When we are attacked, with words, fits, automatic weapons or bombs, we need to defend ourselves. Ordinarily I’m a peacenik and my first response to an attack is to search for a resolution to the conflict or try to mediate. But one has to survive to engage with the attacker for that strategy to work. Sometimes a rigorous defense followed by a counter attack is necessary. There has been much debate since the Feb. 14th Florida high school shooting concerning both prevention and immediate emergency response. Turning schools into barricaded, armed fortresses is a plan that marks one end of the spectrum. Establishing better mental health monitoring (pro, con) and restorative justice systems holds down the other end.
This morning I came across this suggestion: Arming schools with buckets of rocks in each classroom. While this idea may seem ludicrous at first it deserves a second look before we abandon it. Here are some pros and cons that have occurred to me.
Pros
- Being hit by rocks may actually work to deter a shooter. At the very least it will be distracting
- The defenders have a non-leathal action to take
- Keeping rocks around is less dangerous than keeping guns
- Confronting an attacker provides the threatened with a sense of effectiveness
- Every child can throw a rock, some may even hit a disarming or disabling target
- Rock throwers can surround the shooter increasing the likelihood of taking him/her down.
Cons
- To be in a position to throw a rock exposes the thrower to the shooter
- The thrower has to be relatively close to the shooter to be effective
- One bucket of rocks is probably not enough
- The rocks are still potential weapons that violent students could use against each other or school faculty or staff.
My thoughts are certainly not the last word on this subject and I’d like to hear what you think about it. My purpose in writing this blog is to explore radical and unusual ideas so please have at it.
Just checking to see if “comments” really works. Now it’s your turn.