Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SDSUfan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Team
    San Diego State
  • Gender
  • Location
  1. Instead of arming teachers what about

    So that's roughly 4/school for a school with a 2K population. Here's how I would start: Eliminate all girls - 1 in 225 Eliminate all males participating on the athletics teams Eliminate all AP students Eliminate all students participating in a club or group. Once you've done that, eliminate all kids who have an intact nuclear family Eliminate any kid with a sibling in the same school. You're now down to a population that is manageable cohort that staff can focus on. A next level interview can eliminate probably 95% + of the at risk population. A quick observational visit to the lunch room will give you a further clues. None of this is foolproof but it's a start.
  2. Instead of arming teachers what about

    Chuck Norris thinks you're a pussy
  3. Instead of arming teachers what about

    There are ways to determine that. Asking, for a start. A call home to parents is another. Not foolproof but you don't know unless you ask. Keep in mind often the motivation for this stuff is attention seeking. I'm having a hard time getting around how many people knew this kid was troubled and how many didn't do anything.
  4. Instead of arming teachers what about

    The kids interact with an adult in small groups at least 6 or 7 adults per day.
  5. Instead of arming teachers what about

    With rare exception, shooters come from the population of kids currently in school. It seems to me an easier task for school staff to determine who the high risk kids are and design some sort of process or program that involves frequent contact, engagement and dialog with them. Help them find ways to fit in or at the very least let them know someone cares. Fellow students can help too. Might not always ID the right kids but with enough personal interaction you have a basis for making that determination. Not everything has to be shoot em up.
  6. Trump Cons Attack Olympic Athletes On Twitter

    You're welcome. Of course here in America, you're free to form your own opinions. Given your demonstrated reasoning abilities however, you might be better served by following my lead. As to the athletes, phuck them.
  7. Trump Cons Attack Olympic Athletes On Twitter

    Like I said, they're free to be boorish Anti-Ameican dickheads. I'm free to tell them to consume a large bag of dicks.
  8. Trump Cons Attack Olympic Athletes On Twitter

    Seriously, did your mother drop you on your head? What part of " everybody gets to say whatever the phuck they want", do you not understand? That includes criticism and telling idiot athletes to STFU, which BTW is probably sound career advice IF you are an athlete that plans to trade on your medal for corporate endorsement work going forward. But if you're a speed skater and your goal is to join Kap in the unemployment line, or become next months Hate Mascot on MSNBC, feel free to run your mouth.
  9. Trump Cons Attack Olympic Athletes On Twitter

    Nope. Once again you idiot, YOU get to say something, I get to disagree. I'd do pictograms but I'm a terrible artist.
  10. Trump Cons Attack Olympic Athletes On Twitter

    No. I don't. In point of fact I think it's s damn good idea. What makes you think its a good idea for them to go to a foreign country and insult the president WHEN the point of the Olympics is to set politics aside and and play games. Phuck them.
  11. Trump Cons Attack Olympic Athletes On Twitter

    Athletes can have their opinions and those that think said opinions are wrong can express their disagreement. See how that works? Say stupid shit, win stupid prizes.
  12. Has the Eunuch in Chief met his match?

    48 hours from now nobody will be talking about Parkland and Hate Trump Posse will be on to the next "outrage". Ritalin is a helluva drug.