no matter what level of training they had.

All this may be moot discussion anyway, for most of the country. Rumor is that Texas may be leaning toward it more and more since we've had an armed district for 4 years now with no problems. It'll be a tough sell in many areas of my state, even so.

Graybeard said...

The thing about the video game link is that you can argue the studies are worthless because the sample is too small. Thankfully, these mass shootings are as horrifically rare as they are horrific. You just don't have enough people to make an statistical medical conclusion.

And, yes, I ignore virtually all epidemiological studies unless "n" is in the hundreds of thousands or millions (and even then...). There's - what? a hundred of these shootings?

Even when there's a million participants, can you control for every combination? Of course not.

For all we know, some tiny fraction of 1% of people taking SSRI drugs and playing video games will do this at five nines confidence. And you'll need a million school shooters before you could say that has been demonstrated.

greg said...

I'm with Tango...just give some teachers a chance to carry without getting fired. My understanding is that they weren't talking cops, but rather volunteers like me and thee.