The Socialist-Left doesn’t really care about protecting children.
Let’s just say it: The Socialist Left cares more about gun confiscation than commonsense ideas that will really protect kids.
Once again, we are witness to the nation’s Socialist-Left blithely assuming the unearned mantle of moral superiority because they supposedly care for ‘the children’. Allegedly ‘objective’ journalists are falling all over themselves to promote a nascent campaign to destroy our commonsense civil rights to the exclusion of steps that will really ‘Do Something’.
It is not without a hint of irony that the nation’s Socialist-Left does not care about children before they are born. Never the less, soon after they become a precious commodity that must be protected at all costs – including everyone’s fundamental human rights. Those who are merely a cluster of cells or some other humanity denying pejorative in
…show more content…
the womb, suddenly become children to be exploited for political gain upon their full emergence into the world. Gun Control Doesn’t Work – If it did, Chicago would be the safest city in the nation. Before the nation’s Socialist-Left is coronated by the world with the laurels protector of children par excellence, shouldn’t we examine their alleged solutions as to whether they work? For if gun control doesn’t work, then they are merely setting up next the mass murder tragedy another round of attacks on our civil rights. Examine their much ballyhooed utterances over the past few days: The national socialist left is promising a little temporary safety exchange for a mere pittance of your essential liberty. Of course, if they are pressed on the point, they will respond with some sort of meaningless boilerplate of cutting down the carnage. Such is usually the case, but the false media narrative remains. So what are we getting for the low-low cost of our freedom? How do their ‘solutions’ fair in the real world? Do they actually protect people? Or do they make the situation worse - far worse? Well, we already know that very much like it’s tyrannical half sister socialism, Gun control doesn’t work. Just ask the good people of Chicago or Caracas whether depriving the innocent of their means of self-defence will protect them. Parenthetically speaking, if gun control actually worked in some mythical Utopia, we would be hearing it about 24/7. This fantasy world doesn’t exist, but there are steps that can be taken to save at least one life – and isn’t that the standard by which such things are measured? Commonsense steps that will really protect children and their Civil Rights There have been plenty of suggestions of initiatives that will help reduce these terrorist attacks, from containing the contagion by reducing the killer’s media profile to providing better security.
Not to mention restoring basic discipline and a moral underpinning to our children. Or simply letting people defend themselves getting rid of the insanity of so-called “Gun Free” zones.
But instead of discussing steps that will actually work, the Socialist-Left ridicules them http://ideas.time.com/2012/12/21/viewpoint-arming-teachers-isnt-the-answer/ them https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/parkland-shooting-armed-teachers-are-not-the-answer-1164544579770
Or they insanely advocate we go further in removing God from the public square. https://www.dailywire.com/news/27320/americas-leading-scientists-degrasse-tyson-and-ben-shapiro
or decrees them to be a redirection from their real obsession.
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/374304-dems-say-gop-focus-on-mental-health-is-redirection-from-gun-control The Takeaway To be perfectly blunt about it: The most disgusting aspect of this whole cycle is that it won’t do a thing to protect children and we will be back here doing the very same thing in a few weeks or months. That is what is sickening about this whole affair, and just crediting the Socialist-Left with just a modicum of basic intelligence will reveal that know this as well. To the nation’s Socialist-Left, getting to their ultimate goal gun confiscation is far more important than the lives of children they supposedly want to protect. They care more about depriving people of the means to resist [how’s that for a word?] to their Marxist tyranny than everyone’s safety, and they are willing to climb over the bodies of children to get there. If the nation’s Socialist-Left really cared about protecting children they would advocate what works instead of what brings them power.
Which leads into my third and final premise, changing the date will be a large step towards reconciliation and act as a demonstration that we have aspirations to make our country better. Many people claim that changing the date will not change history. Of course they’re right because nothing can change history. If we were capable of doing so, I’d like to think we would have done it already. Changing the date of Australia Day will not reverse the suffering that the original custodians of this land were subjected to. Nor will it abolish the iron fist of racism that Australia seems to be gripped by.
Picture a stunning sandy beach, waves lapping on the shoreline and the sun setting on the horizon creating a breathtaking atmosphere. The never-ending golden sand stretching as far as the eye can see. This is Australia.
Jonsson, P. (2011, March 3). What recourse now to Westboro Baptist Church's rude protests?. Christian Science Monitor. p. N. PAG.
One of the biggest debates in education is how to respond to gun violence in schools. According to BBC, “There were 64 school shootings in 2015” (BBC). One response to the rise in gun violence in schools is to arm teachers. Even our President has mentioned “giving a bonus” (Davis 2) to teachers that The fact that the idea of arming teachers is even being discussed is disappointing. Bringing more guns into a school is not the answer to gun violence. Most people that defend the idea that guns will “help” keep schools safe have basically three points: (1) teachers will be trained in gun safety, (2) it helps deter potential school shooters, and (3) it will make the students feel more safe. Even though there is some truth to those points, I think that the cons of arming teachers vastly outweigh the pros of arming teachers.
That is why Rebekah Elliott’s article “The Real School Safety Debate: Why Legislative Responses Should Focus on Schools and Not on Guns” would be valuable to include. Elliot writes that to properly provide safety into schools is to put more funding into higher security and individual school safety programs. Like many writers, she agrees that the Sandy Hook incident shifted America’s views on the second amendment but she believes that having armed teachers could be a safety risk in itself. Her argument is that although it would be more cost efficient to arm teachers than to hire more security, it could increase the liability for negligence if there was a result in injuring a student (2015
I know that gun control will never work the way it is meant to work, but I also don't have a lot of other ideas.
In conclusion, enabling stricter gun control laws will help to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, criminals, and children and teens. With these laws put into place there will be more assurance of the safety of American citizens. It is not necessary to strip citizens of their right to own a gun, but we should be able to make it harder to get guns. If you are someone with a clear record and using a gun for recreation use, you will have no trouble obtaining a gun. In the long run increase the laws on gun control hurts nobody. Despite historic events where governments seized firearms and killed millions of citizens, today we have a different problem, which is making sure guns are in the right hands.
Ever seen your best friends face get ripped to shreds in front of you? Ever seen your best friend that you've known for 3 years, get torn apart by bullets right there next to you, knowing you can do something about it? I have. It's burned into my memory. If friendship has an opposite, it has to be war. Back in school we'd pretend to be soldiers, I'd be raking in vietcong kills, while they were laying around. But every time, they'd die and it'd be my fault, every time. Vietnam is filled with either screaming of pain or screaming of victory. A changing and a changeable place.
The first and main reason why is because it would mainly to keep our school faculty members and students safe and away from danger. Some people think that firearms are bad and evil. If teachers can be taught gun safety and how to conceal a firearm; there wouldn't be any problems. Students can be informed as well. Yes, guns are lethal, but they can be completely safe if taken proper precautions. The classroom is meant for learning in a clean and uninterrupted environment. A concealed firearm in a teachers’ possession wouldn’t hurt anything. A perfect example is the Price Middle School Shooting. A staff member said he had clear visual of the shooter and he could have stopped him in his tracks if he conceal carried. The staff member could not do anything so he fled the scene. Some people consider this idea completely terrible. The liberals think that the
Whether liberal or conservative, everybody can agree that the violence in the United States, thanks to firearms, must come to an end. In light of recent mass shootings and the overall murder and crime rates involving firearms, the debate over whether or not the laws pertaining to guns need enhanced or amended has been on the front page of newspapers, websites, and a main topic of discussion in our own government. The thing is, knee-jerk reactions from both sides of the political spectrum have plagued our minds and law makers, turning any chance of compromise into for-or-against mindset debates. With the right knowledge and correct path of correction, we all can make the United States a better nation together,
So let’s say the school gets ahold of the police and they won’t be there for another 30 minutes, if we have teachers with guns, then the suspect would be taken care of a lot sooner than what the police would have done. Death is not around us everyday and that's why we overlook the possibility that a school shooting could happen in our small community. Pennsylvania and other rural areas have started to let their teachers carry guns because of an incident that happened and they overlooked the possibility too, but we have a chance to act now to protect our students. “No student, no family, no teacher and no school should have to live the horror of
So I feel way different about guns than most people. Guns don't really scare me, but still the thought of someone coming into my school and me having no sort of defense scares me. If only 1 person in our schools has guns then, how is that going to protect all 1300 of us.78 percent of NC educators think guns on teachers is a bad idea.(Helms) I interviewed my English teacher asking these three questions would you carry a gun?What do you think schools could do about school safety?Would you feel safer if in that situation if one of your teacher peers carried a gun at
When a student wakes up every morning and commences to get ready for school, the last thing they should be worrying about is if they could be caught in the middle of crossfire between weapons within their own school. With allowing teachers to carry guns in school, there comes a lot more discipline in the classroom because teenagers are unpredictable. At any moment, a student could get hold of the hazardous weapon and cause chaos. In a recent article conducted by Michael Hansen, he stated accurate concerns that come with such an impactful decision. Hansen stated, “In fact, it is almost certain that easier access to guns in schools would pose a greater overall threat to student safety that the current threat of mass shootings in schools” (Hansen). This concept is extremely
They believe that gun violence will go down if the classes are present and taken in school. As introduced by Snyder. it is said that sex education in schools has been shown to reduce sex crimes. Therefore by association, students should receive mandatory firearms training in order to reduce gun violence. Studies have been presented to show that when gun ownership increases, the rates of violent crime decline (Snyder). A possible explanation for this decrease of violence would be citizens feel more confident when they have a weapon for protection. Those who want the classes in school could believe that the more people know about an object, the less they would want or feel the need to use it for violent acts. For example, owning a gun could height the levels of protection making gun owners and users more aware of difficult situations, thus trying to avoid using the weapon for anything other than a dire circumstance. Moreover in Krey’s article, a school in Virginia did pass a law on April 24, 2006 stating, the education department in the state was going to develop a gun-safety curriculum for public elementary schools that incorporates guidelines from the National Rifle Association (NRA). This law was flexible and allowed each school board the ability to decide whether or not they wanted to include firearm safety into their curriculum. If they were
If teachers have guns, they would be first responders in an emergency situation, while it takes a while, such as “five minutes, ten minutes or [even] longer, [for the police to] respond to [an incident]” (Santoni 2018). Teachers want to have more choices to prevent students from danger in school shooting situations. To be more specific, as a teacher, Kasey Hansen, who is teaching in Utah, wants to ensure the safety of her students, so she is willing to “stand in front of a bullet for any student” (Murphy 2014). To her, this is the best solution to protect students, but she also wants “another option to defend [both students and herself]” (Murphy 2014). Therefore, she is one of many people across America, who encourages teachers to carry handguns in schools after terrible school shootings had happened in America. They believe that they can actively control and solve incidents in emergencies by bearing arms instead of passively waiting for the police officers. Thus, carrying guns is the most optimal idea for educators in order to protect students against the imminent danger. On the contrary, there is a strong disagreement of the idea of arming teachers from Russ Moore, who is the principal of Shaker Junior High School in Latham, New York. Specifically, he states that “changing laws to allow educators to be armed in schools is flatly bad policy and a bad idea.” He believes that “most people would not have rational thought or skill [on how to control guns]” (Moore 2014). In South Dakota, teachers and other staff in schools have joined the program named “school sentinels” that allows teachers and staff to be armed with weapons. In order to qualify this program, the school faculty has “to be approved by the school board or a law enforcement agency” (Chavez 2018). More importantly, educators have to be trained “eighty hours of use