but many of the thoughts I've had this week in the wake of the Parkland, FL shooting.
I. Rights and regulations
The older I've gotten, the more rights conscious I've become.
Right are a tricky bit of business.
When I see people who tend to be more liberal lash out against guns, I cannot help but remember how strongly they lash out when someone who is more conservative wants to restrict their reproductive rights. The way one person feels about the government poking its nose into what a woman does reproductively is the same way another person feels about the government poking its nose into what weapons they can or cannot purchase.
The difference, I think, is that the government in its current form is continually attempting (even if unsuccessful) to restrict and regulate reproduction, and the same is not done for gun-ownership. I frequently see news stories about legislatures in various states trying to pass laws to restrict abortion.
Just as gun-owners don't want the government dictating to them what they can and cannot go with guns, so to do millions of people not want the government dictating to them what they can and cannot do with their bodies.
But what about the babies, someone might argue? The fetuses? This might be the conservative response.
And the people who want some level of restriction on bump stocks and military grade assault weapons might respond, "But what about the innocent school children who are shot?"
In both cases, there is a common desire to protect the innocent.
In protecting the innocent, that may mean that BOTH SIDES must be willing to compromise in some measure.
This country is not very good at the middle ground.
If every person followed the tenets of natural law, there would be no need for man-made law. We have man-made laws because not every one does adhere to natural law. Natural law is the Declaration of Independence, that humans have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If every individual could pursue their own life, liberty and happiness without infringing on others' lives, liberties and happiness, that would be grand. The Constitution is the set of man-made laws that we created to help ensure the natural laws are upheld.
We restrict or regulate for things like pseudoephedrine (because a small slice of the population creates methamphetamines) or yard darts, but we do not regulate as much for guns.
My lifetime allergies make me sympathetic to gun-owners who don't want their rights infringed on....because I know what that infringement feels like when I have to buy my Alavert-D piecemeal at the pharmacy and turn over my driver's license to make my congestion go away. But as a person who is currently infringed on, I also lack sympathy that anyone can go to a gun-show and purchase military grade weapons without submitting their driver's license.
II. Parenting
Without a doubt, parenting is different now, and I'm not entirely sure why.
When I was a kid, if my teacher said I did something wrong, my parents would absolutely take the side of the teacher, and my ass would have been grass. Even if they disagreed with the teacher, which they might express to the teacher, my parents would have (to me) been a united front with my teacher.
As the Larry Nasser trial has shown, accepting "authority" figures without question is not always good. It is not a terrible thing that parents are less willing to accept without question or critical thinking the authority figures in their children's lives. How many kids were abused by priests in the 1970s and 1980s because parents respected these "authority" figures beyond reproach?
But rather than taking a middle ground, parents have gone off the proverbial cliff. If a child does wrong, everyone but the child is held responsible. It is the teacher's fault, the administration's fault, the school board's fault, the district's fault.
My hope is that eventually the pendulum will swing back.
Of course, there are plenty of children whose lives are untimigated disasters because their parents lives are unmitigated disasters.
Even though I am a lowly substitute teacher, I see this all the time. One student who is in a class I have frequently subbed for is one of four children who are being raised by grandparents. From what I understand, her mother lost custody because of drugs. I do not know if a father is in the picture. This girl is a special needs student who is heading down a road that will go nowhere.
She is a sad, sad child, and I cannot help but feel for her (even though I am also fully aware that she can be/is manipulative). What I have noticed is that she works very hard, at least when I am there. She is by no means perfect, but she tries very hard. Unfortunately for her, her special needs (and I'm not certain what they are) make learning a difficult thing, but she does the work as best she can.
One week, when I subbed, I overheard her talking to a girl in class about when she turns 14 soon, she is gonna smoke pot. She mentioned that she hangs out with a guy who is 18. I don't need to tell you how messed up this is. I didn't say anything that day to the girl.
The next time I was there, though, I did say something to this girl. I commended her on how hard I see her working when I'm there, and I mentioned her conversation from the previous week. I told her that I know she is going to probably do whatever she wants, because I was 14 once too, and I remember how stubborn I was, but that I hoped she wouldn't do it because she is such a hard worker and has such potential.
This girl got tears in her eyes, so I let her hang out in the hall for a few while she composed herself. When she came back in the classroom, she came up to me and thanked me for saying what I said. I told her I never say things I don't mean, and that I hope she at least thinks about it.
I'm not this child's parent, and there is little I can do, but my hope is that what I said makes some difference for her. I don't expect that she is going to go down the "better" path, the path of less heartache, but for the moment, she knows someone sees her potential and cares, that someone doesn't want her to fall through the cracks.
She is one child of perhaps hundreds of thousands of children who are at-risk, through no fault of their own. And one teacher with 30 students in every class cannot be expected to "save" every child.
Unfortunately, there are some students, perhaps like the boy in Parkland, who are beyond saving.
III. Mental health and gender
I have a "mental illness," though I would say it is of the mild variety. I was self-aware enough to get help.
I have a child with a "mental illness," and I have done what I can to get him help.
I work very, very hard to instill empathy in my child, to help provide some protection that his mental illness will not ever become one that harms others (or himself).
I have seen a number of comments about mental health in the wake of the Parkland shooting, like the fact that females make up a large percentage of the incidence of mental illness, and yet it is boys who are the school shooters.
Why is this?
I wish I knew.
Boys are falling behind in many ways. Girls are outpacing them in college.
The push to help girls attain equality has, perhaps inadvertently, left boys behind.
As a mother of a girl, I'm glad females have more opportunities.
As a mother of two boys, I worry about their self-image and opportunities.
In the wake of helping boys become more sensitive and empathic, there has been a pendulum swing towards hyper-masculinity. It seems like there is an either or. Either a boy is a sensitive-type or a masculine dude.
Again, our country isn't too great with the middle ground that a boy can be both.
IV. Schools, teachers, and police
If I wanted to be a sniper, I would have gone into the military or law enforcement.
No teacher goes into teaching because they want to wield a gun. They either love their subject and want to share it with others, or they love kids. Or both.
Given all the responsibilities of teachers, they do not need to be tasked with protecting children by carrying weapons.
There is no way in hell that asking teachers to carry weapons is a good idea, and I'm saying this on a purely logical level.
Things to consider--
1. When exactly are teachers supposed to get training for weaponry? Is this going to count as professional development or will they still have to do their normal professional development each year in their subject areas? Are schools going to pay for this additional training? How often does the training need to be reviewed? Is there licensing and associated fees? Who pays for those?
2. Will schools provide the weapons to teachers? Will schools pay the increased insurance for these teachers? If a teacher carries his/her own weapon, who carries the insurance? The school or the teacher or do both? Does the teacher get additional pay for acting as both teacher and security?
3. Do parents have the right to request that their children not be placed in a classroom with a teacher who carries a weapon? Do parents have the right to request that their children be placed in a classroom with a teacher who carries a weapon? How does this affect class size and scheduling?
4. If there are schools where no teachers have weapons, while some schools have an overabundance of teachers with weapons, do those teachers have to change schools? Will this be a stipulation in employment contracts?
5. Are schools going to provide weapon safes in the classrooms where these teachers are? Are these teachers the only ones with access to these safes? Does administration have access?
6. Given the budget cutbacks for most schools, where is the money going to come from to pay for these guns, insurance, safes, and training? Would the money be better spent in getting metal detectors for schools?
7. If a child were to inadvertently get a hold of a gun and hurt someone, is the teacher responsible or the school? How much liability insurance is needed? Given that there are limitations on what types of playground equipment schools have, I wonder if underwriters would even give insurance for this?
V. Conclusion?
It's complicated. I consider myself fairly intelligent, but I'm no expert on any of these things. These are just the thoughts that have been running through my head without any evidence or dialogue with others.
I. Rights and regulations
The older I've gotten, the more rights conscious I've become.
Right are a tricky bit of business.
When I see people who tend to be more liberal lash out against guns, I cannot help but remember how strongly they lash out when someone who is more conservative wants to restrict their reproductive rights. The way one person feels about the government poking its nose into what a woman does reproductively is the same way another person feels about the government poking its nose into what weapons they can or cannot purchase.
The difference, I think, is that the government in its current form is continually attempting (even if unsuccessful) to restrict and regulate reproduction, and the same is not done for gun-ownership. I frequently see news stories about legislatures in various states trying to pass laws to restrict abortion.
Just as gun-owners don't want the government dictating to them what they can and cannot go with guns, so to do millions of people not want the government dictating to them what they can and cannot do with their bodies.
But what about the babies, someone might argue? The fetuses? This might be the conservative response.
And the people who want some level of restriction on bump stocks and military grade assault weapons might respond, "But what about the innocent school children who are shot?"
In both cases, there is a common desire to protect the innocent.
In protecting the innocent, that may mean that BOTH SIDES must be willing to compromise in some measure.
This country is not very good at the middle ground.
If every person followed the tenets of natural law, there would be no need for man-made law. We have man-made laws because not every one does adhere to natural law. Natural law is the Declaration of Independence, that humans have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If every individual could pursue their own life, liberty and happiness without infringing on others' lives, liberties and happiness, that would be grand. The Constitution is the set of man-made laws that we created to help ensure the natural laws are upheld.
We restrict or regulate for things like pseudoephedrine (because a small slice of the population creates methamphetamines) or yard darts, but we do not regulate as much for guns.
My lifetime allergies make me sympathetic to gun-owners who don't want their rights infringed on....because I know what that infringement feels like when I have to buy my Alavert-D piecemeal at the pharmacy and turn over my driver's license to make my congestion go away. But as a person who is currently infringed on, I also lack sympathy that anyone can go to a gun-show and purchase military grade weapons without submitting their driver's license.
II. Parenting
Without a doubt, parenting is different now, and I'm not entirely sure why.
When I was a kid, if my teacher said I did something wrong, my parents would absolutely take the side of the teacher, and my ass would have been grass. Even if they disagreed with the teacher, which they might express to the teacher, my parents would have (to me) been a united front with my teacher.
As the Larry Nasser trial has shown, accepting "authority" figures without question is not always good. It is not a terrible thing that parents are less willing to accept without question or critical thinking the authority figures in their children's lives. How many kids were abused by priests in the 1970s and 1980s because parents respected these "authority" figures beyond reproach?
But rather than taking a middle ground, parents have gone off the proverbial cliff. If a child does wrong, everyone but the child is held responsible. It is the teacher's fault, the administration's fault, the school board's fault, the district's fault.
My hope is that eventually the pendulum will swing back.
Of course, there are plenty of children whose lives are untimigated disasters because their parents lives are unmitigated disasters.
Even though I am a lowly substitute teacher, I see this all the time. One student who is in a class I have frequently subbed for is one of four children who are being raised by grandparents. From what I understand, her mother lost custody because of drugs. I do not know if a father is in the picture. This girl is a special needs student who is heading down a road that will go nowhere.
She is a sad, sad child, and I cannot help but feel for her (even though I am also fully aware that she can be/is manipulative). What I have noticed is that she works very hard, at least when I am there. She is by no means perfect, but she tries very hard. Unfortunately for her, her special needs (and I'm not certain what they are) make learning a difficult thing, but she does the work as best she can.
One week, when I subbed, I overheard her talking to a girl in class about when she turns 14 soon, she is gonna smoke pot. She mentioned that she hangs out with a guy who is 18. I don't need to tell you how messed up this is. I didn't say anything that day to the girl.
The next time I was there, though, I did say something to this girl. I commended her on how hard I see her working when I'm there, and I mentioned her conversation from the previous week. I told her that I know she is going to probably do whatever she wants, because I was 14 once too, and I remember how stubborn I was, but that I hoped she wouldn't do it because she is such a hard worker and has such potential.
This girl got tears in her eyes, so I let her hang out in the hall for a few while she composed herself. When she came back in the classroom, she came up to me and thanked me for saying what I said. I told her I never say things I don't mean, and that I hope she at least thinks about it.
I'm not this child's parent, and there is little I can do, but my hope is that what I said makes some difference for her. I don't expect that she is going to go down the "better" path, the path of less heartache, but for the moment, she knows someone sees her potential and cares, that someone doesn't want her to fall through the cracks.
She is one child of perhaps hundreds of thousands of children who are at-risk, through no fault of their own. And one teacher with 30 students in every class cannot be expected to "save" every child.
Unfortunately, there are some students, perhaps like the boy in Parkland, who are beyond saving.
III. Mental health and gender
I have a "mental illness," though I would say it is of the mild variety. I was self-aware enough to get help.
I have a child with a "mental illness," and I have done what I can to get him help.
I work very, very hard to instill empathy in my child, to help provide some protection that his mental illness will not ever become one that harms others (or himself).
I have seen a number of comments about mental health in the wake of the Parkland shooting, like the fact that females make up a large percentage of the incidence of mental illness, and yet it is boys who are the school shooters.
Why is this?
I wish I knew.
Boys are falling behind in many ways. Girls are outpacing them in college.
The push to help girls attain equality has, perhaps inadvertently, left boys behind.
As a mother of a girl, I'm glad females have more opportunities.
As a mother of two boys, I worry about their self-image and opportunities.
In the wake of helping boys become more sensitive and empathic, there has been a pendulum swing towards hyper-masculinity. It seems like there is an either or. Either a boy is a sensitive-type or a masculine dude.
Again, our country isn't too great with the middle ground that a boy can be both.
IV. Schools, teachers, and police
If I wanted to be a sniper, I would have gone into the military or law enforcement.
No teacher goes into teaching because they want to wield a gun. They either love their subject and want to share it with others, or they love kids. Or both.
Given all the responsibilities of teachers, they do not need to be tasked with protecting children by carrying weapons.
There is no way in hell that asking teachers to carry weapons is a good idea, and I'm saying this on a purely logical level.
Things to consider--
1. When exactly are teachers supposed to get training for weaponry? Is this going to count as professional development or will they still have to do their normal professional development each year in their subject areas? Are schools going to pay for this additional training? How often does the training need to be reviewed? Is there licensing and associated fees? Who pays for those?
2. Will schools provide the weapons to teachers? Will schools pay the increased insurance for these teachers? If a teacher carries his/her own weapon, who carries the insurance? The school or the teacher or do both? Does the teacher get additional pay for acting as both teacher and security?
3. Do parents have the right to request that their children not be placed in a classroom with a teacher who carries a weapon? Do parents have the right to request that their children be placed in a classroom with a teacher who carries a weapon? How does this affect class size and scheduling?
4. If there are schools where no teachers have weapons, while some schools have an overabundance of teachers with weapons, do those teachers have to change schools? Will this be a stipulation in employment contracts?
5. Are schools going to provide weapon safes in the classrooms where these teachers are? Are these teachers the only ones with access to these safes? Does administration have access?
6. Given the budget cutbacks for most schools, where is the money going to come from to pay for these guns, insurance, safes, and training? Would the money be better spent in getting metal detectors for schools?
7. If a child were to inadvertently get a hold of a gun and hurt someone, is the teacher responsible or the school? How much liability insurance is needed? Given that there are limitations on what types of playground equipment schools have, I wonder if underwriters would even give insurance for this?
V. Conclusion?
It's complicated. I consider myself fairly intelligent, but I'm no expert on any of these things. These are just the thoughts that have been running through my head without any evidence or dialogue with others.
No comments:
Post a Comment