>

In this instance, "pants" = UK slang: rubbish; worthless; poor quality.
goddamn,  sounds absolutely premeditated.  
"Two days before the shooting, the boy allegedly “slammed” Zwerner’s cellphone and broke it, according to the claim notice. He was given a one-day suspension, but when he returned to Zwerner’s class the following day, he pulled a 9mm handgun out of his pocket and shot her while she sat at a reading table, the notice says." >

Well, yeah, he brought a gun. 
I wonder if there were any risk assessments done for concerning behaviour? 
That’s what would happen in a Canadian school. >

So here's what we learned from other articles:
- another student warned the front office about it because he had shown bullets to other students before he shot her
-the teacher warned the office about issues after the phone was taken, the front office said "it's end of day so nothing we can do"
-the parents claimed the child was in a program and was supposed to be in the class with him, but wasn't that day. 
-parents claim the gun was locked up...(qustionable). 
So basically there was a lot that wasn't done, but there was a lot of warning. >

That part about the front office doing nothing checks out. In my brief time working at public schools several kids engaged in violently disruptive behavior and the general response was - handle it yourself. >

That must be a US-specific thing.
I know Canadian parents may claim the front office does nothing, but provided everyone does their job, this is not a thing. >

Goddamn I wish I was a Canadian! >

A six year old who tried to choke a teacher and shot another one.  It just blows my mind.  When I think about what I was up to at 6, that type of behavior didn't even exist in my mind.  So much shit must be wrong with that child that I do not even see a way he could be helped. >

I think it proves they can’t just not do anything with the child. Very complicated situation… >

Conduct disorder? Where tf are the parents? Why are we not hearing about them? >

Cuz they've lawyered up and s/he's told them to shut up. >


s/he’s

IMO using “they” whenever gender is ambiguous is best practice. Not trying to be pedantic/nitpicky tho! >

some of us older kids were taught in school to use she/he in formal writing and that using 'they' as a singular is incorrect and improper.  Before that, 'he' was always used in formal writing, regardless of gender (before my time).  The American English language is pretty GD fluid and once we enter the work force/adult life, we're left behind on how these writing principles are amended.  I, myself, have never refreshed my Little Brown Book.  :-) >


some of us older kids were taught in school to use she/he in formal writing and that using 'they' as a singular is incorrect and improper. 

True, and we were also taught not to split infinitives, or end a sentence with a preposition.
It turns out that all three of these "rules" are equally pants. :) >

Pants/skirts