Error message

Updates from Organizations - Government agencies - Advertise Various Artists

Monday, July 9, 2018 - 10:45am

Arming teachers

By Basma Ismail

 

On May 22nd, 2014, Donald Trump announced to the world via his Twitter account that Hillary Clinton accused him of wanting to bring guns into classrooms. Almost four years later, Trump tried to convince us that arming teachers while on school grounds is the answer to school shootings and massacres. 

With the lack of laws and training regarding carrying and purchasing guns, more students are likely to die in schools if Trump’s ideas are applied. He argues that it will allow teachers to respond quickly to possible shootings and be better equipped to protect their students. Studies show that aggression among students is more likely to increase while in the presence of a weapon which increases the chance of casualties. It perceives educators as killers as they are ready to shoot and kill at any given moment. It also leads to the increase of behavioral issues as students are aware of its presence, which might lead to feelings of fear instead of feeling safe or a student trying to steal the gun and use it. Another potential consequence is the killing of teachers since the police are more likely to shoot whoever is in the possession of a gun upon being called to the scene 

Whoever said that being in a classroom with armed teachers would make students feel safe? As a woman of color, I would not step foot in such a place nor would I want my daughters there. If mass shooters can buy guns and go on a shooting spree, what makes the teachers any different? They are humans as well, not angels with all the right answers to chemical equations and calculus problems. People get angry, have psychological problems and deal with struggles and pressure in different ways. And some go on shooting sprees.

Millions watched Senior Deputy Ben Fields grab a 15-year-old African American student from her seat by the neck, throw her to the ground, then drag her out of the classroom. You might have wondered if the girl had done something such as threatening the teacher or her classmates to warrant the police being called on her while still seated in her class. But nope, she did not. She had her cell phone out which was against the rules. She refused to hand it over which resulted in her being manhandled and humiliated at this rebellious tender age. Maybe we should care more about educating our teachers on adolescent’s mental health and how to mentor them instead of scarring them for life. Perhaps we should be certain our teachers and school officers are emotionally mature enough to work with children. 

School is a place where children not only study science and history but also learn life skills, lessons, and values. What we should be doing is teaching conflict resolution in schools rather than punishment. Incorporating its practices among teachers, administrators, students and parents has been proven to result in higher grades, ability to solve problems, and higher self-esteem.

Help us bring conflict resolution education to our classrooms, not guns!

~~~~~~~

Basma Ismail, mother of two, writes for PeaceVoiceandstudies Conflict Resolution at Portland State University.

“Gangsterism” or “Progress”? Examining North Korea’s Latest Statement on Denuclearization

by Mel Gurtov

 

Most US news reports are suggesting that the North Koreans may be backtracking on their commitment to denuclearization, calling the US position “gangster-like” following the visit of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Pyongyang. What the North Korean foreign ministry actually saidin its statement of July 7 is far more nuanced, and speaks directly to the longstanding differences between Pyongyang and Washington.
 

I urge readers to judge for themselves whether or not it is a rational, reasoned statement—and then consider Pompeo’s assessment of progress in the talks with the North Koreans. Here are my brief assessments:
• The North Koreans believe Trump promised “a new way” to deal with US-DPRK relations and denuclearization, namely, step by step. Their view is clear: denuclearization comes last, not first—a longstanding position. Instead, Pompeo brought only renewed US insistence on the old US position: CVID (comprehensive, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization).
• In the North Koreans’ mind, the joint US-DPRK statement out of Singapore laid out three priorities (and in this order): creating a “peace regime” on the Korean peninsula, improving relations, and denuclearization. But the US is riveted on the last, they say, and has offered nothing on the other two.
• What does a “peace regime” mean? Some observers think it means terminating the US military presence in and defense obligation to South Korea. But the North Korean statement says otherwise. “Peace regime” means a “declaration of the end of [the Korean] war at an early date”—replacing the armistice with a peace treaty, which “is the first process of reducing tension…” The statement makes no demands about the US-South Korea relationship other than to dismiss as inconsequential Trump’s decision to suspend (not end) the joint exercises that had been scheduled for August.
• The statement emphasizes trust building. That’s the key argument for a phased approach to denuclearization: establish a peace regime to defuse tension and build trust. Only then will the North Koreans feel secure enough to take action—exactly what kind, we still don’t know—on denuclearizing. And the North Koreans maintain that they have taken a few trust-building actions, listing dismantlement of a test area for a new ICBM engine and discussion of returning the remains of US POWs and MIAs.

To those of us who watch North Korea closely, this picture is not in the least surprising. Kim Jong-un had staked out his notion of the proper timeline for denuclearization months ago, and the North Korean quest for security via normal relations with the US and a peace treaty to end the Korean War is well known. The Trump-Kim summit was a breakthrough in terms of direct dialogue, but unless the US gets beyond “CVID,” the North Koreans will continue work on nuclear weapons and missiles and the dialogue with Washington will revert to an ugly form.

--end--

 

Mel Gurtov, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Portland State University.

=====================

With districts voting for all 435 seats in the House of Representatives this year and major mayoral elections coming up in cities like San Francisco and Washington, the personal-finance website WalletHub today released its report on 2018’s Best- & Worst-Run Cities in America.

To determine the effectiveness of local leadership, WalletHub compared 150 of the largest U.S. cities based on their operating efficiency. For each city, WalletHub constructed a “Quality of City Services” score – comprising 35 key performance indicators grouped into six service categories – that was then measured against the city’s total per-capita budget.
 

Top 20 Best-Run Cities in America

1

Nampa, ID

 

 

11

Las Cruces, NM

2

Provo, UT

 

 

12

Greensboro, NC

3

Boise, ID

 

 

13

Cedar Rapids, IA

4

Lexington, KY

 

 

14

Huntington Beach, CA

5

Missoula, MT

 

 

15

Billings, MT

6

Sioux Falls, SD

 

 

16

Raleigh, NC

7

Durham, NC

 

 

17

Rapid City, SD

8

Lewiston, ME

 

 

18

Fort Wayne, IN

9

Nashua, NH

 

 

19

Fargo, ND

10

Oklahoma City, OK

 

 

20

Virginia Beach, VA

 
 Best vs. Worst

  • Casper, Wyoming, has the lowest long-term debt outstanding per capita, $657, which is 33.3 times lower than in Washington, the city with the highest at $21,862.
     
  • Rutland, Vermont, has the fewest violent crimes (per 1,000 residents), 0.50, which is 40.9 times fewer than in Detroit, the city with the most at 20.47.
     
  • Fargo, North Dakota, has the lowest unemployment rate, 2.1 percent, which is 4.9 times lower than in Flint, Michigan, the city with the highest at 10.3 percent.
     
  • Fremont, California, has the lowest share of the population living in poverty, 5.3 percent, which is 7.9 times lower than in Flint, Michigan, the city with the highest at 41.9 percent.

To view the full report and your city’s rank, please visit: 
https://wallethub.com/edu/best-run-cities/22869/