I believe she asked that they not do that out of fear of retaliation.
Which itself is an issue that needs to be addressed.
Yeah, I apologize. That came off as more argumentative than I intended. I wholeheartedly agree with you and was just trying to show the absurdity of the suggestion that turning our schools into fortresses would do a damn thing. Not only is it political theater, it's a logistical, financial, and educational impossibility and any attempt at doing so could be easily thwarted in seconds in about 10 different ways.
I mean for the love of God, a shooter could just it in their car across the street and fire into the schoolyard during recess, or when kids are coming to/leaving school. I don't care if the school is built like ADX-Florence. You ain't stopping that. There will always be a bottleneck that can be exploited.
Pathetic.
I'm stating it right now. I am officially running for President in the 2024, 2028, 2032, and 2036 elections. Therefore, to avoid the appearance of impropriety and not show political bias, the criminal court system cannot send me to jail until after the 2036 election, regardless of what crimes I commit or am convicted of in the mean time. The crimes I commit between now and then are irrelevant. I mean, you can convict me of those crimes if you'd like. You just can't punish me for it because I'm a Presidential Candidate under the Trump standard set forth by this judge.
This act of "not showing bias" goes to show the exact bias that the entire court system continues to give to Trump: giving him special privileges that exactly zero other people in this country would have extended to them in the same situation. And in one fell swoop, Merchan shows that he's absolutely no better than the rest of them; when push comes to shove, every single one of them will go out of their way to avoid holding Trump accountable for anything, all the while wondering why he keeps doing it.
He's doing it because it works. He's doing it because you let him. He's doing it because you are unwilling to do anything to stop him.
And he's going to keep doing it because you continue to let him win. Fuck this judge and fuck every other judge who continues to rule that Trump gets special treatment as if it's some kind of fucking birthright.
There is more than can be done besides turning schools into fortresses and thoughts and prayers.
I have almost 20 years of experience working in the public school system. You know those "fortresses"? They're also for show. Unless you're literally putting every child through a metal detector individually (which would take way too much time), any student can easily sneak a weapon right in their backpack. Schools simply do not have the time or resources to be checking every individual student every time the metal detector goes off, assuming they have one in the first place. Those bulletproof windows don't do shit when the shooter is in the building already. And any adult can socially engineer their way to access by simply claiming to be a parent, vendor, substitute teacher, or whatever. I have been to dozens of districts. The number of "fortresses" that could effectively stop a school shooter is exactly zero.
Give me a public school building anywhere in the country, and I'll show you ten ways that all of your security measures will do exactly nothing. I will bet large sums of money on it.
I know the Trump train is going full steam ahead and Vance is just along for the ride. And I know who's driving the train. But is there nobody pulling Vance aside and telling him that every once in a while he needs to learn to shut the fuck up?
It's one thing for Trump to say it himself. He's an incoherent moron who can't put together a coherent thought, and can be written off like a homeless person in the park preaching to the pigeons. But JD Vance is an articulate, educated individual. But IMO, the fact that he's actually coherent just makes it worse when he says it because that means actual, significant thought has been put into it, which also means coherent thought has been put into implementing it.
Just think of how much more dangerous Trump would be if he were actually a coherent, functioning person. That's JD Vance.
The trailer-park methheads who have meth'ed their way right onto disability.
You know, the type of person you want your kids around for 8 hours a day, right?
D is an imbecile, BUT I don’t think he’s entirely off of base here. Grandparents (and other extended family members) have historically been very involved in the raising of young children.
First, my children are not my parents', siblings', or friends' responsibility. Just like their kids aren't mine.
Second, in an age where people are continuing to work even beyond retirement (either by choice or need), these people all likely have work and family responsibilities of their own. And even if they don't, what if they simply just don't want the burden of taking your child for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week? I know plenty of grandparents who like the idea of the kids coming by on the weekend where they can load them up with sugar and send them home, and who's opinion is that of "Hey, I raised my kids. My job is done. It's your turn now.", and do not want the day-to-day responsibilites of child care.
What about those who have no family? Maybe their parents have died. Or maybe they're too old to keep up with the day to day responsibilites? Or your family are simply not the type of people you want your children to be around? What if they live too far away to make childcare a viable option?
Are they also supposed to be responsible for feeding and transporting your child around (to and from school, for example) for free?
Your position just defends the GOP take on the matter that poor people should just rely on these resources as if they're available to everybody without issues, and that family members are all well-adjusted members of society who will gladly essentially take on the full time job of child care worker for free because they have no responsibilities of their own. Look at it this way. If these people have parents, siblings, and friends available to them and they're not using them for child care, there's probably a reason for that. Because I can guaran-fucking-tee you they looked into it.
I think the right cares about kids dying,
The right has shown exactly zero evidence of this in the 25 years since Columbine happened. The most they have ever given is "Thoughts and prayers", "this isn't the time to talk about it", and "Hey, can we just remove the doors?"
But it’s not an “oh well” glance at it.
It is as long as Republican politicans continue to say it is. It is as long as the only "solutions" that the GOP supports are political theater stunts that have proven to be ineffective, have no chance of working, and don't reduce the availability of guns.
Tell me this: When was the last time a school shooter showed up, found the doors locked, and just said "aw shucks" and gave up? When was the last time a school shooter, having already gained access to the building, was successfully thwarted by teachers without hurting anybody? When was the last time a school shooter even gave half a shit about anti-gun laws when they're not even planning on living through the event themselves? How many schools in this country are actually physically equipped to stop a school shooter that is that determined to gain entry?
These things don't work because there are two important facts that people refuse to understand: Once the shooter gets access to their weapon of choice and entry to the target location (both of which are pathetically easy), everything else is irrelevant. Laws don't matter. He won. He has his weapon, he has his targets, your kids are dead, along with the shooter who will most likely commit suicide while he's "at his peak", therefore ignoring consequences or even having to live with what he did.
And until any of this changes, anything the GOP says absolutely is an "Oh well" glance at it. Because they actively refuse to do anything beyond that.
@Nightwingdragon
@lemmy.world