If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Blaze)   Save a fellow student from being shot point blank? That's a suspension   (theblaze.com) divider line 116
    More: Florida, deadly weapon  
•       •       •

13633 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Mar 2013 at 5:04 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



116 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-03 01:49:14 AM

Anderson's Pooper: I get the concept and, to an extent, may even agree with it. But when you call it a suspension, especially in this type of incident, you're just asking for additional headaches. Call them "safety days" or something more neutral and you'll avoid a lot of the blowback.


actually I should have mentioned that they went into that. they had trouble convincing certain kids that by being sent home they were not actually "in trouble." they said that was a major problem because it alienated the kids when they didn't deserve it, but they felt they were between a rock and a hard place. do you alienate one kid to avoid a possible gang violence issue, or let him stay and risk it actually happening? the teachers and admins they were shadowing hated both options, but went with the greatest good
 
2013-03-03 02:00:37 AM

ciberido: Ronin FF: Well then, I guess we're good here, since every liberal I have ever met can't see the truth right in front of them. EVERY ONE sees what they want to see, not what is there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. That's what it means to be a liberal.

Stop licking paint and maybe you'll get to meet some liberals who exist outside of the hallucinations.


Wait, what drugs am I supposed to do in order to meet liberals? I been doin a shiatload of coke and ecstasy but I keep meeting Republicans.
 
2013-03-03 02:16:35 AM

untaken_name: ciberido: Ronin FF: Well then, I guess we're good here, since every liberal I have ever met can't see the truth right in front of them. EVERY ONE sees what they want to see, not what is there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. That's what it means to be a liberal.

Stop licking paint and maybe you'll get to meet some liberals who exist outside of the hallucinations.

Wait, what drugs am I supposed to do in order to meet liberals? I been doin a shiatload of coke and ecstasy but I keep meeting Republicans.


uh.  weed, LSD...
 
2013-03-03 02:21:21 AM

OgreMagi: Ray Vaughn: Ronin FF: tlchwi02: i'm sure glenn becks personal website wouldn't have any reason to invent, imbelish or change the details to a story to make it pro-gun manufacturer. no sir-ee

But accuse a liberal of the same and its obvious bullshiat, right? Tool.

If that liberal had the same history of obfuscation, lies and BS that Glenn Beck & Co have...then yeah, same thing.

You mean like NBC?


Sure, if you can find hundreds of examples for NBC...knock yourself out.
 
2013-03-03 02:26:32 AM

Ronin FF: Ray Vaughn: Ronin FF: tlchwi02: i'm sure glenn becks personal website wouldn't have any reason to invent, imbelish or change the details to a story to make it pro-gun manufacturer. no sir-ee

But accuse a liberal of the same and its obvious bullshiat, right? Tool.

If that liberal had the same history of obfuscation, lies and BS that Glenn Beck & Co have...then yeah, same thing.

Well then, I guess we're good here, since every liberal I have ever met can't see the truth right in front of them. EVERY ONE sees what they want to see, not what is there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. That's what it means to be a liberal.


Apparently you don't understand the concept of what liberal is. 

And have you ever thought liberals act differently around you when they see the BOLD TYPE talk. Do you notice they start talking slower and using smaller words?
 
2013-03-03 05:03:24 AM
By tackling the gunman they risked injuring a football player in Florida.

They're lucky not to have been expelled.
 
2013-03-03 07:28:19 AM

Singleballtheory: timujin: Krieghund: timujin: Sim Tree: I hate to play the devil's advocate, but there's actually a good reason for this.
In any incident involving a firearm, there's the possibility the attackers' friends could come to school the next day and kill the defender; this is relitivly common in areas with high gang violence.

I understand your attempt to play devil's advocate, but your reasoning seems lacking as it would be even easier for the student to be attacked in his own home.
Though, I suppose that would at least remove any liability from the school, so it does make sense in that regard.  Not for the kid's safety, just monetarily.

The attackers would have to know where the kid lives, and to get there. That might be difficult if he's in a different gang's territory.

It also reduces the risk that other students get hurt in the attack.

Again, I see the point, but finding out where a kid in my high school lived, if I didn't already know, would have been pretty simple.  And if I'm the kind of person willing to go into a school to extract my vengeance, I'm also probably the type to not be too concerned with driving by dude's house and riddling it with bullets.

The only benefit I see here in not having him at the school is to the school itself.

Clearly the answer then is not to attempt any precautionary action at all. The kid's DOA.

Although, from a gun-lover's perspective where do you imagine this kid has a better chance of defending himself (since presumably there is nowhere he will be safe anyway)? The school where guns are not allowed, or his home where -- if he's a true American -- an entire arsenal of weaponry will be at his disposal?


Here's the thing, discerning a sarcastic tone on the internet can be difficult at times.  Plus I've had a lot to drink.  I'm also extremely susceptible to Poe's Law.  I have trouble telling the difference between someone taking a hard right-wing position, and someone mocking those people.  Time for another drink.
 
2013-03-03 07:35:12 AM

Jon iz teh kewl: untaken_name: ciberido: Ronin FF: Well then, I guess we're good here, since every liberal I have ever met can't see the truth right in front of them. EVERY ONE sees what they want to see, not what is there. EVERY SINGLE ONE. That's what it means to be a liberal.

Stop licking paint and maybe you'll get to meet some liberals who exist outside of the hallucinations.

Wait, what drugs am I supposed to do in order to meet liberals? I been doin a shiatload of coke and ecstasy but I keep meeting Republicans.

uh.  weed, LSD...


You mean I have to become a dirty hippie? Fark that.
 
2013-03-03 07:41:11 AM
Ray Vaughn:
If that liberal had the same history of obfuscation, lies and BS that Glenn Beck & Co have...then yeah, same thing.

Don't forget, he doesn't follow your particular brand of religiosity.
 
2013-03-03 09:47:42 AM

Mock26: namegoeshere: Mock26: "The school's referral slip said he was given an "emergency suspension" for being involved in an "incident" with a weapon."

Does getting shot count as being involved with an incident with a weapon?

Well, technically you'd be in posession of a bullet at school, so yeah.

What if it went through the person?


You still touched it, so you were in posession, if just for an instant. Plus, you got the floor all dirty with your blood. Created a slip-hazard, too, son. So suspension AND detention for you. Now grab a mop and clean up this mess. I don't care if it hurts. Your mama doesn't work here.
 
2013-03-03 11:58:54 AM

Jon iz teh kewl: G-d


Don't do that.  You're embarrassing other atheists. It's OK to say "god".
 
2013-03-03 06:14:48 PM

Dragonflew: Jon iz teh kewl: G-d

Don't do that.  You're embarrassing other atheists. It's OK to say "god".


Maybe he's Jewish. Did you ever consider that?
 
2013-03-03 06:35:14 PM

lewismarktwo: It is against some journalistic code not to correct minor grammatical errors when quoting obviously ignorant people?  I mean, it wouldn't change a thing except not make the mother look tarded.


It depends on the publication. It's actually a controversy in journalism land. On one hand, you're never ever supposed to change someone's quote (or use it in a way that changes its meaning). But some papers feel that quoting bad grammar makes the quotee look bad and have a policy of correcting bad grammar. Personally, I'm in the "don't change" camp, but it's not up to me.

/former journalist
 
2013-03-03 06:58:49 PM

untaken_name: Dragonflew: Jon iz teh kewl: G-d

Don't do that.  You're embarrassing other atheists. It's OK to say "god".

Maybe he's Jewish. Did you ever consider that?


G--d point.
 
2013-03-03 07:04:26 PM

Dragonflew: untaken_name: Dragonflew: Jon iz teh kewl: G-d

Don't do that.  You're embarrassing other atheists. It's OK to say "god".

Maybe he's Jewish. Did you ever consider that?

G--d point.


Ok, nice one. Well played, indeed.
 
2013-03-03 07:49:38 PM

Phins: lewismarktwo: It is against some journalistic code not to correct minor grammatical errors when quoting obviously ignorant people?  I mean, it wouldn't change a thing except not make the mother look tarded.

It depends on the publication. It's actually a controversy in journalism land. On one hand, you're never ever supposed to change someone's quote (or use it in a way that changes its meaning). But some papers feel that quoting bad grammar makes the quotee look bad and have a policy of correcting bad grammar. Personally, I'm in the "don't change" camp, but it's not up to me.

/former journalist


Slippery slope?
 
Displayed 16 of 116 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report