Child is killed during school walk out against gun violence

Wait so blame the school, not the person in the truck who hit the kid? Where is the logic in that? I understand that the school was responsible for watching after the kid but he got hit by a Truck. Drivers are responsible for watching out for pedestrians ESPECIALLY in a school zone for this particular reason. School or whoever was supervising should not be blamed.

And someone said the person driving the Truck is the victim? UMMMMMMM what?!

The article is very vague, it does not state whether or not the Truck was speeding, or if the kid was in the crosswalk. that is very important info.

Besides what would a supervisor do to prevent this? run back to try to save the kid and get hit too?

Just by going with the very vague context provided I will say the School did nothing wrong, the Truck driver should go to jail for hitting a kid, who I can only assume was in the crosswalk in a school zone.

a reply to: Blaine91555

Truth spoken! I would sign every single line you wrote. Sorry for the one-liner, a star was not enough to give credit to this post!

a reply to: Wardaddy454

But I keep getting told that no restrictions will keep a bad guy from getting a gun. That means restrictions do no good, so what's the point in having them?

So if I don't carry a weapon, I have no right to go into a public place and not get shot.

Conservatives hate peaceful demonstrations. This thread alone is evidence of that.

originally posted by: jidnum
Wait so blame the school, not the person in the truck who hit the kid? Where is the logic in that? I understand that the school was responsible for watching after the kid but he got hit by a Truck. Drivers are responsible for watching out for pedestrians ESPECIALLY in a school zone for this particular reason. School or whoever was supervising should not be blamed.

And someone said the person driving the Truck is the victim? UMMMMMMM what?!

The article is very vague, it does not state whether or not the Truck was speeding, or if the kid was in the crosswalk. that is very important info.

Besides what would a supervisor do to prevent this? run back to try to save the kid and get hit too?

Just by going with the very vague context provided I will say the School did nothing wrong, the Truck driver should go to jail for hitting a kid, who I can only assume was in the crosswalk in a school zone.

You need to get the facts straight. This was near a busy road outside of the schools district. By taking them outside, they are to be held responsible if something happens. Because they have the overwatch. It´s to be expected from a child that, especially in crowd and upbeat, they just don´t have the situational awareness we adults have.

And that´s why adulst failed to do their job. If the kid ran out on the street suddenly, onto a normal busy road -I was not there- how is the driver to be blamed? Sure his situational awareness should have told him there is a crowd, maybe slow down a bit.

But in now way can that driver be held responsible if traffic was flowing normal and suddenly a child runs in front of his truck.

Kids constantly make bad decisions and it´s the adults job to make sure they learn the right lessons and also let them make their experiences. But when you take kids to a busy road to protest for your cause, damn you ARE to be held responsible if one of those kids runs out on the street.

It´s kids you know, they sometimes forget their surroundings. Do you have kids?

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Wardaddy454

But I keep getting told that no restrictions will keep a bad guy from getting a gun. That means restrictions do no good, so what's the point in having them?

So if I don't carry a weapon, I have no right to go into a public place and not get shot.

Conservatives hate peaceful demonstrations. This thread alone is evidence of that.

The demonstration was peaceful until well meaning but inept teachers allowed a student to be killed by an innocent victim of their well intentioned idiocy.

Kayla, that risk always exists.

I went to school with a lad who got shot, I knew him all my life. You know why he was shot? Because some idiot thought that he was trying to flirt with his girlfriend.

Here's a link to the story: SHOT DEAD OVER A WOLF WHISTLE

I knew Craig all my life, we went to school together. Now this was in Glasgow back in 2004. If someone is shooting you because you whistled at his girlfriend then I'd say acquiring a gun, despite various controls in place, isn't that difficult.

So we could all potentially be shot or whatever. If you're really so paranoid may be you should take advantage of the laws that some of us are actually denied.

Personally, if I could own a gun you better believe I'd have one. Situations can change in a heartbeat. But removing the right to own guns, even limiting certain types of gun or whatever - doesn't really help.

Criminals tend to break whatever laws they have to in order to get what they want - and if you really want something bad enough no matter where you are you have a good change of getting it if you know where to look.

Realistically the only viable option that would satisfy you is if 1) they stopped allowing anyone to buy a gun and imposed some kind of test or evaluation and 2) all the nutters and crims out there who currently already have a gun be good little boys and girls and hand them all over.

Do you believe that's possible? If not, then how do you protect yourself from the naughty boys and girls that didn't hand their guns over? It'd be worse, you'd be scared to go out.

I wouldn't, but you would.

a reply to: Blaine91555

The kids weren't being used. They wanted to do this. Some of the schools were very much against it, the children pushed for it.

I know you guys find it hard to believe that many kids don't want guns in their schools, but it's true. I have talked to many kids (friends of my daughters) and they know about the recent school shootings, and they are upset about them. Not because their parents told them to be upset, not because their teachers told them to be upset. Because it really bothers them. They don't all agree on the solution. Some would like all guns banned, some just want some guns banned, and some just want mentally ill people to not be able to get guns.

They are truly bothered by it and they want to be heard. No one has ever paid any attention to them
before, but now they have a chance to be heard. And some people want to take that away from them.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Right.

No one has listened until now.

And you wonder why people are skeptical.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Wardaddy454

But I keep getting told that no restrictions will keep a bad guy from getting a gun. That means restrictions do no good, so what's the point in having them?

So if I don't carry a weapon, I have no right to go into a public place and not get shot.

Conservatives hate peaceful demonstrations. This thread alone is evidence of that.

The demonstration was peaceful until well meaning but inept teachers allowed a student to be killed by an innocent victim of their well intentioned idiocy.

And that particular school should be held accountable. That doesn't mean that all the other protests at all the other schools that were better planned and executed shouldn't have happened.

I don't think anyone really wants to take that right away from them.

I still think this thread has become something it shouldn't be.

As for the driver being at fault as another poster mentioned - I think that's a bit of a leap. By that reasoning we should automatically convict any driver who hits and kills someone with their car.

We don't, though...because it isn't always their fault. People can be really careless, it's really unfair to leap to that conclusion without the facts.

Only thing I can say for certainty is that there was definitely a lapse in supervision but we all know that anyway. There are plenty of gun threads and all this stuff has already been said.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Nonsense. I'm not criticizing the kids protesting, just the way this all came about and the schools participating by allowing the protest during school hours, on school property. They are most certainly being used.

The media used them. The politicians used them. The teachers and administrators are using them. You think if they were protesting something else like being for say border walls, they would be allowed to do this? Of course not The schools would stop that in a heartbeat and likely punish the kids.

I am not however opposed to young people protesting peacefully and lawfully, but not during school hours on school grounds. Have we become such a partisan cesspool that we are now OK with this? I guess we have. As long as people agree with the partisan cause, use the kids all they want?

I'd say exactly the same if they were protesting for more gun rights. Leave the kids alone and let them be kids. School is for learning, not political, partisan garbage. They will learn how to hate each other soon enough.

a reply to: Blaine91555

The reason it makes sense for the protests to happen on school property during school hours is because the shootings happened on school property during school hours. There’s a message in there. Do you get it?

It’s why Rosa Parks decided to exercise her civil disobedience protest on the bus — because she was discriminated against — on the bus. It’s why protesters walked into the restaurants that didn’t allow blacks and refused to leave — because those restaurants were where discrimination was happening. It’s why King led a march from Selma to the capital of Alabama— because blacks were having trouble registering to vote in Alabama.

Ysleta Superintendent Xavier De La Torre said 12 additional counselors and support staff have been sent to Parkland to help students and adults cope with the incident. The additional staff will spend at least a week at the campus.

De La Torre said about 250 students walked out of class to the football fields Friday. He added that the district's crisis management response team was on hand in anticipation of the event.
Walkout wasn't endorsed by school or district, De La Torre says

"I think what’s being irresponsibly promoted is the idea that this district and Parkland Middle School endorsed or promoted a walkout. Nothing could be further from the truth," De La Torre said.

So the school is distancing themselves from the protest as much as possible. This was not approved by the school.

The superintendent said he's communicated with law enforcement and that no teachers, staff or other school personnel will be facing consequences.

"I’ve been privy to sit with the officers who have interviewed witnesses, including witnesses at the scene, and there isn’t anything even remotely close to warranting any form of discipline to any of the administrative staff, teachers or any support staff," De La Torre said.

De La Torre said the group of students who left the walkout are likely to face disciplinary action.

"As with any other student who is truant, there are consequences," De La Torre said. "We’re trying to be sensitive to the situation and not moving forward aggressively until the investigation is closed, at which time we will determine if consequences are appropriate and what they should look like."

Details released on driver in crash that killed Parkland Middle School student

I wonder what the consequences for truancy are?

The schooly policy:

YISD Policy

It is the responsibility of the parent to notify the campus in writing or by phone call, whenever your child is absent for any reason. If the campus has not been notified, the absence will result in an UNEXCUSED absence after 72 hours. ALL absences, excused or unexcused, are subject to the 90 percent rule. If a student has established a questionable pattern of absences, the principal or attendance committee may require that a student present a physician or clinic statement of illness after a single days absence as a condition of excusing the student’s absence. Any other excessive absences may require a parent conference with a campus administrator. Daily attendance is critical for the academic success of your child!

Compulsory Attendance (direct .pdf link)

So no teachers or administrators will face any sort of consequences, some students will be given unexcused absences.

And a family has lost a son.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Rosa Parks? These children are being discriminated against by the schools? Where, I'll go protest with you. I respect everyone's opinions until they resort to that kind of debate.

I know why Rosa Parks did that and why King did what he did. Made him one of my lifelong hero's. Too compare the two is taking the low road, so I'll move on. You must be truly in partisan madness mode to imply being opposed to this is somehow comparable to being a racist, which is what you seem to be doing here.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

So wait a minute something does not add up here.

- If this was not planned or endorsed, how can that response team anticipate the event? Were they expecting the students to just walk out on their own at sometime?

- How can it happen that 250 students decide to do a walkout on their own and the teachers are just watching. Am I dreaming or would it have been their job to restore order when this walkout was not planned and inofficial?

If it´s the first thing, they soft-handed them because of the current situation and even made a bigger mess.

Regardless what happened, someone was not doing their job.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Wardaddy454

But I keep getting told that no restrictions will keep a bad guy from getting a gun. That means restrictions do no good, so what's the point in having them?

So if I don't carry a weapon, I have no right to go into a public place and not get shot.

Conservatives hate peaceful demonstrations. This thread alone is evidence of that.

The demonstration was peaceful until well meaning but inept teachers allowed a student to be killed by an innocent victim of their well intentioned idiocy.

And that particular school should be held accountable. That doesn't mean that all the other protests at all the other schools that were better planned and executed shouldn't have happened.

Had no schools participated on the naval gazing exercise the only thing that wpuld change would be that this student wouldnt be dead, and the man who struck him would not be a victim of governmental ineptitude

So walk all the children outside so anyone who is 'crazy' and wants as HIGH a death count as possible has them all in one place...yeah, great security for protesting gun violence.

a reply to: Blaine91555

No. What I'm saying is, it makes sense to protest in the place where the thing you are protesting is located-- in this case- the schools, specifically, gun violence in the schools.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Wardaddy454

But I keep getting told that no restrictions will keep a bad guy from getting a gun. That means restrictions do no good, so what's the point in having them?

So if I don't carry a weapon, I have no right to go into a public place and not get shot.

Conservatives hate peaceful demonstrations. This thread alone is evidence of that.

The demonstration was peaceful until well meaning but inept teachers allowed a student to be killed by an innocent victim of their well intentioned idiocy.

And that particular school should be held accountable. That doesn't mean that all the other protests at all the other schools that were better planned and executed shouldn't have happened.

Had no schools participated on the naval gazing exercise the only thing that wpuld change would be that this student wouldnt be dead, and the man who struck him would not be a victim of governmental ineptitude

I'm curious, if the school organized a walk for educational purposes like say to see the traffic, and a child gets run over, where should the blame get focused?

I ask because my child goes for walks around the neighborhood as part of school activities...

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Wardaddy454

But I keep getting told that no restrictions will keep a bad guy from getting a gun. That means restrictions do no good, so what's the point in having them?

So if I don't carry a weapon, I have no right to go into a public place and not get shot.

Conservatives hate peaceful demonstrations. This thread alone is evidence of that.

The demonstration was peaceful until well meaning but inept teachers allowed a student to be killed by an innocent victim of their well intentioned idiocy.

And that particular school should be held accountable. That doesn't mean that all the other protests at all the other schools that were better planned and executed shouldn't have happened.

Had no schools participated on the naval gazing exercise the only thing that wpuld change would be that this student wouldnt be dead, and the man who struck him would not be a victim of governmental ineptitude

I'm curious, if the school organized a walk for educational purposes like say to see the traffic, and a child gets run over, where should the blame get focused?

I ask because my child goes for walks around the neighborhood as part of school activities...

Obviously it would be the fault of all the other schools that also organized neighborhood walks.