School Shootings,
Part III:
The Indecency of College
Administrators.
We're talking Public Trust
and Hiding the Ball.
____________________________________
In previous editions of Good For The Country, I mentioned how
wrongful death lawsuits may play an important role in reclaiming the sovereignty
of the adult students murdered on a campus which had no power to stop a shooter
and which frustrates the target from acting in self-defense. This would serve
the sovereignty of all. Yes, adult students submit to the rules of the campus or
go elsewhere, I know, but this involves a reasonable expectation of a high
degree of trust that the administration not only has student interests at heart,
but also knows what in the world they are doing. Ignoring student input on a
right is not fulfilling this.
When the students know more about the
solution than the administration does, and then an administration won't be
reasonable in its public trust, then the entire United States has a problem.
Please note that as of this writing, school shootings are on the increase this
week alone.
In the case of lawful guns in lawful hands - or, more
specifically, of safety or of citizen authority since the nation's very
inception many, many Educators have forgotten what citizen authority is
viz-a-viz themselves as public servants. Not impressive.
When any
appointed or elected official becomes stubborn and will not hear the obvious
because they sense it will undermine one's prestige and control even a little
one has stopped acting in the interests of the people he/she is sworn to serve
and begins to vex them. In the case of Mike Nifong, many were vexed. In the case
of campus shootings, many are killed for such very similar vexings.
The
cost of this peccadillo of hiding the ball is far too high, and there is
positively no difference between school officials' hiding the ball of citizen
authority and domestic state law and Mike Nifong's hiding the ball.
This
sort of vexing of the people officials are to serve this bad faith hiding the
ball is on the increase. Official stubbornness and defiance of law is becoming
indecent now. Nifong is one example, but when the law is to be shown school
administrators shown adult citizen authority, for instance, or citing and
invoking state law the school policy of banning personal weapons is impeached.
...Or should be, one would think.
Enter the slippery argument of going
to court or other corner of bureaucracy for a ruling' on the question the
administration should already know. Virginia Tech's Report has done this,
seeking advice of law enforcement.
This is the indecency. Pretending
that one is dealing in good faith with students by seeking a ruling. This is as
disingenuous as asking for another toss of the coin, then best three out of
five, then best seven out of ten, all while hiding the ball.
A school has
no such authority to waive a civil right, especially one which acts in
the public interest and which is affirmed by its own state law while the campus
ban on personal weapons operates against the public interest. Consulting
others for a ruling is a stalling tactic. In a public trust, it is bad
faith.
Please see
the White Paper
[www.GoodForTheCountry.org/whitepaper.html] issued by the Good For The Country
Foundation for an explication for non-gun owners who are most concerned in
how best to optimize campus safety and in the safety of their adult
children. The Foundation places the emphasis on relating Original Intent citizen
authority as the consistent solution to many, many such problems even
in 2007 America. On this subject, the Nation's Founders did not
need to foresee high-tech weapons or the murderers who used them what they
feared most was the resurgence of abuses of power. Banning self-defense for
political purposes is an exquisite example of what the Founders feared. Banning
citizen authority of the student body in defiance of state law is adverse to the
very concept of the United States.
In the final analysis, a campus Administration is an aggregate
of individuals in public trust, and does not get the last word, nor do the
bureaucrats they consult and count on for political cover the people get
the last word, even in a private organization where it is their
constituents who speak, and the people spoke three centuries ago. Called
ratification, it is not something subject to majority rule, opinion, or sway in
2007 They've already had this debate. No need to seek a ruling for
another toss of the coin. It's too late. It is inalienable now. Educators really
ought to know better.
Meanwhile, armed self-defense is proven to be a
great Safeguard of our Liberty. Why hide the ball on this? The jig is up: armed
self defense is a Safeguard for students. As such, it's good for the country.
________________________________
John Longenecker is CEO
of the Good For The Country Foundation, a 501(c)(3) organization in the public
interest.
See www.GoodForTheCountry.org
|
