RandomIdoit

I give her a 5/10.

Maybe, maybe not. Who knows? I won't just take their word for it. How can I trust the ones who try to sneak in, or the ones who skip their court date and disappear?

Because welfare did not exist like it does today. Maybe they were starting a new life, maybe they were running away from home, maybe they were looking for business opportunities. They were not looking for welfare that did not exist.

I said I'm all for people coming here to work. And I'm all for that. Do it the legal way. Did I say everyone who comes here is coming to work? No I did not. The people who want to come here and drop anchor hoping for money from the government are the ones that I have a problem with. I even elaborated on that and said that citizens who are able to work should not get handouts either. And the second part of my response was to clarify that people may be willing to come and work, but that does not mean that they should just be allowed to cross over freely. They need to go through the process like so many before them did.

I do not want to give handouts, not even to citizens. If you are able to work, you should work. Don't come here, have a bunch of kids and expect the US to support them. Sorry that you don't like that I don't like able-bodied people with their hand out.

And I'm all for that. Do it the legal way.

Yes I'm pissed. We can find millions of dollars to give to other countries, but cannot take care of our own people. It's ridiculous. Let's say my kids are hungry and do not have clothes but I see the neighbor's kids and they have it even worse than mine do. I'm still going to take care of my kids first and then I would help someone else. That's just the way I am.

1. On the Statue of Liberty. This was written at a time when welfare did not exist. People were coming here to work, not get handouts. 2. We are not responsible for other countries citizens. You any feel like we should be, but that does not mean that we are.

What are we? The world's welfare office? Shouldn't we take care of our own homeless before taking on any more homeless?

Yes.

Like this "Victory or Death" UTSA concept?

1. They aren't going to admit it. Just like they aren't going to admit that Kaepernick is untouchable because it will cost them money. 2. If they thought that they are losing out on even $1,000,000, .01%, do you not think they would think that it was significant?

Like being late for meetings, wearing your jersey untucked, or having your pants above the knee? Players are going to be fined for all of these things.

Looks dry as fuck.

By losing money, they mean that they are losing out on money from the people boycotting. It doesn't mean they are operating in the red.

They will blame declining attendance and TV viewership on the protests, even if it isn't the actual cause. They see it as bad for business just like signing Kaepernick.

They said, "You are costing us money so stay in the locker room if you'd like, and protest on your own time."

it's up to the cba. not the teams. I don't know how the CBA factors into this, but I am going off of what has been reported.

Who said the players cannot be fined? It's up to the individual team whether to fine, suspend, or cut a player.

Parents want to be their kids' friend and not a parent. Kids are entitled and the parents do not discipline their kids like they used to. Kids grew up in the "everyone gets a trophy" world and do not know how to deal with failure and rejection. They also lack coping skills to deal with stressful situations. They are too easily offended and soft.

You do realize bonds have to be voted for right? Like when a new school is proposed, a bond is voted on so they can have the funding. If the majority want to pay for the security upgrades, then it will pass. If not, then they will have to figure out something else to protect the students. Personally, I would pay the extra taxes to go towards security at my children's schools. The logistics are awful but smarter people than me can and should figure it out. Or should they pout and say it's too hard?

That's what bonds are for. Do people want the kids safe or not? You don't have to have the full body scanners that the airport uses. Just use the walk though ones that they have at the theme parks. That should be a huge deterrent. You also have police officers outside to protect the students in line. Or we can just complain about the cost and do nothing.

You have staff doing the bag checks and then you have the campus police free to monitor and protect the lines. I don't see that as unworkable or unaffordable.

So those are just a few warm up items... Who is going to pay for this? Bonds just like they do for upgrades and new schools now. How quickly could these schools be retro fit or built? Depends on what needs to be done, but the simplest ones can be done over the summer. Will private schools be required to make these changes? No. How in the hell are you going to secure a football game, prom, or sporting event? Hire more police to moonlight and metal detectors at the gates. Does anyone really think our kids should be raised like this? Yes, the safer I can make them, the better. Where is the marginal sweet spot and how do you defend it after the next school shooting.... this seems very slippery slope. No idea. These are a few things that I would be in favor of that would be easy to implement: Metal detectors/bag inspection at designated entrances. Some schools only need one, some will need more. All other doors to the school are fire exits. Student Ids scanned when the student enters the school, and scanned when they leave. If a student is scanned in, and they are not in class or accounted for (office, nurse, lunch), security will be notified to locate the student. Distinguishable active shooter alarm that is different than the fire alarm. We don't want students walking out of the classroom. All classroom doors closed during class and locked from the outside when the door is closed. Can be opened from the inside or with a key. Clear backpacks.

RIP to your mom.