The Parkland High School shooting was without a doubt a horrific event that should concern everyone.
What I had hoped to see in the aftermath of this incident was a thorough investigation, analysis and presentation of the facts; and an opportunity for parents, students, law enforcement, school administrators and political leaders to rationally discuss the findings and potential solutions.
Unfortunately, my hopes were short lived. While the National School Walkout was widely presented as a non-political event that was organically driven by students who wanted to draw attention to their concerns about gun violence in schools, it was actually organized nationally by a political advocacy group for progressive causes and political candidates, and widely publicized on a mobilization platform for progressive activists that openly states that it is “dedicated to building power for the progressive movement,” and “only works with progressives.”
Additionally, some of the purported facts that have been circulated to gain support, i.e. that there have been 18 school shootings since the beginning of 2018 have not been accurate. While even one school shooting is one too many, a simple Google search would reveal that the Washington Post dismissed this figure because the organization that provided it included incidents like a suicide outside an elementary school that had been closed for seven months.
Examining this situation further, the solution for action being promulgated by this movement was immediately decided upon without discussion or analysis of the facts, and questioning this approach or choosing to express any other opinion has met stiff resistance.
For example, Kyle Kashov, a 16-year-old Parkland student who was present during the shooting has expressed a desire for a balanced solution that takes into account other significant factors that have come to light about the incident besides the type of weapon used, but he and like-minded students have been largely marginalized.
In some cases, asking questions or having a different opinion has even had consequences.
For example, a California high school teacher was placed on administrative leave after hosting a debate in her social studies class about the walkout’s broader implications, and a Minnesota high school student who peacefully displayed a sign during the walkout paying tribute to the victims and also expressing support for the second amendment was threatened with arrest and escorted off school property.
Demonization has also been prevalent, where student activists like David Hogg have accused anyone who is not completely aligned with this movement of having blood on their hands.
Even students that preferred to remain silent and not participate were placed in an awkward situation in front of their peers, where they risked coming across as ambivalent about the issue and insensitive to the victims.
For example, students in our district received no instruction during the walkout, and were required to wait in specially designated areas as if they were in detention.
Meanwhile parents, with no choice in the matter, essentially provided the funding through our tax dollars to have our kids either be used as partisan political activists by outside interests, or sit in a room doing nothing.
This should be a red line for every parent, no matter what their political inclinations are and what opinions they have about solving this problem. Let’s be honest—now that the precedent has been set the same groups will want to leverage our students in the future for other political purposes, and opposing groups will justifiably want equal time and level accusations of a double standard if they don’t get it.
This will result in endless turmoil and polarization in our schools, and loss of instructional time. We owe our kids better than this.
Let’s keep our focus on providing them with a quality education, while making sure that we are doing all that we can to effectively ensure their safety.
— Bill Varnavas, West Windsor
