Jessicah Lahitou looks back on stats on gun ownership and gun violence and wonders if what we need is a new approach to tackle the violence.
—
My parents grew up in a small farming town, out on the eastern plain of Colorado. When they were in high school during the late 1970s, many of the boys would leave after the final bell to go hunting during goose season.
They brought their guns to school, in order to maximize daylight hours to track the geese. A student could, ergo, view weaponry in the backseats and trunks of several student vehicles parked just outside the high school building itself.
Whether or not bringing firearms onto school grounds was allowed, I don’t know. What I do know is that no effort was ever made stop teenaged boys from doing just that.
♦◊♦
Roughly a decade ago, a good friend of mine was teaching in a rural Texas school district. Some high school boys brought their hunting gear to school, laying for all to see in the backseats of their cars. Their parents and various school board members could not fathom the “hysterical” reaction of her British principal.
According to The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, approximately 47% of US households owned a gun in 1973.
In 2014, that statistic had dropped to just 31%.
Thirty years ago, high school boys were regularly bringing guns onto school grounds, without much fanfare, and without violent incident.
It is impossible to imagine such a thing today. Students are now harshly punished for all manner of otherwise normal behavior, from building clocks to forming gun shapes with their fingers.
And these no tolerance policies appear to be failing. We mourn today yet another gruesome school mass shooting.
Something has changed. What is it?
♦◊♦
In 1980, the courts rightfully ruled that a separation of Church and State meant placards like the Ten Commandments could not be posted in public schools. They were enforcing a key tenet of American democracy.
But there was never any effort made to replace a religious belief with a moral one. Students in today’s public schools may get a “character” lesson here or there, but they will not be given persistent, intentional courses that expose them to deeper thinking about morality.
In this weekend’s edition of the Wall Street Journal, Jonathan Sacks examines why the West has been so bewildered at the rise of religious extremism. Our secular superiority was supposed to spread, the clear benefits of abandoning faith for rational detachment too obvious for anyone to miss.
And yet, as Sacks points out, Western thinkers forgot that “Homo sapiens is the meaning-seeking animal. If there is one thing the great institutions of the modern world do not do, it is to provide meaning.” People need a purpose for their lives, and acknowledging this search should be a part of our school systems. We need to address what Sacks labels the “three questions that every reflective individual will ask at some time in his or her life: Who am I? Why am I here? How then shall I live?”
And the thing is, young people are desperate for those conversations. Throughout my seven years teaching middle and high school, the days we discussed big, thematic questions were always a joy for me. Those were the days my students were most alive, most engaged, and most provoked.
Should you risk your life to help someone else? What if doing so puts your family at risk as well? What happens when “good” people stand by while “evil” people commit crimes? Can they still call themselves “good?”
These questions came up during our study of the Holocaust, and you would not believe how deep, thoughtful, and moved thirteen year olds can be on these complex subjects. I found myself inspired by their answers.
Yet a single class, one unit, here or there, is not enough. Young people are like us adults – they need regular reminders to think along deep and ethical lines, it doesn’t always come naturally.
And there is no excuse at all not to have these classes. Some of the greatest thoughts ever recorded come from philosophers, whose religious beliefs are either nonexistent or irrelevant to their logical exploration of the meaning of a “good” life.
In other words, Jews and Muslims, Atheists and Hindus, Catholics and Buddhists can all benefit from reading Plato.
In fact, as the number of religiously-affiliated Americans declines, the need for classes on ethics and philosophy are ever more important. It strikes me as utterly remarkable that these classes are not already mandatory, as if knowing how to balance a chemical equation is of higher consequence than knowing what makes human life valuable.
Young people – young men – need to have the space and time and guidance, to consider their behavior, the meaning of their lives, and the meaning of the lives of those around them.
♦◊♦
So I question the easy out, that guns are the problem. If we make it very difficult for people to get and own guns, will mass shootings stop?
Perhaps. Perhaps we can retool the 2nd Amendment and see fewer mass shootings.
But maybe not. If guns were the root problem, we would expect to see more mass shootings in the 1970s, when gun ownership was much higher.
I understand the impulse of those who want to restrict guns.
I don’t think it is that simple or easy.
—
Photo: lord jim / flickr
Thank you for writing this: “Jews and Muslims, Atheists and Hindus, Catholics and Buddhists can all benefit from reading Plato.” May I also suggesting reading Cicero as well; and, in particular for young people, his “On Moral Duties,” which Cicero wrote for his son. It is a noble and beautiful work, superbly written, and not over people’s heads. However it is by no means the case that religion is nonexistent or irrelevant for Plato. Plato is above all else a religious philosopher. For him “The Good” and God are virtually synonymous. For the most part Greek and Roman philosophers (except… Read more »
I wonder if it’s really young men we need to fix or is it society. I don’t mean to pick on your article. It just happens to be the one around when these thoughts are going through my mind. My thoughts are sort of philosophical though and it goes like this. Why is it that society doesn’t give a fig about men until there is a mass shooting. Men’s shelters just man up. Men falling behind in school who cares. No HPV vaccine for (no or little oncern for men’s health) men or boys and stop paying for prostate cancer… Read more »
Thank you for asking better questions!