I find the arguement of comparing war deaths to any other type of deaths rather abhorent myself. I went to a viewing party a couple years ago to see the documentary "Out Foxed", showing the bias of Faux News.

They showed a clip of a talking head talking about the latest Pentagon deaths report. And he said something about it not being too bad because you were 15 times more likely to get killed on the freeway in California.

I didn't find that a good excuse for an un-needed war then, or now.

>From FBI reports: 16,692 people were murdered in the United States during 2005. The JAMA reports that over 100,000 patients are killed by doctors annually. Seems like we could do more to prevent these types of deaths.
>
>>Living in some of our cities, people get shot at everyday. You sure know how to sidestep any cogent argument.
>>
>>>I guess I just don't like the idea of a kid having a job where being shot at is reqirement.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>Do you allow your kids to:
>>>>
>>>>1. Drive - A life or death activity. More likely to be killed in an auto accident than in war.
>>>>2. Drink - ditto
>>>>3. Have Sex
>>>>4. Smoke
>>>>5. Cross streets
>>>>6. Fly
>>>>7. Marital Arts
>>>>8. Fire weapons
>>>>9. Swim, etc, ad nauseum...?
>>>>
>>>>All are just as dangerous as being in the military. I was there for nearly 30 years and saw combat only sparsely.
>>>>I bet if you compare statistics of military deaths per capita to driving deaths per capita, the driving deaths would so far outnumber the military deaths to be completely unarguable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Well I suppose I see your point here. But you're dealing with a life-or-death issue here - and yes, it is that extreame of an issue (100+ last month..right?) Hey I think a young adult should be able to have the opportunity to say no to smoking crack, but I'm sure as heck not going to give the crack dealer the kids phone number so he can call and present the opportunity to let the kid make a choice.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Granted, I would not argue otherwise. However, the issue is not whether or not military service is the right path for your child and who is capable (or legally able to) make that decision, but rather restricting the presenting of the information and why it should not be available for the young adult in order to give them the opportunity to make a choice and review his/her options.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Parent make decisions to keep their children safe everyday. An adult is going to have more life-experience and, for the most part, be better equipped to make judgment calls than a teenager.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>That surprises me. I really didn't think you didn't trust your son's judgment? I see no other reason for opt out paperwork to be completed. Afterall, recruiters only present the options to kids, they cannot draft anyone. They cannot force anyone to do anything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>In fact, IIRC, NCLB requires high schools to provide the names and addresses of their students to the military. I know we signed a form requesting Nathaniel's name be withheld from that list.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>This was explained to me by a co-worker. This is something new, part of the "no child left behind" instituted by bush a couple years ago.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Where do you come up with this? During my time as a recruiter, we visited each of the highschools, vo-tech schools, adult schools and college compases in our districts about once a month. No one forced the schools to allow us to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>If its in the education package, then bravo. The kids will get to hear an alternative to further schooling.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>I don't know the specifics, but I've talked to several parents who are very upset that one of the rules of "no child left behind" requires letting military recruiters on campus.
>>>>>>>>>>>>