Toy gun leads to Florida boy's expulsion
- Thread starter awpitt
- Start date
pixiegirl
Cleopatra Jones
libertytyranny
Dream Stealer
zero tolerance rules are there to protect people from subjective rulers. But seeing as how they backfire more often than not...how useful are they really? Bottom line, this kid is 7 years old. Yes, he broke a rule..but how forgetful are 7 year olds? How many times do you have to tell them to do anything at all? He's a little kid who got an extrememly harsh punishment for a pretty small infraction. there should be no problem for any reasonable adult to tell the difference between a real threat and a misplaced toy.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
The Free Fire Department crew will be along shortly to jump my ass over this but, what the hey. 
This is a case where zero tolerance means zero intelligence.
This is a case where zero tolerance means zero intelligence.
kwillia
n/a
Give me an "Hyp"...The Free Fire Department crew will be along shortly to jump my ass over this but, what the hey.
This is a case where zero tolerance means zero intelligence.
Give me an "O"... Give me a "crite"...
What's that spell?
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Give me an "Hyp"...
Give me a "crite"...
Gerber daisy!!!!!!
GWguy
*
gun (gn)
n.
1. A weapon consisting of a metal tube from which a projectile is fired at high velocity into a relatively flat trajectory.
2. A cannon with a long barrel and a relatively low angle of fire.
3. A portable firearm, such as a rifle or revolver.
4. A device resembling a firearm or cannon, as in its ability to project something, such as grease, under pressure or at great speed.
5. A discharge of a firearm or cannon as a signal or salute.
6. One, such as a hunter, who carries or uses a gun.
What that kid had was a faximile, a non-working, non-threatening look alike. By definition, it was not a gun.
n.
1. A weapon consisting of a metal tube from which a projectile is fired at high velocity into a relatively flat trajectory.
2. A cannon with a long barrel and a relatively low angle of fire.
3. A portable firearm, such as a rifle or revolver.
4. A device resembling a firearm or cannon, as in its ability to project something, such as grease, under pressure or at great speed.
5. A discharge of a firearm or cannon as a signal or salute.
6. One, such as a hunter, who carries or uses a gun.
What that kid had was a faximile, a non-working, non-threatening look alike. By definition, it was not a gun.
Baja28
Obama destroyed America
Barely even looked like a gun.
GWguy
*
Even if you stretched the truth so it applies to the "which a projectile is fired at high velocity" because it used a spring to push a projectile, then you'd have to suspend everyone who had a rubberband, because a rubberband could potentially launch a paperclip at a much higher velocity than this spring toy.
Or drinking straws because they can launch toothpicks (the ones with the feathers work especially well....
)
GWguy
*
Wow... glad you're not my mom..... I would have never seen the light of day as a kid...
Cowgirl
Well-Known Member
Wow... glad you're not my mom..... I would have never seen the light of day as a kid...
Nah, I was being sarcastic. All those fire department hard-asses saying the kid should have been above the "law"...
And it kills me how the article says crap like-
Um, hello? Thousands of parents homeschool their kids just fine, so why are they letting him slip 2 years behind? They should do their job and teach him, or get him tutors so he's not falling behind. Duh.
GWguy
*
Nah, I was being sarcastic. All those fire department hard-asses saying the kid should have been above the "law"...
'K....
He did deserve to be reprimanded, to remind him and his classmates how serious this issue is. He did not need to be expelled.
And I take what the kid said with a grain of salt too. He was playing war in the backyard. When he was done playing, he put the toy... where? In his toybox? In his room? No, it went in his school bag. He had every intention of taking it to school in spite of saying he didn't.
awpitt
Main Streeter
'K....
He did deserve to be reprimanded, to remind him and his classmates how serious this issue is. He did not need to be expelled.
And I take what the kid said with a grain of salt too. He was playing war in the backyard. When he was done playing, he put the toy... where? In his toybox? In his room? No, it went in his school bag. He had every intention of taking it to school in spite of saying he didn't.
I thought he said he was hding the gun from his brother which would be why it didn't go in the "toy box".
GWguy
*
I was a middle child of 3 boys. I can imagine what I might have done in a similar situation. While that is a possibility, I still have my doubts.
If you watched full metal jacket all the boys should be expelled...."this is my rifle this is my gun...this if for fightin.. this is for fun....
Natron0915
Active Member
Please!
How about a little, just a little, even the tiniest bit, of common sense put to use here. If anyone possibly thinks the punishment fits the crime, then I truly feel sorry for you.
The fact that the article referenced Columbine, and used that as an excuse to take the ability of a school board to think before it acts, is just as rediculous.
The kid messed up, sure, he should not have brought it to school, but a blind man/woman could see that there was no danger, and it's not a huge leap to determine that there was no malicious intent.
How about a little, just a little, even the tiniest bit, of common sense put to use here. If anyone possibly thinks the punishment fits the crime, then I truly feel sorry for you.
The fact that the article referenced Columbine, and used that as an excuse to take the ability of a school board to think before it acts, is just as rediculous.
The kid messed up, sure, he should not have brought it to school, but a blind man/woman could see that there was no danger, and it's not a huge leap to determine that there was no malicious intent.