3 times? Yeesh. Me thinks the school will be losing this lawsuit badly.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/school-board- ... d=96654019

Ons of the most incredible parts of the story is that Abigail Zwerner was calm enough to get the other kids out of the room after she was shot. Wow. To say this was a epic meltdown of school leadership is an understatement.

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child how a school needs to be warned multiple times that a six year old is an armed responsible gun owner on the property.

Also from the article...
"Earlier this month, Newport News School Board Chair Lisa Surles-Law said they have been given approval to purchase 90 walk-through metal detectors, which will be installed in every school across the district, starting with Richneck Elementary School."

Ah freedom.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child how a school needs to be warned multiple times that a six year old is an armed responsible gun owner on the property.

Also from the article...
"Earlier this month, Newport News School Board Chair Lisa Surles-Law said they have been given approval to purchase 90 walk-through metal detectors, which will be installed in every school across the district, starting with Richneck Elementary School."

Ah freedom.

Been done forever, school resource officers used to be there to make sure you and your buddies didn't go smoke a joint behind the dumpster instead of going to study hall. Now they're the "first line of defense."
How many metal detectors, x-ray backscatter machines, bomb-sniffing dogs, surveillance drones, surplus APCs painted blue, and XXXL body armor will we have to purchase to make Officer McLard of the Uvalde Police gingerly knock on the door? When will we figure out there might be another problem...?

Happens all the time in red states. In Fact, the STL school shooter had his gun taken from him in the week prior, but the police had to give it back due to no red flag laws. This is why when everyone screams gun violence in a blue city, they don't factor in the red statehouse above the blue city.

MaverickM11 wrote:

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child how a school needs to be warned multiple times that a six year old is an armed responsible gun owner on the property.

Also from the article...
"Earlier this month, Newport News School Board Chair Lisa Surles-Law said they have been given approval to purchase 90 walk-through metal detectors, which will be installed in every school across the district, starting with Richneck Elementary School."

Ah freedom.

Deflection aside the school should have acted and didn't and will pay a hefty price.

NIKV69 wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child how a school needs to be warned multiple times that a six year old is an armed responsible gun owner on the property.
Also from the article...
"Earlier this month, Newport News School Board Chair Lisa Surles-Law said they have been given approval to purchase 90 walk-through metal detectors, which will be installed in every school across the district, starting with Richneck Elementary School."
Ah freedom.

Deflection aside the school should have acted and didn't and will pay a hefty price.

Deflection? What deflection? He was citing the article you provided...

The teacher, a school board employee, has a legitimate complaint against her employer and direct boss within her workplace. She notified them of a danger that existed and the lack of response put her in mortal danger.

I don't think you will find many in the school board upset about losing the case, but the main issue is how that Administration failed to properly intervene itself into the situation for a better outcome.

There needs to be better training, better awareness, and perhaps some better ability to facilitate removing such dangers from everyone.

4 times there were warnings, and the administration failed each one.

Yes guns are dangerous and a real issue. But there are too many in the USA that deny that guns are the problem and get up in arms when actions are taken just because of a "report of a gun". Any report should be investigated, with prejudice if necessary. Anyone carrying a gun should be made to feel uncomfortable if it is not concealed properly and registered etc. And those that are carrying legally and properly should have no complaint if asked to demonstrate that they are.

Guns are very dangerous, and the general public can never know when someone carrying one will do something wrong or stupid. Which, again is why, those with guns need to expect to be careful, more than appropriate, and if challenged, prove they are.

Tugg

MaverickM11 wrote:

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child ...

Please tell me that you are being sarcastic. Allowing access of a loaded weapon to a child is the opposite of responsible gun ownership. The parents should face criminal charges.

IMO this is a Class 1 misdemeanor in Virginia - https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/tit ... 18.2-56.2/

Punishment - https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/tit ... on18.2-11/ - (a) For Class 1 misdemeanors, confinement in jail for not more than twelve months and a fine of not more than $2,500, either or both.

We can argue about banning guns as much as we want, and we certainly can do more, but we should all agree that aggressively prosecuting under existing laws would help.

If people really understood that they will spend a year in jail for simply leaving their gun out at home they would take more responsibility.

Geomap

alfa164 wrote:

Deflection? What deflection? He was citing the article you provided...

See reply #9

BTW Vice Principal has resigned.

https://nypost.com/2023/01/25/assistant ... SocialFlow

NIKV69 wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child how a school needs to be warned multiple times that a six year old is an armed responsible gun owner on the property.

Also from the article...
"Earlier this month, Newport News School Board Chair Lisa Surles-Law said they have been given approval to purchase 90 walk-through metal detectors, which will be installed in every school across the district, starting with Richneck Elementary School."

Ah freedom.

Deflection aside the school should have acted and didn't and will pay a hefty price.

The school had to act in accordance with gun laws so they didn't violate the student and his family's gun rights. The school should not have to pay anything, right? They didn't violate gun rights for the student or family. Right?

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

Obviously this is a family of responsible gun owners but explain to me like I'm a child how a school needs to be warned multiple times that a six year old is an armed responsible gun owner on the property.

Also from the article...
"Earlier this month, Newport News School Board Chair Lisa Surles-Law said they have been given approval to purchase 90 walk-through metal detectors, which will be installed in every school across the district, starting with Richneck Elementary School."

Ah freedom.

Deflection aside the school should have acted and didn't and will pay a hefty price.

The school had to act in accordance with gun laws so they didn't violate the student and his family's gun rights. The school should not have to pay anything, right? They didn't violate gun rights for the student or family. Right?

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

TriJets wrote:

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Deflection aside the school should have acted and didn't and will pay a hefty price.

The school had to act in accordance with gun laws so they didn't violate the student and his family's gun rights. The school should not have to pay anything, right? They didn't violate gun rights for the student or family. Right?

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

I was simply pointing out that 2A is such a sacred text to some Americans that even elementary schools must tread lightly or face the wrath of NRA and right wing groups. 2A ends with "shall not be infringed" which is what every gun nut clings to as the definition of "we can own and carry all the guns we want" while demanding that "A well regulated militia" is simply dead text that means nothing in the modern world.

seb146 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

seb146 wrote:

The school had to act in accordance with gun laws so they didn't violate the student and his family's gun rights. The school should not have to pay anything, right? They didn't violate gun rights for the student or family. Right?

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

I was simply pointing out that 2A is such a sacred text to some Americans that even elementary schools must tread lightly or face the wrath of NRA and right wing groups. 2A ends with "shall not be infringed" which is what every gun nut clings to as the definition of "we can own and carry all the guns we want" while demanding that "A well regulated militia" is simply dead text that means nothing in the modern world.

None of that means that it is legal to attempt to murder people…just like the right to vote doesn’t mean that someone can vote 4,000 times for their preferred candidate.

TriJets wrote:

seb146 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Deflection aside the school should have acted and didn't and will pay a hefty price.

The school had to act in accordance with gun laws so they didn't violate the student and his family's gun rights. The school should not have to pay anything, right? They didn't violate gun rights for the student or family. Right?

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

MaverickM11 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

seb146 wrote:

The school had to act in accordance with gun laws so they didn't violate the student and his family's gun rights. The school should not have to pay anything, right? They didn't violate gun rights for the student or family. Right?

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

Perhaps you should read DC v Heller and you’d understand a bit better? Hyperbole doesn’t work here. While some fringe lunatics would argue for no laws at all, I’ve never been one of them.

TriJets wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

Perhaps you should read DC v Heller and you’d understand a bit better? Hyperbole doesn’t work here. While some fringe lunatics would argue for no laws at all, I’ve never been one of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_ ... _v._Heller
"The decision also held that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee."

Seems relevant here, don't you think?

In any case conservatives have done more than anyone to ensure violent and/or suicidal people maintain their guns and then predictably kill themselves or others, so I'm not sure why there'd suddenly be a red line for six year olds.

TriJets wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Can you cite the specific statute that allows a 6 year old to bring a handgun to school in Virginia?

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

Perhaps you should read DC v Heller and you’d understand a bit better? Hyperbole doesn’t work here. While some fringe lunatics would argue for no laws at all, I’ve never been one of them.

Right. So we do need guns laws then.
Which means that using 2A to defend gun rights only goes as far as one's (or the SC's) interpretation of it?

If laws are to be made to restrict 2A's overly lax description of gun possession, where is the line drawn and who draws it? Why can't we have laws that make sure that gun owners are not criminals, mentally or psychologically deficient or unstable individuals, or, you know... toddlers?
That is the will of the vast majority of citizen after all.

So one adult checked the backpack, thought the kid had put the gun in his pocket, but didn't feel like they could pat down the kid ?

Some freedoms will have to give, I guess.

Why isn't this in the 6yr old shoots teacher thread? Two threads on the same subject?

Active thread here: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1480415