Another day, another massacre of schoolchildren. The usual suspects, anxious to safeguard the NRA and gun manufacturing income, are telling us that the armed guards in the latest school horror, prevented the deaths being more numerous. They can’t prove that and in any case there should be no school shooting, anytime, anywhere. Period.

The fact is that shooters know that they have to get past security and (where they exist) the armed guards if they are to murder innocent children. They have a huge advantage: total surprise. However alert guards are thay still don’t know from which direction an attack will come. Unless there are multiple guards, surprising one or two men is not difficult.

I know whereof I speak, although the circumstances were entirely different. This happened to me while I was in the army. Innocently entering a room, supposedly full of people on my side, a .303 bullet passed through my hair, grazing my forehead, and lodging itself in the doorframe. A trained soldier, I had a loaded sub-machine gun in my hands. I was completely paralysed, not to mention terrified. I just stood there, frozen. As Winston Churchill inaccurately observed: “Nothing is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result”. No, Sir Winston, wrong! (The shot was an accident, but the difference between that and terrorism eluded me at the time).

Were I brought up on sherriffs, the wild West, Hollywood mythology, stage coaches, robberies and ridiculously accurate gunfire, I too would believe in sharpshooters gunning down school attackers, just as you see in movies. The messy truth is that if you are suddenly attacked from an unexpected direction you simply do not wheel round and put a bullet through the forehead of an attacker. Most people would be shaking with fright, unable to aim anything like accurately. The exponents of this whole idea are either naive, dishonest or lack the beginnings of an imagination. No, ban automatic weapons and sales to teenagers!

This seems a petty matter, but it puzzles me.

I do the gardening at our house, as befits a born Brit. In the course of this, despite wearing gardening gloves, I get my hands and nails dirty. In the old days the local pharmacy (US)or chemist (UK) carried nail brushes along with toothbrushes, toothpaste, soap etc. One never gave it much of a thought (what the hell is he talking about, I hear you cry! Yes, says I, I shouldn’t even have to think of about it, let alone write a post on nail brushes!).

My point – astonishingly, none of the staff in our local pharmacy have ever even heard of a nail brush! A what, they ask? No,they carry fifty three types of shampoo, but nothing to get your nails clean. I thus have to use a toothbrush. Yes, a toothbrush.

Epicurus conceived his philosophy in his garden. I’m sure he did the odd bit of weeding for mindless relaxation, and some slave used a donkey-hair brush to clean his nails. That was 2,300 years ago. Talk to me about progress.

Here are BBC headlines on May 16th, available via the BBC app on my i-pad (truly!)

“FatTax” row forces New Look price review
Single, 30,and time to leave home
Meghan’s father may not attend wedding
Dealing with a child who won’t sleep
Kristen Stewart goes barefoot at Cannes
How to dress a royal groom
Willow Smith reveals how she used to self-harm
Scariest moment in my police career
Are these (photo) Yorkshire pudding or Yorkshire pancakes?
Cold war over ice cream at school
House-bound woman crowd-funds for chair
Arsenal’s medical head, Lewin, loses job
Playing fantasy football with artificial intelligence

Meanwhile, the world is roiled by the Trump policy on Iran, protestors are being shot in Gaza, autocrats are being elected in countries like Hungary, Turkey, etc, mini- wars against terrorism popping up all over Africa. Brexit is a mess, Argentina is going broke – yet again, etc, etc.

What is wrong with the BBC? I am old enough to remember when it was the prime, world-class newscaster, respected throughout the world. I am told that the broadcast news is more serious and relevant, but why all this pandering to …..whom exactly?

A woman wrote to the Washington Post on May 21,2017 complaining about a daughter-in-law who never thanked anyone for gifts, for meals, indeed, for anything. Carolyn Hax, who writes an agony column for the Post, replied in part that her lack of manners hurt the daughter-in-law more than it hurts the giver. “A glaring social deficit like this will compromise her with almost everyone who experiences it”.

This woman was almost certainly never taught courtesy by her parents. It is a delight to meet a courteous young person who thanks and shows respect and courtesy to everyone, old, young and of every race and creed. It does a child no favours to skip the dull and frustrating business of drilling manners into small children, tiresome as the process is.

I suggest that manners, Epicurean behaviour that greases the wheels of social life, may be being ignored by both parents working full time outside the home. Are they returning home tired in the evening? Are they expecting that schools will do the jobs that should be done by parents, e.g civilising a child? I know really smart, capable parents who are bringing up stellar kids. But as for the others, how njkdo we persuade them that even such a simple thing as saying ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ is a sign that you have joined centuries-long cohorts of people who understand how to win friends and influence others, the bedrock of our social system.