Letter to the Editor: Confronting violence with nonviolence

February 14, 2005
Akron Beacon Journal

The headline on the Jan. 25 front-page story got it right: "Calm words halt vow to kill.'' But the quote in the last paragraph was off base.

The story told how a Brimfield Township man, Rick Reichard, saved his and his mother's lives by facing up to a killer. The suspect had an AR-15 rifle and, police say, had just shot and killed his girlfriend and her 7-year-old son. The alleged killer, wandering through the neighborhood, came upon Reichard, who had just stepped out of his garage. Reichard's mother, Lois Scott, on her way home, stepped out of the house and joined her son, who was facing the suspect with his hands raised, as ordered.

The suspect vowed to shoot and kill them, and Reichard and Scott calmly talked him out of it. They did not try to run, or reach for a weapon of their own or otherwise threaten the suspect. The suspect walked away with his weapon without harming them, and they walked into the house and called 911.

A responding police officer told Reichard and his mother that it was a miracle they were not the suspect's next victims. It was not a miracle but just their good handling of a violent and potentially lethal situation.

What this incident shows is that confronting violence with nonviolent alternatives does work. Does it work all the time? Maybe and maybe not, but it has been proved over and over again that confronting violence with violence, or even threats of violence, doesn't work. It doesn't end the violence, but just results in more. To have a nonviolent society, which we all say we want, we must accept this fact and always seek nonviolent alternatives if and when violently threatened.

Jim McNenny
Stow

Commentary:
Mr. McNenny's theories are so logically bankrupt that it's tempting not to respond.

If confronting violence with non-violent alternatives is such a great thing, why are the three other unarmed people James Earl Trimble confronted that night dead?

Since McNenny claims the Reichards survived because "they did not try to run, or reach for a weapon of their own or otherwise threaten the suspect", the logical conclusion is that the other three victims' own fault they were killed, because they just didn't exercise "good handling of a violent and potentially lethal situation".

One more point, which comes from Snyder's "Nation of Cowards." The
officers who eventually apprehended Trimble were armed. Does the letter-writer recommend that officers not respond
with violence? Would he respond nonviolently to watching someone
rape a family member or friend?

Statistics prove unarmed victims are more likely to be harmed than are those who arm themselves and resist. People tempted to accept Mr. McNenny's poor advice to "always seek nonviolent alternatives if and when violently threatened" should keep that in mind.