A school in New Jersey recently staged a hostage situation to see how their school would handle the situation and work with local authorities. However, they made an interesting choice for the gunmen in the scenario.
Apparently, the school wanted the drill to be as realistic as possible, so they chose Christian gunmen, including, “one who was upset that his daughter was expelled for praying before class.”
What bothers me, among other things, is this quote from the school’s superintendent.
“You perform as you practice. We need to practice under conditions as real as possible in order to evaluate our procedures and plans so that they’re as effective as possible.”
Ah yes this is a very realistic scenario, because we can all think of a time where Christian gunmen took school children hostage in an American high school because they didn’t believe in the separation of church and state. Come on, give me a break. I couldn’t make this stuff up if I tried.
It’s also funny, because I don’t believe it’s a crime for a student to pray before class, so the reason for the supposed attack really is no reason at all.
The funny thing is that you won’t read much about this in the mainstream press, which doesn’t make it any less true, which people are wont to think sometimes. However, if the shoe were on the other foot – if these were Islamic terrorists, or homosexual gunmen, or maybe even “Gunmen for Global Warming” (that’s my phrase, I claim it!), there would be such a firestorm that the superintendent would most likely be forced to resign by the end of the week.
Some might say this isn’t a big deal, but why do we have to label Christians as hostage takers, in a supposedly “realistic” scenario? Why can’t we just leave it at gunmens with no association at all?