Get Schooled

By michelle

October 2, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

all i have to say is that this all makes me want to puke, and home-schooling is more appealing every day.

i’m so very sorry for these families - all of them, from columbine to today’s tragedy.

By Taxpayer

October 2, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this

I worry more about the easy availability of drugs and alcohol at our school than I do about weapons. Kids who get high and drunk, as well as those who have sex early and often, are considered “in” and quite popular. I don’t really think there will be a shooting at our neighborhood school, but I bet that at least one kid is going to wrap a car around a utility pole in the near future — and take a few other kids out, too.

By Reader

October 2, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this

Our school has a safety plan - I think it’s required by law now. We had a scheduled intruder drill last week, just like we have fire and tornado drills. I feel pretty confident that we can follow our plan, but the thought still terrifies me if I dwell much on it. To think people target children this way is just sickening, but it’s reality.

If you’re worried about your child’s school, ask to see their written safety plan. If you see unsafe situations, bring them up (again and again, if necessary!) to administrators. They really listen more to parents in areas like this than to staff.

By Stacey

October 2, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this

Although I do think about it whenever I hear about school shootings, I don’t allow that fear to rule me. Sadly, nowhere is safe these days. Gunmen are shooting up churches, fast food restaurants and shopping malls. As ignorant as it may sound, all I can do is pray for his safety and send him off to school.

By Reader

October 2, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Safety issues to look for: Are visitors required to sign in? Are back entrances locked or monitored in some way? (including restrooms & locker rooms, if these have exits directly outdoors) Do ALL classrooms have doors that lock? Does the intercom work in every room?

By MMM

October 2, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

Stacey is right—violence is everywhere. I feel that there are caring adults at school who will do everything within their power to protect my kids. That is what my kids have at home as well—so they are lucky. I must turn them loose if they are to live in this world.

We have no other world except that which we collectively create. So sad that evil can touch so many so quickly…

By Joe

October 2, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

It’s so sad, all of these crazy killings and so senseless. No matter how aggravated you may be, or in a rush to get them out the door so you can go on with your daily life; hug them before they leave the house and remind them how much you love them.

By SET

October 2, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this

The problem I see with this dialog is that the schools have an agenda which is at odds with what they say their agenda is. So we have to see where security is in the official agenda and the real agenda and propose change if needed.

I believe that due to the Alice In Wonderland existance most large public secondary schools operate under, it’s very hard to do any realistic risk assessment. These people are too divorced from reality.

If they were to undertake a quick assissment of their risks, hopefully using the local police experts, they may find that the most likely deadly violence comes from things other than a Columbine situation. Depending on the Urban/Rural setting the most likely serious threat is Gang Activity (drug/crime disputes), Lover’s Quarrels, Stalkers (of staff or student), Estranged Parent/Disturbed parent action and only after these a murderous/suicidal student or stranger.

To me the best action would be such unpopular actions as elimination of all gang affiliated students and staff, get rid of the love triangles and Public Display of Affection activity, and react strongly to Stalker/Out of Control parent types.

Since most liberals don’t want to offend or confront whole segments of people (or even individuals) these steps won’t happen until the situation is already dire. By then it takes much more energy to clean up the mess.

Brave New World

By jim d

October 2, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

Overall I believe the students are relatively safe.

There was an incident last week at a local school where it was forced to enter a hot lock down becuase a potential weapon threat.

I believe it was handled very professionally, yet several parents are up in arms raisin cain because they wanted their children released. Now how stupid can people be? Let’s see. The schools in a lock down because a weapon may be on the premise so please throw my kid out into the hall and lock them out so someone wondering around with a weapon can shoot them.

God, some parents really concern me!!

By SET

October 2, 2006 06:11 PM | Link to this

There is no perfect national protocol for schools. Stationing armed guards (Police?) in the schools in itself adds some risk. Some schools need them badly, though.

I don’t believe guns are inherently evil - gun training was customary at high schools years ago in parts of the USA. Crazy and Evil people are the problem and a government that breeds them and protects them.

As is usual the right solution is a local decision and not a national one.

I personally like to harden targets. I have a gun - so do many of my friends. My family has always had guns in the home (rifles and handguns). In no way do I advocate this for everyone. Many people are unfit to possess weapons and CA law as well as Federal Law (permanently) takes away the right to legally arm yourself from certain people but maybe not enough of them. We should take away the voting rights of these people also. (In CA most felons can vote.)

By Alton Ewen

October 2, 2006 06:39 PM | Link to this

IT IS SAD TO SAY THAT THIS SPATE OF ATTACK ON THE SCHOOLS IN WHICH THE STUDENTS ARE BEING SLAUGHTERED WILL CONTINUE, BUT FOR HOW LONG I CANNOT SAY. THERE ARE SEVERAL QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED, AND I AM GOING TO ANSWER JUST ONE.WHO IS RESPONSIBLE? WELL, THIS SHOULD NOT BE SO DIFFICULT TO ANSWER. IT IS THE SYSTEM, THE GOVERNMENT, AND THE INEPTITUDE OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PLACED AT THE TOP OF HOMELAND SECURITY. WHAT I HAVE OBSERVED IN THE SYSTEM AS IT RELATES TO SECURITY, IS THAT THOSE WHO ARE IN CHARGED ARE ALWAYS CLOSING THE GATES LONG AFTER THE HORSES ARE OUT. A LOT OF EMPHASIS ARE NOW BEING PLACED ON PREVENTING TERRORIST FROM ENTERING OUR LAND, BUT WHILE SUCH EMPHASIS IS BEING PLACED, TERROISM IS BEING PERPRETRATED BY OUR VERY OWN. PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN ALL SCHOOLS, THE SAME WAY PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES ARE TAKEN TO ENSURE THAT PRAYER IS NOT SAID OR PRACTICE IN THE SCHOOLS. FOR WHAT I KNOW, THE FACT THAT GOD NOR ANYTHING RELATING TO GOD IS NOT APPRECIATED IN SCHOOL, THE NATURAL THING TO EXPECT IS THE DEVIL OR SATAN TO GAIN ACCESS THROUGH THE WIDE OPEN DOORS. IT IS LIKE THE DARKNESS AND THE LIGHT. THE MOMENT THE LIGHT DISAPPEARS THE DARKNESS TAKES OVER.

THINK PEOPLE, THINK. TALK TO YOUR GOVERNMENT WHAT THEN TO EXPECT? THE MOST UNFORTUNATE AND SAD THING ABOUT THESE MASSACRES, IS THE FACT THAT THEY ARE BEING CARRIED OUT ON THE YOUNG AND INNOCENT CHILDREN.

Alton Ewen (Snellville)

By OldSchool

October 2, 2006 06:54 PM | Link to this

Our school has a comprehensive safety plan that we practice on a regular/irregular basis. I think it is as good a plan as possible given the open style campus we have. Our school was built in the fifties and has 4 wings connected with a main hallway (think giant E with an extra horizontal bar). The classrooms on my wing (the 5th wing) open directly to the outside and there are several other buildings housing various specialty programs (shops, JROTC, music, etc). There is simply no way to completely secure the majority of our campus.

Visitors are required to check in but there are those who have been coming on campus for years and who feel “above” that. We’ve had incidents in the past…fortunately no shots fired…and our local authorities were extremely efficient and the situation handled quickly and safely.

We can only do what we can do. To live constantly in fear is hardly living. I feel as safe on our campus as I do around our small town.

By jim d

October 2, 2006 07:01 PM | Link to this

ok alton. I’m thinking.

I’m thinking you’re wrong and perpetuating a lie.

Prayer is allowed in school. To deny a student that right would be a violation of law. What you may have a problem with is that school employee’s may not lead that prayer. It would seem yhey’re government employees and their leading a prayer is also a violation of law.

Get you facts staright before making dumb comments like “PRAYER IS NOT SAID OR PRACTICEd IN THE SCHOOLS”

By Taxpayer

October 3, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

Hey, Alton — your caps lock is on.

By Jim in Marietta

October 3, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this

I’m thankful to live in country that allows me to educate my children at home. My children are not safe in public schools for a multitude of reasons, the least of which statistically speaking is a lunatic with a gun.

By Joy in teaching

October 3, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this

Do I feel safe at school? Most of the time. I do think the administrators at my school try their very best to ensure the safety of students and staff. We are always having updates to security measures and there is an almost fanatical obsession on the part of one of my administrators on “what if?” He’s always playing out scenarios in his head just to see how they would be handled.

Still…when I see news like this in the media, I watch and read every single crumb about it that I can get my hands on. I notice that when there are multiple school shootings like there have been in the past week and a half, I tend to have nightmares about them at night.

Can schools do more to keep guns out? Nope. As long as the nuts out there “have their rights to own a gun”, there will continue to be school shootings.

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this

My stance on “school security” is well documented on this blog….

Simply put: “School Security” is the BIGGEST oxymoron in American Public Education, which is saying something.

We, as Americans, could not stomach the measures necssary to have true school security. And until we do, things along what we have seen in the past week, Columbine-level attacks, and possibly even worse, will continue….

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this

My stance on “school security” is well documented on this blog….

Simply put: “School Security” is the BIGGEST oxymoron in American Public Education, which is saying something.

We, as Americans, could not stomach the measures necssary to have true school security. And until we do, things along what we have seen in the past week, Columbine-level attacks, and possibly even worse, will continue….

By lynn

October 3, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

Fewer Guns.

More accountability and punishment for adults who supply or allow access to guns by minors.

By jim d

October 3, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this

Gun control my derriere.

According to the CDC, more children die needlessly in this country every year from auto accidents, poisoning and drowning than do from homicides committed with guns.

So why not just keep kids out of the water away from chemicals and drugs and not allow them to drive till they’re 20 years old.

Are we starting to see how weak the gun control argument is?

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this

jim:

I’m not advocating general gun control… what I advocate is gun control AT SCHOOL. Make school access as restricted as military base access… then do a THOROUGH search on EVERYONE you let in that gate, EVERYDAY.

By jim d

October 3, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this

Oopps, meant to link the CDC report.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_13.pdf

By jim d

October 3, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

Hi jeff,

I didn’t think you were but a few ladies posting here certainly insinuated gun control was the answer and we both know it’s not.

By TruthHurts

October 3, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

The truth is that schools are perhaps the safest places in our communities. Can tragedies like this occur in schools? Sure, and when it happens it is terrible. Evil and mean people can cause anguish anywhere.

Unfortunately, episodes like this give anti-public school types another excuse to rail against their perceived evils.

By jim d

October 3, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Truth,

I tend to agree with the exception of inclement weather and trailer classrooms that our schools are generally safe. There I have a bit of doubt.

By SNY

October 3, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

Jim D.,

You know that I love reading your posts and most of the time, I agree with you. But, this time you are wrong to a certain degree. Alton is correct - to a point. Prayer is allowed in school as long as you don’t say it out loud and as long as you don’t put your hands together in the traditional pose of prayer. Remember, Gwinnett County told me that to my face personally. Yes, they can still pray, but they have to do it silently and they can only bow their heads, they cannot have the hands together.

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

Truth:

In the average community, the only place I would deem as “secure” is the local jail. Granted, many places in the community are generally “safe”, but I want schools to be “secure”. One gun related death at school is FAR TOO MANY. And we have the power to change that… but we can’t stomach it. Everything I propose is completely legal, but you’ll never see it unless - God forbid - an attack happens such that the entire school population is killed.

By jim d

October 3, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

SNY—-You let them buffalo you.

YES a child can pray aloud, yes they can clasp their hands, hell they can even kneel to pray! As long as they aren’t disruptive.

Depriving them from doing so is a violation of their rights.This is not just my opinion—there is a great deal of case law to support my contentions. Use your search engine, it’s not difficult to find.

By jim d

October 3, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

You are right Jeff.

Before we’d accept tighter control a 9/11 type incident will have to occur at a school. Does anyone else see the tragedy of that?

By SET

October 3, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

Are we on gun control now? Guns are a vital part of public safety. We live in a society that is deliberately producing psychopaths at unprecedented levels. Everybody should know that government and it’s police have no duty to rescue anyone. Try suing a police force because they didn’t respond. The only way to state a cause of action is to claim sex or race discrimination.

Guns don’t kill people - people kill people.

It would be interesting if the voters ever decided to get control of crazies and criminals - impose curfews - force registration - tattoo them, whatever. In the meantime at least in the blue states voters seem to think that disarming law abiding people while adding “protections” for crazies and criminals will make a better and safer state.

CA is going after convicted sex criminals with a vengence and is passing draconian and irrational laws that the courts will apparently uphold. This Jessica’s Law initiative is passing 9 to 1 for the November election is lunacy. But it will tend to force our 100 thousand plus registered sex offenders into Nevada, Oregon and AZ.

Perhaps one day the same tactics will be used on psychopaths. (A psychopath would be someone with a PCL-R score above 28 or so - perhaps only 15% (?) of prison inmates. These people cause a wildly disproportionate number of violent crime - and they are not evenly represented racially. That’s another reason I suppose why this society is unable to effectively decapitate them. It’s not politically correct to do so.

The man that attacked the Amish school was a nut. Other Nuts have attacked public figures, celebrities and even Congress. Are we going to get control of psychotics? Not till after they attack people. Better be ready to defend yourself - especially after a disaster.

Brave New World.

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this

Truth:

As far as the “percieved evils” of public education:

I am a middle school teacher in South GA. There is a LOT that the public thinks of as evil that you will hear me defending at the top of my voice. I just happen to KNOW that schools are nowhere NEAR as secure as people think they are…

And note the distinction between “safe” and “secure”. “Safe”, in my view, means that you have taken measures to minimize harm, but those measures are very porous and easily defeated. It denotes that attacks are unlikely, and therefore only minimal defensive measures are in place. (Meaning that anytime someone wants to attack, a “safe” place is an easy target.)

“Secure” means exactly that. No one gets in without the appropriate people knowing exactly who they are and exactly what they have in their possession. Defensive measures are extensive and very difficult to defeat. An attack on a “secure” facility, while possible, involves a LOT of planning, access to information that is under lock and key at all times, and more than likely multiple people involved.

A picture to illustrate: Imagine trying to attack the local gorcery store vs trying to attack the White House. One is “safe”, the other is “secure”.

By jim d

October 3, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

While I agree with you that we need more stringent methods of safety, I strongly disagree we need such high levels of security, as you deem necessary.

First of all no place is really secure if someone wants to attack it. Remember the Pentagon? Secondly, I have no desire for our public schools to take on the image of a high security prison

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

jim:

This is my point:

If I take a gun to school, what is likely to happen?

If I take that same gun to the Pentagon, what is likely to happen? (I am a civilian who has barely ever SEEN the Pentagon, much less have any authorization to take a gun in the building.)

One man could take out the entire population of any school. If one puts their mind to it, it is really NOT COMPLICATED AT ALL. (Obviously… Kliebold and Harris weren’t exactly geniuses…)

To take out the Pentagon takes either a few men with HIGHLY unorthodox plans or a carefully planned and staged attack with upwards of 2 dozen or more men.

Who is more likely to be able to defend themselves and repel an attacker: A group of 5000 that has all been through basic shooting and defensive maneuvers at some point in their lives - at a minimum - or a group of 5000 whose biggest worry is whether the girl they like likes them?

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

October 3, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this

There is a huge difference between a Crazy Person and this guy in PA.

A crazy person would not have made a conscious decision to let the boys, teacher and other people present, leave the schoolhouse. A crazy person/nut case – is someone who does not know what he/she is doing and doesn’t usually make plans or compile a list of resources to use during a crime.

A crazy person, would have shot everyone insight from the start, including his wife and kids.

This guy made a conscious decision and planned every step in this tragedy. I don’t think he bought 600 rounds of ammunition on the day of the shooting. I bet he purchased it at least a few weeks ago or longer. This was a planned massacre. There is no excuse or explanation as to why he did what he did. He wanted to hurt other people for the “attention” it would bring, to a “cause” that meant something, only to HIM.

If given a psychological test, he would have passed with flying colors. He would have been categorized as depressed or some other NON-threatening category. These are the people who will always fall through the “CRACKS”. Before you can label someone “Crazy”, as in need of serious medical help – they usually have hurt themselves or someone else and/or start to hear voices and talking to themselves.

This was about making headlines and getting attention. This doesn’t make him CRAZY, but mean, hateful and uncaring. Those are characteristics we all have inside. This guy would have NEVER been institutionalized. I’m willing to bet, he has NEVER committed a crime, maybe NOT even a traffic ticket.

My Point – he’s just the average Joe, who decided he didn’t want to face everyday life and decided to seek attention on his way out. You know the type, the ones who usually shoot themselves in the car or turn on the car in their garage, when they are in financial debt.

We are not safe from ANYTHING and the same thing goes for our schools. Should we be concerned? Yes, but - you can only plan and NO Plan is a guarantee of SAFETY.

Another LAW will not keep these types of people off the street.

By MMM

October 3, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this

I must have tempted the Gods with my earlier post—-I got a call from the school this afternoon and have brought my daughter home because she had an accident at school today.

4th grader—first time this has ever happened. She has a skinned up knee, chin and hand that she got when she fell in the parking lot while running to the Spanish trailer. She probably would have skinned both hands except that she was carrying a ketchup packet in one hand and it squished and protected that hand. (I have yet to get to the bottom of why she was carrying it around.)

Oddly—I’m not at all disposed to be angry at the school because the kids often run to get to class quicker. It’s good for them.

By Joy in teaching

October 3, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

Today, our school resource officer did a scan of each and every classroom, checking locks and windows. When he came to my trailer, he recommended that I keep my doors locked at all times…no exceptions. Every single door on the outside of the building will be locked as well…except for the front door. Additionally, if I spot a strange car go past my trailer, I am to alert the office immediately. I’m sure that everyone noticed that 2 of the 3 school shootings this week were by adults who had no business on campus in the first place?

A side note? My principal mentioned at lunch that she’s never recieved so many calls from parents concerned about school safety. Board of Education members have been dropping in schools as well….just to double and triple check things.

I miss the innocence that I once had as a teacher. You know…those days when I didn’t have to worry that my children might be shot at school. I truely do.

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this

Joy,

Luckily, the school I’m at right now has a few things working in its favor:

ONE entry point for the campus, unless you go on a hike.

Both on the MS side and the HS side, ALL cars pass through the view of the office, though you can’t see all cars parked in the lot on the MS side from the MS office.

For those cars that can’t be seen from the MS office, there are classrooms with large windowed doors facing that area, so those cars can be seen from these classrooms.

A weapon is STILL to easy to bring in, but at least visibility isn’t an issue!

:)

By jim d

October 3, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

There’s something to be said for being able to see it comming. :-)

By SET

October 3, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this

I’ve been thinking about this topic again. Isn’t safety a relative term? Look at the murder rate in Oakland CA. Look at the Black Male murder rate in Oakland CA. Now aren’t the schools there relatively safe?

Even when dead bodies are turning up every other day around the city the schools only have occasional felonies on campus.

I would argue that nationally we really don’t have a problem with school safety. The real problem is the deteriorating safety of our cities themselves.

Would it help if the cities imposed a curfew and required everyone without a permit to be indoors midnight to 5am? (Most Oakland killings are late at night.) I suspect you’d save a lot more lives than by putting armed guards in the schools - cheaper also.

And it’s not that I want a curfew. But something has to be done about the feral (or crazy) people lounging around in the American Cities. There’s nothing fundamentally unsafe about the school grounds.

In this country wasn’t there a time when the men in white coats could come to take away people acting nutty )with straightjackets)? And haul them in front of a judge for commitment to the happy home?

In my town and all over CA we have people walking down the streets of downtown talking to their voices. By law they can’t be committed unless they are so far gone they jump in front of cars or won’t try to feed themselves - a very high standard. They have to be an acute danger to themselves or others. Most psychotics can’t be committed long term even by their families. They cycle in and out - mainly out - of County inpatient nuthouses.

They usually leave the schools alone. PA was an abberation. You can’t plan for a black swan.

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

jim:

The biggest plus in ANY school security issue:

The VAST majority of the time, you’re dealing with idiots anyway. Even those with “plans” - such as Kliebold and Harris - are so seriously screwed up that they are easily defeated.

I fear the day that is not the case….

By MMM

October 3, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

Boy do I feel out of touch with some of the rest of you posters. I wonder why?

Maybe it is because I have heard enough of the stories of human depravity and ugliness from the refugee parents that I know we are all ultimately powerless against that specific insanity—-but that that it is part of our human condition. We fix it by treating ever other human as a human being—-not by triple bolting our doors or demanding that our schools or our government give us an iron clad guarentee of safety.

Now before you go calling me naive—-I know people who have witnessed killings of family members, have seen military personnel shooting at children running to cross the boarder. And witnessed a mother who had six children tied on a rope behind her to keep them together as they ran. They shot her youngest at the end of the rope. She had to cut the rope and leave him there to die in order to get the rest to safety.

So why exactly do we feel some entitlement to be safe in our schools and anywhere in the world, and that the might of our government should be able to guarentee that?

Give up that expectation and you start to feel personally responsible to deal with evil wherever you find it. And believe me there is plenty to be dealt with. No one can delegate that responsibility. Hope —which many of the refugees have in abundance, is an inspiration for us all.

By Jeff

October 3, 2006 07:33 PM | Link to this

MMM:

If it was LEGAL for me to PERSONALLY garauntee security at my school, I would do it in a heartbeat.

Until then, it IS the government’s job.

(BTW: That pretty much describes my view of government in general. If you’re going to require me to do something, you better make sure it is legal. If you make it illegal, you better be prepared to do it for me.)

By ack

October 4, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

Jeff always likes to play the big bad tough-guy. Lay off the testosterone. You sound like an overgrown teenager relishing in his own bravado, desparately seeking our validation, attention, and approval.

By ACK

October 4, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

Amazed, I liked your comment. I couldn’t put my finger on it, but it clarified what was truly disturbing me about the Amish shooting. You’re absolutely correct.

By Jeff

October 4, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

ack:

I would suggest that you neither know me nor how I operate.

I love to joke around and lay back and relax, but security is something that I DO NOT joke around with.

One way to tell a man’s greatest fears? Not by his fleeing from their presence, but in how detailed his plans are to combat them.

Security is, has, and always will be one of my greatest fears. Because of that, I’ve learned how to be that “big bad tough guy” you characterize me as, when by nature I am the softest, gentlest person you could ever meet. (A typical example: I read Nicholas Sparks’ At First Sight Monday and LITERALLY cried for about two hours.)

What is one quality shared by all of the great leaders of America, past and present? I would answer that they knew the place of both diplomacy and military might, and were afraid to use neither.

By MMM

October 4, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

Reguarding your “government is responsible” post. Who was responsible for saving that smallest child who was shot by the military in Rewanda attempting to flee across the boarder?

We are lucky that our own govenment is not that corrupt yet—-but we as citizens will get the poorest leaders that we allow.

I feel myself to be very security aware—training in first aid/hazardous materials handling/industrial hygene/fire safety etc. But realistic risk management means that EVERYONE who sees a hazardous condition stops what they are doing to accept personal responsibilty to address it—even something as minor as a puddle of water in a walkway.

The most reliable way to minimize the likelhood of someone doing this is to personally help whenever and whereever you are able to the troubled and hurting people you run across day to day.

The flip side is to correct and demand personal responsibilty from anyone who you see doing something that is hurtful or wrong. This action may involve a intelligent willingness to take risks.

By Jeff

October 4, 2006 09:58 AM | Link to this

MMM:

As much as I believe in security, I believe in FREEDOM just as much, if not more. The struggle between Freedom and Security will never wage more fiercely than it does in my own heart.

That is why I allow people to deal with their situations as best they see fit. The only caveat I place is that no harm can come to another. Every move I know, every tactic I know, if for defensive purposes only. (Though granted, my defensive methods sometimes could wind up with body bags being needed.)

But there is the crux of the matter: Legally, I cannot have so much as a pocket knife on campus. If someone tries to come to school with a gun, it will require some very risky maneuvers on my part to stop them. Therefore, it is the government’s job to secure the school, since it has legally denied me the -hopefully never necessary - tools to do the job myself.

By jim d

October 4, 2006 09:58 AM | Link to this

MMM,

I hadn’t gone there with Jeff since we already disagree on quite a few issues. BUT, I can’t help but wonder just who he considers is the government.

At last recollection, teachers were government employees and as such they would be considered part of the government of which he speaks. Wouldn’t he?

By Jeff

October 4, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

jim:

Teachers are not allowed to have any form of weapon at school.

Change that law, and my school will be secured.

By MMM

October 4, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

Our govenment is supposed to be “of the people, by the people and for the people.”

Jeff, how can you possibly help see that no harm comes to another if you intentionally turn a blind eye to what others do? It is good to know how to use force in self defense or in defense of others in an attack—-but peoples ideas and values become corrupted well before physical violence happens. You seem to be advocating that we wait until surgery and radiation are the only means to save the patient—rather than using sunblock to avoid the skin cancer to begin with.

Yes I believe in the value that personal freedom gives us to avoid corruption and the mis-use of power.

By Jeff

October 4, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

MMM:

Hurting someone’s feelings is not harming them. Pointing a gun at them and pulling the trigger is.

I don’t mind one iota if someone’s feelings get hurt. Big deal. Get over it. What I DO care about is when you choose to deal with your feelings getting hurt by using violence against the one who hurt your feelings.

I tell my students this all the time - and I might as well be talking to the rocks due to the culture ingrained in them -:

VIOLENCE is VERY RARELY the answer, and you better show me that you’ve tried walking away and you’ve tried talking to the person rationally first. Because I GARAUNTEE you that once I catch you using violence, I’m coming down HARD on YOU. At that point, I don’t care what they did. I only care about how you reacted to it. If you come to me and talk to me about what is going on before you hit them, I can do my best to help you and the other person deal with your differences. If you hit them though, they get off scot free and YOU get written up.

By jim d

October 4, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

Teachers packin heat makes about as much sense as surrounding the school with razor wire.

What happens then when a teacher gets a bit stressed? Guess he could just pop a couple of kids to release the tension. (which might just work)

In my opinion, Giving teachers guns may secure the building but it certainly won’t provide much safety for students and staff.

By MMM

October 4, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

Jeff—sounds like you have a set of values here that I agree with and you are to be commended for attempting to pass them to those children in your care.

This kind of engagement is exactly what I wanted to point out, we can’t be everywhere to intervene as “big brother”, but we have a duty to “talk at rocks” and let those rock suffer the consequences when the culture that they put their faith in causes harm. This is true of “rap” lyric, middle-class “I’ve got my kids in private school” forget about public education , or Islamic fundamentalizm that can’t take an criticism from the Pope. Now I’m not saying that those three are equivalent—-but all “values” are not equivalent in their ability to harm others and we do need to engage in the war of ideas that seek to do the least harm.

By Jeff

October 4, 2006 11:24 AM | Link to this

jim:

It is all about personal control. Me, I’ve been in enough pressure cooker situations that I can pretty much garauntee you how I would react, whether I have just my fists or a Colt .45 ACP in my hand.

Legalize the Colt, then make it clear that you life will be an ABSOLUTE LIVING HADES the REST OF YOUR LIFE if a kid gets their hand on it or you use it improperly. Also make it clear that if anyone dies as a result of your gun, unless deadly force was justified to the same standards cops must bear, YOUR life will be taken. (Capital murder charges will be levied against you.)

By jim d

October 4, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

Life’s already for too short for a couple of things without teachers with guns.

Lifes too short for: 1) Hate

and

2) Drinking cheap Scotch.

Pretty much in that order too.

By Jeff

October 4, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this

jim:

Never been a fan of scotch, and I’m giving up my favored Tequila as well…

Kinda amazing… Two months ago I moved out and was going to party it up. Now, I’m already settling down! :)

By MMM

October 4, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

;)

By Hmm

October 4, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

Wow. Thank god weapons aren’t allowed at school. Can’t even begin to comprehend the number of mentally unstable adults walking around, even while holding day-to-day jobs in education, banking, etc. This guy had a gone, he’s one of them. Let’s not willingly arm MORE OF THEM.

By Hmm

October 4, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

I’m sorry, I meant, “had a gun” :)

By wiseone

October 6, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this

Here’s the truth on what’s behind all the shootings.

See this video - a clip from FoxNews:

[http://mms.tveyes.com/ExpandGuest.asp?ln=140891]