anyway.

We just had a "Code Red" drill at the high school I teach at today. We drill what to do in the event of an "active intruder".  All I can think about during these drills is how, if this were real, there would be parents hoping and praying that I do everything in my power to keep their kids safe.  And, I think of my wife and kids, who want me to come home safely.

Note that the kids are under surveillance and it saved no one's life. And yet, the argument is that *more* surveillance will save us all.

We have more surveillance in London than anywhere else. Violent crime is on the decrease, but gun murders aren't. If you're really fucked up, or off, enough to want to shoot someone, you're not going to worry about cameras.

My understanding is that the cameras in London are mostly catching people pissing in alleys and jaywalking. That is, not actually making anyone safer, but getting folks nicked for doing normal, marginal stuff.

The panopticon works when you have an enlightened philosopher king or perhaps when you're in prison. Since it's what we've got now, you have to choose between those. The former doesn't seem like the right answer, somehow.

Somehow I don't think it's the security cameras part that I'd find no need to see a second time. It's the kids being gunned down in their school.

Violence management for EMTs and first-responders is pretty serious stuff. If it's not safe for the EMT to go in, they can't help anybody. Figuring out how to handle a violent person so you can get in to help any victims is key.

It upsets me when real-life kids are more horrible and fucked up than my Poison'd character.

What's worse than that, Matt, is when there are real-life adults who help make those real-life kid horrible and fucked up.