Another day another shooting

[Murphy101]

I was surprised that the first place I read about it was on Korean news and that no one here was discussing it yet.

I guess the common place is just not very news worthy?

Iowa school shooting. 6th grader killed, 5 injured, single gunman killed himself.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/04/us/perry-iowa-school-shooting.html

 

[regentrude]

It was on cnn.

But I'm not sure what we can discuss about it here. I feel we said everything there is to say, so many times over - and it doesn't ever make a difference.

[TexasProud]

19 minutes ago, regentrude said:

It was on cnn.

But I'm not sure what we can discuss about it here. I feel we said everything there is to say, so many times over - and it doesn't ever make a difference.

Yep.  We are powerless to do anything. So why discuss.

[Innisfree]

I saw it last night in the newspapers I follow online. It was more prominent on the BBC website than on the two major U.S. papers.

This morning the article in the online WaPo is way down the page. Here it is, without a paywall: https://wapo.st/41Oci2T

Here’s the story from the NYT, which was similarly inconspicuous. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/04/us/perry-iowa-school-shooting.html?unlocked_article_code=1.LU0.IedL.zeYYpSoDyO4G&smid=url-share

All I can really think is that Iowa has a lot of clout right now. They get to choose how to handle this. The NYT piece notes that media was already in the area because of a campaign event. And that’s probably all that I can say, which is why I don’t think there’s much to talk about here. Everything about this phenomenon is political. I don’t think we’re powerless in the least. But individually, our power is limited. 

We can talk more on the Politics board, but I think we mostly all know what we think. Moderators, I’ll delete the paragraph above if it crosses the line.

[Katy]

I know someone who was working across the street. Even though I was aware of what was going on, I wasn’t sure what to post. We’re very lucky that it was a shotgun with bird shot and a smaller caliber handgun. A lot of people were hurt but had minor injuries. Even the girl that was shot in the head was awake and responsive before she went into surgery. 

[Katy]

It’s not an Iowa decision to not have lots if national coverage, it’s just that the body count is too low for people to care on a national stage. 

[Innisfree]

Just now, Katy said:

It’s not an Iowa decision to not have lots if national coverage, it’s just that the body count is too low for people to care on a national stage. 

No, that’s not an Iowa decision, I agree. I meant more how to respond to it politically, which is why I was concerned about crossing the line here. Iowa is the center of the American political landscape right now. How Iowans talk about this can make news, if they want that to happen.

[Katy]

49 minutes ago, Innisfree said:

No, that’s not an Iowa decision, I agree. I meant more how to respond to it politically, which is why I was concerned about crossing the line here. Iowa is the center of the American political landscape right now. How Iowans talk about this can make news, if they want that to happen.

IDK how much influence Iowa really has anymore. Democrats have stripped them of first in favor of North Carolina. Republican candidates have all said something, but obviously support the NRA. Rural Iowans, like many rural people, frequently live in areas where police response is well over an hour, so even if they don’t have “assault weapons,” many do have at least a shotgun, which is what was used in this case. 

The police were inside the school in 7 minutes, and the shooter was already dead. The reason they were there so fast is the school had a security system that detected the sound of gunfire and alerted dispatchers. Then dispatchers had access to the school’s security cameras and could verify the shooter was there, calling in police and ambulances from surrounding areas. I’m sure the system cost a small fortune. I wonder if all schools in Iowa have a similar system. 

[Heartstrings]

I got several push alerts about it from the AP.  
 

The reality is that school shootings aren’t newsworthy at this point.  They are not new, they are not novel.  There are waaay more every year than the ones that get national attention.   We’d do nothing else if every shooting got multi day coverage and a thread on here.

  Dog bites man isn’t news.   Man bites dog is news.    The 3000th school shooting is as common as dog bites man.   It’s just where we are. 

There are more missing children, missing woman, murders, car accidents, police shootings, police being shot, etc. than we have the capacity or capability to cover or acknowledge in a country of 330 million people.  We couldn’t even read over every single name of a victim from yesterday before it was time to start reading tomorrows list.  
 

What makes one school shooting capture the national attention is an interesting question. So is the question of which missing child or missing woman captures our attention.  These are common place, daily events.  
Why do we know about Patito and Laundry but not the 100s of indigenous woman that go missing?   Why is Jon Benet a household name but not the thousands of murdered children since?  

Edited January 5 by Heartstrings

[Katy]

I mean, if it bleeds it leads, and blonde & pretty privilege seems to be the reason for the coverage to me. 

[GoVanGogh]

One of my siblings lives there and they sent out a family wide text right away. They had heard all the sirens, then helicopters, and knew something had happened. One of their adult children is on the medical staff at the hospital patients were taken to. I talked with my sibling last night and they were all very shaken. “You know it can happen anywhere but you never think about it happening in your own small town,” was said many times during our call. 

[Pawz4me]

1 hour ago, Katy said:

IDK how much influence Iowa really has anymore. Democrats have stripped them of first in favor of North Carolina.

South Carolina, not North Carolina.

[mommyoffive]

I saw it yesterday when it broke on tv here in the morning.  I agree that posting about every school or mass shooting we would have one everyday.  I think only ones with lots of victims get news coverage these days.  But that really sickens and saddens me too, that we as a society are numb and feel powerless to making this stop.  

[livetoread]

I really admire the families of victims who, year after year, keep trying to shift things. It would be so hard to see such apathy by a large segment of our politicians, knowing they are shrugging off the death of your kid. How they don't just end up curled in a corner is amazing to me, because that's pretty much where I am when it comes to the subject.

[Pam in CT]

NPR and Iowa public radio were covering it late yesterday afternoon. 

While I do agree that Some Lives Matter more than others, and there are patterns to the mattering... I don't think the break is whether school shootings are literally "covered."  Mass shootings inside school buildings and targeted shootings of judges are covered in real time; they're still deemed newsworthy by responsible press outlets (DV shootings and driveby shootings maybe notsomuch, unless it's Jon Benet or Tupac). 

I think the issue is more, we the public don't know what to DO with such news. It's right there, on NPR / NYT / WaPo / Fox / CNN / BBC / regional public radio / etc. But it doesn't get a zillion carryovers into the social media infrastructure that most people now get their first (often only) referral to most news. It doesn't fuel the adrenaline cycle.

[Heartstrings]

12 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

think the issue is more, we the public don't know what to DO with such news. It's right there, on NPR / NYT / WaPo / Fox / CNN / BBC / regional public radio / etc. But it doesn't get a zillion carryovers into the social media infrastructure that most people now get their first (often only) referral to most news. It doesn't fuel the adrenaline cycle.

I think some it is the feeling of “why bother?”.   We have talked it around to death here, as it’s been talked to death on every other platform.  We have discussed, negotiated and figured out solutions this problem 1 million times.  It’s all been a waste of time because we have no power to force our carefully crafted solutions to be passed as law.  
Doing it again over this shooting is just an exercise in frustration.  Nothing changed after Littleton, nothing changed after Uvalde, nothing will change after this one, or the one tomorrow.  And there will be one tomorrow or the next day, as sure there’ll be sun.  We can only hold the outrage for so long.
 

Is it worth spending 2 or 3 days fighting over it, again? Is it worth a Facebook post that will create bad blood with Aunt Edna, again.  Is it worth the harassment and doxing threats from bots on “the other side” of the issue to make a Tik Tok?  All to rinse and repeat in a few days over the next one?
 

 

Edited January 5 by Heartstrings

[Frances]

3 hours ago, Katy said:

IDK how much influence Iowa really has anymore. Democrats have stripped them of first in favor of North Carolina. Republican candidates have all said something, but obviously support the NRA. Rural Iowans, like many rural people, frequently live in areas where police response is well over an hour, so even if they don’t have “assault weapons,” many do have at least a shotgun, which is what was used in this case. 

Do you have a source for the response time info? I’m surprised to hear it based on lived experience. While certainly many in Iowa live rurally, it is very evenly populated and not like rural areas in some other states which can be very sparsely populated.

[Pam in CT]

re feeling overwhelmed / helpless => giving up on possibility of change

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

I think some it is the feeling of “why bother?”.   We have talked it around to death here, as it’s been talked to death on every other platform.  We have discussed, negotiated and figured out solutions this problem 1 million times.  It’s all been a waste of time because we have no power to force our carefully crafted solutions to be passed as law.  
Doing it again over this shooting is just an exercise in frustration.  Nothing changed after Littleton, nothing changed after Uvalde, nothing will change after this one, or the one tomorrow.  And there will be one tomorrow or the next day, as sure there’ll be sun.... 

(( I know. ))

And,

I know you know that **grieving / venting / debating better policy on WTM** and **kvetching on Facebook** is not the mechanism through which laws are made.

There really ARE powerful forces allied against better policies that other nations (even those with bears and coyotes preying on farms, even those with recreational hunters, even those with demographically diverse populations, even those whose populations are sufficiently spread out that LE takes a long time to arrive, WE ARE NOT AS EXCEPTIONAL AS WE BELIEVE) have enacted, that we have been unable to get to. The disproportionate impact of those interests are better described as a small number of collective entities that "have a distinct financial interest in fanning the flames / motivating the othering and fear / that fuels more gun sales" than as "voters." 

Which is where the crack is, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in.

I am not suggesting it's ever going to be an easy lift. But for those of us who care about dead schoolchildren / women / judges / unnamed unnoted POC, we have to recognize that

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

... We can only hold the outrage for so long.

outrage isn't what effects change either. Plodding organization, consisted concerted pressure on legislators who always have a finger up to feel the prevailing wind, following the money that is actively seeking to make and keep us outraged and/or hopeless, and the occasional well-targeted lawsuits are what has effected all the major policy and societal changes of the last 70 years.  Effecting change is a MARATHON, and there's not much validation in much of the work. Well, that's how it is.

 

 

Ruth Messinger comes back repeatedly to the idea that we cannot retreat to the luxury of feeling overwhelmed. 

I am not optimistic by disposition -- anyone who knows me IRL will attest to this -- and, also, moments of overwhelmed-ness and the real need to retreat and regroup and refuel really is a real thing. 

But I also have lived long enough to understand that "I'm too overwhelmed; therefore I'm out" is, indeed, a luxury.

 

[Corraleno]

I saw the news story yesterday morning, soon after it happened, and there was an interview with a mother who said she was frustrated and upset that she couldn't find out where her son was, and then she said he was a 6th grader and I just felt sick thinking he was likely the one who was killed and she didn't know it yet when she was being interviewed. Imagine kissing your 6th grader goodbye as he leaves for school, in a "safe" little town in rural Iowa, and the next time you see him is in the morgue.

The issue goes so far beyond gun control, though. We live in a culture that increasingly sees violence and revenge as understandable and even admirable behavior. The people who attacked the Capital and assaulted police on January 6 are still hailed by many as heroes and "political prisoners." We have sitting members of Congress calling for the execution of people they disagree with. We have politicians and media figures harassing, doxxing, and encouraging retaliation against judges and prosecutors and election workers, who are getting death threats in unprecedented numbers. A significant percentage of the US population lives in a media bubble that tells them all day every day that they are under attack and they should be outraged and seething with anger about it, and everything wrong with their lives is the fault of others — particularly those from other races, religions, and political parties.

Give all those angry people easy access to guns, and here we are. Mass shootings may be the most visible and newsworthy manifestation of it, but many more people get shot every day just for pissing someone off in traffic, or turning around in the wrong driveway, or getting a better Christmas present. I read a news story yesterday about two guys who got into an argument in an elevator and they pulled out their guns and killed each other. It's like certain segments of society purposely opened the cultural gas valve and then handed out matches to every pissed off person who wants them. We can (and should) try to regulate who can carry matches, and what kind/how many, but unless we fight back against those who control the gas valve, not much will change.

[Heartstrings]

17 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re feeling overwhelmed / helpless => giving up on possibility of change

(( I know. ))

And,

I know you know that **grieving / venting / debating better policy on WTM** and **kvetching on Facebook** is not the mechanism through which laws are made.

There really ARE powerful forces allied against better policies that other nations (even those with bears and coyotes preying on farms, even those with recreational hunters, even those with demographically diverse populations, even those whose populations are sufficiently spread out that LE takes a long time to arrive, WE ARE NOT AS EXCEPTIONAL AS WE BELIEVE) have enacted, that we have been unable to get to. The disproportionate impact of those interests are better described as a small number of collective entities that "have a distinct financial interest in fanning the flames / motivating the othering and fear / that fuels more gun sales" than as "voters." 

Which is where the crack is, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in.

I am not suggesting it's ever going to be an easy lift. But for those of us who care about dead schoolchildren / women / judges / unnamed unnoted POC, we have to recognize that

outrage isn't what effects change either. Plodding organization, consisted concerted pressure on legislators who always have a finger up to feel the prevailing wind, following the money that is actively seeking to make and keep us outraged and/or hopeless, and the occasional well-targeted lawsuits are what has effected all the major policy and societal changes of the last 70 years.  Effecting change is a MARATHON, and there's not much validation in much of the work. Well, that's how it is.

 

 

Ruth Messinger comes back repeatedly to the idea that we cannot retreat to the luxury of feeling overwhelmed. 

I am not optimistic by disposition -- anyone who knows me IRL will attest to this -- and, also, moments of overwhelmed-ness and the real need to retreat and regroup and refuel really is a real thing. 

But I also have lived long enough to understand that "I'm too overwhelmed; therefore I'm out" is, indeed, a luxury.

 

None of that requires arguing on the internet or making Facebook posts.  “No one is talking about it” does not equal that no one cares.  I would actually argue that arguing on the internet *feels* productive while actually being rather pointless.  Voting, donating, calling representatives, all of that can be done with out a word spoken online.  

Edited January 5 by Heartstrings

[Katy]

2 hours ago, Frances said:

Do you have a source for the response time info? I’m surprised to hear it based on lived experience. While certainly many in Iowa live rurally, it is very evenly populated and not like rural areas in some other states which can be very sparsely populated.

It was in both press conferences and every major media outlet. I’m sure you can see the press conference on YouTube 

 

ETA: oh, I’m sorry, you meant in Iowa, not the 7 minutes. When I lived there and had to call the sheriff office for someone trying to break into my house in a very small town I was told it would take about 36 hours for a deputy to get there unless I’d been shot. After that I talked to a lot of police about it and while that is long for the area, it isn’t unusual in rural areas where there is often only one deputy on duty. Since then we pick housing based on police response time. However we tend to move every few years so I do understand that’s a privilege many don’t have. I was a daughter of a police chief in Florida. A few times when I needed help no one could come for a couple hours because of something happening on the other side of the county. 

Edited January 5 by Katy

[Faith-manor]

16 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

I saw the news story yesterday morning, soon after it happened, and there was an interview with a mother who said she was frustrated and upset that she couldn't find out where her son was, and then she said he was a 6th grader and I just felt sick thinking he was likely the one who was killed and she didn't know it yet when she was being interviewed. Imagine kissing your 6th grader goodbye as he leaves for school, in a "safe" little town in rural Iowa, and the next time you see him is in the morgue.

The issue goes so far beyond gun control, though. We live in a culture that increasingly sees violence and revenge as understandable and even admirable behavior. The people who attacked the Capital and assaulted police on January 6 are still hailed by many as heroes and "political prisoners." We have sitting members of Congress calling for the execution of people they disagree with. We have politicians and media figures harassing, doxxing, and encouraging retaliation against judges and prosecutors and election workers, who are getting death threats in unprecedented numbers. A significant percentage of the US population lives in a media bubble that tells them all day every day that they are under attack and they should be outraged and seething with anger about it, and everything wrong with their lives is the fault of others — particularly those from other races, religions, and political parties.

Give all those angry people easy access to guns, and here we are. Mass shootings may be the most visible and newsworthy manifestation of it, but many more people get shot every day just for pissing someone off in traffic, or turning around in the wrong driveway, or getting a better Christmas present. I read a news story yesterday about two guys who got into an argument in an elevator and they pulled out their guns and killed each other. It's like certain segments of society purposely opened the cultural gas valve and then handed out matches to every pissed off person who wants them. We can (and should) try to regulate who can carry matches, and what kind/how many, but unless we fight back against those who control the gas valve, not much will change.

I had a long response formed, and then read yours. I am just going to go with yours, and say it is spot on.

We are going through some things here in Michigan. We have our first red flag laws, a little buttoning up on some things like private and gun show sales, etc. Nothing that is going to make a major difference. But where the big emotion is at the moment is that Ethan Crumbley(sentenced to life without parole for the Oxford School shooting) has parents sitting in jail awaiting trial for being the horrible, wicked excuse of human beings who with depraved indifference practically made sure their son would murder people. All eyes are on this. If they can be held accountable for the role they played, it may be possible to see some change. The ammosexuals of my state care not a flying fig for human life except their own. They care exclusively for their own skin and their wallets. If it becomes possible to hold every single parent who lets their kid have access to guns in the home accountable for the gun crime that minor commits, and it results in bankruptcy and prison time, some of them might be more willing to exercise caution or get rid of the stockpiles or maybe not act like Bonnie and Clyde at home. But who knows? They may just continue on thinking there will never be any consequences to them personally for being armed for Iwo Jima against "da big, bad gubmint" when that gubmint is bringing snipers, missiles, drones, and nukes to the local yokel gunfight.

My feelings are raw. We just got through the Ethan Crumbley sentencing, and updates on the parents right before Christmas, and we have acquaintances and colleagues with kids in that school district. 

[Pam in CT]

re role of arguing on the internet / making facebook posts

37 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

None of that requires arguing on the internet or making Facebook posts.  “No one is talking about it” does not equal that no one cares.  I would actually argue that arguing on the internet *feels* productive while actually being rather pointless.  Voting, donating, calling representatives, all of that can be done with out a word spoken online.  

100%.

There is **a** function that arguing on the internet / making FB post fills. For many people, it's an important part of processing; and that processing is necessary. And for some, it provides some early pointers to organizations in the space / info about policy that has been effected elsewhere / how to contact legislators etc.  Kvetching on the internet CAN BE a gateway for subsequent more-on-point action, in the same way that exhilarating marches/protests CAN BE a gateway to subsequent more-on-point action.

But neither is where and how actual change occurs. ( Obvi , and yet also, worth saying... )

 

 

re role of criminal and civil liability lawsuits

18 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

I had a long response formed, and then read yours. I am just going to go with yours, and say it is spot on.

We are going through some things here in Michigan. We have our first red flag laws, a little buttoning up on some things like private and gun show sales, etc. Nothing that is going to make a major difference. But where the big emotion is at the moment is that Ethan Crumbley(sentenced to life without parole for the Oxford School shooting) has parents sitting in jail awaiting trial for being the horrible, wicked excuse of human beings who with depraved indifference practically made sure their son would murder people. All eyes are on this. If they can be held accountable for the role they played, it may be possible to see some change. The ammosexuals of my state care not a flying fig for human life except their own. They care exclusively for their own skin and their wallets. If it becomes possible to hold every single parent who lets their kid have access to guns in the home accountable for the gun crime that minor commits, and it results in bankruptcy and prison time, some of them might be more willing to exercise caution or get rid of the stockpiles or maybe not act like Bonnie and Clyde at home. But who knows? They may just continue on thinking there will never be any consequences to them personally for being armed for Iwo Jima against "da big, bad gubmint" when that gubmint is bringing snipers, missiles, drones, and nukes to the local yokel gunfight.

My feelings are raw. We just got through the Ethan Crumbley sentencing, and updates on the parents right before Christmas, and we have acquaintances and colleagues with kids in that school district. 

Yeah.  It took 12 years and some creative legal thinking, but the Sandy Hook lawsuits finally HAVE liquidated Alex Jones' (may his name be erased from memory) evil snake oil machine, monetizing the lives of kindergartners to enrich himself. And perhaps even more importantly, Remington didn't quite accept the idea of liability but nonetheless settled at $73 million, which OTOH they can certainly afford but OTO is sufficient that the cost of insuring against similar liability in the future is suddenly a new cost of doing business.

CT and other states are looking long and hard at policies that extend liability to gun owners (with kids in the house, of unsecured weapons, of unreported stolen weapons, etc) and at requiring weapons to be insured, similar to cars.

 

We have a 2nd Amendment. That really IS a dimension in which we ARE exceptional, compared to our peer nations.  Our way to a saner society IS going to look different than nations that don't have such a provision. But that does not mean there are no roads toward the "well-regulated" side of the 2A's language.

[Ting Tang]

This story really hasn't gotten much coverage.  I saw pictures of the poor little boy who was shot 3 times. 

The school shooter had a lot of problems.  He was going through things with his sexual and gender identity, visiting voyeur groups.  He made strange videos, acting out the TX Chainsaw massacre and Jeffrey Dahmer.  Did anyone see some of the videos of him with his friends?  It looked like they were all alone, not an environment with adults present; that was just my impression--I haven't read much about his familial circumstances.  

He was bullied relentlessly, and the bullies involved his sister.  I don't think anyone deserved to die or get hurt.  Many people are bullied and don't do that, but these days, bullying does not stop when you leave school.  Once again, there were obvious signs.  Things were not right in his life.  I'd say too many adults failed him.    

Why aren't we stopping guns from getting into schools, at the very least?  Would it just take too long for the kids to get into the buildings?  Too expensive?  We've got money for a lot of things.  Schools are soft targets, and they are also places where kids can either thrive or places where some kids get lost, become depressed, and get mistreated.  

My daughter told me she never wants to go to a school again.  Yeah, I told her what happened.  It's scary, but it is our reality.  

[Heartstrings]

1 hour ago, Ting Tang said:

hy aren't we stopping guns from getting into schools, at the very least?  Would it just take too long for the kids to get into the buildings?  Too expensive?  We've got money for a lot of things.  Schools are soft targets, and they are also places where kids can either thrive or places where some kids get lost, become depressed, and get mistreated

The arguments I’ve heard against hardening schools seems to break down into 2 lines of thinking….
 

1) it would hurt mental health for kids to go to school in a prison like setting with metal detectors and guards.
 

I have some sympathy for this one.  I think kids going to school in a prison settings is terrible for the future of our country.  But the alternative seems to be kids going to school in fear of being gunned down, which is also less than ideal.  

2) inner city/gang infested areas use metal detectors and such and we can’t have our nice kids in “good” communities feeling like “those kinds” of people.  

This argument is basically racism.  
 

 

Edited January 8 by Heartstrings

[KSera]

50 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

The arguments I’ve heard against hardening schools seems to break down into 2 lines of thinking….

The primary arguments I see are that it doesn’t actually work and it’s largely impractical (both logistically and financially—for a logistical example, the “single door entry” thing is baffling to consider implementing at any of the campuses around here.)

[Ting Tang]

I know.  😞  We certainly do not want it to have a prison feel, but I am not sure what can realistically be done to protect them anymore.  I feel they are very much unprotected---I still feel like these shootings could have been prevented with interventions with these individuals.  

Have any mass shootings occurred in any inner-city school?  

It's sad when logistics can't justify keeping kids safe.  😞  

[Terabith]

It would be completely impractical here at our high school.  There are two entrances.  Periodically, they will set up a metal detector and make all 2000 kids go through it.  

School starts at 8:30 am, and when they do this, there are always kids still standing in line in the parking lot at 11 am.  And a LOT of kids just give up and leave.  

[Heartstrings]

I wonder how the schools with metal detectors already make it work?  Some schools make it work so it’s not an unsolvable problem.  
 

They aren’t usually tiny schools, I don’t think, so it’s not because they have fewer students.

 You’d need to only have a few points if entry to make it affordable to buy the machines, so I don’t think it’s that they have a ton of entrances.

 I know they usually have more than 1 machine, it’s usually several.

 Leaving kids in lines outside for hours would increase the chance of a drive by in places with gang activity so I would think they would want to prevent that.  

 

So… say 2 entrances with 4 detectors at each one, so 8 machines.   A school with 2000 kids is only 250 kids through each machines every morning.     I wonder how quickly they could do that.  

 

Edited January 8 by Heartstrings

[KSera]

1 minute ago, Heartstrings said:

You’d need to only have a few points if entry to make it affordable to buy the machines, so I don’t think it’s that they have a ton of entrances.

I think this may be one reason it’s more possible to implement in city schools. The ones I’m familiar with are much more compact with fewer entries than the rural and suburban schools which are often many buildings spread around and kids are going from building to building during the day. 

[Terabith]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

I think this may be one reason it’s more possible to implement in city schools. The ones I’m familiar with are much more compact with fewer entries than the rural and suburban schools which are often many buildings spread around and kids are going from building to building during the day. 

Yes, but that doesn't solve the issue of funneling 2000 kids through a couple of detectors and then having to deal with what happens when everyone makes it go off because it dings for cell phones and binders with metal clips and all sorts of other things.  They would have to have both relatively few entrances, but a number of detectors, and staffing infrastructure to deal with the positive screening in a time efficient way.  

Most of the inner city schools I know with metal detectors, the detectors are off the majority of the time.  

[Heartstrings]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

I think this may be one reason it’s more possible to implement in city schools. The ones I’m familiar with are much more compact with fewer entries than the rural and suburban schools which are often many buildings spread around and kids are going from building to building during the day. 

The schools near me have solved this with fencing.  The school as designed has dozens of entrances but they’ve blocked those off exterior walkways with fencing allowing only a few ways to actually enter the building.  They took pretty open campuses and made them more like buildings open to an enclosed court yard.  Where there is a will there is a way.  
 

It does 💯 look more like a prison though.  

[Heartstrings]

1 minute ago, Terabith said:

then having to deal with what happens when everyone makes it go off because it dings for cell phones and binders with metal clips and all sorts of other things.

A few detentions at the beginning of the school year for holding things up because you didn’t empty your pockets would fix that.  Redirect those kids immediately to the side to be gone over with a wand, scolded and given detention.  Problem solved in a week or 2.   

[Terabith]

4 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

A few detentions at the beginning of the school year for holding things up because you didn’t empty your pockets would fix that.  Redirect those kids immediately to the side to be gone over with a wand, scolded and given detention.  Problem solved in a week or 2.   

It really doesn't though, because it's not just pockets.  (And also, our temporary metal detector doesn't have a spot to empty pockets.) It also is everything in their BACKPACKS.  My kids' three hole punch got her dinged.  Her binder has gotten her dinged.  All of these things are in the backpacks.  They would have to have a spot to empty out every item in the backpack (and there are no lockers, so everyone has everything for every class in their backpack), and there would have to be staff who also went through all of those items.  There would have to be full time staff (many of them) devoted to manning the metal detector and the associated bag searches.  It would have to be high school TSA.  

[Heartstrings]

13 minutes ago, Terabith said:

It really doesn't though, because it's not just pockets.  (And also, our temporary metal detector doesn't have a spot to empty pockets.) It also is everything in their BACKPACKS.  My kids' three hole punch got her dinged.  Her binder has gotten her dinged.  All of these things are in the backpacks.  They would have to have a spot to empty out every item in the backpack (and there are no lockers, so everyone has everything for every class in their backpack), and there would have to be staff who also went through all of those items.  There would have to be full time staff (many of them) devoted to manning the metal detector and the associated bag searches.  It would have to be high school TSA.  

That’s why they require the kids to use clear backpacks.  Which I HATED as a kid. 

[Heartstrings]

I think just about any logistical reason why we couldn’t harden the schools has an answer, especially given more money.  I think getting money to harden the schools would be a pretty easy lift in most legislatures, comparatively.  Money for teachers, no.  Money to harden schools, to increase the police presence, to give more money to whoever makes metal detectors, yes.  I think they’d pass that.  

I personally hate the idea.  I’m just afraid of looking back in 5 years, with so many dead kids and even more with PTSD, and really wishing we had done more.  The answer can’t just be to do nothing and hope. After a shooting at the local high school is a bad time to come up with solutions.  

[Terabith]

Increasing police presence in schools leads to terrible outcomes for at risk kids.  The school to prison pipeline is real, and increased police presence in schools leads to kids being arrested and incarcerated for even minor misdeeds, like uniform infractions or talking in class.  

Also.....police officers in public schools in our area have left guns in the bathroom after taking them off to use the facilities.  I honestly believe that police in schools make kids less safe.  

[Heartstrings]

48 minutes ago, Terabith said:

Increasing police presence in schools leads to terrible outcomes for at risk kids.  The school to prison pipeline is real, and increased police presence in schools leads to kids being arrested and incarcerated for even minor misdeeds, like uniform infractions or talking in class.  

Also.....police officers in public schools in our area have left guns in the bathroom after taking them off to use the facilities.  I honestly believe that police in schools make kids less safe.  

I actually completely agree.  But that doesn’t change that over on the other hand kids are getting shot in school pretty much daily.  There isn’t a good solution. 
 

I do think schools could be hardened to an extent without police.  And if the police are already there anyway let’s give them something REAL to do besides hassle kids for dress code.  

Edited January 8 by Heartstrings

[TechWife]

7 hours ago, Ting Tang said:

…

Why aren't we stopping guns from getting into schools, at the very least?  Would it just take too long for the kids to get into the buildings?  Too expensive?  We've got money for a lot of things.  Schools are soft targets, and they are also places where kids can either thrive or places where some kids get lost, become depressed, and get mistreated.  

My daughter told me she never wants to go to a school again.  Yeah, I told her what happened.  It's scary, but it is our reality.  

There’s a point at which schools start to look and feel like prisons.

 There’s the physical cost of things like metal scanners and security guards, but there’s also the cost to the kids & families that comes as a result of going to school in what has become a prison after having gone through a security check to prove you aren’t a risk to the other kids. Innocent children, families, teachers and other staff members are paying the ongoing emotional toll for these tragedies and people continue to ignore  that the reality is that a constitutional right that enables others to gain the tools they need to commit unspeakable horrors is more important than the general welfare of people who are going about their daily lives. Both are constitutional - promoting the “general welfare” of its citizens is at odds with uncontrolled access to deadly weapons. it’s not that the right to “bear arms” is, in itself, in with the general welfare of the people. The way the 2nd amendment right is being applied is in conflict with the general welfare of the people.

Individualism has robbed us of our understanding of what civic responsibility is and as a result we seem no longer actually willing to live our lives making decisions & taking on responsibility toward the common good of our neighbors. 

We the People of the United States,

in Order to:

form a more perfect Union,

establish Justice,

insure domestic Tranquility,

provide for the common defence,

promote the general Welfare, and

secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,

do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

As an aside, the phrase “common good” can be also be from The original language as “general welfare.” We also need to have a better, maybe more classical, understanding of what the words “liberal” and “welfare” actually mean and have wider applications than we are seeing them used at the moment. 

[TechWife]

3 hours ago, Terabith said:

Increasing police presence in schools leads to terrible outcomes for at risk kids.  The school to prison pipeline is real, and increased police presence in schools leads to kids being arrested and incarcerated for even minor misdeeds, like uniform infractions or talking in class.  

Also.....police officers in public schools in our area have left guns in the bathroom after taking them off to use the facilities.  I honestly believe that police in schools make kids less safe.  

Agreeing with this and the problem is that the police officers are at the school, working as police officers, and when it comes down to it, they have the police system available to them, and that’s the lens they work through. They can’t make Jimmy apologize for punching Fred in his nose and running away with Fred’s earbuds. What the police officer can do is arrest Jimmy and put him on the criminal justice system. 
 

I would love to see a team of licensed coumselors with training in trauma response, de-escalation and a full, updated understanding of child development. There are so many many barriers to getting full student support systems in place. It’s really discouraging. 

 

[Heartstrings]

3 hours ago, TechWife said:

Agreeing with this and the problem is that the police officers are at the school, working as police officers, and when it comes down to it, they have the police system available to them, and that’s the lens they work through. They can’t make Jimmy apologize for punching Fred in his nose and running away with Fred’s earbuds. What the police officer can do is arrest Jimmy and put him on the criminal justice system. 
 

I would love to see a team of licensed coumselors with training in trauma response, de-escalation and a full, updated understanding of child development. There are so many many barriers to getting full student support systems in place. It’s really discouraging. 

 

In addition to the counselors, I'd love to see the police out and replaced with private security that works for the school.  A security guard, armed or not, who is not affiliated with the police and is employed by the district and answerable only to the district.  That kind of guard could make Jimmy apologize and go back to class if that's what the principal decides.  We have this sort of structure elsewhere, mall cops usually aren't employed by the police department, my local hospital hires armed security guards directly, with no ties to the police department.  If they work for the school then the school can easily fire them if they go rogue or overstep their boundaries.  The school could also mandate whatever classes or training they want, something that would ideally be put together at least partially by the school counselors. 

We have other options but we (general societal we) act as if we don't.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Heartstrings said:

1 hour ago, Terabith said:

I actually completely agree.  But that doesn’t change that over on the other hand kids are getting shot in school pretty much daily.  There isn’t a good solution. 

As horrific as the school shooting problem is, and as fervently as I believe it’s worth doing whatever we need to to solve, it’s still a fact that kids are overwhelmingly more likely to be shot other places than at school. Hardening the schools doesn’t reduce those shootings at all. Addressing our gun problem does. Among 5-18 year olds, “The data indicate that on average <2% of firearm homicides and <1% of firearm suicides occur at schools (including on the way to or from school)” (School Firearm Violence Prevention Practices and Policies: Functional or Folly?)

4 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

I'd love to see the police out and replaced with private security that works for the school.  A security guard, armed or not, who is not affiliated with the police and is employed by the district and answerable only to the district.

I’m not against this, but it doesn’t seem to make much difference in reality. Many school shootings have happened in schools with security guards. Most school shooters are suicidal; the presence of someone else on site with a gun isn’t a big deterrent. 

[goldberry]

My local rural school district just added armed security but with no school-environment training and will not release to anyone what their training or credentials requirements are. At the same time they refused to renew a mental health grant, which resulted in them firing 15 mental health professionals. They did this because "schools are for education, not mental health or social services." Comments were made that "mental health was just a cover for that gender garbage anyway".  So yes, it's hard not to feel discouraged. 

[Murphy101]

I think the world has been “hardened“ enough bc I’m not seeing any softer humans come out of these policies.

idk about anyone else. Maybe it’s just me. I’m in the dark pit of depression these days so my optics aren’t all that bright. But I’m not feeling one bit tougher or more resilient or safer in my well hardened life so far. And I just don’t understand the logic as to how exactly making our kids environments more hardened is going to make a different result for them. 

By historical standards the daily lives of children have never been more hardened to dangers of all kinds than they have been the last 20 years and all I’m seeing is spikes in mental illness and suicides and violence.

I’m not understanding how the solution to that is more of the same.

Edited January 8 by Murphy101

[Pam in CT]

(( Murphy )) .  Holding you in the light and praying for light to return to your life.

 

 

re lack of transparency around training of armed security officers in school

1 hour ago, goldberry said:

My local rural school district just added armed security but with no school-environment training and will not release to anyone what their training or credentials requirements are. At the same time they refused to renew a mental health grant, which resulted in them firing 15 mental health professionals. They did this because "schools are for education, not mental health or social services." Comments were made that "mental health was just a cover for that gender garbage anyway".  So yes, it's hard not to feel discouraged. 

Does your state have freedom of information act-type legislation in place for public entities?  Mine does (as do many other states); and if your state has an equivalent framework there is a process by which constituents can formally request such information and the school is **required** to provide it.

 

And if not, it is definitely an appropriate issue to ask the school board to intervene to provide transparency to parents and other constituents.  (It's a townwide liability issue as well as a parent issue.)