Teen Jailed for Zero Tolerance Offense, Starved for 36 Hours

Obviously Gov. Scott has failed to get unionized government-run schools under control.

Zero tolerance running amok.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/09/29/teen-jailed-for-zero-tolerance-offense-s

Some school officials really, really need to be fired over this.

 

I agree. In what universe is it ok to search a kids car after he was caught smoking an E-cigarette? Schools rely on the police WAY to much these days.

 

When I was in school I always had my hunting rifle and my break action .410 in my car.

We were a rural community and my teachers all knew I went hunting everyday, squirrels , deer, rabbits, etc.

I don't see the problem, the gun should've been in his trunk or had a trigger lock though. (It's a Mosin he could have just as easily slid the bolt out and put it in the glove box, it then wouldn't have been a firearm)

 

how is it the fault of the school that he was starved? It's also not the fault of the school officials that they are forced to enforce zero-tolerance that anti-gun lobbyists pushed into legislation...


I won't comment on the starving part.... if it happened... that is 100% on the police end of it... not the school who was compelled to enforce a rule that the individual admin may or may not have supported.


When you claim you don't want teachers and admin at the school to use judgement.... this is the result.... zero-tolerance

 

Taxcutter says:
They called the police in the first place.

Unionized government-run schools: Where common sense goes to die.

 

I taught at a rural school that hunted a lot. We had k-8, but as the 8th grade became 9th graders, we added a grade to keep them there until they had graduated. The school is now a k-12


but, when that first group of 8th graders were there, we began discussing that issue of hunting rifles in cars before they started driving . It was to try and prevent them from bringing them on accident...

it seemed to have worked as we never had the issue.


I don't agree that kids can't have hunting rifles in their vehicles on campus... but as a teacher.... I had no say in that policy.... so if/when kids came to school, it would have had to have been enforced or else my teaching certificate was at risk.



now, on the same vein... and I didn't know this... I assumed in Florida, that teachers also were not allowed to bring hunting rifles in their vehicles or have guns in their personal vehicles at all. But that's not the case.

We had a teacher get arrested for pot on campus. A drug dog alerted on his vehicle for pot that was in the pickup truck locking toolbox in the bed of the truck. Also in it, was a hunting rifle (unloaded) and bullets. Of course, all of that was in the news, but the local county po-po made a statement that it is not illegal for teachers to do that. The pot got him fired.... the gun, no charges

 

So you're proposing a zero tolerance policy for school officials?

The sequence of events is unclear, specific details at the time unavailable to us here and now could well be relevant and there are plenty of open questions. I doubt anyone involved would come out spotless from a full understanding of what actually happened.

Of course, none of that will stop the usual suspects using this for their own political advantage (from all sides - politicos are all equally scum as far as I'm concerned).

 

SRO's are local police that the public demands schools have "for safety" again... not in our control.

Police were there and would take over when a search is required, alleviating the schools from this sort of liability.


can't have it both ways, you either want the cops there and involved, or you don't. You can't get mad when police do police things or blame the teachers you forced into using SRO's in the first place

 

you are dealing with an organization that demonizes a pop tart chewed into a shape of a gun or look to imprison kids just for saying the "gun" word...............

 

I'm saying he could have avoided the situation by putting the bolt and the actual rifle in separate compartments, it is no longer considered an operable firearm and then this situation never happened.

I always had my bolt in the trunk and the rest of the rifle in the backseat.
The shotgun I would take the action screw out and put half of it in the trunk and the other half in the back seat.

Being intelligent is always key to avoiding tricky situations.

 

it was the zero-tolerance that the voting public forced upon us to enforce.... but then got mad when it didn't go like they thought...


You say "don't use your judgement, zero-tolerance for guns" then are baffled why toy guns fall under that same policy? Well, if you let us use our judgement... we may could have said... "herpaderp... it's just a poptart"

but alas... we aren't allowed.... because the moment a parent that doesn't like a particular teacher finds out you told little johnny to put up his toy gun, instead of writing him up.... and believe me, the ones that don't like you will find out.... they will try to get you fired for not enforcing zero-tolerance.

- - - Updated - - -

he had it locked, bullets in a different spot... he was fine... it was the fact there was OMGBBQSAUCEGUNONCAMPUS that got people riled up...

 

then common sense and reason have both suffered the same fate..........death by Liberal Progressive

 

I didn't see anything in the post about a trigger lock, it's a Mosin so the safety is the bolt itself; you have to pull the back of the bolt all the way back then turn it.(Safety's suck for Mosins, they randomly snap back into firing position) That doesn't make it an "Inoperable" firearm, he needed an actual trigger lock or to slide the bolt out and move it into a different compartment.

I don't believe he is in the wrong, I'm saying he could've been a little bit smarter about having firearms in the car as minor. (Cop's hate it when minors have firearms in the car, trust me i know.)

 

"denied edible food" is not starved

"Chier was caught smoking an e-cigarette, not a regular cigarette, at school" - what does that mean?

- - - Updated - - -

agree about the gun, now if he took it out of the car that would be a different story

 

E-Cigs have no tobacco, they use a vapor.

If you serve a food that is unedible to someone with Anaphylaxis, it is starving them. (You know, you can eat this and possibly die or you can go hungry)

 

What am I supposed to be outraged about? He had a gun on school grounds. That is something for which we should show no tolerance.

Also, he was not "starved". Thirty-six hours is not even two days. A human can go for close to 2 months without food.

 

thanks, I have no issue with a teen smoking a e-cig, maybe he was trying to quit smoking real cigs

- - - Updated - - -

thanks, I have no issue with a teen smoking a e-cig, maybe he was trying to quit smoking real cigs, whats next suspend a student for having a nicotine patch?

what food was he served that he turned down? and was he allergic to it really?

.

 

Yes, He had Anaphylaxis caused by peanuts, he was served food with peanuts as an ingredient. He had to refuse the meal due to a disability.

 

what was this food that he was served?

 

I don't understand the problem? Weren't you JUST arguing in the other thread that if the federal government feels that something in the constitutional is unacceptable or morally unjust then they should have the right to change the constitution as they so choose and if you don't like it then they can violently suppress you and force you to accept it.

Didn't you JUST say that was okay?

They've already done it once and you said it was acceptable to you. What's the problem with them declaring the 2nd amendment being immoral and unilaterally change that?

 

Zero Tolerance = Zero brains

Its just so sad that our teachers & schools are NOT allowed to use common sense anymore. Blame liberals. They control the schools. Who the ^$*#(#@( sends a kid to the principles office for chewing a pancake into a gun? The teacher should easily be able to say, "Jimmy, will you just eat that instead of playing with it, and don't do it again, thanks." How hard is that?

 

It would have been what ever they were serving the night he got arrested. I do know people with peanut allergies in prison's (Not sure about the local jails) have to get separate lunches.

 

He came to school with a gun, and smoked cigarettes on campus.

He deserves to sit in a jail cell for a couple of days. Maybe then, he will start to respect rules and authority... maybe even starting using his noodle.

 

zero tolerance is a result of an overly PC world and knee-jerk legislation after events like Columbine or Sandy Hook.... I would LOVE to be able to look at an airsoft gun, and take it up and give back to the parents directly when they drove up to the school and picked it up so they knew Jr brought his toy to school.... but alas.... I'm not allowed to do that anymore. Because just as soon as a kid in class goes home and tells his parents "Billy brought a gun to class and Mr Beason took it up"

'well, did anything happen to Billy?"

'no, mom, he stayed in class'


"WHAT?!?!?! I'm going to call the principal about this, because Billy should have been expelled"


Next thing I know, I'm in a meeting with professional practices... trying to explain why I didn't follow a zero tolerance rule when "common sense" isn't allowed.

of course, whichever parent had the kid arrested, even the complainer, they would have tried to play it off as a dumb rule. Parents are wishy-washy.... a rule they expect me to enforce against other kids, somehow, shouldn't apply when it's their kid in trouble.

 

I have a (then) 16 y.o. cousin get into some trouble over e-cigs.


When they first started gaining popularity, you had parents buying their kids that crap.... (the jury is still out if they are better or worse than smoking). The kids being dumb asses like highschool kids can typically be, some started smoking them in the back of classes. The problem was.... where was it specifically written in policy that e-cigs were not allowed. I mean, "distraction in class" (which it most certainly can be) is very subjective and damnit.... we can't be having teachers using judgement, now can we? So the district put in a county wide policy that basically equated it to real cigerrettes. Board voted and approved.

However, kids kept doing it, and parents would claim ignorance to the rule (like that should matter) My cousin, like a lack of brain using moron he can be.... (I say that out of love).... smoked that crap he got from a friend in the back of class, then upped the stupid by walking out of the office and just leaving campus with a friend who came to pick him up while he was waiting for the principal to suspend him or whatever....



So, absolutely NOT, should e-cigs be allowed on campus. Even teachers aren't allowed to use them. (we had a substituted put on the 'do not use again' list because she was puffing away on one of those things. Dipping below the desk, puffing, then coming back up....


E-cig smokers are doing a fine job getting those stupid things banned by their annoying, self-centered habits, just like they did with real cigs....