Posted by Tina
Students in a Michigan college have been given hockey pucks for self defense in case of a campus shooter and, “as a reminder that you’re not powerless and you’re not helpless in the classroom.”
Not a bad idea but in an age when a kindergartner can be sent home for making his fingers into a gun as he plays, I wonder at the contorted mind that found justification for promoting this potential weapon. The school does have a no-weapons policy:
No person shall possess a pistol or any other firearm, dangerous weapon, weapon, explosive or incendiary device on the campus provided…
Hmmm…
In 1997, junior league player Graham Christie died from a hit to the chest by a hockey puck.
In 2002 a fifteen year old girl died from injuries she received when she was struck by a hockey puck at a hockey game.
In 2005, Jaxon Logan, a hockey player at Brigham Young University, was struck in the chest by a hockey puck. Logan collapsed moments later…cardiac arrest.
In 2011 a sixteen year old hockey player was killed in a game when a flying puck struck him in the neck.
So, should a hockey puck be considered a weapon, or not?
Is this a good idea for self defense on school campuses?
Is the well meaning policy in conflict with the anti-gun crowd who seem to detest the idea of self defense?
I’m dying to know your thoughts.
I believe the world record in the NHL is 108 mph. Major league fast balls top out around 98 mph. So, unless they also issue hockey sticks, or you are the next Nolan Ryan, you’re pretty much pucked. You would be better off with a wrist rocket and some steel ball bearings. Or a can of wasp spray.
Personally, I’d carry a 9mm. Screw their asinine rules. I’d rather have them sue me than bury me.
The term “hockey puck” has a colloquial meaning. It is the equivalent of “dumb as a doorknob” or “dumb as a bag of door knobs” which originally meant deaf but has transmuted into stupid just as “dumb” (once generally accepted as meaning deaf) has transmuted into “stupid.”
It should be fairly clear that the folks attending and running Oakland University are a bunch of hockey pucks.
Detroit Free Press explains:
The idea of using the quirky self-defense tool grew out of a training session Police Chief Mark Gordon led in March for faculty members on what they should do if a gunman enters their classroom.
A participant asked what people could bring to campus to be better prepared in case they need to fight back. The university has a no-weapons policy.
Gordon’s advice? Be ready to throw something — anything — that could distract a shooter, even a hockey puck, as a last resort if fleeing or hiding aren’t an option.
“It was just kind of a spur-of-the-moment idea that seemed to have some merit to it and it kind of caught on,” Gordon said.
Did you catch that? The university has a no-weapons policy.
No doubt hockey pucks (the non-human kind) will shortly be banned along with baseballs, hockey sticks, baseball bats, ping pong paddles and tennis rackets.
Wonder how many hockey pucks the magazine of a hockey stick holds?
Ahhh, America.
And I’m surprised at you, exposing an authority figure to ridicule like this.
Which authority figure did you have in mind?
The police chief … and I feel for the man. I’m supposing he did not expect that his hearers would go so ostentatiously literal on him … on a slow news day. His proposal is psychologically sound in the abstract: if you think about the thing (what would I do if …), rather than the usual wallowing in irrational fear … you will be better able to cope if something nasty should happen.
I don’t think anyone was ridiculing the police chief. If anything the college authorities and most students were ridiculed for their hypocritical thinking! (Legal Weapons bad…hockey pucks used as weapons good.) Why are the students not fearful of these weapons being turned on them as they are with legal guns? Were all of the snowflakes dismissed for the day to avoid harming them emotionally?
Nobody here commented on the psychological soundness, even in the abstract, of the proposal. That doesn’t mean we are incapable. It does mean having fun at the expense of those who often “wallow in irrational fear” over guns and look down upon NRA members can be a humorous distraction for responsible gun owners and supporters of Second Amendment rights.
Men, you did not disappoint! (I love how the male mind operates.)
Thanks for the giggles…well done!!