Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Safety’

School Choice Can Be Your Hall Pass Out Of Increasingly Violent Classrooms


BY: ANGELA MORABITO | JANUARY 24, 2024

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2024/01/24/with-student-violence-on-the-rise-parents-should-be-free-to-choose-safe-schools/

student knocks teacher unconscious

Author Angela Morabito profile

ANGELA MORABITO

MORE ARTICLES

  • A teacher on the outskirts of Cincinnati is recovering from brain surgery after a student violently attacked her earlier this month. The 60-year-old teacher was harmed so severely by a teenager that doctors had to remove part of her skull to help manage swelling in her brain.
  • Last spring, a Tennessee teenager pepper-sprayed a teacher for confiscating her phone. Also last year, a Texas administrator was beaten to the ground by a group of students.  

As school choice expands across the country, millions more parents have the chance to send their children to schools that best meet their needs. They are eager to flee schools that foster poor behavior. Parents know their children best, and they know a child’s best educational fit is based on more than only test scores and graduation rates. Academic performance is critically important, but so too are intangible factors that shape a child’s educational experience. It is no surprise that school culture is one of the top factors parents consider in choosing where to send their kids to school.

The most recent Parent Involvement in Education survey, conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics in 2019, found that 71 percent of parents who considered sending their children to a school other than their government-assigned one rated “safety, including school discipline” as “very important.” Only 53 percent ranked “academic performance of students (e.g. test scores, dropout rates)” the same way.

This concern for discipline and safety is not surprising. No parents want to send their children somewhere unsafe. Sadly, many schools tolerate bad behavior and thus foster more of it, creating an environment where teachers can hardly teach, and students can hardly learn.  

School violence is on the rise for several reasons, two of which can be tied directly to policies pushed by teachers’ unions and fringe civil rights groups and accepted as gospel by many in the public education establishment. The first is prolonged school closures resulting in a steep decline in good behavior by students.

The Student Pulse Panel, a study conducted by the Institute of Education Sciences, found that 38 percent of public schools saw an increase in physical altercations between students following the pandemic. (Less than 10 percent saw a decrease.) More than half of public schools saw an increase in threats of physical altercations between students. The damage is not just physical. More than half of public schools reported an increase in “student acts of disrespect [towards staff] other than verbal abuse.”

The study says, “More than 8 in 10 public schools have seen stunted behavioral and socioemotional development in their students because of the COVID-19 pandemic.” But Covid did not cause student behavior to circle the drain. Prolonged school closures, driven by teachers’ unions and their political allies, meant that students forgot how to behave at school.

The second culprit is “restorative justice,” a so-called “disciplinary” model embraced by teachers unions and administered by school systems across the country. This harmful practice is by no means restricted to blue states, nor is it a post-Covid phenomenon. Leading into the pandemic, 21 states and D.C. had laws on the books supporting the use of restorative justice in schools. Among those states are Texas, Florida, and Utah, far from the usual suspects when it comes to educational malpractice.

Under restorative justice, suspending and expelling a student is to be avoided at all costs. Real consequences are replaced by “healing circles.” School resource officers are sidelined, and teachers lose control of their classrooms.

Every single one of the violent incidents noted above happened in a school or school district that has embraced restorative justice policies. The teacher near Cincinnati taught at a school that advised a “verbal warning using restorative practices and affective language” when students are disruptive. The school district in Tennessee is the home of a “restorative practice program,” and the Texas school had moved to adopt more restorative practices in its Campus Improvement Plan.

Education freedom can help solve this problem. Several studies have demonstrated that school choice leads to safer schools.

But a school culture need not be violent to be rotten. There is a reason “Mean Girls” resonates across generations. Bullying is real, it can be severe, and parents deserve the right to decide if and when their child needs a fresh start at a new school. No children should have to risk their mental health and emotional development because they can’t choose another school and get a fresh start.

A good school, the kind of school parents seek out for their kids when they have school choice, is one that not only excels academically but maintains high standards of behavior. Such schools excel academically in no small part because they maintain high standards of behavior. Test scores are only one piece of the education freedom puzzle. Parents see the full picture, and education leaders would do well to follow suit.


Angela Morabito is the spokesperson at the Defense of Freedom Institute, a former U.S. Department of Education press secretary, and a visiting fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum.

No, Gun Violence Isn’t the Leading Cause of Death Among Children


BY: DAVID HARSANYI | APRIL 26, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/26/no-gun-violence-isnt-the-leading-cause-of-death-among-children/

Vice President Kamala Harris

I recently wrote about an extraordinarily misleading Kaiser Family study that claimed “1 in 5” Americans have a family member who has been killed by a gun. Kaiser’s inflated findings were based on a small sample size of self-reported answers to questions that offered no useful limiting parameters. In many ways, another endlessly repeated contention of gun controllers suffers from the same problem: Gun violence is the number one cause of death of children in AmericaVirtually every media outlet and Democrat repeats this contention — including, recently, the vice president. The claim is meant to conjure up distressing images of frolicking kids in parks and schools being gunned down by assault weapons.

And horrific events certainly happen in the country. We need not gloss over the evil of mass school shootings, even if they’re rarer than gun-control types would have you believe. But that does not give people license to make things up.

We don’t really know which study Harris based her comments on, if any. And different sources come to different conclusions. None of them, however, are grounded in our familiar understanding of “children.” These studies count adults who are 18 and 19, and sometimes up to 25, years of age. Americans under 18 can’t purchase guns legally. That age seems, at the very least, the most obvious divide between adults and children. Because when you take 18- and 19-year-old adults out of the equation, the number of gun-related deaths among kids plummets considerably.

According to the CDC, the number one killer of children between 1-14 are accidents — vehicular, suffocation, and drowning. Twice as many kids under 12 died in cars than from guns. Also, if these studies began at birth rather than starting at one, the leading killer of all children would be diseases and genetic abnormalities. Surely a one-year-old is as much a “kid” as a 19-year-old. (And if you begin at fetal viability, by far the leading killer of young people would be late-term abortions — more than 8,000 viable unborn, and probably more than 50,000 performed after 15 weeks.)

No doubt, after many years of decline, there has been a rise in juvenile criminality. And 19 and 18-year-olds are far more likely to engage in criminality than 14 and 15-year-olds. There has also been a rise in juvenile suicides over the last several years. It’s a mental-health crisis. None of the “reasonable gun safety laws” Harris is pushing address those problems.

Perhaps one day, with the advances in car safety technology and medicine, her claim about guns and kids will be true. Today it’s not.


David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist, a nationally syndicated columnist, a Happy Warrior columnist at National Review, and author of five books—the most recent, Eurotrash: Why America Must Reject the Failed Ideas of a Dying Continent. He has appeared on Fox News, C-SPAN, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, ABC World News Tonight, NBC Nightly News and radio talk shows across the country. Follow him on Twitter, @davidharsanyi.

DAVID HARSANYI

VISIT ON TWITTER@DAVIDHARSANYI

MORE ARTICLES

Congressman wants to ban sale of enhanced body armor to civilians


 

http://www.guns.com/2014/08/08/congressman-wants-to-ban-sale-of-enhanced-body-armor-to-civilians/

8/08/14

DHSpolice_state

 

Rep. Mike Honda, (D-CA), has submitted a bill to the U.S. House that would prohibit the sale, use or possession of what he terms military-grade body armor.

Rep. Mike Honda, (D-CA), wants to ban the sale of certain kinds of body armor to civilians. (Photo: LA Times)

Rep. Mike Honda, (D-CA), wants to ban the sale of certain kinds of body armor to civilians. (Photo: LA Times

Honda reasons that this measure would aid law enforcement in taking out an active shooter, since the active shooter wouldn’t be able to obtain body armor.

“There is no reason this type of armor, which is designed for warfare, should be available in our communities except for those who need it, like law enforcement,” Honda said in a statement last week. “There’s nothing more dangerous than what a well-armored, unstoppable active shooter can do. This bill is common-sense and long overdue.”

Honda’s bill, H.R. 5344, The Responsible Body Armor Possession Act, would place a ban on what it terms ‘enhanced body armor.’ This type of armor as referenced in the bill’s language would include any wearable armor including helmets or shields that offer a ballistic protection of Type III or above as determined using National Institute of Justice Standard–0101.06. The only exceptions to the prohibition would be for law enforcement, military and government agencies.

Type III and higher body armor is commonly available both new and used Obey MAthroughout the country. Recently companies such as Bullet Blocker have even made efforts to produce school safety equipment such as bullet proof backpacks, whiteboards and children’s-sized nylon jackets up to NIJ Type III ratings aimed to protect youngsters from active shooters.

Honda advised in a press conference Wednesday that the reason for the bill was a shooting on July 22 in Riverside County, where a man wearing body armor and armed with an assault rifle shot and killed two sheriff’s deputies and wounded another.

However, this statement is not entirely correct as the shooting in question resulted in the deaths of two civilians, not law enforcement officers, and the injury of a deputy by fragments. Reports of the now-dead suspected shooter wearing body armor are likewise anecdotal and not reflected in the released information by the Riverside County Sheriff.

National gun control groups are coming out to support Honda’s initiative.

In a statement by the Violence Policy Center posted Wednesday, the group applauded the lawmaker’s measure, saying, “The gun industry has increasingly featured body armor in firearm company marketing materials, which display men wearing body armor and helmets while carrying military-style assault rifles.”camo

In the VPC’s statement, the group likewise list Adam Lanza and John Holmes, the mass killers linked to the shootings in Newtown and Aurora respectively as being protected during their sprees by body armor. However, like Honda’s statement, this one is flawed as well.

While in both cases the alleged shooters were described by media as being armored, Lanza was later confirmed to be wearing a ‘fishing vest‘  while Holmes was equipped with a tactical load bearing vest, neither of which offered ballistic protection.

Even if Honda’s bill does not make it into law, it is already against the law for criminals to add body armor to their toolkit. Since 2002, it has been illegal under federal law for convicted felons to possess body armor of any sort. This has been prosecuted in U.S. courts even in states that do not criminalize the possession of body armor.

Honda’s bill is currently referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and has three co-sponsors.

Article collective closing

Tag Cloud