Educators ‘outraged’ after attorneys argue 1st-grade teacher shot in school is ‘workplace injury’ - eviltoast

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.

    • 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.

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

          Well, you’re clearly not listening to what I’m actually saying, and instead arguing points that don’t even apply.

          Conservatives, and particularly neoconservatives, don’t have a monopoly on the concept of armed citizens. Try googling the phrase “if you go far enough left you get your guns back”

          Until you can repeat back to me what that means, I think it’s pretty clear you’re a sentiment bot or shill of some kind.