Stop 'bad guys with guns' by implementing good policies

Apr 02, 2013

Tragedies involving children, such as the one at Sandy Hook Elementary School, fuel massive outrage and calls for immediate action to prevent similar atrocities. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has put forward a National Shield School Proposal which supports the placement of armed security in all schools. A new review by Gordon and Angela Crews from Marshall University in West Virginia and Catherine Burton from The Citadel in South Carolina attempts to find a balanced and unbiased view of the facts within this heated and emotional debate. Their paper, which appears in the American Journal of Criminal Justice, published by Springer, sets out what these proposals would mean to schools and offers some alternative suggestions.

Though the National Rifle Association presents a convincing argument, the authors have found that some of the evidence which they use to back their proposals is erroneous. The NRA contends that schools are not safe places for children, when they are indeed the safest places. They have stated that school violence is the "leading cause of death" of children when statistics clearly show that unintentional injury is the primary cause of death among 5-24 year olds.

Crews and his colleagues then point out that it is still not proven that actually prevent school violence. Both Columbine and Virginia Tech, where two of the most deadly school shootings occurred, already employed armed security guards. There are also the financial implications of such a scheme. These are enormous, both in terms of implementation and civil and/or criminal liability. Suggestions that volunteers carry out armed policing of schools, though cheap, only adds another layer of potential problems.

There are numerous other concerns. There is the increased chance of injury and death. Questions have already been raised about the potential for security firms involved. There is a raft of problems already documented relating to security guards in schools ranging from criminal activity to increased student detention rates. There is the not inconsequential potential for arms kept at schools to fall into the wrong hands. When there are such serious doubts about the efficacy of a proposal and the costs are so high, alternative solutions must be sought.

Two questions, which the National Rifle Association repeatedly fails to address when looking at school shootings, are whose hands the weapons were in and the ease with which they got there. Crews and his colleagues note that in the past there has been a reluctance to profile school shooters. However, there is evidence to show that in the majority of cases the assailant suffered from some type of mental health issue, dysfunctional family, problems at school, social isolation and in some instances, bullying. They suggest that it is these issues that are the root cause of these tragedies and that in order to prevent school violence, society must address troubled youth, along with their ease of access to weapons.

The authors conclude: "Preventing school violence does not have to be expensive. All it takes is preventing the development of young men and women into perpetrators of school violence, and putting armed guards at fortified schools will not do this...It just requires someone to pay attention, to listen and to care, which really cost nothing." Their assertion is given backing by teachers in California, sixty-seven percent of who believe that hiring a counselor would be more effective at preventing than hiring a police officer.

Explore further: New 'Surveyman' software promises to revolutionize survey design and accuracy

More information: Crews GA, Crews AD and Burton CE (2013). The only thing that stops a guy with a bad policy is a guy with a good policy: an examination of the NRA's "National School Shield" Proposal. American Journal of Criminal Justice DOI 10.1007/s12103-013-9202-x

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

School shootings: What we know and what we can do

Dec 19, 2012

Since the early 1970s school shootings at American elementary, secondary and higher education institutions have been a painful reality for American society. After each incident – like the recent attack in Newtown, CT – ...

Zero tolerance ineffective in schools, study finds

May 10, 2010

Zero tolerance policy in schools - which can mandate automatic punishment for weapons, drugs, profanity and various forms of disruptive behavior - is failing to make students feel safe, contends a new study by two Michigan ...

Recommended for you

World population likely to peak by 2070

Oct 23, 2014

World population will likely peak at around 9.4 billion around 2070 and then decline to around 9 billion by 2100, according to new population projections from IIASA researchers, published in a new book, World Population and ...

Bullying in schools is still prevalent, national report says

Oct 23, 2014

Despite a dramatic increase in public awareness and anti-bullying legislation nationwide, the prevalence of bullying is still one of the most pressing issues facing our nation's youth, according to a report by researchers ...

Study examines effects of credentialing, personalization

Oct 23, 2014

Chris Gamrat, a doctoral student in learning, design and technology, recently had his study—completed alongside Heather Zimmerman, associate professor of education; Jaclyn Dudek, a doctoral student studying learning, design ...

User comments : 7

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rfw
2.2 / 5 (10) Apr 02, 2013
The higher the density of guns, the more people are killed or injured. The Guns That Do Not Exist Cannot Be Used To Kill People.
Scarlett
1.4 / 5 (9) Apr 02, 2013
A school is the safest place for a kid?! Uh... sure, Mr Science Dude: Sure. (How did you arrive at that hypothesis, exactly..?)

You guys are usually great, but you should stick to science stuff.
LariAnn
2.1 / 5 (7) Apr 02, 2013
I have no doubt that mental health issues must be addressed before any hope of diminishing violence (including violence involving guns) can emerge. Unfortunately, many, if not most, issues stem from conditions at home, where law enforcement has no jurisdiction unless a crime is committed (when it is too late). Criminalizing law-abiding citizens won't do anything except make it easier for criminals to rob and kill using illegal guns and other weapons. An unarmed populace is very low-hanging fruit for criminals.
crimedoc
5 / 5 (4) Apr 02, 2013
A school is the safest place for a kid?! Uh... sure, Mr Science Dude: Sure. (How did you arrive at that hypothesis, exactly..?)

You guys are usually great, but you should stick to science stuff.


Scarlett,
This data comes from the National Center for Injury Prevention & Control (2012). Since 1992, less than 2% of all youth violent deaths have occurred at school (meaning 98% occurred away from school), and other violent crime rates (rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault) away from school are higher than rates at school. Overall, students are safest at school than away from it.
Lurker2358
1.7 / 5 (6) Apr 02, 2013
However, there is evidence to show that in the majority of cases the assailant suffered from some type of mental health issue, dysfunctional family, problems at school, social isolation and in some instances, bullying


That's a meaningless fact, since all the criminals are "diagnosed" with a mental health issue after the fact by the defense attorney (by default) through a paid "mental health professional".

It works like this.

1, Evil bastard, but otherwise normal, plots a murder spree.

2, Evil bastard commits the murder spree.

3, Evil bastard is arrested and diagnosed with a mental defect.

4, Because people cannot face the fact that evil is a choice, they then blame the Evil Bastard's actions on the post-hoc diagnosis of a mental defect.

5, Thus Evil Murdering Bastards are not held accountable for their evil acts.
VendicarE
3 / 5 (6) Apr 02, 2013
The NRA is an organization that is in business to tell lies.

Just like every other Conservative "think" tank.

It is long past overdue to put some bullets into the brains of the NRA directors.
crimedoc
5 / 5 (1) Apr 02, 2013
That's a meaningless fact, since all the criminals are "diagnosed" with a mental health issue after the fact by the defense attorney (by default) through a paid "mental health professional".


Lurker,
Some states allow "not guilty by reason of insanity," (NGRI)some allow "guilty but mentally ill" (GBMI) and some do not allow either. It is entirely wrong to say that "all criminals are diagnosed with a mental health issues." In fact, research indicates that these defenses are used in less than 1% of felony cases and is usually unsuccessful. GBMI is equivalent to a conviction and just reduces (but does not excuse) culpability.