If teachers strike nationally, could they bring the NRA to its knees?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Think about it. Segregation ended because protests seeker a specific outcome. Those included, in individual cases, desegregating buses, lunch counters, school districts, etc. Those are very specific things. You did not answer my question. What specific action do you want to happen as a result? "Fewer student deaths" is not it. We all want that. What action(s) do you seek, that can be agreed upon by all, do you seek that will result in safer schools?

Who says that it has to be agreed upon by all? If we only did things that everyone agrees on, we'd never do anything.

As for the rest -- my suggestion is, when the protests happen, you listen to what the protesters say. That will answer your question about what the protesters want.

The difference here is we are talking about public schools and students. This is not a march on Washington. It's pulling 5, 6, 7 year olds out of class or keeping them from being able to attend whether they or their families agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The difference here is we are talking about public schools and students. This is not a march on Washington. It's pulling 5, 6, 7 year olds out of class or keeping them from being able to attend whether they or their families agree.

PP, there were a whole lot of civil rights actions that were not the March on Washington.

If you don't want to do it, then don't do it.

(Being 6 and 7 years old did not save the first-graders at Sandy Hook ES on December 14, 2012.)

[Anonymous]

I haven't read the thread, so maybe someone else responded with this already.

I don't think it would matter, because Congress (this one, today) doesn't care about educating children. They care about $$$ for the rich, and only money for the rich. So they would act like they cared, argue and get nothing accomplished, and then be like..."but the kids should be in school" (and then snicker behind closed doors because what they really want is an uneducated population).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the thread, so maybe someone else responded with this already.

I don't think it would matter, because Congress (this one, today) doesn't care about educating children. They care about $$$ for the rich, and only money for the rich. So they would act like they cared, argue and get nothing accomplished, and then be like..."but the kids should be in school" (and then snicker behind closed doors because what they really want is an uneducated population).

PP, if we try, we might succeed, or we might fail. If we don't try, we are certain to fail.

Also, this Congress, today, is not the Congress we will have for all eternity. There is an election in November 2018. And another one in November 2020. National, state, and local elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read the thread, so maybe someone else responded with this already.

I don't think it would matter, because Congress (this one, today) doesn't care about educating children. They care about $$$ for the rich, and only money for the rich. So they would act like they cared, argue and get nothing accomplished, and then be like..."but the kids should be in school" (and then snicker behind closed doors because what they really want is an uneducated population).

PP, if we try, we might succeed, or we might fail. If we don't try, we are certain to fail.

Also, this Congress, today, is not the Congress we will have for all eternity. There is an election in November 2018. And another one in November 2020. National, state, and local elections.

Agree with both pps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The difference here is we are talking about public schools and students. This is not a march on Washington. It's pulling 5, 6, 7 year olds out of class or keeping them from being able to attend whether they or their families agree.

PP, there were a whole lot of civil rights actions that were not the March on Washington.

If you don't want to do it, then don't do it.

(Being 6 and 7 years old did not save the first-graders at Sandy Hook ES on December 14, 2012.)

Again, you missed the point. I was responding to the PP who stated a protest does not have to be agreed upon by all. I was saying that's fine for something like a march, where a person is make an individual decision to participate. That is different from making a class full of students participate. Will schools seek permission from parents? Would they opt out?

(There are varying opinions on what action(s) could have helped save the students at Sandy Hook.)

[Anonymous]

I am a teacher. I do not own a gun and I have no intention of ever owning a gun; however, I am NOT going to strike over "the NRA" and wanting to "bring the NRA to its knees". I don't think the NRA is the real problem. I think that our poor mental health care policies are the problem. I also think the problem is some people not doing their jobs and some family members not being proactive in getting a love one mental health help.

If you want to do something then I suggest that rather than depriving children of their right to an education you should caucus your local, state and federal legislatures for changes in mental health care policy and programs. There is no way that I am supporting the nonsense of a strike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Again, you missed the point. I was responding to the PP who stated a protest does not have to be agreed upon by all. I was saying that's fine for something like a march, where a person is make an individual decision to participate. That is different from making a class full of students participate. Will schools seek permission from parents? Would they opt out?

(There are varying opinions on what action(s) could have helped save the students at Sandy Hook.)

Who is talking about making children do things?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher. I do not own a gun and I have no intention of ever owning a gun; however, I am NOT going to strike over "the NRA" and wanting to "bring the NRA to its knees". I don't think the NRA is the real problem. I think that our poor mental health care policies are the problem. I also think the problem is some people not doing their jobs and some family members not being proactive in getting a love one mental health help.

If you want to do something then I suggest that rather than depriving children of their right to an education you should caucus your local, state and federal legislatures for changes in mental health care policy and programs. There is no way that I am supporting the nonsense of a strike.

OK, then don't.

But PP, do you think that only the US has bad mental health care policies and indifferent family members? It seems unlikely to me. Other countries also have bad mental health care policies and indifferent family members, but we're the only country that has routine school shootings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, you missed the point. I was responding to the PP who stated a protest does not have to be agreed upon by all. I was saying that's fine for something like a march, where a person is make an individual decision to participate. That is different from making a class full of students participate. Will schools seek permission from parents? Would they opt out?

(There are varying opinions on what action(s) could have helped save the students at Sandy Hook.)

Who is talking about making children do things?

https://www.womensmarch.com/empower/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher. I do not own a gun and I have no intention of ever owning a gun; however, I am NOT going to strike over "the NRA" and wanting to "bring the NRA to its knees". I don't think the NRA is the real problem. I think that our poor mental health care policies are the problem. I also think the problem is some people not doing their jobs and some family members not being proactive in getting a love one mental health help.

If you want to do something then I suggest that rather than depriving children of their right to an education you should caucus your local, state and federal legislatures for changes in mental health care policy and programs. There is no way that I am supporting the nonsense of a strike.

OK, then don't.

But PP, do you think that only the US has bad mental health care policies and indifferent family members? It seems unlikely to me. Other countries also have bad mental health care policies and indifferent family members, but we're the only country that has routine school shootings.

I understand; however, you are mistaking causal and correlation. I have not read anything here or anywhere else online about this that shows that this "strike" will solve the problem. All I see and hear is a lot of emotion and foot stomping from people refusing to step up to the plate and do the work of changing laws and policies while depriving children of their right to learn.

[Anonymous]

I'm a teacher and I LOVE the idea of teachers joining together to fight the NRA. We've got to do something bold to get our politicians' attention. Maybe this will make our nation consider which it loves more, its kids or its guns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I understand; however, you are mistaking causal and correlation. I have not read anything here or anywhere else online about this that shows that this "strike" will solve the problem. All I see and hear is a lot of emotion and foot stomping from people refusing to step up to the plate and do the work of changing laws and policies while depriving children of their right to learn.

All I see and hear is a lot of emotion and foot stomping from people about how other people shouldn't protest because it won't do anything anyway.

Will the strike, all by itself, magically solve this problem? Nope. Is it a start? It sure is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, you missed the point. I was responding to the PP who stated a protest does not have to be agreed upon by all. I was saying that's fine for something like a march, where a person is make an individual decision to participate. That is different from making a class full of students participate. Will schools seek permission from parents? Would they opt out?

(There are varying opinions on what action(s) could have helped save the students at Sandy Hook.)

Who is talking about making children do things?

https://www.womensmarch.com/empower/

Women’s March Youth EMPOWER is calling for students, teachers, school administrators, parents and allies to take part in a #NationalSchoolWalkout for 17 minutes at 10am across every time zone on March 14, 2018 to protest Congress’ inaction to do more than tweet thoughts and prayers in response to the gun violence plaguing our schools and neighborhoods. We need action. Students and allies are organizing the national school walkout to demand Congress pass legislation to keep us safe from gun violence at our schools, on our streets and in our homes and places of worship.

Students and staff have the right to teach and learn in an environment free from the worry of being gunned down in their classrooms or on their way home from school.

Parents have the right to send their kids to school in the mornings and see them home alive at the end of the day.

We are not safe at school. We are not safe in our cities and towns. Congress must take meaningful action to keep us safe and pass federal gun reform legislation that address the public health crisis of gun violence. We want Congress to pay attention and take note: many of us will vote this November and many others will join in 2020.

Join us in saying #ENOUGH!

Sounds good to me.

I don't see anything in there about forcing children to do things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Again, you missed the point. I was responding to the PP who stated a protest does not have to be agreed upon by all. I was saying that's fine for something like a march, where a person is make an individual decision to participate. That is different from making a class full of students participate. Will schools seek permission from parents? Would they opt out?

(There are varying opinions on what action(s) could have helped save the students at Sandy Hook.)

Who is talking about making children do things?

https://www.womensmarch.com/empower/

Women’s March Youth EMPOWER is calling for students, teachers, school administrators, parents and allies to take part in a #NationalSchoolWalkout for 17 minutes at 10am across every time zone on March 14, 2018 to protest Congress’ inaction to do more than tweet thoughts and prayers in response to the gun violence plaguing our schools and neighborhoods. We need action. Students and allies are organizing the national school walkout to demand Congress pass legislation to keep us safe from gun violence at our schools, on our streets and in our homes and places of worship.

Students and staff have the right to teach and learn in an environment free from the worry of being gunned down in their classrooms or on their way home from school.

Parents have the right to send their kids to school in the mornings and see them home alive at the end of the day.

We are not safe at school. We are not safe in our cities and towns. Congress must take meaningful action to keep us safe and pass federal gun reform legislation that address the public health crisis of gun violence. We want Congress to pay attention and take note: many of us will vote this November and many others will join in 2020.

Join us in saying #ENOUGH!

Sounds good to me.

I don't see anything in there about forcing children to do things.

When we walk out what do you propose we do with our kindergarteners, first graders, second graders, etc.?