School District That Provided Rocks To Defend Against Shooters Beefs Up Security

[fast]

How about we go back to the kind of child abuse that wasn't considered child abuse before it was later deemed child abuse by university faculty and their friend-approved studies. For instance, when an elementary teacher is told by the parent to treat the child with a pop to the hand like they were their own (child abuse not considered child abused until it later was) VERSUS a teacher taking out a belt and striking the students with the buckle end, leaving a gnash on the child (child abuse that was and still is child abuse).

When a grandmother gets a switch, or when a father is stern, that kind of child abuse would allow for 2nd amendsment issues to disipate. When a kid carries a gun to school, it won't be to shoot everyone. It would be to show his friends. The teacher wouldn't call every branch of the military. Remember fast, do as you've been taught: don't point your gun at anyone unless you are going to shoot them. "Yes, Mrs. White, I won't."

Guns increase risk, but risk doesn't hurt. What hurts is a warped mind wanting to unleash a fury of anger. Everybody is all "touch my child and I'll kill." Well, maybe some old school physical and mental abuse is not a recipe for lifelong scarring but a necessary love. Throw in a few pounds of authoritarianism, a bit more love from a real family unit, and an attitude of days of old (the good ones, of course), then who knows, we might not need rocks.

On a more serious note (as there's truly no more hope for real progress), isn't the whole rock thing some second rate objection stemming from the 2nd amendment issue?

 

[RavenSky]

I am touched that the school district's administration donated their brains in order to protect the children.

- - - Updated - - -

According to conservative arguments, throwing rocks is just as deadly as an assault rifle, therefore this is a completely effective defense. It's only absurd if you think conservative arguments are wrong, and they can never be wrong.

Also, rocks are not sentient, therefore it would be wrong to tell this school they can't use rocks for self defense.

- - - Updated - - -

If you ban rocks, then only criminals would have rocks!

And sidewalks... don't forget sidewalks. Maybe we can arm the kindergarteners with sidewalks, too

 

[RavenSky]

Just give the teachers guns. That allows them to shoot any rogue goalies.

You know this brings a question to mind: Why did we start at "Give teachers guns" rather than "Give teachers tasers" I'd actually be more afraid of that personally but am all the same surprised that wasn't the starting point.

Tasers won't sell more guns for the NRA

 

[RavenSky]

Part of me understands the desperation behind this 'bucket of rocks' idea. As Mumbles said, there really isn't much a school administration can do if our lawmakers (and society at large) refuse to do anything about the proliferation of guns and gun violence.

At our company, we have annual "active shooter" training, too. The "hail mary" is exactly this... throw anything/everything possible at the shooter and physically attack him. Basically, the idea (flat out stated for us adults) is: a bunch of you will die but maybe a bunch others will have time to escape.

This is what 6-year old Jesse Lewis did instinctively at Sandy Hook. He was shot point blank in the head for his efforts, but several of his classmates were able to escape thanks to him.

Is this really what is has come down to? We are expecting children to throw rocks at shooters armed with assault rifles because our politicians are too deep in the pockets (or too far up the ass) of the NRA?

Really?