Yes, You Should Blame Public Education for School Shootings.

You drop your kids off at school in the hopes that they will be protected, fed and (presumably) well educated.

Given that the government controls education, we instead receive what we have come to expect from all of the “services” that the government provides: services provided badly, with minimal innovation and at an outrageously high cost.  In essence it is the exact opposite of what we have come to demand from the private sector, which provides us with items of ever-increasing quality combined with ever-declining cost, just imagine what $1,000 worth of a personal computer gets you today versus what that got you a mere 15 years ago!

Immediately following the horrific Sandy Hook School Shootings, the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre dared to suggest that “the only thing that stops a bad-guy with a gun, is a good-guy with a gun.”

The only way to answer that question is to face the truth. Politicians pass laws for gun free school zones, they issue press releases bragging about them. They post signs advertising them. And, in doing so, they tell every insane killer in America that schools are the safest place to inflict maximum mayhem with minimum risk. – Wayne LaPierre, 2012

Gun-controlling Liberals scoff at the idea.  They jeer, joke and jest at the very notion that a firearm can be used to protect and preserve life.  Instead, they propagate bizarre notions that guns can be eradicated with the waive of a magic wand, that if they can ban just one more “scary-looking” rifle like the AR-15, or another arbitrary cosmetic feature, or additional background checks, that gun-related tragedies will no longer happen.  By the gun-controllers’ reasoning, by lumping in the overwhelming majority of peace-loving, law-abilding gun owners in with the bad guys, they will prevent another gun-related homicide from ever taking place.

The epitome of hypocrisy: “Do as I say, not as I do.”  Every gun-hating liberal politician protects his life and the lives of his immediate family members with guns.  The fact that they delegate that responsibility to armed guards, or in the case of former President Barack Obama, with Secret Service agents, does not belay the fact that gun-grabbers are outright hypocrites.  Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Rahm Emmanuel, Diane Feinstein and the rest all have protected their lives with guards and guns that taxpaying Americans (that’s you and I) paid for.

The epitome of Liberal Elitism: “If you can’t afford to outsource your protection to a licensed armed-guard service, then too bad for you!”  That about sums it up, doesn’t it?  Armed protection becomes a luxury item reserved for the rich and politically powerful.  Dim-witted pseudo-celebrities like Kim Kardashian, who regularly relies on the services of bodyguards, has taken up the hollywood pet-hobby of pleading for gun control.

Blame and over-regulate guns as a response to school shootings?

With clockwork reliability, left-liberals demand that the government step in and fail to solve a problem that the government itself creates.

You are compelled by way of forced-taxation to pay for a public educational system that neither educates, nor protects your children in a reliable, safe and friendly manner.  It is yet another failing of the big-government monopoly.  End of story.

Children who are unfortunate enough to be stuck in the modern-day gulag that is government education are unsafe across the board:

  • They are unsafe from the dangerous goals and ideologies of far-left extremists, such as neo-marxist ideologies, postmodernist philosophies, extreme feminism and gender-reconstructionism.
  • They are unsafe from physical harassment by bullies, gangs and other forms of student-on-student abuse.
  • They are unsafe from would-be predators that see unprotected school grounds as welcome targets for shootings.

All of these issues are direct results of the environment that children are forced to be in, and a crappy product that you are forced to pay for.

Safety is Just Another High-valued Commodity, one that the Government is Unwilling to Provide.

What if the education of children were left exclusively to the free market?

What can we be assured will happen?

Competition will reign supreme, as it does in the tech sector.  Competitors will do their best to offer ever-increasing quality of education for ever-declining cost to the parents.  Business-to-business training programs will also become more prevalent, as companies will be happy to train the next generation of employee-hopefulls with the exchange of greater brand recognition and community involvement.

Secondly, we will see greater diversity in what our kids will be learning, and the content of this education will better tailor itself to each child’s unique talents, gifts and needs.  If there’s one thing that socialized education ensures, it’s that everybody gets the same garbage: leftist, post-modernist, social-justice-gender-reconstructionist trash is pawned off on us as “education.”

And last, but not least, you (the parent) as the ultimate consumer, demand that if you are going to leave your children in another’s care, that your children be protected.

My local Chase Bank always has an armed guard on the premises.  Why?  You have to ask?  The bank values its customers, and its customers value their safety and their money.  Any would-be bank robber would be more likely to rob an unguarded bank than a guarded one.

The presence of an armed guard can be intimidating to some people, so at our bank, the guard also functions as a greeter.  He smiles at you when you walk in the door, and asks you how your day is going.  Instant feeling of safety and rapport.

Florida Armed & Unarmed Security Guards in the Tampa, St ...

At every school that I have attended in my life: from preschool to elementary school, to highschool and then college, not one of these institutions had a single armed guard on duty or full-time police presence.  Not one of them.

Let’s compare and contrast the free-market solution to the government solution, shall we?

  • Cash deliveries and stocking ATM machines – protected with armed guards because money is valuable.
  • High-profile banks – protected with armed guards because the bank regards their customers and the money of their customers as valuable.
  • Retail establishments – certain malls and retail establishments employ armed guards because they value their property.
  • Rich hollywood actors and dipshit It-girls – employ armed guards to prevent stalkers, harassers and potential kidnappers.
  • Liberal elite politicians at all levels – exempt themselves from anti-carry laws or use the services of protective agencies such as the Secret Service to protect their lives from would-be attackers.
  • Public Schools and Universities – blame the guns and gun-owners when something bad happens.

Are you starting to see the problem?  The differences in the mindsets between my pro-second-amentment allies and the left, is as stark as the difference between fantasy and reality.  The gun-haters are happy to accept the protection that guns provide them, so long as they are rich and powerful enough to have someone else do it for them.  In the real-world, most of us have to fend for ourselves.  When something bad happens with a gun at the hand of a crazy madman, liberals blame the gun, and their political opponents, the “bitter clingers.”

If a nutcase had decided to attack the University that I once attended, he would have been met with a “gun free zone,” (i.e. sitting ducks), because relatively all adults in the state of California are barred from carrying weapons, to say the least about supposedly “gun friendly” states that still ban college students from carrying on campus.  Said homicidal maniac, similar to the Virginia Tech Shooter, would have been met with minimal resistance, just a crowd of fleeing, screaming college kids.  There are no armed guards or full-time campus cops.  Someone would have had to call the police and wait upwards of 10-20 minutes (at best) for them to assess the situation and respond.

Which would you rather send your child to: a run-of-the-mill, “duck-and-pray” public school, or a private sector school with twenty-or-so, vetted, trained, helpful, friendly and VERY armed security guards?


  • I think you are missing something that is key. All of the school shooters have been young white males. Why? It is an important question.

    My cousin lost his daughter in the Columbine shooting. At the time, 1999, I believed the shooting was an aberration never to be repeated. In 2018 they are brutally routine. Why?

    Here’s a thought. Grades K-8 are overwhelmingly taught by women, and in the mid70’s, the colleges of education were infiltrated by women’s studies. These young teachers entered the schools in the 1980’s and began teaching that white boys will become monsters – an exaggeration, until some of them become monsters. Boys are being taught from kindergarten to think along post modernist, feminist lines. A six year old boy accepts what he is taught as gospel. He is being taught that there is something wrong, fundamentally wrong, with the male sex. Of all males, white males are the most corrupt.

    Where are the black or Hispanic school shooters? Those boys are taught that they are oppressed by the white male hierarchy. They are oppressed, not corrupt.

    Eventually some these white boys break, say f-you school, f-you teachers, f-you parents. I am going to take the thing you love most, and then kill myself for spite. Eliminate the guns, they will use explosives. Eliminate the explosives, they will use an axe. The method is irrelevant. They are the product of training, of indoctrination, of a malevolent ideology that began in with post modernism, spread to the teaching colleges, twisted the curriculum, and ultimately twisted their minds.

    • The ‘young white male’ theory might fall apart if you look at it as simply a reflection of the majority-population as a whole. Indoctrination and alienation, the lack of male role models, a female-centric upbringing are causal factors in young-male criminality – 100% with you there!