< dogscatskidslife, TJ Morgan, veterinary technician, veterinary medicine, consumer, activist, day to day real life events, writer, stories, photographs, photographer, CafePress.

Monday, October 16, 2006

Now That's My Kind of Classroom...

Most of you guys know that I was born and raised in Texas.

That I am a self-starter...


Capable of problem-solving...

A "can do" kind of person...

If I am inclined to do it that is.

Finally, there's a public school that is imparting that same kind of attitude to their students.

Here's an interesting public school program that is probably the only one like it in the country.

We've all heard the stories and have seen the pictures about the school massacres...

Well, the public schools in Burleson, Texas, are teaching their students to fight back.

That's right.

They're telling them to attack their assailant.

Students are also instructed not to comply with a gunman's orders, and to take him down.

Sounds logical to me.

One man.

30 students and a teacher throwing everything they've got at him...

I would rather die fighting than shot dead with my head between my knees.



Blogger Sicilian said...

TJ. . . I thought the Amish girls empitomized Jesus. . . they said to the shooter. . . kill me. . . spare the others . .. I don't know as an adult if I could have done what she did.

October 17, 2006 12:12 AM  
Blogger Pattie said...

It is a solution I would not have thought of.
I guess I have always thought that in a school shooting situation, the kids are essentially helpless. This proves they don't have to be.
Although I must admit, I wouldn't want any of my kids going it alone and attacking a gunman. They would be shot....probably killed. And I would be very angry. However, a GROUP of kids rushing a gunman? Refreshing idea, but I hope they would get him down on the first try.

I agree with you, TJ. I would rather die trying than to die with my head between my knees. If faced with a similar circumstance, I hope I would have the guts. Let's face it, that is what it takes.GUTS.

This reminds me of how I felt after 9/11...a take no prisoners approach....a "not going to take bullies, gunmen, terrorists, etc" lying down. It's the American way.

October 17, 2006 4:27 AM  
Blogger Sue said...

TJ: It's an original idea and perhaps one that will become more popular. Perhaps these gunmen might think twice if they knew that their prey were not such an easy target.


October 17, 2006 5:30 AM  
Blogger It's me, T.J. said...

Hey Sicilian...

As far as the Amish girl is concerned, she did put the other's needs before her own. She did try to protect them and save their lives. She did do a very selfless act.


It was not God's will for her to die in the other girls' place. It was not God's will for any of them to be killed.

While Jesus did "die for us", he did not die from a random act of violence. His death was orchestrated and had to fulfill his purpose on this earth. His purpose was to redeem mankind from their sin. Jesus had to be sacrificed and spend three days in hell and fight a spiritual battle with Satan, and take the keys of hell from Satan. His resurrection is the physical manifestation over spiritual death. He had to do all of this to redeem us from our sins so that we could live after our physical deaths.

The reaction of the Amish community after the tragedy does epitomize Christ as represented by their forgiveness of the perpetrator. But I don't believe that God has called any of us to be "sheep for the slaughter". Only Christ could be that sacrifice.

There are many instances where God has called the righteous to fight and to wage war. Instances where Christians have had to stand up and refuse to obey commands that were against God. God requires us to stand up for our faith and beliefs. He requires us to be martyrs of the faith, but I do not believe God calls us to be slaughtered for the sake of the act itself.

I feel that Jesus is really misunderstood in these ways. I think that a lot of people believe that Jesus just let people "walk all over him". But he didn't. He was a strong man and stood up for his convictions, for what was right.

The best example is when he tore through the temple and ran the money changers out. I believe that there is such a thing as a "righteous anger". And he certainly was a reflection of God, his father, in this incident.

I feel that many Christians think that they have to be silent. That they have to be submissive. But I think this is wrong. Our Lord is a strong God. And we are His people right? Made in His image?

God has never approved of the "wicked". And he has most definitely displayed his anger many times, as recorded in the Bible.

God also does not like lazy and idle people. He wants people to take control of their lives and to honor Him through it. He wants us to use our lives to help others; I don't think that death is part of this plan.

And I don't believe that I should stand, with my hands to my side, and submit to a presumed authority of an un-Godly man.

The precious child who offered her life also believed that the shooter would keep his word. That he would kill her and let the others go. She could not understand that he would be a liar and a deceiver as well as a killer.

If I were the girl who was offering to give my life for the others, then I would have to think that I would have to provide some way for escape.

Only by throwing myself at the attacker would there ever be any chance of their survival.

October 17, 2006 4:51 PM  
Blogger It's me, T.J. said...

Hey Pattie...

I would not ever, ever, ever want any of my children to face this type of situation.

However, I can only be so grateful to those who were able to fight the terrorists in the plane that didn't make it to its target. God bless the families of those who died in United 93.

Their selfless act saved countless lives.

Hey Sue...

These types of crimes are aimed at the weak and the defenseless. I think that it would make a big difference too. Especially if there were armed adults in the schools.


October 17, 2006 4:56 PM  
Blogger Smalltown RN said...

Some very thought provoking comments made here.

Anyone who chooses to take the life of another I believe is mentally unwell. For example, suicide bombers, the name itself should say it all. It is not considered normal behaviour to kill oneself, hence the individuals must have some form of mental instability. People don't normally go around thinking that they want to kill off a classroom full of students unless they are having ideations of being all powerful and controlling. When the individual gets into that mind set, would you blieve that person or persons to be of sound mind? I am thinking not.

As far as taking up arms, guns beget guns and hence increases the possibility of violence,and I just wonder where ends.

October 18, 2006 2:52 AM  
Blogger It's me, T.J. said...

Hey Mary Anne...

You're right. I don't believe that these people are of "sound mind".

As far as taking up arms, guns beget guns and hence increases the possibility of violence,and I just wonder where ends.

I feel that this is a 'slippery slope' argument. I don't believe that normal and law abiding citizens who own guns perpetrates more guns, which thereby perpetrates more violence.

I also don't believe that disarming law abiding citizens will reduce the problems that are associated with guns.

Because the perpetrators of gun associated violence will always have guns. They're not going to give them up; leaving the 10% of the bad people wielding control and power over the 90% of the good people who remain unarmed and helpless.

There aren't any guns in the schools, yet there is an increase in gun associated violence in these schools. Guns didn't beget guns in this instance, and I don't believe that they do in any other instances.

The problems of gun associated violence are much deeper than individual gun ownership. These problems have their roots in the social ills of our society. Gun legislation isn't going to fix these problems either.

Right and wrong are no longer the acceptable moral boundaries by which to live our lives. There are too many areas of gray in our societal moralities. A society will fall without the structure and support of a good moral framework. Laws will always be inadequate in the legislation and control of mankind's actions. The attitude of "anything goes" will eventually turn into "everything falls" if our moral structures are not shored up and supported.

We cannot look at these issues on the surface and believe that if we take away the 'candy' that the child will no longer cry and yearn for it. We have to change our attitudes.


October 18, 2006 12:27 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home