Let me begin by saying that I truly have little to no expertise in these areas, and will simply be trying to present several thoughts and potential courses of action in the coming years. It appears to me that public opinion regarding shootings in America, particularly school shootings, has reached a boiling point. Either something drastic will be done to counter these events, or they will become part of the background noise of this fallen world, much like bombings and American service members' deaths in the Middle East have become. It seems to me that something will be done this time. Whether you like President Trump or not, he has a tendency to latch onto a problem and do something about it. What that something is and whether it is a good thing or not is far above my pay grade, but I would expect something to be done in the next few years, else we will slip farther into moral insensitivity, and that is a story for another day.
I would also like to say that I am angered and saddened by this, and have prayed for the families affected. I wish to stir up no ill will, but to get real, honest dialogue going about how we can fix these problems. If that is not your goal, please stop reading.
Let me take this opportunity to clear something up. Some national news outlets have been claiming that there have been eighteen school shootings this year. This is simply false. This article by the Washington Post clears up the false claims and has links to the website that originated the erroneous data. This false information has taken over the internet in the past few days. If you type "18 " into your google search bar, the first auto-generated result is "18 school shootings in 2018." This illustrates how the rise of the internet has contributed to the spread of false information, but that is also a story for another day (In the future I think I will come back here and link to those articles).
There have been calls for several different courses of action over the past few days, and I would like to look at a few of them. The first, and one of the most sensible, has been to have schools hire veterans to be security guards in schools. This seems to be a fantastic idea, and there is downside I can see. Veterns are often lonely and can have difficulty porting over to the civilian workforce. This would provide them with a stable job that is somewhat familiar, and interation with kids at schools would be of massive benefit, both for the veteran and for the kids. Anytime humans of different ages and experiences interact and communicate in a healthy environment, good things happen. It would give the kids a greater appreciation for their citizenship, and encourage them to take an active role in civic duties. It is easy to ignore the history teacher saying that such and such a number of men died to give you these freedoms, but it is much harder to ignore when he says good morning and stops the traffic for you to cross the street to school every morning. Additionally, it would greatly benefit the veterans by giving them a way to integrate back into civilian life. Kids are naturally disarming, and I think this job would almost be a kind of therapy. Of course this could be just "magical Christmas land" scenarios, but this system seems to lend itself to mentoring and therapeutic relationships.
Of course, there are potential downsides. Some veterans admittedly need mental counseling when they come back, and handing them a gun and sending them into schools is not the best thing for them. However, this is not all veterans, there would just need to be effective screenings for hiring. Even older veterans of Korean and Vietnam wars would be a great addition to this system. They would be a grandfather or uncle type of figure in the school, someone the kids know has their back. I could go into the problems within education this would help alleviate, like bullying, shaming, and other issues, but that is yet another story for another day. If someone knows of an actual problem with this idea, please describe or link to it in the comments, because I cannot think of one.
Another idea thrown around in the past few days, especially on social media and in the national news, is further gun control. I will admit that on this issue I am a bit biased towards not restricting the procurement of firearms. However, there is little I can say here that has not already been said or that will change anyone's mind, so I will link to a good defense of the right to bear arms and move on. The TL;DR is making firearms illegal stops law-abiding citizens from having them, but not people who are planning for months and years how to do the most damage to a group of people. There is a counter argument for this in the realm of suicide, but I will not go there today.
The final idea that has seen a lot of media coverage and social media time is the root issue of mental health. What good is it, many ask, to take away guns or to hire security? This treats the symptom, not the disease, and the disease is mental health. Many would say that we need to identify those who are mentally ill, isolate them from society, and treat them. At face value, this is a perfectly logical argument. We need to remove those who are most at risk of performing these attacks. Those who do not have a correct view of human life and value should be controlled and given the proper help until a point in time where they are healed and able to function in society again. They should not be allowed in schools if they have shown the signs of mental illness, and we could even institute mental health "checkups" or tests throughout the high school years to ensure everyone is safe. After all, the highest priority is keeping the general population safe, and those do not have a healthy view of society must be removed.
Do you agree with the above paragraph? Think carefully for a couple minutes and decide.
Those words should absolutely terrify you.
Let me attempt to explain why.
When we say that an individual carried out a shooting because of a mental illness, what do we mean? We mean that they murdered because of a medical condition. Not because they desired to cause others harm, or because they were following some warped ideology, or even because others had pushed them to the brink. This action was simply the result of a biological problem, a genetic disease, or a chemical imbalance. They didn't pre-meditate to kill anyone. They had no specific person they wanted to harm; they just needed to let out some anger. They don't understand what they were doing, their mental illness kept them from even comprehending the pain and loss of life they would cause.
Do you see what has happened? We have removed all responsibility. It is no longer a moral issue, but a medical one. It is no one's fault, we just shake our heads, shed a tear, and say, "These things just happen sometimes." We have abstained the perpetrator of any responsibility, but we have done the same for society at large, and ourselves. It simply can't be helped. Hollywood, society, bullying, none of it is at fault. It's just medical. This destroys the last few shreds of morality we have left in our culture. And then what?
If we say that pre-meditated murder is simply a mental health issue, then we must do the best we can to help those with the condition! We must institute mental health tests throughout schools, weeding out those who show signs of these tendencies. We will put them in institutions to help them, while removing them from society's eye to keep society pure. Do you see? This all smells of Nazi Germany, and must be avoided at all costs. But this is a slippery slope. What else is a medical issue that is contrary to society and should be curtailed? What political affiliations, religions, ethnic backgrounds, etc. are a problem that must be removed? And note that those effecting this removal do no believe they are doing evil, but truly making society better! They are "healing" us. Hitler believed the same thing.
I will close with this quote from Martin Niemöller, a survivor of Nazi Germany:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
These young men do not need hospitals: They need love, and fathers, and teachers, and students, and people who are willing to love them. They do not need to be corridor-ed off from society. They need love.
Please love the ones you can reach.
(Please see Lewis' article on the welfare state for more thoughts.)