“Those who lack the courage will always find
a philosophy to justify it” -- Albert Camus
The real problem
with the Hartford Courant's editorial is that the editorial board that signed
off on it appears to lack the courage of its own admittedly fuzzy convictions.
The collapse in courage begins with the editorial’s title, “Bravado Alone Won’t
Stop Gun Toll.”
Well, of course it
won’t. When has bravado alone ever stopped a bullet? The paper is careful not
to mention that the “Gun Toll” in Connecticut includes crimes committed by
criminals who will not be deterred by the gun restriction bill produced by
Connecticut’s General Assembly, pretty much for the same reason bank robbers
are not deterred by bank regulations governing the withdrawal of money from
bank vaults. Law abiding clients of banks studiously make out all those
withdrawal slips; robbers don’t bother to observe such proprieties.
The brave principal
of Sandy Hook Elementary School and the school’s equally brave
psychologist stepped out into a hallway to confront a heavily armed Adam Lanza,
and the results were horrific. Because both women were murdered, we may never
know what impelled them to confront Mr. Lanza, but no one, most especially the
editors of the Courant, would doubt their bravery—proof positive that bravado
ALONE could not have turned aside a determine Mr. Lanza. That word – “ALONE” –
is present in the Courant’s title as a rhetorical safety net. Would an armed
and brave principal have been more of a deterrent to Mr. Lanza than an unarmed
and brave principal?
The right answer is
– yes.
Suppose Mr. Lanza,
on entering the Sandy Hook School, had been confronted with a sign posted
prominently on the grounds of the Arkansas Christian Academy, a private school:
“Staff is armed and trained. Any attempt to harm children will be met with
deadly force.” Another school posted a sign that read, “Fifty percent of our
staff is armed. Guess which ones.” Those words on those signs ALONE, rational
people may agree – provided they are supported by a sufficient armed deterrent
– certainly are more discouraging to possible mass murders than an editorial in
a newspaper claiming that bravado ALONE could not have deterred Mr. Lanza.
The Courant concedes
that “An armed guard at a school may deter an attacker”, and inserts a qualifier
– “but it is just as easy to imagine a
guard, taken by surprise by a heavily armed assailant who is willing to die,
being the first victim.” Well, of course it is. Mr. Lanza’s assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School has expanded
the range of possibilities, and the editorial board editors at the Courant have
very fertile imaginations.
Connecticut’s
“multi-pronged approach to gun safety,”
the Courant advises, “makes more sense. The law, passed in response to the
murders of 20 small children and six female educators by a troubled young man
with an assault-style rifle, bans certain types of weapons including
assault-style rifles, improves school security and puts more resources
into mental health treatment.”
Of course, the
state’s answer to the massacre at Sandy Hook is far less “multi-pronged” than
Newtown’s preventative approach—because Newtown has made provisions for armed
guards at its schools. Presumably, those armed guards will be prepared to repel
assaults with sufficient weaponry. And the presence of such armed guards in the
rebuilt Sandy Hook Elementary School will be far more effective in repelling
Lanza-like assaults than editorials in the Courant suggesting -- the editors are fuzzy on the
point – that the bill passed by the General Assembly ALONE will deter
determined gunmen from firing upon unarmed principals and school psychologists
and teachers and defenseless school children.
Months after the
assault on Sandy Hook Elementary School, we still do not know for certain the
mental condition of the shooter. In its editorial, the Courant has been careful
to use the term “troubled” in connection with Mr. Lanza.
The much delayed
criminal investigation asserted that there was no evidence uncovered by
investigators to suggest that Mr. Lanza suffered from a causative mental deficiency.
Toxicology reports indicated there were no drugs in his system at the time of
the shooting, the authoritative criminal report declared.
Mr. Lanza’s father
has indicated he is prepared to turn over his son’s medical records to a panel charged
with recommending to the General Assembly provisions that address possible
deficiencies in the treatment of mental disorders. Indeed, one report indicated that Mr.
Lanza’s father had previously attempted
to offer his assistance; decision makers rebuffed his efforts.
When pressure was
exerted on the panel to issue its recommendations quickly, the panel point
blank refused to issue directives in the absence of the data it needed – i.e.
Mr. Lanza’s medical records – to issue effective and reasonable
recommendations. The panel wisely has waited on the data before discharging its
assigned mission. It said to politicians and others urging quick action -- no
certain data, no certain recommendations; this course of action was rational,
responsible and right.
The General Assembly
that quickly reported out the current gun restriction bill took a much
different course: It passed a bill in the absence of data it needed to write
effective legislation. Public hearings on the final bill were waived because,
as governor Dannel Malloy insisted at the time, SOMETHING had to be done
immediately. The necessary data was withheld
by a much delayed criminal investigation, and it is altogether likely – in the
absence of corrective legislation – that a future General Assembly will repeat
exactly the same deficient process, best described by the Queen of Hearts in
Lewis Carroll’s “Through The Looking Glass.” Says the imperious Queen of Hearts
to Alice, “First the verdict, then the trial!” In some editorials, the Courant and others reproved Danbury State’s Attorney Stephen Sedensky for repeatedly delaying release of the criminal report.
Alice’s appropriate response
brings us back to reality with a start: “`Who cares for you?' said Alice, (she
had grown to her full size by this time.) `You're nothing but a pack of cards!'”
There are extremely
important lessons to be learned from Sandy Hook, yet it seems doubtful we will
learn anything from a horror that has consumed twenty-six innocent victims. Do
armed personnel frustrate possible murderers? Yes, they do. If they didn’t, we
wouldn’t bother sending armed first responders to mass murder crime
scenes. Should legislators have before
them the data they need to write effective legislation? Yes, they should. Even
partly completed investigative reports can be issued to legislators through in
camera proceedings. If there are HIPAA laws preventing the flow of necessary
information to legislative bodies charged with writing bills that may
substantially alter the way mentally ill persons are treated, necessary
exemptions should be introduced into the law -- so that legislators can
accomplish their constitutional prescribed tasks.
This is the field
that must be tilled. Instead, we involve ourselves in Alice in Wonderland
excursions, very entertaining and diverting perhaps; but trips of this kind
lead down rabbit holes and take us far from reality.
Comments