cb1000rider wrote:Political speech has been ruled on many times within the public school context...
Yup, it sure has, here are two examples
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)
(Students do not leave their rights at the schoolhouse door)
To protest the Vietnam War, Mary Beth Tinker and her brother wore black armbands to school. Fearing a disruption, the administration prohibited wearing such armbands. The Tinkers were removed from school when they failed to comply, but the Supreme Court ruled that their actions were protected by the First Amendment.
Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975)
(Students are entitled to certain due process rights)
Nine students at an Ohio public school received 10-day suspensions for disruptive behavior without due process protections. The Supreme Court ruled for the students, saying that once the state provides an education for all of its citizens, it cannot deprive them of it without ensuring due process protections.
cb1000rider wrote:Political speech has been ruled on many times within the public school context... I'd like to see the T-shirt too.
I still think this kid just bought himself a tax-payer college scholarship courtesy of some over-zealous educators and law enforcement.
I'm not so sure. Officially he wasn't arrested for the shirt. Heck the cops weren't there for the shirt but rather the disturbance that occurred when the teacher asked/told the kid he couldn't wear it. The Officer comes in and try's to figure out what's going on and the Kid won't stop talking long enough for the Officer to do so. Contempt of cop? Well I guess you could say that but we don't know how many times or what the Officer tried to get the kid to shut up and yes he does need to allow the Officer the ability to do his job. We don't give Cops all that many tools to handle situations like that. It's all very well to say he should of been able to handle a 14yo without arresting him but if you have told the kid to stop, then stop again, then stop or else, well then arresting people is what you do. Would I be happy about this happening , no but that's a far cry from preferring an outcome to being legally or civilly liable because the kid talked himself into a ride.
cb1000rider wrote:Political speech has been ruled on many times within the public school context... I'd like to see the T-shirt too.
I still think this kid just bought himself a tax-payer college scholarship courtesy of some over-zealous educators and law enforcement.
I'm not so sure. Officially he wasn't arrested for the shirt. Heck the cops weren't there for the shirt but rather the disturbance that occurred when the teacher asked/told the kid he couldn't wear it. The Officer comes in and try's to figure out what's going on and the Kid won't stop talking long enough for the Officer to do so. Contempt of cop? Well I guess you could say that but we don't know how many times or what the Officer tried to get the kid to shut up and yes he does need to allow the Officer the ability to do his job. We don't give Cops all that many tools to handle situations like that. It's all very well to say he should of been able to handle a 14yo without arresting him but if you have told the kid to stop, then stop again, then stop or else, well then arresting people is what you do. Would I be happy about this happening , no but that's a far cry from preferring an outcome to being legally or civilly liable because the kid talked himself into a ride.
Were this kid's parent(s) not called? Why is it that the school felt it okay to simply call in law enforcement because of a T-shirt they didn't like, obviously for political reasons? I would understand if the kid was 18, 17, maybe even 16...but he was a middle schooler. The parent(s) should have been called unless the kid was just outright violent. And I don't consider being mouthy as violent unless physical threats were made.
cb1000rider wrote:Political speech has been ruled on many times within the public school context... I'd like to see the T-shirt too.
I still think this kid just bought himself a tax-payer college scholarship courtesy of some over-zealous educators and law enforcement.
I'm not so sure. Officially he wasn't arrested for the shirt. Heck the cops weren't there for the shirt but rather the disturbance that occurred when the teacher asked/told the kid he couldn't wear it. The Officer comes in and try's to figure out what's going on and the Kid won't stop talking long enough for the Officer to do so. Contempt of cop? Well I guess you could say that but we don't know how many times or what the Officer tried to get the kid to shut up and yes he does need to allow the Officer the ability to do his job. We don't give Cops all that many tools to handle situations like that. It's all very well to say he should of been able to handle a 14yo without arresting him but if you have told the kid to stop, then stop again, then stop or else, well then arresting people is what you do. Would I be happy about this happening , no but that's a far cry from preferring an outcome to being legally or civilly liable because the kid talked himself into a ride.
Sorry, I disagree. If the kid was trying to explain himself to the officer and the officer wasn't willing to listen and told him to shut up, then the kid was within his rights to go ahead and talk. I have personally seen, a couple of times, and many times on You Tube and "Cops" when officers threatened to arrest someone for obstruction when they were doing nothing more than explaining their version of events. "Tell it to the judge." and "Let the judge/jury sort it out." is a popular answer, but doesn't, to me, rise to the level of obstruction, particularly when, say, a teacher is standing there freely giving her version of events without any counter.
"If you won't shut up, I'm taking you to jail." is a pretty poor attitude to me.
jimlongley wrote:"If you won't shut up, I'm taking you to jail." is a pretty poor attitude to me.
I was basically told the same thing when a DPS officer claimed I ran a stop sign - which I did not. I was told "I'm giving you a warning, but if you keep telling me you are not guilty I will write a citation." So yeah, not a stretch of the imagination that a cop would take someone to jail for not shutting up.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison
Funny(scary) to see people being put jail or "targeted" by our govt for expressing or trying to express their rights. Yet, the very people that are trying to take away our rights are the ones that are running around free as a bird.
Our country is upside-down.
The best gun to defend yourself is the one you have.
K.Mooneyham wrote:
Were this kid's parent(s) not called? Why is it that the school felt it okay to simply call in law enforcement because of a T-shirt they didn't like, obviously for political reasons? I would understand if the kid was 18, 17, maybe even 16...but he was a middle schooler. The parent(s) should have been called unless the kid was just outright violent. And I don't consider being mouthy as violent unless physical threats were made.
My understanding is a teacher at lunch said something to the kid about the shirt and it ended up with kids standing on tables yelling. Doesn't sound like the cop showed up because of anything but the disturbance. You do realize many schools have cops that work right there in the school. It very well may happen that no one called anyone that the officer simply responded to the disturbance. As far as the officers actions we just don't have enough info but there certainly appears to be more than enough PC to support the charge.
jimlongley wrote:
Sorry, I disagree. If the kid was trying to explain himself to the officer and the officer wasn't willing to listen and told him to shut up, then the kid was within his rights to go ahead and talk. I have personally seen, a couple of times, and many times on You Tube and "Cops" when officers threatened to arrest someone for obstruction when they were doing nothing more than explaining their version of events. "Tell it to the judge." and "Let the judge/jury sort it out." is a popular answer, but doesn't, to me, rise to the level of obstruction, particularly when, say, a teacher is standing there freely giving her version of events without any counter.
"If you won't shut up, I'm taking you to jail." is a pretty poor attitude to me.
Well what if the Officer was trying to speak with others and the kid wouldn't shut up making the officers job more difficult. That more than fits the requirements of the law and seemingly fits the scenario. And in the whole "Tell it to the judge" situation, again you stop if the cop says so. If the officer feels they have PC, the judge comment is a clue that they think it should go to the court to decide and that the cop isn't going to hold court in the street, they are not required to listen to you without end, and yes you can interfere by trying to force them to listen when they are trying to do something else. Of course in your version the kid should shout down the teacher who would be trying to describe events to the officer.
What do the police have to do with school dress codes to start with. This was not a police matter. Speaking is not a crime...contempt of cop should not be a prison worthy offense. A teacher screaming at a student over a shirt IMO is a matter for HR and possibly the counseling department.
Yet another example of a person (this time a teen) getting railroaded because someone got their shorts in a twist and want this teen to learn to fear and tremble as serf instead of standing as a citizen.
SAHM to four precious children. Wife to a loving husband.
"The women of this country learned long ago those without swords can still die upon them!" Eowyn in LOTR Two Towers
mamabearCali wrote:What do the police have to do with school dress codes to start with. This was not a police matter. Speaking is not a crime...contempt of cop should not be a prison worthy offense. A teacher screaming at a student over a shirt IMO is a matter for HR and possibly the counseling department.
Yet another example of a person (this time a teen) getting railroaded because someone got their shorts in a twist and want this teen to learn to fear and tremble as serf instead of standing as a citizen.
Didn't I hear that the interaction between the teacher and the student over the shirt ended with a disturbance that included 30 kids standing on tables? So if the "cops" responded to that rather than an issue with the kids shirt it sure makes a difference in how it's viewed, at least from my perspective. Then again I've heard that the principul may have called the police when the kid was in the office and the charge was because the kid wouldn't talk. My point being since we can't get a good understanding of what happened making sweeping comments seems precipitous to me.
mamabearCali wrote:What do the police have to do with school dress codes to start with. This was not a police matter. Speaking is not a crime...contempt of cop should not be a prison worthy offense. A teacher screaming at a student over a shirt IMO is a matter for HR and possibly the counseling department.
Yet another example of a person (this time a teen) getting railroaded because someone got their shorts in a twist and want this teen to learn to fear and tremble as serf instead of standing as a citizen.
Dindn't I hear that the interaction between the teacher and the student over the shirt ended with a disturbance that included 30 kids standing on tables? So if the "cops" responded to that rather than an issue with the kids shirt it sure makes a difference in how it's viewed, at least from my perspective.
So my question would be....why in the world would a teacher let this escalate to such a state over a Tshirt?
Doesn't really seem that there were really any adults present.
I don't know what really happened, I wasn't there, but it sure looks to me like all this could have been handled a lot differently.
Maybe like adults in charge?
"All it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing"
Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.
Yes a teacher screaming her head off at a teacher does attract attention. That is not the student's fault. Even if he screamed back at her...it is still simply a school matter. I think we can be pretty sure the student was not screaming at the teacher because if he had been it would have been all over the place that what he was suspended for was defiance (not a dress code infraction.) Once he figured out that it was over a shirt, if no one was injured, the LEO should have walked away.
Is it possible for the teen to have been talking over the LEO, sure. But as he had just been harrassed by a teacher over a shirt and had the cops called on him OVER A SHIRT (and the disturbance the teacher made) his being unnerved is 100% understandable. Do you really think it is ok to call talking over a person "obstruction" shouldn't we have a little more respect for the seriousness of that charge. Do you think it is ok to throw a teen in jail for a year because his teacher made a scene and then he talked too much?
I am not nearly as trained as a LEO, just was a teacher myself, I could very easily handle children even when they were talking over me, even when they were bigger than me. I did not have a pair of cuffs and a badge, but I usually found out the truth of a situation without those tools. If I, a little 5 foot 4 inch woman can do that I really expect a LEO to be able to do the same.
SAHM to four precious children. Wife to a loving husband.
"The women of this country learned long ago those without swords can still die upon them!" Eowyn in LOTR Two Towers
mamabearCali wrote:What do the police have to do with school dress codes to start with. This was not a police matter. Speaking is not a crime...contempt of cop should not be a prison worthy offense. A teacher screaming at a student over a shirt IMO is a matter for HR and possibly the counseling department.
Yet another example of a person (this time a teen) getting railroaded because someone got their shorts in a twist and want this teen to learn to fear and tremble as serf instead of standing as a citizen.
Dindn't I hear that the interaction between the teacher and the student over the shirt ended with a disturbance that included 30 kids standing on tables? So if the "cops" responded to that rather than an issue with the kids shirt it sure makes a difference in how it's viewed, at least from my perspective.
So my question would be....why in the world would a teacher let this escalate to such a state over a Tshirt?
Doesn't really seem that there were really any adults present.
I don't know what really happened, I wasn't there, but it sure looks to me like all this could have been handled a lot differently.
Maybe like adults in charge?
You're giving the teacher too much credit. It's 100% ideological. The left uses every scrap of power they can muster to destroy their opponents. If that means ruining the life of a child in order to advance their agenda, they have zero qualms about it. If they had the power right now to attempt to round up and exterminate Christians, conservatives, gun owners, etc, then we'd be fighting for our lives. The real shame here is that there are so many people in law enforcement, like the officer in this case, who are willing to help the left destroy the Republic.
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."
jocat54 wrote:
So my question would be....why in the world would a teacher let this escalate to such a state over a Tshirt?
Doesn't really seem that there were really any adults present.
I don't know what really happened, I wasn't there, but it sure looks to me like all this could have been handled a lot differently.
Maybe like adults in charge?
I could come up with a dozen scenarios where it was clearly the kids fault. The only reason to assume it was the teacher escalating the issue is because it fits a internal narrative you prefer. Heck we don't know that the teacher is even anti gun or NRA, they could just have been trying to enforce what they thought was a school policy. While I thinks it's stupid I bet there are many schools where it would be against policy so it's possible to have an honest misunderstanding without having sinister motives.
You're giving the teacher too much credit. It's 100% ideological. The left uses every scrap of power they can muster to destroy their opponents. If that means ruining the life of a child in order to advance their agenda, they have zero qualms about it. If they had the power right now to attempt to round up and exterminate Christians, conservatives, gun owners, etc, then we'd be fighting for our lives. The real shame here is that there are so many people in law enforcement, like the officer in this case, who are willing to help the left destroy the Republic.
