- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 43,134
- Reaction score
- 16,114
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Did you read the article where the school said it wasn't just about the casing?
Yeah...sounded like a school trying to save face.
Did you read the article where the school said it wasn't just about the casing?
While I agree, the casing should be a non-issue regardless other disciplinary issues. If the child somehow had "2 disciplinary strikes" against him this does not rise to the level of a 3rd.And you seem to have no valid response to my position that the school is only acting "dumbly" if you blindly believe the word of the parents, without hearing the side of the school who is likely legally prohibited from speaking about the child.
And given the fact I've seen similar situations such as this (not gun related, but the same basic concepts) on several occasions, all of which came about because of a lie from the parents, I'm going to believe it's far more likely to school is telling the truth when they say the suspension is not just about the casing.
The school wrote in a letter before the story was out that they repeatedly informed the child's parents about policy violation "to save face"???Yeah...sounded like a school trying to save face.
Unless...While I agree, the casing should be a non-issue regardless other disciplinary issues.
It does if it is repeated insubordination. Again, if I warn a child twice to stop talking and the child continues to talk, then the third time he's out of my class and gets an F for the day. Fairly common procedure in life, not just in school, but in life.If the child somehow had "2 disciplinary strikes" against him this does not rise to the level of a 3rd.
It wasn't a live bullet. Just an empty shell.
The school wrote in a letter before the story was out that they repeatedly informed the child's parents about policy violation "to save face"???
Tell me...why do you believe the parents of the problem child over the school, when much of the evidence suggests the school is in the right and the parents aren't telling the truth?
Unless...
"The letter says they’d repeatedly been reminded about Hunter using other toys as make believe guns, in violation of school policy"
In other words, it sounds like the suspension was more about repeated insubordination, not for the casing. Let's put it another way. We can both agree schools have no problem with students talking to each other, unless they do it inappropriately/at the wrong time. So if I have a student in class and he's talking while he's jogging, that's fine. But if I'm lecturing before the activity and the student is talking, and I tell him to stop talking multiple times and he still doesn't stop, then further punishment is warranted.
That's what it sounds like happened in this case. It sounds like the child was repeatedly told his behavior was incorrect and the student persisted in the incorrect behavior. The letter clearly states the school has contacted the child's parents on multiple occasions, so that tells me this was not a one time event. It seems to me the parents aren't telling the whole truth and that the child wasn't suspended for bringing a casing to school, but rather repeated violations of school policy.
It does if it is repeated insubordination. Again, if I warn a child twice to stop talking and the child continues to talk, then the third time he's out of my class and gets an F for the day. Fairly common procedure in life, not just in school, but in life.
Just like the outrage of the gun lobby in response to this pre-school following its own policies.
You have not followed the thread not read the article did you....
It's only policies of irrational fear instilled but the irrational left that has no grasp on reality. So much so that kids can get suspended for chewing a poptart into a gun shape. The inmates are truly running the asylum.
Did you not read what I've posted? How can you jump to partisan attacks like "irrational left" when all the evidence supports the idea the parents weren't telling the truth?It's only policies of irrational fear instilled but the irrational left that has no grasp on reality. So much so that kids can get suspended for chewing a poptart into a gun shape. The inmates are truly running the asylum.
All the more reason to teach boundaries. Allow me to quote The Andy Griffith Show:Ok, but the kid is 4.
But you don't know all the methods the school took. Perhaps they've already taken many steps to better the kid and the kid continues to be a disruption. Again, that comes back to the school and privacy laws.If a 4 year old is that disruptive as to be considered an outlier among other 4 year olds, I would imagine that there was a different / better way to help the kid out than a 7 day suspension.
Understood.It's not that I don't understand that rules are rules, and it's not that I don't sympathize with the concerns that created those rules
Only if you assume the school jumped to this punishment. But I have a very strong suspicion there have been MANY disciplinary steps along the way and it finally progressed to this point.if you'll forgive the inappropriate pun, it's a little like hunting for ground hogs with hand grenades.
The school wrote in a letter before the story was out that they repeatedly informed the child's parents about policy violation "to save face"???
Tell me...why do you believe the parents of the problem child over the school, when much of the evidence suggests the school is in the right and the parents aren't telling the truth?
Unless...
"The letter says they’d repeatedly been reminded about Hunter using other toys as make believe guns, in violation of school policy"
In other words, it sounds like the suspension was more about repeated insubordination, not for the casing. Let's put it another way. We can both agree schools have no problem with students talking to each other, unless they do it inappropriately/at the wrong time. So if I have a student in class and he's talking while he's jogging, that's fine. But if I'm lecturing before the activity and the student is talking, and I tell him to stop talking multiple times and he still doesn't stop, then further punishment is warranted.
That's what it sounds like happened in this case. It sounds like the child was repeatedly told his behavior was incorrect and the student persisted in the incorrect behavior. The letter clearly states the school has contacted the child's parents on multiple occasions, so that tells me this was not a one time event. It seems to me the parents aren't telling the whole truth and that the child wasn't suspended for bringing a casing to school, but rather repeated violations of school policy.
It does if it is repeated insubordination. Again, if I warn a child twice to stop talking and the child continues to talk, then the third time he's out of my class and gets an F for the day. Fairly common procedure in life, not just in school, but in life.
The problem is the child continually violates the rules. I think that's been made fairly clear.Why is a 4 year old who pretends that a toy is a gun a discipline problem?
The problem is the child continually violates the rules. I think that's been made fairly clear.
If you're asking why it is a rule that a kid not pretend he has a gun, then I'd say because that kid likely doesn't pretend he has a gun and isn't shooting it. And if a kid has a pretend gun and is "shooting" it at other children, then that's a real problem, especially in today's educational climate.
Kids rarely pretend other toys are guns for reasons other than to pretend shoot them.
That wouldn't even happen in Canada where we hate guns
Why is a 4 year old who pretends that a toy is a gun a discipline problem? That sure seems like normal kid behavior to me.
People over react these days. When I was in elementary school, it was common to turn in live ammunition and knives in to teachers under amnesty. The thing is teachers never threw a fit, because jonny was hunting with his 3006 rifle and forgot he left a mag full of it in his jacket pocket, he turns it in teacher just held it until the parents came to get it.
Now if he forgot about it in his jacket pocket and came to school on monday, and turned it in, man he would be facing a world of hurt, it is sad people can not ration and simply go into hyper ventilate mode over everything.
I doubt that would hold up much if a child did bring a gun to school and started shooting. Then everyone would ask "why did no one do anything before?". Not speaking of this child in particular, speaking in general terms.I'd suggest that maybe the problem is adults who keep telling kids that pretend stuff is real and/or dangerous.
Who told him it was dangerous? They just said it was against the rules. Please don't make up stuff to fit your agenda.When you tell him that kind of thing is dangerous
That's ignorant as hell. A gun is much larger.Boy suspended for taking shell casing to preschool, mom's Facebook post goes viral | Fox News
And of course there is the predictable chorus of "OMG stoopid lib'rals that's not a shotgun bullet it's a child-killer 4000 bullet!".
Honestly, who cares?
It is highly irresponsible for these parents to allow their kids to bring gun crap to a preschool. If you don't know that the kid has a bullet in his backpack odds are he could sneak a gun into the preschool. Kudos to this preschool for removing their kid. I wouldn't ever send my kid to a place with irresponsible gun owners like that.
Yes...we are going to say, "OMG stoopid lib'rals" because they are indeed stupid. This is a shell casing from a spent shell. This means there is no bullet, no charge, nothing. It's less dangerous than a pencil or stairs.
It's not irresponsible at all to let a child that is old enough to know not to put something in their mouth and choke on it to have one.
The school's vice-president e-mailed her that he was notifying the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). He confirmed that to Fox 2 but said since A Place 2 Grow was licensed by DCFS, DCFS needed to be notified.
The school wrote in a letter before the story was out that they repeatedly informed the child's parents about policy violation
The school wrote in a letter before the story was out that they repeatedly informed the child's parents about policy violation "to save face"???
Tell me...why do you believe the parents of the problem child over the school, when much of the evidence suggests the school is in the right and the parents aren't telling the truth?
Unless...
"The letter says they’d repeatedly been reminded about Hunter using other toys as make believe guns, in violation of school policy"
In other words, it sounds like the suspension was more about repeated insubordination, not for the casing. Let's put it another way. We can both agree schools have no problem with students talking to each other, unless they do it inappropriately/at the wrong time. So if I have a student in class and he's talking while he's jogging, that's fine. But if I'm lecturing before the activity and the student is talking, and I tell him to stop talking multiple times and he still doesn't stop, then further punishment is warranted.
That's what it sounds like happened in this case. It sounds like the child was repeatedly told his behavior was incorrect and the student persisted in the incorrect behavior. The letter clearly states the school has contacted the child's parents on multiple occasions, so that tells me this was not a one time event. It seems to me the parents aren't telling the whole truth and that the child wasn't suspended for bringing a casing to school, but rather repeated violations of school policy.
It does if it is repeated insubordination. Again, if I warn a child twice to stop talking and the child continues to talk, then the third time he's out of my class and gets an F for the day. Fairly common procedure in life, not just in school, but in life.