Another hack in an unneccesary position on the taxpayer dole?
to "the Wonders of Socialism" (OP$ :)
but your right...an "glorified" Hall Monitor type...
Posted on 10/28/2012 4:51:20 AM PDT by real saxophonist
Boy does right thing, school suspends him
By Christian Boone
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
When 8-year-old Andrew Berry discovered he had accidentally brought his unloaded pellet gun to Newton County Theme School at Ficquett on Monday, he immediately notified his teacher.
He “did the right thing” by turning in the weapon, discreetly, said his mother, Kristy Berry, whose husband serves as a combat flight medic in Afghanistan. “The principal told me [Andrew] handled it the right way,” she said. “So did the police.”
But she said a school resource officer also told her son that he had broken the law. The third-grader was suspended for no less than 10 days for what everyone agrees was an innocent mistake. Andrew is scheduled to appear before a school tribunal on Oct. 31, day seven of his suspension, according to his mother.
“He absolutely did the right thing by reporting it immediately. But a rule was still broken: A gun was brought to school. And there are mandatory consequences for that,”
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
The right thing to do when dealing with leftist thugs is keep quiet and wait till school is over and bring the pellet gun home
You can’t win with these buttwipes. The only right thing with them is to follow there dogma.
This is going to come to a head soon. No sense becoming a martyr. Wait and you can become a warrior for liberty. Much better than a martyr
What is a “school rescource officer”? Another hack in an unneccesary position on the taxpayer dole?
Seriously? We are way out of whack in our society today. Seems like the boy showed more maturity than the administration. Good grief!
The public school system is essential to the establishment of socialism in America.
Instilling abits of conformity and obedience to petty tyranny is Job #1 for America’s school teachers.
It’s working! Forward!
This child should have never been placed in the hands of criminal union thugs.
In some areas its a PD kiss-ass assigned to hang out at a school and do absolutely nothing on the tax payers dime,whoops sorry, dollar.
This is a tool using family, kids learn to use tools almost as soon as they can walk.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a “school tribunal” before.
It is hard to do the right thing in a world that is controlled by stupid people, servants in our society is as the saying goes FOOLS IN PARADISE.
More like a Star Chamber.
“He absolutely did the right thing by reporting it immediately. But a rule was still broken: A gun was brought to school. And there are mandatory consequences for that,”
Jawohl!
ALLES IN ORDNUNG!
Shut down the Pooblik Skool Collective.
Correct, the parasite that justifies their position with crap like this. See, they prevented another potential tragedy
“My grandson forgot to take his little Swiss Army knife out of his pocket and got suspended.
This is a tool using family, kids learn to use tools almost as soon as they can walk.”
Young “Tool user” meets older “Collectivist Tool”.
That is not a formula for a happy ending.
On the good side, that child now understands why socialism and socialists are bad.
But if he had brought a condom on a banana he would get all A’s.
Dad taught me how to sharpen it and said if he ever found it to be dull he would take it away, because “Yanking on a dull knife is how you get cut”.
I carried a knife in kindergarten and every school year after, always shaving sharp.
We puzzle over the reasons 40% of the population supports Obama but given the number of people who turn their children over to government indoctrination centers for 12 years I’m surprised the figure isn’t even higher.
Sir,
In the case of Andrew Berry, your “Resource Officer” is an idiot. He/she is teaching an 8-year-old that doing the right thing is a criminal act. Someone trying to qualify their job at the expense of an innocent is unconscionable and should be fired. Hopefully you and the board will rectify this.
The kid is looking good, GG, 100% swamp critter. He will be 21 in June, all blue twisted steel and brains.
Yes, there ought to be a law.... Oh wait, there’s already how many 100’s of 1000’s of them? Lawyers have a stanglehold on common sense, nobody is allowed to apply it because it will interfere with someone else’s perceived right to a risk-free life.
His lesson for the day........how ignorant the publik skool sistem is.
Same as a Zampolit.
It’s a tough lesson, but the sooner every child learns that authority figures, law enforcement, judges & courts, bosses, etc simply can not be trusted to do the right thing with any kind of reliability, the better off they will be.
Please do not change the name of the source when posting an article. It’s not cute or funny, and it prevents others from re-posting your article on other websites (ie Facebook or a blog) because it’s juvenile.
Let the other side act like children.
Damned fools and their zero-tolerance. My son intervened when another kid in his junior high class attacked their pregnant teacher. He put the attacker on the ground and got suspended for “fighting” in school. He was treated like a hero at home during his suspension, and when he went back to school, the principal bought him lunch. He got A’s from the teacher for the rest of the year. As I told him, sometimes you have to take a hit for doing the right thing, but don’t ever let that stop you.
A ten day suspension from a school like that is like being banned from a crack house - it should be viewed as a badge of honor rather than a punishment.
Heck, he’ll probably learn more during those two weeks then he would have normally. Given the kid a computer, the urls to K-8, Kahn Academy and Free Republic, and set him loose.
The lesson this young man and others who have found themselves in this situation has nothing to do with the importance (snicker, snicker) of a zero-tolerance policy as it relates to the safety of students. It certainly is not about the truth and doing the right thing.
Lesson learned: Hide whatever it is, and hope you can get through the day without the offending item being noticed.
This young man and his classmates have learned that the adults in charge are going to nail them regardless. The adults in charge see no difference between an honest young man and a gangbanger.
The children have learrned that lying (even by omission) is the preferred course of action.
Jawohl!
ALLES IN ORDNUNG!
This was not Naziism -- it is following the rules or the law. In America, if we instituted a law or rule that is not satisfactory or commonly agreed, we change it. Ignoring or disobeying the rules or the law, or flouting it, is lawlessness. In my Bible, it is the word "Sin."
Deliberately, or unintentionally, the boy disobeyed the rule, hence the penalty: (1) partly to fix the rule in his mind; (2) partly to emphasize the rule in the minds of other students, their parents, and the staff; and (3) demonstrating the cost that to make rules stick, the consequence must be at least a bit more expensive than the cost of consequences from the unacceptable activity.
The boy expected that revealing his culpability, he must pay the cost. That is a golden demonstration of integrity, which the lack of the penalty negates his integrity.
You are coaching others to disregard the rule of law in American life and call insistence upon it Naziism?
I reject your approach.
If you don't like the law, change it if you can, but obey it if you can't.
That is Scriptural.
"Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the king as supreme; or unto governors as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise if them that do well, for such is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: as free, anf not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God." (1 Peter 2:13-16)
You mean, somehow the boy "forgot" he had the gun? You want me to "forget" that I am carrying a concealed deadly weapon (and have a license to do so)(and I do)(and I'm getting ready to go to church in a few moments, where my pastor also carries)(but not to a Post Office, the VA, or a public school, for instance)?
Take your mindset back to Obama, who forgets who he is, and lies.
Sorry, I can't respect your reply to this article.
And it happens once he has "served time" .. I'd flip off that little group. All rules were followed, time served, end of story.
Boy does WRONG thing.
Do not cooperate with these rights destroyers. They want to condition us to confess our so-called sins to them. Teach your children, even 8 year olds, the truth. Steel their hearts.
Zero tolerence sux. Even cases involving felony acts take “intent” in to account. The kid obviously had no intent.
Petty bureaucrats...
Color me surprised that I find myself agreeing with an ACLU'er, but I do. The next student will be strongly motivated not to self-report.
In the end, my son was expelled from school for 5 days for landing a few on this kids face.
Zero tolerance at it's finest. But, he was awarded dinner of his choice that evening for both accuracy and well executed defense (both of my boys have been doing youth boxing and jui jitsu for several years). He is beginning to understand the consequences of liberalism and the people who hide behind it.
Whoa, hold it. You're starting with a bad premise: that this 'rule' is legitimate.
Here in America we have Constitutions which are the supreme laws of the jurisdiction to which they apply (US Constitution for federal government, State Constitution for state government).
So let's see what the State's Constitution says:
ARTICLE I, SECTION I, Paragraph VIII. -- Arms, right to keep and bear.So, the state cannot infringe the right to keep and bear arms, and by claiming the pellet-gun was a 'gun' they are admitting that it is a weapon and therefore arms.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.
Further, the federal constitution says:
Amendment IIThere is a lot of smoke, lies and misdirection about this amendment, mostly because it's very simple and following the simplicity would erode a big chunk of power the government has amassed for itself, in short: the government may not restrict people from owning, storing, or using weapons. (The results of using weapons is different because it's the action that's punished; i.e. using a weapon doesn't make murder, manslaughter, etc worse.)
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Lastly, let us turn to the Supreme Court to see what they have said on the issue:
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137; 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803)
This original and supreme will organizes the government, and assigns to different departments their respective powers. It may either stop here, or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments.
The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the Constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the Constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the Constitution by an ordinary act.
Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The Constitution is either a superior paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and, like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.
If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts on the part of the people to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.
Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently, the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.
So then, your entire argument is null and void because the very law wherein he is accused prohibits that very accusation from being legitimate.
A school resource offizer is a cop assigned to your public schools because the students are best described as FERAL HUMANS. These “students” will rape/rob/murder each other while the “Education Administration” wrings its hands & the “parents” of these students proclaim to anyone stupid enough to listen “My baby didn’t do nuffin”! Does this answer your question?
While one of these days you will find yourself at the edge of an open mass grave staring down at dozens if not hundreds of corpses wondering how you got there just before a single pistol shot to the back of your head rings out.
The apparatchiks of the state are not your friend ,the open mass grave that is the history of the 20th century prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Sorry, your premise is wrong. An eight-year-old child is not fully and accountable as a citizen until reaching majority; the parent is in charge, able to impose all sorts of infringements (with his/her rules to be obeyed). The school acts in place of the parent and for the government, with its own rules clearly understood and accepted by the parent placing the child into the school's care.
This particular child was clearly not to bring a pellet gun to school, which is a gun regardless of propellant; and presumably he was not with the implicit permission of the parents, either. Furthermore, his conscience (correctly) told him he was wrong. So he confessed without attempting to hide or misdirect attention to his error, admitted it before being "caught," suffered the just consequence, and moved ahead from this with a clear conscience toward a later age when his circumstances and/or the law would change.
All your talk about the Constitution (and I know it pretty well) only serves to set the background. The situation does not find the Constitution wrong. The premise is that the rule was the same as when I went to grade school about 70 years ago, and with the community I lived in, who elected the school board, operating under county and state laws, and included the parents who governed my behavior and expected community standards to be observed.
Please do not think the Constitution excuses one from lawful limitations, especially to those imposed by the child's authorities. I took my hits at that age, and learned thereby.
You seem to just be attempting to use the Constitution to excuse infringing the right of a parent or his/her agent, the school, from governing a minor child however they see fit.
You may add to this a couple of side notes: (1) my first play gun was a broken-stock old octagon-barreled .32 single-shot dropping block rifle (we had no money for cap-gun toys); and (2) I learned how to shoot well in junior high school with Crosman .22 CO2 guns, under adult supervision (no one ever imagined that it would be permitted to bring a Daisy BB gun to school}, the guns being locked up when practice was over.
Again, if you don't like it, change the laws and rules the Constitution permits. Under it, the right of a minor child to have and carry a gun is going to be infringed, like it or not.
Pellet gun or one of those airsoft things?
Yep...
So, what these dumbass school administrator type arsewipes have just taught this kid is this:
If you make a mistake, do not own up to it. Keep your mouth shut and continue on as though nothing happened. Don’t try to rectify the situation, don’t admit anything. Lie if you have to. Because once you have made that innocent mistake we are going to screw you over if we find out about it, no matter what you do.
A cop. Complete with the batman belt and the power to arrest.
“If you make a mistake, do not own up to it. Keep your mouth shut and continue on as though nothing happened. Don’t try to rectify the situation, don’t admit anything. Lie if you have to.”
If those school administrators have taught this boy that lesson, or more likely taught his more observant classmates, then they have learned the essential survival technique of surviving and thriving undre conditions of socialism.
Not a bad lesson, really, for the next generation.
“If you make a mistake, do not own up to it. Keep your mouth shut and continue on as though nothing happened. Don’t try to rectify the situation, don’t admit anything. Lie if you have to.”
If those school administrators have taught this boy that lesson, or more likely taught his more observant classmates, then they have learned the essential survival technique of surviving and thriving undre conditions of socialism.
Not a bad lesson, really, for the next generation.
So then you agree that the young one's gun-carrying is infringed... then how can you derive a restriction [on age] where none exists?
The title of [ART I, ] SECTION I is RIGHTS OF PERSONS.Do you intend to assert that the boy is not a person? {There is nothing in the previous-posts's cited constitution segments which justifies an age restriction.}
This knee-jerk response has no bearing on the instance covered by the article. Free obedience to just law is the issue here, as was Peter's reaction to just and unjust regulation. Justin Martyr was a student of Peter, reportedly.
Even so, if it happens, a shot to the back of the head is not the end of everything. They can only kill the body. Think of Paul Schneider and Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who were meek to the right and rebellious to the wrong, not vice versa.
Think of the old tale of George Washington, who took a whipping, rather than tell/act a lie. That is what the boy of this article accomplished, knowing the consequence.
Perhaps from his father, who says, "Son, don't take that BB gun out of this yard, and don't point it at anybody, or I'll take it away from you and ground you for two weeks." In the same fashion that Dad says, "You talk to me that way again, and I'll tar your hide." Are you getting this? The infringement is present, right, and just. Needs no Bill of Rights. The boy has none in this context. His role is to learn, not dictate.
As your reply was both thoughtful and detailed, I shall attempt to reply with both thought and detail.
I posted the following: “He absolutely did the right thing by reporting it immediately. But a rule was still broken: A gun was brought to school. And there are mandatory consequences for that,”
Jawohl!
ALLES IN ORDNUNG!”
You seem to have conflated Prussian militaristic behavior with the Third Reich. It is a very common mistake, However, the Prussians would have despised the Nazis.
Next, your: “This was not Naziism — it is following the rules or the law. In America, if we instituted a law or rule that is not satisfactory or commonly agreed, we change it. Ignoring or disobeying the rules or the law, or flouting it, is lawlessness. In my Bible, it is the word “Sin.”
Law, unless that of a totalitarian state, is tempered with “judgment”. “Es La Ley” (Spanish for “It’s the law”) has been the excuse for some of history’s scoundrels. Worse, I would like to suggest is that you seem to have overlooked the American tradition of rejection of legal perfectionism Legal perfectionism is the theory that law must treat all alike under the same circumstances. It was a theory when the Greek City States were home to their ancient philosophers. Said philosophers rejected legal perfectionism as impossible. Why - because the Greek City/State was too large for mere Man to write laws capable of fairness for all. Thus the 40,000 voting citizens agreed with their leading intellectuals that human judgment was essential.
That judgment was to be exercised by the Pooblik Skruel Collective employees - instead, judgment was replaced by a edumacator blabbering platitudes.
As for your application of “sin” in this case, perhaps thou standeth on thin ice. Consider that sin requires knowledge of doing wrong and willingly so doing. Lawyers call this “Mens Rea”. I suggest that mere forgetfulness does not rise to the level of either “sin” or “mens rea”.
As for your recitation of Liberal education ‘principles’, if I may be forgive using such a word to describe the usually principle-deficient acts of edumacators in the Collective, fixing the rule smacks of “brain washing, wouldn’t you agree? Remembering a rule is one thing, making blind acceptance of it the habit of tyrants.
Emphasis is one thing, but since you used the abuses of the Third Reich, isn’t what the edumacator response was relative to the “offense’ and the student attempt to do the right thing - somehow doesn’t that excess remind you of how the Nazi’s executed 100 of the nearest villagers in the case of a partisan killing a Nazi solder? Technically, I am trying to raise the issue of disproportionate response.
“demonstrating the cost that to make rules stick, the consequence must be at least a bit more expensive than the cost of consequences from the unacceptable activity.”
If you meant “the cost of the consequences must be more expensive than the cost of the consequences, I am puzzled by this redundancy which seemingly you found significant.
“You are coaching others to disregard the rule of law in American life and call insistence upon it Naziism?”
What you claim I wrote is only what you wanted to read into it. Law is to be followed by teh citizen, and executed by teh courts, with judgment. I objected to the rigid and judgment averse behavior of the minor level mind in a tax payer supported position. Rather than concern with what was best for the student, Mr/MS/It Edumacator merely cowered behind the most restrictive view and penalized, Penalized, Penalized!!! what was clearly a case with little to no mens rea. Typical edumacator behavior, unless the offense is aprt of the Pooblik Skruel Collective Agenda. Had the student been caught ‘fisting’ on campus after a “sex ed” class one can’t help thing that such a student would be “counseled” rather than penalized.
Such is the edumacator mentality in all too many of America’s public schools.
Back to your post. Regarding theological demands for submission to the King, Are you familiar with teh thought that Americans are unique in the world in that we consider ourselves “sovereign citizens” and that we are the beneficiaries of rejection of the Medieval iron fisted rule of Church and King?
We do expect to judge the facts, the laws, and their application. That is our right, and the concept of the Jury being the final authority in the court is based upon the American concept of the supremacy of a jury of sovereign citizens exercising their judgment.
Blind submission to law is not the American way.
Whpooer toime, Good Sir. You posted:
“You mean, somehow the boy “forgot” he had the gun?
Could well be - many responsible adults have.
“You want me to “forget” that I am carrying a concealed deadly weapon (and have a license to do so)(and I do)(and I’m getting ready to go to church in a few moments, where my pastor also carries)(but not to a Post Office, the VA, or a public school, for instance)?
I would hope a fellow FReeper would not forget Concealed Carry regs, but should you so do, I also hope (and expect) the authorities would remember the issue of intent and not mindlessly penalize you for being human and forgetting.
” Take your mindset back to Obama, who forgets who he is, and lies.
Sorry, I can’t respect your reply to this article.”
Might I inquire as to what is the reason for such seemingly deeply felt animosity?
Are you perhaps a public school employee? If so, please remember that a primary rule of all polite discourse is that present company is always excepted from the discussion. This is particularly necessary in FR discussions regarding education as I am aware that some very conservative, even strict construction advocate FR members are employees of the Pooblik Skruewl Collective.
Nothing I post in this thread was meant personally.
Lastly, I come from a family of educators, was once a Liberal in my 20’s, and am now somewhat beyond my 40’s. And I did read Churchill, the education community has read my papers, and while I reread Churchill and left Liberals, educators read my papers (tripped over truth) and also did as Churchill predicted - got up and proceeded on with no change in behavior.
So, in regards to your suggestion regarding my return to Liberalism:
1. I can’t (they won’t have me). ;-) ;-) ;-)
2. I won’t (there are things no gentleman ever does).
Sorry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.