No. of Recommendations: 6
Initial reporting a few hours ago was notoriously foggy, not due to a lack of facts but lack of clarity in the writing written by ADHD addled "internet reporters." One story mentioned that all schools in the entire Georgia county where the actual shooting site resided were put on lockdown. Several paragraphs later, a mention was made that a threat was called in.
Okaaaaaaayyyyy...
What is the average internet citizen supposed to derive from that exposition?
Is THIS what happened?
1) a person made a threat of violence at a specific date and time against ALL schools in the area
2) ALL schools in the entire county were put on lockdown
3) then an actual shooting took place at ONE of the schools
Or is THIS what happened?
1) a shooting began at school X in a Georgia county
2) approximately at the same time, a threat was called in referencing a wider set of schools
3) all local schools in the entire county placed themselves on lockdown
Or is THIS what happened?
1) a shooting began at school X in a Georgia county
2) rumours spread that a threat related to the shooting had been called in or spread via social media
3) all schools in that Georgia county have adopted a rule that ALL schools go on lockdown any time ANY school experiences a shooting
Or something else?
If all schools in a county have decided to trigger lockdowns any time there is a shooting in any one of the schools or a credible threat communicated, they are going to be traumatizing 100% of the students in that tnat entire county far more than any other students in the country, needlessly. If they are that terrified of a future event, maybe they should start voting out idiots who block meaningful limits on automatic weapons and registration loopholes for gun purchases. Don't just further traumatize the children.
WTH
