(06-13-2022 12:40 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (06-13-2022 10:14 AM)Hambone10 Wrote: The purpose of this is to save lives... not to point fingers. I'm betting most teachers don't want the discretion we are discussing... and those that do are the ones I'd worry most about. It seems pretty simple to me to mandate that all gun possession or knives or assaults or what have you get reported to SOMEONE... who then decides whether or not to escalate it to therapy, parent-teacher conference, the police or other...
To be fair, do either of us know that this is not still included? As was discussed, the bill still says to follow federal guidelines which may include those weapons (as far as I can tell, it still requires reporting of the possession of a firearm).
Knives iirc were specifically excluded. As was 'threats'. The only thing I know is mandatory to be reported anywhere is guns, and that is a federal guideline. As to anything else, there is no 'secondary' reporting... so their options still seem to be, say nothing... or tell the police... at least from a state policy standpoint. Because the state is California, I don't think there are any 'plans' on local reporting... at least not in the big areas.
Quote:I actually think we're on near the same page regarding outcomes, but there is a difference of understanding on what the California bill requires. We both seem to recognize a benefit in required reporting for serious issues, and this California law does require reporting to law enforcement in some instances. Defining what exactly constitutes a "serious issue" as I put it would be helpful, but I don't have the time to dig. My guess is that there is still a requirement for a weapon (firearm, knife, etc.), but not for getting into a fight, verbally threatening someone, etc.
Guns are federal... I believe knives were excluded. I KNOW that box-cutters and razors were excluded.... but again, you seem to miss my point.
Verbal threats always seem to be innocuous, UNTIL you look back at a mass shooting and you find that as one piece of a pattern of (especially) escalation... especially if the 'verbal threat' becomes the actual target. I'm just using that as an example.
Quote:I also think developing a intermediary for less-serious issues, so that someone has a place to report and discuss the issue without triggering a required law enforcement action, would be beneficial. I don't know if that's something that needs to be legislated, though.
Of course it does... because it needs funding and structure and coordination across multiple venues and job descriptions.
Quote:We will have to agree to disagree about what path if more or less burdensome for teachers
FIne... its not integral to my point... I really don't care that much about their burden when it comes to eliminating school shootings, but I was trying to be nice....
Quote: and would result in better outcomes for identifying and proactively addressing student issues.
How? There is absolutely nothing about doing that in this bill. What you are suggesting isn't in this bill. If that's your idea, then please articulate what that looks like to you because its not here in this bill. All this bill says is that teachers no longer are REQUIRED to report to police, anything except guns. It doesn't provide any other direction, and certainly doesn't create any means of 'identifying and proactively addressing student issues'.
Quote:From my perspective, it would be more stressful to wonder if I were going to be formally reprimanded/fired because I forgot to report an incident that I missed (like a student threatening another).
which is precisely why you just have them report everything. Such a concern is now moot.
Quote: I think teachers are likely already on alert for odd behavior, and I think requiring them to memorize specific issues that require reporting to law enforcement is an unneeded stressor that could be addressed in another manner.
I'm sorry... why do you keep going back to a specific list of issues that requires reporting to law enforcement? I've suggested teachers don't report ANYTHING to law enforcement... but instead to their immediate supervisor... just like you would with Sexual Harassment or Workplace Discrimination or anything else. I KNOW you aren't saying that reporting sexual harassment is an overly -burdensome list of issues to memorize.
Quote:And that doesn't touch on what it does to students who worry about being literally policed 24/7. I think the risk of a few bad apples ignoring any and all reporting is probably worth it to reduce the legitimate policing of children/teens and the extra stress on teachers.
Again, you're not understanding... To your last comment though... How many bad apple students are shooting up schools? I'm betting the percentage of 'bad apple' teachers who let some of these things pass is VASTLY higher... and for those who end up shooting up schools, it seems that the percentage is 100%.
As to policing them 24/7, YOU keep bringing up police, not me. I'm moving AWAY from police. I think ANY threat of violence needs to be looked in to, just like sexual harassment or bullying. If you see a pattern, you may need to intervene. If you don't, its not a big deal. One event is not a pattern. If it happens 5 times, maybe SOMEBODY should ask the student if they're doing okay?? How is the school counselor (or their academic advisor or whomever) going to know to do that if 5 different teachers all witness each single event... and none of them think it worth reporting?
When I think of how to reduce school shootings, or really ANY mass shooting... it certainly seems that addressing the issues before they REACH the point of violence (when they are still just verbal threats) is vastly preferable on many levels than TRYING to take hundreds of millions of guns out of circulation, almost exclusively from people who have never ever used a weapon improperly.
Quote:Tying this back to the point of this thread, I don't think this California bill is nonsensical now that we've dug into it a bit.
I do. They swung too far one direction, and are swinging too far now in the reverse... missingin both directions. If you think this way is 'closer', that's fine... but its still not a fix. We'll do this for a while... and then there will be a shooting... and someone will suggest we go back to a 'zero tolerance' policy... and so on ad infinitum. It isn't what was originally reported to be, but its still not a good solution. My suggestion is (imo) vastly better.... and it addresses numerous liberal priorities like 'defunding' the police, increasing counseling and intervention for disaffected teens, reducing school violence, especially shootings and probably a number of other issues. Again, as someone seeing what happens in high and middle schools now, at a GOOD school... (I have two 14 and now four 27yr olds) I see drugs being RAMPANT and the teachers and 'campus police' mostly turning a blind eye... You can probably go into any bathroom in any high school and find numerous kids AT BEST, vaping... or an FFA kid 'faking' his drug test (yes)... at worst, MUCH worse.... MJ, Acid, Mushrooms and the school can't do much of anything, unless they quite literally catch them in the act... and they are discouraged on many levels (mostly from parents) from even going IN TO the bathrooms (where most of this bad stuff happens). IDK about guns, but if there are lots of drugs, there are weapons. More though, I'm looking at bullied kids... Disaffected kids... loners... kids with poor impulse control and no supervision. Teachers aren't equipped to handle this... especially if the parents don't step up. I've seen it in California first hand. They have the same issues... and worse.
/
Wow... does this make sense to ANYONE??
