Darrell Scott, father of one of the Columbine High School shooting victims, spoke to the U.S. House Subcommittee on Crime on May 27, 1999.

His impassioned speech insisting that guns and gun aficionados were not to blame for the spree that claimed 13 lives, plus those of the two killers, was recently reprinted in our newspaper.

I’m not, repeat not, here to discuss Mr. Scott’s views on gun control.

But he made a number of other curious statements in his testimony, and, though I believe some leeway must be given to persons who have suffered a loss such as his, I also believe such people do not have special political insights simply because they were associated with a well-publicized tragedy.

In arguing against gun control, Mr. Scott cited what he called "the first recorded act of violence," namely the Biblical account of Cain killing Abel. "The villain was not the club he used," he said, pointing out that humans have been committing murder since long before guns existed.

OK, fine.

But then Mr. Scott went on to argue that the real cause of such acts of school violence is the absence of prayer.

You’ve stripped away our heritage, /you’ve outlawed simple prayer, he said, quoting a poem he’d written. Now gunshots fill our classrooms/ and precious children die.

Now, wait a minute. When, exactly, was "simple prayer" ever banned in this country? And how would it even be possible to forbid someone from praying? People can address God all they want without ever speaking a word aloud, and there’s no machine yet that can monitor or control our thoughts.

The only sort of prayer that has been "outlawed," as I understand it, is group prayer in public schools. In landmark decisions in 1962 and ’63, when it was still a common practice for teachers to lead their charges daily in prayers and recitations of the Lord’s Prayer or Bible verses, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that localities could no longer require students to participate in those rituals — which, if they were anything like the Pledges of Allegiance we recited every day, amounted to little more than rote mumblings.

So schools quit having group prayer, and religious conservatives have been claiming ever since that this is bringing about the downfall of society. They’ve tried countless convoluted means of getting school prayer resumed: stating that students who don’t want to take part in prayers can leave the room (a highly effective way of making a kids feel strange and different); having prayers be "student-led," rather than led by teachers or other officials (talk about peer pressure!); having a "moment of silence" every day for "meditation" (the intention clearly being to urge prayer on the kids); and so on.

But the Supreme Court has struck down every such proposal, and rightly so. There is no way to bring any sort of enforced prayer routine into the schools without ostracizing students who aren’t of the majority’s religion. Even the blandest, most non-denominational prayers shut out agnostics and atheists — and what is accomplished anyway by such vague, meaningless praying?

Surely prayer should be spontaneous and heartfelt, personal and private, rather than something chanted every day at a certain time in a public place. No less a religious authority than Jesus of Nazareth advocated such a policy, stating in Matthew 6:5-6:

"And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by men. Truly, I say to you, they have their reward. But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your father who sees in secret will reward you."

No Supreme Court decision stops people from praying privately, or worshipping in public in their chosen church with others of their faith. No one is being arrested for talking to God.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the (Columbine) school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school," Mr. Scott told the House subcommittee. "I defy any law or politician to deny him that right!"

Has anyone anywhere claimed that terrified teenagers facing possible death should be banned from praying? Has anyone filed suit against Columbine school officials for letting Craig Scott pray in that library?

Of course not. But this is what Mr. Scott purports, saying that there is "legislation that . . . denies your God-given right to communicate with Him."

Any student in any school in this country has the ability to talk with God at will — in a bathroom, a hallway, even a classroom. Adding a 60-second moment of meditation or some daily unison chanting will not enhance anyone’s ability to communicate with God.

Conservatives accuse liberals, perhaps with some justification, of seeking simplistic solutions when they call for more gun restrictions. But to argue that returning public prayer to the schools will somehow solve the problem of school violence is surely even more simplistic.