So who is going to scrutinise the person with upper hand?

In the wake of a mass shooting case at a high school in Florida, US president Donald Trump suggested that teachers should be armed. English-language media outlets reported it widely but I did not really read the details, for the idea was too funny.

Some Hong Kong Cantonese talk shows also discussed about the idea. Basically it was said that teachers should be armed, so that they could defend their students when outsiders intruded the school and are shooting around. Or when any student shoots around. So, what if the teachers themselves go crazy and start shooting? In that case, the headmaster / principal should be armed. 

And so, what if the headmaster goes out of his or her mind and starts shooting randomly? There should be armed police officers guarding around the school area all the time. And so, who should make sure the police are not trigger-happy officers?

The questions keep looping around themselves and the problem won’t be solved so long as gun problems in US prevail.

It is equivalent to a family. When the mother is handed a club, so that she could beat the kids up just in case they go raging, the father has to be given a bigger club so that he could stop his wife when she goes nuts. The grandfather / senior man next door has to be given an MLB baseball bat – so that he could storm into the house – just in case the husband goes crazy and starts bashing his wife and kids. But who is going to monitor the grandfather / senior man next door?

The problem starts from violence itself. No greater violence is going to stop violence; reducing and doing away with violence in the first place does.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *