Good evening, Dave: You earlier wrote that you were going to "see if I [you, Dave] can make the point for you [me, Lowell]." You then proceeded to talk about writing letters to Congress demanding that it become illegal to write zombie stories.
I think you missed my point. Rather than presume that the educators are crazy or irrational, try something even scarier on for size: they (educators and police) are perfectly sane and rational. In other words, they really are afraid of this relatively harmless kid--and for good reason. Where does that logic take you? Well, it means that if this kid decides he really wants to harm someone at the school, then he can do so with near impunity. That is why the draconian steps are "necessary" the moment some kid does, says, draws, or writes something that could be construed as indicating any kind of desire to harm anyone. If you follow that logic, then it means that the school administrators/teachers/staff and (police and prosecutors) are all acutely aware that they are completely helpless should ANYONE have some desire to harm the children (or any adults) in the school. I don't care what your politics are: it's unacceptable that children should be so completely unprotected from a known danger (namely, violence). One way or another, schools need to be made safer so that the sane, rational reaction to future such incidents can be something closer to the sort of "reasonable" response we would take to, say, a Steven King. When that happens, then we will know that the adults in the school believe that they are protected from whatever anyone might do and thus can conclude that the children are also safe. Lowell C. Savage It's the freedom, stupid! Gun control: tyrants tool, fools folly. Dave Laird wrote: > Good evening, Lowell... > > Lowell C. Savage wrote: > > > Sorry for the double-send. > > That's not a problem. With my head bound up in constriction bands to help > fight off sinusitis inflammation, I was already seeing double of > everything anyway, so it fit right in. 8-) > > > Good evening, Dave. > > > > I don't think I understand the point you were trying to make for me. > Was > > your response supposed to be satire? If so, of what? > > Sort of. I've read and re-read the news about the Zombie story and the kid > ostensibly responsible. From all I've read, somehow I continue to draw the > same conclusion, that the only crime he is actually charged with is > politically-incorrect thinking. > > Did he physically threaten anyone in any way? Not as far as I can tell. > > Did he conspire in some way to deprive anyone of their right to speech? > Not as far as I can tell. > > Did he urge anyone else to write stories about Zombies attacking anyone > else other than in the fantasy of his story? No, not as far as I can tell. > > Failing to isolate a victim, an act of violence or any other crime against > society, the only crime I seem to be able to figure out is that the kid > had a prodigious imagination, and had thought politically-incorrect > thoughts. This, in Conster's thoughts, speaks volumes about the strange > thought pathways of educators and local law enforcement officials which, > in my opinion, is NOT a pretty picture at all. Are they not loonier than > the kid's story? > > Where I turned to pseudo-satire, was in assuming that this strange mindset > of lawmakers and educators is probably much more widely-accepted than we > might first think. One good way to detect whether that presumption, on my > part, is true is to write the members of Congress demanding that they > outlaw stories about Zombies entirely. Put together a coalition of > outraged citizenry demanding an end to "terrorist writings" by young > writers with jumbled minds. > > Then in a moment of chilly awareness, I suddenly realized that the > Congress-critters might actually boost such a proposal into a House Bill > and forward it to The Shrub for quick ratification without once looking > closely at the actual events that have taken place. > > Now, if such a bill were created, and God forbid, it ever was passed to > Bush for signing into law, where will laws against politically-incorrect > thinking ever end? > > Today it is the Zombies that are illegal. Tomorrow writing fanciful tales > about our own government will be outlawed. Once you start the erosion, > lending it authenticity through the legal process, allowing this entire > macabre reign of events to happen without resistance, you open the door > even wider to other acts of terrorism against freedom of thought, do you > not? > > I think I hear George Orwell and Rod Serling cawing like crows from the > ground beneath our feet, laughing themselves silly at our expense. In > fact, I cannot imagine a single writer of merit who wouldn't be shaking > their head at this mockery of law and the assault against common sense > taking place. > > Dave > -- > Dave Laird ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > The Used Kharma Lot > Web Page: http://www.kharma.net updated 11/24/2004 > Usenet news server : news://news.kharma.net > > Fortune Random Thought For the Minute > A countryman between two lawyers is like a fish between two cats. > -- Ben Franklin > _______________________________________________ > Libnw mailing list > [email protected] > List info and subscriber options: > http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw > Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [email protected] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
