This T-shirt case is absurd. Taken to its logical conclusion, no books showing pictures of guns or stories of guns or guns on the internet would be allowed.
I have been to Lancaster, PA. I know this type T-shirt. It is a political statement. The official tipped his hand when he mentioned Columbine. Gun free zones do not work because criminals do not read nor follow laws. Had a good citizen been at Columbine with a right to carry, then there would have been far fewer deaths. Anna. Yes, a rule is a rule and if schools enforced all their rules then we would have better discipline and be able to teach much more quality education.
However, in my observations, the school officials are scared to confront gun carrying gang members while putting on a big show of suspending someone who sketches a gun on a piece of paper or uses a plastic knife to butter her bread at the lunch table. That is The Truth.

what kbiel said. This has nothing to do with this kid’s fallen uncle, it’s a disservice to even bring that into it.

The kid should have turned the shirt inside-out.

The NEA/ AFT / Socialists are driving this sort of absurdity. Their whites-of-the-eyes fear of even the mention of guns is pushing deep into insanity territory.

If they really wanted to keep kids safe, they would have gun safety courses, marksmanship classes and at least one armed shooter to a classroom, like they did in Israel.

Evidently, that is not their true objective, which is more likely creating a stigma against guns*and stoking a climate of fear with respect to the armed citizen.

* See Creating Norms of Non-Possession

If I were that kid, I’d go back to school with a picture of a Minuteman on my shirt, musket and all.
See who would be “sensitive” to that!

Two words: school uniforms.

If dozens of kids in high schools and colleges across the country were not killed by loonies with gun maybe this would not be an issue.

RBB,

Limiting the rights of the law-abiding majority to preclude the the illegal actions of the “loonies” and the lawbreakers doesn’t make much sense… particularly in a country where one of the founding principles is one of limited government.

Kbiel,

Your attempt at sarcasm isn’t up to your usual standards. Nor does the original story indicate in any way that young Mr. Donald Miller, III is “a whiney [sic] self-important hooligan” or that he is in any way “belligerent” as you have previously described him.

Conceivably, Miller could be as dumb as a box of dirt, or a straight “A” student and a prospective Eagle scout. The same speculation could also apply to the school’s principal or the president of the school board that instituted the ridiculous policy of saving students by sensitively banning even the image of a gun.

And all this in a state famous for the fact that the entire state shuts down each year for the first day of deer season.

If dozens of kids in high schools and colleges across the country were not killed by loonies with gun maybe this would not be an issue.

Even accepting your rather absurd logic…none of those students were killed with gun pictures on tshirts. Logic fails.

I cannot imagine that any reading of a zero tolerance rule towards weapons could cover a picture on a T-shirt. Otherwise, Chief is right, magazines would have to be banned, the net shut down, etc, so that students neither see a picture of a gun, the word “gun”, or a description thereof. It smells funky and is therefore, probably a lie.

Schools are known for banning shirts with conservative messages, while allowing liberal messages to go unchecked. This is one more example of that, no question.

While I think the school policy is stupid, I don’t buy the “I was honoring my uncle” line. There is nothing in the description of the shirt that even hints to me that the kid has an uncle in Iraq or even in the military. Rather, I think this sounds like another case of a snot-nosed brat who doesn’t know when to back down because his parents have always told him how great he is. Just because he’s on my side of the political divide with regard to terrorism (and possibly gun rights) does not make him right.

Now, had he worn a t-shirt with a picture of the famous minute man statue or the fallen soldier symbols (helmet on gun with hanging dog tags, surrounded by a pair of boots), then I might be more willing to take sides with this kid.

Nor does the original story indicate in any way that young Mr. Donald Miller, III is “a whiney [sic] self-important hooligan” or that he is in any way “belligerent” as you have previously described him.

Yes, whiney (also whiny) and self-important is my characterization and could be completely wrong. Characterizing him as belligerent is certainly warranted given that he belligerently refused to comply with the authority above him.

Conceivably, Miller could be as dumb as a box of dirt, or a straight “A” student and a prospective Eagle scout.

His intelligence, grades or rank in the scouts (if any), none of which I commented on, has no bearing on the fact they he is going about changing this stupid policy in a way that is not going to bring sympathy to his cause.

The same speculation could also apply to the school’s principal or the president of the school board that instituted the ridiculous policy of saving students by sensitively banning even the image of a gun.

On that, you and I can agree.

Look people, I’m not defending this asinine policy, but we don’t calling for revolution over idiotic things like this. Likening this kid to patriots and saying that he should vandalize other people’s property over a stupid t-shirt is just over the top. It’s not like they’re going door to door and confiscating people’s guns (something for which I would call for revolution). It’s not like they kid was suspended for believing in gun rights and bagging terrorists. He was properly punished for being a belligerent brat. There is a right and proper way to have this stupid policy changed; addressing the school board and then, if they won’t act, campaigning against them in the next election. Refusing to comply and then suing for non-existent rights is the kind of behavior we should be discouraging. And we certainly shouldn’t be encouraging vandalism. That’s the kind of behavior we (or at least I) deplore when coming from the leftard protesters like Code Pink and Cindy Sheehan.

Just because Ellinas happens to agree with me doesn’t mean that I’m wrong though I did have to think about it for a moment.

I’m not talking about surrendering rights, I’m talking about not raising whiney, self-important hooligans who think everything they want to do is suddenly a right. It is not his right to wear a shirt with a gun on it anymore than it is his right to wear a shirt with a jihadi symbol on it. That the policy is stupid does not make it unconstitutional.

And please reread the description of the shirt. What about that shirt tells you that he has an uncle in Iraq or even in the military? What about that shirt says, “I’m proud of our soldiers.” It doesn’t even mention soldiers or the military. That argument is clearly an excuse after the fact to cover for this kid’s belligerence and his parents complicity.

This T-shirt case is absurd

I agree.
Regardless as to how stupid, lame, idiotic the rule may appear to us it is what it is. Period.
The rule was established prior to the incident. The student broke the rule. The student defied authority of the situation. End of story.

Even the image of a gun violates school policy. Apparently students are supposed to pretend as though guns don’t exist. In order to, you know, keep them safe.

Let’s not forget these are many of the same people who ride around with “Visualize World Peace” bumper stickers on their Prius’. No doubt, the threat of Islamist terrorism, such as the horror of 9-11, would be dealt with, safely, in a similar manner, if only they are given the chance.

If this was my kid, I’d sue too. And I’d be beating down the ACLU’s door, and making sure everyone knew I was doing so.

I definately agree that this is a stupid policy. But I agree completely with kbiel.

In reality, schools are being run by gangs.

I don’t know where you taught, but I can assure you that schools are not run by “gangs” in Lancaster, PA. I came from a “tougher” area than Lancaster (though I would never describe my area as tough) and there weren’t any gangs. Now if you want to talk about Philly, that’s another story.