Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And yet Louisiana is the per capita murder state in the US. Perhaps they are using a bit too much hot sauce.Cajun food calms the savage beast.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
And yet Louisiana is the per capita murder state in the US. Perhaps they are using a bit too much hot sauce.Cajun food calms the savage beast.
Yep, and the Southern states in general have higher murder rates than elsewhere in the country.And yet Louisiana is the per capita murder state in the US. Perhaps they are using a bit too much hot sauce.
Most vets are REMFs anyway. Those who actuallyOr train teachers. Offer teachers more pay to go through training.
Even if only five teachers out of twenty do the training... That's five trained people that's always there.
Offer the job to vets
But only among those who eschew Cajun food.And yet Louisiana is the per capita murder state in the US.
But only among those who eschew Cajun food.
Of course.So just the Creole. That sounds a bit racist.
Don’t be silly. We trust teachers completely when it comes to something simple like shooting people. We just don’t trust teachers when it comes to doing something like teaching.I thought teachers weren't trusted these days?
I chew Cajun food. Better than swallowing it whole.But only among those who eschew Cajun food.
You're pretty wise (for a Canuckistanian).I chew Cajun food. Better than swallowing it whole.
Yeah, well that and I can't count how many times I've vocalized a desire to do violence to another while in a state of anger but nothing comes of it. I've even recently had more thoughts of violence than normal, but it's a symptom of stress, frustration, unmet needs and anti-trans bigotrybut it's not actually going to manifeat as violence.I read this with some skepticism. Courts have a habit of taking what autistic people say wildly out of context, which is easy to do because people with autism don't always phrase things in the most obvious way. Their tone often comes across completely differently from how they meant it.
It's worth noting that apparently he was homeschooled at the time with no access to firearms, so shooting up the school might have just been an exaggerated expression of frustration and hopelessness rather than a real threat. It's clear he was suffering.
It seems more like a kid is being punished for speaking frankly about the thoughts he's struggling with, rather than getting him better care, based on a prior stereotype about autistic people being "school shooters" when most shooters have been antisocial, not autistic.
I don't mean to condemn efforts made to prevent shootings. This particular story just seems off to me.
Whatever else happens to him I hope he gets the help he needs.What are they going to do to him?
He just made a threat.
Lock him up forever?
Arresting him doesn't indicate that's the goal, but rather just punishing an angry youth doing nothing more than running his mouth and make everything worse for him.Whatever else happens to him I hope he gets the help he needs.
I don't see your reasoning. Peace officers are the first-responders. The boy had made threats of violence. It is quite reasonable that those sent to respond should be those best trained to handle and diffuse potential violence. After any immediate threat is resolved then others respond to other aspects. AFAIK that is pretty standard.Arresting him doesn't indicate that's the goal, but rather just punishing an angry youth doing nothing more than running his mouth and make everything worse for him.
Wow! He never did read his article that he linked.I don't see your reasoning. Peace officers are the first-responders. The boy had made threats of violence. It is quite reasonable that those sent to respond should be those best trained to handle and diffuse potential violence. After any immediate threat is resolved then others respond to other aspects. AFAIK that is pretty standard.
It's actually not really that common, especially when it can't be followed up (can't shoot without a gun).I don't see your reasoning. Peace officers are the first-responders. The boy had made threats of violence. It is quite reasonable that those sent to respond should be those best trained to handle and diffuse potential violence. After any immediate threat is resolved then others respond to other aspects. AFAIK that is pretty standard.