Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Take the state out of the schools!!!!!
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 43 of 107 (26976)
12-17-2002 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Tranquility Base
12-11-2002 9:07 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Tranquility Base:
What you are (realistically) suggesting is more input from the locally elected school councils. This already occurs in some regions doesn't it? And in some schools in the USA creation can be taught alongside evolution.
Not in publically-funded schools. Religious private schools can teach and pseudoscience they want to.
Tell me, how many of the hundreds of creation stories from around the world do you think those schools teach?
quote:
With a particualrly slanted school baord one could probably even ban macroevolution. True?
Yes, but it wouldn't last long in the courts.
quote:
The real issue is that one is up against democray. IN the USA, andnowhere else really, it is possible to have a mojity of 6-day creation believers. I prefer the idea of a good Christian school rather than relyingon conveniently slanted majorities.
It is also possible, say in parts of NYC, to have a majority of Hindus or Buddhists or Native Americans in the southwest, each with a non-Christian religion and each with their own different creation story.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-17-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Tranquility Base, posted 12-11-2002 9:07 PM Tranquility Base has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 44 of 107 (26977)
12-17-2002 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by John
12-14-2002 3:21 PM


quote:
So I just suggest parents hone their childs ability to think and reason
quote:
Ah... but you are asking a lot.
Yes, considering that today more people in the US than ever believe in silliness like homeopathy, magnet therapy, and psychic's ability to talk to the dead.
It is too much to ask people to think critically when uncritical thought is at an all time high among our population.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by John, posted 12-14-2002 3:21 PM John has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:14 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 45 of 107 (26979)
12-17-2002 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by mark24
12-15-2002 5:17 PM


quote:
What makes you think parents are good teachers, anyway? They may think they are. If you had two people, one, the parent, & the other a qualified teacher holding a mathematics degree, who would most likely make the best job of imparting mathematical knowledge to the child? Do you see how silly your argument sounds? That there are bad teachers is irrelevant, their are bad teaching parents too. At least the teacher accredited by the relevant authorities.
I shudder to think of what my life would have been like if I had been home schooled.
See, I grew up in a emotionally abusive home. My parents did not like each other, and I don't think they liked their four children, either. I don't ever remember either of my parents reading a book to me.
My mother would have resented like HELL having to teach me, and it would have meant that I wouldn't have had the relief of escaping that house five days a week.
Neither one of my parents are good teachers. My mother was highly critical of everything I ever did and my father just yelled at me when I did anything wrong. (you should have seen him trying to teach me to drive a stickl shift. I sat with him in the car once and then taught myself from then on. The prospect of killing myself or having the transmission leap out of the hood of the car was less scary than having him in there with me)
quote:
A parent who loves their child knows how that child learns. A parent who loves their children will go to all ends to provide a proper education.
That is assuming that every parent is emotionally prepared to be a parent, let alone a teacher.
My mother never figured out how I learned. I had to figure out how to not get yelled at.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by mark24, posted 12-15-2002 5:17 PM mark24 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 46 of 107 (26980)
12-17-2002 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by funkmasterfreaky
12-15-2002 6:20 PM


quote:
What makes you think parents are good teachers, anyway?
quote:
Well I should hope they are good teachers, that's what they signed on for when the brought a child into this world.
Well, yes, we can hope, but it is naieve to think that most people who have kids do it with a whole lot of forethought.
I think most people have kids because they expect to get married and have a family and they don't think about it much beyond that.
quote:
If you had two people, one, the parent, & the other a qualified teacher holding a mathematics degree, who would most likely make the best job of imparting mathematical knowledge to the child?
quote:
Most likely the one who cared if the child understood the concepts being taught. So I'd say the parent. For one a mathematics degree is not necessary to teach through to high school math.
Gee, do you think that most Americans have a good enough grounding in math, including triganometry and calculus, to be able to teach it?
I don't.
quote:
That most teachers don't care about each child in their class is relevant. The fact that this system only works for a very small percentage of kids is relevant.
...and the schools that work are almost always the ones with the most money. Go figure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-15-2002 6:20 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 47 of 107 (26983)
12-17-2002 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by funkmasterfreaky
12-15-2002 10:08 PM


quote:
Why do you think we have kids shooting up schools,
Easy availability of guns in the US?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-15-2002 10:08 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:26 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 62 of 107 (27175)
12-18-2002 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 1:14 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
quote:
Yes, considering that today more people in the US than ever believe in silliness like homeopathy, magnet therapy, and psychic's ability to talk to the dead.
It is too much to ask people to think critically when uncritical thought is at an all time high among our population.
This again points to the education system. People take what the read/hear as fact, because they have been taught to regurgitate information instead of process it.
Thanx for solidifying my belief that the current system doesn't work.

The current system WOULD work just fine, as it has in the past, if we funded all schools well and there was more parental involvement across the board.
We were shocked that Sputnik was launched, so there was a big thrust in science and mathematics instruction, and, lo and behold, critical thinking among the general population was up, and belief in the paranormal was down.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:14 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 63 of 107 (27179)
12-18-2002 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 1:26 PM


Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
quote:
Sorry Schraf this seems like the cop out excuse to this problem. Personally I hate the idea of any sort of gun control. (this is a whole new thread)
So, do you think that anyone should have the right to own a rocket launcher? How about a machine gun?
quote:
Don't you think an educated mass should be able to teach their children that it is wrong to shoot others!?
Maybe, except that the consequences of failure to teach this lesson, combined with easy availability of guns results in tragedy.
Thet is the price you pay for being in love with guns.
quote:
I think these occurances have more to do with the social damage that kids are sustaining in the school system.
Kids have ALWAYS sustained damage in the school system, in their neighborhoods, in their families and peer groups. That is nothing new.
quote:
I personally did not have a good go of the public school system, when I saw the Columbine shooting on the news it was not a shock. It saddened me greatly that these kids had not been able to cope with their situation and had destroyed their own lives in anger.
And that is why guns should be kept far, far away from troubled people, and should be difficult to get and have very strict laws about keeping them secure.
quote:
However it was an event that was becoming inevitable, you would not believe the amount of kids in our systems who have a "hit list" of peers and teachers in their schools.
But I made mental lists of people I hated or who were mean to me when I was in school, too, and I had my fantasies of making them suffer.
I don't pretend to think that the easy availability of guns is the only reason things like this hppen, but you are wrong to think it is a new thing that kids can't cope or that they get picked on at school.
I think that lack of parental and community responsibility and supervision contributes greatly to the problem.
In the past, troubled kids brought knives to school. It's a lot harder to mow down dozens of people with a knife. Now they go buy a gun on the street or at a gun show.
quote:
I don't think this problem is anywhere near over, though the footage from Columbine may be deterring others with the same ideas.
I know I entertained this very thought many times growing up in the public school system, I just eventually chose drug abuse instead.
EXACTLY. You entertained these thoughts, as a lot of people did.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 1:26 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 10:25 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 64 of 107 (27184)
12-18-2002 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 2:03 PM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
[B]
quote:
. Why? Because it requires that at least one parent stays home and is motivated enough to teach a child. The rich... well they can just send their kids off to private school. For the poor... a lot of inner city families cannot afford to do this and single moms cannot afford to do this. It is unrealistic to adopt a policy of home schooling for America. I think those parents that want it, well we should let them know they can... but otherwise stay out of it.
quote:
Part of the problem with our current system has been pointed out, the economics that gets involved. You stand a much better chance to get a good education if you are born into a rich family and live in a wealthy neighbourhood. This is not how our wonderful freedom is supposed to work, is it? Otherwise it is still as it has always been in any other "class" oriented society. The rich nobles get the best education and remain the rich nobles, while the poor peasants get a shoddy hasty education and remain poor peasants.
This is why we need to fund all public schools in each state equally instead of having school funding based upon property taxes. I think one state voted to do that this November...was it Florida?
quote:
I also understand the problem of single parent families, completely switching to a home system would be impossible for such people. First off any man who abandons his children and wife (girlfriend, whatever) alone to fend for themselves is no man at all.
Agreed.
quote:
Another problem I have which you touched on is the two working parents. I think alot of the time (not all) that this is selfishness on the part of the mother. Where she is more concerned about her career than her children and shirks her responsibility as a mother to further her own personal goals.
Ah, classic mysogyny. How offensive.
Who the hell are you to decide, for all women, what their "responsibilities" are? Since when is it SOLELY a mother's responsibility to be at home as the primary caregiver to children? Why are fathers not at all responible, in any way, for providing primary care to their children at home? Nobody blames fathers for being selfish for not staying at home with the children and having a career. Why is that? It couldn't be a double standard, would it?
Wake up and move into the new millenium, Funk. Those old strict gender roles don't work any more now that women want to have a rewarding life outside the home, or stay at home with their children, IF THEY WISH. Having a career makes women more educated and more interesting people, therefore they are likely to be better mothers. Studies also show that children who spend time in good daycare are more interactive and stimulated and have better coping skills; iow are just fine.
I had a stay at home mother an IT SUCKED. She didn't give me the time of day; most of the time I didn't interact with her at all and I played by myself and then got yelled at to clean up my mess. I had much more fun when I occasionally went to the babysitter's place and she actually played with me.
quote:
The flip side of this is that North Americans are slaves to money, credit spending and keeping up with technology wastes alot of our resources. I think most people can live comfortably and happy with a whole lot less money than we seem to think we "need" to make. To shorten these two points up, it is our own greed that is robbing from the education of our children.
I do agree with this.
quote:
I hope I have not offended anyone with this post as I know I have made some strong statements. Please accept my apologies in advance if I have inadvertantly insulted anyone.
SOrry, you did offend.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 2:03 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 65 of 107 (27186)
12-18-2002 8:59 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by funkmasterfreaky
12-17-2002 6:29 PM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
AAArrrrggghhhh *pulling own hair in frustration* lol
I should have known to phrase that in a more "socially acceptable" fashion. I don't believe it has to be the mother no. It can and I'm sure does work the other way around.
I must learn to state things much more clearly, it seems that as soon as a Christian says things along a certain line people suddenly jump to conclusions. I can see Schraf coming along screaming that I'm a woman hater, that I'm afraid of them like all other "fundies". This is not the case.
Look, Funky, you were pretty damn clear when you stated that a mother is shirking her responsibilities when she works outside the home.
Your blatant ommission of any mention of fathers shirking their responsibilities when they work outside the home was also crystal clear.
I am not sure how you could have stated your belief that "working mothers are shirking their responsibilities" in a non-offensive way.
And I didn't jump on you for it because you are a Christian. I would jump on anyone stating such...things.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-18-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-17-2002 6:29 PM funkmasterfreaky has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 66 of 107 (27187)
12-18-2002 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by funkmasterfreaky
12-18-2002 3:33 AM


quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Quetzal,
I am so sorry to offend you, though I think you are an acception to the rule. That's awesome! Remember my view is limited to North America.

Why do you think Quetzal's family is the exception to the rule? Based upon what?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 3:33 AM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Quetzal, posted 12-18-2002 9:41 AM nator has replied
 Message 69 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 3:52 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 70 of 107 (27361)
12-19-2002 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Quetzal
12-18-2002 9:41 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Quetzal:
quote:
Originally posted by schrafinator:
quote:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Quetzal,
I am so sorry to offend you, though I think you are an acception to the rule. That's awesome! Remember my view is limited to North America.

Why do you think Quetzal's family is the exception to the rule? Based upon what?

That's an excellent question, Schraf. With the exception of our wandering lifestyle (3 countries in 8 years), I don't consider us very unusual. Most of my peers with families are quite similar in outlook and behavior. I mean, we're not doing all this racing around with kids by ourselves - a lot of our friends are doing the same thing. I think there's two problems here: 1) funk is operating under an erroneous, religiously-inspired stereotype, and 2) I'm probably the first person to sit down and actually tell him some details about "the other side".
Just my thoughts on it.

Well, that's been my experience with our friends with children, too, which is why I asked.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Quetzal, posted 12-18-2002 9:41 AM Quetzal has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 71 of 107 (27362)
12-19-2002 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by funkmasterfreaky
12-18-2002 3:52 PM


Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Why do you think Quetzal's family is the exception to the rule? Based upon what?
quote:
Based on observation. It's seems very rare that I run into people who are/were happy with their family life.
Gee, I have lots of married friends, both with and without kids, who are really happy.
I was raised by a stay at home mother and I had a pretty lousy home life.
My sister is a stay at home mom but never dealt with our abusive childhood, so she is raising neurotic, unhappy kids.
A different sister and a brother both did the work to deal with their abusive childhoods, and both are raising wonderful, happy kids.
Hmmm, maybe the reason kids are happy or not in their home life has little to do with if their mother "selfishly" stays home and much more to do with how much support and love they get from their parents, and how emotionally healthy and happy their parents are.
quote:
There is so much anger towards parents, and hatred to their own families. I have met more people who were damaged by the school system than who had a positive experience from it. There is a definate problem here. This is not a religious pov. Even before I decided to walk with the Lord about 4 months ago, this was an issue that I spent alot of thought on. My solution hasn't changed, other than that I personally would say that God is the best "glue" to mend this broken situation. My views on parental involvement, and home education did not stem from my religious belief. I had formed these views prior to my committment to God.
I think the best thing to mend this situation would be;
for women to get the same pay as men for doing the same work (passage of an ERA would be great).
for companies and government to wake up to the fact that child care is a FAMILY issue, not "just" a women's issue.
to raise the minimum wage to a living wage so even lower paying jobs wouldn't require both parents to work several jobs just to make ends meet.
for the men in our culture to understand that June Cleaver never existed.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-19-2002]
{Fixed a quote box - AM}
[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 12-19-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-18-2002 3:52 PM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 12-20-2002 2:16 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 79 of 107 (28286)
01-02-2003 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by gene90
01-01-2003 8:25 PM


quote:
Originally posted by gene90:
I don't know why American crime rates are so high. But I think that if we took the guns away knives would just become more popular -- and it would offend a tremendous number of people who really appreciate gun ownership, most of whom are responsible enough.
I do not think that we should take all guns away. I think hunting rifles and the like are fine, for instance. But I do not think that handguns or other military type weapons are appropriate for civilian ownership. They are specifically designed to kill people.
It would be great if knives became popular instead of guns. It's kind of difficult to do long-distance or drive-by knifings, or to accidentally stab someone two houses over. It is also a lot more difficult to mow down lots of people with a knife.
quote:
Plus I suspect that the gun culture would just encourage a huge black market gun trade, so that criminals are well armed and the average citizen isn't.
I don't think the average citizen is very well armed now, anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by gene90, posted 01-01-2003 8:25 PM gene90 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 9:57 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 84 of 107 (28428)
01-05-2003 12:33 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by funkmasterfreaky
01-02-2003 9:57 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
[B]Gun control almost seems like a good idea, except for the practical application. Who is allowed to have weapons?[/QUOTE]
Those who pass psychological and gun safety tests, and who do not have any criminal records.
quote:
Who judges the capability of a person to own a gun?
Psychologists, law-enforcement professionals, gun experts, etc.
quote:
Ultimately I'm asking where do you draw the lines, and how far do you go to enforce them?
I would suggest drawing the line at hunting firearms.
quote:
One of the problems I have with what Canada is doing with gun control is that, they are giving the police the freedom to search for guns in your home without a warrant! Now this is absolutely unacceptable! Maybe if (as my dad said over Christmas time) we had a justice system, instead of a legal system, I could deal with this. However it seems that justice is something we only stumble across occasionally, in the system we have in place.
How far can you go to enforce this regulation? How many freedoms would you give up?
10 out of 10 people die anyway, I don't think you'll be any safer without a gun.
Um, have you SEEN the gun death rate in the US compared to other industrialized nations?
How many children do you want to see with their heads blown off before you stop saying "Oh, well, everybody dies anyway?"
Damn.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-05-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 9:57 AM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by achoo, posted 01-05-2003 3:15 AM nator has not replied
 Message 87 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-05-2003 6:37 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 86 of 107 (28441)
01-05-2003 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by funkmasterfreaky
01-02-2003 10:25 AM


[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
[B]
Originally posted by schrafinator:
Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
quote:
Sorry Schraf this seems like the cop out excuse to this problem. Personally I hate the idea of any sort of gun control. (this is a whole new thread)
So, do you think that anyone should have the right to own a rocket launcher? How about a machine gun?
quote:
I'd rather these were in the hands of civilians instead of under the command of governments who are motivated by big business.
Holy crap, you want it to be legal for the people like those in the Michigan Militia to own rocket launchers and machine guns?
Tanks. What about tanks? Should people be allowed to own tanks with rocket launchers? Should my neighbor be allowed to own an anti-aircraft gun because he fears that the MIB will take him away?
You are painting yourself into a silly scenario, funk.
quote:
Don't you think an educated mass should be able to teach their children that it is wrong to shoot others!?
Maybe, except that the consequences of failure to teach this lesson, combined with easy availability of guns results in tragedy.
Thet is the price you pay for being in love with guns.
quote:
So because of a few neglecting parents you will take away freedoms and any hope of self defence from the whole population?
I thought that you said that lots and lots of parents were neglecting their kids, and also that most teachers didn't care about their students and that the school system subjected a lot of kids to mental stress and abuse.
First this was a huge problem, but now it is a small problem of "a few"? Which is it?
The writers of our bill of rights could not have had any idea of the killing technology that would be developed in the future. Back when single-shot muskets and long rifles and bayonetts were the personal weapons of choice, and there was quite a lot of danger of our government becoming a lot like England's, it made sense for them to keep guns legal. I don't think that the writer's intent was for rocket launchers to be available to every citizen.
I would actually have no problem with every family who wanted to own a musket or a long rifle to have one.
quote:
I think these occurances have more to do with the social damage that kids are sustaining in the school system.
Kids have ALWAYS sustained damage in the school system, in their neighborhoods, in their families and peer groups. That is nothing new.
quote:
I didn't say that it was new, just that it's getting worse. So it's been going on forever anyways so who cares!? Is that what you're getting at.
Where is your evidence that it is getting worse? Could it be that more people are talking about it and assigning blame rather than the problem actually being worse?
I never said I didn't care, so please stop putting words into my mouth. I am just suggesting that perhaps it is your preferred perception that it is getting worse.
quote:
I personally did not have a good go of the public school system, when I saw the Columbine shooting on the news it was not a shock. It saddened me greatly that these kids had not been able to cope with their situation and had destroyed their own lives in anger.
And that is why guns should be kept far, far away from troubled people, and should be difficult to get and have very strict laws about keeping them secure.
quote:
So who isn't troubled?
Very cute. You know exactly what I mean.
quote:
However it was an event that was becoming inevitable, you would not believe the amount of kids in our systems who have a "hit list" of peers and teachers in their schools.
But I made mental lists of people I hated or who were mean to me when I was in school, too, and I had my fantasies of making them suffer.
I don't pretend to think that the easy availability of guns is the only reason things like this happen, but you are wrong to think it is a new thing that kids can't cope or that they get picked on at school.
I think that lack of parental and community responsibility and supervision contributes greatly to the problem.
In the past, troubled kids brought knives to school. It's a lot harder to mow down dozens of people with a knife. Now they go buy a gun on the street or at a gun show.
quote:
Kids don't seem to have problems getting drugs on the street, even though there is legislation against them. What makes you think guns will be any different? Hiding the problem away underneath some legislation does not solve anything.
We would need to stop producing cheap firearms, and we would have to be serious about enforcement if we wanted to be serious about reducing gun death in the US.
The NRA is evil. I do not say that lightly.
When they hold rallys in Colorado two weeks after Columbine, and in Flint right after that grade-schooler killed his classmate, I think it is safe to say that they are sick MF-ers.
quote:
I don't think this problem is anywhere near over, though the footage from Columbine may be deterring others with the same ideas.
I know I entertained this very thought many times growing up in the public school system, I just eventually chose drug abuse instead.
EXACTLY. You entertained these thoughts, as a lot of people did.
quote:
Why are people being driven to these thoughts, isn't this the problem in the first place? Has nothing to do with wether or not you have access to a gun.
No shit.
But don't you think it is stupid to risk lots and lots of people getting KILLED because it is easy for any disturbed wacko to get a gun when he can't cope?
Perhaps you are willing to trade those thousands of lives for your cozy happiness with a warm gun, but I am not.
[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 01-05-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-02-2003 10:25 AM funkmasterfreaky has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-05-2003 7:20 PM nator has replied
 Message 90 by funkmasterfreaky, posted 01-06-2003 1:57 AM nator has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024