Florida Teacher of the Year's gun violence post goes viral after school shooting

[DemonGeminiX]

A Teacher of the Year at a Florida middle school posted a Facebook message that has since gone viral saying parents need to “step up” when it comes to their kids’ behavior.

“Okay, I’ll be the bad guy and say what no one else is brave enough to say, but wants to say,” Kelly Guthrie Raley, who was named Eustis Middle School Teacher of the Year 2017-2018 last month, said in a now-viral Facebook post following the mass shooting that killed 17 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

Raley said she’ll “take all the criticism and attacks” for her opinion because, as a teacher with two decades of experience, she has to worry about an active-shooter situation on a daily basis.

The middle school teacher said over her almost two decades as an educator that she’s seen an increase in violence and a lack of compassion among students.

“Until we, as a country, are willing to get serious and talk about mental health issues, lack of available care for the mental health issues, lack of discipline in the home, horrendous lack of parental support when the schools are trying to control horrible behavior at school (oh no! Not MY KID. What did YOU do to cause my kid to react that way?), lack of moral values, and yes, I’ll say it – violent video games that take away all sensitivity to ANY compassion for others’ lives – as well as reality TV that makes it commonplace for people to constantly scream up in each others’ faces and not value any other person but themselves, we will have a gun problem in school,” the sixth-grade language arts teacher wrote.

Raley, who loves hunting and four-wheeling in her spare time, added that she grew up with guns in her home.

“But you know what? My parents NEVER supported any bad behavior from me,” Raley said.

She said when she began teaching 20 years ago, she never had to worry about calling a student’s parents and getting cussed out, told to go to hell, or threatened with a public shaming all because she was calling out their child’s behavior. Something, she said, has got to change.

“Parents, it’s time to step up!” Raley urges. “Be the parent that actually gives a crap! Be the annoying mom that pries and knows what your kid is doing. STOP being their friend. They have enough ‘friends’ at school. Be their parent. Being the ‘cool mom’ means not a damn thing when either your kid is dead or your kid kills other people because they were allowed to have their space and privacy in YOUR HOME.”

She doubles down that she had guns in her home.

“But you know what? I never dreamed of shooting anyone with his guns. I never dreamed of taking one! I was taught respect for human life, compassion, rules, common decency, and most of all, I was taught that until I moved out, my life and bedroom wasn’t mine...it was theirs. And they were going to know what was happening because they loved me and wanted the best for me.”

Raley concludes her post by adding that she never brought up gun control.

“This post wasn’t about gun control,” she said. “This was me, loving the crap out of people and wanting the best for them. This was about my school babies and knowing that God created each one for greatness, and just wanting them to reach their futures.”

Raley said the only thing she holds dearer than teaching students is her faith and family, and that her father, a military hero, and her mother, a retired school teacher, inspired her to be who she is today.

[deebakes]

how long until she is reprimanded?

[RBP]

Good for her.

[Muddy]

I hear her, but its just another one of us longing for the way things used to be. Im afraid her target audience wont even read or see this or more so, see themselves as her target.

[RBP]

I hear her, but its just another one of us longing for the way things used to be. Im afraid her target audience wont even read or see this or more so, see themselves as her target.

So don't fight? Not all "progress" is positive. When people have a progressive cancer, they don't say "I long for the days without cancer", they attack the cancer.

[Hal-9000]

Good for her.

I read the shooter bought the weapon used in the shooting. Didn't you report that the gun was owned by another person who had the proper clearances and stored it properly in a gun safe?

My question is - Who sells an AR-15 to an 18 year old? I think it's safe to say the gun is hardly used for hunting.

So walk down the path a little further with me. The kid gets cleared having no history of mental health dings on the record, yet we do have background on him saying he had some issues.

Have I got this right in terms of timing? He's 19 now and bought the gun on his own when he was 18? I'm going to have to side on the liberal left here and say certain types of weapons should not be made available to the open public. Being Canadian and looking at a picture of an AR-15, it boggles the mind people with 'clean records' who are still in their teens can just buy them.

[RBP]

I read the shooter bought the weapon used in the shooting. Didn't you report that the gun was owned by another person who had the proper clearances and stored it properly in a gun safe?

My question is - Who sells an AR-15 to an 18 year old? I think it's safe to say the gun is hardly used for hunting.

So walk down the path a little further with me. The kid gets cleared having no history of mental health dings on the record, yet we do have background on him saying he had some issues.

Have I got this right in terms of timing? He's 19 now and bought the gun on his own when he was 18? I'm going to have to side on the liberal left here and say certain types of weapons should not be made available to the open public. Being Canadian and looking at a picture of an AR-15, it boggles the mind people with 'clean records' who are still in their teens can just buy them.

I posted that the shooter legally purchased the gun and it was stored in a gun locker. As for the rest, I am not opposed to compromises.

[Hal-9000]

I posted that the shooter legally purchased the gun and it was stored in a gun locker. As for the rest, I am not opposed to compromises.

I misinterpreted and thought it was someone else who owned the gun.

And yes, me too on the rest of it...

[Pony]

I read the shooter bought the weapon used in the shooting. Didn't you report that the gun was owned by another person who had the proper clearances and stored it properly in a gun safe?

My question is - Who sells an AR-15 to an 18 year old? I think it's safe to say the gun is hardly used for hunting.

So walk down the path a little further with me. The kid gets cleared having no history of mental health dings on the record, yet we do have background on him saying he had some issues.

Have I got this right in terms of timing? He's 19 now and bought the gun on his own when he was 18? I'm going to have to side on the liberal left here and say certain types of weapons should not be made available to the open public. Being Canadian and looking at a picture of an AR-15, it boggles the mind people with 'clean records' who are still in their teens can just buy them.

So you want to ban it because of the way it looks? It fires no differently than any other semi-auto rifle. I can buy a pellet gun that looks just as threatening and I can easily modify my little 22 rifle to look the same, it doesn't make it any more or less dangerous.

. Generally speaking someone could do a lot more damage in an environment like a school with a shotgun. The military "style" weapons are just that, a style, they simply appear to look more dangerous but do not fire "100's of rounds a minute" like I see posted by the ignorant every time there is a shooting.


That said, I would be OK with them making the legal purchase age 21 instead of 18 for all firearms, I really don't think it would make much of a difference as most weapons used to kill by 18-21YO's have not been historically legally purchased. The vast majority of the time the gun is found to be illegal in the hands of the person using it.
In the most recent case the kid should never have been able to buy the guns with the long history he had. There were a LOT of failings by parents, police, schools and the feds but wouldn't it make more sense to fix the failures to make a better effort to identify and restrict the very small percentage of people capable of these horrific acts than to punish everyone for the deeds of a few?

TLDR: It's a people problem, not a gun problem.

[Hal-9000]

So you want to ban it because of the way it looks? It fires no differently than any other semi-auto rifle. I can buy a pellet gun that looks just as threatening and I can easily modify my little 22 rifle to look the same, it doesn't make it any more or less dangerous.

. Generally speaking someone could do a lot more damage in an environment like a school with a shotgun. The military "style" weapons are just that, a style, they simply appear to look more dangerous but do not fire "100's of rounds a minute" like I see posted by the ignorant every time there is a shooting.


That said, I would be OK with them making the legal purchase age 21 instead of 18 for all firearms, I really don't think it would make much of a difference as most weapons used to kill by 18-21YO's have not been historically legally purchased. The vast majority of the time the gun is found to be illegal in the hands of the person using it.
In the most recent case the kid should never have been able to buy the guns with the long history he had. There were a LOT of failings by parents, police, schools and the feds but wouldn't it make more sense to fix the failures to make a better effort to identify and restrict the very small percentage of people capable of these horrific acts than to punish everyone for the deeds of a few?

TLDR: It's a people problem, not a gun problem.

A semi automatic AR-15 doesn't fire faster than a 22?

And no, I never said I want to ban it because of the way it looks. It was one line in my post with a personal observation on the way the weapon looks when compared to hunting rifles I've seen.

I think it's an availability problem and an 18 year old buying an AR-15 semi automatic rifle is at the heart of it.

It seems we may get into a discussion about how AR-15's are just like any other weapon and how I shouldn't demonize it. The model seems to be a commonality in shootings.

To me, it's an assault rifle and has no place being sold to private citizens. If a person can convert it to fire a faster rate (bump stock, have I got that right?), it leaves the purview of hunting rifles.

I can only support the idea of home and personal protection so far, and I guess that ends with certain types of weapons. Again, I believe that availability is a large part of the equation along with problem people.

[RBP]

I wish we could ban the word "AR-15". It's become a pejorative and allows reporters and activists to be lazy.

[Hal-9000]

When we were young we would play SWAT. We made copies of the variations on machine guns and assault rifles that actual SWAT members used. Going on optics and capability, only police (and special police at that) used these weapons. Point being, you never saw anyone in the public owning and walking around with similar weapons.

Fast forward to more recent times, using the past 20 years as a waypoint, it seems the public has freer access to assault type weapons. Is that fair to say?

I want to know if there's a correlation between availability of certain types of weapons and more frequent school shootings. I can't recall very many school shootings before Columbine. I realize there have been horrible events like the Texas University clock tower shootings in the 60's, and the teen girl who the song I Don't Like Mondays is based on from the 70's, but statistically speaking, have school shootings in general occurred more often in the past two decades, than the previous three decades for example?

[Muddy]

So don't fight? Not all "progress" is positive. When people have a progressive cancer, they don't say "I long for the days without cancer", they attack the cancer.

Im with you, Im just not sure it has any real affect.. also once she dropped all the god stuff in there people are gonna just say 'Trump'..

[Pony]

A semi automatic AR-15 doesn't fire faster than a 22?

And no, I never said I want to ban it because of the way it looks. It was one line in my post with a personal observation on the way the weapon looks when compared to hunting rifles I've seen.

I think it's an availability problem and an 18 year old buying an AR-15 semi automatic rifle is at the heart of it.

It seems we may get into a discussion about how AR-15's are just like any other weapon and how I shouldn't demonize it. The model seems to be a commonality in shootings.

To me, it's an assault rifle and has no place being sold to private citizens. If a person can convert it to fire a faster rate (bump stock, have I got that right?), it leaves the purview of hunting rifles.

I can only support the idea of home and personal protection so far, and I guess that ends with certain types of weapons. Again, I believe that availability is a large part of the equation along with problem people.

No, it does not fire any faster than any other semi-auto firearm, including handguns. One trigger pull = one bullet. It fires the same as my 22 but is considerably more powerful (speed of the bullet, not the rate of fire). I agree some things may need to change, including bump-stocks. To my knowledge only one shooter has used that though.

"Assault rifle" is just a term twisted by the liberal media to describe any threatening looking weapon, by my definition an assault rifle would be a full-auto like those used by the military and are VERY hard and expensive to legally purchase. They are also very, very rare to see used in a shooting despite what action movies and the media would have us believe.

And you said home and personal protection, what about hunting and competitive sport shooting? The AR 15 is one of the more popular rifles used for hunting.

Also, an AR15 is not technically a model, more a style. It refers to the main firing mechanism but is mass produced by many different manufacturers under many different names. It seems to be the most commonly used weapon simply because it's popular do to it's "cool, military" appearance.

Basically, I'm all for banning (or highly regulating) bump stocks and any other mods that would increase the fire rate, I'm all for not allowing mentally ill and persons that are high risk of killing others such as a violent history, etc. Although in many cases those people are already felons and not legal to own any weapon. But banning the AR-style of weapon would only lead bad people to use another equally or more deadly weapon, ban those, they would move to the next on the list, etc,etc. leading to an all out ban on everything.

The overall stats show that it's a small percentage of people in the states doing almost all of the killing, I simply cannot get behind punishing law abiding people for the acts of a few.

[Pony]

I wish we could ban the word "AR-15". It's become a pejorative and allows reporters and activists to be lazy.

And "assault weapon"