The Aftermath of Sandy hook
I had written this on December 15th, 2012.
There will never be words adequate to describe the murder of so many children at Sandy Hook. There will be extensive finger-pointing as there always are after these incidents. I also know that I will never change the mind of someone who believes in the opposite of what I do. That an “Armed Trained responsible person” in that school would have stood a far better chance of fending off this monster. I hate the fact that our society has devolved to the point where this is actually necessary. But “hating” the state of affairs does not help or solve the problem. Spree Killers, Terrorist or your run of the mill criminal never really give too much thought about violating Gun laws in the first place. We have tried for almost a century to “Ban Drugs” and we see how well that has worked out. Banning guns will more or less have the same result. No matter what the good intentions are, the bad guys simply do not care about violating laws.
When we teach our courses on Terrorism, Criminal behavior and surveillance, We always include the attack cycle in these modules. Part of that cycle is Target Selection. Targets are chosen because they are perceived to offer the attacker the maximum benefit with the lowest risk. An elementary school is the height of an easy target for a terrorist organization or a spree killer Like Adam Lanza that targeted Sandy Hook elementary School. He knew there would be little or no resistance and that there was a high probability that he would be able to carry out his attack unimpeded. I don’t really know what the answer is. I would bet that at some point we are going to find out that this Evil man had some psychological breakdown, mental deficiency or the like. At the end of the day, 20 Children and 6 adults were taken from us. I can’t help but think that If there were trained armed personnel on site at the school coupled with enhanced security procedures beyond focusing on purely cosmetic approaches, that the outcome would have been different. I know that gun control advocates will say that adding an armed person will only raise the risks. That of course is simply not borne out by the facts. To understand this, you need to look no further than to look at how the United States practices self-defence. America has benefited from our ability to keep our enemies at bay because they know we have the most powerful military in the world coupled with an economy that can sustain our military capabilities (America the entity is well armed and trained). The cost of attacking us is simply too high. Terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda are very similar to mentally unstable “Spree Killers” such as Adam Lanza or the Aurora Colorado Movie theater Killer. They are outliers and no amount of negotiating or placating them will change their ideology or goal of causing maximum carnage. Much in the same manner that the United States prevents and deters aggression, an armed trained responsible person is a far better deterrent to criminal activity than any Gun ban or gun free zone. There is not a responsible elected official in the United States who would advocate that the United States of America disarm itself. Yet there are elected officials who advocate that we the law-abiding citizens disarm.
There is no doubt that we must find better ways to intervene when mental illness begins to manifest in someone. Denying our citizens the right of self-defense because of the actions of “outliers” is not an effective solution. You cannot “ban” evil. I recognize that this is a very tricky topic, but denying law-abiding citizens their right to defend themselves will only create more opportunities for mad men and criminals to victimize the rest of us without the ability to defend ourselves.