14 Year old boy to be charged as a criminal

[freeatlast]

1. The title is misleading. A plastic ball, even a small one, is not a spit ball. A plastic ball could cause pretty severe damage to a person's eye. They had enough force to cause welts on a female student's arm. [ http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2011/022011/02032011/604793 ]

I remember my brother perfected a way of shooting real spit wads through the metal tube taken out of a ball point pen. He could get a lot of force and they hurt when they hit. I remember that well.

2. He is 14 and young, even older teenagers, do not think before acting. It is normal. Their brain has not fully developed and thinking of consequences is not part of their thinking ... and probably their ability to think.

3. It does seem a bit excessive to throw him out for the rest of the year. Let him have a short expulsion and then perform 200 hours of community service.

4. Seems a lot of people on the BB who claim to be conservative and law and order folk are taking a liberal stance on this one. I find that ......... :laugh:

I have to agree. Like I said there is not enough information to be clear on this issue, but it is clear he violated policy. I have no doubt he knew the policy and what he was doing, but he did not believe that they meant what they said. The evidence is that he certainly did not announce he was shooting plastic pellets, but was hiding as not to get caught. It is like people who speed and then get a 250 dollar ticket and cry it is too much. The answer is you were warned and got what you were suppose to get why are you complaining.
In this case my guess is that this young man will never again do this or anything like it. A tough lesson, yes, but if he had believed in the first place he would not be where he is today.

 

[Salty]

What problem is that?

The ability to actually think and use common sense

... but it is clear he violated policy. I have no doubt he knew the policy and what he was doing,

I agree with you, but the problem is that the punishment should fit the crime -

but he did not believe that they meant what they said.

Not necessarily -

It is like people who speed and then get a 250 dollar ticket and cry it is too much. The answer is you were warned and got what you were suppose to get why are you complaining.

So are you saying that a person who goes one mile over the speed limit should pay the same $250 fine as the person who is driving 50 miles over the speed limit?
In California a first time ticket for talking on a phone is $20, a second offense is $50. In New York a ticket will cost you $100 + 2 points on your driving record. I think Calif has used a little bit more common sense.

In addition, you really believe that a candy cane is a weapon?

Lets used detention like it should be used; and other appropriate measures that would "inconvenience" the individual

Actually Crabby's statement actually backs me up:
2. He is 14 and young, even older teenagers, do not think before acting. It is normal. Their brain has not fully developed and thinking of consequences is not part of their thinking ... and probably their ability to think.

actually backs Since he is young, that is even more the reason for not giving a severe punishment. Crab mention 200 hours of community service - that would be 8 hours a day for 5 months of Saturdays. I like the ideal - but I would go more with about 25 hours - for a first offense.

 

[Salty]

This "Zero Tolerance Policy" has hit a new low!!!!

 

[freeatlast]

The ability to actually think and use common sense


I agree with you, but the problem is that the punishment should fit the crime -


Not necessarily -



So are you saying that a person who goes one mile over the speed limit should pay the same $250 fine as the person who is driving 50 miles over the speed limit?
In California a first time ticket for talking on a phone is $20, a second offense is $50. In New York a ticket will cost you $100 + 2 points on your driving record. I think Calif has used a little bit more common sense.

In addition, you really believe that a candy cane is a weapon?

Lets used detention like it should be used; and other appropriate measures that would "inconvenience" the individual

Actually Crabby's statement actually backs me up:
2. He is 14 and young, even older teenagers, do not think before acting. It is normal. Their brain has not fully developed and thinking of consequences is not part of their thinking ... and probably their ability to think.

actually backs Since he is young, that is even more the reason for not giving a severe punishment. Crab mention 200 hours of community service - that would be 8 hours a day for 5 months of Saturdays. I like the ideal - but I would go more with about 25 hours - for a first offense.

I agree that it is normal for today's teenagers not to think clearly, but that is because their parents have not taught them clearly, but also it is no excuse. My guess is that this young man is thinking clearly now.

I did not say a candy cane was a weapon although I suppose it could be made into one. So I am not sure where you got that.

One of the biggest problems with our young people today is the liberal adults that continually tell them that they don't have the ability to think, they are too young to hold accountable and so on. This young man is being held accountable and he will learn a valuable lesson if the discipline is left to stand. He will be a better person if these irresponsible liberal complainers will just allow the system to work. Does the punishment seem strict, yes, but he knew what to expect, but did not believe it would happen.
My guess is that many on this board who clam to be Christians and followers of God think His way is strict. The bottom line is not what we think about if it is too strict. The bottom lime are we going to believe it will be carried out as stated. It is all about faith. This young man is learning to believe.

 

[Gina B]

This "Zero Tolerance Policy" has hit a new low!!!!

I don't agree with zero tolerance policies because they leave no room for common sense.

On the other hand, children are made aware now in schools, starting right away, that drawings or replications of weapons are not allowed.

There's no reason students and parents should be uninformed. I see no problem with the "threat of suspension" over breaking that rule in school. There have been very young people, younger than fourth grade, that have carried guns to school. Schools are trying to combat violence by having students learn from the very beginning that guns in school shouldn't be a thought.

I can find no fault with that concept. I do find fault with parents who know the rules, their kids break them WITHOUT GOOD CAUSE, and then they get mad at the school.

If you choose to send the kiddos to a public institution, you are bound to have your child abide by those rules or face consequences. The rules may seem unfair or dumb, but if they can't be tolerated, don't agree to them by sending your child. It's that simple. Sometimes there's not a lot of choice and one must send them even when they disagree, but that's the tough part about having no choice. You're forced to agree with the rules that the institution you place your child in has set up.

Those who are bothered enough by it need to work to change it. Until then, abide by it or deal with it.

 

[freeatlast]

I don't agree with zero tolerance policies because they leave no room for common sense.

On the other hand, children are made aware now in schools, starting right away, that drawings or replications of weapons are not allowed.

There's no reason students and parents should be uninformed. I see no problem with the "threat of suspension" over breaking that rule in school. There have been very young people, younger than fourth grade, that have carried guns to school. Schools are trying to combat violence by having students learn from the very beginning that guns in school shouldn't be a thought.

I can find no fault with that concept. I do find fault with parents who know the rules, their kids break them WITHOUT GOOD CAUSE, and then they get mad at the school.

If you choose to send the kiddos to a public institution, you are bound to have your child abide by those rules or face consequences. The rules may seem unfair or dumb, but if they can't be tolerated, don't agree to them by sending your child. It's that simple. Sometimes there's not a lot of choice and one must send them even when they disagree, but that's the tough part about having no choice. You're forced to agree with the rules that the institution you place your child in has set up.

Those who are bothered enough by it need to work to change it. Until then, abide by it or deal with it.

Well put. :thumbs:

 

[Salty]

I did not say a candy cane was a weapon although I suppose it could be made into one. So I am not sure where you got that.

If you read my links, you would understand


and BTW, does that mean you also agree with Gina's first paragraph?

 

[freeatlast]

If you read my links, you would understand


and BTW, does that mean you also agree with Gina's first paragraph?

Yes but with explanation. The problem with much of zero tolerance is the same as with not having zero tolerance, but in reverse. Neither seems to have common sense when exercised by different people.

I have no problem with zero tolerance if it spells out exactly the discipline in each possible varying infraction. That way each person is dealt with exactly the same within the same infraction.

However without zero tolerance and where there is a range of possible discipline there is never the same justice rendered. So I do not hold to one size fits all where different infractions happen, but I do hold to one size fits all within the same infraction which I still consider zero tolerance.

 

[InTheLight]

Incident comments submitted by Spotsylvania High School Assistant Principal Lisa Andruss: "Andrew had a small plastic tube and a handful of plastic pellets. He used the tube to shoot students in the hallway during lunch. He hit at least 3 students, all of which reported the incident to administration. Several students notified the administrators of what he was doing and was [seen] by Mrs. Jackie Smith demonstrating to his friends how to use the device. When he was called into the office he handed me the tube and the pellets. He stated, 'I thought it would be cool if I could shoot them out of something like I had in my pocket. So I took out my pen and took it apart. I tested it and it worked ok. I took it to school and shot it a few times at various people.'"

Andrew had been involved in other incidents, but had been "given another chance and returned back to his assigned school."

"Clearly he has not learned from his past poor choices," Davis wrote.

Mikel said his son was disciplined in middle school for shooting rubber bands with a ruler. Andrew was also suspended for three days while in middle school after bringing a comb to school that resembled a pocket knife, his father said.

http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2011/022011/02032011/604793/index_html?page=1


Based on his previous two infractions, it sounds to me like the kid was well aware of the weapons policy at his school district when he shot pellets at classmates. The punishment seems severe, but three strikes and you're out, apparently...

 

[Salty]

I have no problem with zero tolerance if it spells out exactly the discipline in each possible varying infraction. That way each person is dealt with exactly the same within the same infraction.

But 0 tolerance does NOT spell out the exact discipline for varying infractions

...but I do hold to one size fits all within the same infraction which I still consider zero tolerance.

then that is not a "Zero tolerance" policy


so, I ask again - is a Candy Cane a weapon?

 

[freeatlast]

But 0 tolerance does NOT spell out the exact discipline for varying infractions



then that is not a "Zero tolerance" policy


so, I ask again - is a Candy Cane a weapon?

same answer, it could be.

 

[Salty]

same answer, it could be.

So is a house key, pencil, pen, paper clip, you name it - should all those be banned and thus the student be banned from school for a full year?

 

[Salty]

... Andrew was also suspended for three days while in middle school after bringing a comb to school that resembled a pocket knife, his father said.
Based on his previous two infractions, ...

A comb!!! Well, that should have been grounds for immediate and permanent dismissal from the school district ....!!!!

 

[InTheLight]

A comb!!! Well, that should have been grounds for immediate and permanent dismissal from the school district ....!!!!

Probably one of these 'switchblade' combs.

Which means he should know the zero tolerance policy at the time he was committing his third infraction by shooting pellets at people.

 

[freeatlast]

So is a house key, pencil, pen, paper clip, you name it - should all those be banned and thus the student be banned from school for a full year?

No I don't think those should be banned, but if the student by some clever manuplation turns any object including those mentioned into a banned instrument then I do believe that student should be held accountable.

 

[freeatlast]

Colorado police pepper-spray 8-year-old student

Here is an example why strict measures need to be taken. Here is a child if not stopped now is headed to prison for murder. Here is a case where the parents have failed the child and society will suffer the consequences.

By The Associated Press LAKEWOOD, Colo. -- The mother of an 8-year-old boy pepper-sprayed by suburban Denver police as he threw a violent tantrum at his elementary school said Wednesday that she wishes authorities had chosen to talk him down instead.
Police in Lakewood say they pepper-sprayed 8-year-old Aidan Elliott twice Feb. 22 at Glennon Heights Elementary School after he refused to drop a piece of wooden wall trim that he was trying to stab them with.
"I wanted to make something sharp, like if they came out, 'cause i was so mad at them," the boy said on NBC's "Today" show. "I was going to try to whack them with it."
His mother, Mandy, said she wants police in Lakewood to get special training in dealing with children. She said her son has a history of behavioral problems and has responded to rationalization in previous outbursts.
"I don't think a child should get pepper sprayed," the woman said.
Asked on ABC's "Good Morning America" whether he meant it when he told police he wanted to kill them, the boy responded: "A little."
Police say pepper-spraying the boy was the safest option.
"I kind of deserved it," Aidan conceded to "Today."
The mother said her son was in a special program for children with behavioral problems. He has since transferred to another school.
Video: http://bcove.me/okbew7o0

 

[HankD]

So is a house key, pencil, pen, paper clip, you name it - should all those be banned and thus the student be banned from school for a full year?

Common sense says look not only at the delivery system (and ban the obvious, gun, knife...etc.) but whether or not the intent to do personal injury and or assault upon another was demonstrated.

A hand or foot can be made into an assault weapon.

HankD