We need to find out how to prevent every school shooting, but focusing on the overwhelming male incidence of these tragic events may be helpful.
The need for a cohesive, consistent national dialogue on school shooting prevention is, at times, palpable. Now that the school season has begun, this disturbing topic in America's schools is seldom far from discussions on school safety.
The FBI report not only debunks the "good guy stops the bad guy" nonsense, but also gives us some important data to judge the validity of another NRA mantra, namely, whether "bad guys" are drawn to commit shootings in gun-free zones.
Having seen the impact of easier handgun access on gun homicide rates, the legislature in its wisdom now believes that it will move the gospel of "good guys with guns protecting us from bad guys with guns" into the schools.
In ordering his review of the military weapons programs, Obama said "there is a big difference between our military and our local law enforcement and we don't want to blur those lines." School officials that have armed their police with assault-style weapons have done more than blur that line.
The two students accused of plotting the shootings were arrested. The system in place to red-flag and avert such tragedies worked. Yet the anxieties and uncertainties linger. How can I -- and other parents -- confronting this or similar scares reassure our children as they return to the classroom?
We need to teach them how to handle their emotions, how to cope with being well and truly angry or upset and how to communicate and express themselves in a healthy way
Again, it seemed too silly to take seriously. Consider: The book tells the story of 13-year-old Brenna Strong, who spends a Saturday morning running errands with her mom, Bea ("Be Strong") and her dad, Richard ("Dick Strong"). Just like thee and me -- only Mr. and Mrs. Strong carry handguns for self-defense. Openly.
We should be asking: Is the person is a danger to him or herself or to others if he or she had a gun? That is the question. The notion that we can use mental illness as a way to determine that someone is somehow more dangerous is just ill-informed.
Every time a campus shooting has happened in the 13 years since I became a college counselor and professor in Washington D.C., I tell myself that it's not something that only happens at colleges, and that these things can happen anywhere.
We are going about this all wrong. The folks on the left say with fewer or no guns we will have fewer or no more gun crimes. The folks on the right say with more guns we will have more safety from people who would abuse guns.
the department still grapples with the reality that at least half of seriously mentally ill people receive no treatment at all, a situation of possible danger to the entire community and, far more often, to themselves.
The bar for having someone placed on a mental-health hold for more than a few days is very high. As a society we are predisposed to making it extremely difficult to remove a person's rights. I certainly don't want my rights removed, but where should that standard be? Lately I'm not sure that we've set the bar correctly.
"The country has to do some soul searching about this. This is becoming the norm and we take it for granted in ways that, as a parent, are terrifying ...
The view propagated by the NRA that gun ownership keeps the federal government "in check" is not only historically inaccurate, but also contrary to the actions of our Founding Fathers.
I should not be forced to live in fear. I should not be forced to look for hiding spots every time I enter a new room. I should not have to worry about my friends in all corners of the country. None of this should be my job.