TexasCHLforum.com

"More than 2,500 students caught with firearms at school

A total of 2,554 students were expelled for bringing a firearm to school in the 2001-2002 school year. The Gun-Free Schools Act requires that each state or outlying area receiving federal funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act have a law that requires all local educational agencies to expel for at least one year any student found bringing a firearm to school. Here's how those expulsions break down:


Grade level: Fifty-seven percent of the expulsions were students in high school, 30 percent were in junior high and 13 percent were in elementary school.


Type of gun: Fifty percent of the expulsions were for bringing a handgun to school; 38 percent were for some other type of weapon such as bombs or grenades or starter pistols; and 12 percent were for bringing a rifle or shotgun to school.


Penalty reduced: Thirty-seven percent of expulsions were shortened to less than one year.

Source: U.S. Department of Education"

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/ ... /1012/NEWS

Nope. Don't seem to be working & don't see any possibility of criminals (young or old) deciding to obey a "New Law". Those #s don't include the guns brought to school by mad parents. Remember Tyler.

I am surprised. I just knew that this law would work.

dws1117 wrote:I am surprised. I just knew that this law would work.

LOL

You are sicker than you think today. That fever & virus has bothered your thinking more than your stomach. Get well FAST.

longtooth wrote:You are sicker than you think today. That fever & virus has bothered your thinking more than your stomach. Get well FAST.

You're probably correct. Time for a nap. Have a great day.

Another problem is that we apparently don't mean what we say. Why are the expulsions for less than one year if the law says they are supposed to be for AT LEAST one year?

Venus Pax wrote:Another problem is that we apparently don't mean what we say. Why are the expulsions for less than one year if the law says they are supposed to be for AT LEAST one year?

My problem is ...
What is an expulsion to the offender other than a vacation from rules?

True punishment would be REQUIRED attendance for them.

Expulsion just means that they CAN be on the streets doing what they want! i.e.dealing drugs, stealing cars... etc.

That is true; however, my point is that we don't follow through.

dws1117 wrote:I am surprised. I just knew that this law would work.

Well, maybe a new law will help?

Venus Pax wrote:Another problem is that we apparently don't mean what we say. Why are the expulsions for less than one year if the law says they are supposed to be for AT LEAST one year?

This has bled over from parenting. I see it every day with my niece and nephew.

They're told that if they don't cease their bad behavior, they'll receive a certain punishment. Then this punishment isn't administered.

And we wonder why they don't listen when they're told how to behave or not to behave.

Diode wrote:

dws1117 wrote:I am surprised. I just knew that this law would work.

Well, maybe a new law will help?

And maybe Bill Gates will name me the sole beneficiery(sp?) to his fortune.

And maybe....Oh never mind that won't happen either.

cjlandry wrote:

Venus Pax wrote:Another problem is that we apparently don't mean what we say. Why are the expulsions for less than one year if the law says they are supposed to be for AT LEAST one year?

This has bled over from parenting. I see it every day with my niece and nephew.

They're told that if they don't cease their bad behavior, they'll receive a certain punishment. Then this punishment isn't administered.

And we wonder why they don't listen when they're told how to behave or not to behave.

Reminds me of those parents who warn that they're "going to count to three!"

And so they keep warning they're going to count to three. And eventually, they start counting. "One... I told you, stop it!" "Two.... Do you want time out? I mean it!" "TWO.... I really mean it!" "TWO... I'm going to come over there!" "Two and a HALF!" . . .

etc., etc., etc.

Meanwhile, my kids have all known that if I'm counting to three, "ONE" means standing up, stripping off my belt, and starting in their general direction. Funny how I seldom made it to "two", much less "three".

My three year old says "sir" and "ma'am". He sometimes gets his manners mixed up; when he sneezes and we say "bless you!", he says, "You're welcome!" He's very Three, and will argue that he doesn't want something while arguing that he really does. But when it comes to manners, I think we've got him started on the right path. He didn't get there by coddling.

Kevin

KBCraig wrote: Reminds me of those parents who warn that they're "going to count to three!"

And so they keep warning they're going to count to three. And eventually, they start counting. "One... I told you, stop it!" "Two.... Do you want time out? I mean it!" "TWO.... I really mean it!" "TWO... I'm going to come over there!" "Two and a HALF!" . . .

etc., etc., etc.

Meanwhile, my kids have all known that if I'm counting to three, "ONE" means standing up, stripping off my belt, and starting in their general direction. Funny how I seldom made it to "two", much less "three".

My three year old says "sir" and "ma'am". He sometimes gets his manners mixed up; when he sneezes and we say "bless you!", he says, "You're welcome!" He's very Three, and will argue that he doesn't want something while arguing that he really does. But when it comes to manners, I think we've got him started on the right path. He didn't get there by coddling.

Kevin

My son is 7, and when I get angry and call his name, he snaps to attention and shouts, "Sir Yes Sir!"

I didn't even teach him that! LOL!

We didn't even say "Sir Yes Sir" in my platoon in boot camp. Our Senior Drill Instructor taught us that "We don't kiss (butt)".

I heard my Daughter-in-law tell her Nephew ''I don't DO two's and three's'' My Mom didn't either