School Shootings (By The Numbers)

 

From The Washington Post

Louisiana GOP Tries To Force Religion On School Children

Dan Rather comments on the Louisiana GOP's mandate to put the Ten Commandments in every school classroom:

Just when you think the audacity meter has reached its zenith, along comes the Republican-dominated Louisiana state legislature. This week it passed — and the state’s far-right governor signed — a law requiring all public classrooms to display the Ten Commandments. 

 

Governor Jeff Landry argued that the Commandments are not simply religious treatise but “foundational documents of our state and national government,” perhaps trying to circumvent the inevitable hue and cry from just about everyone.

I’ll get to the hue and cry in a moment. First, if one wants to talk about foundational documents of our government, I think the Constitution is a better place to start. The First Amendment guarantees the separation of church and state. Full stop. Requiring the displaying of the Ten Commandments violates the constitutional principle of religious neutrality. 

Honoring Supreme Court precedent is another foundational tenet of our democracy. Yes, this has happened before. In 1980’s Stone v. Graham, the Supreme Court struck down a Kentucky law that also required the display of the Ten Commandments in schools. The court found that the law violated the First Amendment’s establishment clause. In its opinion, the court wrote that the Ten Commandments are “undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths” and displaying them “serves no ... educational function.”

One could argue that Louisiana should be more concerned with the quality of the education in those classrooms than what is on their walls. The state ranks near the bottom nationally for education and 50th for overall quality of life. Perhaps instead of this political stunt, Louisiana lawmakers should think about raising teacher pay, among the lowest in the nation. Or maybe try to keep kids in school? The state ranks 48th in graduation rate. 

Putting an 11-by-14-inch poster “in a large easy to read font” in every classroom from kindergarten through graduate school will cost money. Don’t worry — it will be paid for by private donations. But who will pay for the inevitable and orchestrated legal fight to come? Louisiana taxpayers. 

After eight years of a Democratic governor, the Republican- controlled state legislature is making up for what it sees as lost time. It recently turned down federal aid for summer food assistance, claiming it wants Louisiana families to be self-sufficient. Those same families suffer from a higher rate of food insecurity than most of the country. And Louisiana is the first state to advance a measure designating abortion pills as dangerous controlled substances. 

 

Now to the hue and cry. It was loud and it was immediate, coming from, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, which jointly stated that the law “violates students’ and families’ fundamental right to religious freedom.”

So why would Louisiana bother with what seems to be a cut-and-dried case of unconstitutionality?  

“I can’t wait to be sued,” Governor Landry said at a Republican fundraiser in Nashville, according to The Tennessean. Good thing, because the ACLU has already filed suit.

All this is part of a larger national plan by a minority of  Christians to inject expressions of their faith into everyday life, whether we like it or not. With a highly politicized and far-right majority on the Supreme Court at the ready, these groups believe they will get a friendlier reception from the court and could ultimately be successful. 

 

They have reason to be hopeful. In 2022, the court sided with a high school football coach who argued he had the right to pray on the 50-yard line after games. The increasingly porous boundary between church and state seems to be eroding faster than a snowball in July. Even so, legal experts think this one is a real stretch.

Charles C. Haynes, an expert in religious liberty and civil discourse, told The New York Times that he believes the state is “overreaching,” adding that “even this court will have a hard time justifying” what Louisiana lawmakers came up with. 

But perhaps most interesting is how do parents and lawmakers square the behavior of their revered MAGA leader with the Ten Commandments? 

 

Democratic strategist David Axelrod on X had this recommendation: “Here’s a suggested quiz for the schoolchildren of Louisiana: ‘Look at the poster on the wall of the Ten Commandments and write down the total number Donald Trump has broken.’”

We could quibble about the total number, but let no one be mistaken: This new Louisiana law is a dangerous development for our country. Donald Trump champions a national movement to eliminate the separation between church and state.   

"An Obscene Revision Of Black History"

Eugene Robinson, in The Washington Post, comments on Florida's new racist school board decision. Here is part of what he wrote:

Florida’s decision to teach in schools that slavery in this country was of “personal benefit” to some enslaved people is obscene revisionism. It is like teaching that though Abraham Lincoln might have been assassinated, at least the performance at Ford’s Theatre that night was first-rate.

For those who doubt this obscenity is actually in the curriculum, look no further than Page 6 of Florida’s 2023 academic standards for teaching social studies: “Instruction includes how slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.”

It was Gov. Ron DeSantis, running for the GOP presidential nomination as an “anti-wokeness” Savonarola, who inspired this latest effort to both-sides slavery. (Months ago, the state rejected an Advanced Placement course on African American studies, saying it “significantly lacks educational value.”) On Friday, DeSantis blamed the state Department of Education — “I wasn’t involved,” he claimed — but also defended the abomination: “They’re probably going to show that some of the folks that eventually parlayed, you know, being a blacksmith into doing things later in life.”. . .

I have looked through the new Florida curriculum to see whether that sentence about “personal benefit” might be a singular aberration, and it is not. Yes, the standards do require that students be taught about the horrors of slavery. But they also leave some very wrong impressions.

The curriculum mandates that teachers “examine the various duties and trades performed by slaves (e.g., agricultural work, painting, carpentry, tailoring, domestic service, blacksmithing, transportation).” That suggests a smorgasbord of career options, but in fact the vast majority of enslaved African Americans were forced to do backbreaking work as field hands. Very small numbers were employed otherwise.

Florida wants students to study “how trading in slaves developed in African lands (e.g., Benin, Dahomey)” and “the practice of the Barbary Pirates in kidnapping Europeans and selling them into slavery in Muslim countries.” In other words, I guess, “Black people started it” and “White people were slaves, too.” Students are also to be taught that the first Africans brought to Jamestown in 1619 were technically indentured servants. Show me the indenture documents.

The problem with all of this is that it seeks to contextualize American slavery as something other than what it was: a unique historical crime, perpetuated over 2½ centuries. Slavery was practiced here on an industrial scale, based on race and the belief in white supremacy, with not just individuals but also their descendants consigned to lifelong servitude.

The Florida curriculum does a similar trick in interpreting the Jim Crow period. It calls for studying “acts of violence perpetrated against and by African Americans” — blaming both sides — but then mentions the “1906 Atlanta Race Riot, 1919 Washington, D.C. Race Riot, 1920 Ocoee Massacre, 1921 Tulsa Massacre and the 1923 Rosewood Massacre.” All of those atrocities, and many more, were White riots against innocent Black victims.

What happened happened. We will not move forward until we truthfully acknowledge where we’ve been.

No One Needs An Assault Weapon - Ban Them!

The following post is by Robert Reich: 

A woman armed with assault rifles entered a Christian school in Nashville and fatally shot three nine-year-old children and three staff members before she was shot and killed by the police.

It makes me weep. It’s happening gain and again and again. Our children.

President Biden renewed his call for Congress to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban, but with Republicans in control of the House there’s little to no chance. 

So far this year, there have been 129 mass shootings in the United States. 

Ten of the 17 deadliest U.S. mass shootings since 2012 have involved AR-15s. In a review of the history of the AR-15, the Washington Post reports that it was originally designed in the 1950s as a soldiers’ rifle. “An outstanding weapon with phenomenal lethality,” according to an internal Pentagon report. It soon became standard issue for U.S. troops in Vietnam (where the weapon was called the M16). 

Few gunmakers envisioned that ordinary people would buy the semiautomatic version, which didn’t seem suited for hunting and appeared overkill for home defense. The National Rifle Association and other industry allies focused on promoting traditional rifles and handguns.

Today, the AR-15 is the best-selling rifle in the United States, owned by about 1 in 20 U.S. adults, or roughly 16 million people. It dominates the walls and websites of gun dealers. (Republican Rep. Barry Moore of Alabama has even introduced a bill to declare the AR-15 the “National Gun of America.”) 

What accounts for this dramatic change? Follow the money. The early 2000s were a tough time for the firearms industry. Gun sales had been flat for several years. But after the Assault Weapons Ban ended in 2004, gun manufacturers saw a chance to ride a post-9/11 surge in military glorification. As America soldiers were seen in Afghanistan and Iraq wearing tactical gear and holding M16 and M4 carbine rifles, gunmakers used the conflict-zone images to market AR-15s. 

“We made it look cool,” said Randy Luth, the founder of gunmaker DPMS, one of the earliest companies to promote AR-15s. “The same reason you buy a Corvette.”

One Smith & Wesson AR-15 ended up in the hands of Kyle Rittenhouse, the teenager who fatally shot two people and wounded a third during 2020’s racial justice protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin. As Rittenhouse explained during his trial, he chose an AR-15 because “I thought it looked cool.” 

Another AR-15 was alluring to the gunman who killed 10 Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo in May 2022. “The AR-15 and its variants are very deadly when used properly,” he wrote in a manifesto filled with racial vitriol. “Which is the reason I picked one.” Ten days later, 19 schoolchildren and two adults were shot to death in Uvalde, Tex., with another AR-15.

The string of attacks prompted President Biden, who as a senator had strongly supported the 1994 assault weapons ban, to promise a renewed effort to stop the sale of military-style weapons. Last year, the Democratic-led House passed a new assault weapons ban on a tight party-line vote of 217-213 — the first time the measure had been voted on in nearly three decades. But the Senate, also run by Democrats, never took action.

***

When Bill Clinton signed the original Assault Weapons Ban in 1994, he was widely condemned by Republicans and gun owners. The Democrats’ subsequent losses of the House and Senate in the 1996 midterm elections were partly blamed on the ban. But it saved lives. 

The 10-year length of the ban has allowed researchers to compare mass shooting deaths before, during, and after the ban. 

Before: From 1981 (the earliest year analyzed) until the ban went into effect in 1994, the proportion of deaths in mass shootings in which an assault rifle was used was lower than it is today, and the average number of yearly deaths attributed to mass shootings was 7.2.

During: In the years after the assault weapons ban went into effect, the average number of yearly deaths from mass shootings fell to 5.3. Even including 1999’s Columbine High School massacre (the deadliest mass shooting during the period of the ban), the 1994 to 2004 period saw lower average annual rates of both mass shootings and deaths resulting from such incidents than before the ban’s inception.

After: In the years after the assault weapons ban expired in 2004, the data shows an almost immediate – and steep – rise in mass shooting deaths to an average of 25.

Researchers have calculated that the risk of a person in the U.S. dying in a mass shooting was 70 percent lower when assault weapons ban was in place than it is today. 

Facts, data, logic, analysis — do they play any role in what our government decides? The Republican Party in particular no longer listens, or thinks. It is owned — lock, stock, and barrel — by the gun industry. 

You might think that preventing young children from being murdered in random mass killings by assailants with assault weapons would be a goal shared by all lawmakers. But you’d be wrong.

 

The Assault Weapons Ban must be reinstated — the greed of gun manufacturers be damned.

Do Republicans Care About The Lives Of School Children?

There have been 28 shootings in schools this year in the United States. That's more than two for every month of the year (and we still have nearly a month to go before the year is over). This doesn't happen in any other developed nation, and there's no reason for it to be happening here.

So, why does it continue to happen? Why have there been 655 mass shootings this year? Why have 41,672 people died from gun violence this year? 

The reason for all of the above is the refusal of Congress to do anything to restrict access to guns by the dangerous individuals who shouldn't have them -- primarily Republicans. These Republicans fall back on arguing that they are protecting the Second Amendment. That's mendacity!

No right is without its restrictions. Free speech has its limits. You can't yell fire in a crowded place, or encourage anyone to harm another person. Even the right to vote has restrictions. A resident of this country must be a citizen, and must be registered.

The right to own a firearm also has its limits, even though many Republican officials don't like that. The Supreme Court has ruled that the government can restrict who can own or buy a firearm, and even restrict the type of firearm that can be bought or owned. These restrictions don't keep any honest and law-abiding person from buying or owning a firearm.

We may not be able to stop all gun violence or deaths, but we can pass some laws that would significantly reduce the gun violence and deaths -- some common sense laws that would save lives without violating the Constitution.

The most obvious one is to plug the loopholes in the background check law, so felons, abuser, terrorists, and other dangerous people can't legally buy a firearm. This is supported by about 90% of the population, including most gun owners. But Republicans continue to block it, afraid they might lose the NRA money for their re-elections.

Evidently, NRA money is more important than the lives of Americans -- including school children.

No one is trying to take away the right of law-abiding people to buy or own a gun. But some restrictions are necessary to save lives. Good people must step up and vote against any politician that refuses to vote for sensible and constitutional legislation. The school shootings, and other mass shootings, will not stop until this is done.

The Republican officials have blood on their hands -- but so do the people who vote for them (knowing they will do nothing to protect American lives).

43% Of Republicans Oppose Teaching History Of Racism

The chart above reflects the results of the new Monmouth University Poll -- done between November 4th and 8th of a national sample of 811 adults, with a 3.5 point margin of error.

The Right-Wing Attempt To Propagandize K-12 Students

 

In a blatant attempt to play to his right-wing Republican base, Governor Abbott has announced a criminal probe into whether there is pornography in high school libraries in Texas. Real pornography doesn't exist in those school libraries, but you can bet he'll find some. That's because the definition of pornography for right-wingers is anything that doesn't agree with their view of the world (anything that doesn't promote their views on race, science, history, government, or sexuality).

They don't want to teach students to think. They want to propagandize the students into accepting the right-wing version of the world. They want a whitewashed version of history, a religious version of science, an unrealistic version of government, and a prudish version of sexuality (or nothing about it) taught.

They seem to think students are not very smart, and will just accept whatever they are told in school. They are wrong!

What they want has already been tried. In the 1950's, this same kind of propaganda was fed to students. But it only resulted in a student backlash in the 1960's. It started with the Free Speech movement, and then spread to all aspects of our society. An underground culture was born and the spread throughout society.

With the internet so easily available to almost everyone in the U.S., the effort to propagandize young people has even less a chance to succeed. The truth is available to anyone -- whether you teach it in the schools or not. And today's youth -- already more liberal than the youth of the 1950's -- are not about to return to a time when white men ruled and everyone else was a second-class citizen.

The effort to return to a society of white privilege and patriarchy is doomed to fail. This is just the dying gasp of the white patriarchy -- the final effort of a failed system to survive. 

Critical Race Theory Is Not Taught In Any U.S. K-12 School

 

The election in Virginia last Tuesday was disastrous for Democrats. There are probably many reasons why it happened. But one big reason is revealed in exit polling that asked voters what issue was most important for them. That issue, especially for white voters was EDUCATION.

Now this is not education as it has been in the past, with educational issues like class size, testing, charter schools, or school funding. No, this time it was about race and ethnicity.

Youngkin (the GOP candidate) made that clear in the final days of the campaign, when he told voters that he would ban teaching Critical Race Theory in Virginia schools on his first day in office. That will be an easy task, because Critical Race Theory is not being taught in Virginia K-12 schools and there is no plan to have it taught. The same is true in every other state -- it is not taught and never will be.

Republican candidates across the country are lying about Critical Race Theory. They have turned it into some kind of monstrous program to embarrass white children and make them ashamed. It is NOT!

What is Critical Race Theory? It is a college level course that is discussed and taught mainly in law schools. To put it simply, it is the recognition that U.S. laws and society has racism built into it, and focuses on how to legally make those laws (and society) fairer to all Americans.

Do you want laws and societal structures that are fair to everyone? Republicans don't. They have demonized Critical Race Theory to get what they want -- a whitewashed version of history. They don't want students to learn about the evils of slavery. They don't want students taught the real reason for the Civil War -- slavery. They don't want students to learn about Jim Crow laws, the Ku Klux Klan, lynchings, or the white rioters that wiped out Black communities (like in Tulsa).

In short, they don't want real history taught. They want a white racist version of history taught.

If a Republican tells you he/she will prevent the teaching of Critical Race Theory in K-12 schools, he/she is lying, and is furthering racism.

If a voter believes that Critical Race Theory is being taught in K-12 schools, that voter is stupid or racist -- probably both.

American history has many bright moments, but it also has many dark moments. Both must be taught. Failure to do that means racism will continue, and we will be doomed to repeat many of those darker moments in our history.

The Effort To Ban Books Is Back In Texas (And Elsewhere)

The effort to ban books is back in Texas. A Republican state legislator has asked all the state's schools whether they have any books on his list of "dangerous" books -- a list that contains over 800 books. It seems that the GOP is afraid that students might stumble across the truth by reading a good book, instead of just swallowing the lies they want taught. It's shameful, and schools should ignore his ignorant request.

Here are some of Karen Attiah's thoughts on the matter in The Washington Post:

“Only the very weak-minded refuse to be influenced by literature,” wrote Cassandra Clare in her novel “Clockwork Angel.” A powerful and debilitating strain of such intellectual fragility has been sweeping across red states such as mine. Texas stands at the front lines of America’s thought wars, with books increasingly the battlefield.

Last week, state Rep. Matt Krause (R-Fort Worth), chairman of the House General Investigating Committee, sent school districts a list of more than 800 books and asked that they investigate how many copies are in their classrooms or libraries, as well as the amount of money spent on them. Krause also wants the districts to identify books or content dealing with human sexuality, HIV/AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases and graphic depictions of sex.

And borrowing language from the so-called anti-critical-race-theory laws recently passed in Texas and other states, Krause asked schools to report whether they have books that could make students “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex.” Districts were given until Nov. 12 to respond.

As colder weather approaches, it’s as though Krause plans to use school books to keep us all warm this winter — at the requisite 451 degrees Fahrenheit. Given our rickety power grid, I suppose torching books might tide Texans over for a while.

On a more serious note, looking at Krause’s list, it’s hard not to conjure up images of totalitarian regimes and violent groups that have gone after books throughout history, from Nazi attacks on works considered “un-German” in 1933 to al-Qaeda destroying precious manuscripts in Timbuktu. A gander at Krause’s list reveals an almost exclusive focus on race and racism, sex and sexuality, LGBT issues, abortion and — gasp — even puberty. . . .

And as to making students uncomfortable? Many of the titles were written precisely to help developing young people become more comfortable with being and feeling different — whether it be due to their race, gender or sexuality.

For now no bonfires are planned, but really none will be necessary if teachers are scared out of introducing books into classes in the first place, which one imagines is the point of this exercise. There have already been reports of teachers pulling titles preemptively to avoid controversy. . . .

It’s not hard to read between the lines. These attacks on books come as a response to the growing power that marginalized people have demonstrated recently in our public discourse. Book-banning, like the Southern Strategy of old, is an effort to harness White fears of a new, more racially equal America.

And so another cycle turns. For as long as the GOP tries to stop new generations from learning from America’s past, we will be doomed to repeat the darkest elements of it.