A picture might still be worth a thousand words, but just make
sure one of those words isn’t “gun” — at least not while in a New
Hampshire high school.
Blake Douglass, a 17-year-old student at Londonderry High
School, is about to take his high school to court over their
refusal to allow him to wear a shooting vest and hold an open
shotgun over his shoulder in his senior picture. Douglass, a
longtime hunter and skeet shooter, said he simply wanted to honor
his hobby. It’s seems reasonable enough, especially in light of the
fact that the school has allowed every other manner of prop to be
displayed in other students’ senior portraits, from musical
instruments to cars.
“What they’re doing is basically discriminating based on content
or message,” Douglass’ lawyer Penny Dean told the Associated Press.
“You can’t do that. You might want to, but you can’t — and
especially you can’t with a broad policy like this.”
But Superintendent Nathan Greenberg felt that if Douglass’s
portrait were allowed to run as is, “it could be construed that the
school could be endorsing guns.” Endorsing guns? What, are they
afraid the school is suddenly going to become the O.K. Corral if a
picture of a gun is in the yearbook? They shouldn’t weight their
own endorsements so heavily: School officials endorse abstinence
and sobriety every day, too, and few young people these days seem
to take those seriously. Incredibly, Greenberg also raised the
specter of Columbine-like school shootings in arguing against the
picture, as if any kid with a gun, no matter how well behaved or
responsible, would suddenly become a murderous thug. “Maybe it’s
not fair but that’s the reality,” Greenberg said. Somebody’s been
watching Bowling for Columbine.
Strangely, Greenberg never felt the need to step into the senior
photo process when past students had pictures run in the yearbook
of themselves with nooses, liquor bottles, and baseball bats.
Underage, illegal drinking is apparently an acceptable hobby, but
hunting is not? A noose which is — let’s face it — only good for
hanging oneself or others is cute, but the mere image of a
skeet-shooting gun has the potential to spark a school massacre?
Somebody over at Londonderry High has got their priorities screwed
up. Greenberg now says some of these pictures unfortunately
“slipped through.” He certainly picked an interesting time to put
his foot down.
VIEWS SUCH AS SUPERINTENDENT Greenberg’s are reinforced by the
simplistic demonizing of rural states by anti-gun organizations
like the Brady Campaign. This year’s Brady Campaign Report Card
handed a dismal D-minus to the state, and went so far as to claim
they were sending all of New Hampshire to “the time-out chair,” for
failing to impose the draconian gun laws they have suggested. That
New Hampshire does not have a serious gun problem is insignificant
to these folks. They don’t care about results. They are only
interested in keeping up appearances. How else to explain the
Granite State’s D-minus for nine gun homicides in 2001, while
Massachusetts had 80 and still earned an A-minus?
And please spare us the argument already bubbling up into the
throat of every foe of the Second Amendment. The discrepancies are
not simply a factor of population differences. And as a
sidebar, so what if it was? The reality on the ground in New
Hampshire is that the people have shown themselves worthy of their
right to bear arms and places are not being shot up left and right.
A safe state is a safe state. Nevertheless, while population does
affect the numbers, it does not come anywhere near to exonerating
the Brady Campaign’s fuzzy math and self-righteous proclamations.
Let’s use the clearest example. California (rated A- by the Brady
campaign) had 499 handgun deaths in 1998, while New Hampshire
(rated D-) had 9. California’s population is roughly 27 times
bigger than New Hampshire’s. Twenty-seven multiplied by 9 equals
246 handguns deaths. That’s still less than half of A- California’s
rate.
CLEARLY, THE NATIONAL ANTI-GUN lobby wants to believe the worst
about the state. Even though these findings have no basis in
reality, the powers that be at Londonderry High School have opted
to accept it as gospel. So be it. But Blake Douglass deserves
praise for not only protesting but sticking to, um, well, his guns.
The principled young man refused an offer to have the picture
appear in a different part of the yearbook as a compromise. This
was likely nothing more than an attempt to shut the young man up
and call off the media hounds. Douglass’s life would certainly have
been much easier if he had taken the deal and moved on. It is never
fun to speak truth to a power you must deal with every day. But
Douglass didn’t back down. He retained counsel and is fighting a
lonely fight for what is right. For this, we should all be
thankful.
If this act of discrimination had gone unchallenged, it would
give tacit approval to the idea that guns are to be only feared and
regulated. Instead, Douglass is showing an entire school and
community that there is another point of view. Assumptions of what
it means to be a progressive thinking young person are being
questioned. Certainly many will walk away from this convinced as
never before that our liberal brethren and Michael Moore are right
and all guns are terrible and need to be kept out of the hands of
ruffians. But in others the seeds of doubt will be planted.
It takes an act of courage to create fertile ground for such
seeds. Here’s to Blake Douglass for stepping up to the plate and
dissenting when it would have been easier to just take off the
vest.
