Jump to content


Photo

Another letter published in the Rockford Register Star


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 vito

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,988 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 04

Posted 20 May 2019 - 06:22 AM

I've had pretty good success in getting letters to the editor published in the Rockford Register Star, and today's edition had this letter of mine. Several of my letters that have been published have been pro-gun, so I am pleased with trying to get some sense out to the readers whether or not they agree with me. Here is the letter: "The irony of telling students to fight back if confronted by a shooter in their school (“Fighting back becoming part of school shooting guidance”) is that the very authorities giving this guidance adamantly oppose giving anyone in their school the tools with which to effectively defend themselves. Throwing books or other items at an armed shooter is a feeble and likely unproductive defense, as is charging the shooter and becoming an easy target.

 

While I admire the bravery and dedication to others’ safety that such action shows, if we truly want schools to have the ability to defend against an armed attacker, we must allow responsible adults in the school to be armed as well. In Illinois,

we have hundreds of thousands of law-abiding citizens who have undergone the necessary training and background checks to be issued a license to carry a concealed firearm.

I have little doubt that if Illinois law allowed for such, many of these citizens would volunteer to spend time in our public schools, being there only for the purpose of defending the students if a school shooter threatens lives.

Keeping the schools as “gun-free zones” does nothing to deter someone intent on murder, but is effective in making our schools “target-rich environments” for the killers.

(Name deleted for the forum) Rockford

 


Edited by vito, 20 May 2019 - 06:23 AM.

Retired U.S. Army and Veteran of the Vietnam conflict

NRA Life Member

Fully retired!

 


#2 cybermgk

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,151 posts
  • Joined: 10-October 17

Posted 20 May 2019 - 08:45 AM

I would have added the need to harden our schools like we do to other entities like banks, Governent buildings or inner city schools.  Yes, that means single entry points with controlled entry and metal detectors, armed guards inside during day, and outside monitoring to and from school traffic of children.


ISRA Member

NRA Member

U.S.A.F Veteran

Single Father of 2


#3 vito

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,988 posts
  • Joined: 30-October 04

Posted 20 May 2019 - 11:51 AM

I wanted to focus on the urging of students and teachers fighting back, and not having the means to do that. Bringing up other aspects of school security would have made the letter too long and less likely to get published. But of course, I agree that hardening the targets is another critical part of keeping the students safe. 


Retired U.S. Army and Veteran of the Vietnam conflict

NRA Life Member

Fully retired!

 


#4 Euler

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,919 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 18

Posted 20 May 2019 - 01:38 PM

Some of the articles after the recent STEM shooting mentioned how more schools are teaching "Run/Hide/Fight" instead of the much more prevalent "Shelter in place" approach to dealing with active shooters. The anti-2As in the articles objected to "requiring" children to fight.

Of course, Run/Hide/Fight isn't about requiring victims to fight back. It's about realizing their chances of survival are better if they resist being shot than if they comply with being shot, after escape and evasion are no longer options.
The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.

- Albert Camus, Resistance, Rebellion, and Death, 1960.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users