PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues 8th grade student suspended, arrested over gun t-shirt


Pages : [1] 2

Count Alex's Wins
04-23-2013, 02:42 PM
:facepalm:

Thanks, Obama.

http://wowk.images.worldnow.com/images/22020264_BG1.jpg

http://www.wowktv.com/story/22020264/8th-grade-student-arrested-over-gun-t-shirt

When 8th grade Jared Marcum got dressed for school on Thursday he says he had no idea that his pro-Second Amendment shirt would initiate what he calls a fight over his First Amendment rights.

"I never thought it would go this far because honestly I don't see a problem with this, there shouldn't be a problem with this," Jared said.

It was the image of a gun printed on Jared's t-shirt that sparked a dispute between a Logan Middle School teacher and Jared, that ended with Jared suspended, arrested and facing two charges, obstruction and disturbing the education process, on his otherwise spotless record.

Jared's father Allen Lardieri says he's angry he had to rush from work to pick his son up from jail over something he says was blown way out of proportion.

"I don't' see how anybody would have an issue with a hunting rifle and NRA put on a t-shirt, especially when policy doesn't forbid it," Lardieri said.

(READ MORE: Questions remain unanswered for 8th grade student arrested over shirt)

The Logan County School District's dress code policy prohibits clothing that displays profanity, violence, discriminatory messages and more but nowhere in the document does it say anything about gun images.

"He did not violate any school policy," Lardieri reiterates. "He did not become aggressive."

Now, Lardieri says he's ready to fight until the situation is made right.

"I will go to the ends of the earth, I will call people, I will write letters, I will do everything in the legal realm to make sure this does not happen again," Lardieri said.

Logan City Police did confirm that Jared had been arrested and charged today.

13 news tried contacting the Logan County School District but has not heard anything back.

cosmo20002
04-23-2013, 02:46 PM
:facepalm:

Thanks, Obama.

http://wowk.images.worldnow.com/images/22020264_BG1.jpg



Get yer hair cut, ya hippie! :cuss:

cosmo20002
04-23-2013, 02:50 PM
Right or wrong, any dipshit knows that wearing that shirt to school is going to be a problem.

However, I have no idea why this would result in an arrest.

mikey23545
04-23-2013, 02:53 PM
Right or wrong, any dipshit knows that wearing that shirt to school is going to be a problem.

However, I have no idea why this would result in an arrest.

Explain this retarded statement.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 02:54 PM
Arrested would be too far. I have no idea why schools don't have uniform policies. It's just incredibly short-sighted, in my opinion.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 02:55 PM
Explain this retarded statement.

You don't think that would disturb a lot of students and teachers?

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 02:58 PM
Explain this retarded statement.

Controversial shirts are banned from schools all the time. Kids aren't allowed to wear shirts that promote drug and alcohol use. My senior class had shirts that said "Big Cock Security" with a picture of a rooster in a police uniform...banned.

In middle school me and a buddy jocked Kurt Cobain's style and wore dresses over our clothes. We were told to remove them immediately.

Typically schools here would make kids turn their shirts inside-out if their shirt was thought to be offensive.

I agree that arresting this kid may be over the line though.

Chiefspants
04-23-2013, 02:58 PM
You don't think that would disturb a lot of students and teachers?

Growing up in central Kansas, seeing these shirts were pretty much standard operating procedure in high school.

cosmo20002
04-23-2013, 02:59 PM
Explain this statement.

Schools are sensitive about guns. That's the way it is. Tough shit if you can't wear your gun shirt to school.

WhawhaWhat
04-23-2013, 03:00 PM
The Logan County School District's dress code policy prohibits clothing that displays profanity, violence, discriminatory messages and more but nowhere in the document does it say anything about gun images.

I believe the most of these policies usually say something about clothing that is disruptive as well.

It's still stupid to kick him out of class, but I noticed when they wrote "and more" in the story that there is probably something that the writer didn't tell us.

jettio
04-23-2013, 03:01 PM
Methinks this might be more believable as a complaint about 1st Amendment oppression if the dad picked up the kid from school and not at the jail.

You never know with these stories, but it seems that even if the teacher was in the wrong for thinking that the shirt was not allowed, the kid might have compromised his chance to defend 2 constitutional amendments all at once if he went berserk enough to get charged with obstruction. Assuming that is obstructing a police officer.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:03 PM
Growing up in central Kansas, seeing these shirts were pretty much standard operating procedure in high school.

We live in a particular era where school shootings are something that students, teachers, administration, and parents take very serious caution with, as more than an abstract threat, but something that should be prepared for.

Amnorix
04-23-2013, 03:03 PM
Whole thing seems insane to me, to be honest.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:06 PM
I believe the most of these policies usually say something about clothing that is disruptive as well.

It's still stupid to kick him out of class, but I noticed when they wrote "and more" in the story that there is probably something that the writer didn't tell us.

The complete lack of telling how it escalated into an arrest is interesting.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:07 PM
You don't think that would disturb a lot of students and teachers?

A t shirt?

The pussification of america continues...

fan4ever
04-23-2013, 03:08 PM
You don't think that would disturb a lot of students and teachers?

Does the shirt say something I don't see? Protect your rights is pretty much the message from what I can read on the shirt. The association with the NRA is the kicker, I know, but attach that shirt to any other venue like pro-choice agenda and I doubt that would have raised an eyebrow...and been a really much bigger deal had someone been suspended for wearing it.

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 03:08 PM
A t shirt?

The pussification of america continues...

You a fan of letting kids wear gang colors in schools?

2bikemike
04-23-2013, 03:08 PM
The teacher was completely out of line and I think in the end it will bear out that way. I doubt seriously the prosecuter will pursue it.

Logan City Police Chief E.K. Harper told ABCNews.com that Marcum was not arrested for wearing a t-shirt, but for "disrupting the school process."

"His conduct in school almost incited a riot," Harper said.

White said that charges being filed against Marcum are pending the prosecutor's office's review of the evidence. But he insisted that it was the teacher who caused the issue by confronting the teen, and that video gathered from the school will prove it

Logan county schools' dress code, which is posted online, prohibits clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexual language, along with ads for alcohol, tobacco or drugs. There is no mention of the NRA or guns.

On top of his arrest and trip to the police station, Marcum was suspended from school for one day. This morning, he returned to school wearing the same t-shirt, White said.
White accompanied Marcum and his stepfather to a meeting at the school, where the principal, according to White, said that she "hates that it happened" to Marcum.

Logan County students wore NRA t-shirts today in solidarity with Marcum, White said, adding that Marcum is an honor roll student eyeing a career in the military. Zigmond did not mention any disciplinary action during school today.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:08 PM
We live in a particular era where school shootings are something that students, teachers, administration, and parents take very serious caution with, as more than an abstract threat, but something that should be prepared for.

Remind me of that when t shirts can shoot people

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:09 PM
A t shirt?

The pussification of america continues...

This isn't a new issue. There was a huge Supreme Court case in the 1960s where some kids in Iowa where red arm bands. The arm bands were declared a disturbance by administration.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:10 PM
You a fan of letting kids wear gang colors in schools?

Oh nos, what will we do when there are enough gangs when all of the colors are taken?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:11 PM
Does the shirt say something I don't see? Protect your rights is pretty much the message from what I can read on the shirt. The association with the NRA is the kicker, I know, but attach that shirt to any other venue like pro-choice agenda and I doubt that would have raised an eyebrow...and been a really much bigger deal had someone been suspended for wearing it.

The picture of the gun is the kicker. A shirt that would have just said "Go NRA: Protect the 2nd Amend!" would probably have been accepted.

Count Alex's Wins
04-23-2013, 03:12 PM
I used to eat my toast into a gun. I'm really glad I didn't get arrested because I mock toast gun has to be worse than just a picture of a gun right?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:13 PM
Remind me of that when t shirts can shoot people

Would you find it reasonable if a kid was told to change his shirt because it had a print of a naked woman on the back?

LiveSteam
04-23-2013, 03:13 PM
If that shirt said I support gays , Nothing would have happened to the kid till after school.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:15 PM
I used to eat my toast into a gun. I'm really glad I didn't get arrested because I mock toast gun has to be worse than just a picture of a gun right?

A student in today's high schools would most likely have their mock gun taken away from them, and if they resisted it, a suspension.

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 03:16 PM
If a shirt had this image, would you all be ok with kids wearing it to school?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/1338597515_Eazy-E32.jpg

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:16 PM
Logan County students wore NRA t-shirts today in solidarity with Marcum, White said, adding that Marcum is an honor roll student eyeing a career in the military . . .

I hope he learns how to tolerate being told what to wear and how to follow rules he might not like.

LiveSteam
04-23-2013, 03:17 PM
If a shirt had this image, would you all be ok with kids wearing it to school?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/1338597515_Eazy-E32.jpg

Freeeeeez! gangster style


http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/taigi/taigi1205/taigi120500108/13830112-hand-holding-penis-shape-water-pistol-isolated-on-white-background.jpg

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 03:19 PM
Freeeeeez! gangster style


Why do you even read/post in here? You bring absolutely nothing to any debate.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:19 PM
Would you find it reasonable if a kid was told to change his shirt because it had a print of a naked woman on the back?

But thats against the rules, isn't it. What he had on his shirt was not.

Don't discriminate.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:20 PM
This is a case of an idiot looking for a reaction from idiots who are only too happy to over-react. Idiots generally don't cause problems, as non-idiots can neutralize the threat. It's only when idiots run into other idiots that sparks tend to fly (See Trayvon/Zimmerman).

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:22 PM
If a shirt had this image, would you all be ok with kids wearing it to school?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/1338597515_Eazy-E32.jpg

Sans the white sox hat, yes

jettio
04-23-2013, 03:24 PM
This isn't a new issue. There was a huge Supreme Court case in the 1960s where some kids in Iowa where red arm bands. The arm bands were declared a disturbance by administration.

If you want to read originalism unintentionally parodying itself, you should read Clarence Thomas's opinion in the recent "bong hits for Jesus" case about public school 1st amendment rights..

Pretty much said that there were not many public schools in the 1860's when the 14th amendment was adopted, and that, in the few public schools that did exist, the teachers could clout students in the mouth for any behavior so public schoolkids today should not have the 1st Amendment rights discussed in that Iowa case you refer to.

Would be kind of ironic to apply his reasoning to this case since he wants to be pro-gun rights.

LiveSteam
04-23-2013, 03:26 PM
Why do you even read/post in here? You bring absolutely nothing to any debate.

you still haven't answered my question from yesterday. so dont yap to me about debate, in a thread thats a pissing match over NRA clothing

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:26 PM
But thats against the rules, isn't it. What he had on his shirt was not.

Don't discriminate.

I don't know. A naked woman could be "sexual language" but maybe a gun would also be a display of "violence" with that same broad reading principle.

mikey23545
04-23-2013, 03:26 PM
Controversial shirts are banned from schools all the time. Kids aren't allowed to wear shirts that promote drug and alcohol use. My senior class had shirts that said "Big Cock Security" with a picture of a rooster in a police uniform...banned.

In middle school me and a buddy jocked Kurt Cobain's style and wore dresses over our clothes. We were told to remove them immediately.

Typically schools here would make kids turn their shirts inside-out if their shirt was thought to be offensive.

I agree that arresting this kid may be over the line though.


Just for the board communists, the Logan County schools dress code:


http://lc2.boe.loga.k12.wv.us/manhigh/code.htm



Student dress and grooming should be in good taste and appropriate for the occasion.

Sunglasses are not to be worn in the classroom unless a medical permit is on file.

No hats or bandannas are to be worn in the building during the class day. If students must wear a hat to school, the hat must be placed in the locker and left there until the school day is over. Vocational students may take their hat at the time of their departure.

Appropriate clothing should be worn at all times. The main torso of the body should not be visible. Therefore, the wearing of mesh shirts would be inappropriate without and appropriate shirt under the mesh shirt. The wearing of garments considered as tank tops or tops with spaghetti straps is inappropriate.

Any article of clothing or accessories, such as jewelry with spikes, dog collars, wallet chains, chains worn as belts, that may cause injury to another student may not be worn at school or school functions.

Clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases are not to be worn at school or school functions.

Clothing that displays advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco, or drug product is not to be worn at school or school functions.

Waistband of shorts, slacks, skirts, and similar garments must be worn above the hips. If belts, suspenders, or straps are worn, they must be worn in place and fastened. Undergarments shall not be visible. Any article of clothing that is excessively torn may not be worn.

Shoes must be worn at all times. Shoes with laces should be laced and tied at all times.

Business-style blazers, suitcoats, and ties are permitted but outdoor jackets and coats are not to be worn or carried to class.

The legs of trousers and pants shall be worn down at all times.

Hem lengths on dresses, skirts, and shorts must be no higher than mid thigh.



Feel free to find the part where it says "First and Second Amendment rights are not to be defended by any student!"

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:27 PM
This is a case of an idiot looking for a reaction from idiots who are only too happy to over-react. Idiots generally don't cause problems, as non-idiots can neutralize the threat. It's only when idiots run into other idiots that sparks tend to fly (See Trayvon/Zimmerman).

I could see that being the case here. You make an astute point.

mr. tegu
04-23-2013, 03:28 PM
"I never thought it would go this far because honestly I don't see a problem with this, there shouldn't be a problem with this," Jared said.

The kid obviously knew this was going to cause some trouble he just didn't know how much. My guess would be the class had some conversations that basically ended up with students are not allowed to where images or represent guns in the school. So he tested the boundaries.

Also, how do we even know about this? Who made it public? How did the media pick it up? I never understand that with such a silly little story like this.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:29 PM
If the picture of the gun is the problem...would he have been suspended if the same gun was on his shirt, but it said..."Ban Assault Weapons" instead of "Protect Your Rights"?

There is nothing on his shirt that is offensive. There is nothing on his shirt that promotes terrorism, violence, mass shootings, etc. Expressing support for an Amendment in the Constitution of the United States is not against any rules of the school

The school was wrong, plain and simple.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:30 PM
I don't know. A naked woman could be "sexual language" but maybe a gun would also be a display of "violence" with that same broad reading principle.

The gun in this particular context does not convey a sense of "violence", and anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:31 PM
Feel free to find the part where it says "First and Second Amendment rights are not to be defended by any student!"

There's a time and place for everything. A student's rant about gay marriage during math class would be an inappropriate place to exercise her First Amendment.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:31 PM
If the picture of the gun is the problem...would he have been suspended if the same gun was on his shirt, but it said..."Ban Assault Weapons" instead of "Protect Your Rights"?

There is nothing on his shirt that is offensive. There is nothing on his shirt that promotes terrorism, violence, mass shootings, etc. Expressing support for an Amendment in the Constitution of the United States is not against any rules of the school

The school was wrong, plain and simple.

THIS

King_Chief_Fan
04-23-2013, 03:31 PM
I hope he learns how to tolerate being told what to wear and how to follow rules he might not like.

what creative liberties did you take to determine that the rules listed were broken by the kid?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:32 PM
If the picture of the gun is the problem...would he have been suspended if the same gun was on his shirt, but it said..."Ban Assault Weapons" instead of "Protect Your Rights"?

There is nothing on his shirt that is offensive. There is nothing on his shirt that promotes terrorism, violence, mass shootings, etc. Expressing support for an Amendment in the Constitution of the United States is not against any rules of the school

The school was wrong, plain and simple.

The problem appears to be that it caused a disturbance. I can see that happening. Can you?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:35 PM
what creative liberties did you take to determine that the rules listed were broken by the kid?

"Appropriate clothing should be worn at all times."

If this shirt caused a disturbance to students and teachers, it's reasonable to call it inappropriate.

Radar Chief
04-23-2013, 03:35 PM
I hope he learns how to tolerate being told what to wear and how to follow rules he might not like.

Since heís going to a place that the rules are very clearly stated and not up to the whim of a teacher with an agenda I doubt itíll be much of a problem.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:36 PM
The gun in this particular context does not convey a sense of "violence", and anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that.

And this.

Was going to say just about that. Guns are not violent, people who use them inappropriately are violent.

Just like the pic KChiefer posted. That man wasn't doing anything violent with the guns, but the way he was holding them is perceived to be.

Now, if that were a white cowboy holding them like that, could say the same thing be said?

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:36 PM
I could see that being the case here. You make an astute point.

The kid knew that the school was likely to make a stink about the shirt. He was simply prepared to make a bigger stink. What he did not anticipate is that the school was willing to make an EVEN BIGGER stink. This will probably end with the kid making the biggest stink and suing the school.

We've got a north going Zax running into a south going Zax. /Dr. Seuss

Fish
04-23-2013, 03:37 PM
The picture of the gun is the kicker. A shirt that would have just said "Go NRA: Protect the 2nd Amend!" would probably have been accepted.

I think that's being overcautious to the point of absurdity. Students are smart enough to separate the image of a gun from the potential violent effects of a gun. Let's don't remove all common sense from the discussion...

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:38 PM
The problem appears to be that it caused a disturbance. I can see that happening. Can you?

Not if his teachers act in a professional manner. The shirt actually could have lead to a class discussion about being getting involved, contacting your Congressman, and standing up for your Constitutional rights. The teacher could have stated that while he did not support the message of the shirt, that he supported the right of the student to have that opinion. That would have been a much better outcome than what happened, no?

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:38 PM
And this.

Was going to say just about that. Guns are not violent, people who use them inappropriately are violent.

Just like the pic KChiefer posted. That man wasn't doing anything violent with the guns, but the way he was holding them is perceived to be.

Now, if that were a white cowboy holding them like that, could say the same thing be said?

The man in that picture is famous for songs advocating gun violence.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:39 PM
Since heís going to a place that the rules are very clearly stated and not up to the whim of a teacher with an agenda I doubt itíll be much of a problem.

I doubt he goes into the military, anyway. All I needed was to see a picture of him to say that. Reading the story confirms it.

mr. tegu
04-23-2013, 03:39 PM
The kid knew that the school was likely to make a stink about the shirt. He was simply prepared to make a bigger stink. What he did not anticipate is that the school was willing to make an EVEN BIGGER stink. This will probably end with the kid making the biggest stink and suing the school.

We've got a north going Zax running into a south going Zax. /Dr. Seuss

I agree. The kid said so himself.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:40 PM
Not if his teachers act in a professional manner. The shirt actually could have lead to a class discussion about being getting involved, contacting your Congressman, and standing up for your Constitutional rights. The teacher could have stated that while he did not support the message of the shirt, that he supported the right of the student to have that opinion. That would have been a much better outcome than what happened, no?

Or they could have, you know, taught math.

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:40 PM
The man in that picture is famous for songs advocating gun violence.

But he isn't doing anything violent with them Is he

WhawhaWhat
04-23-2013, 03:40 PM
Feel free to find the part where it says "First and Second Amendment rights are not to be defended by any student!"

You left out this part:


Since there is a direct relationship between dress and behavior, it is believed that students and staff should dress appropriately for the school setting. Appropriate, will be defined here as right and correct for the school setting and functions, conducive to learning, and shall not distract from or be disruptive to the learning process.

Logan County School students should always be neat and clean in their dress and appearance. It is expected that each student will maintain a proper mode of dress, both during the school day and at all school activities. If in the judgment of the administration, a student is dressed inappropriately, the student will be required to change clothes or cover up inappropriate clothing before returning to classes. Time out of class will be regarded as unexcused. Additional measures may be taken if deemed necessary by the administration. The administration has the final authority on all matters relating to the dress code.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:40 PM
The gun in this particular context does not convey a sense of "violence", and anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that.

Guns are inherently violent, so I don't think you're correct about that.

2bikemike
04-23-2013, 03:41 PM
There's a time and place for everything. A student's rant about gay marriage during math class would be an inappropriate place to exercise her First Amendment.

And this kid was singled out in the lunch line after being in school for half the day without incident. Until douchebag liberal agenda pushing lunchroom monitor decides a shirt is inappropriate.

King_Chief_Fan
04-23-2013, 03:41 PM
Not if his teachers act in a professional manner. The shirt actually could have lead to a class discussion about being getting involved, contacting your Congressman, and standing up for your Constitutional rights. The teacher could have stated that while he did not support the message of the shirt, that he supported the right of the student to have that opinion. That would have been a much better outcome than what happened, no?

what??? Do something educational and benefit to all? Imagine a teacher seizing them moment.....nope, let's have the kid arrested:doh!:

Fish
04-23-2013, 03:41 PM
The problem appears to be that it caused a disturbance. I can see that happening. Can you?

According to this, the teacher caused the disturbance, not the shirt..

White said that charges being filed against Marcum are pending the prosecutor's office's review of the evidence. But he insisted that it was the teacher who caused the issue by confronting the teen, and that video gathered from the school will prove it

If a student wore a shirt with a purple turtle on it, and a teacher acted offended and caused a disturbance, would you feel it just to suspend the student and ban shirts with purple turtles?

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:42 PM
Guns are inherently violent, so I don't think you're correct about that.

Your misguided perception

ptlyon
04-23-2013, 03:42 PM
According to this, the teacher caused the disturbance, not the shirt..



If a student wore a shirt with a purple turtle on it, and a teacher acted offended and caused a disturbance, would you feel it just to suspend the student and ban shirts with purple turtles?

I F'n HATE people turtles

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:43 PM
I think that's being overcautious to the point of absurdity. Students are smart enough to separate the image of a gun from the potential violent effects of a gun. Let's don't remove all common sense from the discussion...

Students also know about high art, but I have a slight suspicion that a t-shirt prominently featuring Michelangelo's David could cause enough of a disturbance that an administration would ask the student to remove it.

2bikemike
04-23-2013, 03:44 PM
Guns are inherently violent, so I don't think you're correct about that.

No they aren't! Its the violent person behind the gun. The gun will just sit there all day doing nothing until a dumbass picks it up to do something stupid.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:45 PM
Guns are inherently violent, so I don't think you're correct about that.

An inanimate object cannot be inherently violent...a person can be violent, and animal can be violate...but a lifeless inanimate object cannot be violent.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:46 PM
And this kid was singled out in the lunch line after being in school for half the day without incident. Until douchebag liberal agenda pushing lunchroom monitor decides a shirt is inappropriate.

Yes...the north going Zax was fine until he ran into a south going Zax.

He was an idiot the whole time, but the non-idiots gave him a wide berth. It was only when he ran into another idiot that shit went down.

mikey23545
04-23-2013, 03:46 PM
Not if his teachers act in a professional manner. The shirt actually could have lead to a class discussion about being getting involved, contacting your Congressman, and standing up for your Constitutional rights. The teacher could have stated that while he did not support the message of the shirt, that he supported the right of the student to have that opinion. That would have been a much better outcome than what happened, no?

The teacher that started the disturbance attacked the student in the lunchroom, not a classroom. He saw the kid in the lunchroom and walked over and told the student he had to take the shirt off or turn it inside out because it offended him. It was not causing any problem at all until then.

By the time the police got there it was because the rest of the students were cheering for the kid as the teacher tried to bully him.

The teacher should be fired, then executed to serve as an example to other commie teachers.

mlyonsd
04-23-2013, 03:46 PM
The kids hair-do is much more disturbing than the shirt he's wearing.

Fish
04-23-2013, 03:46 PM
Students also know about high art, but I have a slight suspicion that a t-shirt prominently featuring Michelangelo's David could cause enough of a disturbance that an administration would ask the student to remove it.

Because that would depict nudity/sexuality. Which is directly stated as being forbidden in their rules. Unlike a depiction of a gun.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:46 PM
According to this, the teacher caused the disturbance, not the shirt..



If a student wore a shirt with a purple turtle on it, and a teacher acted offended and caused a disturbance, would you feel it just to suspend the student and ban shirts with purple turtles?

Yeah, according to the student, he is blameless. Crazyass teacher came after him. I'm sorry, I'm not going to buy his story right away. I have a pretty strong presumption that teachers aren't going to go up to students and create disturbances.

Radar Chief
04-23-2013, 03:47 PM
Guns are inherently violent, so I don't think you're correct about that.

:spock: Uh, wut?
You realize youíre assigning malicious intent to an inanimate object, right?

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:49 PM
An inanimate object cannot be inherently violent...a person can be violent, and animal can be violate...but a lifeless inanimate object cannot be violent.

That's like saying a dildo isn't sexual. A gun is a tool used for a violent act.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:49 PM
No they aren't! Its the violent person behind the gun. The gun will just sit there all day doing nothing until a dumbass picks it up to do something stupid.

Violent people are also inherently violent. Guns are inherently violent, too, in the sense that they are dangerous. It's like poison. Hide it from yo kids.

mikey23545
04-23-2013, 03:49 PM
Yeah, according to the student, he is blameless. Crazyass teacher came after him. I'm sorry, I'm not going to buy his story right away. I have a pretty strong presumption that teachers aren't going to go up to students and create disturbances.

Oops, it was captured on a surveillance camera in the cafeteria...Looks like your left wing psycho buddy teacher is out of luck...

King_Chief_Fan
04-23-2013, 03:49 PM
Yeah, according to the student, he is blameless. Crazyass teacher came after him. I'm sorry, I'm not going to buy his story right away. I have a pretty strong presumption that teachers aren't going to go up to students and create disturbances.

LMAO

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 03:49 PM
Just for the board communists, the Logan County schools dress code:

...

Feel free to find the part where it says "First and Second Amendment rights are not to be defended by any student!"

"Student dress and grooming should be in good taste and appropriate for the occasion."

There's your answer.

2bikemike
04-23-2013, 03:49 PM
I would say that since the Kid returned to school wearing the shirt and several other kids wore the same or similar shirts in support without incident, the kid won.

Radar Chief
04-23-2013, 03:50 PM
I doubt he goes into the military, anyway. All I needed was to see a picture of him to say that. Reading the story confirms it.

Itís the Beatles hair cut isnít it?
Donít laugh, I went to Basic with a guy that arrived wearing a mullet that covered his eyes and went half way down his back. The barbers laughed up a storm cutting his hair.
He not only made it through Basic but went to the same AIT as I did, ended up stationed not far from me in Germany and was part of one of the firing batteries my company supported during Desert Shield/Storm.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:50 PM
Oops, it was captured on a surveillance camera in the cafeteria...Looks like your left wing psycho buddy teacher is out of luck...

Is the video posted anywhere? I would not minding seeing it for myself....

Fish
04-23-2013, 03:51 PM
Yeah, according to the student, he is blameless. Crazyass teacher came after him. I'm sorry, I'm not going to buy his story right away. I have a pretty strong presumption that teachers aren't going to go up to students and create disturbances.

No, that was according to an attorney. Who also claims that video surveillance footage will corroborate that story.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:51 PM
Because that would depict nudity/sexuality. Which is directly stated as being forbidden in their rules. Unlike a depiction of a gun.

How does a picture of a sculpture of a nude man represent sexuality but a picture of a gun not represent violence?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:51 PM
:spock: Uh, wut?
You realize youíre assigning malicious intent to an inanimate object, right?

No, there's no assignment of malice anywhere in my post. If someone said, "Man, this sure is a violent storm," that person is not saying that the storm is purposefully acting with the intent to harm.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:52 PM
Oops, it was captured on a surveillance camera in the cafeteria...Looks like your left wing psycho buddy teacher is out of luck...

Show me.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:53 PM
"Student dress and grooming should be in good taste and appropriate for the occasion."

There's your answer.

There is nothing inappropriate in wearing a shirt that supports the Constitution of the United States of America. Unless you hate the Constitution....you don't hate the Constitution do you?

2bikemike
04-23-2013, 03:53 PM
Violent people are also inherently violent. Guns are inherently violent, too, in the sense that they are dangerous. It's like poison. Hide it from yo kids.

Are hammers inherently violent? Are Cars? No they are freaking tools just like guns are tools. Just because something can be dangerous in the wrong hands does not make it inherently violent.

BucEyedPea
04-23-2013, 03:54 PM
There is nothing inappropriate in wearing a shirt that supports the Constitution of the United States of America. Unless you hate the Constitution....you don't hate the Constitution do you?

Yes he seems as though he does.

King_Chief_Fan
04-23-2013, 03:54 PM
"Student dress and grooming should be in good taste and appropriate for the occasion."

There's your answer.

not the answer as what is appropriate has not been defined

It appears to be at the whim of a teacher who created the scene. Catch the comments already made about the event?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:54 PM
Itís the Beatles hair cut isnít it?
Donít laugh, I went to Basic with a guy that arrived wearing a mullet that covered his eyes and went half way down his back. The barbers laughed up a storm cutting his hair.
He not only made it through Basic but went to the same AIT as I did, ended up stationed not far from me in Germany and was part of one of the firing batteries my company supported during Desert Shield/Storm.

It's 2013, man. It's a Beibs haircut.

And yeah, that's pretty much the indicator. And his scrawny ass redneck body type. I'm profiling, I know.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 03:54 PM
No, there's no assignment of malice anywhere in my post. If someone said, "Man, this sure is a violent storm," that person is not saying that the storm is purposefully acting with the intent to harm.

A storm can be violent...it does not acting with intent to be violent. Natural events can be violate, there are animate acts of nature.

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 03:54 PM
There is nothing inappropriate in wearing a shirt that supports the Constitution of the United States of America. Unless you hate the Constitution....you don't hate the Constitution do you?

Do you approve of kids wearing shirts that promote communism?

2bikemike
04-23-2013, 03:55 PM
No, there's no assignment of malice anywhere in my post. If someone said, "Man, this sure is a violent storm," that person is not saying that the storm is purposefully acting with the intent to harm.

A storm moves under its own power. A gun is incapable of moving on its own.

Radar Chief
04-23-2013, 03:55 PM
Are hammers inherently violent? Are Cars? No they are freaking tools just like guns are tools. Just because something can be dangerous in the wrong hands does not make it inherently violent.

From what Iím reading thatís a yes.
Just think of the violent band saw, its whole purpose is to rip material from itís home shredding it to tiny bits.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:55 PM
No, that was according to an attorney. Who also claims that video surveillance footage will corroborate that story.

Attorneys can sometimes trump up facts. His attorney is probably a jackass who needs a client.

Fish
04-23-2013, 03:57 PM
Attorneys can sometimes trump up facts. His attorney is probably a jackass who needs a client.

He's speaking with infinitely more insight into the situation than you are...

Radar Chief
04-23-2013, 03:57 PM
It's 2013, man. It's a Beibs haircut.

And yeah, that's pretty much the indicator. And his scrawny ass redneck body type. I'm profiling, I know.

See, I never consider Beiber. EVER.
And the Army wants runners. Theyíre not after big guys, they want kids that can run miles at a time.

King_Chief_Fan
04-23-2013, 03:57 PM
Attorneys can sometimes trump up facts. His attorney is probably a jackass who needs a client.

maybe, but it sounds like a jackass at the school needs a lawyer

BucEyedPea
04-23-2013, 03:57 PM
Look who's answering a question by asking a question...to avoid answering a question.

Do you approve of kids wearing shirts that promote communism?

Well Che Guevara ones have been popular. I saw those. But that's a message that isn't based on anything America was founded on. It's not even in the same category of thing. And you wonder why I haven't answered all your questions.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 03:57 PM
There is nothing inappropriate in wearing a shirt that supports the Constitution of the United States of America. Unless you hate the Constitution....you don't hate the Constitution do you?

Are you okay with a student wearing a t-shirt with two gay guys having sex and the caption: "Support the 14th Amendment!"

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 03:58 PM
Are hammers inherently violent? Are Cars? No they are freaking tools just like guns are tools. Just because something can be dangerous in the wrong hands does not make it inherently violent.

A hammer is a tool of carpentry. A gun is a tool of violence. If the school's dress code prohibited clothing promoting carpentry, then a shirt with a hammer would be unacceptable.

BucEyedPea
04-23-2013, 03:59 PM
A hammer is a tool of carpentry. A gun is a tool of violence.

Even when a gun is used to start a race?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:00 PM
Are hammers inherently violent? Are Cars? No they are freaking tools just like guns are tools. Just because something can be dangerous in the wrong hands does not make it inherently violent.

Hammers and cars are not inherently violent. Guns are: their sole purpose is to cause harm or threaten to cause harm, whether that be in protecting yourself, fighting for your country, or gathering up your dinner.

Guns are dangerous in the right hands as well as the wrong hands. It's why only law-abiding citizens who have proper mental capacity should own them. If guns weren't violent, they'd be pretty much useless.

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 04:00 PM
Well Che Guevara ones have been popular. I saw those. But that's a message that isn't based on anything America was founded on. It's not even in the same category of thing.

True, and I wouldn't have a problem with a teacher telling a student not to wear a Che Guevara shirt in a classroom setting.

And sorry, I don't think asking if I "hate the Constitution" warrants a response.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:00 PM
Do you approve of kids wearing shirts that promote communism?

Do I approve? No. Would I suspend a kid for wearing a t-shirt with Lenin on it in my class? No. If I were his or her history teacher, would I ask the student if the knew what their shirt represented? Sure, to start a discussion about how communism is a form of government that takes away individuals rights, and about how our country boldly stood up to the Stalins of the world for almost a half century during the cold war.

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:00 PM
How does a picture of a sculpture of a nude man represent sexuality but a picture of a gun not represent violence?

Nudity alone is equitable to sexuality. Are you just trying to be obtuse?

BucEyedPea
04-23-2013, 04:02 PM
True, and I wouldn't have a problem with a teacher telling a student not to wear that shirt in a classroom setting.
I had to let them wear T-shirts like that when I was teaching several years back.

And sorry, I don't think asking if I "hate the Constitution" warrants a response.

Yeah, I know. Truth hurts. It was rhetorical though.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:02 PM
A storm can be violent...it does not acting with intent to be violent. Natural events can be violate, there are animate acts of nature.

Is a dildo sexual?

jettio
04-23-2013, 04:04 PM
If the picture of the gun is the problem...would he have been suspended if the same gun was on his shirt, but it said..."Ban Assault Weapons" instead of "Protect Your Rights"?

There is nothing on his shirt that is offensive. There is nothing on his shirt that promotes terrorism, violence, mass shootings, etc. Expressing support for an Amendment in the Constitution of the United States is not against any rules of the school

The school was wrong, plain and simple.

This was in West Virginia. If anybody wore a "Ban Assault Weapons" shirt at that school it probably would have made a lot more of the fellow students mad than this kid's shirt.

In most 1st Amendment contexts there is not supposed to be a "heckler's veto," that is, you are not supposed to limit the free speech of one viewpoint because of fear of how opponents of the viewpoint would react. Maybe in public school, they effectively allow the "heckler's veto" by labelling some shirts disruptive and asking the students to turn the shirts inside out.

In that school, the hypothetical kid with the Ban Assault Weapons t-shirt might have been asked or told to change the shirt sooner in the day.

From looking at the abcnews website and video. Seems like this kid was expressing the majority viewpoint of his community and ran into a teacher who may or may not have held a different viewpoint and asked the kid to change shirts or turn it inside out.

Should not have escalated, but this is not a situation where the minority viewpoint of a community is getting suppressed. This is a case were a kid expressing the majority viewpoint of his community decided that he did not want to follow the directions of a teacher who may or may not have held the minority viewpoint.

mr. tegu
04-23-2013, 04:04 PM
The kid wore a shirt he knew would cause trouble of some sort. A teacher got all worked up and did not maintain an adult to child relationship. Much ado about nothing.

BucEyedPea
04-23-2013, 04:04 PM
Is a dildo sexual?

Well, you can make a smoothie with 'em too.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:04 PM
Hammers and cars are not inherently violent. Guns are: their sole purpose is to cause harm or threaten to cause harm, whether that be in protecting yourself, fighting for your country, or gathering up your dinner.

Guns are dangerous in the right hands as well as the wrong hands. It's why only law-abiding citizens who have proper mental capacity should own them. If guns weren't violent, they'd be pretty much useless.

Are you sure about that...given that more people die in a year via the hammer, than die by the gun on that kids shirt.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:04 PM
Nudity alone is equitable to sexuality. Are you just trying to be obtuse?

So nudity is equitable (sic) to sexuality, but a gun isn't equitable (sic) to violence?

I've been naked without having sex. I've never fired a gun that wasn't violent.

loochy
04-23-2013, 04:05 PM
We live in a particular era where school shootings are something that students, teachers, administration, and parents take very serious caution with, as more than an abstract threat, but something that should be prepared for.

it's a damn shirt

there's no threat

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:05 PM
Hammers and cars are not inherently violent. Guns are: their sole purpose is to cause harm or threaten to cause harm, whether that be in protecting yourself, fighting for your country, or gathering up your dinner.

Guns are dangerous in the right hands as well as the wrong hands. It's why only law-abiding citizens who have proper mental capacity should own them. If guns weren't violent, they'd be pretty much useless.

World class Olympic shooters would tend to disagree. The ISSF adamantly disagrees. Even I own several firearms that have never harmed a single living organism. It's as wrong as saying all pit bulls are killers.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:08 PM
Are you sure about that...given that more people die in a year via the hammer, than die by the gun on that kids shirt.

Yes, I'm sure about it. I don't consider dementia violent, but I'm sure a lot of people die from that each year. I do consider meteor crashes violent though, even though no one died from one last year.

ChiliConCarnage
04-23-2013, 04:09 PM
Itís the Beatles hair cut isnít it?
Donít laugh, I went to Basic with a guy that arrived wearing a mullet that covered his eyes and went half way down his back. The barbers laughed up a storm cutting his hair.
He not only made it through Basic but went to the same AIT as I did, ended up stationed not far from me in Germany and was part of one of the firing batteries my company supported during Desert Shield/Storm.

It might be the "Fuck you" to authority attitude. lol All he had to do was turn his shirt inside out and have his father schedule a meeting with the principal. The kid wouldn't even turn the shirt inside out when asked by the police so they arrested him.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:09 PM
it's a damn shirt

there's no threat

"Threat" isn't the standard. "Disturbance in the classroom" is.

Rudy lost the toss
04-23-2013, 04:09 PM
Yeah Im sure your son just fell asleep on his desk and woke up in cuffs. Just change your shirt, dipshit.

KChiefer
04-23-2013, 04:10 PM
How about Charles Manson shirts? Anwar al-Awlaki shirts? All good?

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:12 PM
World class Olympic shooters would tend to disagree. The ISSF adamantly disagrees. Even I own several firearms that have never harmed a single living organism. It's as wrong as saying all pit bulls are killers.

All dogs are inherently killers, which is why they will chase squirrels around the yard. Just because we've adopted their use (for our practical purposes) doesn't change their inherent nature.

You might use your particular guns for a sexual fetish or whatever, but the inherent nature of "guns" is a violent one.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:13 PM
Yes, I'm sure about it. I don't consider dementia violent, but I'm sure a lot of people die from that each year. I do consider meteor crashes violent though, even though no one died from one last year.

One could say that a hammer is more inherently violent than a gun, no? After all, the hammer committed more violent acts.

Again, inanimate objects are just that, inanimate. A rock is just a rock, it only becomes a violent weapon when someone throws it at someone else's head.

Name one gun that killed someone without a person pulling a trigger. Guns do wander around the streets by themselves committing random acts of violence.

There is no proof that you can offer that shows that any inanimate object is "inherently violent"...or "inherently kind", or inherently anything. Objects are just objects. It is people, not objects, that need to be held accountable for violent acts.

Radar Chief
04-23-2013, 04:14 PM
How about Charles Manson shirts? Anwar al-Awlaki shirts? All good?

Hmmm, violent people but were they as violent as a band saw? For lack of a clear standard thatís the one Iím going with.

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:14 PM
So nudity is equitable (sic) to sexuality, but a gun isn't equitable (sic) to violence?

I've been naked without having sex. I've never fired a gun that wasn't violent.

There are laws against walking down the street naked. But I can walk down my street with a gun at my hip and not break any laws. Why? Because everyone doesn't equate guns with inherent violence.

I find it hard to believe you've ever fired a gun, if you're that ignorant of its inherent properties.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:14 PM
Why do we all feel compelled to defend idiots just because the other side was also an idiot?

mr. tegu
04-23-2013, 04:15 PM
Why do we all feel compelled to defend idiots just because the other side was also an idiot?

LMAO

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:16 PM
One could say that a hammer is more inherently violent than a gun, no? After all, the hammer committed more violent acts.

Again, inanimate objects are just that, inanimate. A rock is just a rock, it only becomes a violent weapon when someone throws it at someone else's head.

Name one gun that killed someone without a person pulling a trigger. Guns do wander around the streets by themselves committing random acts of violence.

There is no proof that you can offer that shows that any inanimate object is "inherently violent"...or "inherently kind", or inherently anything. Objects are just objects. It is people, not objects, that need to be held accountable for violent acts.

A hammer can be used for violence, but it is not intended, designed, and created for the purpose of violence.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:18 PM
There are laws against walking down the street naked. But I can walk down my street with a gun at my hip and not break any laws. Why? Because everyone doesn't equate guns with inherent violence.

I find it hard to believe you've ever fired a gun, if you're that ignorant of its inherent properties.

I can have a statue of David replica in my yard, and it's perfectly legal.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:19 PM
One could say that a hammer is more inherently violent than a gun, no?

One could say that, but they'd be wrong. One could say that hammers are violent too, but it stretches the meaning of 'violent.' I suppose the consequence of a nail being pounded upon through a piece of wood could be considered violent, but most people would not think so. A hammer is a useful tool to build things. That's its purpose and overwhelming use.

cosmo20002
04-23-2013, 04:20 PM
I had to let them wear T-shirts like that when I was teaching several years back.



[shudders at the thought]

mr. tegu
04-23-2013, 04:22 PM
Tis a silly argument.

http://theculturecrunch.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/monty-python-and-the-holy-grail.jpg

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:22 PM
A hammer can be used for violence, but it is not intended, designed, and created for the purpose of violence.

Yeah, but that's rather irrelevant. A mosquito wasn't designed for the purpose of killing humans. But mosquitos have killed more humans than any other source. More than all wars combined.

Are you saying the intent(which is still debatable) is more important than the actual resulting outcome? Because that's stupid..

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:24 PM
When you're arguing that the statue of David is sexual but guns aren't violent, you've lost the argument.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 04:25 PM
Controversial shirts are banned from schools all the time. Kids aren't allowed to wear shirts that promote drug and alcohol use.

This isn't that though. The kid is expressing something about what would be discussed in any Civics or Government class. It's a little strange to have the kid arrested.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 04:26 PM
When you're arguing that the statue of David is sexual but guns aren't violent, you've lost the argument.

Guns aren't violent. Violence is a human emotion, or rather the result of human emotions. Human beings are violent.

cosmo20002
04-23-2013, 04:26 PM
One could say that a hammer is more inherently violent than a gun, no? After all, the hammer committed more violent acts.


JFC, not this again. There is no year in which hammers killed more people than guns, unless you count the time before the invention of guns.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:26 PM
A hammer can be used for violence, but it is not intended, designed, and created for the purpose of violence.

The intentions of the design of an object do not somehow give an inanimate object inherent properties, though. A gun is just a hunk of metal, until someone picks it up and uses it. The inherent violence at that point is in the person, not the gun. Someone could use a gun for a paperweight....is it still inherently violent then?

Besides, the argument presented by Jenson is not only is a gun inherently violent...but that the picture of the gun on the shirt is somehow inherently violent as well. That was his reasoning for the shirt causing a disturbance.

That argument just does not make any sense to me. Trying to transfer the inherent violence from a person, who has free will to choose, to an inanimate object that can do nothing with being acted upon by an animate object, is just silly.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:28 PM
Yeah, but that's rather irrelevant. A mosquito wasn't designed for the purpose of killing humans. But mosquitos have killed more humans than any other source. More than all wars combined.

Are you saying the intent(which is still debatable) is more important than the actual resulting outcome? Because that's stupid..

I don't have any idea what the fuck your mosquito reference is supposed to mean, but guns have killed millions of people over the years. They are inherently violent. That is not to say they are inherently dangerous when handled responsibly, but they are undeniably violent.

stevieray
04-23-2013, 04:28 PM
This isn't that though. The kid is expressing something about what would be discussed in any Civics or Government class. It's a little strange to have the kid arrested.are you kidding, that spineless teacher's delicate sensibilites couldn't handle a....NRA logo.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 04:29 PM
It reminds me when some dipshit on a message board said some kind of nonsense about "There is nothing more cruel than a human being." No shit. It's a human action and emotion. Good grief.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:30 PM
Guns aren't violent. Violence is a human emotion, or rather the result of human emotions. Human beings are violent.

Humans can be violent by doing violent things. Violent things are something that causes death or destruction. The purpose of guns is to kill or destroy.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:30 PM
The intentions of the design of an object do not somehow give an inanimate object inherent properties, though. A gun is just a hunk of metal, until someone picks it up and uses it. The inherent violence at that point is in the person, not the gun. Someone could use a gun for a paperweight....is it still inherently violent then?

Besides, the argument presented by Jenson is not only is a gun inherently violent...but that the picture of the gun on the shirt is somehow inherently violent as well. That was his reasoning for the shirt causing a disturbance.

That argument just does not make any sense to me. Trying to transfer the inherent violence from a person, who has free will to choose, to an inanimate object that can do nothing with being acted upon by an animate object, is just silly.

Whether or not they can spontaneously engage has no bearing on whether or not something is violent.

A nuclear warhead is violent. A nuclear warhead can not fire itself.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:31 PM
I don't have any idea what the **** your mosquito reference is supposed to mean, but guns have killed millions of people over the years. They are inherently violent. That is not to say they are inherently dangerous when handled responsibly, but they are undeniably violent.

Rocks have killed millions. So have knives, hammers, anything you can think of.

The more correct statement would be "People have used guns to kill millions of people over the years." It is people that have killed.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:32 PM
Guns aren't violent. Violence is a human emotion, or rather the result of human emotions. Human beings are violent.

Violence isn't an emotion.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 04:32 PM
are you kidding, that spineless teacher's delicate sensibilites couldn't handle a....NRA logo.

huh? I can understand the school or teachers having a hard time about a gun on a tee-shirt. I wouldn't have a problem with it, but I went to school in a different time. What I cannot understand is why these dippy's had the kid arrested. In fact if I were the officer I would remind the school that law enforcement is not a toy and leave the scene.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:33 PM
Whether or not they can spontaneously engage has no bearing on whether or not something is violent.

A nuclear warhead is violent. A nuclear warhead can not fire itself.

A nuclear warhead is a hunk of metal with radioactive materials. If you do nothing to a nuclear warhead, it is not violent at all....it will just sit there and collect dust.

Objects are not violent, people are.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 04:33 PM
Violence isn't an emotion.

It is the result of human emotions and without humans it would not exist. guns or no guns.

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:36 PM
I don't have any idea what the fuck your mosquito reference is supposed to mean, but guns have killed millions of people over the years. They are inherently violent. That is not to say they are inherently dangerous when handled responsibly, but they are undeniably violent.

LMAO.... no, guns haven't killed millions of people. People have killed millions of people. Using rocks, swords, knives, clubs, guns, etc.

But not a single one of those inanimate objects did any harm without the human intent behind it.

Do you understand the meaning of inherent?

"Existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute."

Existing in something. Violence does not exist in that hunk of metal.

Go sit a gun down on a table, and don't let anyone touch it for several years. See how much violence it exerts on its environment on its own.

Your argument is fail.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:37 PM
Rocks have killed millions. So have knives, hammers, anything you can think of.

The more correct statement would be "People have used guns to kill millions of people over the years." It is people that have killed.

Hammers have never built anything, either. They are, however, designed to assist in carpentry. They are tools of carpentry.

Cars don't drive. People drive. If a dress code prohibits wearing anything that promotes driving, would a shirt with a car on it be a-ok in your mind?

Guns are tools of violence. It is their sole purpose for existing.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 04:37 PM
Humans can be violent by doing violent things. Violent things are something that causes death or destruction. The purpose of guns is to kill or destroy.

Not entirely. Violence is neither bad or good. Those are points of view. Guns are inanimate objects that can be used for more than just destruction or killing. In the vein of what we're talking about, killing other human beings could be good or bad depending upon your point of view. But again violence is the result of human emotions, meaning without humans.. violence doesn't exist. Ergo, humans are violent and not inanimate objects.....for now.

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:38 PM
Violence isn't an emotion.

LMAO.... go ahead and define violence for us...

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:39 PM
It is the result of human emotions and without humans it would not exist. guns or no guns.

Are you really saying that only humans can be violent? Please retract your statement for your own dignity.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 04:43 PM
For the record, I don't agree that a picture of a gun constitutes a "display of violence".

La literatura
04-23-2013, 04:51 PM
Not entirely. Violence is neither bad or good. Those are points of view. Guns are inanimate objects that can be used for more than just destruction or killing. In the vein of what we're talking about, killing other human beings could be good or bad depending upon your point of view. But again violence is the result of human emotions, meaning without humans.. violence doesn't exist. Ergo, humans are violent and not inanimate objects.....for now.

In the vein of what we're talking about, killing other human beings, whether good or bad, is violent. Also, killing deer, alligators, aardvarks, and aliens. All violent actions. If an alien used a gun to kill a deer, I'd say violent. If a deer used a gun to kill an aardvark, I'd say violence has occurred. The common theme here is the death or destruction that results by use of the gun. That's the purpose of a gun: to do violence for some other purpose. It's inherently violent.

Fish
04-23-2013, 04:58 PM
In the vein of what we're talking about, killing other human beings, whether good or bad, is violent. Also, killing deer, alligators, aardvarks, and aliens. All violent actions. If an alien used a gun to kill a deer, I'd say violent. If a deer used a gun to kill an aardvark, I'd say violence has occurred. The common theme here is the death or destruction that results by use of the gun. That's the purpose of a gun: to do violence for some other purpose. It's inherently violent.

No, the common theme is one sentient being acting upon another. Remove the sentient beings from your example and just allow the guns to remain, and poof there is no longer any violence present.

mnchiefsguy
04-23-2013, 04:59 PM
No, the common theme is one sentient being acting upon another. Remove the sentient beings from your example and just allow the guns to remain, and poof there is no longer any violence present.

Yes, and if you remove the guns from the example, and replace them with rocks or hammers....and the violence would remain.

Fish
04-23-2013, 05:00 PM
Yes, and if you remove the guns from the example, and replace them with rocks or hammers....and the violence would remain.

Good point.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 05:09 PM
You can use language to sort this out with in the context of what we're talking about:

"I am feeling gun" - doesn't make sense
"I am feeling hammer" doesn't make sense
"I am feeling table" Doesn't make sense


"I am feeling violent" Makes sense
"I am feeling cruel" Makes sense

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 05:10 PM
Are you really saying that only humans can be violent? Please retract your statement for your own dignity.

No. It's true.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 05:13 PM
In the vein of what we're talking about, killing other human beings, whether good or bad, is violent. Also, killing deer, alligators, aardvarks, and aliens. All violent actions. If an alien used a gun to kill a deer, I'd say violent. If a deer used a gun to kill an aardvark, I'd say violence has occurred. The common theme here is the death or destruction that results by use of the gun. That's the purpose of a gun: to do violence for some other purpose. It's inherently violent.

Maybe, but the good or bad nature of violence is a point of view. Is killing another human being a good or bad thing? Depends on you, how you feel, and the situation.

You can learn this from watching a Star Wars movie...good and bad are points of view. The theme is repeated over and over.

Fish
04-23-2013, 05:25 PM
You can use language to sort this out with in the context of what we're talking about:

"I am feeling hammer" doesn't make sense


Calling bullshit...

http://25.media.tumblr.com/9bbfd5ea7b2acf5cb70c6776f844c654/tumblr_mi2utg3sgw1s559c9o1_500.gif

Aries Walker
04-23-2013, 06:06 PM
I would be interested to see the rest of the information about this case. If the kid (regardless of what his father said) did get aggressive during the debate with his teacher, then yeah, suspend him. So far, we don't know.

That said, there's another issue here. We should imagine if his t-shirt had no letters, or no image, and that will tell us which is the real issue, the image of the hunting rifle, or the pro-NRA political statement. I can understand it more if it's the former, although if that's the case they should not suspend the kid but instead amend their school handbook. If it's the latter, they should either ban political statements of all kinds from school clothes, or allow them from both sides.

Superintendent Me would amend the handbook to outlaw the images of firearms or political statements from school clothes, and send a letter out to all kids and parents explaining that the only reason the kid is having his suspension lifted is because it wasn't spelled out in the handbook, and explain the limits and why they are there.

Problem solved. Now back to Ethan Frome.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 06:08 PM
Calling bullshit...

http://25.media.tumblr.com/9bbfd5ea7b2acf5cb70c6776f844c654/tumblr_mi2utg3sgw1s559c9o1_500.gif

Ah..That would be "I'm feeling Hamma!"

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 06:10 PM
I would be interested to see the rest of the information about this case. If the kid (regardless of what his father said) did get aggressive during the debate with his teacher, then yeah, suspend him. So far, we don't know.

That said, there's another issue here. We should imagine if his t-shirt had no letters, or no image, and that will tell us which is the real issue, the image of the hunting rifle, or the pro-NRA political statement. I can understand it more if it's the former, although if that's the case they should not suspend the kid but instead amend their school handbook. If it's the latter, they should either ban political statements of all kinds from school clothes, or allow them from both sides.

Superintendent Me would amend the handbook to outlaw the images of firearms or political statements from school clothes, and send a letter out to all kids and parents explaining that the only reason the kid is having his suspension lifted is because it wasn't spelled out in the handbook, and explain the limits and why they are there.

Problem solved. Now back to Ethan Frome.

This is honest, good administration tactics.

stonedstooge
04-23-2013, 06:14 PM
I would be interested to see the rest of the information about this case. If the kid (regardless of what his father said) did get aggressive during the debate with his teacher, then yeah, suspend him. So far, we don't know.

That said, there's another issue here. We should imagine if his t-shirt had no letters, or no image, and that will tell us which is the real issue, the image of the hunting rifle, or the pro-NRA political statement. I can understand it more if it's the former, although if that's the case they should not suspend the kid but instead amend their school handbook. If it's the latter, they should either ban political statements of all kinds from school clothes, or allow them from both sides.

Superintendent Me would amend the handbook to outlaw the images of firearms or political statements from school clothes, and send a letter out to all kids and parents explaining that the only reason the kid is having his suspension lifted is because it wasn't spelled out in the handbook, and explain the limits and why they are there.

Problem solved. Now back to Ethan Frome.

You would recommend the changes to the handbook. The school board approves or disapproves. Not your call as superintendent

La literatura
04-23-2013, 06:20 PM
Maybe, but the good or bad nature of violence is a point of view. Is killing another human being a good or bad thing? Depends on you, how you feel, and the situation.

You can learn this from watching a Star Wars movie...good and bad are points of view. The theme is repeated over and over.

It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad. What matters is it's violent. Using a gun is an act of violence. Whether it be for a good or bad purpose is completely irrelevant.

Similarly, a tornado is a "violent storm." It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad. All that matters is that it is destructive and causes death.

The person who invented a gun thought to himself, "I need something that is better than this dagger/stick. I need something that is going to quickly kill my enemies and my prey. I need something that can be really destructive."

A gun is inherently violent. This is not saying that humans don't do violence using a gun (or another type of instrument).

You're not going to convince me that a gun is not inherently violent. And I might not convince you that it is. That's fine.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 06:25 PM
No. It's true.

Feel free to walk into a tiger's cage at the zoo, then.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 06:33 PM
Feel free to walk into a tiger's cage at the zoo, then.

What you would call violence, I would call survival instincts on the part of the tiger. The tiger isn't intelligent. Any emotion you feel on the Tiger's actions are a construct of your own mind. Its your feelings.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 06:36 PM
What you would call violence, I would call survival instincts on the part of the tiger. The tiger isn't intelligent. Any emotion you feel on the Tiger's actions are a construct of your own mind. Its your feelings.

This is a false dichotomy. Survival instincts on the part of the tiger can be violent. They are not mutually exclusive. A tiger ripping apart the flesh of a human being, teeth gorging limbs, blood and guts thrashing around, and the screams of a person being split open is a violent death.

stonedstooge
04-23-2013, 06:44 PM
This is a false dichotomy. Survival instincts on the part of the tiger can be violent. They are not mutually exclusive. A tiger ripping apart the flesh of a human being, teeth gorging limbs, blood and guts thrashing around, and the screams of a person being split open is a violent death.

For the person. Perfectly natural for the tiger

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 06:45 PM
It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad. What matters is it's violent. Using a gun is an act of violence. Whether it be for a good or bad purpose is completely irrelevant.

Similarly, a tornado is a "violent storm." It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad. All that matters is that it is destructive and causes death.

The person who invented a gun thought to himself, "I need something that is better than this dagger/stick. I need something that is going to quickly kill my enemies and my prey. I need something that can be really destructive."

A gun is inherently violent. This is not saying that humans don't do violence using a gun (or another type of instrument).

You're not going to convince me that a gun is not inherently violent. And I might not convince you that it is. That's fine.

It cannot be irrelevent. It invalidates your position. Because if the violence is constrewed as good, then what's the problem? That violence occurred?

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 06:46 PM
For the person. Perfectly natural for the tiger

Violence doesn't have to be unnatural.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 06:46 PM
For the person. Perfectly natural for the tiger

Exactly.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 06:46 PM
It cannot be irrelevent. It invalidates your position. Because if the violence is constrewed as good, then what's the problem? That violence occurred?

Violence is amoral.

Garcia Bronco
04-23-2013, 06:47 PM
Violence is amoral.

That's a point of view. You're talking about good and evil and inbetween. You are still on the scale from good to evil.

La literatura
04-23-2013, 06:50 PM
For the person. Perfectly natural for the tiger

Well, I'm not at all concerned of whether a tiger thinks a gun is "inherently violent."

rockymtnchief
04-23-2013, 06:52 PM
https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/11949_380176605431828_735332613_n.jpg

La literatura
04-23-2013, 07:04 PM
It cannot be irrelevent. It invalidates your position. Because if the violence is constrewed as good, then what's the problem? That violence occurred?

You're completely missing the point. All that I'm saying is that a gun is inherently violent because its purpose and use is to do violence. Yes, that violence can sometimes be good, and sometimes bad, and sometimes meaningless. That's not what matters. All that matters is that it does violence -- that's what makes it inherently violent.

So, gun (the general) is inherently violent. It doesn't mean that it will always be in use for a violent purpose or that it couldn't be used for a good violence (self-defense or eating).

But this explains why it is reasonable for people to see their classmate with a picture of a gun and have it disturb their learning environment to the point where it is reasonable for administration to say, "It's not appropriate. Please change."

I wanted to tie in my essential point for why it matters.

InChiefsHell
04-23-2013, 07:04 PM
Perhaps the definition of violence would be helpful...

vi∑o∑lence
/ˈvī(ə)ləns/
Noun

Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
Strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force.

Saul Good
04-23-2013, 07:07 PM
Perhaps the definition of violence would be helpful...

Someone is about to argue that guns aren't designed to hurt, damage, or kill...just watch.

Aries Walker
04-23-2013, 08:10 PM
The person who invented a gun thought to himself, "I need something that is better than this dagger/stick. I need something that is going to quickly kill my enemies and my prey. I need something that can be really destructive."
The first ones were cannons, and so had nothing to do with hunting. However, yes, their primary purpose was, and still is, to kill. They are weapons in the purest sense of the word; there's no doubt about that.

notorious
04-23-2013, 08:31 PM
I'll file this under "Meh".


Choose your battles wisely.

rockymtnchief
04-23-2013, 08:31 PM
The first ones were cannons, and so had nothing to do with hunting. However, yes, their primary purpose was, and still is, to kill. They are weapons in the purest sense of the word; there's no doubt about that.

They're weapons, no doubt. However, to say their sole purpose is to kill is incorrect. Many people shoot targets without any intent to hunt or kill someone. There are plenty of people out there shooting competition, trap, skeet. Some firearms are works of art and will never be fired.

Out of all the handguns I own, only one has been used to kill (gophers). The others are for my enjoyment.

Aries Walker
04-23-2013, 09:19 PM
They're weapons, no doubt. However, to say their sole purpose is to kill is incorrect. Many people shoot targets without any intent to hunt or kill someone. There are plenty of people out there shooting competition, trap, skeet. Some firearms are works of art and will never be fired.

Out of all the handguns I own, only one has been used to kill (gophers). The others are for my enjoyment.
I didn't say 'sole'. I said 'primary', for exactly that reason.

rockymtnchief
04-23-2013, 09:25 PM
I didn't say 'sole'. I said 'primary', for exactly that reason.

Point taken.

rockymtnchief
04-24-2013, 07:15 AM
A West Virginia teen who was arrested and suspended for wearing a National Rifle Association T-shirt to school returned to class Monday wearing the same shirt that got him into trouble.

Jared Marcum, 14, was joined by about 100 other students across Logan County who wore shirts with a similar gun rights theme in a show of support for free speech.

Ben White, the Charleston lawyer representing the Logan eighth-grader, said the Sons of the Second Amendment, a gun rights group, purchased and distributed the shirts.

Jared, a student at Logan Middle School, was arrested and suspended Thursday after he was pulled from a cafeteria line and told to remove or turn his shirt inside-out an order he refused.

“I’m still confused, thoroughly confused,” he told a local TV station. “The school didn’t even make a statement to the news agencies, much less myself.”

School officials told the eighth-grader Monday that his one-day suspension was appropriate because he was being disruptive.

Mr. White said Jared was exercising his right to free speech and did not disrupt anything.

Video evidence in the case, Mr. White said, indicates that the situation in the cafeteria deteriorated when a teacher raised his voice while confronting Jared. Other students jumped up on benches and began chanting Jared’s name.

“I think the disruption came from the teacher,” Mr. White said.

A police officer arrested Jared after he was sent to the school office and again refused to remove the shirt.

Mr. White said Jared was arrested on two charges of disrupting the educational process and obstructing an officer, but predicted those charges would be dropped.

The case has been turned over to the local juvenile prosecutor.

“My sense is that no charges will be imminent,” Mr. White said.

Jared’s stepfather, Allen Larieris, told The Associated Press that the teen was expressing his support for the Second Amendment right to bear arms by wearing the shirt, which he said did not violate the school’s dress code.

Logan County Schools’ dress code, which is posted on the school system’s website, prohibits clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases. Clothing displaying advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco or drug product also is prohibited.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/22/west-virginia-teen-returns-to-school-with-nra-shir/

Johnny Vegas
04-24-2013, 08:21 AM
If a shirt had this image, would you all be ok with kids wearing it to school?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/1338597515_Eazy-E32.jpg

Eazy E was gang affiliated. The t-shirt the kid is wearing isn't promoting sex, gangs, or violence. In fact he's encouraging to protect your rights. Schools teach the constitution and bill of rights don't they? unless I'm missing something I don't see what the kid did wrong.

El Jefe
04-24-2013, 08:26 AM
You don't think that would disturb a lot of students and teachers?

An NRA shirt in the midwest? Iz u serius cuz?

King_Chief_Fan
04-24-2013, 08:58 AM
It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad. What matters is it's violent. Using a gun is an act of violence. Whether it be for a good or bad purpose is completely irrelevant.

Similarly, a tornado is a "violent storm." It doesn't matter whether it's good or bad. All that matters is that it is destructive and causes death.

The person who invented a gun thought to himself, "I need something that is better than this dagger/stick. I need something that is going to quickly kill my enemies and my prey. I need something that can be really destructive."

A gun is inherently violent. This is not saying that humans don't do violence using a gun (or another type of instrument).

You're not going to convince me that a gun is not inherently violent. And I might not convince you that it is. That's fine.

link?

Saul Good
04-24-2013, 10:00 AM
Eazy E was gang affiliated. The t-shirt the kid is wearing isn't promoting sex, gangs, or violence. In fact he's encouraging to protect your rights. Schools teach the constitution and bill of rights don't they? unless I'm missing something I don't see what the kid did wrong.

...and the 21st amendment legalized liquor. Is it cool if he wears shirts promoting booze?

Seriously, don't fucking go to school wearing a shirt with a picture of a gun on it if you're told not to.

Also, don't make a huge ordeal out of it if some kid wears a shirt with a picture of a gun on it trying to get a reaction.

Both sides of this are fucking idiots. Stop defending either side. That kid has 50 other shirts he could have worn. He was fishing for victimization. People that do that sort of thing cause problems for everyone.

It's not like the right to wear shirts with pictures of guns on them to school is some worthy cause. Wear the shirt as soon as you leave school, and spare us all your phony outrage.

mr. tegu
04-24-2013, 10:15 AM
link?

I really want to set that guy on fire. But he is all the way over there and I am right here. How can I do this? /George Carlin on the thought process of inventing the flame thrower.

La literatura
04-24-2013, 10:22 AM
link?

http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/TUTORIAL/GUNS/GUNHIST.html

ghak99
04-24-2013, 10:22 AM
This reminds me of a situation I put myself into back in highschool. :evil:

Bump
04-24-2013, 10:52 AM
America = police state

mnchiefsguy
04-24-2013, 12:10 PM
...and the 21st amendment legalized liquor. Is it cool if he wears shirts promoting booze?

Seriously, don't ****ing go to school wearing a shirt with a picture of a gun on it if you're told not to.

Also, don't make a huge ordeal out of it if some kid wears a shirt with a picture of a gun on it trying to get a reaction.

Both sides of this are ****ing idiots. Stop defending either side. That kid has 50 other shirts he could have worn. He was fishing for victimization. People that do that sort of thing cause problems for everyone.

It's not like the right to wear shirts with pictures of guns on them to school is some worthy cause. Wear the shirt as soon as you leave school, and spare us all your phony outrage.

He was never told not to....nowhere in the rules is that type of shirt prohibited. Once the teacher starts yelling and screaming about it, what do you expect a teenager to do? Of the two parties in the incident..the teenager acted like a typical teen...but the adults in the situation failed miserably at acting like the responsible adults they are supposed to be in that situation.

When I was in school, kids wore Budweiser t-shirts all the time. Spuds McKenzie was a big marketing tool for Bud, and it seems like everyone had a Spuds t-shirt in one form or another. I do not remember anyone ever getting sent home or arrested for it.

mr. tegu
04-24-2013, 12:16 PM
He was never told not to....nowhere in the rules is that type of shirt prohibited. Once the teacher starts yelling and screaming about it, what do you expect a teenager to do? Of the two parties in the incident..the teenager acted like a typical teen...but the adults in the situation failed miserably at acting like the responsible adults they are supposed to be in that situation.

When I was in school, kids wore Budweiser t-shirts all the time. Spuds McKenzie was a big marketing tool for Bud, and it seems like everyone had a Spuds t-shirt in one form or another. I do not remember anyone ever getting sent home or arrested for it.

The kid knew it was going to cause some trouble, he just didn't realize how much. My guess is there was some type of discussion prior and it was conveyed to him and the students they should wear that type of shirt. He pushed the boundaries and the teacher reacted ridiculous as well.

"I never thought it would go this far because honestly I don't see a problem with this, there shouldn't be a problem with this," Jared said.

mnchiefsguy
04-24-2013, 12:21 PM
The kid knew it was going to cause some trouble, he just didn't realize how much.

Yeah. And most teenagers like to cause a bit of trouble now and again. If the teacher said nothing about the shirt, which was not forbidden by the dress code of the school, what happens then? A whole bunch of nothing. The kid did the equivalent of lighting a match, and the teacher dump a gallon a lighter fluid on it.

mr. tegu
04-24-2013, 12:22 PM
Yeah. And most teenagers like to cause a bit of trouble now and again. If the teacher said nothing about the shirt, which was not forbidden by the dress code of the school, what happens then? A whole bunch of nothing. The kid did the equivalent of lighting a match, and the teacher dump a gallon a lighter fluid on it.

See my additional comment.

bevischief
04-24-2013, 12:29 PM
Controversial shirts are banned from schools all the time. Kids aren't allowed to wear shirts that promote drug and alcohol use. My senior class had shirts that said "Big Cock Security" with a picture of a rooster in a police uniform...banned.

In middle school me and a buddy jocked Kurt Cobain's style and wore dresses over our clothes. We were told to remove them immediately.

Typically schools here would make kids turn their shirts inside-out if their shirt was thought to be offensive.

I agree that arresting this kid may be over the line though.

This should have been the response.

Johnny Vegas
04-24-2013, 01:14 PM
...and the 21st amendment legalized liquor. Is it cool if he wears shirts promoting booze?

Seriously, don't fucking go to school wearing a shirt with a picture of a gun on it if you're told not to.

Also, don't make a huge ordeal out of it if some kid wears a shirt with a picture of a gun on it trying to get a reaction.

Both sides of this are fucking idiots. Stop defending either side. That kid has 50 other shirts he could have worn. He was fishing for victimization. People that do that sort of thing cause problems for everyone.

It's not like the right to wear shirts with pictures of guns on them to school is some worthy cause. Wear the shirt as soon as you leave school, and spare us all your phony outrage.

no because its against school policies to wear shirts promoting booze. it wasn't in this case against school policy to have a gun on a shirt. so tell me where he broke the rules here?

KChiefer
04-24-2013, 01:40 PM
This should have been the response.

Yes, but the problem here is that the kid refused to remove/reverse his shirt. The articles surrounding this are extremely lacking on details as to what led to the arrest. The school district may be staying mum about it due to possible lawsuits. This buttmunch has nothing to lose so of course he'll put his side out publicly.

A later article says one of his friends tried to wear a shirt with guns to show support for his friend but was told to take it off. I'm guessing that kid did what non-shit-stirrers do and took it off.

------

To anyone saying guns aren't covered in the dress code policy, you're right, they aren't...explicitly covered. However, WhawhaWhat's post points out exactly where school administration has the right to deem any shirt as inappropriate.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=9617542&postcount=57

Prison Bitch
04-24-2013, 01:42 PM
Yes, but the problem here is that the kid refused to remove/reverse his shirt.


Trayvon refused to stop when asked.

Fruit Ninja
04-24-2013, 01:44 PM
A t shirt?

The pussification of america continues...

it was like that when i was a kid in the 80's. Them big Johnson shirts got quickly banned once they figured out what it meant lol

put i agree on the pussification part for alot of things. Im not politically correct and wont ever be and im ok with that. lol

KChiefer
04-24-2013, 01:46 PM
Trayvon refused to stop when asked.

George Zimmerman had ZERO authority over Martin. Teachers DO HAVE authority over students and their classrooms.

You're a stupid, stupid person.

CrazyPhuD
04-24-2013, 01:48 PM
"I am feeling hammer" doesn't make sense
"I am feeling table" Doesn't make sense


Too be fair both of these statements make perfect sense if you've been drinking. But usually the second will come after the first.

Johnny Vegas
04-24-2013, 01:50 PM
Yes, but the problem here is that the kid refused to remove/reverse his shirt. The articles surrounding this are extremely lacking on details as to what led to the arrest. The school district may be staying mum about it due to possible lawsuits. This buttmunch has nothing to lose so of course he'll put his side out publicly.

A later article says one of his friends tried to wear a shirt with guns to show support for his friend but was told to take it off. I'm guessing that kid did what non-shit-stirrers do and took it off.

------

To anyone saying guns aren't covered in the dress code policy, you're right, they aren't...explicitly covered. However, WhawhaWhat's post points out exactly where school administration has the right to deem any shirt as inappropriate.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=9617542&postcount=57

thats a bullshit grey area. any part of clothing can be deemed inappropriate. where is the line drawn? It should be cut and dry what the forbidden clothing should be. This gives the teacher a reason to fuck with kids that don't act accordingly to their views. Its was the teachers own discretion to remove the kid. Did they by chance get a complaint from a student? I'm not reading that anywhere. So it comes down to how much the teacher dislikes a student they can use these bullshit grey areas in rules to punish and embarrass the kid.

mr. tegu
04-24-2013, 01:53 PM
thats a bullshit grey area. any part of clothing can be deemed inappropriate. where is the line drawn? It should be cut and dry what the forbidden clothing should be. This gives the teacher a reason to **** with kids that don't act accordingly to their views. Its was the teachers own discretion to remove the kid. Did they by chance get a complaint from a student? I'm not reading that anywhere. So it comes down to how much the teacher dislikes a student they can use these bullshit grey areas in rules to punish and embarrass the kid.

"I never thought it would go this far because honestly I don't see a problem with this, there shouldn't be a problem with this," Jared said.

Let's not act like this came out of nowhere. He knew he was pushing the limits and would get in trouble. They probably had some sort of discussion that led to an opinion/decision that a shirt shouldn't be worn. Of course the teacher completely overreacted, but it certainly doesn't seem like it was out of nowhere just because the teacher didn't like him.

Johnny Vegas
04-24-2013, 01:58 PM
Let's not act like this came out of nowhere. He knew he was pushing the limits and would get in trouble. They probably had some sort of discussion that led to an opinion/decision that a shirt shouldn't be worn. Of course the teacher completely overreacted, but it certainly doesn't seem like it was out of nowhere just because the teacher didn't like him.

to get him arrested seems like they don't like this kid. any one of us knows they usually contact the parents to come get them at school. Any kid that gets busted with weed in school has their parents come get them instead of take him to jail and have the parents get them there. I've seen it happen when I was in highschool. They really don't like this kid and its obvious.

mr. tegu
04-24-2013, 02:03 PM
to get him arrested seems like they don't like this kid. any one of us knows they usually contact the parents to come get them at school. Any kid that gets busted with weed in school has their parents come get them instead of take him to jail and have the parents get them there. I've seen it happen when I was in highschool. They really don't like this kid and its obvious.

Could the severity of calling police be because they don't like him? Sure. They probably wanted to make an example out of him also. But confronting him about it initially seems more likely that the teacher was mad he would push the limits and apparently do something he knew would cause trouble. As Saul has been saying, idiots all around in this story.

Bump
04-24-2013, 02:29 PM
Could the severity of calling police be because they don't like him? Sure. They probably wanted to make an example out of him also. But confronting him about it initially seems more likely that the teacher was mad he would push the limits and apparently do something he knew would cause trouble. As Saul has been saying, idiots all around in this story.

He's wearing a shirt that says "stand up for your rights" and gets arrested for it.

It doesn't matter, that's how America is today. Think for yourself in school? We're calling the police.

Saul Good
04-24-2013, 03:40 PM
He's wearing a shirt that says "stand up for your rights" and gets arrested for it.

It doesn't matter, that's how America is today. Think for yourself in school? We're calling the police.

Yeah. And the guys in Boston got arrested/killed for wearing hats.

mikey23545
04-24-2013, 03:53 PM
http://imageshack.us/a/img854/3114/obamathedictator1122013.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/854/obamathedictator1122013.jpg/)

Radar Chief
04-24-2013, 04:36 PM
Yeah. And the guys in Boston got arrested/killed for wearing hats.

So scrawny kid with the retro Ramones hair cut had blown, was about to blow, people up? Good thing they got the little miscreant out of school now.

Saul Good
04-25-2013, 07:02 AM
So scrawny kid with the retro Ramones hair cut had blown, was about to blow, people up? Good thing they got the little miscreant out of school now.

Oh,we're just changing the argument whenever we please?

Radar Chief
04-25-2013, 07:54 AM
Oh,we're just changing the argument whenever we please?

:shrug: I was agreeing with you. The bomb chucking terrorist got shot/run over/ thrown in the pokey because one of them was wearing his hat backwards. And really, who can argue? They deserve it for that kind of shit.

Garcia Bronco
04-26-2013, 12:28 PM
Anyway...to what we were talking about the other day.

Since violence is a human contruct of intelligence, and since guns are not intelligent ergo guns cannot be inherently violent. Human beings are and when you come up with an answer for that...I won't need a gun anymore.

ThatRaceCardGuy
04-26-2013, 08:23 PM
If you wear a shirt to school with a gun on it you're a ****ing idiot. If you think this is okay you're a ****ing idiot. If you believe this is Obamas doing ...you're a ****ing idiot. You have to be a hard line right winger , tea bagging, Rush cock sucking, NRA cum swallowing ass shit to think this is not an issue...but hey...this is DC.

Johnny Vegas
04-26-2013, 08:35 PM
If you wear a shirt to school with a gun on it you're a ****ing idiot. If you think this is okay you're a ****ing idiot. If you believe this is Obamas doing ...you're a ****ing idiot. You have to be a hard line right winger , tea bagging, Rush cock sucking, NRA cum swallowing ass shit to think this is not an issue...but hey...this is DC.

doesn't mean jack fucking shit coming from you.

J Diddy
04-26-2013, 08:42 PM
Huge fan of schools having uniforms so none of this shit every happens.

ThatRaceCardGuy
04-26-2013, 08:44 PM
[QUOTE=Johnny Vegas;9634577]doesn't mean jack ****ing shit coming from


Yawn

cosmo20002
04-26-2013, 08:47 PM
Huge fan of schools having uniforms so none of this shit every happens.

Know who liked uniforms? Hitler.

J Diddy
04-26-2013, 08:48 PM
Know who liked uniforms? Hitler.

Don't make me neg rep your ass to oblivion weiner head.

90% of all social problems in schools have something to do with clothing some way or another.

cosmo20002
04-26-2013, 08:49 PM
Don't make me neg rep your ass to oblivion weiner head.

90% of all social problems in schools have something to do with clothing some way or another.

Was supposed to be sarcastic.

petegz28
04-26-2013, 08:50 PM
You don't think that would disturb a lot of students and teachers?

Good thing our schools shelter our kids from the real world instead of educating them. ;)

J Diddy
04-26-2013, 08:50 PM
Was supposed to be sarcastic.

so was I

Bear with me. The pills make me dry.

J Diddy
04-26-2013, 08:52 PM
Good thing our schools shelter our kids from the real world instead of educating them. ;)

Yes, because in the real world you can go into work with any old shirt with a cause on it.

cosmo20002
04-26-2013, 08:55 PM
http://wowk.images.worldnow.com/images/22020264_BG1.jpg



Whenever I open this thread, the main thing I see is this kid tweaking his nipples.

J Diddy
04-26-2013, 08:58 PM
Whenever I open this thread, the main thing I see is this kid tweaking his nipples.

I'm all like get a hair cut, bah.

CrazyPhuD
04-26-2013, 09:06 PM
Whenever I open this thread, the main thing I see is this kid tweaking his nipples.

That only makes sense if he has the saggy nipples of a 60 year old woman....

WhiteWhale
04-26-2013, 09:24 PM
Explain this retarded statement.

Seriously? I went to school in the 90's and shirts with guns and alcohol were banned.

It was an annoying problem for me, because a lot of band shirts I had contained images of things not allowed. I just kept a spare shirt. I knew someone might bitch at me about it. Most of the time I got away with it.

I'm not going to be a martyr for it. I pick my battles, but I thought it was a stupid policy then and still think it's stupid. He chose to be a martyr for it. Whatever.

petegz28
04-26-2013, 09:36 PM
Yes, because in the real world you can go into work with any old shirt with a cause on it.

:huh:

Pawnmower
04-26-2013, 09:45 PM
fucking stupid public school, deserves to get sued into oblivion and paved over

Pawnmower
04-26-2013, 09:46 PM
it isnt even a controversy

we have a right to bear arms

its not anything like drugs or alcohol or sexual stuff

J Diddy
04-26-2013, 09:56 PM
it isnt even a controversy

we have a right to bear arms

its not anything like drugs or alcohol or sexual stuff

schools have the right to set dress codes

Why would a school want something disruptive, such as this shirt, in their walls?

jspchief
04-26-2013, 10:41 PM
Just skimmed the thread so not sure if this has been said...

A lot of public schools have "zero tolerance" policies that would cover a tshirt with a gun on it, even if the dress code doesn't specifically state it. So simply posting the school's dress code may not tell the entire story.

Yes, zero tolerance rules are stupid.

stevieray
04-26-2013, 10:54 PM
it isnt even a controversy

we have a right to bear arms



you didn't get the memo?

....the right to bear arms is offensive.

Brock
04-26-2013, 11:10 PM
I got sent home over a black sabbath t shirt. No sympathy here.

CrazyPhuD
04-26-2013, 11:25 PM
Just skimmed the thread so not sure if this has been said...

A lot of public schools have "zero tolerance" policies that would cover a tshirt with a gun on it, even if the dress code doesn't specifically state it. So simply posting the school's dress code may not tell the entire story.

Yes, zero tolerance rules are stupid.

I have zero tolerance for zero tolerance rules.

CrazyPhuD
04-26-2013, 11:29 PM
schools have the right to set dress codes

Why would a school want something disruptive, such as this shirt, in their walls?

Or one could argue the similar point of why would a school want students who can think for themselves?

In a world that practices and preaches tolerance of all ideas even those we disagree with it wouldn't ever matter what anyone wears on their shirts.

Instead we teach a brand of tolerance(regardless of political spectrum), where we're tolerant of someone being different so long as it's a different I agree with....

2bikemike
04-26-2013, 11:34 PM
I got sent home over a black sabbath t shirt. No sympathy here.

I got sent home for a shirt that said "Put Something Exciting Between your Legs" Had a picture of a Moto X rider jumping a bike. All my shirts had to do with dirt bikes at the time. My mom was pretty pissed since she bought me the shirt.

Garcia Bronco
04-28-2013, 06:05 PM
Having the kid arrested was dumb. That's where I get upset about it.

Rudy lost the toss
04-30-2013, 09:13 PM
Do all NRA shirts come in sleeveless?

Radar Chief
05-01-2013, 09:55 AM
Do all NRA shirts come in sleeveless?

I assume he cut the sleeves off so he could flash those monster cannons of his.

Saul Good
05-01-2013, 10:51 AM
I assume he cut the sleeves off so he could flash those monster cannons of his.

Maybe they suspended him for showing off his guns.

Saul Good
05-01-2013, 10:53 AM
it isnt even a controversy

we have a right to bear arms

its not anything like drugs or alcohol or sexual stuff

We have a right to do a lot of things. We don't have the right to do them all at schools, though.

BigChiefTablet
05-01-2013, 11:53 AM
I assume he cut the sleeves off so he could flash those monster cannons of his.

Duh. He cut of the sleeves because he has the right to bare arms.

Radar Chief
05-01-2013, 12:54 PM
Duh. He cut of the sleeves because he has the right to bare arms.

http://i42.tinypic.com/35bigxc.jpg

Radar Chief
05-01-2013, 01:56 PM
Maybe they suspended him for showing off his guns.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4kU0XCVey_U" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Saul Good
05-07-2013, 10:01 AM
Just skimmed the thread so not sure if this has been said...

A lot of public schools have "zero tolerance" policies that would cover a tshirt with a gun on it, even if the dress code doesn't specifically state it. So simply posting the school's dress code may not tell the entire story.

Yes, zero tolerance rules are stupid.

Want to know why zero tolerance policies are necessary? It's because there is no middle ground with people like you. For example, in this thread:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=272768

A kid brings a fucking shotgun to school, and you still bitch about him getting kicked out of school. Zero tolerance is the end result of people who constantly bump the line...and bump the line...and bump the line. Eventually, authorities have to say, "fuck it" and throw common sense out the window. Now, you can't bring a toy gun to school. You can't point your fingers like a gun. You can't bite your sandwich into a gun shape. You can't wear a shirt with a picture of a gun.

There is simply no room for using common sense in judgment, because people like you think that it's just fine and dandy if a kid brings a real gun to school as long as its not loaded...or it is loaded, but he keeps the safety on...or the safety is off but he doesn't pont it at anybody...or he does point it at somebody but not above the waist...or he points it at someone's head but doesn't shoot them...or he does shoot them but only wounds them...

cosmo20002
05-07-2013, 11:34 AM
Want to know why zero tolerance policies are necessary? It's because there is no middle ground with people like you. For example, in this thread:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=272768

A kid brings a ****ing shotgun to school, and you still bitch about him getting kicked out of school. Zero tolerance is the end result of people who constantly bump the line...and bump the line...and bump the line. Eventually, authorities have to say, "**** it" and throw common sense out the window. Now, you can't bring a toy gun to school. You can't point your fingers like a gun. You can't bite your sandwich into a gun shape. You can't wear a shirt with a picture of a gun.

There is simply no room for using common sense in judgment, because people like you think that it's just fine and dandy if a kid brings a real gun to school as long as its not loaded...or it is loaded, but he keeps the safety on...or the safety is off but he doesn't pont it at anybody...or he does point it at somebody but not above the waist...or he points it at someone's head but doesn't shoot them...or he does shoot them but only wounds them...

Good points. Mixing chemicals to create explosions is also ok if no one was hurt and/or you, another student, or a media source says it was an "experiment gone wrong."

jspchief
05-07-2013, 12:25 PM
Want to know why zero tolerance policies are necessary? It's because there is no middle ground with people like you. For example, in this thread:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=272768

A kid brings a fucking shotgun to school, and you still bitch about him getting kicked out of school. Zero tolerance is the end result of people who constantly bump the line...and bump the line...and bump the line. Eventually, authorities have to say, "fuck it" and throw common sense out the window. Now, you can't bring a toy gun to school. You can't point your fingers like a gun. You can't bite your sandwich into a gun shape. You can't wear a shirt with a picture of a gun.

There is simply no room for using common sense in judgment, because people like you think that it's just fine and dandy if a kid brings a real gun to school as long as its not loaded...or it is loaded, but he keeps the safety on...or the safety is off but he doesn't pont it at anybody...or he does point it at somebody but not above the waist...or he points it at someone's head but doesn't shoot them...or he does shoot them but only wounds them...

First off, I didn't say it was ok for a kid to bring a gun to school. I just said that expulsion and a felony charge were excessive.

Second, people like me aren't the reason zero tolerance policies exist. Quite the opposite. It's the people that are incapable of applying common sense to look at things on a case by case basis. For instance, looking at a good student, who had a legitimate (albeit irresponsible) reason for having a shotgun in his vehicle, and deciding that its not on par with someone who brings a gun to school with ill intentions. The people who are incapable of expecting a grade schooler to know the difference between a weapon, and a pop tart bit into the shape of one.

Don't blame me for your inability to apply common sense.