Hopefully all Canadian schools close on April 20 to show solidarity for a gun-free culture.
I know education is provincial jurisdiction but it would be nice to have some federal government leadership on this particular issue to show support for our American cousins.
Are the schools officially closing for the day?
Or are some students planning to not attend?
It's basically the difference between a labour "lockout" and a strike.
Anyway, I took a screenshot of the thread, as started, so please don't try to change the title to "So are Canadian students going to..."
Why are the marchs taking place on 20 April?
Why are the marchs taking place on 20 April?
That's the 19th anniversary of the Columbine High School massacare.
Why are the marchs taking place on 20 April?That's the 19th anniversary of the Columbine High School massacare.
Thanks. I guess the makes sense.
I would think there would be more "protests" before then.
Who is supposed to be influenced by these proposed Canadian shutdowns? Closing down schools across the USA might send the American government(which actually writes American gun laws) into a degree of panic. I'm not sure why they would care if Canadian schools shut down.
This is ridiculous. Of all the diversionary news-cycle crapola. There are many good causes for which to mobilize Canadian students. This doesn't even make the long list.
What’s Missing From the Gun Debate
It’s simple: Science.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/18/whats-missing-from-th...
Students plan to walk out of schools to protest gun laws
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/02/17/students-teachers-plannin...
NorthReport:
Unless the plan for a Canadian walkout gains momentum, you should put news about the American protests on some thread dedicated to American politics.
How are Americans our cousins, unless we actually have some cousins there? I certainly support the students, but we are NOT a part of the US.
I'm completely indifferent. If the massacre of children at the hands of a young lunatic didn't change American gun policy,why the hell will this?
Remember. Sandy Hook was a false flag operation and everyone involved was an actor -- says a large portion of Americans. It's a liberal hoax. Goddamned Obama and Hilary planned the whole thing. Just like this and the shooting in Vegas etc..etc..To take away your guns..blah blah blah.
Too much $$$ funneling through Washington and too many sitting politicians in bed with the NRA.
As they say in 'Goodfellas' fuhgetaboutit.
Personally,I've stopped caring. Americans are gun nuts unlike any other country that's not a war zone or a Third World country. Nothing is ever going to change. And in the words of the Repugnicans 'It's too soon to talk about guns' as it always is.
How are Americans our cousins, unless we actually have some cousins there? I certainly support the students, but we are NOT a part of the US.
+1.
I'm not American (thank Christ)
This is ridiculous. Of all the diversionary news-cycle crapola. There are many good causes for which to mobilize Canadian students. This doesn't even make the long list.
Agree very much with this. Guns are America's problem and it will remain that way until they learn to help themselves.
Also, not wishing to interfere with our American cousins' momentary mass movement, but I find it tragicomic that someone is calling for a school shutdown protest TWO MONTHS FROM NOW. I guess that's to highlight the urgency of the matter.
What a sad, diversionary farce. Someday young people in the U.S. will reawaken the revolutionary spirit of the 1960s and 70s, and actually fight for something. But not today, not now, not any time soon. I hope and pray I'm wrong about that.
I guess that's to highlight the urgency of the matter.
I guess they thought it would resonate better on the anniversary of Columbine, but I agree that two months from now any momentum from this latest tragedy will either have cooled to room temperature, or have perhaps been replaced by another shooting.
Interesting (in a sense) article about school shootings, and why we shouldn't worry: School shootings are not the new normal, despite statistics that stretch the truth
Everytown for Gun Safety reported that there to have been 290 school shootings since the catastrophic Sandy Hook massacre some five years ago. However, very few of these were anything akin to Sandy Hook or Parkland. Sure, they all involved a school of some type (including technical schools and colleges) as well as a firearm, but the outcomes were hardly similar. Nearly half of the 290 were completed or attempted suicides, accidental discharges of a gun, or shootings with not a single individual being injured. Of the remainder, the vast majority involved either one fatality or none at all.
What the author never bothers to ask is whether attempted gun suicides, accidental discharges of a gun in a school, or "failed" school shootings where the shooter simply fails to hit anyone have always been a part of the school system, and/or whether we can hope that most school shooters don't know how to aim for the body mass. The shootings can't always equal Sandy Hook, but if Billy Loner discharges two magazines into the cafeteria and fails to murder anyone, that's good luck, not good management, and I don't think there's anything deceptive about including Billy and his stormtrooper aim into the stats.
I'm completely indifferent. If the massacre of children at the hands of a young lunatic didn't change American gun policy,why the hell will this?
The difference is that this time the students themselves are speaking up and putting forth their own solutions. It's one thing to claim that these are false flags or for the gun lobby to claim that liberals want to take away the second amendment. I actually wonder if a false flagger or gun nut will actually try and confront the students and tell them why they are wrong. It would be something if caught on video, but somehow I think the crazies would be too cowardly to try.
What a sad, diversionary farce. Someday young people in the U.S. will reawaken the revolutionary spirit of the 1960s and 70s, and actually fight for something. But not today, not now, not any time soon. I hope and pray I'm wrong about that.
What a callous, dismissive remark, especially from someone claiming to support young people in their struggles. School students in the US are hurting right now and they are very on edge and scared as a result of the threat of gun violence within their community. If they choose to speak up about it, why belittle them? If they feel it's an important enough issue to speak up about, who are we to tell them that they are wrong?
What a sad, diversionary farce. Someday young people in the U.S. will reawaken the revolutionary spirit of the 1960s and 70s, and actually fight for something. But not today, not now, not any time soon. I hope and pray I'm wrong about that.What a callous, dismissive remark, especially from someone claiming to support young people in their struggles. School students in the US are hurting right now and they are very on edge and scared as a result of the threat of gun violence within their community. If they choose to speak up about it, why belittle them? If they feel it's an important enough issue to speak up about, who are we to tell them that they are wrong?
They're not "wrong". You've totally misunderstood my points, which are twofold: 1) The thesis of this thread - i.e. Canadian students joining some movement for gun control in the U.S. - is pathetic and foolish. 2) There is no movement in the U.S. on this issue. That's an observation. The teary photo ops in the wake of this horror mean nothing. If we can't tell the difference between a real movement (e.g. the 2012 student strike, which was sustained, fearless, powerful, principled, and defeated not only tuition increases, but the Charest government) - and what is happening in the U.S. right now (nothing) - then we are not doing our job as progressives.
But if you prefer to see me as dismissive of the profound feelings of the youth - fill your boots. But please, when you're done, think about what I'm saying, even if you may not like the passion with which I'm doing it.
The teary photo ops in the wake of this horror mean nothing. If we can't tell the difference between a real movement (e.g. the 2012 student strike, which was sustained, fearless, powerful, principled, and defeated not only tuition increases, but the Charest government) - and what is happening in the U.S. right now (nothing) - then we are not doing our job as progressives.
Because we are the arbiters of what movements are real and which ones aren't?
The news about this particular school shooting is about a week old. Events are still unfolding in real time, and what seems different this time is that affected students are speaking out and that students across the country want to speak out on this as well. As to how this plays out, it's still early days. It may morph into something bigger, or it may fizzle out. Only time will tell.
This is ridiculous. Of all the diversionary news-cycle crapola. There are many good causes for which to mobilize Canadian students. This doesn't even make the long list.
well, you've offered up a good reality check, as usual, and it's not my call on how canadian students might support their fellow turtle-islanders.
but i sense something different about this. the anger and directness of those chants, the " calling bs " speach... i can't think of an issue with as dramatic, clear and uncomplicated link to usian youth as this; this is a social media resonant issue, and youth like their social media a little... so...
i also wondered about the long timeline till national day of action. more time to heat up, perhaps.
Unionist:
My reasons for dismissing the proposed Canadian walkout are that I don't think anyone in the USA(or indeed any other country besides Canada) cares whether Canadian kids stop going to school. Your argument seems to be "Well, there's no point in joining this walkout, since there's no movement in the USA for gun-control".
But that argument you're making would apply just as easily to the kids in the US who want to go on the school-strike. Why go on strike to protest something if there's no larger movement? Would you make that argument to them as well?
And I think there's also a useful distinction to be drawn between "no movement" and "no successful movement". If, as you claim to wish, "the revolutionary spirit of the 1960s" is to be re-awakaned in the USA, it will happen because currently unsuccessful or dormant movements are revitalized.
(And you know, quite frankly, if I was the guy who started the Boycott/Sanction Saudi Arabia thread, I'd be a bit hesitant about dismissing the effectiveness of other peoples movements.)
‘He’s my hero’: Florida student used his own body as shield to protect classmates
https://globalnews.ca/news/4033715/florida-shooting-student-anthony-borg...
Canada: Let's support these students.
Students are rising up against gun violence in the aftermath of the Florida shooting
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/19/17027250/march-protest...
It's overdue: A gun- free culture
Why the NRA Always Wins
It’s not the money. It’s the culture.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/19/why-the-nra-always-wi...
Unionist:
My reasons for dismissing the proposed Canadian walkout are that I don't think anyone in the USA(or indeed any other country besides Canada) cares whether Canadian kids stop going to school. Your argument seems to be "Well, there's no point in joining this walkout, since there's no movement in the USA for gun-control".
No, you've conflated two separate issues. Let me quote what I said above:
1) The thesis of this thread - i.e. Canadian students joining some movement for gun control in the U.S. - is pathetic and foolish. 2) There is no movement in the U.S. on this issue. That's an observation.
My argument for Canadians students not joining is point #1 - and it appears to me that we're in agreement on that in broad terms, but you can confirm or not. My point #2 was an observation. I'm an outsider, and my observation may be right or wrong. But we can discuss that too.
But that argument you're making would apply just as easily to the kids in the US who want to go on the school-strike. Why go on strike to protest something if there's no larger movement? Would you make that argument to them as well?
Absolutely not. If I were an activist in the U.S., I would would promote seizing on this moment to actually build a movement, tie it to other existing movements, etc. Even if the prospects were slim (which, as an observer, I believe they are).
And I think there's also a useful distinction to be drawn between "no movement" and "no successful movement". If, as you claim to wish, "the revolutionary spirit of the 1960s" is to be re-awakaned in the USA, it will happen because currently unsuccessful or dormant movements are revitalized.
I don't "claim to wish". I wish. But my observation stands pending evidence to the contrary. We can affect the situation in the U.S. - by combating its international interference and aggression. That's what we did in the 60s and 70s, along with people all around the world. That's what the people of Southeast Asia did, by inflicting military defeat on the U.S. That's what the people of Afghanistan are doing, and many other countries. Sadly, I believe the best prospects for change in the U.S. are from external crisis and defeat. I wish I'm wrong.
(And you know, quite frankly, if I was the guy who started the Boycott/Sanction Saudi Arabia thread, I'd be a bit hesitant about dismissing the effectiveness of other peoples movements.)
I'm proud of that thread. I was making a point, and certainly not claiming to start a movement. But the opposition to Canada's participating in and assisting foreign aggression and crimes against human rights is more real and more durable, if still "unsuccessful" (and you know, there have been some successes on that front, and there's lots of debate and discussion), than the utterly non-existent response to slaughter of youth in U.S. schools, which never survives a news cycle.
It will change. I'm very optimistic about (especially) youth and minorities in the U.S. There will be a movement against gun violence, and (more importantly IMHO) a movement to stop political donations from anyone except individuals, as we have achieved in most Canadian jurisdictions.
But it has not changed yet. Not even an iota. To pretend otherwise is to mistake headlines for front lines.
Unionist:
So, your argument is that there is no point in Canadians getting involved in the American school-strike, because school-strikes in Canada don't have any impact on the American government? If so, yes, we are in agreement.
I will say that the issue of whether or not there is an actual anti-gun movement in the USA strikes me in that case as a bit of a red herring. There are activists who are trying to do something about the issue. I agree they've been largely unsuccesful, but I'm not sure that's enough to disqualify them as a movement. Unless there's some technical definition of "movement" that requires activists to have a degree of success before they attain "movement" status.
FWIW, if someone were to suggest that Canadians should boycott products made by some company whose US offices donate large sums to the NRA and pro-gun politicians, I'd be fine with that. Though, personally, I think a lot of Canadians would just find that to be too much of a headache, unless gun violence was somehow affecting life in Canada.
There should be an international shutdown of schools on April 20 to support these american students, and hopefully Canada will show some leadership here.
School shooting survivors want to talk about gun control with Florida's lawmakers
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/us/florida-school-shooting/index.html
Gun owner destroys rifle after Florida shooting: ‘Now there’s one less’ – video
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2018/feb/20/gun-owner-destroys...
There should be an international shutdown of schools on April 20 to support these american students, and hopefully Canada will show some leadership here.
School shooting survivors want to talk about gun control with Florida's lawmakers
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/20/us/florida-school-shooting/index.html
Gun control is an American problem. Not a Canadian one. They are the ones who need to help themselves. Canada has much more important things to take of right here at home.
So no.
Unionist:
So, your argument is that there is no point in Canadians getting involved in the American school-strike, because school-strikes in Canada don't have any impact on the American government? If so, yes, we are in agreement.
Hang on one sec. Here are some arguments:
1) Gun control in the U.S. is the business of residents of the U.S., not of foreigners.
2) What "American school-strike"? Link, please. Are we talking about the April 20 thing, or the March 24 thing, or both, or neither? I note that one of them isn't even on a school day.
3) If Canadian students and their supporters wish to activate themselves in progressive causes, there is no shortage of important ones. Gun control in the U.S. doesn't make the long list.
4) If there were a movement to reduce gun violence in the U.S. (which there is not), and if we were asked for solidarity, we (progressive Canadians) should consider and respond at that time. Solidarity is important.
5) We need gun control in Canada (yeah). So let's work on that - then maybe we can lecture and help others. Someone abolished the long-gun registry - and no party whatsoever is campaigning to get it back, notwithstanding the crocodile tears of some at the time. And the registry in itself was a feeble half-hearted response to the Polytechnique massacre and the (very real) movement which that spawned. Some Saskatchewan farmer killed an Indigenous youth with a semi-automatic handgun. No public discussion about that whatsoever. Semi-automatic firearms - and handguns - should not be available for ownership by Canadians
6) I live within a 15 minute bus ride of at least three school shootings (Polytechnique, Concordia, Dawson). We have work to do in Canada. Saying "oh, but it's so much worse in the U.S." - doesn't cut it for me.
I will say that the issue of whether or not there is an actual anti-gun movement in the USA strikes me in that case as a bit of a red herring. There are activists who are trying to do something about the issue.
School shootings are a regular occurrence in the U.S. Please identify these "activists" for me - or one or two of them - and let me know what they've been doing between December 14, 2012 and the day before the Parkland massacre. I haven't heard anything, but perhaps you have.
FWIW, if someone were to suggest that Canadians should boycott products made by some company whose US offices donate large sums to the NRA and pro-gun politicians, I'd be fine with that.
Interestingly, no one has suggested that. Because there's no movement. Nor have I seen any movement in the U.S. to ban corporate and union political donations. That would be worth supporting - and if we can do it in Canada, why can't they even, like, give it a try?
If all the Canadian schools close because of a protest of a state of existence in a foreign country, that is millions of Canadian parents who will have to worry about care for their children during this time. Which could mean they would have to call in sick, or pay a ridiculous amount for private child care which would no doubt be on "surge pricing".
Canada does not have the same problem with guns as the US does. The very fact that we do have our shit together on this issue should be the very reason we do not need to protest in solidarity, especially at the inconvenience of millions of Canadian parents.
However much we can express our personal outrage at the individual acts of mass murder in the United States, this is not representative of the Canadian body corporate. We have sufficient rules governing guns, and our murder statistics are proof of it.
This is somewhat off topic, but Matt Taibbi's latest piece at Rolling Stone has a different take on the U.S. problem of mass shootings. He proposes that better gun control would be helpful, but what is really needed is a less violent national ethos.
We just don't believe in peace. We don't believe in nonviolence. The organizing principle we're going with instead involves using technological mastery to achieve order by killing exactly the right people.This is despite the fact that "precision" killing turns out to be less than precise in reality, whenever anyone bothers to check. And we don't dwell on the misses, like those millions of Indochinese men, women and children we once massacred with bombs and chemicals and evil little pellet-mines. It's always the enemy who doesn't value human life, who thinks "life is not important," as General William Westmoreland – one of the early users of the term "body count" – once said about "the Oriental."
Gun control? I'm all for it. But this madness won't stop until we stop believing that killing makes us strong, or that we can kill without guilt or consequence just by being "precise." What beliefs like that actually make us is insane and damaged, and it's no surprise that our kids, too, are beginning to become collateral damage.
[Unionist scrapes the bottom of the barrel with another of his trademark "I TOLD YOU SO"™ moments:]
There is no movement for gun control in the U.S. The best we can do to commemorate this and other similar catastrophes is to rid Canada of this menace. It will mean combatting the same powerful lobby and money here, but it can be done.
Unionist:
Would this count as "movement to reduce gun violence in America"...?
http://lawcenter.giffords.org/
What a super ridiculous idea to have the world protest America's fetish. I agree with progressive 17..We don't have that problem. Take a big city like Montreal..We get 25,MAYBE 30 murders a year and only a fraction of them are gun related. Even a huge city like Toronto,a city the size of Chicago,gets about 100 murders a year. Although in Toronto,there is a little more gun violence. But a drop in the bucket next to any major city in the US. Even a small percentage next to American suburbs.
As a Canadian,why should I care? Everytime there is a mass shooting in the States,gun sales go UP. That's their bed they made,they can lay and marinade in it.
Case in point,a gun store owner in Parkland stated. 'Why call these guns assault rifles?Trucks kill people all the time,do we call them ' assault trucks' ?'
And that is America in a nutshell. All they care about is fetuses,guns and Jesus. That's it,that's all.
They are a lost cause and only THEY can fix their cancerous problem. But the majority of Americans are not interested. So why should I care? I don't.
Anyway. What do you think is doable, Unionist? What kind of legislation do you think the Congress and Senate in the U.S. will go for?Nothing, Tommy. They are a brutal assembly of invaders, occupiers, profiteers, and assassins. They will never go for anything. Since when did that become the criterion for what people should advocate and fight for?
And to Boom Boom's question, Obama will do nothing, so why ask what he can get?
These illusions are profoundly dangerous. Only catastrophic change will modify the direction of the United States. It may be economic collapse, or war. There is no internal movement of any dimension that can bring about the smallest reform. Tomorrow, maybe. Not now.
I'll be reviving that thread soon. Historical context is important, I think. Memories are short.
Even a huge city like Toronto,a city the size of Chicago
Just a sidebar, but Toronto is the fourth largest city in North America. Only Mexico City, NYC and LA are larger.
Even a huge city like Toronto,a city the size of ChicagoJust a sidebar, but Toronto is the fourth largest city in North America. Only Mexico City, NYC and LA are larger.
Thanks for the heads up. But 100 murders per year for the Fourth largest city in North America is very little to nothing. It's actually impressive. You have the same murder per capita as here in Montreal. Now compare that with major cities in the US that have 1 000 and more per year. All smaller than Toronto with the exception of NYC and LA.
That's as safe as you could ask for. Which is why I die laughing when Canadians clutch their pearls crying about the crime rate in this country. Morons.
Well, I think we can still reduce it, especially in the case of conjugal and other family violence. But that would be by providing more help to victims of family violence.
Most murders here are either gang - drug deal etc related or family (and "friends") disputes, like the 61 year-old-man who recently killed his 55 year-old brother (they shared a flat) in the Centre-sud district. I believe most are knife or other non-gun killings. And some of the gun killings were so-called "settlings of accounts".
Unionist:
Would this count as "movement to reduce gun violence in America"...?
http://lawcenter.giffords.org/
Sorry I missed your question, VOTD.
My answer: No.
Well, I think we can still reduce it, especially in the case of conjugal and other family violence. But that would be by providing more help to victims of family violence.
Most murders here are either gang - drug deal etc related or family (and "friends") disputes, like the 61 year-old-man who recently killed his 55 year-old brother (they shared a flat) in the Centre-sud district. I believe most are knife or other non-gun killings. And some of the gun killings were so-called "settlings of accounts".
Unfortunately,it's unlikely,no matter hw many laws or what kind of laws you implement,conjugal violence will probably always exist. So too will be drunken family arguements ending in violence.
And it's true. The vast majority of murders on the Island of Montreal are knife related. And out of those knife related murders and attempted murders,it's usually gang or drug related (I hate the term ' drug related' considering that it's money,not the drugs,that create violence) Occasionally some knife assaults are after 3 a.m. (at closing time) involving drunks.
Would I like to see an end to conjugal violence,rape,armed robbery? Of course. Unfortunately when a government (almost always Conservative) implements a 'tough on crime' or ' zero tolerance' to crime it focuses almost exclusively on drugs. Not sexual assault,not conjugal violence,not even violent crime in general. Just drugs and property crime.
I've lived in Montreal all my life. I've been in every part of town. West,East,South,North. From one end to another. Day and night and I NEVER had to look over my shoulder once. I would confidently say that Mon treal is the safest major city in North America. I think paranoids who think there's a thief or serial killer lurking at every corner of this city should really travel a bit. Especially to the US. THEN come back and moan about our crime rate.
Until this moment I agreed with the majority, that a student strike in Canada made no sense. Then I remembered something in a recent article about young people not seeing borders the way older people do because of the planet wide effects of climate change. That isn't to say that they don't want national borders, just that they recognize that countries don't live in a vacuum and we have to work together.
Canadian students can't make an impact on American politics but they can show solidarity and that can increase cross-border respect and affection. There is no measurable impact of something so small but it contributes to relationship building. It puts student activist types in touch with each other.
Pondering, I agree with you about borders and youth and solidarity. But there will be no strike in the U.S. So let's move on.
