1635
Say the line
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
1635 points (98.3% liked)
Political Memes
5579 readers
273 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If the school can't suspend him for allegedly making this threat there's no way they'd be able to take the guns out of the house for the same thing. There's no right to an education in the Constitution, but there is a right to bear arms.
There was no proof it was him who made a threat - that's the point.
There are ways to take away weapons from people when a threat is credible, during the course of an investigation.
There should be more limits on access to guns regardless.
The constitution needs an update. For one, this was not the purpose of the second amendment, and two, its an amendment - just like every other aspect of the constitution, it can be changed.
There is no gun crime without guns. The idea that we need to look anywhere else is, to me, absolutely ludicrous and shameful.
Edit: Regarding the edit - the fact that there is no right to education is also a problem, albeit a different one.
The idea that the 2nd amendment exists but nothing regarding education does should not mean "Well fuck all these kids because 1 out of several hundred may have actually been a threat" is completely deranged to me. Sorry, but there is no world where you're going to convince me otherwise. The problem is the guns.
I'm saying that if I were a principal and the FBI let me know they talked to a kid my response wouldn't be to wait for him to show up, regardless of what the rules say, because I care more about kids not getting shot than the rules. Which is why I'm not a principal.
Also, if the threat wasn't credible enough to suspend him, it was definitely not credible enough to remove the guns from his parents' possession. The guns would still have been there.
Anyways, this topic pisses me off more than the awful conference call I'm avoiding so I'm not going to respond anymore.
I agree its good you're not the principal.
And I would disagree on not being able to seize weapons, hell they can seize anything without a crime today, that's what civil asset forfeiture is. No crime even needs to be committed, no arrest needs to be made, and its legal for them to do today. Republicans would lose their collective marbles over it though - but fuck them.
But directly incarcerating (or punishing kids based on an unknown set of anonymous sources) would absolutely be a problem.
I hope your day gets better.
Just wanted to mention, more information has come out.
The investigation was in May 2023. His dad bought him the gun used to kill two children and two teachers as a Christmas present, in 2023. After the visit from the FBI.
His dad has now been arrested as well.