View Full Version : Students suspended for stopping gunman-FL news
MK262MOD1
03-02-2013, 20:18
http://www.fox4now.com/news/local/194396721.html
Students wrestle pistol away from Gunman threatening fellow student, saving his live and then they are suspended.
Really, is this where society is going?
Pathetic
DarkFungus
03-02-2013, 22:23
Ridiculous. Heads caged inside of their own assholes.
North Carolina has this same kind of rules. Your kid is in a fight and doesn't hit back. They are suspended for fighting. No questions.. done.. suspended for 2 or 3 days.
Yes we are making weaker Americans. If I could have home schooled or private school, I would have. Sad state of affairs of public school systems are going into.
Scimitar
03-02-2013, 23:12
My reading of it, is that the suspension is automatic for multiple good reasons.
Until a full investigation has been carried out, who knows how each student was ACTUALLY involved.
Instant suspension means far lesser chance of any of the participants, right or wrong, ending up being in the same local as each other and ending up in an all too common secondary incident.
Bad reporting...plenty of holes...typical
S
I understand the concept of instant suspensions for fighting participants. This was not a typical "boys will be boys" type of altercation, however. Lives were at stake, and the young men who took action instead of accepting their fate as victims should be applauded for their initiative.
Bullshit IMHO. It isnt always that cut and dried. What ever happend to peoples critical thinking skills? These are the people teaching out youth and they can not use critical thinking skills and see the rules are not relevant in this case?
As Earl Pitts says, "WAKE UP AMERICA!" As one that has traveled and worked (read as in SF) in ~20 countries, we are seeing the regression of these critical thinking skills to the levels in those third world countries. The third world, and our, countries educators do not want problem solvers, they want government dependence. Critical thinkers are independent problem solvers, not sheeple. They want sheeple. They do not teach or practice these vital critical thinking skills but instead teach rote.
TrapLine
03-03-2013, 07:24
Ridiculous. I guess he did steal a chance for the gun grabbers to scream about the children.
Bullshit IMHO. It isnt always that cut and dried. What ever happend to peoples critical thinking skills? These are the people teaching out youth and they can not use critical thinking skills and see the rules are not relevant in this case?
Did you miss the part of the story that said he refused to cooperate with the investigation?
MK262MOD1
03-03-2013, 08:59
My reading of it, is that the suspension is automatic for multiple good reasons.
Until a full investigation has been carried out, who knows how each student was ACTUALLY involved.
Instant suspension means far lesser chance of any of the participants, right or wrong, ending up being in the same local as each other and ending up in an all too common secondary incident.
Bad reporting...plenty of holes...typical
S
Instant suspensions are rarely productive. I want kids that can think/act and not be cowed into inaction by policy.
As for reporters well, no disagreement there.
Seems the kids were suspended for 'not co-operating with the investigation', not that they necessarily did anything wrong in disarming the kid with the gun.
Scimatar's comments were accurate as far as why such actions may be necessary when something like this happens at a school.
Richard :munchin
nousdefions
03-03-2013, 09:56
Several years back, when my son was in middle school, he received a 3 day suspension for fighting. I spoke with the assistant principal, with my son present, and he acknowledged that the other boy was a known bully. I asked why was my son suspended if the offender was a known bully. He said that they had a "zero-tolerance" rule for fighting. I calmly explained that my son doesn't start fight, but that he finishes fights. He wouldn't look me in the eye after that and apologized and said there was nothing that he could do about it.
Since when did "zero-tolerance" (of evil) become "zero-tolerance" (of responsibility)?
p.s. here it is almost 12 years later and it still pisses me off.
God help our Republic.
The Reaper
03-03-2013, 10:41
Several years back, when my son was in middle school, he received a 3 day suspension for fighting. I spoke with the assistant principal, with my son present, and he acknowledged that the other boy was a known bully. I asked why was my son suspended if the offender was a known bully. He said that they had a "zero-tolerance" rule for fighting. I calmly explained that my son doesn't start fight, but that he finishes fights. He wouldn't look me in the eye after that and apologized and said there was nothing that he could do about it.
Since when did "zero-tolerance" (of evil) become "zero-tolerance" (of responsibility)?
p.s. here it is almost 12 years later and it still pisses me off.
God help our Republic.
We had the same experience with our son at the local middle school.
He got jumped and pounded, and he got a week of ISS. This was about the third time, invariably when the adult supervision was elsewhere doing other things.
The princicpal said that if he had hit back, he would have been sent home for a week.
The other kid got a week at home, and after several other altercations, a trip to the special school for thugs.
I told him to hit back and hit hard next time, and I would support his move 100%. No need to get your ass kicked because some bureaucrat told you not to fight back.
TANJ.
TR
My then 15-y.o. daughter was being bullied by a boy in her JROTC class at the Retiring of the Colors. He got in her face, calling her names, yelling at her, and daring her to do something. She broke his nose, got a week of suspension, and when mommy pressed charges, arrested, which were dropped when the judge and state attorneys saw the witness statements. Oh, big man doesn't bully anyone anymore and the daughter graduated HS early.
Back to the kid in the Fort Myers HS - suspension is not always a form of "punishment" - as with this case, it can also be used by a school as a form or "house arrest" pending the result of a serious investigation whose outcome is TBD. I used it on occasion, although we called it a "furlough" to aid in our record keeping and the perception students/families/faculty have when the word "suspension" is used.
That being said, I don't understand the school district's failure to be aggressively proactive with this and use the media to help defer all the speculation, especially in today's "OMG GUNS!" environment, by releasing an immediate statement to the public and on the school's parent alert network, something along the lines of:
There was a serious incident today on one of our school buses in which a high school student, for as yet unknown reasons, threatened another student with a gun. Other students nearby took action and secured the gun before anybody was harmed. The matter was immediately reported to the police and they are investigating. As a precautionary measure in accordance with district policy, the students involved in the incident have been suspended from participating in any school activities pending a preliminary appraisal of the extent of their involvement based upon the investigation and any further actions which may then be deemed necessary. We appreciate your concerns and cooperation as we work through this especially disconcerting matter, and will do our utmost to keep the community apprised of the status of our efforts to resolve it as expeditiously as possible.
The rumor mill runs rampant when something like this happens and the normal levels of dramarama among students, faculty, and families increases exponentially, depending upon the type of incident and who was involved. Not saying anything about it just increases the angst and rumors, and the reason why we always released as much information as we legally could as soon as possible.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
MK262MOD1
03-03-2013, 15:34
Back to the kid in the Fort Myers HS - suspension is not always a form of "punishment" - as with this case, it can also be used by a school as a form or "house arrest" pending the result of a serious investigation whose outcome is TBD. I used it on occasion, although we called it a "furlough" to aid in our record keeping and the perception students/families/faculty have when the word "suspension" is used.
That being said, I don't understand the school district's failure to be aggressively proactive with this and use the media to help defer all the speculation, especially in today's "OMG GUNS!" environment, by releasing an immediate statement to the public and on the school's parent alert network, something along the lines of:
There was a serious incident today on one of our school buses in which a high school student, for as yet unknown reasons, threatened another student with a gun. Other students nearby took action and secured the gun before anybody was harmed. The matter was immediately reported to the police and they are investigating. As a precautionary measure in accordance with district policy, the students involved in the incident have been suspended from participating in any school activities pending a preliminary appraisal of the extent of their involvement based upon the investigation and any further actions which may then be deemed necessary. We appreciate your concerns and cooperation as we work through this especially disconcerting matter, and will do our utmost to keep the community apprised of the status of our efforts to resolve it as expeditiously as possible.
The rumor mill runs rampant when something like this happens and the normal levels of dramarama among students, faculty, and families increases exponentially, depending upon the type of incident and who was involved. Not saying anything about it just increases the angst and rumors, and the reason why we always released as much information as we legally could as soon as possible.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
This I agree with as well, wholeheartedly and if presented that way it makes sense.
I must say when I read the article the thing I went with was the referral itself which stated they were suspended for being a part of an incident ( and not the mother's quote, that stated they were suspended or not cooperating). It might be much to do about nothing but certainly appeared to be a punishment and not a protection when I first read it. I mean, if the suspect is in a juvenile detention facility are they really protecting these kids by suspending them? I ask that in all honesty as it surely didn't seem that way. Perhaps I am wrong and just see the degradation of societal norms in everything I look at....
MK262MOD1
03-03-2013, 16:06
Richard,
Your post changes my mind on this.
I still hate zero tolerance policies though.
FWIW and something to consider-
If I 'suspended' a student, it was for punishment and there was no work to be accepted during the period of the suspension with the student receiving a "0" for any work due during that time.
If a student was 'furloughed' because of something like a chronic illness, a family emergency, or an investigation, the student's advisor coordinated with the faculty in sending the assignments home and the student was expected to turn them in upon his return to school (or within a reasonably determined period of time) for grading and credit.
Teens do dumb things, and the only "Zero Tolerance" we practiced was arrest and automatic expulsion if a student brought a weapon (knife or gun w/o prior permission) or drugs on campus, or was caught stealing.
I know of many schools which follow a similar philosophy in their treatment of such student affairs.
And so it goes...
Richard
GratefulCitizen
03-03-2013, 22:06
Government schools are not for-profit businesses.
The students/parents are not customers.
A logical consequence is that decisions will be made for the needs of the school, even if this at the expense of the individual.
They don't have to compete for "customers".
Delegating the authority over your children to strangers involves risk.
Delegate wisely.
Dozer523
03-03-2013, 22:34
... A logical consequence is that decisions will be made for the needs of the school, even if this at the expense of the individual.
They don't have to compete for "customers".
Delegating the authority over your children to strangers involves risk.
Delegate wisely.I'm not sure of your point. Regarding being a customer, I have more say in what happens in my school district then i do at my local grocery store. I pay for levies and bonds. I can vote for or even run for election to, the school board. Regarding the "needs of the school" comment again I'm in the dark but the PURPOSE of a school is to educate the student. Obviously, safety is a need toward the purpose. But, if one doesn't like it they can vote with their feet and depart the public system for a private school or home schooling.
The students/parents are not customers.
They don't have to compete for "customers".
That is a bit of an archaic statement in America today where many larger districts, besides offering a general educational experience to the communities they serve, do allow competition within the district for students and their families by considering their families as "customers" and creating schools which are "site-based" entitites with a governing advisory body of administrative staff, faculty, parents, and local business and community leaders; allowing students "school choice" within the district; and allowing students to "compete" for career-based, thematically focused "Magnet Schools" with demanding curricula focusing on such programs as math-science, science-engineering, performing and visual arts, classical studies, and medicine-law, to name a few I've encountered.
In a nation with 26,407 public secondary schools and 10,693 private secondary schools, as well as the option to home school, there is a great deal of variety and dynamic change taking place within an educational system which, unfortunately, also frequently suffers from pedagogical stagnation, ineffective quality controls, and poor leadership.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
medic&commo
03-04-2013, 07:40
Thank you Richard, now I understand the logic behind 'zero tolerance'.
I do hope the investigation will be done post haste, to afford the student(s) a return to the school and to clear their record.
IMO some administrators do carry the 'zero tolerance' to extremes:
1. Pink bubble maker
2. Paper cut out
3. Finger pointing
4. Bitten Pop-tart
all have been cases where elementary children have been suspended.
m&c
GratefulCitizen
03-04-2013, 11:55
I'm not sure of your point. Regarding being a customer, I have more say in what happens in my school district then i do at my local grocery store. I pay for levies and bonds. I can vote for or even run for election to, the school board.
Exactly.
I can't go to my grocery store and decide what other people will feed their children.
If I don't like what the grocery store offers I can refuse to do business with them and take my money elsewhere.
What would grocery stores be like if your individual shopping list was primarily decided by the community?
Would they be very responsive to your concerns if they still get to keep your money when you decide to take your business elsewhere?
Regarding the "needs of the school" comment again I'm in the dark but the PURPOSE of a school is to educate the student. Obviously, safety is a need toward the purpose. But, if one doesn't like it they can vote with their feet and depart the public system for a private school or home schooling.
I agree that the purpose is to educate the student.
It does not follow that the interests of the individual take precedence.
In most states, you child is forced to consume what the state decides is best and learn in an environment and rules structure they think is best.
The fact that their are multiple public and private options still does not remove the heavy hand of the state.
Other people still get to decide what's on the menu for your child.
(Arizona is a notable exception in that, other than notifying the state of your intentions, homeschooling is completely unregulated).
The problem with public education is forced participation.
If people were able to remove their children and associated funding for any reason they wish, schools would be more responsive to the will of the parents.
Dozer523
03-05-2013, 03:57
Exactly.
Thanks for clearing that up. :confused:
No, please. Don't explain it to me again, I'll be fine.