Bank of America blames firearms with ‘military characteristics’ for mass shootings, but report on Parkland massacre shows Cruz asked for but was denied help!
Anne Finucane, Vice Chairman of the Bank of America.
Anne Finucane, Vice Chairman for Bank of America in a letter stated,
We know there is a limited role we [Bank of America] can play as a company to make a direct contribution to reaching a day we all want, when we no longer have to suffer a mass shooting tragedy in our country.
Firearms with military characteristics have been used in many of these tragedies, including at schools in Florida and Connecticut.
We have firearms industry clients who do not manufacture this type of firearm. But we are engaging the limited number of clients who do, to learn their plans to keep this type of firearm from being used in mass shootings. In those discussions, we have indicated it is our intent that we will not finance the manufacture of this type of firearm for non-law enforcement, non-military use. We want to understand what those clients are doing to end mass shootings, and what we can do to help them.
Bank of America and Anne Finucane miss one key factor in mass shootings, the shooters.
If Bank of America truly wants to help prevent mass shootings, then they must take into account the shooter. Issues such as how did the shooter purchase a firearm with military characteristics, was the purchase legal, what was the background of the school shooter, did the shooters family, friends or fellow students know his intent, what did law-enforcement know about the shooter? Lastly, what did the local school district know about the shooter and did the district do its duty to either help or report the shooter to the appropriate authorities.
We now learn that, in the case of Nicholas Cruz, he asked for help and was denied it.
A heavily redacted report was released on August 3rd, 2018 after Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer ordered Broward County Public Schools to release its report on Nicholas Cruz, the shooter who slaughtered 17 people on February 14th, 2018 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.
According to The Daily Beast,
In Cruz’s junior year, after he had already begun exhibiting behavior so disturbing it led to guidance counselors wanting to have him committed, the teenager sat down with education specialists to discuss his options for further schooling.
He was told he could transfer to Cross Creek, a school tailored for students with special needs; sue the Broward school district; or stay at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School without any special counseling. According to a review of that meeting featured in the new report, school officials left out one crucial fact: Cruz was still entitled to special assistance at Stoneman Douglas if he chose to stay.
Being unaware of this option, however, Cruz—whose developmental delays were flagged at age 3—was reportedly stripped of counseling services and left to fend for himself as a “regular student.”
The Sun-Sentinel noted that the investigation found that the school district “did not follow the requirements of Florida statute or federal laws governing students with disabilities” in two specific instances:
- School officials misstated [the shooter’s] options when he was faced with being removed from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School his junior year, leading him to refuse special education services.
- When [the shooter] asked to return to the therapeutic environment of Cross Creek School for special education students, the district “did not follow through,” the report reveals.
What would have happened if the district had told Nicholas Cruz the truth about his options? What would have happened if the Broward County School District followed through on returning Nicholas Cruz to the therapeutic environment of Cross Creek School?
Perhaps Ms Finucane should meet with school districts across America and ask them what are they doing to stop one of their students from becoming the next mass shooter?
This woman has a heart of clay and a mind of iron. She thinks that eliminating guns (the only way to prevent shootings in her estimation) will bring about some sunshining day of happiness, but it will in fact produce the exact opposite. If, as I assume she desires, an attempt is made to take all the guns away from everyone but military and law enforcement, the ensuing civil war will be more bloody than she should ever in a million years contemplate.
Now, as a corporate executive, she is free to divest herself of any industry she wants: firearms, petroleum, toy retailers, or American Flag manufacturers. I am quite sure that other financial institutions will be glad to eat her lunch for her.
Ms. Anne Finucane has taken the same stance that innumerable Leftists have taken: Blame the Guns. Yes, the inanimate becomes animate in their world of ideological dementia. And being convinced that guns do the killing, the only solution is to remove them from society so the sun can shine again.