Parkland Middle School student hit, killed on Loop 375 after leaving campus during walkout

Why do you think outings require waiver forms? Do you suppose that the duty that extends on outings (in loco parentis) somehow doesn't extend to school grounds?

O my..

 

O that's precious. You don't know that liability waivers are a thing. O dear.

 

I'm ready to have school resource officers on the entrances and exits, and to close down other points of ingress/egress.
How do you suppose you keep a building secure anyways?

 

By banning guns lol

 

Since it was on school grounds and the kid hopped a ****ing wall and no one even noticed much less did anything about it, I'd say its pretty reasonable the school was negligent. Especially since the mass rally was by no means necessary for school purposes.

Yeah. I am. Now if people like you would stop authorizing the government to waste the money I give them for schools, roads and the national defense on asinine bullshit like the snail darter, and if birds get horny on cocaine, I'd be much obliged.

 

I love these libs.... I say "secure the building" they immediately point to the cost and propose nationwide citizen by citizen restrictions as a cheaper alternative....

 

What a load of crap! You did not even know that he jumped over the school wall. Little doubt that he did it regularly but just because it was linked to your precious guns you say that the school is at fault. No doubt if he was killed at any other time he jumped over the wall or skipped school you would be blaming him and saying that it is not the fault of the school and no way should his family be allowed to sue the school.

 

That's quite the crystal ball you've got their karnack.
The school negligently supervised the child, and that led to the child's death. Period. I'd be saying that whether they were unnecessarily protesting firearms or cheese whiz.

 

Indeed he would have accused the kid of being a dumb liberal millennial snowflake (A new favorite from the righties on this forum).

 

What is your feeling on this?
https://www.theexpertinstitute.com/...-leads-truant-student-getting-hit-motorcycle/

 

It purports to be an expert witness statement likely in some form of personal injury litigation on the defense side.
As such it is an argument.


Here: http://education-expert.com/2013/02/school-negligence-and-appropriate-supervision-of-children/

 

Well, I knew that. I asked your opinion, since the two situations are so very similar…. and the argument is that the school is not liable for injury when a child skips school and is off school grounds.

 

That's ideological narratives for you.

 

One libs superhero when he’s attacking gun owners and the Bill of Rights is a poor mistreated scapegoat when gun owners fight back

 

First thing you're going to want to do is find a source using Texas law then. Second thing you're going to want to do is find a source with all the facts rather than a summary.
You realize this does not use texas law... right?

Also you misstate: The argument is not off grounds = not our problem, the argument is THIS PARTICULAR CASE lacks the required nexus of facts necessary to tie the breach of duty to the injury.

 

Actually this kid was killed emulating David "Lil Hitler" Hogg, the Parkland Pukes, and the DNC anti-gun crusade.

Their rhetoric got a kid killed.

 

Thing is the kid wouldn't have been out of school if he hadn't been emulating David "Lil Hitler" Hogg, the Parkland Pukes, and the DNC anti-gun crusade.

So following that train of logic, if he wasn't out of school he wouldn't have been killed.

What it comes down to is that the "Goosestep to strip our freedoms" crowd caused this death by spreading a trend that encourages kids to run wild free of supervision.

 

Except for the unsupervised liberal protest the 11-year old would have been at his desk sleeping or watching sex ed videos

 

Nope the kid did nothing of the sorts. David Hogg didn't climb a wall to get out of classes, and crossed a busy freeway to get to a park. Sorry that you are lacking reading comprehension.

 

So, that's how you see it? I think you're reacting without listening to what they are actually saying.

It wouldn't matter if the kids from Stoneman Douglas High School specifically said they are not for a gun ban, would it?

Minoff instantly replied, "gun-wise, I don't think there's any way to prevent it. You outlaw guns, just creates higher demand for it."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v...her_demand_wont_prevent_school_shootings.html
​

Even if you firmly believe they want to confiscate all your guns, going after kids is not a good look, especially ones that just had classmates and friends murdered in their classroom by a guy that shouldn't have had guns. Responsible gun owners call out stuff like that. If you want to "fight back," it's going to start with an open conversation, not with name calling.

 

Most private school teachers I worked with over the years are quite liberal. Conservatives don't want to teach school because there's not much money in education, even less in private schools.

Raise the pay or teach your own kids.

 

Will the family being suing Soros, who has funded ALL OF THIS nonsense? David Hogg, as well?

 

ROFL

 

Of course I realize this situation is in Texas. I pointed that out to some in this thread linking it to the Stoneman Douglas students in Parkland, Florida, because the school in this story is Parkland Middle School.

I asked your opinion on the argument, since both situations are so similar and this argument disagrees with the one you've been making in this thread. In the link it specifically says:

In most cases, a school does not have a duty to supervise and protect a student once they leave school grounds. In this case, even though the school failed to monitor the student and stop him from leaving school, the teacher had no way of knowing about the danger the student would face when he left school grounds. Since a school usually does not have a duty to protect a student from injuries when they are off school grounds, the school’s failure to stop the student from leaving school might not be held to be the proximate cause of him getting hit by a motorcycle.​

We don't know all the specifics in the Texas case, so we can't pre-judge that the school was negligent and liable. Maybe they are, but maybe they aren't. I'd agree the kids shouldn't have been able to slip away unnoticed, but then, back when I was a kid, you weren't supposed to smoke in the restrooms at school either. However, it happened daily. One way or another, these kids made a plan, were determined to get off campus without being caught, and took advantage of the situation to do so. It would be really hard to prove negligence, IMO.

 

Politics. There is no legal duty to get a waiver, nor is there any protection against negligence afforded by a waiver.

Of course it extends to outings.