If Teachers Have Guns More Innocent Black Kids Will Die

If Teachers Have Guns More Innocent Black Kids Will Die

It's a set-up.

On the afternoon of February 14th 2018, Nikolas Cruz walked into Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School with an AR-15 rifle and gunned down 17 people.

Like clockwork, the debate over guns has resurfaced. And the phrases, "gun reform," and "common sense gun laws" headline almost every major story following the deaths of these 14 students and 3 members of the faculty.

While most liberals are using their common sense and calling for stricter screenings on who can purchase guns, as well as bans on certain rifles, a few too many conservatives choose to hear "ban all the guns and let them cancel freedom!"

In fact, many conservatives, along with the Cheeto-In-Chief, have decided that the solution to the problem is to put out fire with more fire. Their argument is that having more guns in schools will make the schools safer. This made think of the officer assigned to Marjory Stoneman Douglas. You know, the one who hid outside the entire time? Deputy Scot Peterson. In fact, just yesterday I read an article about him. Did you know he was actually a former employee of the month? Someone at ABC felt like this guy deserved an entire article to highlight all the "good things" he has done. All I can do is assume that maybe this was to spray a little Febreze on the STANK fact that the only armed member of law enforcement hid outside in a corner and let 17 people die on his watch.

So, the government wants to waste more of our tax dollars on paying cowards who do nothing all day but eat potato chips and ride around campus harassing the female students? I mean, this man didn't even go inside. He fired not a single shot and lead not a single student to safety. He didn't even try, and we want more of him?

But everyone then clarified what they meant by wanting more guns in schools. It isn't that they want more police officers assigned to campuses, it's that they want Mrs. Peggy Johnson from the English department strapping a piece to her ankle every morning while going over her Huckleberry Finn lecture notes.

Now, chances are they will never get the funding to provide guns for even the smallest percentage of teachers or even training for those who have their own, but lets play devil's advocate for a second (seeing as how everyone else seems to be doing so these days) and say that a handful of teachers in every public elementary, middle and high school across the U.S were given handguns and some sort of training.

There are a handful of obvious reasons as to why this is just a really bad idea.

First of all, teachers simply wouldn't be able to get to the gun on time in most cases, and I'm sure we're not expecting Mrs. Johnson to boss up and go leaping over bookshelves and sliding under desks to get to it while "crater-face Johnny" is waving around and assault rifle.

Then there's the high probability that the children would find the gun and hurt themselves or others. Let's not pretend that these teachers are REALLY watching these children every second of every day. There's a reason kids come home with gum in their hair or a detention letter for somehow finding the time to create whole damn Crayola murals on the walls when no one was looking.

Then what about the very real chance that teachers will use the gun or at least the idea of the gun to scare children into submission. You really want your child to come home saying that Mr. Smith threatened to "bust a cap" in his ass if he didn't stop whispering during silent reading?

And could you even imagine what would happen to Black teachers carrying guns? I honestly think this is a setup. The government wants to hand guns to Black people for them to get caught with, perceived as a threat and then gunned down by police. Think that's a reach? Two words...Philando Castile.

Now, here one final scenario and I am sure will be all too common...

Teachers would murder Black and brown children.

Arming teachers will directly result in Black and brown students being shot to death.

I mean, think about. Trayvon Martin got shot by a wanna-be-cop because he was perceived to have been "somewhere he shouldn't." Police officers are legitimately trained to not jump at the sight of a leaf falling, but they still panic in the presence someone larger than them that happens to be Black basically every day.

What do you think is gonna happen to Jamal when the shaky Calculus teacher catches him skipping class and eating a bag of Flaming Hot Cheetos behind the gym? I'll tell you what will happen. Jamal will die from the clip that was emptied into his chest, the teacher will be questioned by local law enforcement—questioned, not arrested—and then let go while crying about how bad he feels after his mistake. Then white America will rally around the teacher in the court of public opinion to let him know that it was okay to have shot the unarmed n*gger because this never would have happened if he were in English class like he was supposed to be.Then they will remind everyone of how much of a "bad seed" he was by bringing up the fact that his parents are un-wed, his history of skipping school and tendency of turning in assignments late.

We'll hold a Black Lives Matter rally, to which the Cheeto-in-Chief will make some disparaging remarks about and Angela Rye and Symone Sanders will then have to shut down some crusty ol' white lady and her foolishness on CNN...rinse, wash, repeat. And in the off chance this teacher IS sat down in an actual court of law, a jury of his peers will NEVER convict him because incident after incident and murder after murder, history has taught us that white people are generally afraid of Black people, and Black people are never worthy of the benefit of the doubt.

My point is that America is entirely too racist to arm another set of public servants with guns when the ones who have them now use literally images of young Black men as target practice.

Cover Image Credit: Linkedin Sales Navigator

Popular Right Now

Dear Senator Walsh, I Can't Wait For The Day That A Nurse Saves Your Life

And I hope you know that when it is your time, you will receive the best care. You will receive respect and a smile. You will receive empathy and compassion because that's what we do and that is why we are the most trusted profession.


Dear Senator Walsh,

I can't even fathom how many letters you've read like this in the past 72 hours. You've insulted one of the largest, strongest and most emotion-filled professions.. you're bound to get a lot of feedback. And as nurses, we're taught that when something makes us mad, to let that anger fuel us to make a difference and that's what we're doing.

I am not even a nurse. I'm just a nursing student. I have been around and I've seen my fair share of sore legs and clinical days where you don't even use the bathroom, but I am still not even a nurse yet. Three years in, though, and I feel as if I've given my entire life and heart to this profession. My heart absolutely breaks for the men and women who are real nurses as they had to wake up the next morning after hearing your comments, put on their scrubs and prepare for a 12-hour day (during which I promise you, they didn't play one card game).

I have spent the last three years of my life surrounded by nurses. I'm around them more than I'm around my own family, seriously. I have watched nurses pass more medications than you probably know exist. They know the side effects, dosages and complications like the back of their hand. I have watched them weep at the bedside of dying patients and cry as they deliver new lives into this world. I have watched them hang IV's, give bed baths, and spoon-feed patients who can't do it themselves. I've watched them find mistakes of doctors and literally save patient's lives. I have watched them run, and teach, and smile, and hug and care... oh boy, have I seen the compassion that exudes from every nurse that I've encountered. I've watched them during their long shifts. I've seen them forfeit their own breaks and lunches. I've seen them break and wonder what it's all for... but I've also seen them around their patients and remember why they do what they do. You know what I've never once seen them do? Play cards.

The best thing about our profession, Senator, is that we are forgiving. The internet might be blown up with pictures mocking your comments, but at the end of the day, we still would treat you with the same respect that we would give to anyone. That's what makes our profession so amazing. We would drop anything, for anyone, anytime, no matter what.

You did insult us. It does hurt to hear those comments because from the first day of nursing school we are reminded how the world has zero idea what we do every day. We get insulted and disrespected and little recognition for everything we do sometimes. But you know what? We still do it.

When it's your time, Senator, I promise that the nurse taking care of you will remember your comments. They'll remember the way they felt the day you publicly said that nurses "probably do get breaks. They probably play cards for a considerable amount of the day." The jokes will stop and it'll eventually die down, but we will still remember.

And I hope you know that when it is your time, you will receive the best care. You will receive respect and a smile. You will receive empathy and compassion because that's what we do and that is why we are the most trusted profession.

Please just remember that we cannot properly take care of people if we aren't even taken care of ourselves.

I sincerely pray that someday you learn all that nurses do and please know that during our breaks, we are chugging coffee, eating some sort of lunch, and re-tying our shoes... not playing cards.

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

Dear Nancy Pelosi, 16-Year-Olds Should Not Be Able To Vote

Because I'm sure every sixteen year old wants to be rushing to the voting booth on their birthday instead of the BMV, anyways.


Recent politicians such as Nancy Pelosi have put the voting age on the political agenda in the past few weeks. In doing so, some are advocating for the voting age in the United States to be lowered from eighteen to sixteen- Here's why it is ludicrous.

According to a study done by "Circle" regarding voter turnout in the 2018 midterms, 31% of eligible people between the ages of 18 and 29 voted. Thus, nowhere near half of the eligible voters between 18 and 29 actually voted. To anyone who thinks the voting age should be lowered to sixteen, in relevance to the data, it is pointless. If the combination of people who can vote from the legal voting age of eighteen to eleven years later is solely 31%, it is doubtful that many sixteen-year-olds would exercise their right to vote. To go through such a tedious process of amending the Constitution to change the voting age by two years when the evidence doesn't support that many sixteen-year-olds would make use of the new change (assuming it would pass) to vote is idiotic.

The argument can be made that if someone can operate heavy machinery (I.e. drive a car) at sixteen, they should be able to vote. Just because a sixteen-year-old can (in most places) now drive a car and work at a job, does not mean that they should be able to vote. At the age of sixteen, many students have not had fundamental classes such as government or economics to fully understand the political world. Sadly, going into these classes there are students that had mere knowledge of simple political knowledge such as the number of branches of government. Well, there are people above the age of eighteen who are uneducated but they can still vote, so what does it matter if sixteen-year-olds don't know everything about politics and still vote? At least they're voting. Although this is true, it's highly doubtful that someone who is past the age of eighteen, is uninformed about politics, and has to work on election day will care that much to make it to the booths. In contrast, sixteen-year-olds may be excited since it's the first time they can vote, and likely don't have too much of a tight schedule on election day, so they still may vote. The United States does not need people to vote if their votes are going to be uneducated.

But there are some sixteen-year-olds who are educated on issues and want to vote, so that's unfair to them. Well, there are other ways to participate in government besides voting. If a sixteen-year-old feels passionate about something on the political agenda but can't vote, there are other ways of getting involved. They can canvas for politicians whom they agree with, or become active in the notorious "Get Out The Vote" campaign to increase registered voter participation or help register those who already aren't. Best yet, they can politically socialize their peers with political information so that when the time comes for all of them to be eighteen and vote, more eighteen-year-olds will be educated and likely to vote.

If you're a sixteen-year-old and feel hopeless, you're not. As the 2016 election cycle approached, I was seventeen and felt useless because I had no vote. Although voting is arguably one of the easiest ways to participate in politics, it's not the only one. Since the majority of the current young adult population don't exercise their right to vote, helping inform them of how to stay informed and why voting is important, in my eyes is as essential as voting.

Sorry, Speaker Pelosi and all the others who think the voting age should be lowered. I'd rather not have to pay a plethora of taxes in my later years because in 2020 sixteen-year-olds act like sheep and blindly vote for people like Bernie Sanders who support the free college.

Related Content

Facebook Comments