Creating hysteria over guns
<<…>>
John Lott Jr.
The concern about violence in public schools has quickly turned into
hysteria. Fanned by politicians, notably President Clinton, and the
media,
what may have begun as misguided but reasonable concerns over safety has
ignited into an implacable and unreasoned hatred of guns, or indeed
anything
that looks like a weapon. Across the nation, those entrusted with the
care
of children have transformed firearms into a symbol of menace and evil,
attempting to purge guns from the consciousness of kids, even when all
admit
doing so would in no way improve safety.
I had a firsthand glimpse of the hysteria last fall, when I took my four
boys to the Yale University Health Service for their annual medical
checkups. Prominently displayed posters on the walls warned about having
handguns in the home. Along with the normal questions about medical
histories, the nurse practitioner asked us whether we owned guns and
whether
they were locked up or loaded. Her tone made it clear she disapproved of
our
answers, and she was unmoved by the fact that the Centers for Disease
Control could only identify 21 children under age 15 dying from
accidental
handgun deaths in 1996. But the hospital had no signs warning parents
about
5-gallon water buckets, in which 40 children under the age of 5 drown
every
year, or about bathtubs, which claim 80 lives. No questions were asked
about
whether we kept our buckets stored away or our bathroom doors locked.
Yet the hysteria Americans may face when they walk into their
pediatrician’s
offices pales when compared to what is going on in our schools. Under a
“zero tolerance” policy, students face suspension or expulsion for even
carrying around pictures of guns or other weapons. Students ranging from
elementary school to college have even been expelled for even bringing
water
pistols to school, though no one believes brightly colored plastic water
gun
can be confused with a firearm.
On Tuesday, Jesse Jackson entered the fray again by asking the Illinois
state legislature to limit the zero tolerance penalties imposed by local
school boards. He believes these rules have primarily impacted black
students, though he claims this is not a racial issue: “Eventually,
whites
who are victims of this will join in great numbers, too.”
Take some examples that have all occurred during just the last few
months:
* A Minnesota high school refused to accept a yearbook picture of a
graduating senior sitting on a 155 mm howitzer. Senior Samantha Jones
had
chosen the picture because she was proud of her plans to join the Army
this
coming June. Like many seniors she had picked a picture that showed her
future plans. Even though the school board chairman failed to overturn
the
decision, he noted how proud he was of the young woman “honoring the
flag
and service.”
* Ponder, Texas, school officials had a 13-year-old boy arrested and
jailed
for six days because of a class Halloween writing assignment. The boy
wrote
a story involving the deaths of two fellow students and the accidental
shooting death of the class’ teacher. The county district attorney did
not
plan to prosecute the youngster, noting that “It looks to me the child
was
doing what the teacher told him to do, which was write a scary story.”
Nor
did the teacher appear offended or threatened, giving the boy a grade of
100, plus extra credit for reading it aloud to the class.
* Three San Diego students found a gun while walking to school. After
briefly picking it up to see if it was a real gun, they threw it away
and
went on to school. When one of the students informed a teacher about the
gun, all three students were suspended and currently face the threat of
expulsion. The student’s offense? The California state code requires the
suspension of any student who possesses a firearm on the way to school,
and
the school principal sees no leeway in interpreting the rules.
One city councilman was so worried that the punishment would discourage
students from reporting any weapons to the proper authorities that he
raised
a $500 reward for the suspended student who reported the gun.
* After 13 award-winning years as the Reading, Ohio, school district
superintendent, John Varis stepped down prematurely. News reports claim
that
he was forced out for advocating that teachers be allowed to carry guns
for
protection. In reality, all Mr. Varis did was launch a broad inquiry
into
ways of making school safer, and along the way he mentioned the
possibility
of allowing guards or teachers to have guns.
What Mr. Varis found most disconcerting is that people’s minds simply
“shut
down” when he came to talking about safety measures for school attacks.
Mr.
Varis is puzzled by the hostile reaction to even asking about what
policies
might save the most lives. He is also worried that signs in front of
schools
proclaiming the area a gun-free zone are a “sheer idiocy. When you
translate
the sign it says that risk-free zone for a perpetrator.”
Mr. Varis’ resignation has not stemmed the hysteria. Some parents are
now
trying to revoke his pension.
* In December, the federal government launched psychological profile
tests
that will be used to identify students in kindergarten through 12th
grade
that may be prone to violence. Among the reported questions that will be
kept on file is whether or not the family owns a gun.
Given the recent hysteria over guns, it is hard to believe federal law
has
prohibited guns within 1,000 feet of a school since 1995. Yet even
supporters of this law will be hard-pressed to claim it has produced the
desired results. Indeed, that may be what started the hysteria. By
demonizing a broad class of objects, anti-gun activists are swinging the
debate away from facts and that guns on net save lives. Rooting out guns
has
become an end unto itself.

John R. Lott Jr. is a senior research scholar at the Yale University Law
School. He is author of “More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and
Gun
Control Laws” (University of Chicago Press, 1998).

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/comment3-01302000.htm