|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
VA: Can we lock down guns instead of schools?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
A few teachers and I just spent more than a half hour cooped up in a dark room with a bunch of students. Shushing the kids, keeping them quiet. What kind of class was this, you might reasonably wonder. A dark room? Silence? (Can elucidation—to have something ‘made light’—even take place in darkness?) What exactly was transpiring in this room devoid of students questioning or teachers explaining—a room where, except for the occasional giggle or sigh of impatience, everyone was deadly silent?
It was a lockdown drill. |
| Comment by:
Millwright66
(3/21/2015)
|
Sounds like a "failure to communicate" to me. Don't know about y'all but I had to deal with "Duck and Cover" drills as a school-age youngster. And for far less logical reasons ! Kids are adaptable if presented with reasons why they're doing what's asked of them. If there's any "failure" in this concept it lies with the school administrations and teachers.
Childhood is dangerous. Children have an innate drive to explore their world. Parents need to learn/accept their children learn more by "doing" than by "seeing" or "reading". Doing provides direct tactile feedback and stimuli well-suited to short attention spans. Caring parents need to encourage exploration, but strive to forsee and advert its more lethal consequences. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
