Ohio Teachers Can Carry Guns With 24 Hours of Training
Plus: progressive groups imploding, stock and crypto markets plunging, and more.

Ohio is making it easier for teachers and school employees to carry weapons. The state says in a new law that teachers need only 24 hours of training—not 700—in order to carry a gun in a school setting. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed this change into law on Monday.
Seven hundred hours of training certainly seems excessive. Surely, whatever needs to be covered in terms of gun safety should be able to be taught in a much shorter amount of time.
But should teachers be allowed to be armed in the first place? Some argue that it will help stop school shootings. It's "probably the most important thing we have done to prevent a school shooter in Ohio," said state Sen. Niraj Antani (R–Dayton) on the Senate floor.
Others may suggest that teachers don't lose their Second Amendment rights when they go to work. Of course, many workplaces prohibit firearms on premises without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment.
And many teachers are agents of the state, charged with watching the children of families that may have little choice but to send them to the local public school. That shades the situation a little differently.
Are teachers with guns just exercising their rights and protecting their students? Or does this amount to stationing ample armed guards at sites of public education?
One can imagine many scenarios where armed teachers could backfire. For one thing, more guns in schools make it much more likely that a student could somehow get hold of one. And while most teachers who carry will surely do so responsibly, there could always be outliers, who use their weapons to intimidate or threaten unruly students—or worse.
At a hearing on the bill, retired Columbus, Ohio, police commander Robert Meader said it would "cause harmful accidents and potentially even needless deaths."
Of course, Ohio has allowed teachers to carry guns for years, and it's led to little incident.
Previous rules required that teachers could carry if a local school board approved it (and under the new law, school boards will still have to consent to teachers and staff in their district having guns.) How much training they needed to do so kicked off a debate that made it to the state Supreme Court.
In 2021, the Court said "that state law required them to first undergo the same basic peace officer training as law enforcement officials or security officers who carry firearms on campus—entailing more than 700 hours of instruction," notes The New York Times. "That ruling, Mr. DeWine said on Monday, had made it largely impractical for Ohio school districts to allow staff members to carry firearms."
And Ohio is far from alone in letting teachers be armed.
"Twenty-eight states allow people other than security personnel to carry firearms on school grounds, with laws in nine of those states explicitly mentioning school employees," the Times points out.
But the idea is unpopular among educators. "Nearly three-quarters of U.S. school teachers oppose the idea of training certain teachers and staff to carry guns in school buildings," and "nearly six in 10 teachers think it would make schools less safe," reported Gallup in 2018.
Ohio's change has once again kicked off a nationwide debate over educators with guns—plus a slew of misleading headlines about what's actually taking place. For instance, The Washington Post says "Ohio will arm more teachers," making it sound like armed teachers will be mandatory.
Ultimately, Ohio probably has the right idea: leaving it up to individual school districts.
The new law "does not require any school to arm teachers or staff," DeWine said on Monday. "Every school will make its own decision."
FREE MINDS
Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups. The Intercept takes a look at how infighting is crippling organizations, including abortion-rights group the Guttmacher Institute. Ryan Grim depicts a Zoom meeting the group held in the summer of 2020:
Heather Boonstra, vice president of public policy, began by asking how people were "finding equilibrium" — one of the details we know because it was later shared by staff with Prism, an outlet that focuses on social justice advocacy.
She talked about the role systemic racism plays in society and the ways that Guttmacher's work could counter it. Staff suggestions, though, turned inward, Prism reported, "including loosening deadlines and implementing more proactive and explicit policies for leave without penalty." Staffers suggested additional racial equity trainings, noting that a previous facilitator had said that the last round had not included sufficient time "to cover everything." With no Black staff in the D.C. unit, it was suggested that "Guttmacher do something tangible for Black employees in other divisions."
Behind Boonstra's and the staff's responses to the killing was a fundamentally different understanding of the moment. For Boonstra and others of her generation, the focus should have been on the work of the nonprofit: What could Guttmacher, with an annual budget of nearly $30 million, do now to make the world a better place? For her staff, that question had to be answered at home first: What could they do to make Guttmacher a better place? Too often, they believed, managers exploited the moral commitment staff felt toward their mission, allowing workplace abuses to go unchecked.
The belief was widespread. In the eyes of group leaders dealing with similar moments, staff were ignoring the mission and focusing only on themselves, using a moment of public awakening to smuggle through standard grievances cloaked in the language of social justice.
This is only one small example in a long-read rife with tales of division and drama. Check out the whole thing here.
FREE MARKETS
All sorts of bad financial signs are percolating. The stock market is plunging in expectation of the Federal Reserve raising interest rates again to address inflation. And cryptocurrency values are also taking a dive.
It's official: The US stock market (S&P 500) closed in a bear market, a 20% decline from the Jan. 3 closing high.
The Nasdaq index is already in bear market
Bear markets don't always mean a recession is coming, but they are another red flaghttps://t.co/9rZYmHe56t #stocks pic.twitter.com/muB4CGMDvN
— Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) June 13, 2022
"The S&P 500 fell 3.9 percent on the day, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq composite index slumped 4.7 percent," notes The Washington Post. "The Dow Jones industrial average sank around 2.8 percent. Each of the indexes is down sharply in 2022, and there is no clear indication of when the markets could stabilize. Cryptocurrencies also swooned Monday, with bitcoin losing more than 10 percent of its value."
QUICK HITS
First SCOTUS decision of the day (and not the last) is about the Double Jeopardy clause.
Held: Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar successive prosecutions
of distinct offenses arising from a single act. Justice Barrett writes.https://t.co/MnwTOEGvlv pic.twitter.com/DGVb2c6QJf— Gabriel Malor (@gabrielmalor) June 13, 2022
• The second hearing of the select committee investigating January 6 was held yesterday. The New York Times has a rundown of what was revealed.
• Congress is considering controversial data privacy legislation in a hearing today.
• President Joe Biden is less popular than Donald Trump:
If journalists want a sense of how unpopular Biden is, here's a comparison: Trump's approval average on 6/13/2018 was 43.4. Disapproval: 52.1. Biden's approval on 6/13/2022: 39.3. Disapproval: 55.0. Biden is several points MORE unpopular than the historically unpopular Trump. pic.twitter.com/AtoB4vsF9m
— Scott Whitlock (@ScottJW) June 13, 2022
• Michigan revoked an ACAB license plate after deciding it didn't really stand for "all cats are beautiful." First Amendment lawyer Adam Steinbaugh has more details (and the documents discussing the decision are here):
Someone sent this tweet to the office of Michigan Secretary of State @JocelynBenson.
The license plate was revoked. https://t.co/mVOemt3ovi
— Adam Steinbaugh (@adamsteinbaugh) June 13, 2022
• Inside Democrats' controversial strategy of trying to boost conservative extremist candidates.
• Does affordable housing make the surrounding neighborhood less affordable?
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Seven hundred hours of training certainly seems excessive.
It's a simple point-and-click interface.
Maybe they can spend the other 676 hours on learning how to lock doors.
I’ve made so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. (res14) It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Here’s what I do.
.
For more details visit:>>> https://brilliantfuture01.blogspot.com/
Enjoy sexy contacts with fine ladies in EU only at sex in winterthur
...many workplaces prohibit firearms on premises without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment.
So suddenly I'm a nobody.
Many workplaces aren't the government. You know that whole 'but, muh private companies!' thing?
Where libertarians argue about if / how the companies aren't as constrained by, for example, the 1st amendment as much as the government is (even if they should still culturally and philosophically value the principle of freedom of expression). Why would the same argument not apply to the 2nd?
I realize my thinking on private companies making rules restricting speech or guns is influenced more than I like to admit by all the Westerns I watched growing up. The Western code about guns was always if the owner of the saloon asks you to check your gun at the door, you check your gun at the door.
So you never really grew up.
Brutal but touché
Entirely apropos, blunt, and how the fucktard trolls/shills and sophists should be handled.
But it's ok to force a private business to bake a cake.
Not according to me.
"... check your gun at the door." ... ?
Around here (I am thinking of Nadless Nardless the Nasty NAZI, for example), that means, when entering through the door, check that your gun is still working correctly, by shooting anyone visible inside the building, who looks like he or she might NOT be a rabid Trump cultist!
Boy, oh boy, the gray box ankle biters continue with all the pointless ankle biting on my comments. Guys, it really doesn't add anything positive to the comments section.
How do you know what is being said if they are just grey boxes?
He posted yesterday that he has another window of Reason open that isn't logged in.
No problem if it weren't one-sided.
Give us a legal standard that says, "If you prohibit legal carry of firearms in your facility, you are assuming a rebuttable liability for safety of the person thereby prohibited from carrying the effective means of self-defense with them." Otherwise no.
How is that not using government to impose your will on someone else's private property?
What about this: if you feel you need to be armed that badly, you don't patronize the establishment in question.
Yeah, it's a fairly fringe position, but the statement is false because yes, there are some people who see that as an affront to the second amendment.
Among those who actually give a shit about the 2nd amendment (or just personal security), it's pretty common to find workplace restrictions offensive.
Yeah, the author needs to get out more.
...more guns in schools make it much more likely that a student could somehow get hold of one.
Gun Club!
Yeah, remember when hundreds of kids shot each other every month when they brought guns to school for clubs and other reasons?
The above statement assumes that any student with a gun is immediately going to start shooting up the whole environment. It's only a risk if the student that gets the gun is apt to shoot up a school anyway.
"...state law required them to first undergo the same basic peace officer training as law enforcement officials..."
Teachers can't very well hide outside the classroom and inside the classroom at the same time.
"...entailing more than 700 hours of instruction," notes The New York Times.
700 hours??? Do they not see the price of ammunition today?
Why would the price of ammo be a significant factor. That 700 hours of training probably includes less than 7 hours of range time.
5.70 costs like a buck a round these days. That adds up over 7 hours.
It's not like the teachers are shooting .22. Everyone would make fun of them for being wusses.
If they are planning to carry around children, they should probably already be spending at least 20 hrs/yr at the range as a hobby. The rest can be filled through other means. Regardless, I agree that 700 hours is completely out of line.
Leaving it up to the local school board is definitely the right move. I live in rural Southeast Ohio and guns are still a very normal and foundational part of the culture here. Gun clubs are a dime a dozen and you can find one hosting a shooting competition within 30 min of any type of firearm you prefer (with the exception of full-auto). Obviously, all (or most, I'm not sure about the closest city school system) the school districts around me allow it, but most districts in urban centers probably will not allow teachers to arm themselves.
"All sorts of bad financial signs are percolating."
ENB, I have written several times how wonderful I think you are. But you dropped the ball here. In fact, the Biden economy is the best ever. Don't believe wingnut.com disinformation claiming otherwise.
#TemporarilyFillingInForButtplug
Prices are higher because everyone is richer.
The crash of cryptocurrency simply reflects new confidence in the US Dollar.
My dream of $100/loaf bread draws ever closer.
I'm holding out for standing in line to buy bread at $100 a loaf, and being turned away because there is no more bread. Bernie tells us this is true plenty.
"Bread lines are good because that means people are getting food."
It is almost as if that came out of a little red book that was so popular in the 60s.
But should teachers be allowed to be armed in the first place?
Yes. Just like most people should be able to. Guns aren't a haunted object.
. Of course, many workplaces prohibit firearms on premises without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment.
Public schools aren't private business. And even then many have issues with it.
I have issues when a private business tells me I can't carry when I go inside. These businesses aren't going to protect me, but they will stop me from protecting myself. I see that as an affront to the right of self defense.
But, on the plus side, if I'm concealed carrying properly, they never have to know I had a gun on the property.
Now you've got the idea. Also - they'll just ask you to leave if they find out you're armed. At worst your guilty of trespassing...
You don't have to go inside the business.
You don’t have to squawk like a bird, but here we are.
One can imagine many scenarios where armed teachers could backfire. For one thing, more guns in schools make it much more likely that a student could somehow get hold of one.
Stupid people are free to imagine parades of horrible about anything.
And while most teachers who carry will surely do so responsibly, there could always be outliers, who use their weapons to intimidate or threaten unruly students—or worse.
Lol. So libertarian arguing from what if.
and an extremely stupid and far fetched what if
Somewhere, sometime, there will be a teacher involved in an ND, and the press will scream that they predicted this outcome. It'll be on CNN for three days if a student gets hurt.
And result in show-trials such as we're getting now.
Arguing as if extremely far-fetched unrealistic potential occurrence is likely is the hallmark of a certain type of feminist thought.
No shit. How dare the author consider possible unintended consequences. Those things should never be said. There mere mentioning of those things means the person believes those things will definitely happen and completely opposes the original idea.
"what if some old person spend their SS check on buying a gun then shoots up a school"
Well, better cancel SS. I got a good "what if" case that shows it could be a danger
We're talking about guns in schools. Look, I support the idea because the deterrent effect alone will stop school shootings.
However some of these "what-if" scenarios are very real possibilities that should be considered, and steps should be taken to prevent them.
But she isn't considering it...She is throwing it up as a reason NOT to allow teachers the right to carry. She is accepting it.
I didn't read it as an argument against. More like weighing pros and cons.
You probably didn't read it at all but just have ot attack your perceived enemies.
Haha. Man. This sums up not only this comment section, but all comment sections worldwide.
And libertarians don't wright pros and cons. Rational people admit bad things can happen. Maximization of liberty is the ideal. But keep proving youre not a libertarian.
I'm ok with raising an objection to confront and refute it. But ENB didn't do that. So either she actually believes it is an effective argument, or she is concern trolling ("Just asking questions we need to grapple with"). Feh. It is clear what she is doing.
It is clear she wasn't weighing pros or cons because she ignored the pro side. You were correct below where you state she can't be purely anti 2a so has to be emotive about it instead.
And libertarians don't wright pros and cons.
What?
You can invent thousands of cons for any action to end in harm. Think butterfly effect. Judging regulations on potential abuses is a fools game.
So libertarians should understand the people impacted versus what the intention of the law or regulation is.
If it is more detrimental in numbers or has no bearing on harm of others on a neutral sense, it shouldn't be supported. By pros and cons there ENb was using what ifs more than benefit vs negative. So maybe I used the wrong phrasing. Whatifs should never fall in the cons portion of measurement.
And libertarians don't wright pros and cons.
Brain-dead ideologues don't weigh pros and cons, and continue to push for the implementation of their ideology even if the cons outweigh the pros. See: committed communists
And Jeff joins sard in defending government growth of regulations and laws.
On a topic where 99.9% of gun owners will never misuse their firearms.
Good work you two.
To give them and other safety whores any consideration, you have to realize they cannot (or will not) do math.
If the chance of a bad thing is one in a million, then for a group of 100, that thing is virtually impossible. But for a nation of 330 million, that thing will happen almost every day--and show up on the news. But the odds for any individual have not changed.
Moreover, it's still ENB, or whomever, striving to hem in teachers and administrator's rights. If a state or school district wants to limit who can carry what on school grounds, they can still generally do so, even just by informal policy. Unless the teachers and administrators are absolute morons, in which case ENB should be pushing at ending public education, it's not even a 10 min. conversation, which almost certainly will happen anyway, for teachers and admins to figure out who's taking the 24 hour course and who isn't.
It is a silly and disingenuous what if. Straw grasping
more kids will be killed on their way to school than by any accidental shootings so kids should not go to school since getting them there is more dangerous than having a gun
Progressive solution: kids should just live at school, and never leave the building. Duh.
And guards must be stationed to ensure that they never leave, but are required to run and hide if someone with a gun shows up, because they have to go home at end of shift.
Why did you attack me for pointing out the idiocy of whatifs if you support the idea? Just being a troll?
People make mistakes. If we're going to allow teachers to be armed, then there better be some rules with some strict enforcement to prevent what-ifs from happening.
What's idiotic is to pretend that unintended things never happen.
There is a rule. The training. People make mistakes so we need government regulation?
Go with that.
Nobody here is pretending bad things aren't happening. We accept it and don't limit your rights due to it. You know, libertarianism.
with some strict enforcement to prevent what-ifs from happening.
Also lol at the statist request here.
Statism or anarchy, with no in between?
False dichotomy eh?
Yes, you are presenting a false dichotomy.
Lol. No I am not. Sarc buddy. Take a day off. This has been a terrible morning for you.
Please reflect on fallacious terms. Educate yourself. Save us both trouble.
I like to see various states experimenting with different rules about this.
It grows tiresome when all there is is endless debate and chatter about various public policy proposals. At some point, try things out at the state level and see how it goes.
The only caveat there is that mass school shootings in Ohio are rare enough there won't be any real data on whether letting teachers have guns in the classroom helps or not. It's sort of like spraying tiger repellent around the school to keep tigers away.
It grows tiresome when all there is is endless debate and chatter about various public policy proposals. At some point, try things out at the state level and see how it goes.
IOW, embrace the dictatorship of relativism because absolute truths terrify the Left. Tell us something new
More control, less freedom, and by no means let that nasty representative government thing take time to function. The left-leaning/progressive types truly are the worst craven boot-licking nanny state as god types.
At some point, try things out at the state level and see how it goes.
Oddly, the Left rejects your suggestion when it comes to SCOTUS rejecting Roe v Wade, and letting State Legislatures decide, as you argue because ....reasons.
Dictatorship of relativism it is
I like to see various states experimenting with different rules about this.
-------
Utah already allows teachers to carry. Guess how many school shootings have occurred in Utah since.
But whatif one occurs tomorrow!!!!!!!
On a related note, Israel had a mass shooting at a school in the 1970s. They've had two attempts since then, in both of which cases the terrorist scumbags involved were dispatched in seconds. If there are any pinheads in Israel stupid enough to call for "gun free school zones", they don't get much attention.
-jcr
Getting back to my second point, is there any clearcut before/after data for Utah?
Were there any mass school shootings before the rule went in place?
This page, which I am not claiming is definitive in any way, lists three shooting incidents in Utah:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States_(2000%E2%80%93present)
The description of one of the three incidents listed for Utah: "An elementary school teacher with a concealed weapon permit had her gun fire accidentally in a faculty bathroom at Westbrook Elementary School. The bullet shattered a toilet, and fragments of both the bullet and the porcelain injured her leg."
Why can't you do your own homework?
LOL.....yes, the incident you mention, one where a bullet was fired into a ceiling and immediately stopped by a teacher & student, and one actual shooting of a student AFTER THE DAY WAS OVER, and who lived.
-------
Hillcrest student Jasen Trotter said he witnessed the fight from about 15 feet away. The two boys appear to have planned their encounter beforehand and met just minutes after the school day ended, he said.
Trotter described how one of the boys unexpectedly pulled out a gun, shot the victim and then shot him again while he was on the ground.
-----
Even by the most generous standards, those aren't mass shootings.
This isn't about unintentional consequences. It is asking everyone to be held accountable for someone obviously acting poorly.
What if a person is so addicted to drugs, they steal to get money to feed their habit? What if an immigrant coming into the country is a felon and kills a bunch of Americans?
Her argument is the kind of collective-punishment nonsense that ENB would absolutely reject if it were about anything other than icky boom sticks.
Further, it sounds like it's just redefining the criteria in which teachers can carry guns in school. And it's at a local level. I have no particular faith in the quality of teachers, but this is the laboratories of democracy concept that is extremely important to our nation.
I think the biggest problem is just that the morning newsletter is a sort of quick take article that isn't particularly well thought out. Some people can do pretty reasonable punditry daily, but Reason is not one of them.
" Some people can do pretty reasonable punditry daily, but Reason is not one of them."
And if your "daily punditry" is to argue against allowing Teachers to exercise their right to self defense, maybe you reserve that for your personal blog, rather than the morning lynx for the stalwart defender of liberty.
Lol. Defend stupid what ifs. Do that.
So libertarian. Imagining and fearing bad things instead of justifying liberty.
Remember the idea of problem solving and compromise? The law doesn't require anyone to carry a gun. The administrators can decide among themselves that the threat of every last teacher, administrator, lunch lady, and janitor having the ability to ventilate any given shooter is sufficient. Even if the facts wind up being that only the Vice Principal keeps an unloaded revolver locked in his desk and a single bullet in his breast pocket. Nobodies rights infringed, nobody exposed to any actual increased risk. Actual compromise.
Why is the mere mention of unintended consequences interpreted to mean opposition to the original idea?
You are really stretching to say "A person illegally misusing a gun is an unintended consequence of allowing teachers to legally carry". That's like saying homicide by immigrants is an unintended consequence of immigration.
I'm saying that in an environment filled with children, things can happen. Kids pay attention and get into stuff. Kids are impulsive. Some kids are physically stronger than their adult teachers.
These things need to be taken into consideration.
I'm not saying that those are reasons to not have guns in school.
Why is the mere mentioning of unintended consequences interpreted to mean opposition to the original idea?
And environment filled with anything, things can happen. Amazing argument.
Some kids are physically stronger than their adult teachers.
These things need to be taken into consideration.
Some men are stronger than women, these things need consideration.
Why is the mere mentioning of unintended consequences interpreted to mean opposition to the original idea?
When someone lays put only the negative outcomes of the policy. They are seen as against it. Stop bullshitting everyone.
When someone lays put only the negative outcomes of the policy. They are seen as against it.
No one is allowed to voice concerns?
Sure boy who cried wolf. Keep emoting.
Because, as I indicated especially in this case, it ignores broader reality to assume some sort of divine vision on the part of the speaker. Particularly a speaker who's divine vision itself is largely unclear despite being detached from reality.
What if a teacher uses a gun recklessly? Is the problem spates of school shootings or that every last student never sees a bullet fired in anger? If it's a spate of school shootings, then isn't one teacher the cost of ensuring 19 lives in TX, 17 kids in FL, 12 kids in CO? Until you've got a teacher shooting up a school, you're hypothetically sacrificing those 48 lives so you can feel sanctimoniously justified in addressing a situation that's never happened.
Who decides what constitutes a teacher using or storing a gun recklessly? ENB? Or is it the administrators who are already in charge of a school or the law enforcement and judicial agencies we already have in place?
Since ENB fails to even tangentially address all of this reality, this isn't really an 'unintended consequences' argument, it's blind, emotive spitballing.
Who decides what constitutes a teacher using or storing a gun recklessly? ENB? Or is it the administrators who are already in charge of a school or the law enforcement and judicial agencies we already have in place?
Just like any other workplace. Policy.
That still doesn't answer my question. Are you saying that someone is doing a bad thing when they ask "What if a beefy bully strongarms a teacher and steals their gun?"
I think it's a legitimate question.
OK, just because you think a question is legitimate doesn't mean it is. Mindless blathering still mindless blathering. "What if a beefy bully strongarms a teacher and steals their gun?" is a different question than "What if a teacher loses their gun?" and every minute spent answering the latter question, which already has an answer, is a minute spent not answering the former question, which may not. "What if?" is not a concern. It's concern trolling. "What if a clearly-defined incident we haven't accounted for, preferably with examples, with a proposed stop gap, prevention, or alternative." is expressing legitimate concerns.
There are several commenters here who are on a hair trigger, poised to criticize Reason, and ENB specifically, for anything under the sun they can latch onto to criticize them about.
Why do you suppose it’s so easy to do so?
Hey, don't look at me, I have you muted, which means I am not looking at you. You can take a break and stop ankle biting on my comments anytime; it would improve the comments section if you'd act like a grownup.
HA HA. I’m muted, but you respond anyway.
The weak intellectuals that call the left home can't handle pointing out their ignorance.
You know, calling it ankle biting because someone you don’t like responds to your comments makes you seem so mature and not at all like a smug condescending douche canoe.
We should ban threatening people with guns in schools just in case.
Yes, we need more lawz and regulayshuns.
It's a joke. ENB is engaging in retardedly pointless sophistry. Current law already bans what she's proposing. Moreover, teachers, admins, and parents aren't morons, virtually nobody would fault an admin for letting go of a staff member who handled a weapon recklessly or aggressively (like the dumbass officer mocked round the internet for shooting himself in the foot).
ENBs 'what if' sounds an awful lot like the bulk-standard 'new mom/parent' paranoia where her husband winds up installing locking screens on the windows that are 36" off the ground and installing anti-tip anchors on furniture pieces that are wider than they are tall.
My wife wanted me to install magnetic locks on all our lower kitchen cabinets. I threw a hair tie on the one under the sink and called it a day. And nothing else happened.
I did have to put in a couple of cabinet anchors, which was pointless as my kids aren't much for climbing.
I did see a kid almost kill themselves on a book case one time. He was like 2 years old and bolted across the dining room faster than his parents could react, climbed up a book shelf and pulled it down on him. The only thing saving him was a table that caught the top of the book case about 3 feet off the ground. Scared the shit out of all of us.
I didn't see the bookcase and don't consider the possibility of death to be nill, but improbable.
All the wall anchors on heavy furniture in our house until a few years ago when the kids got to the "If he pulls the TV onto himself, he owes me a new TV." age. My then 8-yr.-old was climbing a tree at the bus stop and fell. When I saw him slip and invert, hands at his sides, I was certain he was going to break his neck. His foot caught in a fork in a branch and then I was sure his ankle was dislocated. And I'm not the type to overreact in such a manner. When he righted himself and dropped down from the tree squarely on both feet, I went back in the house.
No tree anchors? Kidding. I fell out of a tree as a kid, hit a branch, then the ground. Never told my folks. Hurt like a bastard. The new crop of retarded risk-averse/prevent all risks types of, not just parents, but people would be wryly amusing were they not so common and pathetic.
The same broodling that nearly fell out of the tree was, since he could stand up, *always* standing up in the bathtub. Sure enough, he slips and splits his chin open. While waiting to see a physician the ER nurse asks him if he's OK and if they can do anything for him. The little bastard replies, "If you could get a doctor out here to fix my chin, that would be good." Sure enough, next evening, fresh stitches and all, the moron stands up in the bathtub again.
Broodling number 3 tipped a piano bench over and fractured his toe. Broodling number 2, with the chin scar, on the way to the doctor is cuing him up with the "Will I be able to play the piano?" joke. If Mrs. Casual ever asks, they don't make piano bench anchors.
Before I was allowed to have my son in my house, the court ordered that his mother be allowed to inspect my house. She complained that I didn't have any of the safety locks on the cabinets. I pointed out that I was at her house multiple times and her safety locks were not, in fact, locked. She looked me dead in the eye and said, "at least I have the option."
Don't forget foam padding on the corners of coffee tables.
We've seen a picture of ENB's "husband"- no way he's capable of installing anything
A certain type of person, let's call them pajama class liberals, likes to spend all their time imagining (and inventing) all kinds of risks and dangers, but can't assess these in terms of probability and relative impact. Every danger is deadly.
They also can't relate the costs and benefits of mitigation, nor can they understand negative consequences (or just plain useless, silly "do something" actions).
For a societal example, see California's ridiculous cancer warnings.
"A certain type of person, let's call them pajama class liberals, likes to spend all their time imagining (and inventing) all kinds of risks and dangers"
The same people that scream at me daily that the climate apocalypse is coming anytime (for the 5th decade in a row)
We can also ban students from attacking teachers so as to steal their guns.
And if a teacher DOES do that, surely they'd face severe consequences, that could be dealt with after the fact. Surely teachers aren't going to start suddenly murdering students just because guns are present. Otherwise how can we trust these maniacs with scissors?
And, again, the issue is supposedly a series or spate or culture of school shootings. One teacher getting pissed and shooting one student is bad but it's better than 3 separate people killing 19, 17, and 12 separate groups of kids at 3 separate schools. The actual concern commensurate with the problem would be "What if several school teachers go nuts and start shooting up classes?" but that question, besides being absurd, would go unasked because it strongly hints that the problem is systemic to humans and we couldn't possibly vet people hard enough, and not caused by guns.
Except the people raising these possibilities are not stupid but malevolent. They want more dead kids in schools so they have fresh bodies to stand atop and demand the forfeiture of the rights of law abiding citizens.
So those possibilities should never be mentioned, considered or examined?
It’s possible, even probable, that a meteor will destroy the earth. Some day.
Why bother with anything?
It's a lot more probable that a big kid might overpower an armed teacher, or that a teacher might get careless.
Are you saying those things shouldn't be said? The mere mentioning of them equals supporting gun-free-zones?
That's some pretty narrow thinking.
Just admit you choose safety over liberty. That's where your spiraling is leading you to.
Freedom is risky. And annoying, unfair, and unpredictable. Therefore all concerned people should ban freedom.
I just wish they would find themselves another country. This is clearly a country founded on liberty and individualism, and they want neither.
They want a nanny state that takes on all risks/responsibility for them and makes everything all better, with all the loss of freedom that entails. This is not a sustainable relationship with these people
Canada?
You will also note youre avoiding the good things that could happen like the estimated tens of thousands of crimes stopped from an armed populace.
People are trying to have a conversation here. Please stop shitting up the thread with your personal bullshit.
It looked like a “what if” to me.
Lol. You interjected into the conversation not me retard. And you did so from a statist view point.
You do realize that from the beginning I've said that gun-free-zones are the problem, right?
I believe that people should not be prohibited from arming themselves in schools. How is that for a statement of belief, asshole?
However.... It's not just any old environment, and as such there are some special considerations that should be considered.
Now please stop twisting my words and go fuck yourself.
That goes against every other statement you made above. Such as
with some strict enforcement to prevent what-ifs from happening.
You saying that there shouldn't be any rules at all, or that if there are rules that they shouldn't be enforced? Rules without enforcement are called suggestions.
2 false dichotomies. Good work buddy.
The training is fine. It is probably even too high as a concealed carry class is 8 hours. At least in az.
No. One can imagine a parade of horrible about any action. Voting leading to dictatorships. Cooking leading to food poisoning.
Stop defending your reactionary bullshit. Stop loving and pushing policy from unfounded fear.
Next up are you going to ask to ban all guns because people get shot? Because thats where this bullshit goes.
And let's be honest. Your original post was just reactionary to try to attack me and it backfired spectacularly on you are your lack of principles.
https://reason.com/2022/06/14/ohio-teachers-can-carry-guns-with-24-hours-of-training/?comments=true#comment-9543435
Which I responded to dummy. Want this link?
https://reason.com/2022/06/14/ohio-teachers-can-carry-guns-with-24-hours-of-training/?comments=true#comment-9543391
You know you fucked up and are trying to get out of it lol.
I was trying to have a conversation about guns in schools.
You're making it a conversation about me. As usual.
Thanks for shitting up the thread. It's what you do best.
Lol. Ypu are retreating to this argument again? How embarrassing.
Did you forget you interjected first? Half of your arguments are regarding me. That you've presented false dichotomies twice.
I already stated my views and remained consistent. I didn't waffle on both sides of the issue like yourself.
Define strict enforcement for us.
I remember the movie The Manhatten Project where it high school student built a nuke with his education. We should talk about if education is necessary now.
I think it's a bit extreme to say they want more dead kids, but I will agree that they don't miss an opportunity to stand on those tiny coffins to try and get what they want done.
Oddly. negative scenarios involving, say, illegal immigration or grooming are never considered....
Stop being racist. Only guns can cause violence.
Which brings us to the Law of Salutary Contradiction, whose formulation is: “That’s not happening and it’s good that it is.” OR is it the Law of Merited Impossibility, which holds: “That will never happen, and when it does, boy will you [homophobes, transphobes, racists, sexists, whatever] deserve it.”
I saw a sad movie once about a poor immigrant who was taken over by gun culture and became a serial murderer. I think it was called Scarface.
better to have one accident than have a whole school of kids slaughtered but hey it if thats what it takes.
far fewer accidents or even crimes by legal carriers so yea they are just dreaming up any scenario to keep guns only in the hands of the evil people
If you are planning a parade, watch out for rogue red SUVs.
Nearly three-quarters of U.S. school teachers oppose the idea of training certain teachers and staff to carry guns in school buildings...
Wait, there isn't a strong left wing bias among public school teachers, is there?
Are they more opposed to being shot or some teachers carrying guns? It's the idiocy of the whole operation that will stop real solutions from happening. It's almost impossible to find any statistics relating to CCW holders committing crime. I wonder why that is?
After Uvalde, my Facebook feed was flooded with people urging the politicians to do the simple thing to keep kids safe. By that, they all mean banning AR's, which will have zero impact on the issue.
And seriously, if a school has, say, 100 teachers and support staff, just two of them being armed might be sufficient, especially you imply others might be armed.
If I was a public school teacher I'd have a gun with me with or without permission. If a shooter comes into my classroom I'm gonna use it and if I get fired so be it.
So arm the other 25% and call it a day!
"..nearly six in 10 teachers think it would make schools less safe," reported Gallup in 2018.
More of a feeling than a thought.
Yes, Uvalde = less safe than arming teachers.
Sadly, it will be less safe: once the cops come in and shoot the teacher who stopped the mass shooting.
Does anyone really need a cite for this?
Unless the police proceed to kill all the kids, your argument seems to be kind of stupid.
Yes, cite please. Sounds like a hypothetical that has never happened in the real world.
Today:
Security guard slain trying to intervene in murder-suicide, California cops say
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article262492507.html
Sorry, bad example.
here
https://www.chicagocriminallawyerblog.com/chicago-police-officers-shoot-security-guard/
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-chicago-security-guard-shot-by-police_n_5be9a032e4b0caeec2bbcbb3
Acknowledged.
Sorry, I wasn't specific in my comment. I was asking for a cite specifically about a case where a cop has come in and shot a teacher who stopped a mass shooting". I thought that was obvious of the context of Griffin3's comment, which I was replying to.
Caw caw!
What? You think the police are going to willingly confront an armed teacher? Google Uvalde police response and get back to me.
CB
Was that supposed to be a reply to Griffin3? He's the one who thinks that such a thing has happened. I'm the one who thinks this scenario hasn't ever come up in the real world.
What if that happened though, Liarson? That would be bad though, right? Sounds like one of them important "what is". Or it was an attempt at an ironic joke originally. But you are quite a bit slow though.
nearly six in 10 teachers think it would make schools less safe
How many of those teach Statistics?
What would make this worthwhile information from Gallup is their stance on gun control. If the same teachers were somehow, shockingly, inflexible gun control advocates, then this 'nearly six in 10' figure can be tossed out as the garbage it very likely is.
"staff were ignoring the mission and focusing only on themselves, using a moment of public awakening to smuggle through standard grievances cloaked in the language of social justice."
See also the recent Wapo drama wherein they decided to have a high school level woke-off/victim-olympics in public, showing them to be the useless, immature, braindead SJW's that our universities seem to turn out in excess numbers.
Let them eat their own. If a recession is good for one thing, its trimming back on SJW focused loss-leaders when a company cant afford to keep up the façade.
As a literature major, I don't have any beef against liberal arts studies. But even when I was in school universities had weird ass departments of victim studies. At UCSD the then named Third College was jokingly called Third World College because everyone there (except Stephen Cox) was teaching or majoring in some sort of victim studies. Women's Studies, Black Studies, literally Third World Studies. Even the Communications majors were saying "what a bunch of weirdos".
It's from those departments that these strange new progressives are coming from. Imagine six years of 24/7 Identitarian indoctrination. We don't have significiant problems with STEM majors, not with traditional Liberal Arts majors, and not even with some of the squishier Psych and Anthro majors. It's only from the Victimization Department that we get Victimization Cult members.
Someone made a point a few months back that a whole bunch of unwanted effects came from this push to get kids into college. You had essentially millions of kids going into college who could do nothing but attend checkbox classes. For example, half of all education degrees awarded these days are for "Education Administration", not teaching. And then also all these victim studies classes.
And what happened when all these people graduated? They needed jobs. Voila! Administration jobs in schools have increased massively, and Diversity Equity and Inclusion positions now weigh down every large company in the country. The over supply of useless, unproductive workers created new markets of useless, unproductive work.
Stop funding higher ed. Students can make their own decisions about costs and benefits if paying out of pocket, or getting loans from private banks. All the bullshit majors (and faculty) would disappear in a couple of years.
Yup. And, sadly, in the last decade or so, conservatives have learned how to play the victim game. The conservative victimhood narrative led directly to Trump being elected.
Cite?
Mike loves nothing more than to bring up conservatives. Talk about something else, and he wants to talk about conservatives. They live within his fevered dreams. Because Mike doesn't want a discussion, he wants to bitch about conservatives.
Here, when everyone was discussing GMOs, he wanted to stir up shit about vaccinations.
https://reason.com/2022/01/07/mandatory-gmo-disclosure-doesnt-sway-shopping-habits-but-will-drive-up-costs/?comments=true#comment-9293589
The conservative victimhood narrative led directly to Trump being elected.
It did? The 'deplorables' wanted a voice, not victim status. Their focus was on being heard and having their values valued and not ignored to cater to the victims studies progressives and undermine the deplorable idea of America.
This is not a good 'both sides' argument.
It fails as an argument, but it is the preferred narrative, trump elected due to white/conservative grievance and victimhood narratives. It's pure projection and alinsky at heart, and to be expected from a shill.
Because at some level they accepted Hillary’s assessment of them as being “deplorable”.
Maybe they didn’t really believe it, but they acted like they did for political gains. Instead of defending their own political views and culture with dignity and rationality, they used their victimhood to justify going down the low road and electing a buffoon to represent them.
Ooops, Mike let the mask slip again. Notice that he deigns to peer into the mind of MILLIONS of conservatives, and know what makes them tick.
Mike likes to pretend that he is totally reasonable. He is just asking questions, see. He just calls out when people are arguing in bad faith. And, of course, if you are one of Tens of Millions of people who voted for Trump- the only choice reasonably capable of defeating Hillary Clinton- it must have been because you had a victim complex.
Not because you believed his stance on trade or immigration. Not because of supreme court picks. Not because it was blatantly obvious that Hillary Clinton was a notoriously corrupt scofflaw. No. It could only be because she said mean things about them.
Next time Mike tells you how people on this site are unfairly imputing motives of people, be sure to bring this up.
they used their victimhood to justify going down the low road and electing a buffoon to represent them.
I think you meant Trump used his understanding of messaging to his constituency to rally their support. As individual humans, the 'deplorables' wanted nothing more than to shove their FU votes in the face of Elitist Hillary. Hardly a victim mentality.
The only one crying foul over and over when the votes were counted was Miss Hillary. I'd say she got what she asked for and more.
It's only from the Victimization Department that we get Victimization Cult members.
Not for long, if it's even still the case now. When religious zealots are in charge, they make sure their religion dominates.
I look forward to the actual shooting phase of the 21st century American religion wars.
I did philosophy and literature for a year before dropping out. I also talked with various Humanities students when I went back as I did programming work for the various departments to pay for college the second time.
Regardless, there's the grievance culture aspect to it, for sure, but there's also the rise of Critical Thinking which weirdly precludes really reading a lot of material or grappling with it. Not just in the Great Books sense, but there's been this push towards teaching people a lens to read things through and what is actually read is not actually important. I think this has also significantly lessened the quality of the average humanities degree.
I know when I was in school the second time for CS, I was working out of school, had a failing relationship that inflicted huge time drains on my life, had class, and I discovered I STILL read more literature than a student pursuing a BA in Humanities.
They were too busy activisting to read.
" We don't have significiant problems with STEM majors, not with traditional Liberal Arts majors, and not even with some of the squishier Psych and Anthro majors"
STEM definitely not yet, but they are trying their best to break into this (requiring physics courses adjust themselves to fit with DEI initiatives)
Traditional liberal arts? I guess give me your list of what you consider to be under this umbrella. I would argue there is a high likelihood there is indoctrination there.
Psychology is going to be lost soon (its about 90% gone). Its a field dominated by women now, and more importantly, by very left leaning women. The mind virus is well seated in the field of psychology and its only going to get worse. The march from gender identity disorder (DSM4) to gender dysphoria (DSM5) will likely be to further normalize it or completely remove it in the next version. The normalization of deranged or just plain weak mental health is rampant in psychology and it is a direct result of the woke women who have taken over.
Victim studies (TM) used to be at least a distinct set of majors or classes. Now its integrated into so many more traditional fields at least in academia. I would like to see a person in academia in psychology, some sociology major, or even english/lit stand up and just put forth that they are willing to have the debate (not necessarily even endorse) "is there really systemic racism?" and see how quickly the mob comes for them.
I fear we are about to lose the entire academy, at least as any form of knowledge-seeking entity in the spirit of the enlightenment. And science in general is now under pressure way beyond DEI head counting. I hear more and more how science has to embrace "other forms of knowing", i.e. tribal shamanism and post-modern crap.
We are returning to the Middle Ages in term of intellectual and dogmatic achievement, imposed by the Church.
The problem is that the Victimization Cult unironically views themselves as an ideological virus that's meant to infect and break down the existing society. They've effectively taken over all of academia this way.
But those same hyper-left universities are still full of systemic racism!
"Inside Democrats' controversial strategy of trying to boost conservative extremist candidates."
Our Democratic allies are so smart! You might even call this the "Pied Piper Strategy." 🙂
#Resist
They were all for Trump until he looked like he would get the nomination. Poor Hillary got cheated by them.
Hilary got 'cheated' by reality.
That's one way to put it. The correct, very accurate way to put it, but how about her truth being more important than facts?
That's not necessarily specific to Hillary though; even Biden said he believes "truth" over facts. It's just a dem thing I think.
Her Truth didn't include enough ballots from mysterious, unmarked boxes.
Lessons learned.
Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups.
Circular firing squads of escalating victimhood competitions tend to do that.
Circular firing squads of escalating victimhood competitions..
Beautiful.
I take comfort in the fact that this is true. Check this out from the Democratic Socialists of America 2019 convention.
https://youtu.be/bHRxu3XrsHg
How far socialism has fallen.
I think the anti-Soviet writers were mocking just this pedantic bullshit, the priggishness, and the officiousness in much of their writing. Thus their, and current folks who oppose the narrative, unpersoning. No gulag here, yet, but the statists seem hellbent on nationalized police, so I suspect it is in their 5 year action items.
The Death of Stalin did a good job with it.
Basic principle from many martial arts disciplines: If you have an enemy like that, stop fighting with them and let them fight among themselves.
Right-wingers are constantly getting hardcore progressives to unify by focusing on the right wingers. If they hardcore progressives alone for a while, they'd all eat themselves.
Yes but we know that the GOP will try very hard in the next few months to lose elections they have no business losing.
What do you think the right wingers should do to leave the progs alone, mike? Cuz it sure looks like the progs don’t wanna leave anyone alone.
You’re the guy who brings up “victim narratives” and somehow only sees the right doing it, so I’m honestly curious what exactly your prescription is for leaving the progs alone. Since you’re trying to be so helpful and all, with your unbiased observations.
Your critics here are right. You try to present yourself as reasonable and with no team, but you just post stupid shit and blame the people who call you out on it for being dicks. You suck.
"Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups."
What else would you expect to happen when you put race hustling, victim mongering and offense seeking people together?
The more they cancel each other, the less they can cancel the rest of us. Genius self-sabotage!
and it's led to little incident
As in No Incidents? Or at least No Reported Instances I Can Find?
At least be a little honest.
All sorts of bad financial signs are percolating.
Not sure what this has to do with a year-and-a-half-old riot.
Come on. Somehow this is Trump's fault.
Portland started rioting longer ago then that.
"President Joe Biden is less popular than Donald Trump"
Literally. Impossible.
Biden liberated and dismantled Drumpf's concentration camps, delivered the vaccine and shut down the virus, built the strongest economy ever, and frightened Putin into submission. There's no way his approval rating could fail to reflect what an unqualified success he's been.
#DefendBidenAtAllCosts
Did anybody expect Dad to be more popular than your wealthy, jet-setting, womanizing, racist, uncle? The adults are in charge again. If the rabble-rousers don't, sit down and shut up, we're going to turn this car right around and go back to making deals with Saudi princes to make oil cheap enough to get home.
Nate Silver suspects that pollsters are still unintentionally oversampling Democrats. John Kudla thinks that it could be affecting results by 4 to 6 percentage points.
"Unintentionally" -- good one.
Well part of the problem for sampling, according to Silver, is institutional trust. Conservatives now make up most of the low trust voters.
"First, Republicans are becoming more distrustful of institutions, and that may be extending to how they feel about pollsters.
Second, suburban Republican college graduates are more likely to fear professional sanction for their views and are therefore self-censoring more, including in surveys."
He goes on to speculate that partisan nonresponse is a phenomenon where low-trust conservatives opt out of participation in the polls and are replaced by higher-trust leftists.
High-trust voters are basically the opposite. They tend to be leftist and very enthusiastic about talking to pollsters.
Pollster Richard Baris believes that another reason for Democrat bias in polls is sample location.
"You have to look not just at who you poll, but where you poll. The way they're polling, they are reaching voters that skew too urban.
In that case, your Republican sample will be stacked with the John Kasich and Bill Kristol Republicans. That's not the Republican Party that gave the presidency to Trump.
Conservatives now make up most of the low trust voters.
IIRC recent polling data these last 6 months from various outlets
indicating that Independents, Hispanics and a growing number of blacks are also pledging to vote for Republicans, precisely bc they distrust Biden and Democrats.
It's the possible implications I find interesting. If polling really is biased by 6 percentage points, that puts Biden at as low as 33% approval and 61% disapproval, which is crazy.
Then try to imagine if America didn't have a complicit press who've been hiding the big stuff.
Does that imply Trump was over 50%?
"Second, suburban Republican college graduates are more likely to fear professional sanction for their views and are therefore self-censoring more, including in surveys."
Boy golly, I can't possibly imagine why they think that.
They ALWAYS oversample Dems. Why would they change now for these midterms?
Sampling is hard.
So do mail-in ballots.
Nothing about freeing women from the burden of paying for tampons, one of the dastardly war crimes Republicans committed in their War On Women?
Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar successive prosecutions
of distinct offenses arising from a single act.
Prosecutors have resumes to pad and guilty pleas to coerce.
You can always tell the lawsuits against Trump are going so well when the DA jumps to a new set of walls to close in.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-york-attorney-general-investigate-disturbing-jan-6-allegations
Is Reason fine with this persistent targeting of a person instead of a crime?
Since they seem to be fully in agreement that he must have done something bad I'd say yes, they're fine with it.
Trust the experts.
it would "cause harmful accidents and potentially even needless deaths."
Of course, Ohio has allowed teachers to carry guns for years, and it's led to little incident.
"Oh, very well. POTENTIALLY harmful accidents."
The second hearing of the select committee investigating January 6 was held yesterday.
They found unlike private businesses Congress didn't have insurance to cover the damages.
You don't need insurance when you can just forcibly seize funds from the citizenry.
The hearing yesterday was just them presenting testimony from people talking about how Trump reacted to the election. It was straight from the impeachment prosecution. Allegations that Rudy Giuliani got really drunk on election night were sprinkled in, and then people like Bill Barr and others saying they disagreed with Trump repeating the stolen election claims. Basic Politico-level debunking of some of the election fraud cases, and a few casual aspersions flung at the 2000 Mules documentary without really addressing anything specific.
You watch so we don't have to, and for that, gratitude.
"Twenty-eight states allow people other than security personnel to carry firearms on school grounds, with laws in nine of those states explicitly mentioning school employees,"
Any data on school shootings in those states? I would imagine that the fact that they're not gun-free-zones would by itself discourage potential shooters.
Oh yeah, the first thing a school shooter looks for is a gun-free zone. Hell, they will even cross state lines to find a suitable school.
That was called "sarcasm". Truth is school shooters target their own local schools. And it's invariably suicide by mass murder spree, so they don't much care if it's a gun free zone or not, they're just there to make a "statement".
If they don't choose gun-free-zones, why do the vast majority of mass shootings happen in gun-free-zones? Coincidence?
There may be confirmation bias there: the vast majority of schools are gun-free zones, so, of course, the vast majority of mass school shootings happen in gun-free zones.
They never shoot up gun stores.
"Oh yeah, the first thing a school shooter looks for is a gun-free zone."
Why the strawman?
It's Brandyshit; expect nothing else.
School shootings are statistically random events, so I suspect the (I'm assuming) low population & density as a pretty severe confound.
We miss you Avenatti. You were the best of the leftist fandom here.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/crime/avenatti-plead-guilty-stealing-millions-clients
that was the scumbag lawyer who brought the fabricated Kavanaugh rape victim, wasnt it?
And the porn star prior.
He got his start representing Stormy Daniels and quickly became a CNN and MSNBC favorite guest.
He was going to run for president at one point. I can't believe that they can manage to find so many shittier human beings than Trump to try and take him down. If he's so bad, why are all of the smoking guns coming from people way worse than him?
Remember when they were sucking Eric Schneiderman's dick because he was going to take down Blumph once and for all, only to have it fall apart because he was accused of sexual assault himself?
Samantha Bee devoted a whole segment to kissing his ass, and then had to put up a disclaimer on the episode after that happened.
Reasons article on it.
https://reason.com/2018/09/26/swetnick-says-kavanaugh-aided-gang-rape/
And check out the usual suspects shitting up the comment section. Some things don't ever change.
Saw John and Chipper in there. Good times.
Michigan revoked an ACAB license plate after deciding it didn't really stand for "all cats are beautiful."
However, according to acronymfinder.com, it stands for "All Cops Are Beautiful".
Before I knew it as "All Cops Are Bastards" I knew it as "Always Carry A Badge". They're like magic talismans that ward off all kinds of evil prosecution specters.
I thought the vehicle was just advertising that it's a cab.
yeah, more subtle than the Uber and Lyft stickers.
I thought it was Phil Collins, his other car just says "A B".
ACAB = Always Closing Always Be. Alec Baldwin taught me that.
President Joe Biden is less popular than Donald Trump...
"If the election were held today..."
Reason staff will still place strategic votes for SleepyJoe.
Return to normalcy!
Turns out the conspiracy that Rep Lauderhill led people through the Capitol jan 5th to survey attack points was bullshit. But the Legos weren't.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/capitol-police-nix-jan-6-panels-claim-gop-rep-led-recon-mission-day-before-riots
And yes the j6 committee pushed this theory.
Im sure the reprint and correction for this will come around when the Russiagate one does
Find fine hot ladies for sex contacts in EU at sex in luzern
"Luzern"
Absolutely disgusting. Who in their right mind would have sex with the Swiss?
Nothing sexier than precision.
I can think of lots of sexy things to do with chocolate, cheese, and cuckoo clocks.
Michigan revoked an ACAB license plate after deciding it didn't really stand for "all cats are beautiful."
Saved that motorist from regularly getting pulled over and harassed by cats.
Inside Democrats' controversial strategy of trying to boost conservative extremist candidates.
Yet another lesson not learned in 2016?
It’s like they’re playing a game of chicken… on a skateboard.
More like a mine cart on tracks.
But a dems version of a right wing extremist is someone that thinks parents should have a say in their child's upbringing
Or, that men shouldn't compete with women in sports.
“staff were ignoring the mission and focusing only on themselves, using a moment of public awakening to smuggle through standard grievances cloaked in the language of social justice.”
So they’ve been paying attention.
That's not ignoring the public movement, that IS the public movement. Advance yourself by attacking others, claim victimhood at all costs.
White house just can't admit failure.
“So we know — we know that the — that high prices are having a real effect on people’s lives. We get that. And we are incredibly focused on doing everything that we can to make sure that the economy is working for every — American people. But we are coming out of the strongest job market in American history, and that matters. And that — a lot of that is thanks to the American Rescue Plan, which only Democrats voted for that — Republicans did not — and it led to this economic boom — this historic economic boom that we’re seeing with jobs,” she said.
Are you implying that Republicans admit failure?
When did they fail?
Are you deflecting again? Can you admit democrats have failed?
I think he is implying that the current white house cannot admit failure.
Regardless of whether they admit failure, their current box-checker is the worst possible choice for press secretary. She is bad in a way that no professional speaker could ever make a living being.
Did you see her when she couldn't find her pre-made answer to the baby formula question?
"Remain calm! All is well! ALL IS WELL!"
I am impressed at how they managed to get someone with black skin who comes across as simultaneously whiter and less competent than Psaki.
She's dumber than a goddamn post. She can't even read the talking points, and if it's slightly off script, she looks like a deer that just got mowed by an 18 wheeler.
Does affordable housing make the surrounding neighborhood less affordable?
It sends property values up?
Broken windows bring up economic activity which means more jobs for everybody.
"But should teachers be allowed to be armed in the first place?"
Jesus Christ, ENB. Just go to Vox already.
Her morning screed is nothing more than concern trolling about icky guns. While her position at Reason means that she must be technically opposed to gun control, she searches long and hard for any reason to get people to question whether Teachers should be ALLOWED to exercise their 2nd Amendment Right to Self Defense.
She is quick to mention that all sorts of employers ban their employees from carrying. This, of course, is non responsive to the question she posed ("Should" employers ban their employees). Then she says that there is always a chance a student will get ahold of a gun. There is also a chance kids get ahold of booze in your house, or drugs. Should we allow parents to have guns, booze or drugs? Why is that different? Finally she says a lot of teachers don't want to carry...as if that should override the preference of the few teachers who DO want to carry.
This is a mushy, emotional soup that ENB has internalized over the past weeks in her Blue Bubble enclave. Every one of these arguments are arguments made about general gun ownership (and drugs, and gay sex, and immigration) and she can't even tell. Because she is so cloistered among her Blue Check Twitteratti, none of these simplistic arguments has ever been challenged in her mind, even though they are utterly pedestrian.
It is bad enough that ENB cannot be bothered to defend freedom in a magazine ostensibly about liberty. But add onto that the fact that she is posing some of the laziest, and unprincipled arguments against freedom that are out there. And EVEN WORSE, we see that someone A) edited this, failing to challenge such sloppy thinking, and B) she was so lazy that she couldn't even correct it.
"Ohio's change has once again kicked off a nationwide debate over educators with [Are we missing a word here?]"
This is really a new low for ENB and Reason.
"Jesus Christ, ENB. Just go to Vox already."
This. I can already get her take from any of the left wing outlets in the country, and there are tons of them. The only thing she is remotely libertarian on is probably sex work and weed. Otherwise she is a huffpost/vox/vice/salon writer.
There is also a chance kids get ahold of booze in your house, or drugs. Should we allow parents to have guns, booze or drugs?
Baby steps, O.
This is what happens with chicks in charge.
At the very least, simultaneously in charge without the legal ability to slap them across the face. And, to be clear, I don't mean an aggressive, dominating, closed-fist assault.
Repeal the 19th!
Then she says that there is always a chance a student will get ahold of a gun. There is also a chance kids get ahold of booze in your house, or drugs. Should we allow parents to have guns, booze or drugs? Why is that different?
There are two concerns here: the legality of the matter, and the wisdom of the matter.
Should it be *legal to permit teachers to carry guns at school? That depends entirely on the decision of the property owner.
Is it *wise policy* to permit teachers to carry guns at school? That is a different question entirely.
Yes parents have the legal right to own guns and liquor and (some) drugs. That does not mean it is *wise* for parents to leave their guns, and liquor, and drugs around for their kids to find.
I am personally ambivalent about the idea of armed teachers. I'm willing to wait until we have some empirical data to base a decision on whether it is wise policy to permit teachers to carry guns in the school.
Where would this data come from ?
The data says 99.9% of gin owners will not misuse them and a child is more likely to die driving to school than being shot. We have the data. Jeff is just a statist.
Lawful gun owners misusing guns is a rare event, that is true.
Mass shootings at schools are also rare events.
Which is rarer? Hmm?
Well, which one, Jeff?
I don't know. That is why I would like for there to be a study so that we could have some empirical evidence.
We need something done now. Haven't you watched the news?
It's always precious when "principled" people forfeit rights to pragmatism. Assumedly, if I were to provide a study saying that more Americans are killed by illegal immigrants than saved by illegal immigrants, would he suddenly be on board with mass deportations?
Way to base your principles on experts there.
So much individualism.
It’s funny you still claim to be a individualist libertarian.
Yeah, though I think the ultimate question is one of risk tolerance rather than some empirical question of whether it really stops school shootings.
I've wondered this a bit, because school shootings are so rare how can we reasonably test the effect of any given policy decision here? I imagine there is some sort of rare event type analysis people do these days, but I question that. I've seen a lot of bad statistical inference and it gets bad real quick in data sparse spaces.
Why does it matter which is rarer of both are rare?
I would hope that there would be studies to investigate if having armed teachers increased or decreased mass shootings and/or gun violence in school.
To be truly rigorous, it would seem that we need some double-blind tests. Are schools with armed teachers more safe vis-a-vis active shooters? Are schools with armed teachers less safe due to accident or stolen weapons or teacher intimidation?
Allocate a certain number of schools with unarmed teachers as a control group. We can test the former by sending a number of active shooters into both groups (armed test group and unarmed control group) and measure the number killed & wounded. We'd need to adjust for suicidal shooters vs those hoping to get away with it.
We can also count the number of dead & wounded in each group due to teachers carrying and negligence causing accidents, or having their weapons stolen and turned on the classroom, or just teachers using their firearms to bully children. We should expect zero incidents in the control group, but it is possible that some teacher carries a firearm in contradiction of the rules.
Once we have all the numbers in hand, we can do the math to see what the relative risk factors are.
Whoa, that will never work, it isn't scientism, and it implies that the dominant in-group may have to accept facts instead of simply sticking to narratives and agenda.
Of it takes it from 0.01% to 0.011% are you going to scream 10% increase?
School shootings are rare. Stop implementing policies on society to fix it.
"Yes parents have the legal right to own guns and liquor and (some) drugs. That does not mean it is *wise* for parents to leave their guns, and liquor, and drugs around for their kids to find."
And no one is trying to argue for a Policy where teachers leave guns laying around for kids to find. Obviously, it would be unwise to have a policy of letting teachers leave sidearms sitting in a school.
The policy in question is whether or not to allow responsible teachers to arm themselves. The fact that some teachers will violate that policy is as relevant as the fact that some parents will allow their kids access to drugs.
Nope, we need to get rid of teachers or at least malign them all for the actions of a few. I see no reason to treat teachers better with relation to the molesters and a abusers among them than they treat gun owners with respect to the criminals that use guns. Individual teachers to be exempted on a case by case basis of course.
I think there is something to the question of prudence of any given teacher carrying a gun, and in what situations.
A dumb example, but it's reasonably prudent in some prison school to perhaps not have teachers with guns interacting with kids who are high risk to grab them. Even if it's restricting the teacher's right in that situation (which I can argue is not true since the school presumably has some right to control its campus (though that's complicated once more in the public school scenario, which is why we should get rid of public schooling (t-t-t-triple parenthetical))).
I think that gets at the wisdom of subsidiarity. Have the decision making be as granular as possible.
There is nothing unique about teaching in a school, versus being at a mall, or having kids at home. Every day, people walk around hundreds of minors in daily conveyance without some kid being compelled to take their gun and shoot the place up.
You very specific What If, about a prison school is obviously so far of an edge case, that I feel comfortable discarding it as just that. In a prison, there are tons of guards available to protect the teachers. Unless we intend to turn schools into prisons, this specific case should be discarded.
I find it odd that principled sarc didn't attack you for having the same viewpoint i expressed above.
To be fair, your one liners came first, and are easier to consume than my rants.
Sarc no read real good.
Then she says that there is always a chance a student will get ahold of a gun.
Every high school has a Chemistry lab. They can already get ahold of things a lot more deadly than guns.
The only thing more deadly than guns is an unmasked student...
This raises a question I do find interesting though. Why don't we see more attacks like that? Why is it always a gun? It would be super easy to just drive a truck into a school drop off zone too. Even bomb building is not beyond some teenager who is so inclined. The worst school massacre in our history, almost a 100 years ago now in Bath, used bombs.
Why don't we see more attacks like that?
Because the object of teenage school shooters is not the killing. It is to be noticed.
She is quick to mention that all sorts of employers ban their employees from carrying.
Does she bother mentioning that all sorts of employers don't ban their employees from carrying?
Salon may be a better fit.
Sqrlsy would love that. It's already the source for most of his links.
As I parent, I would never let my child drink my booze.... The little mooch can buy her own
Well, ENB isn't a Libertarian. So this type of emoting makes perfect sense if you understand she's a far left progressive.
Do Democrats Already Have Their Own Trump That Could Win in 2024?
Oprah. All she needs is a catchy slogan!
You get 10 percent inflation! And you get 10 percent inflation! And you get 10 percent inflation!
Look under your seat for your brand new chicken in every pot
Trump is so evil and nasty and orange that Democrats are looking for their own.
You joke, but I think she would be incredibly powerful if she ran. Celebrity is very powerful in the US, that was true of Trump as well. He was a real celebrity in a way basically no politician is.
Dr. Oz's run is basically entirely bolstered by his celebrity as well.
Opra winfree for president!
She promises to keep the inflation rate lower than her weight!
Others may suggest that teachers don't lose their Second Amendment rights when they go to work. Of course, many workplaces prohibit firearms on premises without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment.
Property rights take precedence.
So a property owner could rape you once you step on their property?
Nope, the NAP takes precedence over property rights.
Maybe make us a rights diagram.
That will be entertaining.
It’s certain to be drawn in crayon.
"The state-----> all rights"
Which rights go into trunks?
Forcefully taking away my property, or gun, is a violation of the NAP. Me carrying it unseen by you is not.
Try again.
I agree, in general. In the specific case of public institutions it gets weird. I don't see most people upset about not being able to bring guns into court houses or something, but it still feels different to me from, say, a business asking you not to carry a gun on premise and requesting you to leave if you disobey their rules.
Vanity Fair: Trump’s Truth Social Is Allegedly Banning People for Talking About the January 6 Hearings Because Of Course It Is
Yeah, that’s right Vanity Fair. Of course it is. Because in a capitalist society private entities get to do whatever the fuck they want. Ever hear of “no shoes, no service”? As a person who is GOP Proud (gay and Black, btw) I know that capitalism is best when the government stays out of people’s lives (with notable exceptions like abortion, drugs, Border Patrol, military spending, invading Middle Eastern countries, gay butt sex, etc.). Liberals! If you want to post on Truth Social so much, build your own Truth Social!
Citizens United.
Poor shrike.
Been a rough few weeks for you shrike. It'll be okay.
And besides… I’ve been posting freely on Truth Social about Jan. 6th ever since. Just look…
Ali Alexander on Truth Social: J6 Committee, you won’t be getting an Oscar for this! Hoax!… This is SO overly scripted. All teleprompter. No authenticity. This ain’t convincing anyone!
What a disgusting slur against this gay and Black man who is GOP Proud like Caitlin and Milo. Liberals need to get a new schtick!
Link?
https://truthsocial.com/
America’s free speech site.
You can also contribute to my legal defense fund at givesendgo.com. Just search for “Let me tell you about the number 17” and you’ll find me. Praise Jesus and God Bless!
A link to the your post, Shrike.
And it's not like anyone at TRUTH Social ever said they wouldn't ban people for speaking their mind.
Still butthurt you haven’t been invited?
I'm not sure what anyone on TRUTH social is doing. It was not clear to me that they had any particular philosophy.
They promoted themselves for months before going live as the new social media site that wouldn't censor anyone's speech.
Cite?
> Are teachers with guns just exercising their rights and protecting their students? Or does this amount to stationing ample armed guards at sites of public education?
The latter in my opinion. The real problem is that the government should not be running schools. I've got no problem with a private school allowing teachers to be armed. But I greatly suspect you won't find any who will do it. The parents won't want it.
The answer for parents who worry that there aren't enough guns in schools should be free to remove their children from the schools.
p.s. When I was in high school we still had JROTC training with rifles. And it wasn't at all unusual to see a gun in a gun rack in the back of a pickup cab parked in the student lot. Gawd I feel old.
"The latter in my opinion."
Oh? Teachers are nothing more than armed guards?
" I've got no problem with a private school allowing teachers to be armed."
Then why can't public schools allow the same thing?
" But I greatly suspect you won't find any who will do it. The parents won't want it."
You need to spend some time, along with ENB, outside your blue bubble.
> Oh? Teachers are nothing more than armed guards?
In a public school they are indeed agents of the state. I say this coming from a public school teacher family. Arming public school teachers turns them into armed agents of the state.
> Then why can't public schools allow the same thing?
Because public schools should not exist in the first place. It was an idea invented in the US for the purpose of turning Catholic children into Protestants. If there is a pressing need for the government to fund schools, then fund it through vouchers.
Now it's one thing if a small community decides to fund a teacher for their one room schoolhouse (which was my grandma, by the way), but quite another when it's a state system of control over children run by the Governor and his political buddies, and then overseen by the President and his political buddies. At the minimum let's devolve it back to the county level.
You didnt actually answer his questions. Why does a public worker deserve less leeway than private in regards to their rights?
Who have you polled to assert parents dont want teachers armed? Because over 50% support it.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2022/06/02/new-polling-shows-americans-want-teachers-armed-more-guns-in-schools-n2608142
Get out of your leftist bubble some time.
"Arming public school teachers turns them into armed agents of the state."
AN armed agent of the state is not the same as an Armed Guard...You understand that, don't you? For example, most Armed Guards I have observed do not have a day job teaching their inmates. Do you understand that there is a difference between a "Guard" and a "Teacher"?
"Because public schools should not exist in the first place. It was an idea invented in the US for the purpose of turning Catholic children into Protestants. If there is a pressing need for the government to fund schools, then fund it through vouchers."
Sounds good to me. But in the mean time, why can't the public school allow its teachers to be armed? You said:
"The answer for parents who worry that there aren't enough guns in schools should be free to remove their children from the schools."
Isn't the inverse equally true? The answer for parents who worry about too many armed teachers in their school should be be for them to remove their kids from the school?
Because public schools should not exist in the first place. It was an idea invented in the US for the purpose of turning Catholic children into Protestants.
Wow, now that is an accusation leveled at John Adams I have never heard before.
The answer for parents who worry that there aren't enough guns in schools should be free to remove their children from the schools.
Will those parents get refunds on all the cash they pay into public schools? Because a large proportion of parents would gladly take their kids out of public schools if they could afford it.
84 school districts in Texas are enrolled in a program called the "School Marshal Program" - teachers and staff have the option to get training and carry firearms in school - unfortunately, Uvalde wasn't one of them...
I'm still floored at the failed response of so called "law enforcement officers" at Uvalde and Parkland...
I’m looking at the S&P 500, and it is still up over a 2-year period. It has gained a lot over the last 5 years.
Most people do not have the slightest idea how investing works. They don’t understand long-term investing, and they don’t understand that dips bring opportunities to buy.
Still gonna polish that turd, huh?
He is supporting trump with that comment.
He’s too dumb to realize that.
"Most people do not have the slightest idea how investing works. "
This is the impulse of most people who ultimately let the state get away with too many things. At the end of the day, it always comes down to "You people need a Top Man to protect you."
"Most people do not have the slightest idea how investing works. They don’t understand long-term investing, and they don’t understand that dips bring opportunities to buy."
"They're little people who can't understand the concepts like I can. They need someone to guide them."
Apparently the ankle biters thought I was making a political statement in favor of Biden or against Trump or something like that. I was making a non-political observation about how poorly the average person understands investing.
Give us a couple of your investment ideas. We will see how they pan out ..
Being mike means never having to actually respond to real criticism. Just toss unsubstantiated grenades and walk away playing the victim of "ankle biters".
The latter is the richest irony, never rising to the level of self awareness to discover that it is the anklebiter.
All he does is troll through the arguments slinging shit at conservatives, and picking fights with one line trolls. And he complains about people doing the same to him. SMH.
Mike assumes incorrectly and blames others.
Never change.
I'm just buying into it. We'll see what happens. I have my house now, I'm young, let's ride this coaster.
Not everyone entered the market in 1954.
And to be clear, some people entered the crypto market on June 6th. Ouch!
I know several people who stopped contributing or re-directed 401k deposits to safer (low return) investments during this down turn - they are really missing the point! I've 5-7 years before retirement - there's time to ride this one out just like others in the past. Though I have been moving to a more balanced portfolio before this downturn, but, I'm still majority in stocks! Buying the dip!
I definitely wouldn't trust sending my kids to school with most of today's mentally ill, gender-queer emotional nutjobs who serve as teachers with firearms. They are more likely to shoot a boy for misgendering a classmate than to actually prevent any active shooter.
But I send my kids to private school anyway.
"today's mentally ill, gender-queer emotional nutjobs who serve as teachers" would not be the teachers with weapons. It would be the rational conservatives that have gone through the proper training and are accustomed to the use of their particular weapon.
> In the eyes of group leaders dealing with similar moments, staff were ignoring the mission and focusing only on themselves, using a moment of public awakening to smuggle through standard grievances cloaked in the language of social justice.
Well yeah. Say what you will about the old progressives, and I will say mostly bad. But the new breed has a very different outlook on the world. Everything is literally about them. It's the Eighties Me Generation twisted in on itself into a parody of social activism.
Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups.
Organizations that do not allow for any form of dissent from the narrative are internally dysfuctional?
Man, I so did not see that coming.
he second hearing of the select committee investigating January 6 was held yesterday. The New York Times has a rundown of what was revealed.
Obviously, it revealed nothing remotely important or, I don't know, you might have led with that.
Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups.
There's always someone who isn't woke enough.
"Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups."
Unpossible! How could groups dedicated to fighting and/or promoting dysfunction, staffed and supported by people whose very existing is centered on their own or other peoples' dysfunction, get sidetracked by, well, dysfunction.
Anyway, let's hope this trend accelerates.
"The S&P 500 fell 3.9 percent on the day, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq composite index slumped 4.7 percent," notes The Washington Post. "The Dow Jones industrial average sank around 2.8 percent. Each of the indexes is down sharply in 2022, and there is no clear indication of when the markets could stabilize. Cryptocurrencies also swooned Monday, with bitcoin losing more than 10 percent of its value."
Since only greedy, rich people own stocks and crypto, this must be good news, right?
liberals hardest hit.
That wealth tax is going to be bringing in a lot less this year
A thing we don't discuss enough is how much the rise and fall of the major indexes is from a few companies. For instance, the FAANG group was responsible for a large portion of all of the growth in the economy over the last decade or so. I will try to find a precise number for that.
While I'm not bothered by these high performing companies, and think it's pretty damn beneficial to have them, I fear the more sluggish growth in other sectors. I also fear the reduced entrepreneurship for small businesses.
I can't help but wonder if the growth of these few companies covers up systemic issues elsewhere. The last few decades have not been too great for deregulation or pulling back on state control. I wish we could focus on ways of improving these parts of the economy as small businesses really are more important for the lives of many people, and it's something that doesn't always show up in large scale metrics like GDP.
Can't find a single chart that shows the growth of FAANG companies vs. the economy, but I did find this fun tidbit:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/faang-stocks.asp#:~:text=Since%20the%20S%26P%20500%20is,States%20economy%20as%20a%20whole.
tldr: In Jan 2021, the FAANG companies made up 19% of the value of the S&P 500.
"Inside Democrats' controversial strategy of trying to boost conservative extremist candidates."
The party of compassionate virtue continues it's degradation into total slime.
on the question of guns in schools and accidents. several states already allow this with no accident or else it would have been declared from the mountain tops. also lets look at churches many churches have unidentified armed volunteers with no accidents and one very successfull stopping of a mass shooter that happened just a few years ago and was caught on video it was a great shot. the claims of accidents are not backed up. The only requirement I would have is that the person must keep the gun on themselves at all times and not keeping it in a top drawer or in a purse it must be on the person, this limits the chance of kids getting a hold of the gun
This. Very common. Many carry in church. No issues. Many churches have an anonymous volunteer or two.
"Nearly three-quarters of U.S. school teachers oppose the idea of training certain teachers and staff to carry guns in school buildings," and "nearly six in 10 teachers think it would make schools less safe," reported Gallup in 2018.
No surprise, as most public school teachers (especially those in Democrat controlled School Districts) want to ban guns, repeal the 2nd Amendment, ban carbon based energy resources, impose Marxist, BLM, CRT and transgender curricula upon children, and make America a socialist nation.
And of course, most public school teachers also supported the unscientific and disastrous Democrat lockdowns, school closures, mask mandates and vaccine mandates.
But they are so i pro abortion. Most of these support abortion up to the third trimester. Natural born killers, don't you think. You've got to give these killers a chance.
Right, Ray, you know they can kill.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/leaked-internal-messages-show-twitter-employees-debating-whether-ban-libs-tiktok
If this incident doesn't show progressives how corrupt the arbiters of truth are at Twitter, I don't know what will. Banning somebody that simply re-posts their own non-sense; progressives really are horrible people.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/we-appear-be-entering-recession-coinbase-explains-why-it-fire-18
With bitcoin crashing to $21,000 overnight down more than two thirds from its all time high as opportunistic traders short the crypto in hopes of forcing Celsius to liquidate, and Microstrategy to get a margin call (it won't until bitcoin drops to 4K), moments ago the CEO of the largest US crypto exchange, Brian Armstrong, head of Coinbase, sent a letter to all his employees that he will fire 18% of the company's employees as "appear to be entering a recession after a 10+ year economic boom" and since another "crypto winter" is on deck, he has "to ensure we stay healthy during this economic downturn". His full letter is below, and while reading it, consider that every other startup - and certainly those that are unprofitable (Coinbase at least has positive EBITDA) which would be about 99.9% of them - will be sending out identical letters in the coming days if not hours, as the tidal wave of mass layoffs we discussed recently becomes a tsunami...
Buy! Buy! Buy!
Please do Ali Snakbar.
Maybe if you are broke you will stop posting nonsense.
Except crypto companies are in a particularly vulnerable position, having been built on nothing.
But I'm told that crypto companies are not necessary to transact with crypto. They're just noise in the aether, and even in their absence, crypto is a viable, transactable currency just waiting to be adopted by billions worldwide.
BTC worked before coinbase and it will work after coinbase.
The Dot.com meltdown comes to mind. That is also where some of the stupid ideas like having rec rooms, vid games and scooters in the office came from. The precurser to google and its culture. The idea that we are not here only to work and produce something but let's have some playtime too.
Most of those dots, built on nothing, crashed and burned.
Unlike our dollar which has the backing of.... Ummmmmmmm
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/jan-6-prisoner-who-was-denied-cancer-treatment-now-dire-straits
"Seven hundred hours of training certainly seems excessive."
700 hours is 17.5 full weeks of 8 hour days of training.
The complete Ohio police academy session is 26 weeks. Do Ohio police officers spend 17.5 weeks on firearm training, leaving a scant 8.5 weeks to cover everything else on the curriculum?
Can they double dip and do donuts and pistols together?
It would explain the lack of discipline they often show. It would not explain how cops often seem to still be bad shots.
That's simply poor training and poor maintenance of what skills they may have. I find that a lot of folks think once one has learned a skill, they magically stay proficient. Utter bullshit, especially with high stakes skills which require a lot of rigorous training to remain proficient.
Fair point. I wonder if there are statistics about abuses by newer cops vs. older cops.
Also isnt boot camp 9 weeks?
It will be interesting if one of those teachers has to use their weapon. I'll be curious if the School District and Teacher's Unions stand up for the teacher or throws them under the bus.
I know Reason hates cops and "qualified immunity", but, there is a reason that they put Police officers in schools. Under qualified immunity (no matter how bad it is abused) there is legal protection for the police. There isn't any for a teacher or even an armed security guard. The article mentioned teacher's being "agents of the state". I would be interested in how that would play out in the event a teacher uses their weapon. The average person has more legal protection under self defense than an armed guard. Would "qualified immunity" extend to the teacher?
If it ever happens, I see lines of lawyers waiting to file lawsuits for everything from "the teacher could have wounded him" to "my little Suzi is traumatized" to "my little Billy has a hearing loss because of the gunfire". Then there's the media, who a few weeks ago were clamoring for the Police being removed from the schools. As I said, "Interesting."
So you are saying the real problem is lawyers.
A large pert of it is. Businesses that are "gun free" are mentioned. How much of that is because of liability concerns? I worked for a place that used to have "safety reviews" of it's products. Our lawyers made us stop because the records of those meetings could be used against the Company if there was an incident.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/peak-inflation-was-fairytale-just-transitory-inflation
According to calculations by Bloomberg Economics, the inflation tax currently costs American households $433 per month. That comes to a $5,200 annual increase in household costs.
Taking into account rising prices, the average consumer took a pay cut from April to May, according to a separate BLS report.
Average hourly earnings rose 0.3%, but real wages fell 0.6%. On a year-on-year basis, real average hourly earnings decreased 3%, seasonally adjusted.
This undercuts the popular narrative that “inflation isn’t really that bad” because wages increase as well. Rising wages don’t keep up with rising prices. As a result, American consumers are running up record levels of debt and burning through savings to make ends meet.
And as bad as these numbers are, it’s actually worse than that. This CPI uses a government formula that understates the actual rise in prices. Based on the CPI formula used in the 1970s, CPI is above 17% — a historically high number.
Yep, I got a rather big raise and a promoting this year with another raise, and realistically, it won't be enough to keep up with rising prices. I'm going to be making less next year.
Not only that, but at some point the measures to rein in inflation will begin to result in companies massively laying people off. The mix of unemployment and rampant inflation is going to be all but solidify Biden's "carter 2.0" status.
Let children be in charge, and this is what you get. Like so many things, people were screaming this at the top of their lungs and leftists just kept saying "its not happening". Of course when you have economic geniuses the likes of AOC in your roster, you get the results you would expect.
And just yesterday Biden was bragging about his historically wonderful economy.
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1536381883860279297
"cause harmful accidents and potentially even needless deaths."
So can mopping the floors.
>without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment.
fuck off
>no Black staff in the D.C. unit
Because they were all aborted?
LOL
These are not people
https://twitter.com/StephLauren/status/1536705957744582669?t=icLMEgSd-uexOWsRLP3csA&s=19
The anti-vaxx crowd's favorite talking point these days, "Why are vaxxed and boosted people getting Covid multiple times?!" is such a spectacular self-own.
They're getting it multiple times because they're not dying the first time, my dudes.
That means it's working.
I guess they forgot how it was sold.
A victim of the memory hole. I would feel bad if they weren't trying to be cocky about their ignorance.
Everyone who got it the first time died. 100%. Party of scientism!
I love when some vaxxed person claims their vax saved their life when they finally got COVID and it wasn't so bad. But ONLY because they were vaxxed. SMH
You know how Putin responded to COVID-19?
These are the extreme measures Vladimir Putin takes to avoid COVID-19
By Dana Kennedy
October 3, 2020 4:40pm
https://nypost.com/2020/10/03/these-are-the-measures-vladimir-putin-takes-to-avoid-covid-19/
The responses give me hope for humanity. Even some of her otherwise fellow travelers are calling her out.
We should all appreciate discussions of "unintended consequences." No matter how outlandish the concern is, one is sure to hear it mentioned at the next town meeting to discuss some measure or another. It helps to have read here, and thought about, ways a libertarian is going to be able to counter Karen when she stands up and demands safety over liberty is always in style.
Michigan revoked an ACAB license plate after deciding it didn't really stand for "all cats are beautiful."
Can you imagine being dumb enough to make this your vanity plate?
It was replaced with IH8COPZ
officer Zelinsky hardest hit
The IHOP off of exit 8C?
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1536693021521154049?t=C8amQXzTorTRKnsq2uw5MQ&s=19
NEW - China uses its vast COVID surveillance infrastructure to stifle protests by turning people's health QR codes red.
[Link]
You know who Emperor Xi supports in the war in Ukraine who supports him back?
"A CAB" looks like a rideshare offer
Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups.
Um, has anyone ever watched video from a progressive group meetup?
No, though I've been at an anarchist book fair before. And, for whatever reason, progressivism and most forms of anarchism are closely related.
Jesus... it's like no one has paid attention to how toxic this social justice ideology is. And 'toxic' in the proper use of the term. It destroys everything it touches, including its own handlers (at some point).
Pro tip, we're already IN a recession.
Dangerous Disinformation. We're seeing a historic economic boom.
I think so as well, we're right at the start, and things are going to get bad. This coming winter is going to be brutal.
"Internal dysfunction plagues progressive groups."
What else would you expect to happen when you put a bunch of race hustling, victim mongering and offense seeking people together?
Yeah, fill a room with a bunch of Felicia Sonmezes and then watch what happens.
I took a 4 hour gun safety class which seemed more than adequate. I also am taking an 8 hour class on Self Defense in a couple of weeks. That would be 12 hours and I think it would be more than sufficient for the teachers.
If they already had a pistol and concealed carry course, and there was a requirement for annual refresher class, to include range time, then, yes. This is the 'common sense' way to overcome, if possible, the anti-gun zealotry in the opposition to teachers being able to provide security for students in their care.
ACAB is also 2/3 of a Genesis album
Yeah, but post-Peter Gabriel. So, whatever.
true, although the *real* demarcation is when Steve Hackett left two albums post-Pete
I grew up in a different culture from you hippies. More reggae, ska, and working class music than the weird rock culture. Not necessarily a better culture, but I prefer the music, that is certain. Also, one of the earlier instances of the media lying about white supremacy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URHpaozLrJw
Oi! East Bay Ray is one of history's better guitarists.
If journalists want a sense of how unpopular Biden is, watch him on TV.
"Journalists" are the only reason that Biden's approval rating is above zero!
Imagine being more unpopular than Trump without a sham investigation and 24/7 negative coverage on every news channel and program (including fake news programs like Daily Show).
"Of course, many workplaces prohibit firearms on premises without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment."
On the other hand, some change jobs when an employer decides to decimate the bill of rights.
>>The second hearing of the select committee investigating January 6 was held yesterday.
lol nobody fucking cares ... "the day I'll burn this whole place down, when the circus comes to town"
Read all the details -
https://babylonbee.com/news/death-toll-from-jan-6-skyrockets-as-hearing-viewers-die-of-boredom
"...an outlet that focuses on social justice advocacy."
I'm old enough to remember when justice advocacy meant something like ensuring equality under the law for criminal defendants, especially poor ones.
700 hours seems very excessive for anyone who is actually qualified (i.e., not suffering from a mental deficiency - which would include some teachers IMHO) to carry safely in a classroom but 24 hours seems like it would be too little for some -- esp. those who have no past experience with firearms.
It seems like passing a fairly rigorous objective tests of such things as laws, safety rules, tactics, and accuracy coupled with "real life" physical situational testing under stress. Such tests should follow a uniform standard and be administered by independent third parties and should be the primary criteria for "certification". Perhaps a requirement for some number of hours of training would be required as well - and perhaps 24 hours would be sufficient in that case.
There's a BIG difference between a teacher who, for example, has extensive military experience (including, perhaps, military police) and/or law enforcement experience and one who first picked up a gun yesterday.
24 hours seems like it would be too little for some -- esp. those who have no past experience with firearms.
Considering that 99.99+% of those hours will effectively amount to "How to lock your gun in a box and forget about it.", I'm inclined to say that 24 hours is way too much. I will admit that we are talking about public educators though.
A. One doesn't ned extensive police or military training to effectively defend oneself, or those in your care. Ordinary people do it -every- day.
B. There is a vast spectrum of experience between "military experience (including, perhaps, military police) and/or law enforcement experience" and "one who first picked up a gun yesterday". One wonders why you've tried to reduce the variables to a binary set....
Still don’t see any articles following up on whether the Patriot Front members arrested in Coeur d’Alene have been charged or have appeared in court.
In this article, it is mentioned that someone bailed one of the members out of jail. It’s a curious article, going into how the 27-year-old sought out the Patriot Front to fill a void left when his father came out as gay and left the family:
https://nypost.com/2022/06/14/patriot-front-member-kicked-out-by-mom-after-idaho-arrest/
Oh, looks like they are all out on bail, and won’t appear in court soon:
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/white-nationalist-group-members-face-riot-planning-charges-idaho-court-2022-06-13/
They had shields, but I have yet to see any mention of weapons. No bats, no crowbars, no pipes, much less machetes or guns. Apparently "at least one smoke grenade," and I'm wondering what the fuck that means when it's phrased like that.
I did read that article that included an operations plan. If there's evidence they were planning to be violent, that's going to be where it is. I'd be interested in seeing what it says.
I heard they had fire extinguishers. Dangerous, dangerous stuff.
You can always trust the feds on weapons
Way back in pre-history (Vietnam anti-war protests in the sixties) I had a couple friends get busted for taking over an academic building. They had planned on utilities being cut, so they brought camp stoves and lanterns. They had planned on tear gas, so they brought bandannas and vinegar to put on them.
The cops reported they had bomb making materials.
On the theory they could pour out the vinegar, pour in the stove fuel, and tear up the bandannas to make molotov cocktails.
(all charges dropped)
""Nearly three-quarters of U.S. school teachers oppose the idea of training certain teachers and staff to carry guns in school buildings," and "nearly six in 10 teachers think it would make schools less safe," reported Gallup in 2018."
Translation: Nearly three quarters of U.S. school teachers are mentally defective fuckwits who shouldn't be anywhere near other people's kids.
But we knew -that- already....
"Dead gunmen kill no kids".
Good, teachers cowering in a corner in gun free zones, watching the kids get killed, and pleading with angry killers obviously is not working. Anything is a better plan.
"many workplaces prohibit firearms on premises without anyone considering it a big affront to the Second Amendment."
incorrect. it is a massive affront wherever it may be, but even more so when one works in a government facility.
Ouch! But SOOOOO true! LOL!