cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/3089104

NEWPORT NEWS — The Newport News Education Association President condemned the premise of the school division’s motion to dismiss Abigail Zwerner’s pending $40 million lawsuit.

The motion was filed last week by attorneys representing the School Board and argues that Zwerner, who was shot in her classroom at Richneck Elementary in January by a 6-year-old student, is only entitled to file a worker’s compensation claim because the injury she sustained from the shooting is a “workplace injury,” and that the shooting was a hazard of the job.

    • dsco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I know I’m beating a dead horse here, but assault rifles have been illegal for decades. I live in Texas, have many friends with literal armories, and have had a range membership - I have never in my life seen an assault rifle outside of active duty. Not once. Not at a gun show, not in a private collection, not even from my crazy libertarian prepper friend that takes his bug out bag everywhere he goes.

      This media craze about assault rifles/weapons is the epitome of a strawman.

      For all the haters: assault rilfe, military firearm that is chambered for ammunition of reduced size or propellant charge and that has the capacity to switch between semiautomatic and fully automatic fire. Source

      • pips@lemmy.film
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004. In the civilian context, an assault weapon is semiautomatic. Fully automatic weapons are, to put it lightly, uncommon among civilians so assault weapon refers to a variety of styles of semiautomatic firearm.

        • dsco@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why is that? The first time I noticed it was a few years ago. I know some circles think that not-gun-people thought AR=Assault Rifle, which maybe some did, but why the inaccurate blanket statement? Also, shouldn’t we be going after handguns since they’re used 4-5x as much for gun deaths in the US? I just don’t get it.

          • pips@lemmy.film
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Why is what? Why did the ban expire? It had a sunset date and wasn’t extended. Why are fully autos not popular? Combination of laws and practicality. Why are certain civilian semiauto rifles called assault weapons? Military has assault rifles, civilians use the broader term assault weapons to capture a broader category.

            Why not go after handguns? NRA and their ilk keep blocking those efforts.

        • killa44@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Consider this: not everyone familiar with firearms is a right wing lunatic. In fact, there is a surprisingly large and generally quite chunk of the population that is moderate to left leaning with various levels of support for civilian firearm ownership. If you go far enough left you find the people actually willing to fight for the good of the people and against tyranny (not like, "no step on snek tyranny, but more a long the lines of the black Panthers of old, or the current volunteers providing armed protection to lgbtq events in Texas, etc).

          How would you suggest that such a person point out to you that you’re using emotionally charged language to create a false dichotomy and ramble off blatant ad hominem attacks?

          Here’s something else to consider: the US government is bad at writing laws. If you want a great example, check the CAFE emissions standards. Using a chart that effectively allows bigger vehicles to get lower mileage has not resulted in manufactures making more fuel efficient vehicles, it’s resulted in larger vehicles. This is why you can’t buy a small pickup truck like the old ranger or s-10. So people are forced to buy larger vehicles (that use more resources to manufacture) that get worse mileage, and in turn actually increasing total fuel consumption. That’s obviously really stupid if you think about it for a few minutes.

          Most gun laws are equally as stupid and short sighted, but because the topic is more political and constantly in the news (even though the planet burning up is way more important, but I digress) it is debated more emotionally. In the example above if one doesn’t take the time to understand general concepts about modern vehicles, legislation, and the various terms used to describe it, they won’t have an educated opinion. An uneducated opinion is just noise.

          This is relevant to firearms because most laws are feature restrictions of some kind. For example, banning a vertical foregrip. Defining what that is surprisingly tricky, and the government gets it wrong, or leaves loopholes, or has some other weird side effect. That’s ignoring the fact that the purpose of a foregrip is to give the shooter better ergonomics and control. More control is safer and the odds of a shooter missing a target are reduced. So why would the government decide to ban something that is effectively a safety device while using incorrect jargon? Great question! Go ask the state of California, and new Jersey, etc.

          At the end of the day, the only way to eliminate gun violence is to eliminate all guns. In the US that is logically impossible even if the constitution and will of the people is ignored. Calling something “assault” is as meaningless as cereal manufacturers saying a bowl of sugary carbs in milk is good for your heart.

            • killa44@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think you need to go re-read and do some research. I never suggested a solution to school shootings at all. If you want one it’s simple: better quality of life overall, better quality education, and guaranteed social services of various kinds. This is quite straightforward.

              Now, if you’ll stop putting words in my mouth I’ll give you one more try. Otherwise, it seems like it’s you that’s sticking to the talking points and not at all paying attention.

                • killa44@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Bruh. You’re talking to an atheist socialist. I don’t know how to be any more clear: your generic talking points literally don’t make sense in any context, and certainly aren’t a coherent response to anything I’m saying.

                  Many other modernized countries have the basic components that create a functional society. I’m not suggesting someone invent Star Trek replicators and magically solve all the problems. I’m saying the basic psychology that leads someone to commit atrocities almost always leads to a root cause that can be addressed at a macro level with the resources already available right now. We simply choose not to and allow the ultra wealthy to create an environment more and more conducive to enriching themselves further. This includes just about every piece of legislation that passes anywhere in the country - both for limiting and expanding firearm rights.

                  More guns surely isn’t the answer either, they are already prolific. You couldn’t get more even if you wanted. If you want to talk about realistic legislation a competence-based graduated ownership (or use, depending on how you define legal terms) permit addresses the vast majority of issues that both colors of koolaide drinkers ramble on about. In fact, we already do this with cars and motorcycless and airplanes and mining equipment and dangerous chemicals. It’s not a difficult problem to solve. And yet, the actual legislation that is created to placate moderate liberals is always feature bans, and almost always only applies to new purchases instead of ownership or use.

                  You’d have to be an actual crypt dwelling sould eating ghoul to not acknowledge a realistic solution to the problem you are actively crying about, because that would mean you don’t actually care at all and are just here for the drama and churn.

        • dsco@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The terminology isn’t arbitrary, and the story was about a teacher getting shot (with a pistol) and the legal battle going on with her claim. But good job on the emotionally charged comment. If we wanted ban all diesel trucks to help the environment, would we picket with signs that say ban leaded gasoline? That would make us look ignorant, right?

        • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you want to solve a problem you need to understand the problem, using terms like “assault rifle” when 97% of all gun violence uses hand-guns including school shootings shows you don’t actually care about understanding the problem, let alone solve it.

      • TheHighRoad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Short-barrel carbine ban doesn’t have the same ring. I still think they should go as they really amount to nothing more than murder fantasy toys for grown boys.

        • dsco@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I get that, and I’m sure there’s a fair bit of LARPers out there with their tacticool gear just itching for a reason to use it.

          But the highest gun violence in this country is done by handguns, and now we have glock modifications that make them fully automatic that anyone can buy off what is essentially Etsy. Are we going after assault weapons because they’re an easier target than semiauto pistols and trying to make some headway against the gun lobby, or are they just the big bad right now because of our profoundly sick society.

          Not saying most people should own one, but the AR platform has value in that it relatively cheap, fully modular, and has a variety of uses. I know it’s a sour subject, but objectively it’s a great tool.