What doesn’t make sense

Author: TheUnderdog

Posts

Total: 23
Topic's author
#1
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
Let’s say there is a school shooting.  Why do people tear down the whole school because of the shooting?  Like, there was a brutal rape and murder in Central Park.  Nobody decided to tear down all of Central Park.

Like the Sandy Hook shooting; everyone involved with that shooting is at least in highschool now.  There is not a single elementary school aged person in Sandy Hook that will be traumatized by being in the same building.

Tearing down buildings and re building them is such a waste of money!
#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,618
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Maybe parents dont want to send their kids to that school, so they have to shut it down.
Topic's author
#3
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Best.Korea
If that was the case, then after the rape and murder that happened in Central Park, people wouldn’t go to the park anymore.

Being in a building where a shooting took place doesn’t mean you will get shot.  I don’t want to spend taxpayer money on the results of people’s feelings.  I’ve driven on the same roads as at least one murderer.  It doesn’t mean I’m going to get murdered.
#4
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,618
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TheUnderdog
Its how people feel about such schools. They dont feel same for roads and parks.
Topic's author
#5
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Best.Korea
There was a kid who brought a knife to my elementary school.  I never wanted to tear down the school based on it.

There was a school where a teacher raped a student.  Nobody thought of turning down the school because of the child rape.

Like, it’s a waste of taxpayer money and I’m fiscally right wing which means I want to cut government spending.  That means I have to ignore people’s feelings because they are irrelevant.

The only thing that is relavent for policy is logic and moraltiy; logos and ethos.  Patheos has no place.
#6
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
Watch Amityville.  It's bad MOJO,


Besides that it probably is traumatizing for the teachers that still work their and siblings following them to that school.in the following years
Topic's author
#7
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
The teachers and traumatized students can teach or be taught somewhere else.  Just don’t destroy the school.
#8
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Nobody wants to drive by the school their child died every single day. Nobody wants a bunch of true crim tourists and conspiracy theorists coming to their town to gawk at what they see as a tourist destination.  You need to get out of your ivory tower and have a heart
Topic's author
#9
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@WyIted
Nobody wants to drive by the school their child died every single day.
Then find a different route.  I have a highschool; I just don’t drive by it if I don’t want too.

Nobody wants a bunch of true crim tourists and conspiracy theorists coming to their town to gawk at what they see as a tourist destination.
They may not seek it out, but I wouldn’t care.

You need to get out of your ivory tower and have a heart
That’s rich coming from you.  But to address your point; I don’t care about feelings when it comes to public policy if I can save money.  My money matters more than people’s feelings; it’s a product of being fiscally right wing; cutting government spending on wasteful projects like this.
#10
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
That’s rich coming from you.

I don't understand what that is supposed to mean. I have a deep sense of empathy and always have had one. 

; it’s a product of being fiscally right wing; cutting government spending on wasteful projects like this.
I don't know what you mean by right wing but you probably aren't as right wing as me and I believe in libraries, and publicly funded parades and festivals. I believe in museums. 

I think it's important for major cities to have a well funded public transportation system. I also think that it is important to tear down elementary schools where a bunch of kids died in a mass shooting. 

I don't think any of that shit means I am not fiscally conservative only that I am not an anarchist
#11
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
A Zedku for UDog.


Yep,

Overthink creates daft ideas.

Like,

Another school shooting,

But guns still good.


Clever stupid gene.
#12
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
But guns still good.
There are areas of the world with a lot of guns, not as much as america but still a lot, who al.ost never have school shooting issues. 

It's not the source of the issue. I believe we should figure out whatever the he'll the source of the issue is and take care of it. 
#13
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@WyIted
Socio-psychological trend is my guess.

A bit like transgenderism.

Could be something in the water I suppose.
#14
WyIted
WyIted's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 5,455
3
4
9
WyIted's avatar
WyIted
3
4
9
-->
@zedvictor4
I guess it can be argued that regardless of root cause that better gun laws could prevent it, but for every kid that feels like shooting up their school, maybe less than 1% do, and by reducing the amount of people who feel that sort of pain or anger or whatever it is, than we can also lower the odds of it occurring. 

I feel like people just jump to gun grabbing as a gut response to make a political statement rather than actually looking for politically viable solutions that could actually save lives. 
#15
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheUnderdog
There is not a single elementary school aged person in Sandy Hook that will be traumatized by being in the same building.
Because they figured that students are probably not in the best learning environment walking through a hallway where multiple dead bodies of kids once laid for doing the same thing they are doing right now.
Topic's author
#16
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Another school shooting, 

But guns still good.
Murder is bad, but vast majority of gun owners are safe and it’s group punishment to disarm/punish people for crimes they didn’t commit.  Collective punishment is bad.


Topic's author
#17
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Double_R
Because they figured that students are probably not in the best learning environment walking through a hallway where multiple dead bodies of kids once laid for doing the same thing they are doing right now.
G1 is the original group of Sandy Hook kids at the time of the shooting encompassing all grades present.

G2 is the new Sandy hook kids there one year later.  There is much overlap between G1 and G2, but they aren’t identical groups.

The kids at Sandy Hook now are in G13.  G13 kids won’t be traumatized by the shooting that G1 endured.  If G1-6 wants to go to school somewhere else, that’s understandable.  They were in the building during the shootout.  Don’t destroy the building though because eventually the kids there will be in G7 or higher.
#18
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
Sure.

But loaded guns are never safe.

And a loaded gun only requires a minority to render it lethal.

And for sure, some people shoot recreationally, but I'm guessing that the bulk of gun owners in the U.S. have them as either a weapon of self defence or an instrument of empowerment.

Guns are therefore a sort of self fulfilling prophecy.

Someone will eventually get killed.

And if it's you, you won't care because you will be dead.

And barring a few close relatives, no one else will care.

Such is U.S. culture.
Topic's author
#19
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@zedvictor4
But loaded guns are never safe.
Nothing is 100% safe, not even the internet.

I'm guessing that the bulk of gun owners in the U.S. have them as either a weapon of self defence or an instrument of empowerment.
Most have it for protection.  There are 100 million gun owners in the US.  If 10% of them were murderers every year, then there would be 10 million murders in the US a year.  In reality, there are about 20,000 homicides; and the average murderer murders 2 people; so 10K murderers a year.

10K/100M = 1/10K.

There is a .01% chance a generic gun owner is a murderer.

And if it's you, you won't care because you will be dead.

And barring a few close relatives, no one else will care.

Such is U.S. culture.
Sure; Americans are extremely individualistic and proud of that.  Everyone is individualistic to an extent; otherwise there would be no kids in foster care because they would all be adopted.
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheUnderdog
Most have it for protection.
Yep, that was what I stated.

That and an instrument of "individual" empowerment.


And only U.Dog could widen the discussion to take onboard the U.S, childcare system.

Nonetheless, always nice to exchange ideas with you.
Topic's author
#21
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@zedvictor4
Nonetheless, always nice to exchange ideas with you.
Mutual.
#22
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheUnderdog
G13 kids won’t be traumatized by the shooting that G1 endured.
You didn’t hear a word I said. Walking down a hallway or into a classroom where multiple children were shot dead is like walking through ground zero, you don’t just pretend nothing happened there. And even if you think you could, so what? It’s not a good learning environment, and even if it had nothing to do with the children at all, even if it was all about the trauma of the adults it’s still their trauma and their decision. Why do you even care about this?
Topic's author
#23
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Double_R
Walking down a hallway or into a classroom where multiple children were shot dead is like walking through ground zero, you don’t just pretend nothing happened there.
What if the kids don’t know what building it was?  You can ignore the decades old shooting.  Like the gay bar club shootout in Orlando happened.  They didn’t tear down the bar.

Why do you even care about this?
Economic reasons; tearing down schools and building new ones costs millions of dollars I think.  My tax money matters more than people’s feelings; it’s a product of being fiscally right wing and cutting government spending.