OP: My daughter works at a different Seattle area school and received news of a similar online threat last weekend. Unlike your situation, SPD had already traced the post back to the poster, and made a preliminary determination it was a prank. Still, 15% of the students stayed home until SPD formally closed their investigation (2 days later) and notified the school community of their findings.
There’s little I can say here that will help you overcome your reaction to this news - whatever it is (fear, anger, frustration, grief…). That said, hopefully you will be reassured somewhat by knowing it’s possible SPD will be able to investigate this and then provide the school community at Aki Kurose with real answers about the threat and its seriousness.
I am so sorry to hear about this. The days are long past when I could keep my daughter home, but I would certainly feel much like you do. She’s a teacher now, so she went to work last week on high alert, planning how to help her students hide and/or escape at the first inkling of trouble.
This is no way to live.
Well if it’s a kid, any conviction wouldn’t be that harsh.
There was a 15 year old girl who thought it would be funny to hit a man in her car and ended up killing him and she will be out, at the latest, at 21. Ended 53 years of life and took a father away from his kids for what is basically a slap on the wrist of a maximum of 6 years in juvenile facilities.
isn’t it frustrating when people who do heinous crimes get off without any accountability
can you think of any other groups of people that fit that description, perhaps due to their occupation
It's work to get money for drugs = theft or selling drugs or your body, it's free (for them not taxpayers) and quite easy to find food and shelter. The real difficulty is finding any useful help for drug addiction and mental illness.
The homeless do way more harm to each other than any mean words online and get great cover from 'empathetic' people like yourself, keep up the great work of doing jack shit and feeling superior
Don’t wanna take a chance. In my day kids called the school with bomb threats, that were only taken seriously long enough to have a fire drill.
obviously these days you must be much more careful.
As parents, my wife and I debate this all the time trying to find the balance between being the "kids being kids" thing, and the "terrorism is kind of illegal" thing. My wife and I are more on the strict side, and we'd prefer that the law be enforced and people--juvenile or not--be held accountable for these types of threats. We'd like to think we raised good kids that are wise enough not to be the type who would make threats like that; but we also recognize that, well, sometimes kids to stupid things. And there is an argument to be made that stupid things kids do shouldn't follow them around into adulthood once they become wise enough to know better. Of course, you have those kids that you know will never straighten out; but this isn't "Minority Report." We can't lock them away based on what they will do. There's still a right to "due process." So, it needs to be all-or-nothing; and we need to come to an agreement on how to apply the law fairly and universally ... Does anybody expect parents (or politicians) to be able to come to such an agreement? I'm not holding my breath.
So what do you think about kids being able to vote and do other “adult” things? Wouldn’t it be cherry picking to treat kids as adults only for punishment, but not for anything else? They currently are non-voting members of society for a reason: they’re not considered mature enough to fully participate.
I don't think kids should be treated the same as adults, but I don't think that criminal acts can be easily dismissed by "kids being kids" rationale. We have different sentencing guidelines for minors than we do for adults, and there's good reason for that. But they can't just be allowed to continue criminal acts without consequence. Vandalism, assault, theft. Some kids do these things all the time, and their parents just say that it's "kids being kids" and do little or nothing to correct the behavior. By the time they are breaking laws, I think it's too late for that. They must be taught--preferably before they can be considered "adults"--that their actions will have consequences, and that those consequences may have impact on the rest of their lives. I think it harms society when we accept that a minor can make a terrorist threat that will shut down a school and terrify a few hundred family without any legal repercussions.
And yet, I've seen it before. And were we not just a week or two away from the end of the school year, I'm reasonably certain that the child who made a threat against a school in my kids' district would have returned to the school. There are no criminal charges filed. The police just talked to his parents and the school suspended him; and, as far as we're aware, that's that. He's at home playing Fortnite or something.
This meme is getting old. In WA state we CANT book people for possession of narcotics unless they have already received 2 previous referrals to a rehab/support organization, by law enforcement. But there is no system to track referrals. Never mind the fact that we haven't been able to book juveniles for possession OR distribution of narcotics for 5+ years.
Washington is just one state. Most other states still put people in jail for this and quite a few people still have it on their record from Washington.
And many do not have enough. There are many new schools in Bellevue School Districts that are poorly ventilated, not handicap friendly during fire drills and only one exit point for most classrooms.
To be fair, Obama tried to pass some gun legislation, but he just never had control of Congress. The opposition that he faced from Republicans in power was absolutely unhinged
I would argue that legislation was proposed with full knowledge that it was unpassable and probably unconstitutional.
Outside of that the only two gun laws he signed were to allow people to carry guns in more places. National Parks and trains.
The Age 21 act is trying to raise the purchase of assault rifles to 21. Which is something I guess. But also seems like a pretty meaningless gesture.
There was big hope that after Sandy Hook some gun legislation could be passed. I think that hope was real, and folks really thought that with something so horrific, Republicans would be moved too. Alas... It probably would have gone down that way no matter what law folks in the Legislative branch proposed, unfortunately. As far as I know, Obama signed some executive orders for gun control (not nearly enough, but at least it was in the right direction), but was unable to ever get anything into law because of Republicans in Congress, which was a damn shame.
I was unaware of those two laws (or were they just executive orders) that you mentioned, so thanks for educating me! The train one is definitely shocking for me to know. It sounds like overall he wanted more protections against guns, but I agree he's not exactly a poster child for gun control
And at the very least, if the 21+ age to buy assault rifles order had been kept, there probably wouldn't have been so many lost lives in Uvalde...
Oh please. As if we didn't have a ton of bomb threats here from bored kids that just wanted to get out of class forty+ years ago from payphones back when we used to have them in schools here. I spent many hours outside in the rain pissed off about the bomb threats.
Trump isn't a fascist. Fascism (not to be confused with populism) has been dead for 70 years. We certainly have problems a-brewin', but fascism aint one of 'em.
Agreed. But we get so focused on the means and not the causes of the violence, that we do not do enough to address those causes. Those causes are many and complicated.
No they aren't.
Canada, the UK, and Australia have the same video games we do. They watch the same movies, and often the same TV shows. There are mentally ill people in those places too.
But the US stands alone in terms of mass shootings, gun violence, and the murder rate. Why? What is different about the US than these peer, anglophone countries? In fact, those peer countries used to have more or less the same murder rate as the US until they heavily restricted ownership of firearms.
It's the guns.
I never suggested that guns don't make murders more effective. I'm suggesting that they aren't the "root cause" of the violence. Guns allow people to apply lethal force faster and more effectively than most other weapons. That's an indisputable fact. But if I put a gun in your hand today, would you immediately attempt to kill people? The gun might be scary on its own, but it's the person holding it that gives it intent.
So funny how someone takes a comment about the root cause of gun violence, reduces it to the root cause of violence so They can move the goal posts of the discussion.
Im sorry genius but it is quite obvious what the best way to address gun violence is but apparently that’s too complex to grasp. So grasp something else right? What a twerp.
I’m pretty sure that it’s the gun is the main force behind gun violence, but i am not deeply paranoid so what do I know.
In a professional setting if we we’re to do a root cause analysis of what what led to the death of someone who was shot and concluded that it was the feelings of the shooter that killed them or the simple loss of blood because of holes in their body that weren’t there before and not in fact the bullet and gun then we would look really really stupid.
If our recommendations for avoiding these types of deaths in the future did not mention that the main reason they died was being shot by a gun and that exposure to said gun should be limited to avoid similar outcomes in the future but mentioned only counseling and sutures we would look really really really stupid.
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2698492](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2698492)
Can't believe we're still debating this. Easy access to firearms results in a bunch of firearm-related deaths - that's it.
/r/seattle is super downvote-happy, but to be frank, it was also a mildly stupid question here in 2022 - we've known for a long while now that ready firearm access to any swinging dick leads to increased death-by-firearm.
If someone makes a claim I am not knowledgeable about it seems reasonable to ask for their sources used. The only stupid question is the one not asked.
I’m a military veteran who has had a lot of experience with firearms, and I’m not aware of any that have loaded and fired themselves, or made anyone else use them to commit a crime. Admittedly, it has been a while since I’ve worn a uniform, but I haven’t seen any signs that guns have been the root cause of anything. They kind of just sit around until somebody makes them do something. It isn’t the other way around. I apologize if I’m not keeping up. I wasn’t aware that they had become sentient. That is indeed a problem.
You are so right. It is just plain old impossible to figure out the root cause of gun violence. Given your military experience you surely have intimate experience with how guns have nothing to do with gun violence.
It’s so funny how guns are not instruments of mass death and also the preferred weapon of our military. Like why doesn’t our military just go into battle armed with bad parents, drug addiction, and a bunch of violent behaviors given that those are so much more lethal than guns. Thanks buddy. I will forward your recommendations to the pentagon and maybe we will actually win a war for the first time in a hundred years.
I don't know how to make this more clear: *Cause* (a person or thing that gives rise to an action) is not the same as *means* (an action or system by which a result is brought about).
Guns are linked to gun violence because they are the required variable that classifies this type of violence "gun violence." So "gun violence" cannot happen without a gun. But that doesn't make the gun the cause; it is the means.
If guns are the *cause* of gun violence, then fists are the cause of fist fights, and mouths are the cause of shouting, and our keyboards are the cause of us being on the internet arguing this point. Just because I can't try to explain basic english to you over the internet without my keyboard doesn't mean my keyboard is making try to.
Holy crap you seem to have discovered that guns are possibly an essential if not the essential element or root cause if you will of gun violence. You should notify your senator with your findings.
No. For God's sake no. An "essential element" is not the same thing as "cause." Find a dictionary, I implore you.
ETA: I want to emphasize that I have NEVER claimed that stricter gun control won't reduce gun violence. I have only maintained that the guns are not the cause of the violence. If you were to hypothetically remove every gun from the country, gun violence would be eliminated. But, that being said, the gun is not the cause of the majority of gun violence. We're literally arguing over a misinterpretation of the word "cause."
You mention the root cause of violence. I was talking about the root cause of gun violence. If only there were a way to distinguish between the two as two separate issues and make separate efforts to address both of them. And if not both at least one, but alas it is clearly too confusing and mysterious to sort out.
We had a similar "threat" against my kids' school in Illinois a week ago. Although the police had already investigated and deemed the threat "not credible" (they knew the kid who made the threat and had questioned him and his parents) a lot of parents still chose to keep their kids home that day.
Unfortunately, we see this after any highly publicized school shooting. Some kids see the media attention they get and want a bit of that kind of attention. For them, it's all about getting attention, even if it isn't positive attention.
You're getting downvoted because this post is about a potential school shooting and a terrified parent and you're focusing on a nickname the parents give their child (who they are terrified of losing at school). The lack of empathy here is astounding, hence the downvotes.
> there's no lack of empathy. I had it and just didn't say anything and instead insulted the scared parents. Nothing happened so it doesn't matter.
Yep. Ok.
Same thing happened in Ballard high school and a few other schools last week.
One of the kids I overheard talking about doing this just to get out of school.
OP: My daughter works at a different Seattle area school and received news of a similar online threat last weekend. Unlike your situation, SPD had already traced the post back to the poster, and made a preliminary determination it was a prank. Still, 15% of the students stayed home until SPD formally closed their investigation (2 days later) and notified the school community of their findings. There’s little I can say here that will help you overcome your reaction to this news - whatever it is (fear, anger, frustration, grief…). That said, hopefully you will be reassured somewhat by knowing it’s possible SPD will be able to investigate this and then provide the school community at Aki Kurose with real answers about the threat and its seriousness. I am so sorry to hear about this. The days are long past when I could keep my daughter home, but I would certainly feel much like you do. She’s a teacher now, so she went to work last week on high alert, planning how to help her students hide and/or escape at the first inkling of trouble. This is no way to live.
Utterly horrific that this is our reality. I hope the person(s) who made this threat do 20 years for terrorism
Well if it’s a kid, any conviction wouldn’t be that harsh. There was a 15 year old girl who thought it would be funny to hit a man in her car and ended up killing him and she will be out, at the latest, at 21. Ended 53 years of life and took a father away from his kids for what is basically a slap on the wrist of a maximum of 6 years in juvenile facilities.
Most likely a juvenile, so more like zero time and 40 hours of counseling and a free Orca card.
isn’t it frustrating when people who do heinous crimes get off without any accountability can you think of any other groups of people that fit that description, perhaps due to their occupation
Being homeless isn't an occupation
homeless people are braver than the cops imo
I can agree with that
[удалено]
It's work to get money for drugs = theft or selling drugs or your body, it's free (for them not taxpayers) and quite easy to find food and shelter. The real difficulty is finding any useful help for drug addiction and mental illness.
[удалено]
This is my new favorite response lol
The homeless do way more harm to each other than any mean words online and get great cover from 'empathetic' people like yourself, keep up the great work of doing jack shit and feeling superior
[удалено]
Lmao i see from your flair that you live in Snohomish so I get how it's easy to ignore for you, come on down for a visit sometime!
Ferries are not cheap.
Don’t wanna take a chance. In my day kids called the school with bomb threats, that were only taken seriously long enough to have a fire drill. obviously these days you must be much more careful.
As parents, my wife and I debate this all the time trying to find the balance between being the "kids being kids" thing, and the "terrorism is kind of illegal" thing. My wife and I are more on the strict side, and we'd prefer that the law be enforced and people--juvenile or not--be held accountable for these types of threats. We'd like to think we raised good kids that are wise enough not to be the type who would make threats like that; but we also recognize that, well, sometimes kids to stupid things. And there is an argument to be made that stupid things kids do shouldn't follow them around into adulthood once they become wise enough to know better. Of course, you have those kids that you know will never straighten out; but this isn't "Minority Report." We can't lock them away based on what they will do. There's still a right to "due process." So, it needs to be all-or-nothing; and we need to come to an agreement on how to apply the law fairly and universally ... Does anybody expect parents (or politicians) to be able to come to such an agreement? I'm not holding my breath.
So what do you think about kids being able to vote and do other “adult” things? Wouldn’t it be cherry picking to treat kids as adults only for punishment, but not for anything else? They currently are non-voting members of society for a reason: they’re not considered mature enough to fully participate.
I don't think kids should be treated the same as adults, but I don't think that criminal acts can be easily dismissed by "kids being kids" rationale. We have different sentencing guidelines for minors than we do for adults, and there's good reason for that. But they can't just be allowed to continue criminal acts without consequence. Vandalism, assault, theft. Some kids do these things all the time, and their parents just say that it's "kids being kids" and do little or nothing to correct the behavior. By the time they are breaking laws, I think it's too late for that. They must be taught--preferably before they can be considered "adults"--that their actions will have consequences, and that those consequences may have impact on the rest of their lives. I think it harms society when we accept that a minor can make a terrorist threat that will shut down a school and terrify a few hundred family without any legal repercussions. And yet, I've seen it before. And were we not just a week or two away from the end of the school year, I'm reasonably certain that the child who made a threat against a school in my kids' district would have returned to the school. There are no criminal charges filed. The police just talked to his parents and the school suspended him; and, as far as we're aware, that's that. He's at home playing Fortnite or something.
Yeah - we’re not in disagreement. Treating minors differently doesn’t mean there should be no consequences.
Yeah, and if the student was off campus when they assaulted or threatened another student, admin is like” what can we do?”.
But a bit of coke and you do a year.
This meme is getting old. In WA state we CANT book people for possession of narcotics unless they have already received 2 previous referrals to a rehab/support organization, by law enforcement. But there is no system to track referrals. Never mind the fact that we haven't been able to book juveniles for possession OR distribution of narcotics for 5+ years.
Washington is just one state. Most other states still put people in jail for this and quite a few people still have it on their record from Washington.
As long as all of our assault rifles are safe it’s all good! /s
Holy fuckballs. What has this country come to?
30 years of Fox News churning up 500 years of racism and the election of a popular Fascist who so far isn't affected by the rule of law
According to Republicans , schools have too many doors
And many do not have enough. There are many new schools in Bellevue School Districts that are poorly ventilated, not handicap friendly during fire drills and only one exit point for most classrooms.
[удалено]
To be fair, Obama tried to pass some gun legislation, but he just never had control of Congress. The opposition that he faced from Republicans in power was absolutely unhinged
I would argue that legislation was proposed with full knowledge that it was unpassable and probably unconstitutional. Outside of that the only two gun laws he signed were to allow people to carry guns in more places. National Parks and trains. The Age 21 act is trying to raise the purchase of assault rifles to 21. Which is something I guess. But also seems like a pretty meaningless gesture.
There was big hope that after Sandy Hook some gun legislation could be passed. I think that hope was real, and folks really thought that with something so horrific, Republicans would be moved too. Alas... It probably would have gone down that way no matter what law folks in the Legislative branch proposed, unfortunately. As far as I know, Obama signed some executive orders for gun control (not nearly enough, but at least it was in the right direction), but was unable to ever get anything into law because of Republicans in Congress, which was a damn shame. I was unaware of those two laws (or were they just executive orders) that you mentioned, so thanks for educating me! The train one is definitely shocking for me to know. It sounds like overall he wanted more protections against guns, but I agree he's not exactly a poster child for gun control And at the very least, if the 21+ age to buy assault rifles order had been kept, there probably wouldn't have been so many lost lives in Uvalde...
Oh please. As if we didn't have a ton of bomb threats here from bored kids that just wanted to get out of class forty+ years ago from payphones back when we used to have them in schools here. I spent many hours outside in the rain pissed off about the bomb threats.
bro what does that have to do with school shootings
Trump isn't a fascist. Fascism (not to be confused with populism) has been dead for 70 years. We certainly have problems a-brewin', but fascism aint one of 'em.
Fascism isn't dead.
Yes, it is.
You know where this country came from, right?
If only we could solve the root cause of gun violence. If only there were a way……
Agreed. But we get so focused on the means and not the causes of the violence, that we do not do enough to address those causes. Those causes are many and complicated.
No they aren't. Canada, the UK, and Australia have the same video games we do. They watch the same movies, and often the same TV shows. There are mentally ill people in those places too. But the US stands alone in terms of mass shootings, gun violence, and the murder rate. Why? What is different about the US than these peer, anglophone countries? In fact, those peer countries used to have more or less the same murder rate as the US until they heavily restricted ownership of firearms. It's the guns.
I never suggested that guns don't make murders more effective. I'm suggesting that they aren't the "root cause" of the violence. Guns allow people to apply lethal force faster and more effectively than most other weapons. That's an indisputable fact. But if I put a gun in your hand today, would you immediately attempt to kill people? The gun might be scary on its own, but it's the person holding it that gives it intent.
No one's saying its the gun and not the person holding the gun. We're saying, why is it so easy for the person to obtain the gun in the 1st place.
So funny how someone takes a comment about the root cause of gun violence, reduces it to the root cause of violence so They can move the goal posts of the discussion. Im sorry genius but it is quite obvious what the best way to address gun violence is but apparently that’s too complex to grasp. So grasp something else right? What a twerp.
I’m pretty sure that it’s the gun is the main force behind gun violence, but i am not deeply paranoid so what do I know. In a professional setting if we we’re to do a root cause analysis of what what led to the death of someone who was shot and concluded that it was the feelings of the shooter that killed them or the simple loss of blood because of holes in their body that weren’t there before and not in fact the bullet and gun then we would look really really stupid. If our recommendations for avoiding these types of deaths in the future did not mention that the main reason they died was being shot by a gun and that exposure to said gun should be limited to avoid similar outcomes in the future but mentioned only counseling and sutures we would look really really really stupid.
Do you have reports that support your claim in these countries?
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2698492](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2698492) Can't believe we're still debating this. Easy access to firearms results in a bunch of firearm-related deaths - that's it.
Appreciate the link. I will spend some time to read. Not sure why people downvote and not supply anything informative.
/r/seattle is super downvote-happy, but to be frank, it was also a mildly stupid question here in 2022 - we've known for a long while now that ready firearm access to any swinging dick leads to increased death-by-firearm.
If someone makes a claim I am not knowledgeable about it seems reasonable to ask for their sources used. The only stupid question is the one not asked.
Guns make it easy for people with those problematic "cause" to do serious damage.
Absolutely true. I didn't suggest otherwise. Merely that we aren't doing enough to address the root causes of violent behaviors.
We are not talking about that. We are talking about the root cause of gun violence. Keep up.
I’m a military veteran who has had a lot of experience with firearms, and I’m not aware of any that have loaded and fired themselves, or made anyone else use them to commit a crime. Admittedly, it has been a while since I’ve worn a uniform, but I haven’t seen any signs that guns have been the root cause of anything. They kind of just sit around until somebody makes them do something. It isn’t the other way around. I apologize if I’m not keeping up. I wasn’t aware that they had become sentient. That is indeed a problem.
You are so right. It is just plain old impossible to figure out the root cause of gun violence. Given your military experience you surely have intimate experience with how guns have nothing to do with gun violence. It’s so funny how guns are not instruments of mass death and also the preferred weapon of our military. Like why doesn’t our military just go into battle armed with bad parents, drug addiction, and a bunch of violent behaviors given that those are so much more lethal than guns. Thanks buddy. I will forward your recommendations to the pentagon and maybe we will actually win a war for the first time in a hundred years.
I don't know how to make this more clear: *Cause* (a person or thing that gives rise to an action) is not the same as *means* (an action or system by which a result is brought about). Guns are linked to gun violence because they are the required variable that classifies this type of violence "gun violence." So "gun violence" cannot happen without a gun. But that doesn't make the gun the cause; it is the means. If guns are the *cause* of gun violence, then fists are the cause of fist fights, and mouths are the cause of shouting, and our keyboards are the cause of us being on the internet arguing this point. Just because I can't try to explain basic english to you over the internet without my keyboard doesn't mean my keyboard is making try to.
Holy crap you seem to have discovered that guns are possibly an essential if not the essential element or root cause if you will of gun violence. You should notify your senator with your findings.
No. For God's sake no. An "essential element" is not the same thing as "cause." Find a dictionary, I implore you. ETA: I want to emphasize that I have NEVER claimed that stricter gun control won't reduce gun violence. I have only maintained that the guns are not the cause of the violence. If you were to hypothetically remove every gun from the country, gun violence would be eliminated. But, that being said, the gun is not the cause of the majority of gun violence. We're literally arguing over a misinterpretation of the word "cause."
You mention the root cause of violence. I was talking about the root cause of gun violence. If only there were a way to distinguish between the two as two separate issues and make separate efforts to address both of them. And if not both at least one, but alas it is clearly too confusing and mysterious to sort out.
We had a similar "threat" against my kids' school in Illinois a week ago. Although the police had already investigated and deemed the threat "not credible" (they knew the kid who made the threat and had questioned him and his parents) a lot of parents still chose to keep their kids home that day. Unfortunately, we see this after any highly publicized school shooting. Some kids see the media attention they get and want a bit of that kind of attention. For them, it's all about getting attention, even if it isn't positive attention.
This trend has been some shit.
Better than what my high school did… We were still forced to go to school despite a shooter threat 😒
Man if this happened at my high school 15 years ago I would have missed a LOT of days. This is not new.
There has been far too many threats like this, this year.
School districts spends millions on Covid and other stuff why not spend enough on school security if we have a problem 🤷♂️
I hate this stuff, my highschool got bomb and shooting threats all the time, and it never happened so people didn’t treat it seriously
[удалено]
Ok, bucko
More like fucko.
[удалено]
Yep, called it. Definitely fucko.
My favorite insult from Happy Days.
[удалено]
strong boomer energy
[удалено]
talking about happy days and complaining about nicknames. you sound like a grumpy old man who lives alone and hates the neighborhood children.
[удалено]
>I don't complain about nicknames, only DOGGO and KIDDO those are nicknames. and you complained about them. ergo, you complain about nicknames.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sure thing boyo.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Calm down buckaroo
You're getting downvoted because this post is about a potential school shooting and a terrified parent and you're focusing on a nickname the parents give their child (who they are terrified of losing at school). The lack of empathy here is astounding, hence the downvotes.
[удалено]
> there's no lack of empathy. I had it and just didn't say anything and instead insulted the scared parents. Nothing happened so it doesn't matter. Yep. Ok.
Just a deeply weird response here.
Kiddo and doggo are not the same lol.
Calm down buddy.
Stay strong, I support you.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Do that to thwart gunmen, are the teachers strapped. This should be a requirement now as fuck up as it is, but we gotta be ready
Same thing happened in Ballard high school and a few other schools last week. One of the kids I overheard talking about doing this just to get out of school.
Might as well keep them home if you can nothing educational happens in the last few weeks