Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The government will just build a new school on the same place and say all is well. Fuggin idiots. They (the people) will of course pay for it and feel all good when the ribbon in cut and flags fly low. People are stupid.
I was shaking my head over this.
School budget increases of any amount can have a hard time getting passed yet, for this purely emotional issue the entire school gets razed and a new one built.
The government will just build a new school on the same place and say all is well. Fuggin idiots. They (the people) will of course pay for it and feel all good when the ribbon in cut and flags fly low. People are stupid.
It's not being built at the same site. Not that it matters in any practical sense.
But to address the original post: 50 million dollars seems like a lot of money to erase a tragic memory. This doesn't strike me as a constructive use of resources, much less a rational price tag for what amounts to a communal coping mechanism.
Which leads me to another question that level-headed people might want to ask if we can strip the emotional from the practical: why the bloody hell does it cost over 40 million dollars to build an elementary school to educate 600 students?
I think there is something being overlooked here. The school was about 45 years old, built during a time when many schools were being built feverishly, and therefore cheaply. The elementary school here where we live was pulled down and replaced when it was 50 years old. There wasn't even that much discussion here in town about rehabbing the school, given the problems the school has always had which stem from that specific style of school construction that was common back then, the same style of construction that is evident from photos I've seen of Sandy Hook. While I'm sure that the tragedy motivated many to favor a tear-down and rebuild approach, I wouldn't be surprised if someone brought up the "waste" and had their arguments in that regard rebutted with reports of how the school was reaching the end of its useful life, soon, anyway.
I think there is something being overlooked here. The school was about 45 years old, built during a time when schools were being built feverishly, and therefore cheaply.
This reminds me of the "How I met Your Mother" episode where Barney mentions something about 85% of married couples, something or another and Ted notes that whenever Barney makes up stats he always uses 85%.
To say that this school or any school was built cheaply at any particular time is nothing more than making something up based upon what you perceive is the problem with one local school.
The only problem I see is families that had children killed and then had to send siblings there.
Before Sept 16, I would have agreed with the above posts. However, I was working in the building that was the building with the Navy Yard shooter. It was an awful, awful day and 12 of my colleagues were murdered in the building. Add to that, for those that sat in the building during the whole event, many, many people are suffering PTSD due to what they heard and what they saw. One month later, and I'm still very jumpy around loud noises or when I am in a closed in public place and I hear people getting loud or boisterous. These are the associations that several thousand people have with that building and with the event and it's very hard to get rid of. There are people who are suffering far worse than me and will probably never even be able to go back in the building despite the fact that they are doing a total renovation.
So, for the school, I can sort of understand it now. Granted, the "new" children entering that schools will have no memories of the shooting and, at least with a school, you definitely get a fairly significant and quick change in the population unlike a workplace. The problem is that the parents who live in that town who have to send their children there probably will never forget and people will forever talk about kids being murdered in the building and you know how that gets passed down among children: ghosts, hauntings, etc., and many kids just can't handle it.
I was pretty callous about this sort of thing, until it happened to me, and now I can understand the need for it.
$40 million would have paid for a lot of therapy for those that couldn't manage to get over it.
Personally, many people suffer horrifically tragic things in their lives and have to learn to deal with it.
Even with this incident, a new school isn't going to "make it all better" for those that lost children and/or friends.
As I said......I can understand the problems that certain families would have sending their kids there but Columbine and Virginia Tech didn't get torn down.
Now what local communities want to do really isn't a major concern of those outside of those communities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
