High School Football—A Terrorist Threat

By Kellene Bishop, Women of Caliber

Between the fall of 1997 and the spring of 2002, FIFTY-THREE high school students were KILLED playing high school football. (National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research, Feb. 2001) The lives of the spectators and the fellow students of these players will never be the same. And I want something done to make sure that such needless deaths never happen again. Fifty-three deaths! Where is the outrage?! Where’s 20/20 or 60 Minutes when you really need them to shed light on a problem? Why can’t we have Football Free Zones?! Something must be done to STOP these needless football playing deaths. In fact, I think that the schools should all adopt a strict “no play zone” policy. Someone could poke an eye out with one of those footballs, or choke on it. A teacher could be emotionally and physically harmed for life if a student hit them with a football! If you see someone drawing a picture of a football, I don’t care if it’s a fifth grader in St. Petersburg, FL, that person should be arrested. If a drawing of a football is used at school, even if it’s two eight-year olds, they should be have criminal charges filed against them and be considered a terrorist threat. If a child is caught pretending to throw a football, they should be charged with felonious assault. Take down those pictures of football players and coaches! Stop glorifying them. These types of activities KILL KIDS! And if they get caught with a Nerf ball on school property—that’s just unacceptable. Such a criminal should be jailed in Fort Meyers, FL—I don’t care if they ARE a National Merit Scholar. There should be an aggressive and zero tolerance policy to this kind of extreme in order to ensure that no such football players are ever killed playing football again. In fact, this problem is so pervasive, I demand that the National Education Association offer a FREE $150,000 insurance policy to be paid in the event that a teacher ever dies from a football incident.

No. I haven’t lost my mind. “They” have lost theirs. And the previous paragraph will point out to you just how extremely off-base they are.

Between the fall of 1997 and the spring of 2002, 32 students were killed by an incident involving a gun at an elementary or secondary school. (National School Safety Center) This total includes gang-related activities, crimes committed on school properties (even after hours), shooting accidents, as well as the highly publicized school shooting incidences. During this same period of time there were over 128 million children enrolled in such schools. This equates to 1 death per 4 million students.

During this same research period, four teachers were shot and killed at these same types of schools. (National School Safety Center) That equivocates to 1 teacher shot and killed per 3.3 million teachers.

It’s interesting to note that in 2001, that yes, The National Education Association did indeed offer all of its members a FREE $150,000 death policy, payable only under such circumstances. (San Diego Union-Tribune, July 28, 2001) Hmmm… Of course it was free. The likelihood of it happening is 1 in 3.3 million! But you can bet that the press didn’t give you those statistics, did they?

Why have they done so much to attempt to curb the deaths of children from school shootings, but have done nothing to alert them to a situation which takes the lives of more children than “school shootings” do? We have gun free zones to avoid school shootings, why don’t we have “football free zones” as well? The sickening aspect is just how extreme the schools have gone to punish the very non-infractions that I used to illustrate my point in the first paragraph.
A fifth-grade in St. Petersburg, FL was indeed arrested for drawing a picture of “weapons.”
A National Merit Scholar student was jailed in Ft. Meyers, FL because a dull kitchen knife was found under her car seat—it was dropped while her family was moving from one apartment to another.
Two eight-year olds had criminal charges filed against them and were identified as “terrorist threats” in Irvington, New Jersey for playing cops and robbers with a paper gun.
A seven-year old was charged with three counts of felonious assault for pointing a toy gun at three other children during recess in Ann Arbor, Michigan. (Ann Arbor News 2)
Elementary students throughout Texas and Louisiana have been suspended for pointing pencils and saying “pow” and have forbidden the children from drawing pictures of soldiers.
School libraries throughout the U.S. have even removed references to the military.
See: http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id-95000486, and Chicago Sun-Times, June 20, 2001, and NBC Saturday Today, NBC News Transcripts, May 26, 2002

Instead of criminalizing children for being children, schools should participate in sound measures of gun safety education and the U.S. Constitutional Amendments. No wait. Sorry. I must have left the earth for a moment there to even make such a suggestion. I forgot that education in schools is reserved for gay marriages, abortion, and the use of contraceptives.

Any death of a child, young or teen, is tragic. For those who have lost a child to ANY death is unacceptable, of course. Emotionally speaking, I feel that homicide is an even more difficult death to accept in these cases. Any death or harm of a child that can logically be prevented, should indeed be prevented. I’m a huge advocate of seat belts, car seats, and adults not exposing their children to second-hand smoke. To me, these methods pass the “stupid test” in my book. Meaning, they are just plain stupid NOT to employ. And while seat belts and car seats may have been known to even cause the occasional death of a child, but they are logical. However, the media harping on school shootings as if they are the ultimate killer of the children in our world is mal-practice in its truest sense. It’s fear-mongering. It’s a dissemination of false information and it prevents responsible parents from focusing on the true dangers in our midst.

Conservatively speaking 2,000 of our nations children are sexually assaulted by illegal immigrants—EVERY year, and yet we can’t seem to instill an “illegal immigrant free zone” in our nation. (http://www.newswithviews.com/Kouri/jim94.htm)

On average, over 1,700 children die every year as the result of a drunk driver, and yet mandatory accountability for such actions is minimalistic and seriously flawed. (http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html)

Four percent of all pregnant women use illicit drugs and extreme amounts of alcohol, and yet there is absolutely no accountability for such actions. (http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1169.asp)

These are just a few examples of genuine threats to our children. Fight the real enemy, folks, not a fictitious enemy that the media and some government officials perpetuate in order to accomplish other horrible agendas.

May you be victorious in your REAL battles.

Kellene

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.
You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Are You a “Gun Free Zone”?

By Kellene Bishop

While it’s one thing for it to be a federal offense for carrying a firearm into a “gun free zone”, it’s a completely different situation for you to impose such a state upon yourself. There are dire consequences in doing so. And yet the MAJORITY of the women that I speak with who have a concealed firearm permit do not carry a firearm on their person, or even in their purse. As such they are sentencing themselves to the same exposure that a “gun free zone” does to citizens involved in public shootings. While carrying a firearm indeed needs to be a confident proactive decision, too many avoid carrying their firearm on their person for reasons lacking in rationale and substance.

Let’s ask this question. If you were a criminal intent on shooting people, or robbing a place with a firearm, where would you NOT want to go? What would be the most stupid place or area you could attempt to hold up? Let’s see… The Pentagon. A police station. A military base. A Texas rodeo. A donut shop in New York (because that’s where a lot of police hang out – j/k) or a pawn shop in Utah—way too many guns there and people with guns. Yup. I haven’t heard of any criminals trying to hold up the Federal Reserve or Fort Knox in a hundred years. I wonder why that is? Oh yeah, there might actually be GUNS there and people who know how to use them. Indeed, with the exception of a little tongue in cheek humor, these places would be the most risky for a criminal to infiltrate as a result of the harm that he would most assuredly face. And since such criminals are cowards of prey, not predators, they would not be inclined to expose themselves to such a risk.

Now, let’s ask this question. If you were a criminal intent on killing people, where would you go to avoid the majority of risk with the most possible damage? The post office? A school? A church gathering? Blockbusters or McDonalds? (Both opposed to their customers being armed with the ability to protect themselves). And exactly why is that? Because a criminal knows that there are no lawful firearms in these places. Instead, while there may be concealed firearm permit holders, such holders are statistically very law abiding individuals. So, no guns. Just law abiding citizens. As a result of this rationale, what have we seen parading on our televisions as of late? Shootings taking place in “gun free zones.” In fact, the whole nation watched the consequences of a U.S. ship which was barred from having any lawful guns on it. (Thank goodness the captain and pirates were actually off of that ship when the pirates were shot, otherwise an explosion or something dangerous could have occurred—*sarcasm intended*) Seriously. Think for a moment of the multiple victim shootings in “gun free zones” you’ve been exposed to lately.

Riverside, CA—Roman Catholic Retreat—no guns allowed. 2 killed, many wounded at the hands of one gunman
Oakland, CA—No firearm permits issued without insurmountable exceptions. 4 police officers dead at the hands of one gunman.
Detroit, Michigan—Michigan College—gun free zone. 2 dead at the hands of one gunman.
Blacksburg, VA—Virginia Tech—gun free zone. 33 dead at the hands on one gunman.
Colorado Springs, CO—New Life Church—a gun free zone, with the exception of armed security officers who are screened members of the church, one of which stopped the killer with her own gun. 3 were killed that day by a man who was armed with 2 firearms and over a thousand rounds of ammunition.

As “STUPID” as criminals are, do you think that they are not aware of the fact that the likelihood of a WOMAN being armed and able to defend herself is less than 1%?? That’s right. They instinctively see women as a perpetually open season “gun free zone.” No wonder they see women as targets, as easily accessible as a church, school, or federal building. Is that really acceptable to you? And besides, in the name of fashion, for crying out loud… Does a big fat neon bull's-eye on your back compliment any of the fashionable accessories and clothing you adorn yourself with everyday? Contrary to a popular movie title, “death” does not look good on anyone.

Now, here’s a compelling 3-minute video to make you think a little deeper about this issue.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4069761537893819675

My point? So-called “Gun Free Zones” don’t do much to protect anyone from criminals. So why would you insist on imposing a “gun free zone” in the sanctity of your own home or in and around yourself? How about doing more with that concealed firearm permit than just having it in your wallet? How about getting the training and confidence that you need to actually start carrying a firearm on your person and being ready for any possibility in which you would need to defend yourself, your family, or members of your community?

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.
You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Children and Guns—Part II

This is part of a four-part blog series addressing Children and Guns. Part I – want to ensure your kid never commits a crime? Give him a gun. Part II addresses myths of gun safety – what you must know in order to truly protect your children. Part III addresses when it is safe to educate your child on firearms. Part IV explores what’s really responsible for the death of our nation’s children. If you enjoy what you read, please comment and share on your blog or Twitter. Thank you.

The Myth of Gun Safety

By Kellene Bishop

Wow! Our first installment in this series reaped the most feedback, e-mails, and responses than all of our other posts from Women of Caliber. I hope that you will find this installment at least as equally beneficial.

In this piece I’m specifically addressing real gun safety. I’m referring to the avoidance of accidents, and putting the safety of guns around children in its proper perspective. I’ve read far too many statistics which inflate the danger of guns around children. My objection to this is not only that it’s false information, but that such information is the foundation for many women who would otherwise elect to possess a firearm and the accompanying self-defense skills. So let’s provide the real facts so that we can make an educated decision, shall we?

Myth #1: “Children are constantly killed by accidental gun usage.”

The fact of the matter is that the reason why the media highlights the deaths of children via gun accidents is because they happen so rarely. Obviously, it’s much more headline worthy when an innocent child is killed via a gun than a headline reading that a child is 6 times more likely to die in a car wreck than by a gun. In fact, the likelihood of children dying via a car wreck is 14.5 times more likely than from a gun.

There are approximately 300,000,000 guns owned legally by 94 million people in the U.S. There are approximately 40 million children in America. In 1999, the last year for which a detailed breakdown was available, 31 children younger than age 10 died from accidental shootings. The Center for Disease Control only noted 4 children under the age of 10 dying from accidental gun deaths. With 300 million guns and 40 million children, you would think that there would be a lot more deaths if the firearms in our homes were as dangerous as the media makes them out to be.

Based on statistics in the same year, roughly 550 children ages 0-14 were run over by cars, 800 drowned, 660 were burned to death in fires, and 1,850 died inside cars. Most of the 800 drowned were as a result of unattended children in a swimming pool, 93 drowned in bathtubs, and 36 died in 5-gallon buckets, yet we have no "mothers against bathtubs, buckets and swimming pools" organizations to speak of.

Eight times as many children die from non-gun violence acts than from gun crimes. (Kids and Guns, 2000, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquincy Prevention)

82% of homicides against children age 13 and under were committed without a gun. (1997, FBI Uniform Crime Statistics)

While less than 0.1% of all deaths for children between the ages 0-14 are from firearms, 0.6% are from motor vehicles, 5.3% are from being struck in beatings or bludgeoning, 6% from poisoning, and 42.6% from suffocation. (1997 National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics Report)

Why aren’t more children dying at the villainous hands of 94 million gun owners throughout all of America? Because, with few exceptions, law-abiding gun owners are conscientious of educating children on gun safety and likewise practice it themselves. And yet so many parents, and particularly women, relinquish their freedoms to defend themselves based on the warped reality spoon-fed to them by the media.

While one would think that enough has been said about the exaggerated accidents involving children and guns, I still feel it’s necessary to address this next myth.

Myth #2: “If I don’t have a gun, my children are safer and better protected.”

This concern is falsely founded for so many reasons. For starters, if you are not familiar with the workings of a firearm, how are you able to appropriately stop an accident from happening? Suppose you walk in on your child who’s holding a firearm in his hands. What do you do? Do you grab it from him? Do you instruct him to put it down? HOW do you grab it? HOW would you instruct him to put it down? Do you know when a firearm’s safety is actually engaged on every possible gun your child could get their hands on? Do you know the proper manner to TAKE a firearm from an unauthorized child? Why should you NOT holler at the child, even to “freeze” and put the gun down? If you don’t know the answers to these questions then you could actually CAUSE a firearm accident by simply trying to prevent one. (I’ll answer these questions specifically in a further post as the instructions for such an instance are an entirely separate piece.) Additionally, is a child’s exposure to a gun solely relegated to your own home? Not teaching your child (and yourself) about firearms doesn’t protect them, it exposes them.
If they don’t know what a gun really is, then how are they supposed to respect its deadly power or to even be an influence among their less educated friends who may possess a firearm in their presence? Parents who choose to ignore the reality of a firearm in the midst of their children only promote a greater percentage of danger to them.

If you are not in favor of possessing a firearm yourself and teaching the accompanying rules with such a responsibility, then at least teach your child these 4 simple rules when they come in contact with a gun.

STOP!
Don't Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.

(Eddie Eagle Education Program sponsored by the NRA)

When the only exposure to guns that children have is on video games—where they “kill” people who get right back up to play some more—you are increasing the chance of them or their friends being injured in a gun accident whether you possess one or not.

Now, let’s address the last myth. I warn you in advance, this is going to get a bit dicey as it will address a topic that most parents do not want to even think about.

Myth # 3: “Waiting until my children are grown so that they can make their own decision on using a firearm is the best policy.”

First of all, let me ask you this question, when has your child EVER waited according to your time-frame to do anything? They grow up too fast, date far too soon, get married when you swear they are still only 8-years-old, and make you a grandparent while you’re still feeling in your prime. So let’s debunk the myth that they will actually wait until YOU are ready before deciding for themselves about firearm usage. The best thing you can do is to give them proper knowledge and education early on so that when they do make that unprecedented decision for themselves, they do it fully informed.

We communicate regularly with a lot of single moms on the topic of gun ownership so I’m going to create this scenario specifically for you, Super Moms.

Suppose a criminal enters your home just as you’re about to put your 3 children down for bed. He’s got a knife and he’s holding it at you and making vile threats against you if you don’t give him money. He’s also made it clear that he intends to fiercely violate your virtue in the presence of your children. Sounds a bit melodramatic, you may think, but unfortunately this is exactly the situation that numerous children have faced throughout the nation (See examples below). Of course as a mother you don’t want to ever have to think about your child needing to defend your life with a gun. That’s a natural instinct. But if this same scenario is thought out rationally, think about the alternative. Would you rather that your children have to witness a heinous attack on their mother, then her death, and perhaps even be subjected to more violence to themselves afterwards? That’s obviously an even more disturbing thought.

So what do you do? You train your child not to be a victim and to handle a firearm properly. Why a firearm? Because out of all of the championship karate matches I’ve ever been to, I have yet to see a “power pint” who is truly capable of kicking the butt of a drug-enraged criminal intent on causing death and mayhem.

If you do not prepare them mentally for such a situation now, they won’t be ready if such a horrific event does occur and you’ll risk more than one life being lost. By preparing them for such an instance you are NOT emotionally scarring them. You are preparing them to win with the best possible situation. You’re not treating them to bully others. You’re treating them to heroically defend the lives of those around them. Such a mental fostering has a much more powerful effect on their lives than fearfully and helplessly reacting to a crisis. If they don’t decide when they are young, they may not be able to make a decision when someone’s life depends on it.

See:
Boy shoots home invader http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/308864

Son uses shotgun to defend mother against armed home invader http://www.cbs12.com/news/intruder_4709600___article.html/home_alleged.html

17-year-old disarms armed robber and shoots him saving his mother http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2007/06/17-year-old-disarms-shoots-robber.html

Bank robbery and hostage situation thwarted by a teenager in 1915
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070702_1_A4_Kingo54280&breadcrumb=state

17-year-old thwarts home robbery with shotgun http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/khou061228_ac_crosbyshooting.547846d3.html

In closing, I want to reiterate that the maximum way to ensure your children are safe is to be an involved parent. We can’t control what they are exposed to, but we can have a great influence in what happens when they are exposed. While I’m fully aware that parts of this article are quite uncomfortable to consider, I believe that even putting yourself mentally “there” goes a long way to assist you in your progress to be fully capable to defend yourself and your loved ones. I simply don’t want you to NOT make that decision out of misguided information fed to you by the media. As I’ve said before, I respect individuals who elect not to possess a firearm, so long as that decision is based on sound knowledge. I hope this piece has assisted you in making wise decisions regarding your own self-defense as well as that of your children.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved. You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

If a violent criminal has broken in to your home…who’s his first target?

There are a handful of common reasons why women do not proactively learn how to defend themselves either physically or with a firearm. But I have found that most of these reasons can be resolved with education. In today’s article I wanted to give my fellow women some useful food for thought.

Suppose you have a competent husband. He works out. He’s fit. He’s conscious of his surroundings, and perhaps he even is familiar with the proper use of a handgun for self-defense purposes. Let’s even add to the mix that you also have a few children as well who have been taught how to safely live in an environment aware of self-defense. Thus you may have a sense that all is well.

Now, let’s suppose that the unthinkable occurs and a violent criminal has broken into your home. And we’ll even assume that you “got lucky” and your husband is home when the invasion occurs. Who do you think a strategic criminal would target first in order to get his demands met? Your husband, because he’s the strongest threat? No. That would be an incorrect assumption. The criminal would go after you, the wife and mother, first because you are perceived as being the weakest yet the greatest asset. Think about it. What would your husband do in exchange for your life? What would your children do if “Mommy” was being threatened with unspeakable violence? In this instance, your lack of skill and knowledge is actually a dangerous liability to the rest of your family.

This situation could be significantly different if you merely appeared to be the weakest and yet were able to fully protect and defend yourself and your family.

That was a married woman example. Let’s play this out in a single mom situation. The criminal may go after you as you are perceived to be the only viable threat. Or the criminal could go after your children in order to manipulate your actions. Either way, your unquestionable will to protect your children is simply not enough to save them. You must back up that will with knowledge and skill. Otherwise you will still be a liability to your children or anyone else you love and care for.

So how do you defend yourself? While there are many defensive alternatives that can be considered, consider this. A firearm operated safely and with expertise is the ultimate equalizer between a woman and her would-be attacker. If an attacker is under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or rage the proverbial karate chop is not likely to save your life and to end the altercation. You need real stopping powers against such mind and body numbing substances in order to truly bring the altercation to stop and ensure you and your family’s safety.

In today’s society where criminal activity seems to know no bounds, it’s naïve of us women to think that someone else will save us. The police can’t stop every attack from ever happening. Our husbands or significant others won’t always be there to protect us. We will not be able to ward off an intruder solely by our motherly lioness instincts. These instincts may provide us with adrenaline and determination, but unless they are backed up with applicable and practical skill such instincts may only bring us more harm.

Here’s the good news. No, you do not need to train countless hours to have this kind of expertise. And no, you do not need to shrink from your femininity in order to be capable of protecting yourself. There is a proprietary technique available that will ensure that you hit only what you’re aiming at, and to do so expeditiously before the encounter escalates to an impossible situation.

For more information, go to http://www.womenofcaliber.com/

Here’s to your safety and peace.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved. You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.