Gun Control Debate #5

[bluesneakers]

Your statement applies to both scenarios, of my post, #837. The second young man even stated that he hoped he didn't get into trouble for walking out, and he did not. Should he have?

Edit: It seems, that the first kid felt he was forced to choose a side.

I don't write the rules.

 

[rsd1200]

I don't write the rules.

That's not what I asked, but, okay.

 

[bluesneakers]

That's not what I asked, but, okay.

They don't go to the same school so the comparison is meaningless. I'm not going to say what the school should have done. Certainly a school in Ohio isn't going to coordinate its response with a school in North Carolina. I think people just want to use the case of the student who ignored the warning he'd been given to prove some point like students were pressured to take sides or students who walked out didn't face any consequences.

The student in Ohio was not suspended because he didn't pick sides. He was suspended because he ignored the rules and ignored the warnings he'd been given.

 

[rsd1200]

They don't go to the same school so the comparison is meaningless. I'm not going to say what the school should have done. Certainly a school in Ohio isn't going to coordinate its response with a school in North Carolina. I think people just want to use the case of the student who ignored the warning he'd been given to prove some point like students were pressured to take sides or students who walked out didn't face any consequences.

The student in Ohio was not suspended because he didn't pick sides. He was suspended because he ignored the rules and ignored the warnings he'd been given.

I'm okay with the student being punished. He broke the rules. He could have asked to sit in the office, and help sort papers, or, he could have made a t-shirt stating I'm Neutral (easy and cheap). There were options, he could have sought, rather than breaking the rules. I'm not okay with others going unpunished, for breaking the rules and being seen through a different lense. I'm proud of the kids who are using their voices, be it walking out, sitting in, or marching on the front lawn of the White House.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

He didn't want to choose sides so he stayed in the classroom.

I support this kid who refused to be forced to choose sides on this issue. The school should have let the students who didn't want to participate in taking one side or the other stay in their classroom. JMO

 

[bluesneakers]

I support this kid who refused to be forced to choose sides on this issue. The school should have let the students who didn't want to participate in taking one side or the other stay in their classroom. JMO

How is staying in the classroom different from going to study hall?

 

[ohreally]

I do support the student and believe he was doing what he felt was right. With actions come consequences. I take this event as any other event in the school where students leave class to have pep rallies, watch the drama club do a play, choir put on a musical and such. At the high schools I know about no one is forced to go to the event, but must go to study hall so all students can be supervised.
According to the schools web sight the event was not a walkout.
We are not facilitating a walkout, we are planning respectful gatherings as teachable moments . . . we are working with students to find their voice in a safe, dignified, and intentional way.
It was not a gun rights movement or school safety movement
Hilliard Bradley students will hold a moment of silence at 10 am. Later in the day, they will allow students who are interested gather in the stadium to memorialize those killed in Parkland and in other school shootings. Mrs. Mordarski will say a few words and two other students will speak. Their choir will sing and then they will ring a bell 17 times
The event was organized by both the staff and the students.
http://www.hilliardschools.org/hdv/student-gatherings-march-14/

 

[rsd1200]

I do support the student and believe he was doing what he felt was right. With actions come consequences. I take this event as any other event in the school where students leave class to have pep rallies, watch the drama club do a play, choir put on a musical and such. At the high schools I know about no one is forced to go to the event, but must go to study hall so all students can be supervised.
According to the schools web sight the event was not a walkout.
We are not facilitating a walkout, we are planning respectful gatherings as teachable moments . . . we are working with students to find their voice in a safe, dignified, and intentional way.
It was not a gun rights movement or school safety movement
Hilliard Bradley students will hold a moment of silence at 10 am. Later in the day, they will allow students who are interested gather in the stadium to memorialize those killed in Parkland and in other school shootings. Mrs. Mordarski will say a few words and two other students will speak. Their choir will sing and then they will ring a bell 17 times
The event was organized by both the staff and the students.
http://www.hilliardschools.org/hdv/student-gatherings-march-14/

I too support his choice. Sometimes that's the price we pay for standing firm and standing alone. He wanted to remain nonpolitical. I can see his point about not wishing to attend either option. Either choice he made, would seem political (in his eyes). He knew he'd receive consequences for his choice. Just as some who walked out, did, w/o permission, at some other schools. His citation was shared online by a friend.


From link:

Jacob said he felt like the protest was too political and did not want to take either side.


He said he stayed in the classroom to work on school work and said he knew there could be consequences for his decision.
He told 10TV he was willing to accept those consequences.


Jacob said after the walkout was over, he learned he was suspended for the rest of the day on Wednesday and all day Thursday.
Jacob and Scott confirmed the letter being circulated on social media is accurate.


The letter said he was suspended for refusing to follow instructions.


Scott said he did not think the punishment is appropriate for what his son did but wishes people would move on. Jacob added his actions were not supposed to attract as much attention as they did.

https://www.10tv.com/article/distri...d-student-suspended-over-walkout-refusal-fake

 

[Blef]

I support this kid who refused to be forced to choose sides on this issue. The school should have let the students who didn't want to participate in taking one side or the other stay in their classroom. JMO

Thst were allowed to stay in school. In study hall where there was adequate supervision. Feels like nitpicking to say they should have been allowed to stay in the classroom when they could just go to study hall. They had a choice

 

[Blef]

I too support his choice. Sometimes that's the price we pay for standing firm and standing alone. He wanted to remain nonpolitical. I can see his point about not wishing to attend either option. Either choice he made, would seem political (in his eyes). He knew he'd receive consequences for his choice. Just as some who walked out, did, w/o permission, at some other schools. His citation was shared online by a friend.


From link:



https://www.10tv.com/article/distri...d-student-suspended-over-walkout-refusal-fake

if he wanted to stay non-political and said he knew and accepted the consequences of not going to study hall, why is he NOW being political and going to the media? He knew the consequence, made a choice and now is saying it’s unfair. Seems like self-promotion to me.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Thst were allowed to stay in school. In study hall where there was adequate supervision. Feels like nitpicking to say they should have been allowed to stay in the classroom when they could just go to study hall. They had a choice

The student felt that going to study hall would be choosing one side over another. I respect that.

The school should not have put students in a position which made this student feel that he had to stay in class to stay neutral. I've learned from this student's situation that if you don't take a position on a political issue you can be punished.

I don't think that kids should be forced to publicly show how they feel about politics. Maybe some do not have any idea yet. I sure didn't when I was in high school. I was worried about other things. JMO

 

[ohreally]

if he wanted to stay non-political and said he knew and accepted the consequences of not going to study hall, why is he NOW being political and going to the media? He knew the consequence, made a choice and now is saying it’s unfair. Seems like self-promotion to me.

The same can be said for the students that were paddled for thier discipline. They walked out knowing there would be consequences. They were given a choice between suspension or paddling. They and thier parents signed the option for the paddling. Then they went to the media to complain about they form of punishment they chose. They didn't have to agree to the paddling, but did, then complained.

 

[Blef]

The student felt that going to study hall would be choosing one side over another. I respect that.

The school should not have put students in a position which made this student feel that he had to stay in class to stay neutral. I've learned from this student's situation that if you don't take a position on a political issue you can be punished.

I don't think that kids should be forced to publicly show how they feel about politics. Maybe some do not have any idea yet. I sure didn't when I was in high school. I was worried about other things. JMO

no he wasn’t. He chose not to participate in the walkout. He THEN disobeyed school rules by saying he wouldn’t go where they NEEDED him to go for SAFETY. Once again individualism trumps the safety of others. He was displaying no political viewpoint by going to study hall, i’m sure there would be other children who had no standpoint on the subject in there.

 

[Blef]

The same can be said for the students that were paddled for thier discipline. They walked out knowing there would be consequences. They were given a choice between suspension or paddling. They and thier parents signed the option for the paddling. Then they went to the media to complain about they form of punishment they chose. They didn't have to agree to the paddling, but did, then complained.

they are being PUNISHED for asserting their first amendment rights. You know the rights set out in the constitution!

 

[rsd1200]

if he wanted to stay non-political and said he knew and accepted the consequences of not going to study hall, why is he NOW being political and going to the media? He knew the consequence, made a choice and now is saying it’s unfair. Seems like self-promotion to me.

He didn't post his citation on SM, and he was willing to accept his punishment. Do you see the students walking out, w/o permission, unsupervised, w/ the same lens as you view this young man? Would you accuse them of self promotion? The NYT article is two days old. The news 10 article is three days old. It's not new news. It's old news. You're accusing a teen, using his 1A, of self promotion. What would happen on this thread if you accused this young lady, of the same, for speaking to a news station, of self-promotion? She used her 1A, and it took courage to do what she felt was right, too. However, she was outside, and unsupervised.

Sayreville High School student Rosa Rodriguez said the school's principal threatened disciplinary action on anyone who walked out of class Wednesday morning -- but that didn't stop her.

She said students were given the option of walking to the gym and staying there for 17 minutes in honor of the Parkland victims. But she said that wasn't good enough.

http://abc7ny.com/education/single-...ey-school-under-threat-of-suspension/3216954/

 

[Deleted member 39678]

no he wasn’t. He chose not to participate in the walkout. He THEN disobeyed school rules by saying he wouldn’t go where they NEEDED him to go for SAFETY. Once again individualism trumps the safety of others. He was displaying no political viewpoint by going to study hall, i’m sure there would be other children who had no standpoint on the subject in there.

I'm just going by what the kid said. He said that he stayed in the classroom because he didn't want to take sides. I have no reason to believe he is lying about this.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

I'm just going by what the kid said. He said that he stayed in the classroom because he didn't want to take sides. I have no reason to believe he is lying about this.

Civil disobedience often has consequences.

Good on this kid for doing what he believed in, knowing he was going against the rules and being willing to accept the consequences

From the link:

The district says it's responsible for students' safety and they can't be unsupervised.

Jacob's citation for not following instructions was shared online by a friend.

 

[ohreally]

they are being PUNISHED for asserting their first amendment rights. You know the rights set out in the constitution!

No they were not punished for exercising thier first amendment rights. They walked out of class which is against school policy. They can be punished for it, but they can not be punished more harshly than any other student would be for walking out of class.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/you-can-be-punished-for-walking-out-of-school.html

 

[bluesneakers]

if he wanted to stay non-political and said he knew and accepted the consequences of not going to study hall, why is he NOW being political and going to the media? He knew the consequence, made a choice and now is saying it’s unfair. Seems like self-promotion to me.

Exactly. He did what he wanted to do, knowingly broke the rules, and is now complaining, wanting attention.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

To be fair, many of these students are minors and the school has rules. Many schools allowed a choice — study hall or march. Study hall isn’t a punishment. They were supervised either way.

This was a student deciding on their own, who felt like they were forced to take sides and who chose an option that wasn’t allowed. That student isn’t being punished “more harshly.” He isn’t allowed to be unsupervised.

No student was allowed to be unsupervised.

He decided go to against that fundamental, universal school policy. IMHO

It’s fine he did, imho. He knew the consequences and made his decision. ... His own version of civil disobedience. That’s his right, too.

Moo

No they were not punished for exercising thier first amendment rights. They walked out of class which is against school policy. They can be punished for it, but they can not be punished more harshly than any other student would be for walking out of class.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/14/you-can-be-punished-for-walking-out-of-school.html

they are being PUNISHED for asserting their first amendment rights. You know the rights set out in the constitution!