Inseparable is a word. Regarding President Donald Trump, and with much good reason: it is often an ideal descriptive, especially when it comes to his policy pronouncements.
Take your position on the guns, which have come to the fore in the tragic assassination in Florida’s Parkland last week, especially that the safest way to make our schools safe is to dramatically increase the flow of weapons in them.
Even setting aside those objections, Trump does not have his own internal logic. Trump said to the crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Friday, “If this man thought that others would fire at him, he wouldn’t go to that school.” These shooters, whom he describes as “very sick” and “mentally ill”, “feel safe” in schools, he said, because “no one is going to come at them.” “
But if these shooters are truly illiterate, what does Trump think they are rational about so that they can worry about their safety? Were Parkland shooters ready for their old school because it was gun-free (which it was not overdone in a moment) or because it was their old school? As Mark Barden, who lost his seven-year-old son in the Sandy Hook Elementary School murders, Said on Trump’s White House program on Wednesday: “A disturbed sociopathic person in a school committed an act of murder in the school – knowing the outcome of which is going to lead to suicide – nobody would care if he was there with a gun.”
Gun control and gun rights cartoons
And Trump’s arguments also do not fit the facts: the presence of armed security guards has not stopped the killers Columbian to Virginia Tech to Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School, Which featured an armed police officer who did not attend school to confront the shooter. Trump repeatedly slammed the officer for cowardice on Thursday and put his own spin on the situation: “See a security guard does not know children, does not love children.” He said friday afternoon In an appearance with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. “This man standing outside of school the other day does not love children, may not know children. Teachers love their children. They love their pupils. They love their students.”
This is an outrageously insulting thing to say about the 14,000 to 20,000 police officers who serve in public schools: they have chosen careers as police, but cannot be counted on to do their jobs because they leave school Don’t love children they see regularly enough? (The National Association of School Resource Officers, for the record, lists on its website six reasons why generating teachers is one Dangerously bad idea.)
Here again, however, there is a logical paradox: Teachers can be counted on to act selflessly and ruthlessly because they love their students – but how to act? Shot the gun and fired. As Gina Caneva, a Chicago school teacher, notes in a Powerful piece on this site, Arms training involves “mindset development”, which is to say that teachers have to prepare one of their own students to close. A trainer told The BBC states that it “asks teachers to close their eyes and imagine the student entering the classroom with a gun. In fact, a teacher’s position can be just a split-second to assess and react to” Is. This is the most difficult and emotional part. Training, and reduces the tears of some participants. “
Trump’s wacky idea gives new meaning to the idea of teachers loving his students to death.
But coherence is neither Trump’s strong side nor, in fact, necessarily the point of the proposal. It’s not unfair To suggest that this is a shiny shiny object is designed to distract a long time to come up with some other news and change the national topic.
And as such, it is more than a dumb and absurd suggestion, it is a dangerous victim. There is an opportunity here for the deal to be done by a sufficiently skilled and committed leader. As ashley pret Written on this site On Thursday, there are areas where reasonable people on all sides of the gun debate can agree, and there’s no reason they can’t be packed together and passed: ban bumps? Improve background check? great. Grab all the low-hanging fruits in a new bill, pass it, sign it, declare victory and go back to your corners and get ready to start pushing for the harder stuff.
Would this be the right solution? not close. Hell, it probably didn’t stop Parkland; But perhaps it will help prevent a massacre elsewhere. And between incremental progress and gridlock, I’ll take progress.
But making arising schools a focal point of your “solution”, called the poison pill in Washington, is a provision that is sure to sink an otherwise popular bill. You can already see this strategy that the House took action in the Legislative Assembly by reforming the background check with the legislation being passed Effectively permit state concealed carry permit. Such tactics provide pro-gun hard-liners cover to say that they support popular reforms, while also ensuring that nothing is done, as such legislation would allow the Senate to pass. At least don’t give a chance. (You can see something similar for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, where Trump wants to take care of Dreamers while conditioning on impossible demands.)
A real danger, therefore, is that incremental progress fails because our political leaders cannot agree to agree. If Trump can get people to take a “yes” to an answer, he will deserve credit for doing something. But by making armed teachers the center of his plan, Trump is more interested in fire and fury than progress.
And given the stakes of the real world, this poison pill can mean far more real deaths.