This sort of thing makes me angry, and sick at heart, because it’s vile, and unnecessary. Via Fox News: 

Authorities in Ohio are searching for a man who is suspected of stabbing a 7-year-old girl on a school playground during recess Friday, leaving her seriously injured.

Dayton police said a 2nd-grade student was stabbed by a stranger while playing on the swings at the World of Wonder school. According to WDTN-TV, the girl remains in critical condition at Dayton Children’s Hospital.

Police describe the attacker as a black male between the ages of 18 and 20 and a little less than 6 feet tall, wearing athletic shorts and a beige or green sweatshirt over an orange shirt.

Charmine Blunt, a parent of one of the students at the school, said she was waiting inside the gym when she heard yelling and screaming outside.

‘All of the sudden we just hear the kids screaming and running,’ Blunt said. ‘We were like what’s going on what’s going on. And they said a little girl got stabbed so we all run out here to see what’s going on and it was a guy with some blue shorts on.



This school, like almost all in America, was surely a victim disarmament zone, a place where armed sociopaths can be sure they’ll face little or no resistance. This is particularly true of elementary schools. Almost all teachers are women, and virtually none of these schools have a full-time school resource officer. Those few that do have one–a uniformed, credentialed police officer–normally share that officer with many other elementary schools. They see them once a week for a few hours at a time, if that often.

Why don’t they have full time cops? They don’t need them. Resource officers tend to be assigned to high schools where they function more or less as small town cops, handling all of the law enforcement functions necessary in such places. The odds that an armed police officer would be present at any elementary school when a murderer arrives to kill children is tiny indeed. Ask the staff at the World of Wonder School about that. If they had not thought of it in the past, they are now.

Many neighbors in the area told WDTN-TV they are in shock over the stabbing.

‘I can’t even imagine someone coming on the school ground just stabbing a kid a 2nd grader,’ Cassandra Beamon said. ‘That blows me away.

And that too is part of the problem. Most people cannot imagine such things, and that includes teachers and school administrators. Sadly, some of the latter can, but they tend to be more concerned with upholding the purity of progressive ideology than saving the lives of children.

“Oh,” you say, “that’s unfair.” No it’s not. What rational person, particularly one responsible for the very lives of children, can’t foresee this kind of attack? And if they can, and do nothing effective, what’s their excuse? How are they different from the utterly clueless, or from those whose ideology is more important than lives?

Granted, attacks on schools by outsiders, despite media hyperbole, remain thankfully rare. However, the odds are always against someone, and there is no reason–none–why any child at any school, anywhere, cannot be the victim of an attack, just as the 7-year-old girl was attacked.

Dayton Public Schools spokesman David Lawrence said the school took immediate action to protect other students in the vicinity of the attack.

“The school was immediately placed on lock-down.’ Lawrence said. ‘Safety and security personnel immediately reacted from our other surrounding schools and were on site to help support.

It seems that a security guard who is “usually” at that school wasn’t, and several guards from a high school two blocks away rushed over–after the attack. This was Lawrence’s explanation of the bold steps taken after the damage was done. The article does not explain whether any of these “security guards” were armed.

The article also notes there is no apparent motive. Hmm. I can think of a few. This could be an attempted revenge killing relating to the drug trade. It could also be an attempted kidnapping by a pedophile that went wrong. It could also be a madman intent on killing children simply because he wanted to kill children. It is not likely to be an attack of the kind so often publicized, and notice that no gun was involved. It could also be a terrorist attack, though if so, the media isn’t reporting the possibility. Expect, however, this incident to spin up the victim disarmament publicity machine.

I have often written about the national disgrace of keeping schools shooting galleries for madmen. Particularly in a time when the President of the US is actively aiding terrorists and terrorist states, and when we have already suffered multiple attacks on American soil. Terrorist attacks, however, are not the only danger teachers and students face in school. Teachers often face violence at the hands of their students, and sometimes, as in the case of Coleen Ritzer, they are raped, mutilated and murdered. We have lost teachers who, unarmed, heroically and futilely tried to protect their students and stop armed killers. And of course, we have lost children.

Schools have, for the most part, implemented only ineffective, feel-good measures, as I noted in the first of a multi-part series on the issue: School Attacks: Actual Safety v Feeling Safe.  Run, hide, lock doors, are the school safety tools of the day. Where, pray tell, on that playground, could that little girl run? Where could she hide? Behind which door could she barricade herself?

Modern School Killer Repellent credit:

Modern School Killer Repellent

Oh, but that’s not all! When those three methods fail, children should attack armed killers in a kiddie swarm! A middle school in Alabama actually thought teachers should store canned goods in their classrooms, and in the event of an attack, issue them to kids, who would throw them at their armed attacker(s).  I thought the article was an Onion parody. It wasn’t.

Obviously, if everything else has gone to hell, attacking a killer rather than cowering and waiting to be slaughtered is certainly the more moral choice, but why in God’s name should teachers and little children be left with only that pathetic option?

“I’m terribly sorry, Mrs. Smith, that Suzy was slaughtered yesterday, but we did provide canned corn for her to throw, and I’m sure you’ll be comforted by the knowledge we are well trained in running, hiding, locking doors and throwing canned corn. Unfortunately, the killer had a gun, so…”

It is hard for rational people to imagine, but school administrators–for the most part–would rather allow children to die than allow teachers and other qualified, willing, staff, to carry concealed handguns. Their adherence to progressive ideology is more powerful and meaningful to them than the lives of those they are charged to protect and preserve. Fortunately, the odds are generally on their side. They can smugly denigrate those concerned for the lives of children, express faux outrage at the very idea of the law abiding and courageous carrying guns on campus, and downplay the threat. Most of the time, they’ll be fortunate and they can claim the feckless policies that let them feel safe are far better than actually being safe.

Am I being too cruel? I’ve no doubt many of these people really do believe they’re doing the right thing. They really do think they’re protecting children. They really believe that being unarmed and unprotected, and advertising that fact with signs and smug pronouncements of progressive purity is actually accomplishing something. I know many of these people think this way.

How is it such people have any responsibility for children?

I’ve often written this; I can’t write it often enough: one simple, inexpensive or free policy will not only deter attacks, but save lives when they occur. Allow willing staff to carry concealed handguns; it can and will save lives.

The administrative mind tends to want to micro-manage, to maintain control over everything and everyone. Some go about it half way, thinking only one or two people in a school might be armed, or that a gun or two might be locked up in a principal’s safe. The problem is that murderers don’t play by preconceived scenarios dreamed up by people who have no experience with actual violence.

Of what good is the most effective handgun in the world if it’s locked up in a principal’s safe and unloaded when an attacker comes through the front doors of the school? What good will a handgun locked in a teacher’s desk drawer be when she is confronted in a hallway, or at a bus stop, or in a bathroom, as Coleen Ritzer was? And what good will a gun at home in a teacher’s gun safe be when a madman walks onto a playground determined to kill a child?

That 7-year-old girl had no chance. Her teachers had no chance. That particular school will surely have a few “security guards” prominently displayed for the remainder of this school year, but when school opens in the fall, and people’s attention has moved on to new outrages, every child will be no less vulnerable than they were the day a knife was plunged into the body of that little girl. This is the state of school security virtually everywhere in America, circa 2016.

The school in Dayton locked its doors, after the girl was nearly killed. What they should do is ask and correctly answer one all-important question: when all else–run and hide policies, the stockpiling of canned goods, or any other “feel safe” ideology–has failed, and an armed criminal arrives to murder children and staff, what is a school prepared and able to do, then and there, to save lives?

Unless a school has teachers and staff ready, then and there, to use deadly force to save lives, they will be prepared and able to do exactly what that school in Dayton, Ohio was prepared to do: watch children die and lock the doors thereafter.