Skip to comments.A pointed comment on our gun culture
Posted on 03/14/2014 5:32:18 AM PDT by rellimpank
A few words about Nathan Entingh's hand gun.
Meaning, you should understand, not a gun you hold in your hand but, rather, the hand itself, thumb cocked and index finger extended to resemble a pistol. One afternoon late last month, Entingh, who goes to school in Columbus, Ohio, was goofing off in science class when he raised such a "hand gun," pointed it at another kid's head and said "Boom."
Not a good thing to do, and Entingh, who is 10, certainly should have been reprimanded. Instead, he was suspended for three days. His father, Paul, says he's been told that if it happens again, the next suspension may be permanent.
Nobody involved has accused the boy of making a serious threat, posing a serious danger or, indeed, of being anything except an average adolescent. Doesn't matter.
Ohio, you see, has a zero-tolerance policy toward guns or look-alike guns in schools, zero tolerance being the favored new millennium approach to keeping schools safe. As in, remove human judgment from the equation. Pretend all infractions are created equal. Treat the girl who brings Midol to class like a heroin dealer. Treat the kindergartner who kisses a classmate on the cheek like a sexual predator.
And send Nathan Entingh home because, like virtually every American boy who ever existed has done at one time or another, he pointed his finger and made shooting sounds. If you think that's crazy, you probably don't want to hear about the Maryland second-grader who was suspended last year for chewing a Pop Tart into the shape of a pistol.
Surely we all will sleep more peacefully tonight, knowing our schools are safe from pointing fingers and Pop Tart violence.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
May be he is growing a brain of his own.
Perhaps... Just perhaps, they might have an inkling that their position and views have gone a tad too far and that a MAJOR backlash has been building and is about to come crashing down on them.
It's a rare day when I agree with Leonard Pitts on anything. Perhaps the times, are indeed, a'changin'.
Or, more likely, Nathan Entingh is African-American and thus more worthy of concern than others.
The only problem I see here is that The Pitts continues to use “gun culture” without reasoned explanation as to what is meant by its use.
“Gun Culture” is journalistic mental masturbation (self-gratification in its use).
If you read to the end of the article it goes the other way, calling for more gun control. The normal stuff from that rag.
I suspect you didn’t read the whole article. He’s attacking states allowing CC.
This gets a pass.
“Gun Culture” is one of those so called “whistle words” the left loves to use.
The left will use this shibboleth against anyone they disagree with (using whistle words) but when they do exactly the same thing they are to be held blameless. If you point it out you are racist, a redneck, a hillbilly, a non-thinker, knuckle dragger, or any of a whole host of other adjectives that carry negative connotations.
Remember when “coarsening of the discourse” was all the rage, that the use of surveyor’s marks on political literature (”targets”), the mere use of the term targeting, name calling and all the rest that only the right was supposedly doing was causing the coarsening of discourse?
Yeah, free speech for me, but not for thee... and of course, no consequences for me, but if you do it you will be excoriated in the press comrade.
My 3 year old grandson fashions guns our of anything he has at hand. Legos, Lincoln Logs, Tinker Toys, Cookies, Sandwiches ... and then runs around making shooting noises.
And his favorite show is the old “Lone Ranger” series via Hulu.
Yea, insurance and safety training would have prevented Sandy Hook.
I seriously propose what can be called a state “common sense authority” law. That is, public employees, including school administrators and teachers, are granted considerable authority to perform their jobs.
However, “zero tolerance” policies represent an evasion of this authority and judgment. Thus the purpose of the law would be in effect a “mandamus”, an order that they must carry out their duties, including judgment, instead of relying on blanket and unjust policies.
If a student is suspended, while it is based on policies, it is done at the authority of the principal. He alone is responsible for the suspension, based on his judgment that it is an *appropriate* punishment. He cannot blame the policy in and of itself, because he could have decided that it was inappropriate.
This means that, as it should be, authority is always paired with responsibility.
Do we know if Nathan Entingh is black? It matters - matters if press bias runs that deep...
I agree with Leonard Pitts? On anything? Somebody slap me back to consciousness.
Kind of like a 'honky whistle' rather than a 'dawg whistle'.... Interesting concept there jurroppil... I think you've got a winnah!
I guess I’d prefer the term “Patriot whistle”, but if we really want to “own” it then I guess “honky whistle” works well enough.
Right, a perfectly reactionary approach to the issue. How... progressive!