Kid suspended for drawing a gun

[Ghoulish Delight]

I still don't know where you stand, GC, on the hypothetical question posed.

If a kid had a clean record with no prior indication of behavior issues, authority issues, depression, etc., would a single drawing of a gun be enough, in your opinion, to justify suspension without any attempt to address it with either teacher talking to the kid to a visit the school counselor first?

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

I still don't know where you stand, GC, on the hypothetical question posed.

If a kid had a clean record with no prior indication of behavior issues, authority issues, depression, etc., would a single drawing of a gun be enough, in your opinion, to justify suspension without any attempt to address it with either teacher talking to the kid to a visit the school counselor first?

It depends on where the drawing was. If it's on homework to turn in to a teacher as this kid did, yes. On a test, yes. If it was his own journal or at home or in an art class, no.

I have an issue with the school doing it without having something in the student handbook about it. They should have been more clear on it.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

It depends on where the drawing was. If it's on homework to turn in to a teacher as this kid did, yes. On a test, yes. If it was his own journal or at home or in an art class, no.

See, this is where I part completely with you. For all of the reasons CP listed above. A drawing of a gun in isolation, with no other behavioral indicators of a problem, should not be enough to warrant suspension. If the teacher talks to him and he gets defiant about it, absolutely. If a teacher or counselor has warned him not to do it again and he does it again, suspend his ass. If a counselor talks to him and learns that he's dealing with some issues at home...no, scratch that, that should prompt more counseling, NOT punishment.

Going straight to punitive measures for a simple act of expression, even somewhat inappropriate expression, with zero attempt at resolving it with communication is a recipe for disaster. It's telling ALL students, not just this one, that they will not be listened to, that they need to be afraid that what they might say or express will get them in trouble. That, to me, is the kind of thing that leads to Columbine.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

It's telling ALL students, not just this one, that they will not be listened to, that they need to be afraid that what they might say or express will get them in trouble. That, to me, is the kind of thing that leads to Columbine.

I hear you. The Columbine shooters were bullied and were not backed up by the school officials. Then they snapped and committed horrendous crimes. I think the people that were not letting them express themselves were their classmates. There was a lot of bullying going on, from what I remember. (I'm not justifying what they did. They were wackos.)
There were warning signs with Columbine and those signs were ignored. I'd rather a school be diligent about these warning signs than ignore them.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

There were warning signs with Columbine and those signs were ignored. I'd rather a school be diligent about these warning signs than ignore them.

You're getting locked into "Columbine" as the only example. There are plenty of others where bullying wasn't the issue. The only real constant between any of them was that the perpetrators were in desperate need of help and didn't get it for one reason or another.

Blindly suspending students for expression is not diligence. It's simply the other end of the spectrum from completely ignoring it. It's, "We're incapable of treating you as an individual, so we're just going to hope the problem just goes away." Bad bad news.

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

You're getting locked into "Columbine" as the only example. There are plenty of others where bullying wasn't the issue. The only real constant between any of them was that the perpetrators were in desperate need of help and didn't get it for one reason or another.

Blindly suspending students for expression is not diligence. It's simply the other end of the spectrum from completely ignoring it. It's, "We're incapable of treating you as an individual, so we're just going to hope the problem just goes away." Bad bad news.

I use Columbine as an example because it was one of the worst events dealing with students and guns. It was and is a huge deal. People are still debating about the incident.

I think this has little to do with expression and the censorship thereof. It was inappropriate and the kid was rapped for it. It's not a blind suspension, it was seen as a threat. They dealt with it.

I come from a law enforcement family as well. Things like this are very black and white for me. Maybe it shouldn't be but it is.

I found Ally's post interesting because my dad (police sargeant for 30 years or so) does not want me to get a gun. He has many, but doesn't think and of his kids should have them. Ralphie's father insisted upon us having them.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

They dealt with it.

Indeed... what I think they're trying to say, though, is that just "dealing"-- booting a kid, without counseling or communication-- is not a sufficient way to deal with a problem.

(That said, in this situation we don't actually know if they didn't communicate or counsel, do we?)

As a completely hypothetical, though, if the child was suspended without attempt to discuss the situation openly and honestly, I would say that is not "dealing" at all, but rather, pushing a problem out of site without dealing with it.

[AllyOops!]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

I found Ally's post interesting because my dad (police sargeant for 30 years or so) does not want me to get a gun. He has many, but doesn't think and of his kids should have them. Ralphie's father insisted upon us having them.

I should clarify a little bit more:

Both my dad and grandfather (my dad, a Deputy & my late grandfather, a former Reserve) are & were pro-gun ownership. Mainly, because they always needed to have one. My Dad still does. My Mom, also part of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Dept. is against them. Because I grew up with my Mom, we never had one in the house. They were totally forbidden. My boyfriend's dad is a Police Sergeant as well, and I'm interested to know his feelings, so I'll have to ask.

I once dated an Undercover Narcotics Detective who was and had to be packing at all times. It made me extremely uncomfotable. Silly as it may sound, I was afraid he would hug me too tight, the safety would pop-off and boo-ya! Goodnight, Ally. I could always feel the gun when he hugged me (which answers the age old question if he was really happy to see me ). If it wasn't his hidden badge, it was the gun. Nobody wants to feel that on their skin in any circumstance. Creepy, no?

Also, a main point- my Dad did not insist on the guns until a prowler was found on our property. He wanted to make sure that I was protected. I don't feel the need to have one. However, does it make me feel a bit safer knowing it's there? I'd be lying if I said "no".

Oddly, I also feel unsafe at times knowing it's there. I'm always panicked some sort of accident can happen. However, if I truly didn't want it, I could rid myself of it. It's there on a "just-in-case-but-I-PRAY-I NEVER-need-it-EVER basis. I mean, you won't find me polishing it and Wyatt Earping in front of the mirror. You'd never know I even had one. That's the way I want it. It's NOT a toy or a trophy.

Guns are a loaded issue (no pun intended). It's all about personal opinion. And of course, being a responsible and law-abiding gun owner. My Dad wouldn't have given me one if I would have been a hot-headed, act-on-impulse, troubled and reckless individual who thrived on bullying and fighting. He knows his daughter is a big ol' fraidy cat who doesn't like to kill household spiders. I prefer that they are "set free". Born free, as free as the wind blows, lil' fellas.