|
Post by fanofthegame on Mar 2, 2018 21:06:22 GMT -5
Devil’s advocate:
2015 data:
13,286 people killed with firearms in the US. 10,265 by drunk drivers. 38,300 in MVA’s. 480,000 tobacco related deaths.
Do we ban cars, alcohol, guns, tobacco or a combination?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2018 21:33:30 GMT -5
Devil’s advocate: 2015 data: 13,286 people killed with firearms in the US. 10,265 by drunk drivers. 38,300 in MVA’s. 480,000 tobacco related deaths. Do we ban cars, alcohol, guns, tobacco or a combination? We aren't talking about all gun violence, we are talking about mass school shootings. Really, we should ban fast food, soda and cigarettes if we want to save lives...
|
|
|
Post by fanofthegame on Mar 2, 2018 21:48:59 GMT -5
Devil’s advocate: 2015 data: 13,286 people killed with firearms in the US. 10,265 by drunk drivers. 38,300 in MVA’s. 480,000 tobacco related deaths. Do we ban cars, alcohol, guns, tobacco or a combination? We aren't talking about all gun violence, we are talking about mass school shootings. Really, we should ban fast food, soda and cigarettes if we want to save lives... That’s kinda my point. We have finite resources. Our government, our media, and our populace is expending an enormous amount of energy debating the prevention of < 1000 deaths per year while we ignore bigger problems.
|
|
|
Post by galion on Mar 3, 2018 4:30:26 GMT -5
So death by firearm has surpassed death by drunk driver now. For all of you who are concerned, clearly the 2nd amendment is alive and well.
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Mar 3, 2018 6:48:59 GMT -5
What you're talking about is suspending the 5th amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.Good grief. If you're going to do that, might as well suspend the first one, then all the rest will be meaningless. Then the government could do whatever it wanted to "solve" all the problems. Of course, eventually, "We the people" would have to fight another Revolutionary War. Tough to do since the second amendment and all of the people's guns will be gone. Seriously, I think Trump misspoke (as he's done before) and will walk that back. The lawyers and ACLU won't go near "infringing" on the 5th. No, I think Donald knew exactly what he was conveying and I think he had a full understanding of it's legal viability. If retaining weapons that are a potential hazard to the public is suspending the 5th amendment, then revoking one's driving privileges, prior to an in court verdict on a DUI charge, is suspending the 5th amendment. Nope, to take your license the cop has to personally witness you DUI. The crime has already been committed, evidence collected, and you've been arrested. What you're talking about is taking some ones guns away before any crime has been committed. Now, if it is determined that someone should not posses guns because of a prior conviction, mental heath problem, etc. and the standards for such are met as determined by a court order, then he can be put under a legal disability to posses a gun. That is due process and is already possible and done in some cases. The cops won't take your license just because your wife calls 911 and says she's tired of you coming home drunk all the time.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 3, 2018 13:00:23 GMT -5
No, I think Donald knew exactly what he was conveying and I think he had a full understanding of it's legal viability. If retaining weapons that are a potential hazard to the public is suspending the 5th amendment, then revoking one's driving privileges, prior to an in court verdict on a DUI charge, is suspending the 5th amendment. Nope, to take your license the cop has to personally witness you DUI. The crime has already been committed, evidence collected, and you've been arrested. What you're talking about is taking some ones guns away before any crime has been committed. Now, if it is determined that someone should not posses guns because of a prior conviction, mental heath problem, etc. and the standards for such are met as determined by a court order, then he can be put under a legal disability to posses a gun. That is due process and is already possible and done in some cases. The cops won't take your license just because your wife calls 911 and says she's tired of you coming home drunk all the time. I think in this case, there was adequate, probable cause.
|
|
|
Post by deathfromabove on Mar 7, 2018 17:18:16 GMT -5
Teslaspigeons, I get what you are trying to say but there are a few things that I think need to be corrected, maybe. One thing I think that you said was or come close to saying that not all weapons, that is my training because we dare not call them my GUN, do not kill people, again that's my interpretation, but I was taught that all weapons including .22 rifles and pistols will kill anything and any body. Now someone said, I believe, that semi-automatics are not assault weapons. Who ever said that is wrong because you have a Springfield model 1903 rifle that is a semi-automatic, used in WW1 and early WW2 by our troops. So was our M1 Garand and M1 carbine in WW2 and Korea and all three of them are semi-automatics. Not all weapons have to be automatics like a Thomson Machine Gun, BAR, M-14, M-16 or M-4, to be declared as an assault weapons. Having them as an automatic I am against for we do not need them out on the streets, in our schools, business, churches, or even in our homes. My weapons that I brought back with me if they were automatic I took the piece out and made them semi-automatics. Again this is my belief, the way my father taught me and the way I was instructed in the Army. Also I don't mean to step on anybody's toes and pigeon if it wasn't you that said the first part of my sentence I am sorry I been busy and haven't got to read all the messages in the forum and I lost track of who said what, my bad.
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Mar 8, 2018 16:56:57 GMT -5
Teslaspigeons, I get what you are trying to say but there are a few things that I think need to be corrected, maybe. One thing I think that you said was or come close to saying that not all weapons, that is my training because we dare not call them my GUN, do not kill people, again that's my interpretation, but I was taught that all weapons including .22 rifles and pistols will kill anything and any body. Now someone said, I believe, that semi-automatics are not assault weapons. Who ever said that is wrong because you have a Springfield model 1903 rifle that is a semi-automatic, used in WW1 and early WW2 by our troops. So was our M1 Garand and M1 carbine in WW2 and Korea and all three of them are semi-automatics. Not all weapons have to be automatics like a Thomson Machine Gun, BAR, M-14, M-16 or M-4, to be declared as an assault weapons. Having them as an automatic I am against for we do not need them out on the streets, in our schools, business, churches, or even in our homes. My weapons that I brought back with me if they were automatic I took the piece out and made them semi-automatics. Again this is my belief, the way my father taught me and the way I was instructed in the Army. Also I don't mean to step on anybody's toes and pigeon if it wasn't you that said the first part of my sentence I am sorry I been busy and haven't got to read all the messages in the forum and I lost track of who said what, my bad. The term "assault weapon" is a somewhat generic term used to describe the weapons issued to our individual troops to carry into battle. I'm glad you brought up a little bit of history. The Springfield model 1903 you mention, was actually a bolt action rifle, but it was the "assault weapon" issued to most of our troops in WWI. However, pictured side by side to an AR-15, most civilians and politicians with little more than a casual knowledge of firearms would identify it as a "hunting rifle" and the AR-15 as an assault weapon. Actually, the AR-15 was designed for civilian use and has never been issued to our troops for use in battle. So you see, defining an "assault weapon" as a specific model of firearm is a poor way to do it. Let's talk a little more history. At various times in our history civilians actually had access to better weapons than the military was being issued. In the latter half of the 19th century, the lever action repeating rifle was becoming popular with civilians while the military was still being issued singe shot breech loader assault weapons. Going back to the Revolutionary War time, the colonists generally had the same type of assault weapon, the single shot, smoothbore black powder rifles that the British troops were issued. Although some colonists had a new design, the "Kentucky Rifle" with a much more accurate rifled barrel. Now the important point. The Framers of the Constitution made no distinction between the type of arms that civilians could "keep and bear" and the arms that were issued to the military forces. The Second Amendment along with the other amendments making up the Bill of Rights was put there to protect the people from the government that they had just created. After a long and bloody war they realized that over time governments could possibly become oppressive if the people did not have the means to protect themselves from the government.
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Mar 8, 2018 18:04:32 GMT -5
............ but I was taught that all weapons including .22 rifles and pistols will kill anything and any body............. I was taught that all weapons are inanimate objects and will always obey the laws of physics. Some people will disobey the laws of God and man, and will kill anything and any body.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 20:39:57 GMT -5
Teslaspigeons, I get what you are trying to say but there are a few things that I think need to be corrected, maybe. One thing I think that you said was or come close to saying that not all weapons, that is my training because we dare not call them my GUN, do not kill people, again that's my interpretation, but I was taught that all weapons including .22 rifles and pistols will kill anything and any body. Now someone said, I believe, that semi-automatics are not assault weapons. Who ever said that is wrong because you have a Springfield model 1903 rifle that is a semi-automatic, used in WW1 and early WW2 by our troops. So was our M1 Garand and M1 carbine in WW2 and Korea and all three of them are semi-automatics. Not all weapons have to be automatics like a Thomson Machine Gun, BAR, M-14, M-16 or M-4, to be declared as an assault weapons. Having them as an automatic I am against for we do not need them out on the streets, in our schools, business, churches, or even in our homes. My weapons that I brought back with me if they were automatic I took the piece out and made them semi-automatics. Again this is my belief, the way my father taught me and the way I was instructed in the Army. Also I don't mean to step on anybody's toes and pigeon if it wasn't you that said the first part of my sentence I am sorry I been busy and haven't got to read all the messages in the forum and I lost track of who said what, my bad. No I 100% agree all guns are deadly. Even my break action 1000+ FPS pellet gun was deadly. My point is that it is easier to kill a large number of people quickly with some firearms than others and with less training.
|
|
|
Post by deathfromabove on Mar 8, 2018 21:57:48 GMT -5
Fbfan and Teslaspigeons, Thank you for your gracious reply's on this very touchy subject and your knowledge of our history. Fan you are right on the Springfield being a bolt action rifle. I meant to say that but sometimes things just seem to a left and a right turn right over my head without stopping. You are right that it always seems to be that our troops are just about all the time out firepower as we go to war. You were also right, and I pointed that early on this subject that the AR-15 actually started out as a CAR-15. These rifles were never meant to become an automatic but good old Yankee know how figured out on how to make it an automatic weapon. On the 2nd. Amendment, that came about because one of the reasons is the British wanted to take away our firearms for they feared that if they didn't we would be using theme in open rebellion. Thank God they were not able to that because it was the framers and frontiersman that responded to the call to arms, our Minuteman and that is why our Army National Guard has the Minuteman as it's symbol. I also agree that it is man not the weapon that kills. If your rifle is just mounted on the wall that rifle is not going to fire by it's self. It takes a human to KILL. We do need to put God back in our life, back in our school's, in our government. We need to bring back our pledge of allegiance in our school's. We need the respect for our FLAG. When it comes time for me to be with God our father, That flag will draped over me and if anybody try's to take it off and disgrace my nation's flag I am gonna jump out of my casket and beat the he** out of him. Teslaspigeon you are right on certain weapons, mainly automatic's, that can kill unlawful lot of people even with little training and that is why my weapons are semi-automatic because I do not need them now as full megs. I am satisfy with them that way where I can go hunting with them or target practice. My weapons are register with my local Sherriff's Dept. and I will be giving them a round that will be fired so if they are stolen and used in a criminal action they will know whose rifle it is and if it was reported stolen and the history of my rifle. Again thank you guys for your opinions and some history lesson's.
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Mar 9, 2018 17:17:11 GMT -5
Fbfan and Teslaspigeons, Thank you for your gracious reply's on this very touchy subject and your knowledge of our history. Fan you are right on the Springfield being a bolt action rifle. I meant to say that but sometimes things just seem to a left and a right turn right over my head without stopping. You are right that it always seems to be that our troops are just about all the time out firepower as we go to war. You were also right, and I pointed that early on this subject that the AR-15 actually started out as a CAR-15. These rifles were never meant to become an automatic but good old Yankee know how figured out on how to make it an automatic weapon. On the 2nd. Amendment, that came about because one of the reasons is the British wanted to take away our firearms for they feared that if they didn't we would be using theme in open rebellion. Thank God they were not able to that because it was the framers and frontiersman that responded to the call to arms, our Minuteman and that is why our Army National Guard has the Minuteman as it's symbol. I also agree that it is man not the weapon that kills. If your rifle is just mounted on the wall that rifle is not going to fire by it's self. It takes a human to KILL. We do need to put God back in our life, back in our school's, in our government. We need to bring back our pledge of allegiance in our school's. We need the respect for our FLAG. When it comes time for me to be with God our father, That flag will draped over me and if anybody try's to take it off and disgrace my nation's flag I am gonna jump out of my casket and beat the he** out of him. Teslaspigeon you are right on certain weapons, mainly automatic's, that can kill unlawful lot of people even with little training and that is why my weapons are semi-automatic because I do not need them now as full megs. I am satisfy with them that way where I can go hunting with them or target practice. My weapons are register with my local Sherriff's Dept. and I will be giving them a round that will be fired so if they are stolen and used in a criminal action they will know whose rifle it is and if it was reported stolen and the history of my rifle. Again thank you guys for your opinions and some history lesson's. I totally agree DFA. Those things are gone in part because of the 1st amendment. When the liberals agree to give up some of those 1st amendment rights, I'll agree to give up some additional infringements to my 2nd amendment rights.
|
|
|
Post by deathfromabove on Mar 9, 2018 23:53:26 GMT -5
Fbfan and Teslaspigeons, Thank you for your gracious reply's on this very touchy subject and your knowledge of our history. Fan you are right on the Springfield being a bolt action rifle. I meant to say that but sometimes things just seem to a left and a right turn right over my head without stopping. You are right that it always seems to be that our troops are just about all the time out firepower as we go to war. You were also right, and I pointed that early on this subject that the AR-15 actually started out as a CAR-15. These rifles were never meant to become an automatic but good old Yankee know how figured out on how to make it an automatic weapon. On the 2nd. Amendment, that came about because one of the reasons is the British wanted to take away our firearms for they feared that if they didn't we would be using theme in open rebellion. Thank God they were not able to that because it was the framers and frontiersman that responded to the call to arms, our Minuteman and that is why our Army National Guard has the Minuteman as it's symbol. I also agree that it is man not the weapon that kills. If your rifle is just mounted on the wall that rifle is not going to fire by it's self. It takes a human to KILL. We do need to put God back in our life, back in our school's, in our government. We need to bring back our pledge of allegiance in our school's. We need the respect for our FLAG. When it comes time for me to be with God our father, That flag will draped over me and if anybody try's to take it off and disgrace my nation's flag I am gonna jump out of my casket and beat the he** out of him. Teslaspigeon you are right on certain weapons, mainly automatic's, that can kill unlawful lot of people even with little training and that is why my weapons are semi-automatic because I do not need them now as full megs. I am satisfy with them that way where I can go hunting with them or target practice. My weapons are register with my local Sherriff's Dept. and I will be giving them a round that will be fired so if they are stolen and used in a criminal action they will know whose rifle it is and if it was reported stolen and the history of my rifle. Again thank you guys for your opinions and some history lesson's. I totally agree DFA. Those things are gone in part because of the 1st amendment. When the liberals agree to give up some of those 1st amendment rights, I'll agree to give up some additional infringements to my 2nd amendment rights. AMEN, BROTHER AMEN.
|
|
|
Post by dirkadirka on Mar 17, 2018 12:51:22 GMT -5
^^^ So I assume that it's cool to have 5 breaks during the school day as appropriate for our Muslim friends to pray as well, and a designated space for them to do it in?
Just want to make sure we're allowing for God in schools appropriately....
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 17, 2018 17:31:56 GMT -5
^^^ So I assume that it's cool to have 5 breaks during the school day as appropriate for our Muslim friends to pray as well, and a designated space for them to do it in? Just want to make sure we're allowing for God in schools appropriately.... Funny how liberals make it such a big deal to allow people of faith to take 60 seconds or perhaps a couple minutes to say their blessings, with zero disruptions of the everyday, educational process.
|
|
|
Post by dirkadirka on Mar 17, 2018 19:22:48 GMT -5
i'm totally fine with it each way. but if we're going to allow God in the schools, let's allow God in the schools for everyone. He's either in or out.
Deal?
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 17, 2018 20:08:22 GMT -5
i'm totally fine with it each way. but if we're going to allow God in the schools, let's allow God in the schools for everyone. He's either in or out. Deal? I agree, but you know and I know, the muslims get special consideration, with prayer rooms and designated times for their ritual, in which everything is scheduled around it in total accommodation.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Mar 17, 2018 20:12:29 GMT -5
This is the craziest thing I've heard so far after the shooting at the Florida school. There have been many schools across the country in which the students have walked out of school to protest gun laws OR an organized walk out protest was allowed by a school. At one school a student chose not to join the protest. That student was suspended for one day for exercising his Constitutional right NOT to protest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2018 21:45:59 GMT -5
A Muslim really is probably only required to pray once during school if at all. It’s called Dhuhr and it’s usually after lunch, but I’m not sure children are required to do so. Probably the more traditional Muslim’s do
|
|
|
Post by dirkadirka on Mar 18, 2018 21:59:24 GMT -5
i'm totally fine with it each way. but if we're going to allow God in the schools, let's allow God in the schools for everyone. He's either in or out. Deal? I agree, but you know and I know, the muslims get special consideration, with prayer rooms and designated times for their ritual, in which everything is scheduled around it in total accommodation. I mean let's give everyone equal consideration: what do you need for Christians? Really, what does equality look like? - Teachers with guns - Prayers for Christians to start the day - allocated space and times for Muslims I just don't know...where's the middle ground for people. As a liberal, if I'm trying to find a genuine middle ground, where do you think that is?
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 18, 2018 22:56:43 GMT -5
I agree, but you know and I know, the muslims get special consideration, with prayer rooms and designated times for their ritual, in which everything is scheduled around it in total accommodation. I mean let's give everyone equal consideration: what do you need for Christians? Really, what does equality look like? - Teachers with guns - Prayers for Christians to start the day - allocated space and times for Muslims I just don't know...where's the middle ground for people. As a liberal, if I'm trying to find a genuine middle ground, where do you think that is? Middle ground? How about doing what's right. How about getting back to basics, high ideals, family values and principles, before the liberals screwed everything up. As a result, we are educating a generation of kids with little moral conscience. The total preoccupation with the tagging word 'equality' to everything imaginable, is creating a convenient crutch for those who don't feel the need to earn anything through hard work, self sacrifice and inner resolve, replacing them with entitlements mentalities.
|
|
|
Post by galion on Mar 19, 2018 1:47:02 GMT -5
I mean let's give everyone equal consideration: what do you need for Christians? Really, what does equality look like? - Teachers with guns - Prayers for Christians to start the day - allocated space and times for Muslims I just don't know...where's the middle ground for people. As a liberal, if I'm trying to find a genuine middle ground, where do you think that is? Middle ground? How about doing what's right. How about getting back to basics, high ideals, family values and principles, before the liberals screwed everything up. As a result, we are educating a generation of kids with little moral conscience. The total preoccupation with the tagging word 'equality' to everything imaginable, is creating a convenient crutch for those who don't feel the need to earn anything through hard work, self sacrifice and inner resolve, replacing them with entitlements mentalities. Doing what's right? High ideals, family values and principles(however you want to define them) all sound wonderful. Unfortunately they can't be taught in schools. They need to be taught at HOME. It's one thing to ask the schools to reinforce them but quite another to make the schools responsible for instilling them. I also think when most people use the word equality they really mean equal opportunity not equal results. At least that's what I hope they mean.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 19, 2018 6:38:08 GMT -5
Middle ground? How about doing what's right. How about getting back to basics, high ideals, family values and principles, before the liberals screwed everything up. As a result, we are educating a generation of kids with little moral conscience. The total preoccupation with the tagging word 'equality' to everything imaginable, is creating a convenient crutch for those who don't feel the need to earn anything through hard work, self sacrifice and inner resolve, replacing them with entitlements mentalities. Doing what's right? High ideals, family values and principles(however you want to define them) all sound wonderful. Unfortunately they can't be taught in schools. They need to be taught at HOME. It's one thing to ask the schools to reinforce them but quite another to make the schools responsible for instilling them. I also think when most people use the word equality they really mean equal opportunity not equal results. At least that's what I hope they mean. That is the major reason public education has lost it's way. The primary purpose of the educational system in this country is to turn out students to be constructive citizens that will contribute to our society in a positive, constructive manner, within the framework of our nations laws. The goal is to make students fully prepared for their introduction into the second level of education, or positive, functioning contributors to our society. Yes, the school systems should share the responsibility of instilling a good moral conscience in it's young people, in conjunction with guidance from the parents. Ufortunately, parental guidance is lacking or non-existent and that's where it is doubly important they get social and moral conscience from their teaching mentors, they are at the very core of building good citizens. We are not merely programming robots, every student is a human being, with a brain that reasons, has feelings and calculates and dictates behavior. Teachers are much more than purveyors of information. Psychology and a basic understanding of each students problems and needs, plays a big role in the student teacher relationship. It's quite sad, that a large portion of students these days, leave the educational process without any instillment of basic 'right from wrong' or moral conscience. No way, does this fall within the realm of 'religion'.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 19, 2018 8:58:24 GMT -5
Middle ground? How about doing what's right. How about getting back to basics, high ideals, family values and principles, before the liberals screwed everything up. As a result, we are educating a generation of kids with little moral conscience. The total preoccupation with the tagging word 'equality' to everything imaginable, is creating a convenient crutch for those who don't feel the need to earn anything through hard work, self sacrifice and inner resolve, replacing them with entitlements mentalities. Doing what's right? High ideals, family values and principles(however you want to define them) all sound wonderful. Unfortunately they can't be taught in schools. They need to be taught at HOME. It's one thing to ask the schools to reinforce them but quite another to make the schools responsible for instilling them. I also think when most people use the word equality they really mean equal opportunity not equal results. At least that's what I hope they mean.I agree with you 100% Those on the far left want to award total equality to open doors for opportunity for all, and that's great, but also award total equality, to everyone, no matter whether they have earned it or not and that's where they have derailed their argument. Most can agree, equal opportunity, devoid of any discrimination is entitled to all, then it becomes the individuals discretion and own intiative, whether they take advantage in the competitive process that follows.
|
|
|
Post by galion on Mar 19, 2018 12:41:53 GMT -5
Morality and values are something you learn at home. If whatever message you attempt to give a kid in the classroom is not echoed at home then they are just hollow words. So far as your students are not robots point goes, the vast majority of teachers would agree with that. Unfortunately, our law makers do not. So long as a teacher or student is being judged in the classroom by standardized testing, then individuality is going to take a back seat to results. Also, so are your morality and values as they are not part of the test either. None of my children have ever come home and told me that they were asked how to register to vote or solve any moral dilemma on any standardized test.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 19, 2018 13:21:26 GMT -5
Morality and values are something you learn at home. If whatever message you attempt to give a kid in the classroom is not echoed at home then they are just hollow words. So far as your students are not robots point goes, the vast majority of teachers would agree with that. Unfortunately, our law makers do not. So long as a teacher or student is being judged in the classroom by standardized testing, then individuality is going to take a back seat to results. Also, so are your morality and values as they are not part of the test either. None of my children have ever come home and told me that they were asked how to register to vote or solve any moral dilemma on any standardized test. You and I are not in disagreement on this. Standardized testing has overcome the basic premise adopted and accepted by academia till just recently (past decade or so), that the goal is to mold good citizens for the betterment of society and our nation. Although it is happening more and more these days, political indoctrination by certain teachers is not uncommon, going way beyond how to register to vote. It takes a special individual to teach American History, American Government or Social Studies and maintaining a non-biased stance, keeping their personal politics out of the equation.
|
|
|
Post by galion on Mar 20, 2018 1:42:07 GMT -5
I don't think that teaching a kid how to register to vote qualifies as political indoctrination. You need to make up your mind here. You want to teach kids morality and social values, but you are in favor of the standardized testing system which makes that rather difficult. As far as non-biased goes, I would rather my children be exposed to differing opinions and be forced to learn critical thinking skills than just memorize facts.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Mar 20, 2018 7:22:32 GMT -5
I don't think that teaching a kid how to register to vote qualifies as political indoctrination. You need to make up your mind here. You want to teach kids morality and social values, but you are in favor of the standardized testing system which makes that rather difficult. As far as non-biased goes, I would rather my children be exposed to differing opinions and be forced to learn critical thinking skills than just memorize facts. Sounds like you have a few mis-perceptions of what I have been conveying. I agree with everything you just mentioned 100% Teaching students on how to register is not political indoctrination (but it is an enticing opportunity for some teachers that are willing to put ethical conduct aside) and I am not in favor of the current approach to standardized testing, in the fact it has altered today's teachers methodology, forcing them to focus valued time on teaching to the test. I could converse at great length, reasons against standardized testing and your last sentence, I could not agree more, very well expressed.
|
|
|
Post by deathfromabove on Mar 21, 2018 8:13:50 GMT -5
Sportsjock and Galion, You both are saying the same thing and the right thing. Back in my days of school, we had a subject called General Business. In that class we, which was my junior year, was taught on how to register to vote, what party, if any, you want to be in and with us guys we had to learn how to register for the draft, oh those were the days. We also had to learn on how to set up a budget, start a savings, checking and a loan account. Today's kids don't even know what to sign or where to sign a check. Everything is that plastic card junk and nothing else. Kids don't even know how to balance a budget, how to fill out an job application or anything that has to do with living out in this world today. We need to get rid of that stupid standardization testing and get back to teaching the kids on what is important like the 3 R's, your history, and how your government works or suppose to work. We need to teach kids on how to write properly, I have never seen so much sloppy hand writing in my life. We do need to get back to the basics of letting the teachers teach what is important in life and not going by a test. We do need the pledge of allegiance and prayer back in our, and our kids, life again. We need to bring back family values on our TV's again, not these shows like naked and afraid. What ever happen to shows like Father Knows Best, Leave it to Beaver. Even when you are watching a sporting event the players are always using foul language not like the days where the players and coaches watch what they say, not anymore. This society of ours is going down hill fast. Galion, you are right that it needs to be taught at home but the schools need to follow up and also teach the kids values today. It didn't hurt in my days and I think we where better for it. The parents and the teachers worked hand in hand to make us better. Instead of my usual 2 cents this one was worth a nickel. Cost of living just went up.
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Mar 23, 2018 22:05:12 GMT -5
Just read this one and it is worth the read. "Here is what the Indiana Sheriff's Association calls the safest schools in the country. They are located in Shelbyville, Indiana southwest of Indianapolis on I 74. . Not one teacher carries or has any access to a gun or other weapon. Its a number of things the school did a couple years ago specifically after Sandy Hook. That includes every teacher has a panic button on their person that when activated immediately sends out an alarm throughout the school campus for a total lock-down. Said one teacher can shut down the entire school system. With the alarm sounded all doors to the classrooms are secured and every door is bullet proof. Each room has a safe protected area should a shooter be outside and shooting inside thru the windows. The Sheriff has full access / control to hundreds of cameras located thought out the building to view the situation. Every classroom has been outfitted with a radio that has direct access to the Sheriff's office. All hallways are equipped with smoke generators that the main office or Sheriff office can activate making it nearly impossible for anyone to see to move in the hallway. They said other measures exist as well but none of those have any individual other than the police with a weapon. Article quoted the Sheriff saying the last thing I want is 20% etc of the staff running around with guns all chasing a shooter. Said that is best left to trained and fully equipped law enforcement. As said this is considered the safest school system in the country. Cost bit over $400,000 and slightly over $100,000 was provided by a Federal grant. All very good and sensible measures. Saw on the news this morning that Butler County Ohio Sheriff offered FREE concealed carry classes to teachers and other school personnel. Available spots (around 300) filled up in one day. Training starts tomorrow. He said it would be legal in Ohio for school personnel to pack if the school OK'd it. Not making any judgment here, but which way do you think most school boards will go to increase security? Article in the Bucyrus Telegraph Forum: www.bucyrustelegraphforum.com/story/news/2018/03/23/teachers-and-guns-regions-educators-flock-free-concealed-carry-permit-classes/446396002/224 school employees in Richland, Ashland, and Crawford counties sign up for free CC classes.
|
|