http://news.yahoo.com/claim-seeks-10...003646074.html
The first lawsuit is in the works. $100 million for a 6 year old survivor. The comments again show the absolute cluelessness of our society.
http://news.yahoo.com/claim-seeks-10...003646074.html
The first lawsuit is in the works. $100 million for a 6 year old survivor. The comments again show the absolute cluelessness of our society.
There is an interesting argument that since the state forbids any normal, caring adult to carry weapons to defend their charges, the state is responsible when wrongdoing occurs on school grounds.
My T.P. wheeling and dealing feedback is here.
Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one, and it stinks more than mine.
Yo Homie, That my chainsaw ?
Pati, improbe et vince
"Back in my day" we just mostly had our fists and wits and I went to the "Dangerous Minds" (see imdb) HS in California. Our one security guy was not armed and is still the butt of jokes.
So yeah, maybe the parents might want to be able to afford to send their kids to a fancy school with armed guards, since the politicians that send their kids to private schools with armed guards think the "common folk" don't need them.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem. --TJ
I would normally argue against these sorts of lawsuits but in this case I support the family. We send our children to school and expect them to be safe. If a school creates policies they claim will make our children safer and their "safer" practices result in a significant loss of life that could have been avoided with a few preventative measures that school should be liable for any and all loss their irresponsible policies caused.