I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
I find it harder to find info or there is less from left learning sources that do not align with the left narrative with some topics. I find the same from right learning.
So we agree, all media has bias. So do you have a suggestion on how we can overcome this?
Yep, I do.
Confine your informational and current events reading to reliable and reputable sources. Don't rely upon social media feeds to inform you as to what is news worthy at any time. Listen to the actual words of the politicians whenever you can. Avoid commentary and opinion shows on cable television.
Most importantly, utilize critical thought when considering reporting that seems inflammatory AND exclusive...too many people get sucked into echo chamber reporting that is, at its core, poorly sourced or based in opinion/ speculation rather than facts or evidence.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Did I come across as "inflamed"? Not at all. It's hard to tell with the written word about someone's emotional state due to the lack of body language interpretation. It is actually impossible. So if you interpreted my posts as inflamed, then going forward, I am not inflamed or otherwise emotionally agitated in any way.
Yes. I do think that radical ideas could be dangerous.
I'm not certain why you took my remarks personally about CRT inflamed parents making threats.
Yes... those radical ideas about CRT or books in classrooms or about acknowledging gay families in classrooms ARE inflammatory and they ARE dangerous. Those manipulated people are vulnerable to other manipulation and apparently some of them believe that violence is a tool at their disposal to remedy disagreement.
Confine your informational and current events reading to reliable and reputable sources. Don't rely upon social media feeds to inform you as to what is news worthy at any time. Listen to the actual words of the politicians whenever you can. Avoid commentary and opinion shows on cable television.
Most importantly, utilize critical thought when considering reporting that seems inflammatory AND exclusive...too many people get sucked into echo chamber reporting that is, at its core, poorly sourced or based in opinion/ speculation rather than facts or evidence.
Sounds reasonable. Simularily I also source out stories and compare the reporting between the two.
When addressing data, I will refer to the actual source like DOJ stats etc.
Media has a way of manipulating facts with select words. The raw data is always more objective.
I'm not certain why you took my remarks personally about CRT inflamed parents making threats.
Yes... those radical ideas about CRT or books in classrooms or about acknowledging gay families in classrooms ARE inflammatory and they ARE dangerous. Those manipulated people are vulnerable to other manipulation and apparently some of them believe that violence is a tool at their disposal to remedy disagreement.
I didn't take it personally. I suggested to another member that perhaps we should define CRT as there seems to be a strict interpretation of word. Some define CRT as only the course taught in post secondary. So of course a post secondary course isn't being taught k to 12. Some define it as the tenents of CRT are being taught. You then said, "those who are inflamed need to define....". Meaning I'm inflamed? If you were not suggesting I was inflamed that is noted.
I do not believe that teaching children that gay people or racism etc exist is the problem. And yes it is inflammatory and dangerous to deliver material that asigns oppressed and oppressor to children and youth. Or all systems are build for one race exclusively to benefit and actively oppress another. It will stoke animosity and de- motivation/hopelessness.
There is a reason the actual theoretical course is taught to law students. It is because a law student is emotionally developed enough to negotiate the theory and not emotionally internalized the concept.
This is a well rounded source in the topic. It has actual sample studies. It could be more right leaning but a quick scroll about the site doesn't demonstrate far right ideas.
To answer this and other related questions, we commissioned a study on a nationally representative sample of 1,505 18- to 20-year-old Americans—a demographic that has yet to graduate from, or only recently graduated from, high school. A complete Manhattan Institute report of all the findings from this study will be published in the coming months; what follows is a preview of some of them. Our analysis here focuses mainly on the results for the sample overall rather than for various subgroups.
We began by asking our 18- to 20-year-old respondents (82.4 percent of whom reported attending public schools) whether they had ever been taught in class or heard about from an adult at school each of six concepts—four of which are central to critical race theory. The chart below, which displays the distribution of responses for each concept, shows that "been taught" is the modal response for all but one of the six concepts. For the CRT-related concepts, 62 percent reported either being taught in class or hearing from an adult in school that "America is a systemically racist country,” 69 percent reported being taught or hearing that "white people have white privilege,” 57 percent reported being taught or hearing that "white people have unconscious biases that negatively affect non-white people,” and 67 percent reported being taught or hearing that "America is built on stolen land.” The shares giving either response with respect to gender-related concepts are slightly lower, but still a majority. Fifty-three percent report they were either taught in class or heard from an adult at school that "America is a patriarchal society,” and 51 percent report being taught or hearing that "gender is an identity choice" regardless of biological sex.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
I didn't take it personally. I suggested to another member that perhaps we should define CRT as there seems to be a strict interpretation of word. Some define CRT as only the course taught in post secondary. So of course a post secondary course isn't being taught k to 12. Some define it as the tenents of CRT are being taught. You then said, "those who are inflamed need to define....". Meaning I'm inflamed? If you were not suggesting I was inflamed that is noted.
I do not believe that teaching children that gay people or racism etc exist is the problem. And yes it is inflammatory and dangerous to deliver material that asigns oppressed and oppressor to children and youth. Or all systems are build for one race exclusively to benefit and actively oppress another. It will stoke animosity and de- motivation/hopelessness.
There is a reason the actual theoretical course is taught to law students. It is because a law student is emotionally developed enough to negotiate the theory and not emotionally internalized the concept.
No... meaning that we need to look at the definitions and words of the people who are upset and making threats when people disagree. Those are the definitions that matter in this context.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
This is a well rounded source in the topic. It has actual sample studies. It could be more right leaning but a quick scroll about the site doesn't demonstrate far right ideas.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
The concepts are not incorrect, the means of how they are taught is the issue.
History needs to be taught factually and without political agenda.
Is that the issue really? How it's taught versus that it's an educational concept at all? I don't get the impression from those who are angry and made threats that their concerns reflect that.
When do you think that American history was taught without racial bias? Do you think that racism is a political issue or is it a systemic problem? Our history was written from the perspective of white colonizers, would you agree?
Is that the issue really? How it's taught versus that it's an educational concept at all? I don't get the impression from those who are angry and made threats that their concerns reflect that.
When do you think that American history was taught without racial bias? Do you think that racism is a political issue or is it a systemic problem? Our history was written from the perspective of white colonizers, would you agree?
Are we discussing the topic of CRT or those who make angry threats? I took the topic to be about CRT and if it is being taught in schools? I've never heard any parent or anyone say anything about not teaching any history of racism, with anger or otherwise.(I've seen the angry parent videos, I'm not referring to that) They are not angry because they do not want any racism history taught or they want it in taught in a racist way. Or wanting to teach it in a racial bias way as did the "white colonizers". (Note in in no way defend parents that act aggressive or inappropriate. I am referring to what they are angry about and I've never heard them say they do not want racism to be taught at all or they want it to be taught in a racist way. )
The structures of systemic racism are no longer intact systemically. Meaning the previous laws and policies within the system are now illegal. Unless you have a modern day example of this? This is not to say racism does not exist as a whole. Of course it does.
No. History has evolved overtime. Do you think that we teach about racism the same way we did before or during the Civil rights era? Please tell me where that is happening?
So originally yes, at different times it was taught in a different way. . However with many topics such as medicine, it changes overtime.
The teaching of racism isn't taught the same way as it once was. As in pre-cival rights or civil rights era. Or even beyond that.
Roitrn
618 Posts
I posted a example with my original comment regarding the course that violated Florida law. It is bright blue. If you scroll back, it's hard to miss.