Sandy Hook school to be demolished, new school built on same site

3,000 died in the WTC and you don't hear any complaints about the new building on the same site. Would it make sense to leave prime real estate in the middle of Manhattan vacant in memoriam?

I agree that it would be a waste of resources. Public facilities are supposed to be efficient, spartan, and just enough to do the job. A school building is incredibly expensive these days. Maybe that sounds insensitive, but I honestly don't think it would make one bit of difference to the kids. The kids will relate to the event itself more than anything. Moving schools alone might even be more disruptive to their cognizance of the event. Kids grow up and new kids come to the building too.

Add this to the fact that it's a notorious crime scene, and demo would be destroying evidence.

JMHO

reply to post by lynxpilot

As you mention it, and it does bear on the topic in terms of handling the aftermath of tragedy and memorials...this link goes to a specific post made on a 9/11 thread I'd authored for aspects of the Museum/Memorial. That thread topic is unrelated to this, but the post it links to within it is related, I believe.

It shows the open area that has, actually, been left open to the sky above in Lower Manhattan. They didn't rebuild on the literal footprints of the buildings themselves and did turn those into pure memorial and remembrance to the lost. (I hope the member who took these photos and posted them doesn't mind my highlighting them for this reference)

Reflection Pools / Water Features of the 9/11 Memorial Site

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Sorry to offend, but my first thought on reading the title ("Sandy Hook school to be demolished, new school built on same site") of the thread and your subsequent remarks in the OP was to ask what I think is a legitimate question: was Sandy Hook Elementary even being used as a school building at all? Consequent to that line of thought - for me at least - was that its reasonable to ask that question with respect to the fact that if the building indeed was NOT being used as a legitimate school building then it would have been quite appropriate for the 'authorities' to tear it down - thereby eliminating all possibility of evidentiary disclosure to the contrary.

Are you still going to insist that I (we) comply with your rules for the thread as regards what can be discussed and what can not be discussed? If so then I will bow out on the grounds of censorship by the OP. Am I being unreasonable?


ALSO - You stated - Quote - "and the one actually ridiculing another member"

I am not aware that I ridiculed anyone in the thread.

reply to post by POXUSA


I'd just politely request that you not derail the thread. Staff has, apparently, hit one of your messages already. They will close my thread entirely and without much warning ...given the very troubled history of this topic on ATS, if it gets out of hand at all. I have no doubt in my mind about that. It's why I care to say anything.

Ops never "own" their own threads. We all send them off into the world of discussion to sink or swim and find their own path, after hitting the submit button. No questions on that. That doesn't stop me from making my request though, and again, as politely as I can. Thanks.

This is absurd and childish. What a waste of money.

Clean it up, fix it and get back to business.

People in this country can be such p#####s.

Originally posted by lynxpilot

Add this to the fact that it's a notorious crime scene, and demo would be destroying evidence. JMHO

And therein lies the rub (the crux of the whole issue) of the school building. Why hasn't the public ever seen any photographic evidence of the alleged 'crime scene'? The bullet holes - the broken glass door - the blood, and all the rest. Isn't that real evidence that should have been documented and made available to us before any decision to demo the school?

I don't understand this at all. To the average onlooker this might have the look of a rather suspicious demolition. There are a few others here who feel the same way, but it looks as though the other side of the coin will not be open to discussion here ? Oh well. Just my 2 centavos - Then again, perhaps this thread won't go anywhere anyway. Its been up for 12 hours - and has only been able to muster 3 flags and a page and quarter.

I guess it might be better to start another thread but then I am afraid to. Why start something that I won't be able to follow through on? Ya no what i mean?

What a waste of the taxpayer's money. Whatever funds they were planning to waste on going through with this project could've been spent on worthy things. Why destroy the building at all? Let the homeless live in it or something along those lines.

reply to post by Abstruse


No homeless in Newtown. They ship them all to Danbury

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I'm not going to lie. I think it's silly superstitious nonsense. So - pretty much like everything else we do as a people.

Also: rebuilding is a great "boon" for the local economy, and -- sense we tend to look at the economy with the same degree of superstition and silliness -- it makes perfect sense that otherwise rational people are sucked up into the idea of it in the first place.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s

I'm not going to lie. I think it's silly superstitious nonsense. So - pretty much like everything else we do as a people.

I have to say, I really respect that. It's a bit of a kick to my deeply held beliefs...but nothing about mine makes them special over yours, to be sure.

It's rare these days that people just drop the pretenses and just outright state it that way. Fair enough...and I'd imagine the people who made these decisions feel quite similar for rebuilding on the same site and presumably, footprint of the original buildings it all happened in.

the school served it's long time planned purpose .
like the WTC.
no pointing to live it there for evidence.
in israel they never demolish a school or any place after terror attacks.
Ma'alot massacre:
en.wikipedia.org...

A complex dedicated to eliminating guns and explosives should be constructed
where the evil did not take place.

The areas where people died will have to be a memorial.

OH GOOD GOD PEOPLE....SERIOUSLY??? (tearing down a school just to rebuild it)

Let's just pour some tax payer dollars into the ocean while we're at it. What a waste of money. It's a perfectly usable location and facility. Get over it people. Jeez.

First Selectman Patricia Llodra said the new school would cost between $42 million and $47 million, whether it was built at the SAC field, which would require a great deal of site work, or the current school site, which will require the existing building to be demolished.

And just where are those millions going to come from? Taxes from the gun manufacturers in CT? Oh wait, that's right, knee-jerk gun law changes have now forced them to move...

Arms manufacturers in at least two states with strict new gun laws are making good on their promise to move their operations -- along with thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenues -- to locales they deem friendlier to the industry.

Obviously, what they really need there is a school that teaches economics....

People should get over silly superstitions.
If tragedy curses and area then all of Europe would be cursed. The same with the American Indians.

Remodel those rooms into Admin facilities.
Allow those parents with bad feelings to transfer their kids to a different school for the next 6 years.

Done and over with.

If they have nothing to hide, why are they hiding everything?

www.prisonplanet.com...
Contractors involved in the demolition of the Sandy Hook Elementary School are being required to sign confidentiality agreements that prohibit them from publicly discussing the site, taking photographs or disclosing information about the school.

What could the contractors possibly see that is so dangerous? Bullet holes in areas where no one was shot? Or maybe the fact they don't see ANY bullet holes?

It has been determined that the rubble will be dumped in the ocean in a top secret location on top of Osama Bin Laden's body. Once that is accomplished the crew will be "disappeared" and the records sealed until 2063.

Even more weird is that the construction crew has to sign a confidential notice. Why the heck would that be?


EDIT: oops sorry didn't see the post above me.

My thoughts are NOTHING should be built on that spot. A memorial park, something to honor the loss of lives there. A new school should be built elsewhere...but I'm NOT a voter/taxpayer there.

FWIW, I DO feel that places that have had profound violence (even suicides) never "feel" right or tranquil. When I worked in Real Estate, I was legally REQUIRED to tell perspective buyers if I had knowledge if a property had such an event or "notoriety." Some humans I guess are MORE attuned to such "energies."

Lastly, if I had school age children and resided in Newton, I would have moved away. I don't think I could stay there. Just MY gut level reaction.

lynxpilot
3,000 died in the WTC and you don't hear any complaints about the new building on the same site.

The World Trade Center will be filled with offices of grown ups.
The school would be filled with 6 and 7 year olds.
BIG DIFFERENCE.

Common sense and basic psychology - Children can't learn when they are distracted. 6 & 7 year old children will be very distracted and distressed if they are sitting in the same spot that dozens of other children were murdered on. It's just that simple.

Destroy the building. Rebuild elsewhere.
It's important for the psychological welfare of the children and their ability to learn.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Just imagine the ghost stories that would spring from the kids fertile imaginations. The school would always be considered haunted. I think more than a few parents would also fear sending their kids there.