Gun related lock-down at my daughter's school

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

01/18/2013 08:41:49 PM · #26

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Want strange....read This

Ray

That is just wrong...I would not have signed their form....and they would be talking to my lawyer

cowboy221977

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

01/18/2013 08:49:00 PM · #27

Originally posted by LydiaToo:

Educating our children is NOT the government's job. It is the parents' job. IF they choose to give that responsibility over to the government (and they don't have to) or to a private business, then the parents should be able to feel completely comfortable that the person/entity in whom they put their children's care will be able to care for and protect them or they should be allowed to move the child to a place where they DO feel comfortable with the protection/education even if that is at a monetary cost to themselves.

This said, if my child were in the school where a student had posted a threat with a gun in any manner, I'd want to make sure that student was secured as soon as could be... to discuss exactly what his intents were... upon his arrival... or before his arrival.

Most kids will break down and say it was just a joke.

Jokes like this didn't happen in "my day", but I know with social media they way it is now, it's easier to say things we don't mean. Peer pressure is a viable thing.

Still... I think the student could have been detained upon his arrival... instead of shutting the whole school down and terrifying all of the other students and the teachers... and the children's parents.

If the student were already at school when the "threat" was reported, it seems that a simple check on the school computer could determine where that child was supposed to be... a person could be sent to get that child (with reinforcements even) and that would stop the madness.

Please! Can we not back away from all of this and inject some sense into the situations?

I graduated High school in 96.... I always had a gun in my truck...ON CAMPUS.... We would compare weapons in the school parking lot. Sometimes even with cops. There was no "gun scare". There were alot of times where I would go hunting after school so I had ammo and the works

Paul

Leica SL

Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical MF Wide Angle - Black

01/19/2013 03:38:31 AM · #28

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

You say this like it is some of sort of benchmark of 'the right way to live'. You do know how out-of-kilter this is with the experiences of most people don't you?

I'm unclear whether you are making the point that 'things have (rightly) moved on' or whether you are 'hankering for the good ole days'...

pamb

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

01/19/2013 04:16:21 AM · #29

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

I was mostly gut-wrenched when she told me that she grabbed a couple of her friends who weren't very well hidden and stuffed them behind herself. That's the kind of sacrifice I don't want her to ever make.

Oh my. Now that made the tears well up. Old soul indeed. Please give both of your daughters extra hugs from the whole DPC community and let them know that people out there are thinking of them.

PGerst

Canon EOS-20D

01/19/2013 11:48:27 AM · #30

Originally posted by Paul:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

I graduated High school in 96.... I always had a gun in my truck...ON CAMPUS.... We would compare weapons in the school parking lot. Sometimes even with cops. There was no "gun scare". There were alot of times where I would go hunting after school so I had ammo and the works

You say this like it is some of sort of benchmark of 'the right way to live'. You do know how out-of-kilter this is with the experiences of most people don't you?

I'm unclear whether you are making the point that 'things have (rightly) moved on' or whether you are 'hankering for the good ole days'...

cowboy221977

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

01/19/2013 12:22:09 PM · #31

Originally posted by Paul:

I was making the point that society has changed. People have gone crazy. I believe that it is the parenting styles of today vs a few years ago.

rooum

01/19/2013 12:39:43 PM · #32

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Originally posted by Paul:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

I graduated High school in 96.... I always had a gun in my truck...ON CAMPUS.... We would compare weapons in the school parking lot. Sometimes even with cops. There was no "gun scare". There were alot of times where I would go hunting after school so I had ammo and the works

You say this like it is some of sort of benchmark of 'the right way to live'. You do know how out-of-kilter this is with the experiences of most people don't you?

I'm unclear whether you are making the point that 'things have (rightly) moved on' or whether you are 'hankering for the good ole days'...

I was making the point that society has changed. People have gone crazy. I believe that it is the parenting styles of today vs a few years ago.

Every generation believes they are living in more violent crime ridden times and think it was much better 'in the old days'. People were saying people had gone crazy due to parenting styles in the 1950's and the 1850's.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/19/2013 01:40:16 PM · #33

Originally posted by rooum:

Heck, the famed Roman statesman Cicero was bemoaning the deplorable state of Roman youth back in the first century AD :-)

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

01/19/2013 02:48:13 PM · #34

"Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers."
Socrates (469 BC - 399 BC)

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

01/19/2013 03:57:02 PM · #35

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

People have gone crazy.I believe that it is the parenting styles of today vs a few years ago.

Originally posted by Strikeslip:

It seems some people are raising their children to be heroic altruists.

Message edited by author 2013-01-19 15:57:39.

01/19/2013 05:10:08 PM · #36

Originally posted by PGerst:

There is a thread (which has been moved to rant) on Sandy Hook where you will find many complacent comments such as the one you quoted. I left the thread because it was a futile attempt against a bunch of people who either just don't get it, or are just trying to argue for the pure sake of arguing.

Irregardless of the few who feel this way, the reality is there is a greater majority of those who value life over guns and are making strides in the right direction. It will take time, no doubt, but recurring events such as the one in Canada, as unfortunate and scary as they are, do help to pull us out of this mess.

Don't waste your time trying to argue with them at all. Just use their ignorance to form better cogent viewpoints and communicate to those who make the laws.

FWIW, I won't comment any more here. I've said my bit and there is no point in any further response.

Originally posted by Paul:

Originally posted by cowboy221977:

I graduated High school in 96.... I always had a gun in my truck...ON CAMPUS.... We would compare weapons in the school parking lot. Sometimes even with cops. There was no "gun scare". There were alot of times where I would go hunting after school so I had ammo and the works

You say this like it is some of sort of benchmark of 'the right way to live'. You do know how out-of-kilter this is with the experiences of most people don't you?

I'm unclear whether you are making the point that 'things have (rightly) moved on' or whether you are 'hankering for the good ole days'...

When you try to paint the people you disagree with as ignorant using non-words like "irregardless" it says much more than your words do.

01/19/2013 05:16:17 PM · #37

Originally posted by Spork99:

When you try to paint the people you disagree with as ignorant using non-words like "irregardless" it says much more than your words do.

...actually I would argue that it is indeed a word and has been for quite some time. Does it meet the acceptance of the purists... not likely, but it is nonetheless a word.

Ray

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

01/19/2013 05:27:03 PM · #38

Originally posted by Spork99:

When you try to paint the people you disagree with as ignorant using non-words like "irregardless" it says much more than your words do.

Funny but both words have the same root meaning: Irregardless- in spite of, or without regard to. Ignorant- unaware of by intent or circumstance. So when you make a point irregardless of the ignorant, you are ignoring those who are ignoring.

I'm not sure if that is hypocrisy or just irony.

Message edited by author 2013-01-19 17:29:44.

01/19/2013 05:28:48 PM · #39

Irregardless isn't a real word. It's used out of ignorance.

Originally posted by Dictionary:

Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

Message edited by author 2013-01-19 17:32:24.

01/19/2013 05:29:43 PM · #40

Originally posted by Spork99:

Irregardless isn't a real word. It's used out of ignorance.

Best you check your dictionaries...

Ray

01/19/2013 05:31:20 PM · #41

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:
Irregardless isn't a real word. It's used out of ignorance.

Best you check your dictionaries...at least These folks seem to think so.

Ray

01/19/2013 05:31:20 PM · #42

double post.

Message edited by author 2013-01-19 17:36:38.

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

01/19/2013 05:33:57 PM · #43

From Websters
"Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that â��there is no such word.â�� There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead."
From the OED.
" Irregardless was first acknowledged in 1912 by the Wentworth American Dialect Dictionary as originating from western Indiana,[2] though the word was in use in South Carolina before Indiana became a territory. [1] The usage dispute over irregardless was such that, in 1923, Literary Digest published an article titled "Is There Such a Word as Irregardless in the English Language?".

Though its logic is a bit tortured (a bit like flamable/Inflammable) it has been in common North American usage for quite a while and will be in the future irregardless of it's critics.

Message edited by author 2013-01-19 17:36:42.

01/19/2013 05:35:42 PM · #44

Originally posted by BrennanOB:

Originally posted by Spork99:
When you try to paint the people you disagree with as ignorant using non-words like "irregardless" it says much more than your words do.

Funny but both words have the same root meaning: Irregardless- in spite of, or without regard to. Ignorant- unaware of by intent or circumstance. So when you make a point irregardless of the ignorant, you are ignoring those who are ignoring.

I'm not sure if that is hypocrisy or just irony.

My head hurts... :O)

Ray

01/19/2013 05:36:38 PM · #45

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:
Irregardless isn't a real word. It's used out of ignorance.

Best you check your dictionaries...at least These folks seem to think so.

Ray

It's nonstandard, like "ain't" and using it as if it is part of proper English just shows ignorance, especially when trying to make others look ignorant for their views.

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f2.8D

01/19/2013 05:37:42 PM · #46

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:
Irregardless isn't a real word. It's used out of ignorance.

Best you check your dictionaries...at least These folks seem to think so.

Ray

It's nonstandard, like "ain't" and using it as if it is part of proper English just shows ignorance, especially when trying to make others look ignorant for their views.

I would suggest then that you write to the dictionary folks and inform them of the fact that they are simply wrong.

Ray

David Ey

Nikon D80

01/19/2013 05:39:08 PM · #47

Originally posted by BrennanOB:

"Irregardless is an illegitimate word. Putting the prefix Ir before the word regardless effectively makes it a double negative; thus the meaning of the word becomes: "without without regard." so instead of the intended meaning, which is without regard, it becomes just the opposite: with regard to!
Irregardless is a non-word that many a tool mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or uneducated writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so."

01/19/2013 05:40:26 PM · #48

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by RayEthier:

Originally posted by Spork99:
Irregardless isn't a real word. It's used out of ignorance.

Best you check your dictionaries...at least These folks seem to think so.

Ray

It's nonstandard, like "ain't" and using it as if it is part of proper English just shows ignorance, especially when trying to make others look ignorant for their views.

I would suggest then that you write to the dictionary folks and inform them of the fact that they are simply wrong.

Ray

Did you read the definition you linked to? It says the word is nonstandard.

01/19/2013 05:41:30 PM · #49

Originally posted by Spork99:

It's nonstandard, like "ain't" and using it as if it is part of proper English just shows ignorance, especially when trying to make others look ignorant for their views.

Proper English... as in those words that have the letter "U" in them, as in colour, honour, harbour... those kinds of words. :O)

Ray

FourPointX