Public Policy the Author of This Response

Public Policy

The author of this response is asked to answer to five major questions and requirements in this assignment relative to the school shootings and focus group research done within the Clemons and McBeth text. The author is asked to look at the content analysis/problem definition, critique the facilitator, survey/focus group analysis, symbols and metaphors and answer the question of "what's next." The author will do answer to these in the order listed in the assignment.

As for the content analysis and the overall description of the problem, the case study does better than most salacious and over-dramatic media reports about events like Columbine and the like but there is still a tinge of that element present and it's not tamped down at all later on. Rather than focus on the root cuases and the best ways to do deal with school shootings and the like (e.g. help parents be better parents), it tends to be a lot more high-level and "pie in the sky" than the author of this response would like to see.

This segues nicely to the performance of the facilitator of the focus group and that is a mixed bag as a result of the above. The facilitator could have done a lot worse but also could have done a lot better. Perhaps it's controversial to some to point to what can and should be done at all levels of school shootings and what leads up to them, but the author of this response holds that a public policy solution alone is not going to prevent school shootings unless we really start talking about how to deal with people with mental illness. Klebold and Harris (Columbine), Loughner (although he didn't do a school shooting) and Lanza (Newtown) were all clearly deranged and things like gun laws and worrying about that innocent law-abiding citizens do with their guns and why is not the issue.

The survey/focus group angle of this case study was fairly good, the problems with the facilitator and the regulation of the direction of the study aside. It's easy to get caught up in all that especially when the victims are first graders (like the kids in Newtown) but getting too caught up in tragedies can lead to very short-sighted or even flat-out wrong or unfair solutions to prevent those events from happening. The whole "never let a tragedy go to waste" ideology needs to stop. If it can't be justified during normal times and only after a shooting, there is almost certainly something wrong with the line of thought being engaged in and that is true of focus groups as well as public policy creation and passing as well. The symbols and metaphors that are often used in this regard tend to be propagandist and demagogic in nature and that should be avoided rather than embraced or condoned.