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.
kbiel - 12:03pm on 03/11/2008
Anna, kbiel. I was a school teacher and as such do support all school rules. Did you read my explanations? Some schools put on, or act like they are getting tough with students to play to their public so they will look successful. In reality, schools are being run by gangs. I could tell hundreds of stories illustrating this point. If, and I say that with the possibility that it is true, if the rules were made clear, the schools were enforcing all infractions evenly, then, the school should be supported. But. None of us was there.
Chief RZ - 12:03pm on 03/11/2008
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.
realitybasedbob - 01:03pm on 03/11/2008
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.
Bat One - 01:03pm on 03/11/2008
We do have a tradition of ignoring stupid rules, remember?
Yes, there are very real issues with bringing real weapons to school. However, the last time I checked, it was at the very least difficult to kill someone with an image of a gun on a shirt--at least without strangling that person, which could also be done with a shirt without a gun imaged on it.
Bike Bubba - 02:03pm on 03/11/2008
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.
You can bet your ass that were he wearing a shirt with the famous Malcolm X pic, holding an M1 carbine, and with the quote"By any means necessary” he would not be in trouble. Or Che holding an SKS with Revolución! underneath.
This school needs to be wallpapered with these stickers. I got 1/2 a box I will gladly donate.
2Hotel9 - 04:03pm on 03/11/2008
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.
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.
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.
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.
Anna, kbiel. I was a school teacher and as such do support all school rules. Did you read my explanations? Some schools put on, or act like they are getting tough with students to play to their public so they will look successful. In reality, schools are being run by gangs. I could tell hundreds of stories illustrating this point. If, and I say that with the possibility that it is true, if the rules were made clear, the schools were enforcing all infractions evenly, then, the school should be supported. But. None of us was there.
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.
We do have a tradition of ignoring stupid rules, remember?
Yes, there are very real issues with bringing real weapons to school. However, the last time I checked, it was at the very least difficult to kill someone with an image of a gun on a shirt--at least without strangling that person, which could also be done with a shirt without a gun imaged on it.
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.
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
You can bet your ass that were he wearing a shirt with the famous Malcolm X pic, holding an M1 carbine, and with the quote"By any means necessary” he would not be in trouble. Or Che holding an SKS with Revolución! underneath.
This school needs to be wallpapered with these stickers. I got 1/2 a box I will gladly donate.
I definately agree that this is a stupid policy. But I agree completely with kbiel.
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.