In The Gleaner, I read that a teacher who pointed a gun at a student and “swung a machete” at a security guard appealed his dismissal and won reinstatement.
The points of contention were one; the punishment of job separation was excessive; two, there was no protocol in place to guide the deliberations; and three, the Vice Principal’s haste to resolve the matter by terminating the teacher’s job was unfair.
What protocol can or should a school put in place to guide deliberations concerning a teacher pulling a gun on a student? Wouldn’t the protocol’s success be a failure? And invariably, when teachers start shooting students, can we breathe a sigh of relief that it was good for us to be here, armed with guns and get out of jail free?
At what point do we conclude that if teachers need a gun to discipline or defend against a student, we have a failure masquerading as success? Do we need CXC abysmal results to be the mirror to tell us what cannot be denied?
The securities we employ and claim there is a need — reflect our insecurity.
Confidence has fled our decisions, and as a result, our institutions are not the symbol of our erudition but rather compromised concessions.
Where in heaven would a pastor be making an armed delivery? If we have to ask, then we are clearly not in heaven.
Some successes are failures. They are untenable and portend worse to come.
What next, will we consider to arrest our troubles? Armed guards at churches and homes?
Peter Peterkin, Readers Bureau, Contributor
Edited by Jesus Chan
Do you want to add feedback to this story?
Please add a comment in the box below or send email to email@example.com, send us a message on WhatsApp at 646-874-7976 or Call us at 201-500-7715