Recruiting forum off topic thread (no politics, covid, or hot button issues)

[LadyVolette]

You send him to a crisis center and the picture would've been eval'd as threat enough for a hold, especially in context of everything. The fact that his parents wouldn't even take him home is enough evidence that they weren't helping him. Jail wouldn't have done a thing for a 15 year old drawing a picture - no charges would stick to that and you get the same result of him going and shooting people whenever the paperwork is cleared up. The drawing was enough for an eval to put a hold on him and with that he might've gotten help and those kids would still be alive.

When someone writes something like that they tend to mean it. Both that they want help and that they are seriously obsessing about violence towards others that they don't think they can stop themselves. It's basically them sending up a flare. He's the perfect example of a crime that could've been avoided with help. That's why the school's reaction pisses me off so much. His parents, otoh, seem even more worthless.

Agreed, your child is hurting, you need to do something

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Not related here, but I wish parents who don't lock up their guns would be charged when their kids get a hold of them and do damage. I'm pro 2nd amendment, but that gun is your responsibility. If your kid uses it poorly, that's on you.

OK, let me ask you this. At what age does that end? If the kid is still living at home at 18 do you still believe that? 16 when theyre old enough to drive? 13 when theyre old enough to be alone? I understand and respect the idea, I just think its a no win conversation. Many kids are taught from a young age how to safely handle a gun. I dont think its fair to make a blanket law because a few ruin it for the masses.

 

[SergeantVol]

OK, let me ask you this. At what age does that end? If the kid is still living at home at 18 do you still believe that? 16 when theyre old enough to drive? 13 when theyre old enough to be alone? I understand and respect the idea, I just think its a no win conversation. Many kids are taught from a young age how to safely handle a gun. I dont think its fair to make a blanket law because a few ruin it for the masses.

I think gun safety education needs a come back. Something in the style of hunter safety or what they used to teach in schools.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

I think gun safety education needs a come back. Something in the style of hunter safety or what they used to teach in schools.

I agree. I'm not going to get started; because, that's a long road I don't want to go down, but there's a lot of things that should be taught in schools that aren't. But you better damn well know the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell.

 

[UTProf]

Eh, jail can do mental health evaluations, he couldve been put on a psych hold there, and then transferred to a mental hospital.

As far as the parents I agree, I actually find it intresting that they are being charged in this situation. I actually hope their charges stick, and it will force more parents to look at how they handle their kids.

Sending a 15 year old to jail for a drawing would've done nothing. Even if you can somehow manage to get charges filed he's out in a matter of hours with zero help rendered -- a ticking time bomb and one likely made worse by the experience.

Jails simply don't have the resources or staffing to do everything they should be doing. Half the ones operating locally are under various court orders because they're not meeting even the most basic legal requirements on how to operate. It's not malicious so much as a matter of too few staff, resources, even beds or mats to put on the floor, and too many people (many who really shouldn't even be in jail -- you'd be surprised by how many in jail are there for the pettiest of things - things like an outstanding warrant for on a $50 dollar fine for PI but who are simply too poor to pay up or bond out and single moms that missed a court date related to a child's truancy hearing or even outstanding fines from traffic court. It really is mind blowing the low level stuff a lot of people are there for).

Dealing with all of that plus low level and high level criminal offenses, they don't have the resources to get people mental or medical help. For that you need an outside advocate like family or a private attorney that's pushing the system to work for you. Otherwise, the guy who is causing the most immediate problem who isn't likely to be released soon (meaning they know they have to deal with him) will get priority when it comes to mental evals. It can be months or years before someone gets an eval via a county jail and a kid isn't going to be in one that long before having committed an actual adult crime.

OTOH, you send them to a crisis center and they go straight to treatment.

 

[UTProf]

I agree for the most part, but thousands of kids everyday say threatening things or draw disturbing pictures. Yes it means we should get them help, but tje super low percentage that actually turn into violent acts desensitizes people. Just like fire alarms, so many have been false alarms that people don't take them seriously.

Doesn't excuse anyone, but it is a tough spot trying to decide when to take those kinds of things seriously or when a kid is just being edgy and begging for attention. No one has enough resources to take them all seriously all the time.

That's why I think it should be standard to go through a crisis center. They don't have to hold anyone and they're equipped to make a judgment call on stuff like this. It cuts through the wait time for normal evals and it doesn't criminalize a kid (or adult) for having dark or 'edgy' thoughts. It does however give them a chance to get help and to stop something like a school shooting or family violence from happening beforehand. They are basically designed for situations just like this one.

 

[UTProf]

Not related here, but I wish parents who don't lock up their guns would be charged when their kids get a hold of them and do damage. I'm pro 2nd amendment, but that gun is your responsibility. If your kid uses it poorly, that's on you.

They did charge these parents.

 

[Orangeredblooded]

I agree for the most part, but thousands of kids everyday say threatening things or draw disturbing pictures. Yes it means we should get them help, but tje super low percentage that actually turn into violent acts desensitizes people. Just like fire alarms, so many have been false alarms that people don't take them seriously.

Doesn't excuse anyone, but it is a tough spot trying to decide when to take those kinds of things seriously or when a kid is just being edgy and begging for attention. No one has enough resources to take them all seriously all the time.

I’m dealing with my granddaughter being bullied by two males that work for me because they hate me and are taking it out on her, just because I make them do their job. Lord, today teens and young adults are so different from when I was that age. They have different trigger points than most of us here are used to. I told my boss today that social media is owning our young people and making them desensitized to the carnage they afflict.

 

[SoilVol]

Not related here, but I wish parents who don't lock up their guns would be charged when their kids get a hold of them and do damage. I'm pro 2nd amendment, but that gun is your responsibility. If your kid uses it poorly, that's on you.

That's how it was when I was in New Zealand. They take it seriously, too. The owner, if proven negligent, gets charges.

 

[InVOLuntary]

I think gun safety education needs a come back. Something in the style of hunter safety or what they used to teach in schools.

Our people in charge of education are dead set against it. They think the demonization of guns is the answer. It's stupid. They think sex education will curb teen pregnancy. They think drug education will deter drug use. They think dui classes will slow drunk driving. But somehow they're against education on firearm safety.

The NRA (not a fan of the organization any longer) had a program called the Eddie the eagle program that taught firearm safety in schools. I'm pretty sure they were eventually prohibited from doing the training in schools.

 

[SoilVol]

I think gun safety education needs a come back. Something in the style of hunter safety or what they used to teach in schools.

Eddie the Eagle was one of the most successful government-produced public education tools. Should've been widely advertised instead of Smokey The Bear. Need to bring that back.

Whatever your opinions are of firearms, we live in a society with easy access to them. Anyone can accidentally come across a firearm and needs to know how to safely handle it or a child needs to know to go to an adult. Instead many choose to pretend guns don't exist and not educate children about them.

 

[SoilVol]

Our people in charge of education are dead set against it. They think the demonization of guns is the answer. It's stupid. They think sex education will curb teen pregnancy. They think drug education will deter drug use. They think dui classes will slow drunk driving. But somehow they're against education on firearm safety.

The NRA (not a fan of the organization any longer) had a program called the Eddie the eagle program that taught firearm safety in schools. I'm pretty sure they were eventually prohibited from doing the training in schools.

Funny thing is many of those educational pushes work. As proven by the long-term data. Eddie the Eagle worked before it was banned.

Eddie the Eagle is still taught through 4H in Tennessee though. In fact, most TN counties have 4H shooting sports and firearm education programs. Highly recommend letting children participate if solely to learn how to safely be around firearms.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

Is it wrong to get into an argument with anyone else on the board?

So, she was a jerk, but people should have ignored it because of perceived benefit. But you won't ignore the people who called her out on it because they don't carry the same perceived benefit.

You're using a sliding scale of what's right/wrong to do based on what you feel is beneficial to you. That's called being a "respecter of persons", and many would consider that hypocritical.



In other words, it's putting your integrity up for bid.

Machiavelli taught that right/wrong are defined by outcome. i.e. "The ends justify the means." Today, "Machiavellian" is generally used as a pejorative.

This a load of stupid ..no long winded reply from me needed..that will do.

 

[Orange_Crush]

This a load of stupid ..no long winded reply from me needed..that will do.

<eyeroll>

Your discourses generally entail two emojis. The length of discussions directed to you probably aren't the issue.

 

[Ulysees E. McGill]

<eyeroll>

Your discourses generally entail two emojis. The length of discussions directed to you probably aren't the issue.

...

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

Why do people think Twitter is going to die? Because Musk is firing all the commies?

 

[SweetasSoda]

Why do people think Twitter is going to die? Because Musk is firing all the commies?

Thought they were quitting because they can’t work (or not work) from home and talk about their boss.

 

[butchna]

Why do people think Twitter is going to die? Because Musk is firing all the commies?

The Oppressed? They need it to be true…so they’re doubling their tweeting to bring it to existence.

 

[SweetasSoda]

The Oppressed? They need it to be true…so they’re doubling their tweeting to bring it to existence.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Why do people think Twitter is going to die? Because Musk is firing all the commies?

Because twitter was way over staffed, and 90% of its workforce did nothing all day, and it was losing 4 million per day before he got ahold of it. So now the people who did nothing might have to get real jobs and they're big mad now.

 

[theutvolunteers]

Why do people think Twitter is going to die? Because Musk is firing all the commies?

Tech bros have to be the most coddled “workers” of all time.

 

[MoCo_Vol]

Tech bros have to be the most coddled “workers” of all time.

To be fair, most of Twitter's workforce is anything but tech bros. They likely have half a dozen actual tech bros and then a ton of liberal arts drop outs with marketing experience...or I guess I should say had.

Real tech bros DGAF, would rather not interact with anyone at any level ever in their lives.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Because twitter was way over staffed, and 90% of its workforce did nothing all day, and it was losing 4 million per day before he got ahold of it. So now the people who did nothing might have to get real jobs and they're big mad now.

There is great wailing and gnashing of teeth on LinkedIn. #TheDisplaced

 

[Orange_Crush]

Tech bros have to be the most coddled “workers” of all time.

Ease up...









...and get back to coddling.

 

[Jimmy Football]

Because twitter was way over staffed, and 90% of its workforce did nothing all day, and it was losing 4 million per day before he got ahold of it. So now the people who did nothing might have to get real jobs and they're big mad now.

They’re gonna end up finding out Twitter only needs like 40-50 motivated employees to operate, and the rest of their operations can probably be subcontracted out on an ad hoc basis.