Schoolhouse-to-Jailhouse

For this analysis, I chose to read a post from a conservative blog to force me to be more open-minded and think more critically. Until now I had never read a piece from Ann Coulter, and after reading "RACIAL QUOTAS KILL KIDS" I now know why. A conservative social and political commentator, Ms. Coulter uses her platform to incite the conservative masses. “Quotas” is a blog post aimed to look at the Parkland Shooting, and to answer the ever-pressing question of ‘whose fault is it?’  

For Coulter the answer is simple: former President Barack Obama.

Coulter claims the decision to prevent “school-to-prison pipeline” across the country in public schools aided Nikolas Cruz in purchasing the firearms used to carry out the massacre in February. Her evidence? The Obama administration used Broward County, Florida as an initial charter program. The “schoolhouse-to-jailhouse” prevention program, or PROMISE program, was initially designed to keep disciplinary action from remaining on students’ permanent records. The idea behind it, from my understanding, is to give kids a chance at a clean slate, and not looked at as “troublesome” or “thugs”, but to give them a chance to grow up (literally) and become effective members of society. This is not always the case, but there are instances where young men and women view their adolescent records as a life sentence, and they continuously see themselves as failures or “products of the system” and they do not see a way out.

As much as I would like to disagree, I agree that had Nikolas Cruz’s record noted disciplinary behavior, officers would have taken the complaints and 911 calls more seriously. We cannot know for sure if this would change the events of February 14^th, but we can learn from these mistakes. The PROMISE program is a brilliant idea. Fifteen-year-olds should not be punished for skipping class or smoking pot; suspend them, give them community service, but let them learn from their mistakes; we cannot give up on someone for their behavior as a child.

I strongly disagree with Coulter’s argument that President Obama and his administration can be to blame for the massacre in Parkland. Coulter loses credibility for me when she uses inflammatory phrases such as “schools would have to stop suspending black kids for breaking a teacher's jaw, but suspend Asians for dropping an eraser.” Coulter continuously cultivates a liberal-attacking agenda when she tells her readers that the government is going to “take your guns.” When any writer uses leading questions, inflammatory remarks, and/or blinded by bias, they lose credibility. Instead, Coulter should have presented her audience (conservative Republicans, or anti-Obama, pro-gun supporters) with factual evidence of what the PROMISE program was, how it is developed, and other results from various school districts. If someone gives both side A and side B, and then gives their opinion, it establishes a non-bias, which in turn, aids in credibility because both sides are presented equally.

There is not one answer to the Parkland Shooting, or Las Vegas, or Sandy Hook, or Ft. Hood, or Virginia Tech, or Columbine, or all the other senseless massacres. There might never be an answer, but until both sides of the gun debate see that this is not a party (political) issue, but rather an issue of protecting individuals’ inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we might never have an answer.