Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 kronk wrote:
DutchKillsRambo, as one antagonistic person to another, you're very antagonistic.

Also, don't say "cuz". Write out "because", but don't start a sentence with either it, "so", or "and". Saying cuz and prolly are worse crimes than getting You're, your, they're, there, and their mixed up.

THOU SHALT NOT DISPLEASE THE KRONK! THE KRONK HAS SPOKEN!

I've heard he's roguishly handsome and has the ear of the former and future Pope. So remember WWKD (What would Kronk do?)

 kronk wrote:
DutchKillsRambo, as one antagonistic person to another, you're very antagonistic.

Also, don't say "cuz". Write out "because", but don't start a sentence with either it, "so", or "and". Saying cuz and prolly are worse crimes than getting You're, your, they're, there, and their mixed up.

Damn...

<whembly starts brushing up is writing skillz... ><--- oops!>

 djones520 wrote:

Except the people that data is documenting don't live there all year. They live there for 5-6 months at the most. Their migrant farm workers. Seasonal jobs.

Did you even click it? It's a national study.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:
DutchKillsRambo, as one antagonistic person to another, you're very antagonistic.

Also, don't say "cuz". Write out "because", but don't start a sentence with either it, "so", or "and". Saying cuz and prolly are worse crimes than getting You're, your, they're, there, and their mixed up.

You're probably right. Though how many other times on this board has "I've taken some college classes on it" really stood up to any scrutiny when discussing a subject?

Damn. That should have said "From one antagonistic person to another." Forgive my poor grammar. I am ashamed.

Its my chosen career path dude. And I am not claiming to be an expert. I am going to school to learn about this stuff however, and that counts for something.

These workers are making well above minimum wage to harvest produce. They only make it for a few weeks a year. That combines to a high paying job, but low yearly income.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Its my chosen career path dude. And I am not claiming to be an expert. I am going to school to learn about this stuff however, and that counts for something.

These workers are making well above minimum wage to harvest produce. They only make it for a few weeks a year. That combines to a high paying job, but low yearly income.

Right, and the rest of they year their back home, that $13-15K has much greater purchasing power then it does here in the states.

CptJake wrote:
Your last sentence is silly. A county sheriff has no authority to issue temp worker visas nor 'formalize and regulate' any industry, so wether he cares that it would work or not matters little. He can only enforce the laws on the books. I also doubt there are lots of folks who think one sheriff in one county can conduct enough raids to stop the incentive for illegal immigrants. However it is reasonable to think that he can conduct enough raids to lessen the incentive in his county, the only place he has authority in.

And a president has no legal authority to declare war, and yet a very quick reading of history will tell you that if a president wants war there's a hell of a lot he can do to get it.

The point being that a sheriff, like any person in authority, can lead public opinion. He can comment on the situation he sees in front of him, and talk about what overall regulation will resolve problems. Or he can carry on making stupid noise about how he's mean to prisoners and rounds up all of them illegals.

Sheriff Joe opts for the latter. And idiots love him for it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
So?

The farmers should pay more to entice potential employees... and yes, that'll drive up the costs of the produces.

So, we need to decide. Do we want cheap labor and thus cheap food? Or, eliminate illegal workers and pay for increased costs?

But you can have both. You can have good wages, by expanding skilled and semi-skilled industries, while at the same time having workers on temporary visas picking fruit for low wages. This is good for the farm, who has a lower cost and can therefore remain competitive with overseas farms, good for the immigrant who'd otherwise be earning even less in his home country, and good for the local worker, who doesn't chew up ten or twenty years of their life picking fruit for a few dollars more than minimum wage.


But even if you don't go that route and decide to keep American jobs for Americans... then you still have a problem with illegal immigration. And that problem only gets fixed when you seriously crackdown on farms for hiring illegal workers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
ditto... so, why the fuss?

Because it doesn't fit the Sheriff Joe logic that started this thread - talk about tough on crime a lot, and just figure the basic lizard brain logic of 'be meanto them and they'll stop being criminals' will over-ride the actual real world knowledge we have of what drives crime and illegal immigration.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Da Boss wrote:
Where I come from in Ireland, picking strawberries for a pittance is (or was, 15 years ago) a common job for kids looking for some pocket money. It was how I earned the money I spent on models back when I was a kid. It's hard work, the acid gets in your fingers and makes them swell and the skin peels off sometimes, and you're crouched over all day picking in the rain or sun, but at the end of it there was money for you if you kept going. A decent life lesson and probably helped keep me so skinny. Maybe you guys could start pointing kids that way and deal with this obesity thing ye've got going on? Though maybe they'd just eat the strawberries.

The issue, I think, is that in a country with access to large amount of education, is that anyone who works hard and applies themselves is quite likely to end up in a skilled, or at least semi-skilled job, that's a lot better than picking strawberries. So a guy like yourself, who does it when he's growing up, he also works hard in his studies or apprenticeship or whatever, and moves into a job that pays a lot more than fruitpicking will.

There was an interesting UK documentary a couple of years back that took people who'd been on welfare a long time, and put them to work in various jobs that immigrants dominate. The people who went out to replace the Poles picking turnips (I think it was turnips) were a complete disaster, basically for the reasons I mentioned above.

Grey I apologize for being combative. I still believe a school thats heavily involved with agriculture might not be the best place for an objective view of migrant workers, but no need to be rude.

And it looks like 'ol Joe is back at it again. This time with possibly the worst actor of all time.

http://news.yahoo.com/seagal-sheriff-train-arizonans-guard-schools-023031238.html

That honestly scares the gak out of me.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
Grey I apologize for being combative. I still believe a school thats heavily involved with agriculture might not be the best place for an objective view of migrant workers, but no need to be rude.

And it looks like 'ol Joe is back at it again. This time with possibly the worst actor of all time.

http://news.yahoo.com/seagal-sheriff-train-arizonans-guard-schools-023031238.html

That honestly scares the gak out of me.

Seagal actually seems a cool chap.

When he was filming in Alaska for one of his flix, my step-mum helped with the film crew's logistic out there... said Seagal was TALL... but was just as nice as he can be around everyone.

Also, he's been in law enforcement for years in Louisiana (wasn't there a reality show on this?)

Yea he was a sheriff or something (for real)

Yes there was. A pretty cool one too. He seems like an all around great guy.

I'm sorry if don't want to put children's safety into a bunch of pissed off old men trained by the guy who made Exit Wounds.

If were going to put faith into action stars somehow translating the movies into real life we should at least start with GOOD action stars and get the Muscles from Brussels.

Do you really think these guys are going to shoot the children?

Thats the last thing that they would do. They want to protect them.


The type of people that are going to shoot up a school are the kind that want to kill things that won't shoot back. If multiple armed guards are present it is a major deterrent as there would be shooting back.

Most school shooters commit suicide when confronted by the police. This reaffirms the above assertation.

It won't stop all shootings, but it will stop some completely. And those it doesn't stop will still have reduced casualities.

Here in the glorious farmland that is Southern Ontario we grow rocks. You didn't misread that, we actually grow rocks. Every year the frost and thaw when mixed with the plowing of a field pushes up rocks that vary in size from small pebbles to equipment destroying hunks larger than your head. So every year local farmers hire a number of elementary, high school, and college kids, in addition to some people who simply have time but no money, to pick rocks. If one thinks that picking strawberries is tough, picking rocks is worse. I've done both. And I would much rather pick strawberries, as they just scoot you along on a sled attached to the arm of a tractor so you aren't bent over all day. Yet when you're picking rocks you don't have much else of a choice. There are sleds available where you lie face down about an elbows length from the ground and pick the rocks while going less than a mile an hour, but unfortunately you'll inevitably run into one of the loathed head sized pieces of rock, and you'll have to get off your sled and dig that sucker out with a shovel and your hands. So you do that for between 8 to 10 hours a day during the spring and fall on the weekends. Then in the summer you do it as fast as you can so you can pick before the planters go through the fields and get potentially broken due to hitting one of those larger rocks, or blunted or chipped due to hitting one of the smaller ones. This is done in temperatures varying from 25 to 35 degree weather with a high humidity. All for about 10 dollars an hour. Kids would make a couple thousand dollars over a summer picking rocks. It wasn't fun, and it was incredibly hard work, but if you wanted a new dirt bike or four wheeler then that's what you did.

TL;DR, tell the Californians to get their kids off their asses and use some character building child labour.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Do you really think these guys are going to shoot the children?

Thats the last thing that they would do. They want to protect them.


The type of people that are going to shoot up a school are the kind that want to kill things that won't shoot back. If multiple armed guards are present it is a major deterrent as there would be shooting back.

Most school shooters commit suicide when confronted by the police. This reaffirms the above assertation.

It won't stop all shootings, but it will stop some completely. And those it doesn't stop will still have reduced casualities.

No I think a bunch of overweight, elderly men trained by a D list actor having guns in schools is a recipe for disaster. Whats going to stop a teenager from knocking over gramps here and shooting others? At least with a security guard you have someone who is nominally in shape and trained.

This is a worse idea than arming teachers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But then again there's a reason Phoenix is probably highest city on my list of places I would never live.

What security guards have you been looking at? All the school guards I've seen have either been old as heck or fat as the dickens.

Plus one can now get guns that only fire when you hold them.

 Ratbarf wrote:
Plus one can now get guns that only fire when you hold them.

If you're talking about biometric safeties, they work a good 60% of the time at least. When the owner's holding them, I mean. So there's only a 40% chance or so that the gun won't fire when you need it to.

 Ratbarf wrote:
What security guards have you been looking at? All the school guards I've seen have either been old as heck or fat as the dickens.

Plus one can now get guns that only fire when you hold them.

Thats why I said nominally. And if we can't afford arts programs in many schools, investing in fingerprint technology guns for schools (that the vast majority of police officers don't even have mind) just seems like a terrible expenditure of money.

I'd say an armed security guard(s) should have priority over arts and sports.

The investment is worth it to prevent another shooting.

 Grey Templar wrote:
I'd say an armed security guard(s) should have priority over arts and sports.

The investment is worth it to prevent another shooting.

How many school shootings have there been? You would slash things like art and sports for some vague sense of protection?

Ratbarf: My dad has an obsession with rockpicking, I've done that too. And it is not fun times. It is sorta satisfying on a medium sized piece of land though, to start with it full of rocks and end with it all clear and ready to go.

Strawberry picking was better, but it went on for longer. And we didn't have any tractor army thingy, we had to walk along bent over. But that's why it's better work for kids- you're much more flexible at that age and it's all a bit of an adventure rather than mind numbingly boring.
Sebster, I'd say you're fairly spot on, I saw the strawberry picking thing and had to have a little prod, because it immediately reminded me of those summers. When you've picked 5-10 times your bodyweight in fruit to get those terradons, they seem all the more sweet.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
I'd say an armed security guard(s) should have priority over arts and sports.

The investment is worth it to prevent another shooting.

How many school shootings have there been? You would slash things like art and sports for some vague sense of protection?

Art, definitly. Its not a super useful section. It has a place, but it should be tertiary to everything else.

Sports programs are extremely bloated at most schools. While I think they are important enough to keep, they could definitly be dialed back to save money.


With your view, I'll bet you think having insurance is silly too. The chance of a fire burning down your home is remote right?

No the chance of fire burning down your home is huge compared to dieing in a school shooting.

475,000 to 59 according to a quick google.

And the fact you think art programs aren't useful leads me to believe you don't really know a whole lot about how to educate children. It's very useful to producing well rounded children. More so than gun in the hands of a security guard anyways.

Our rock picking season was really heavy in june and july, some fields in august depending on what crop was being done in them, and then again in the fall once the crop had been taken off, and again in the spring as long as it wasn't to muddy. The largest rock we ever pulled out of our fields must have weighed several tonnes. The thing was a large slab like piece, about 8 feet across and 6 feet wide with a depth of a foot and a half to three feet in some places. We broke two sets of chains pulling that thing out and around.

The field across the road from us is over 600 acres. It takes about two to three weeks of 10 hour days to pick that whole thing with one tractor crew.

 DutchKillsRambo wrote:
No the chance of fire burning down your home is huge compared to dieing in a school shooting.

475,000 to 59 according to a quick google.

And the fact you think art programs aren't useful leads me to believe you don't really know a whole lot about how to educate children. It's very useful to producing well rounded children. More so than gun in the hands of a security guard anyways.

We're talking about kids getting killed here. If that can be prevented its totally worth it.

And if you ahd read my post throughly you would have gathered I don't think art is completely useless. Its usefulness is secondary to learning other things and the protection of the kids. Their lives are more important than learning how to paint or play the drums.

But they're not dieing in statistically significant numbers? How many kids are dieing in car accidents to and from school?

How is an armed guard an automatic protection against children being killed? Art is going to help a lot more kids even scholastically than an armed guard. Its not a secondary thing, there's proven links to music helping math.

Thats just disgusting. "Its not statistically significant"

59 out of how many million children in the US? Thats what statistically significant means.

If you're so worried about the children why do you not support tighter bans on guns? If people can't buy these guns than the kids won't get shot right?

Or maybe tragedies like Newtown aside its just not that big of a deal? Its part of the price we pay to be American. I'm much more scared of bees than I am of becoming a victim of a mass shooting.

Because a ban will do nothing. Criminals won't respect it and they can get a gun off the street anyway. Bans don't work, see Chicago.

The next thing to do is to put active protection in place.

But school shootings are most often carried out by students at the school, not hardened criminals with connections that can procure them illegal firearms. In the same vein, a student going to the same school everyday will quickly learn the patterns of the security guard. All he has to do now is shoot him first, and were back to the same point, albeit after a massive amount of money spent.

Why do we need armed guards now? Why not after Columbine? We didn't pass any ridiculous gun bans after that either, so why are we talking bans and armed guards now? Because it was 6 year olds this time and everyone is knee-jerking hard.