I was a bit baffled by the panic that the collective nation felt in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Connecticut. I understand the sadness, but to hear news personalities and politicians so distraught—to see the nation turning on their televisions after work and mashing their faces against the screens wanting to learn more information goes several steps beyond simple grief. There was a fear invoked by the events of December 14th, 2012 where a 20-year-old shooter walked into a school and gunned down over twenty people, mostly kids, before taking his own life, that exceeds rationality and the reason is not what anyone is willing to discuss.
My thoughts about public education have evolved over the last couple of years from something that I previously tolerated as a local nuisance to a national menace of the American psyche. I have learned through my school levy fights that most parents don’t care one iota what their kids are learning in school, or what damage to their social futures that government schools might do to their children over 13 years of elementary school and high school education. Parents simply view public education as a babysitting service while they conduct their busy lives climbing a career ladder hoping that instead of love for their children they can purchase respect with the incomes they’ve earned from their occupations. Some parents do get involved in their children’s education, particularly in sports. However, many of these parents deep down inside hope their children’s participation in extracurricular activities will save money through scholarship earnings when it comes time to pay for college tuition leaving some of the savings that parents toiled over for years free for a nice vacation. The sports participation is not one of love for the child as much as it is hope that their child will land a cherished scholarship. It is rare to see parents in modern America taking an active role in their children’s education because they figure that is the job of the school—and in the back of their minds, the parents reserve the right to blame the school and the teachers for their failures as parents when things go wrong later. That is the essence of modern public education in government schools. The labor unions are happy to exploit this trend to their advantage, and they have. Politicians are happy to exploit the guilt parents feel over their lack of involvement to enrich themselves as social looters. But the real victims have always been the kids who just want parents to love them, teach them, and launch them into a life of their own with some measure of confidence—which they often find completely void.
So I did not feel stunned as others might have when hearing about the Sandy Hook shooting. In fact, due to the social conditions involved on all sides, I am surprised that it doesn’t happen more often. The failure is truly in social collectivism, where parents, kids, and politicians have embedded themselves into each other’s lives like mashed potatoes on a Thanksgiving Day dinner to be consumed by modern society and defecated out as waste products of a life dedicated to serving the collective whole. When it comes to gun violence and the most vulnerable places that they are occurring with the most emotional impact, it is in school settings that they are most rampant. This latest rampage, coming less than two weeks before Christmas, was the nation’s second-deadliest school shooting, exceeded only by the Virginia Tech massacre that claimed 33 lives in 2007. Before that it was the Columbine shooting that was so glorified by the communist leaning Michael Moore film Bowling for Columbine.
The logical conclusion that one could make if they thought clearly on the matter is that if parents wanted their children to be truly safe, and to get a proper education that they would home-school their children instead of sending them to a public school full of unarmed progressive advocates where the children are vulnerable to the collective whims of society. It is in such whims that distorted minds like Adam Lanza can make victims of unarmed children and naive human beings who prefer the peace sign over the barrel of a gun with a continued belief that evil can be legislated out of Earth’s social fabric. People who think in such ways are the real danger to children because they are functioning from a false philosophy that is not driven by logic, but by their own internal selfishness. They do not wish to take the time to raise their own children properly so they send them to public school hoping the government can do it for them—but in so doing, their children are vulnerable to progressive politics, global power grabs, collective identity, and the barbarous malcontents of mental erosion.
My wife and I never left our kids to the fate of public education. My wife was always a stay-at-home mom who drove my kids to school every day and helped them with their homework every night. She also home-schooled them when the school wanted to teach my kids things we didn’t think they should be learning in the fourth grade—such as sex education. Most of what my kids learned they learned with the input of my wife and me spending time with them and taking an active role in their lives which still exists to this day. Many of my kid’s friends they went to school with who had parents who did not take an active role in their child’s lives, are rudderless despots drowning in the oceans of daily living, and that fate was sealed by their parents who used public education to do the job of parenting. We have watched the decline first hand over the last decade and the differences are incredibly obvious.
It is dangerous to place children in large groups unarmed in a school room that only has one door in or out and is guarded by pacifist progressive leaning teachers radicalized by national teachers unions. The policies of progressivism are failing in modern life, and there will be more incidents like the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre. There will be more because all the sorrow in the world can’t remove evil from the planet. Evil cannot be controlled by more rules and regulation. It cannot be quelled by guidance councilors or even more tax money. Success in every American child requires a parent or mentor who will take direct responsibility for a child with real love and understanding that is rooted in individual responsibility. The collectivism that is taught in modern society will produce many more troubled youth like Adam Lanza and leave millions of children perpetually vulnerable in classrooms all over the country because parents use public education as an extension of day care leaving complacent employees to safe guard the lives of Americas children—which is a recipe for disaster.
If parents really wanted their kids to be safe, they would withdrawal them from public school, teach them at home on a computer with online education within the safety and sanctity of private property guarded by American sovereignty, and one of the spouses would quit their full-time job and become a full-time parent because that’s what it takes. The fear that society felt on the day of the dreadful Sandy Hook Massacre was not because of the victims—it was the realization that a system that most everyone has accepted as “good” is actually a very vulnerable environment that is well out of the control of the parents. That vulnerability has been glazed over while busy parents pursue their individual careers, but the knowledge that a crazed lunatic can walk into any public school known to be full of unarmed—naive human beings is a lucrative target for the mentally anguished like Adam Lanza. The fear that people felt upon hearing the news is that what they believed to be safe is quite the opposite, and if they want to keep their kids out of the grips of deaths embrace, or the many social pressures that lead to small losses of innocence, that the parents will have to take more active roles in their family’s lives. And if I were them, I would take my children out of public school and do the job myself—so that I could ensure safety and success. The grief that people are feeling is not for the unfortunate victims and their families, it is the realization that the responsibility for children cannot be pawned off on a group collective, but are the sole enterprises of a parent and their children, and is best protected with a personal firearm, a solid peace-loving religion, and a thirst for learning that is as free of social degradation as possible.
Rich Hoffman
The Overmanwarrior 
some good points here Rich. I have to say, ive been very sad about this tradgedy and to see the video of Spicoli ordering the pizza added some levity. I thought of you immediately last nite and our prior discussions about guns. I still believe in the right to bear arms, but there is just no sane reason ANYONE should own an automatic assault rifle–jmo. I know you will disagree:)
LikeLike
You know I do. But I still like you. By the way, your Christmas present came to our house yesterday and we got the message. Are you out of your mind! How in the world could you send me a “peace sign” ornament for our Christmas tree even joking? You know I have ornaments for our tree that are AK-47’s, .500 Magnums, .38 specials, sawed-off shotguns and many other Midwestern classics. A peace sign does not go very well. : ) You know how infuriated I get over that damn thing–and you send it to me with a Merry Christmas message!
We laughed about it–I know you think its funny. But you’d do well to learn to start packing some guns of your own. That New York mentality against guns belongs in Europe. We need assault weapons so we can stand up to the military if the time comes–to keep them honest. The guns aren’t for protecting our homes from lions, tigers, and bears. The big guns are for protecting our homes from intrusive government and the military we fund, that will be used against us in such a time.
LikeLike
lol Rich–I still like you too–why did I send it? because the thought of you opening it gave me the giggles:).
goes to show that good friends dont always have to see eye to eye on everything, definitely
makes life and friendship more interesting.
so be prepared….I actually decided I would like to take a conceal and carry course and pack some heat!
Dearest hubby agrees.
However, as we have discussed many times before, I do not see any reason in the world why I should legally be able to purchase an automatic weapon–I just dont get it.
so I’ll pack a gun (Oy, can you beleive it?). but should I happen to slip into a homicidal rage, at least I’ll only have 6 bullets and not several rounds.
is the magnet still on the fridge???
PS: you are a good sport!:)
LikeLike
Oh my God.
I don’t even know where to begin here.
You’re the poster candidate for NOT having a CCW. I pray they deny you. It’s bizarroworld x infinaty when people with the minset such as yours…are armed and dangerous.
You give trained (like it’s second skin), responsible people like myself, a bad name.
Take a year of written classes, then another at a range with a full scope of weapons…then decide.
You don’t understand guns. Putting one in your hand because you pass a 12 hour course makes my eyes bleed. This isn’t about your confusion of rifles…(we’ll talk about the label “assault” another day)
This is about your psychy.
Please TKR…Have a gun trainer write. Hurry!
LikeLike
I’m simmering on this topic. It is stunning how emotional people are and how quickly they surrender their rights.
LikeLike
Sent to the Virginia Gazette today. Bob Warren
Some thoughts on Sandy Hook:
The horrific mass murders at Sandy Hook Elementary and Virginia Tech illustrate the inadequacy of current approaches to school security. Lockout, lockdown and hide doesnt work very well when the perimeter of a school is breached because they are a passive response to active acts of violence and evil. An active defense involving active countermeasures is a realistic, practical and effective means of dealing with situations that take place in seconds or a few minutes. Here are a few idea.
Individuals can and do equip themselves with Life Alert call buttons which instantaneously relay a distress message to a central clearing house. Families with infants often install remote activated cameras to allow the parents to observe the behavior of a nanny and baby. Homeowners are increasingly using wireless technology that selectively allows for various lights, electronics, doors and alarms to be activated or de-activated upon command. Low cost items such as these could be installed in schools where their activation would immediately notify and speed the response of the local police.
Armed and permanent security guard are a deterrent to violence, but the costs can be prohibitively high. However, it is possible to have a random and unpredictable police presence. Such a random approach would likely cause uncertainty in the mind of a potential criminal or psychopath. Reservists and soldiers, male and female, returning from active wars are trained to handle lethal weapons. Some of these individuals could be certified and used on a volunteer basis to police school grounds. The internationally recognized Guardian Angels might be an example for a local group.
Non-lethal weapons such as pepper spray, mace, tasers and Phazzer guns are commercially available. In addition, the Department of Defense has developed a wide variety of non-lethal weapons technologies, some of which might be appropriate for use in a school setting. Flash-bang grenades can temporarily blind and stun an intruder. Acoustic, microwave and laser heat weapons can cause pain and disrupt physical functions. Special affect weapons can instantly distort the senses and cause utter confusion. Many of these technological advances have been developed in government laboratories or the private sector under government contract. Our senators and representatives have spent public tax money on them for our protection against enemies foreign and domestic. It is appropriate to analyze which of these technologies can be employed inside schools.
Throughout American history, individuals have had to defend themselves against the worst of society. Turning over ones security to the authorities evolved with the rise of professional police forces and the increase in the number of gun control laws. Unfortunately, the authorities cannot be everywhere all the time, – and with the current economic conditions, police response times are longer and their presence less reliable.
Essentially, defense must start inside a school and with individuals capable of defending themselves. The time for effective action starts within the first few seconds of a potential bad situation. Therefore, decisiveness is essential, and this involves situational awareness, training for instinctive reaction, and the means to act readily at hand.
LikeLike
totally confused but willing to listen—rather than attacking me, why not calmly explain why an “assault” weapon is a misused title–I very much want to understand your point of view, and have always been terribly open in the past to what you have to say–but can you say it without insults please? 🙂
LikeLike
I’m insulted that you, by your posts, go after assault rifles by lack of critical thinking, then say you want to carry…in the manner you presented yourself. Like I said….It gives people like me who have been handling guns since 10, a bad name. Your flippant arrogance about carrying bothers me.
You’ll understand once you get some education. I’ll leave you with a letter from the Oath Keepers.
No one can put it into better perspective than Stuart Rhodes.
The Queen of Battle, and her modern descendants, are the birth-right of every American.
“Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force: Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.” – Patrick Henry
My conscience, and the urgency of our current situation, compel me to speak out. The victim disarmament freaks are now telling us that they don’t want to disarm us- oh, no! They just want to take away our “assault weapons” – our semi-automatic, magazine fed, military-style rifles – and the “high capacity” magazines that feed them. They want us to believe that so long as we can own some kind of firearm, after our semi-auto military rifles are taken, we are not disarmed. That is a LIE.
The truth is that our semi-automatic, military pattern rifles are the single most important kind of arm we can own, and are utterly necessary for effective defense of our lives, property, and liberty. When you are disarmed of your military rifles, you are DISARMED. At that time, the lion’s share of your military capacity to effectively resist tyranny is removed (yes, accurate bolt action hunting rifles are useful in that role too, but the semi-auto battle rifle is truly the Queen of battle, as Col. Jeff Cooper correctly noted). It is a significant force on the battlefield, and as Patrick Henry said, when you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.
It is the height of Orwellian perversion of language and logic to say that disarming you of the most effective arms for combat that you still have is somehow not really disarming you, because you still have hunting rifles and shotguns. And you can bet that if you let them take your military semi-autos, next on their list will be your bolt action rifles, which they will call “sniper rifles” (and by God, that is certainly what they are good for!). And then when they have those, they will go after any weapon that holds more than a few rounds, or is capable of any degree of long range accuracy and penetrating power, telling you that you really don’t need one of those to hunt or target practice (a shotgun will suffice), and then they will take everything except single shot shotguns or .22’s (as was done in England) and on down the line. So long as you have at least a .22, they will say you are not “disarmed” while they take everything else (and then they will take the .22s, or insist that you keep them at a gun-range).
We need to call a spade a spade and teach our fellow citizens that taking away military style semi-autos is disarmament. And we need to throw down the gauntlet and take a hard stand against it, right now. When we, as Oath Keepers, pledged to not obey any orders to disarm the American people, this is what we meant. Any attempt to disarm the people of any arms currently in their possession is illegitimate and must be nullified, refused, disobeyed, and resisted.
And so, in response to this obvious assault on our right to keep and bear arms (as in military arms), I feel compelled to make the following personal pledge:
I Stewart Rhodes, as an American, as a military veteran, and as a father, pledge the following:
I Pledge to never disarm, and in particular, to never surrender my military pattern, semi-automatic rifles (and full capacity magazines, parts, and ammunition that go with them), regardless of what illegitimate action is taken by Congress, the President, or the courts.
I also pledge to pass on those military pattern rifles to my children and my children’s children, as well as the full capacity magazines, parts, and ammunition to needed to use them, regardless of what illegitimate action is taken by Congress, the President, or the courts. As Founding Father Tench Coxe said, while attempting to allay the fears of critics of the proposed Constitution:
The powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry of America from sixteen to sixty. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom?
Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American… [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people. – Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
And that “power of the sword” – those “terrible implements of the soldier,” includes the people’s battle rifles and carbines – their M1As, their FN-LARs, their HK 91s, their Grandfathers’ M1 Garand, their AK 47s, their ARs and M4s, etc. – all of the weapons listed as being targeted for Feinstein’s new and improved “Assault Weapons Ban.”
The whole point of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military capacity of the American people – to preserve the ability of the people, who are the militia, to provide for their own security as individuals, as neighborhoods, towns, counties, and states, during any emergency, man-made or natural; to preserve the military capacity of the American people to resist tyranny and violations of their rights by oath breakers within government; and to preserve the military capacity of the people to defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and domestic, including those oath breaking domestic enemies within government. It is not about hunting, and at its core, the Second Amendment is not really even about self-defense against private criminals. It is about self-defense against public criminals – against tyrants, usurpers, and foreign invaders. (and that is the whole point of the crucial upcoming film, Molon Labe).
LikeLike
thank you Cyd…thats exactly what I was hoping to see…..it really helps me understand the issue more. I have a lot of thinking to do….I certainly did not intend to insult anyone, especially you.
LikeLike