Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
[flagged] Winnie-the-Pooh book teaches Texas kids to ‘run, hide, fight’ in a shooting (theguardian.com)
20 points by detaro on May 25, 2023 | hide | past | favorite | 22 comments


> The book features the honey-loving bear created by AA Milne and illustrator EH Shepard instructing kids about how to react to a mass shooting. It is not an official production, Winnie-the-Pooh has been in the public domain since 1 January 2022.

Not what I expected from "well-known childrens franchise goes public domain"


Precisely what I expected from "well-known children's franchise goes public domain".

The main thing I've learned from the Internet is that, while most people aren't terrible, the most terrible people have the most time on their hands. In a room with 100 people, one of them is the most depraved asshole. And that is the one whose actions will be most important.


I really hate to be the one to inform you about the Winnie-the-Pooh horror movie.


"Turn cute characters into a splatter thing" wasn't that surprising IMHO (see thousands of low-profile early-2000s flash animations), although how big of a thing it became was a bit unexpected.


> If there is danger, the police will come fast to catch the stranger

Oh the irony of having this in Texas. Instead of having real 2nd amendment reform, lets give everyone a book to cope with the new reality.


I'm a pacifist, and generally side with law enforcement even through their fuckups, but someone deserved to hang over the Uvalde shitshow. Accidentally killing suspects who may or may not have been uppity is doing your job poorly, but leaving a bunch of defenseless kids locked in a labyrinth with a gunman is not doing your job at all.

Between coward cops and dissolute gunmen at school or work, it's never too late to learn how to build a proper barricade. Don't stack furniture in front of the door like in zombie movies; the door already serves the purpose of blocking-- instead, hunker down in a classroom/office and build a train of furniture extending from the door to the opposing wall sturdy enough that anybody trying to open it is pushing a column of furniture against a wall instead of shifting a pile of shitty MDF. Then get the hell away from line-of-sight of the door. Expect bullets fired through it in frustration.


More importantly - we could also try to fix the division and culture issues that stirs up the violence, but for separate reasons, no-one wants to do that either. Interestingly we'd rather make people impotent than good.


Honestly I'll take any action. Is it a mental health issue? Let's take action to address those issues. Parenting? Figure out how to improve parent involvement, resources, etc. "division and culture issues that stirs up the violence"? Great how do we DO something about that.

Too often these "it's not the guns it's X", then use that as an excuse to do nothing rather than focus on solving X. I tend to side with the folks pushing for gun restrictions more because they are actually pushing to try something rather than doing nothing.


Who gets to define "good"?


Since the general public doesn't seem to be interested in God anymore, we can start with the data and go from there. For example - fatherlessness creates more violent individuals and the data proves it, let's fix that.


> Instead of having real 2nd amendment reform

How do you propose to reform the second amendment?


Interpreting a well regulated militia to actually mean something.


I don't see how the federal government setting explicit standards for arms and equipment suitable for use in the event of their calling out the militia would help, but I'd not have a huge issue with it.

How about a subsidy? Even something as simple as a tax credit for the purchase of arms, equipment, and ammunition with which to train would probably be broadly popular.

... I suspect this isn't what you meant when you wrote your comment - but it is what the people who wrote and ratified the BoR understood the text of the Second Amendment to mean.


Thorough and enforced training requirements for gun ownership I think would shift a lot of opinions from the somewhat opposed to the accepting column.


This is only a tenable position to hold if you _also_ accept educational requirements to exercise other rights. E.g., the right to vote.

The Supreme Court has held that such requirements to exercise a fundamental right are inherently unconstitutional and discriminatory.

Because rights are held to the standard of scrutiny, the only way to diminish the protections afforded by the second amendment is to lower the standard of scrutiny, which opens the door to two scenarios: either the 2nd amendment is deemed unpopular enough of a right that it warrants diminished protections, which yields the prospect of any right becoming unpopular and protections similarly diminished, or none of the enumerated rights deserve the robust protections that the second amendment provides, which imperils protections on rights we may care more about, like voting (which is not even constitutionally enumerated,) speech, etc.


> On the following page, Kanga and baby Roo are shown wearing boxing gloves. The text says: “If danger finds us, don’t stay, run away. If we can’t get away, we have to FIGHT with all our might.”

That's just the message I got from my own parent. Dad said GTFO, but if you can't, fight like hell and don't fight fair. (Then he gave some specific suggestions.) It may not be good advice for a four-year old, but it's a good algorithm to implant early.


I'm told this is the foundation of Krav Maga.


It's a reasonable strategy. I follow it, and I've taught my children the same.

I don't think it's suitable for a children's book to be sent home with kids without additional explanation or context, though.


A. A. Milne is turning in his grave.


> “should the unthinkable occur”

Yet so common that things like this book make sense.


Unthinkable does not have anything to do with probability. Rather, it’s something the author would prefer to not think about.

Also, you saying it’s common is a judgement call and not a true frequency call.

It can be both unthinkable and uncommon and possible.


I think the right phrase is something like "worth thinking about" rather than "common". It's like the "in the very unlikely event of a water landing..." you hear on airplanes. It is very unlikely but there's something relatively easy you can do that will improve your chances if it does happen.

Either way, it's disturbing that this might be "worth thinking about".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: