#but! you will all blame the underfunded and overworked teachers instead

[falllpoutboy]

people are so quick to blame teachers on literally everything and then wonder why there is a national shortage of teachers and support staff in schools lol

[bondsmagii]

One of the things about the Chriscoarse is that it brings back memories of this kid who I went to school with.

He was always uncomfortably sexual because he’d been severely sexually abused before he hit kindergarten.

He scared other kids because he did upsetting things. He was fine around girls but boys set him off. Like literally. 0% control. In Kindergarten. He was bullied like to a terrifying degree. No one wanted him in their class. Not even the teachers. He received no therapy or support that I know of. They basically quarantined this kid. I actually remember teachers haggling over who had to have him. He always had to move his desk away from the other kids.

I did talk to him a few times over the years because we ran in the social pariah circle at school. He was pretty smart and very..aware of his situation.

He ended up assaulting another boy when I was in middle school and wasn’t heard from again.

All I can think of now is the series of adults that failed to do anything. They were actively disgusted by him. I understand other children’s actions but the adults made me feral and like when he did something bad people felt justified in how they treated him.

The whole situation was tragic and awful

oof. that sounds really rough, and it's especially awful that I want to hope that kid turned out alright but... he probably didn't, and through no fault of his own.

with situations like this, it's difficult to know where to lay blame. there's supposed to be a system in place so that if a child needs help that exhausts the systems already available to them (their parents can't cope alone; the school can't cope alone) the case can be escalated until a situation is found that can cope with the child's needs. too often, this system breaks down at a very low level, and I think that's what happened here.

I'm hesitant to lay blame solely at the feet of the teachers here (obviously excluding any of the assholes you can unfortunately find in this line of work who do genuinely seem to take pleasure in tormenting children). absolutely they should never have let their discomfort be known to the children in their care, and they should never have treated him like they were disgusted by him or fed up with him. but -- and speaking generally now -- teachers are severely overworked, underfunded, and understaffed. they have countless kids in their care, many of them with their own needs, and they're only human. what should have happened here is the child should have been advanced up the system and removed to another situation better suited for him -- a special class with better one-on-one care, a school that specialises in cases like his, a trained therapist to help him deal with his trauma, etc. this obviously didn't happen, and instead this poor kid was left in a regular school surrounded by triggers, and surrounded by adults who just didn't have the time, energy, or skills necessary to help him.

I think... and I'm going to have to word this carefully here, because I'm sure a lot of people would be itching to take it the wrong way, but to put it as bluntly as I dare: it's human to feel scared or even disgusted by situations like this. that doesn't mean it's OK to take it out on the person, or abuse or ostracise them (and this one especially not if you have a duty of care). but teachers aren't saints, as much as some of them can come close. humans are humans, and when we're met with behaviour that's uncontrollable, threatening, and even dangerous, it's natural for us to want to avoid it. it's natural for us to fear it, feel disgusted by it, and even resent it. the thing we have to focus on is how to adequately process these feelings and reach a point where this doesn't translate into mistreatment of the person displaying the behaviours, who very often did not ask to have them as much as nobody asked to have to deal with it.

(people with training in this kind of situation know what they're getting into, and people with a duty of care should be offered training and resources so they can deal with it on a day-to-day basis. but for those people who are untrained or underage, they also have the right to not be involved and to remove themselves from the situation and no longer engage. in school situations, children have no choice in the matter and are often literally forced to socialise with other children they dislike, or who are cruel to them or frighten them. children who are frightened of somebody will bind together and bully to keep them away. this isn't right, but it's the responsibility of those in charge to ensure that this situation doesn't happen in the first place. as for the wider world, I've seen countless people going off at people for posting videos where someone has been aggressive or even attacking them, and so they've yelled or defended themselves, and commenters are going off like "he could be mentally ill! this is so ableist!". the fact that the person might be mentally ill should be taken into account, but if somebody is attacking you on the subway, what are you supposed to do? throw your hands up and let him punch away because he might be sick? you're still allowed to defend yourself, and you're still allowed to be angry and frightened, even if a person is sick. lay the blame, however, at the feet of the system that's allowing this person to be alone, without support, and frightened, rather than assuming that the sick person is attacking out of malice or lack of self-control.)

people seem to focus too much on the emotion, and not the action. I know a nurse who specialises in caring for patients with severe dementia. this can make them abusive and violent. she has been hurt by some of her patients, and even on a good day she finds herself having to deal with things she'd rather not -- copious amounts of human waste, for example. she admits that she's frightened of the violent patients. she admits that she's disgusted by the things some of them say to her and wish on her. she admits that cleaning up a grown adult amount of shit grosses her out beyond belief. it would be impossible for her to state otherwise and have me believe her, because of course she'd feel that way. she's human. the crime isn't in her feeling this way. the crime would be if she left the patients in their own filth because she was "too grossed out" to clean them, and they "deserved" it for messing themselves. the crime would be in if she hit her violent patients back, screamed at them, or locked them in a bathroom until they calmed down. but she doesn't. she cleans them quickly and with dignity. she helps calm them as quickly and as efficiently as possible. when they have times where they're more lucid and calm, she sits and chats with them and listens to their stories and keeps them company. some of them sometimes display remorse when they know they've acted badly, and ask her if she hates them or if she's angry at them, and she puts it very well: "sometimes I don't like your behaviour because it's upsetting for you, but I still like you." this is what matters -- but still some people would look at the fact that she does feel that fear or dread or disgust and judge her on that. it's like what I was taught growing up: your actions matter more than your thoughts.

what I'm saying here, to return to the point, is that it's difficult to lay blame here because while these adults did fail this child, a wider system of support failed them, too. it's impossible to be able to deal with a case like this on your own. support systems are absolutely necessary so everyone can live as comfortably as possible. these teachers had dozens more children in their care and no backup support, no trained professionals. situations like this can be genuinely traumatising for the other children. I still remember a boy in my class when I was 8 or 9 who had rages so violent the police had to be called. it was terrifying, being herded into a corner with the teacher trying to protect us, as this boy hurled furniture and self-harmed in front of us. as an adult I feel desperately sorry for this boy, who was one of my friends when he was calmer, but as a child I just felt fear and confusion and anger at him. why did he have to do this? I didn't understand. god knows what it was like for our teacher. in this case, when a child who is so scared of boys that he terrorises the dozen boys in your class is kicking off, and you're legally not allowed to lay a finger on him even if he's physically harming one of your terrified students, what do you do? with no support, nowhere else to place him so he gets assistance and patience, you have to put him in another room. if he keeps doing it, you have to keep him in that other room. it's horrifically unfair, but what other choice do you have? and while some teachers really should not be in the business, many others are only trying to do their best, and they probably felt terrible about it and that boy probably still haunts them now.

this case is absolutely tragic, but it's unfortunately a common one. there should be so much more in place to assist children in this situation, and on paper it looks like there is, but underfunding and what I can only assume is sheer laziness means that when it comes down to it, everybody only suffers.

[rainbowloliofjustice]

So as someone who could be described as anti-gun, but really doesn't mind normal decent people having guns, let me try to have a more reasonable discussion. Instead of ineffective partial bans, or banning all semi-auto weapons which isn't feasible, how would you feel about things like removing the Dickey amendment or allowing the ATF to have an electronic database? One would allow for better enforcement, the other research into gun violence (which may well back you up anyway) thoughts?

Because I do agree there's more to it than just getting rid of guns. Mental health, better enforcement of existing laws, I think there's more effective steps than bans that leave identical guns legal. I disagree with certain pro-gun points, but most anit-gun people aren't asking the right questions. We all want this fixed. As long as you don't make me own a gun I'm alright with normal people who do. Anyway, I hope you're having a good day

I would say rather than removing the Dickey Amendment, I would say to just amend it. Allow the CDC to research firearms within the context of being able to further help the public, however, the funds can’t be used to promote gun control or anti-gun control. So in other words, the funds would be used for the purpose of researching, however, the funds could not actually be used to fund either side of the gun control debate. This way, research is able to remain fair and impartial because the money couldn’t be used to actually fund an organization on either side of the gun control debate. It could be used for the CDC’s own research. 

No problems with the ATF having an online database. In fact, I would probably encourage them having an online database of people that are bared from using or possessing firearms. 

Yeah. I suppose I could be considered “Pro-gun” when the reality is that I’m pro-”We’ve been doing the same shit over and over again and it isn’t working try something different you dumbasses”. 

Gun free zones are a product of Gun Control. My issue with gun free zones is that they simply aren’t working. You can still waltz onto the school with the gun and shoot someone. The (proposed) attempt at trying to remedy the fact that anyone can still just waltz onto the school grounds with a gun is to allow teachers who have a license/permit to carry to carry. Not to just give every single teacher a gun, but just allow those who are registered and permitted to carry. 

It wouldn’t take any funds from the school because the school wouldn’t be paying for it. The teacher would pay out of pocket for their own license/permit and it would still be up to the teacher whether or not they would carry. 

In the event of a teacher who goes crazy and tries to shoot one of their own students, it is something that would have happened even without teachers being allowed to carry. Someone who is going to do something to break the law will break the law regardless.

“But then why not arm students since the solution to gun violence is just more guns?” (This isn’t from you btw anon this is just something that I’ve heard) Because students aren’t even of legal age to be able to carry. In a place like Vermont, they may be able to purchase a firearm, however, being of age to be able to purchase isn’t necessarily the same as being of age to carry. A lot of this depends on state laws because there is some distention between being able to purchase and being able to legally carry. In general, to be able to get a permit to carry you must be 18 or 21. If you’re 21, chances are you’re already out of high school. At 18, you’re close to graduation, however, the law re; being able to allow teachers to legally carry can also add or change a law regarding how old you have to be in order to carry or just bar any student who has not graduated high school or obtained a GED from getting a license to carry. 

If a student obtains and brings a gun to school (... Like they’ve already been doing...) then it’s already illegal (and a lot of students have already been breaking the law...). Once again, you can’t stop someone from breaking a law by adding more laws. My solution or thoughts on gun violence was never just “add more guns” because I already know the situation is a lot more complex than just “add more guns” or “add more gun control”. 

Most of my issues with “anti-gun” people is that like you said anon, just aren’t asking the right questions or are focusing on the wrong thing entirely. Like the post from the other day, some anti-gun people will take an act of negligence and be like “Oh guns aren’t a problem? I guess this child could have been stopped if there were more guns” when the reality is that if a child shoots another child, it is more often than not an accident as a result of negligence on behalf of adults. They blame the guns when there are a hundred other factors at play that are getting ignored. Negligence, abuse, mental health, etc. If a teenager is abused and mistreated by their peers to the extent that the teenager either kills themselves or kills their peers, isn’t that a problem!? 

“No one would be able to kill that many people with a knife.” (Not from you either anon just another anti-gun argument I’ve heard) Also nevermind the fact that in the US there have been a number of stabbings across schools but no one is trying to say the US has a knife problem. 

You’d be surprised. Sure you probably can’t kill an arena full of people with a knife, but you can just plant a bomb instead. Or drive a truck into a bunch of people. Or illegally obtain a gun (like most criminals already do) anyways and do the same thing. If you’re simply trying to stop gun violence, congrats I guess. If you’re trying to prevent people from dying as a result of violence you still got a long ways to go. Then the question becomes, why do they only care about people dying as a result of gun violence yet death from other forms of violence is acceptable?

“Why is it that it is so important to be able to kill someone / why are objects more important than people?” (IN reference to guns for self-defense)

Because if I have to defend myself from someone I’m going to assume they intend on killing me. If someone breaks into my house, I’m going to assume that they want to take my things and kill me. I’m not going to take the chance of losing my life on the basis of “Well even though they’re basically attacking you they may not want to kill you”. 

“Why not other forms of self-defense?”

Martial arts take years to learn (I know from experience) and master. It also requires being in close quarters with someone most of the time and simply put, not everyone is able to learn nor have the physical strength.

I have asthma. Fuck all if I’m using pepper spray and risking myself ending up in the hospital. 

Once again, knives require close combat. I’m not expecting a pregnant woman to try to fight someone using a knife or martial arts. 

Bats, clubs, etc. require physical strength not everyone may posesses.

You get where I’m heading with this. Guns are the most effective way of allowing someone to defend themselves while taking in account of all forms of disability, stature and physical strength. 

“Well, why not just call the police?”

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against the police. However, I am aware that you have corrupt police officers and even barring those who are corrupt, some people live in areas where the police are understaffed, underfunded, overworked, and underpaid. This can even apply to other emergency services such as firefighters and ambulances. Sometimes there is over an hour before there is a response. 

I would never make someone who does not want to own a gun or to carry own one. Hell, I myself probably would never own a gun or carry one. I’m more of a knife person. I don’t have an issue with allowing the CDC to research gun violence or the ATF having an online database. I’m against the “solutions” that people have already tried and failed at. I’m against the “solutions” that only harm legal gun owners but do nothing to punish or stop criminals. Like, if someone illegally obtains a handgun, the solution isn’t to put more control on handguns. The person already broke the law you already had in place so what would adding an additional law that harms legal gun owners do to a criminal?