Julianne Malveaux's Commentary
BY JULIANNE MALVEAUX
Here we go again. Charles “Andy”
Williams, an alienated and angry young man, and the brunt of jokes, takes a gun
to school and shoots it up. This time,
the school is in Southern California, not Arkansas, Colorado or Oregon, and
this time two youngsters are killed and 13 are wounded. Last time around, the spinners worked
overtime trying to explain what might have happened, and a few people even
dared bring up the subject of gun control.
But by the time Congress got through instead of gun control, our
legislators were talking about carving the Ten Commandments into school halls,
as if they think that Bibles stop bullets.
What a difference two years
makes. Last time a school was the scene
of violence, the President of the Untied States, William Jefferson Clinton,
issued a statement expressing sympathy for the victims, but also referencing
the “troubled young men” who did the shooting.
This time around, President George W. Bush has bumbled his way through a
statement, describing the young gunman as a “coward” and saying that parents
should teach their children the difference between right and wrong. The contrasting statements mirror
contrasting philosophies. President
Clinton wanted to stop crime, but also to get to the source of criminal
behavior. President Bush wants parents
to take responsibility and refuses to see any government role in the tragedy at
when a tragedy like that at Santana High School. Instead of offering the shooter sympathy and compassion, he heaps
it on by calling the child a coward.
It was name calling like Bush’s that
perhaps emboldened Mr. Williams to take his gun to school. Every account of the shooting that I’ve read
describes Williams as “skinny” or “scrawny,” says that he was frequently
teased, that he was the victim of casual robbery (the skateboard he used for
transportation was stolen from him), and vicious teasing. He was teased about everything from the size
of his ears to his sexual orientation.
None of this, of course, justifies his awful crime, but it puts it in
some context. Now you've got cross
generational bashing with yesteryear’s jock, now the President, going from
moral leader to bully with his description of Williams, adding insult to
injury. With two murders on his hands,
one might argue that people can call Williams whatever they like. But it seems to me that our nation’s real
cowardice is in failing to deal with the ready and easy availability of guns,
especially to young people, as well as our failure to penalize those adults who
make guns available to young people.
Williams got his guns from his father’s locked storage
box. Shouldn’t his father, after
hearing his threats, and knowing of his angst, have put his guns somewhere so
his volatile son could not get to them.
Many will say that Williams’ dad couldn’t watch his guns around the
clock, and they are probably right. But
I’m looking for some responsibility here, both on the part of our society and
on the part of young Williams’ parents.
After Columbine, legislation was
introduced that would have imposed criminal liability on parents and other
adults whose weapons were used in juvenile crimes. But that legislation did not pass. Some states have such laws – in Michigan, for example,
20-year-old Jamelle James was convicted of leaving a .32 caliber semiautomatic
pistol in a shoebox in his bedroom. His
6-year-old nephew then took the gun to school and killed his classmate, Kayla
Rolland. Of course, the shooting in
Mount Morris Township was sensationally covered, and people were looking for
blame to land somewhere. They might
have tried pointing it at welfare deform, which forced the young shooter’s
mother to leave her child in the care of her irresponsible, adolescent
brother. But that would require us to
look at society, and to ask harder questions than “where did the gun come
from.” That might have required
introspection, and we’re already bad at that.
With George W. Bush at our nation’s helm, it is about to get worse. Parents need to teach their children the
difference between wrong and right, says Bush.
They also ought to tell them about the dangers of guns. Their words would be more forceful if they
were held responsible for their own weapons, for their children’s actions. But the gun control lobby has such a
powerful hold on our nation’s consciousness that a national law to require
liability probably can’t be passed.
Punishing Andy Williams’ dad won’t
bring back those killed, or ameliorate the injuries of those who were
wounded. But it would send America’s
parents a signal. And, it’s a much more
concrete action than Mr. Bush’s. Andy
Williams may be a coward, but he is a coward we created. And, Mr. President, this is one time when
name calling doesn’t help matters at all.