Steven Singer is a teacher in Pennsylvania. He blogs at Gadfly on the Wall.

He writes:

I drove my daughter to school today.

She thanked me for the ride, I wished her a good day, and she toddled off to the middle school doors.

Her khaki pants needed ironing, her pony tail was coming loose and she hefted her backpack onto her shoulder like a sack of potatoes.

All I could do was smile wistfully.

Parents and guardians know that feeling – a little piece of your heart walking away from you.

Imagine what the parents of the 19 children who were killed yesterday at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, might have felt.

I wonder if the parents of the two adults killed in the shooting gave a thought to their grown children during what may have seemed like just another busy day at the end of the academic year.

We’re all so preoccupied. We tend to forget that every goodbye could be our last.

This marks the 27th school shooting with injuries or deaths so far in 2022.

It comes just 10 days after a shooting at a Tops supermarket in Buffalo, N.Y., where 10 people were killed.

There’s hardly enough time anymore to mourn one disaster before the next one hits.

One would think we would have done something about these tragedies by now.

After all, they aren’t unpredictable. They aren’t inevitable. They’re man-made.

There have been 119 school shootings since 2018, according to Education Week, a publication that has been tracking such events for the last four years.

This only includes incidents that happen on K-12 school property or on a school bus or during a school sponsored event when classes are in session.

If we broaden our definition, there is much more gun violence in our communities every day.

According to The Gun Violence Archive, an independent data collection organization, there have been 212 mass shootings so far this year.

There were 693 mass shootings last year, 611 the year before and 417 the year before that.

Why don’t we do anything about this?

In Scotland 26 years ago, a gunman killed 16 kids and a teacher in Dunblane Primary School. The United Kingdom (UK) responded by enacting tight gun control legislation. There hasn’t been a school shooting in the UK since.

After 51 worshippers were killed in mass shootings at Christchurch and Canterbury in New Zealand in 2019, the government outlawed most military style semiautomatic weapons, assault rifles like AK15’s, and initiated a buyback program. There hasn’t been a mass shooting there since.

In Australia, following a 1996 mass shooting in which 35 people were killed in Tasmania, Australian states and territories banned several types of firearms and bought back hundreds of thousands of banned weapons from their owners. Gun homicides, suicides, and mass shootings are now much less common in the country.

This is not hard.

The rest of the world has cracked the code. Just not us.

Not the U.S.

PLEASE OPEN THE LINK AND READ THE REST OF THIS COMPELLING ARTICLE.

As the details emerge about the Uvalde massacre of children, a puzzling situation appears.

According to CNN, nearly 100 law officers converged on the Robb Elementary School.

More than 100 federal officers responded to Tuesday’s deadly school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, according to Customs and Border Patrol.

“When it was all said and done, we had over 80 officers immediately on the scene, and then right after that, 150 or so officers converged on this area,” Customs and Border Patrol chief Raul Ortiz told CNN on Wednesday.

Ortiz said those officers came from several divisions, including the Border Patrol, Air and Marine Operations and Homeland Security Investigations.

But then, says CNN:

The Robb Elementary School shooter was on the premises for up to an hour before law enforcement forcibly entered a classroom and killed him, officials said Wednesday.

“It’s going to be within, like 40 minutes or something, [within] an hour,” Texas Department of Public Safety director Steven McCraw told CNN’s Ed Lavandera at a news conference.

Rep. Tony Gonzales, whose district includes Uvalde, told CNN’s Jake Tapper he was briefed that shooter Salvador Ramos was in a standoff with law enforcement for about a half-hour after firing on students and teachers.

“And then it stops, and he barricades himself in. That’s where there’s kind of a lull in the action,” Gonzales said. “All of it, I understand, lasted about an hour, but this is where there’s kind of a 30-minute lull. They feel as if they’ve got him barricaded in. The rest of the students in the school are now leaving.”

Department of Public Safety spokesperson Sgt. Erick Estrada declined to be more specific about the timeline in a CNN interview Wednesday night.

Why did this large contingent of law officers wait for 30-60 minutes before breaking into the classroom?

There were scores of “good men with guns” and one “bad man with an AR15 and a handgun.” They didn’t stop him. Why?

We will learn more in the days to come. I hope we learn why armed officers stood back and waited while 19 children and two teachers were murdered.

Mercedes Schneider reports that the National Rifle Association, which owns the Republican Party, issued a pathetic statement about something that happened somewhere that caused some real problems that cannot be mentioned. The NRA feels bad that this terrible thing happened. Since they plan to hold their annual meeting in Houston in a few days, it is embarrassing that this awful bad thing happened someplace not too far away to nameless people.

In the face of massive parent and teacher and student opposition, the state board of education in Massachusetts deferred a decision about a takeover of the school district.

Parents and teachers gathered outside the Massachusetts State House before walking the short distance a Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to show opposition to a state takeover of Boston Public Schools. The state on Monday released a scathing review of the district.
Parents and teachers gathered outside the Massachusetts State House before walking the short distance a Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to show opposition to a state takeover of Boston Public Schools. The state on Monday released a scathing review of the district.JONATHAN WIGGS/GLOBE STAFF

State Education Commissioner Jeffrey Riley hammered Boston Public Schools for its “bloated” central office and “unconscionable” transportation failures in his first public comments Tuesday on a new state review of the district, but held off on recommending any takeover of city schools, saying he remains “hopeful and optimistic” that the state and city can reach agreement on a plan for urgent improvement.

Addressing the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education at its monthly meeting, as dozens of people protested outside and dozens more were turned away from the packed meeting room, Riley said he will give Mayor Michelle Wu a chance to respond to his initial proposal for next steps. Details of that plan have not been released to the public...

For now at least, the state’s approach appears to be gentler than some had feared. Board members — who would need to vote to approve a state receivership — appeared in no hurry to call the question. Several acknowledged the passionate opposition to receivership voiced by students, parents, teachers and elected officials who testified at the meeting, and some expressed doubt that a full state takeover could work in the face of such aversion...

Josiehanna Colon, a student at New Mission High School who testified Tuesday, said she has felt the impact of state oversight. Too much of her education has been centered around standardized testing, she said; further intervention would likely bring more emphasis on tests and less diverse curriculum. “I’m angry that our voices may be ignored,” she said, “and that again and again we care about a test score instead of a child.”

The meeting, which lasted more than four hours and included a detailed presentation on the contents of the report as well as lengthy public testimony, was originally scheduled to take place in the auditorium at Wellesley High School, which seats 700 people. Leaders in the suburban district asked state officials to move the gathering elsewhere after learning that attendance would be high and protests could be held, potentially disrupting their school day.

Relocated to a government building in Boston, the much smaller meeting room could not accommodate all attendees, dozens of whom sat on the floor in a hallway outside the room, watching the livestreamed meeting on their cellphones. Several parents in attendance said they were denied the opportunity to speak at the meeting after submitting formal requests; two speakers chose to split their time with others who were shut out.

The fact that state takeovers have a dismal record of failure was apparently never considered. If at first you don’t succeed, fail, fail again.

Earlier, I posted Gloria Steinem’s advice about gun safety. Treat access to guns like access to abortion. Require a 48-hour waiting period and authorization from a doctor (attesting to your mental health). Permit only one gun store in every state, so prospective gun buyers must travel long distances to buy one. Require them to walk a gauntlet of anti-gun protestors when they enter the store.

Dr. Janet Robinson responded to the post. She has unusual credentials on the subject of school shootings.

She wrote:

I agree with Gloria Steinem’s comments. As the Superintendent of Schools in Newtown when the Sandy Hook massacre occurred, I believed that the horror of that shooting of little children would bring about rapid change in gun laws and went to Washington DC to add my voice in advocacy, only to be abused by conspiracy folks for years after. Some legislators came up with dangerous solutions rather than consider instituting criteria for gun purchases, like arming teachers. How many more children will die or be traumatized by this violence in what should be a safe haven for them before we see our elected officials care enough about our children to pass laws that protect them. There is so much debate about protecting the unborn, why are we not protecting our born children with the same passion?

A friend sent Gloria Steinem’s solution to gun safety:

“How about we treat every young man who wants to buy a gun like every woman who wants to get an abortion:

1. Mandatory 48-hour waiting period, parental permission, a note from his doctor proving he understands what he’s about to do, a video he has to watch about the effects of gun violence…

2. Close down all but one gun shop in every state and make him travel hundreds of miles, take time off work, stay overnight in a strange town to get a gun.

3. Make him walk through a gauntlet of people holding photos of loved ones who were shot to death, people who call him a murderer and beg him not to buy a gun.”

If we really cared about the right to life, this is what we would do.

The BBC compiled this statistical portrait of America’s gun culture five years ago and updated it a month ago, before the Buffalo and Uvalde massacres. The latest studies report that there are more than 400 million guns in the U.S.

It begins:

It was over 50 years ago when the administration of President Lyndon Baines Johnson declared that “firearms are a primary instrument of death in American crime” and that it was “primarily the result of our culture’s casual attitude towards firearms and its heritage of the armed, self-reliant citizen”.

At the time, about 90 million guns were circulating in the country.

Today, there are many more guns and many more deaths.

Firearms deaths have become even more of a fixture in American life, with the 1.5 million that took place between 1968 and 2017 higher than the number of soldiers killed in every US conflict since the American War for Independence in 1775.

In 2020 alone, more than 45,000 Americans died at the end of a barrel of a gun, whether by homicide or suicide, more than any other year on record. The figure represents a 25% increase from five years prior, and a 43% increase from 2010.

Heather Cox Richardson writes a valuable and informative history of the politics of guns in America. She makes clear that the current Republican interpretation of the Second Amendment is not rooted in American history.

Please open the link to see the footnotes.

She writes:

Today, a gunman murdered at least 19 children and 2 adults at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. 

For years now, after one massacre or another, I have written some version of the same article, explaining that the nation’s current gun free-for-all is not traditional but, rather, is a symptom of the takeover of our nation by a radical extremist minority. The idea that massacres are “the price of freedom,” as right-wing personality Bill O’Reilly said in 2017 after the Mandalay Bay massacre in Las Vegas, in which a gunman killed 60 people and wounded 411 others, is new, and it is about politics, not our history.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution, on which modern-day arguments for widespread gun ownership rest, is one simple sentence: “A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” There’s not a lot to go on about what the Framers meant, although in their day, to “bear arms” meant to be part of an organized militia.

As the Tennessee Supreme Court wrote in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”

Today’s insistence that the Second Amendment gives individuals a broad right to own guns comes from two places.

One is the establishment of the National Rifle Association in New York in 1871, in part to improve the marksmanship skills of American citizens who might be called on to fight in another war, and in part to promote in America the British sport of elite shooting, complete with hefty cash prizes in newly organized tournaments. Just a decade after the Civil War, veterans jumped at the chance to hone their former skills. Rifle clubs sprang up across the nation.

By the 1920s, rifle shooting was a popular American sport. “Riflemen” competed in the Olympics, in colleges, and in local, state, and national tournaments organized by the NRA. Being a good marksman was a source of pride, mentioned in public biographies, like being a good golfer. In 1925, when the secretary of the NRA apparently took money from ammunition and arms manufacturers, the organization tossed him out and sued him.

NRA officers insisted on the right of citizens to own rifles and handguns but worked hard to distinguish between law-abiding citizens who should have access to guns for hunting and target shooting and protection, and criminals and mentally ill people, who should not. In 1931, amid fears of bootlegger gangs, the NRA backed federal legislation to limit concealed weapons; prevent possession by criminals, the mentally ill and children; to require all dealers to be licensed; and to require background checks before delivery. It backed the 1934 National Firearms Act, and parts of the 1968 Gun Control Act, designed to stop what seemed to be America’s hurtle toward violence in that turbulent decade.

But in the mid-1970s, a faction in the NRA forced the organization away from sports and toward opposing “gun control.” It formed a political action committee (PAC) in 1975, and two years later it elected an organization president who abandoned sporting culture and focused instead on “gun rights.”

This was the second thing that led us to where we are today: leaders of the NRA embraced the politics of Movement Conservatism, the political movement that rose to combat the business regulations and social welfare programs that both Democrats and Republicans embraced after World War II. Movement Conservatives embraced the myth of the American cowboy as a white man standing against the “socialism” of the federal government as it sought to level the economic playing field between Black Americans and their white neighbors. Leaders like Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater personified the American cowboy, with his cowboy hat and opposition to government regulation, while television Westerns showed good guys putting down bad guys without the interference of the government.

In 1972, the Republican platform had called for gun control to restrict the sale of “cheap handguns,” but in 1975, as he geared up to challenge President Gerald R. Ford for the 1976 presidential nomination, Movement Conservative hero Ronald Reagan took a stand against gun control. In 1980, the Republican platform opposed the federal registration of firearms, and the NRA endorsed a presidential candidate—Reagan—for the first time.

When President Reagan took office, a new American era, dominated by Movement Conservatives, began. And the power of the NRA over American politics grew.

In 1981 a gunman trying to kill Reagan shot and paralyzed his press secretary, James Brady, and wounded Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy and police officer Thomas Delahanty. After the shooting, then-representative Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation that became known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, or the Brady Bill, to require background checks before gun purchases. Reagan, who was a member of the NRA, endorsed the bill, but the NRA spent millions of dollars to defeat it.

After the Brady Bill passed in 1993, the NRA paid for lawsuits in nine states to strike it down. Until 1959, every single legal article on the Second Amendment concluded that it was not intended to guarantee individuals the right to own a gun. But in the 1970s, legal scholars funded by the NRA had begun to argue that the Second Amendment did exactly that.

In 1997, when the Brady Bill cases came before the Supreme Court as Printz v. United States, the Supreme Court declared parts of the measure unconstitutional.

Now a player in national politics, the NRA was awash in money from gun and ammunition manufacturers. By 2000 it was one of the three most powerful lobbies in Washington. It spent more than $40 million on the 2008 election. In that year, the landmark Supreme Court decision of District of Columbia v. Heller struck down gun regulations and declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.

Increasingly, NRA money backed Republican candidates. In 2012 the NRA spent $9 million in the presidential election, and in 2014 it spent $13 million. Then, in 2016, it spent over $50 million on Republican candidates, including more than $30 million on Trump’s effort to win the White House. This money was vital to Trump, since many other Republican super PACs refused to back him. The NRA spent more money on Trump than any other outside group, including the leading Trump super PAC, which spent $20.3 million.

The unfettered right to own and carry weapons has come to symbolize the Republican Party’s ideology of individual liberty. Lawmakers and activists have not been able to overcome Republican insistence on gun rights despite the mass shootings that have risen since their new emphasis on guns. Even though 90% of Americans—including nearly 74% of NRA members—support background checks, Republicans have killed such legislation by filibustering it.  

The NRA will hold its 2022 annual meeting this Friday in Houston. Former president Trump will speak, along with Texas governor Greg Abbott, senator Ted Cruz, and representative Dan Crenshaw; North Carolina lieutenant governor Mark Robinson; and South Dakota governor Kristi Noem—all Republicans. NRA executive vice president and chief executive officer Wayne LaPierre expressed his enthusiasm for the lineup by saying: “President Trump delivered on his promises by appointing judges who respect and value the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and in doing so helped ensure the freedom of generations of Americans.”

Tonight, President Joe Biden spoke to the nation: “Why are we willing to live with this carnage? Why do we keep letting this happen?… It’s time to turn this pain into action. For every parent, for every citizen in this country, we have to make it clear to every elected official in this country, it’s time to act.” In the Senate, Chris Murphy (D-CT) said, “I am here on this floor, to beg, to literally get down on my hands and knees and beg my colleagues….find a way to pass laws that make this less likely.”

But it was Steve Kerr, the coach of the Golden State Warriors basketball team, whose father was murdered by gunmen in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1984, who best expressed the outrage of the nation. At a press conference tonight, shaking, he said, “I’m not going to talk about basketball…. Any basketball questions don’t matter…. Fourteen children were killed 400 miles from here, and a teacher, and in the last ten days we’ve had elderly Black people killed in a supermarket in Buffalo, we’ve had Asian churchgoers killed in Southern California, and now we have children murdered at school. WHEN ARE WE GONNA DO SOMETHING? I’m tired, I’m so tired of getting up here and offering condolences to the devastated families…. I’m tired of the moments of silence. Enough. There’s 50 senators…who refuse to vote on HR 8, which is a background check rule that the House passed a couple years ago…. [N]inety percent of Americans, regardless of political party, want…universal background checks…. We are being held hostage by 50 senators in Washington who refuse to even put it to a vote despite what we the American people want…because they want to hold onto their own power. It’s pathetic,” he said, walking out of the press conference. 

“I’ve had enough.”

Another mass murder of little children. More families robbed of their beloved child. More tears. More grief. More empty expressions of sympathy from politicians who send “thoughts and prayers.”

There is no point in trying to understand the young man who carried out this atrocity. His “reasons” or motive don’t matter. What matters is that he murdered innocent children and teachers.

President Biden sees this horrific tragedy as proof that gun control is necessary to protect the innocent from the evil, the insane, the impulsive killers. I agree.

But it’s perfectly obvious that Republicans will actively fight any effort to curb the means of mass murder. There could be a mass murder every day of the week for the rest of the year, and Republicans would still fight any attempt to screen or limit who has access to murder weapons.

As the tragic events in Uvalde, Buffalo, and hundreds of other places show, Republican Party today believes in the right to life for the unborn, but doesn’t care at all about the lives of the born.

None of us is safe. No place is safe. The U.S. has 400 million guns. No matter how many innocent children or adults die at the hands of a killer, the right to own a gun is more precious to the Republican Party than the right to life.

We have seen plenty of movies about life in a dictatorship, but this video shows you the real thing. A well-known Russian pianist, Alexei Lubimov, announced a concert a few months ago. He planned to play a work by a famous Ukrainian composer, Valentin Silvestrov, and another by Schubert.

As he was playing, with great brilliance, the police arrived to stop the concert. The pianist insisted on finishing the piece he was playing. As the two policemen stood there, the audience applauded vigorously. Then the police told him they had reports of a bomb on the premises, and they had to stop the performance until bomb-sniffing dogs arrived. The dogs arrived two hours later.

The concert was stopped.