Game Fishing Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,118 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
3/11/08
A 14-year-old Pennsylvania schoolboy is fighting back after being sent to detention for wearing a T-shirt bearing the image of a gun in honor of his uncle fighting in Iraq.

Officials at Penn Manor High School in Millersville, Pa., gave Donald Miller III two days of detention in December after he refused to turn his shirt inside out. But Donald and his parents say the shirt is a symbol of patriotism, and they've taken the case to federal court.

Donald's shirt showed a military weapon and the words "Volunteer Homeland Security" on the front. The back of the shirt displayed the words "Special Issue — Resident — Lifetime License — United States Terrorist Hunting Permit — Permit No. 91101 Gun Owner — No Bag Limit" over another image of the weapon.

Miller said he wore the shirt in honor of his uncle, Brian Souders, who is serving in Iraq and who gave it to Miller as a gift.

Donald and Tina Miller filed a federal freedom of speech lawsuit in January against the school district, saying it violated their son's First Amendment rights.

"Donald Miller wears the T-shirt to make the political and emotional statement that he supports his uncle, and all our armed forces, as they bravely exercise their duty to defend this great nation," Miller's attorney, Leonard G. Brown III, wrote in the federal complaint cited in the Sunday News.

The school district is defending its decision, saying it needs to keep students safe during a time of school shootings.

Kevin French, an attorney for Penn Manor, said the school district must create a safe environment, and Miller's T-shirt violated school policy.

"Students who come to school enjoy limited First Amendment rights," French told the Sunday News. "But the school district has the right to enforce policies that protect students."

A federal judge will review this case on March 31.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,057 Posts
the dumbing of America at work. How assinine, like wearing a tee-shirt is a threat. They could keep the kids safer by issueing condoms and shots. lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
I'm going to have to be on the dissenting side. I'm not so sure about the "Special Issue — Resident — Lifetime License — United States Terrorist Hunting Permit — Permit No. 91101 Gun Owner — No Bag Limit". I'm not sure thats the best message to be wearing. It might be a joke, but I don't think its funny. Sure, terrorists are sick people who I couldn't care less if they rot in a 6 foot hole or on top of a 6 foot pile, but is it really necessary for a kid to be wearing that? Granted, I've seen worse, but I didn't think those were appropriate either. Free-speech my ass, I think its just some dumb kid who wanted to be rebellious and a mother who thinks her kid is an angel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,081 Posts
fishinfoolz said:
Any ideas on how the judge will rule.
Schools are non-public forums and can place reasonable restrictions on student speech.

The political speech argument is the right move, because schools are required to maintain neutrality, but schools can still place reasonable restrictions on political speech. I think its clear from the article that the school will counter by saying they didn't ask the student to take the shirt off because of any political message. Rather, they wanted him to take it off because they didn't want anything on school grounds that could encourage violence (shooting people).

I think the recent school shootings REALLY help an already strong school position.

IMO school wins.

--------

To the broader issue of "zero tolerance" policies....I generally don't like them. They're artifical and seem to lead to unreasonable outcomes.

What would we call an individual who lived his entire life based on a collection of "zero tolerance" policies? Unreasonable? Hard headed?

Worse? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,456 Posts
What would we call an individual who lived his entire life based on a collection of "zero tolerance" policies? Unreasonable? Hard headed?

Worse?
I don't know what YOU call him. I call him fishinfoolz. :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,957 Posts
I don't have Dizane's expertise to make a legal judgment call but, as a legal novice, I think his analysis is right on.

The school wins! Zero-tolerance wins! And reasonable thought loses!

In my opinion, pictures of guns and symbolic jewelry are not what zero-tolerance rules should be concerned with. The schools would be more effective focusing on the working models.

I'm glad the board police here are more open minded. :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,081 Posts
Bonzo said:
I don't have Dizane's expertise to make a legal judgment call but, as a legal novice, I think his analysis is right on.
I'm hardly an expert, but I have written on a similar subject (free speech and the establishment clause with regards to religious speech in public schools).

My opinion is just that, my personal opinion. Now it'll probably end up being wrong! :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,270 Posts
I agree with you guys too... and THAT'S what's SCARY! :eek: :mrgreen:

Did you also hear about the kid who was stripped of his class vice presidency and was suspended for buying a bag of Skittles candy from a friend at a school where they don't allow candy in the vending machines for 'nutritional' reasons? conf:

We ARE gettin' a bit carried away with some of this stuff. Tdown:

Student Suspended For Buying Skittles
Contraband Candy Gets Eighth-Grader In Trouble

POSTED: 1:07 pm EDT March 12, 2008
UPDATED: 1:11 pm EDT March 12, 2008


NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- Contraband candy has led to big trouble for an eighth-grade honors student in Connecticut.

Michael Sheridan was stripped of his title as class vice president, barred from attending an honors student dinner and suspended for a day after buying a bag of Skittles from a classmate.

School spokeswoman Catherine Sullivan-DeCarlo says the New Haven school system banned candy sales in 2003 as part of a districtwide school wellness policy.



Michael's suspension has been reduced from three days to one, but he has not been reinstated as class vice president.

He says he didn't realize his candy purchase was against the rules, but he did notice the student selling the Skittles on Feb. 26 was being secretive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,118 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Webo said:
I agree with you guys too... and THAT'S what's SCARY!
OK Webo, here's my new strategy. Just for fun, I'm ONLY going to comment on posts from you I agree with. We'll see how it goes.. :?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,033 Posts
If you're the class vice president, how do you not know the rules against candy? I'm sure there's been uproars about it in the past and present... I find it hard to believe anyone at that school, especially a kid who has had to been there for a bit to get voted into vice presidency, did not know about such a silly rule. Penalty is harsh. Rule is idiotic. That school sucks. Our school sold cinammon buns and donuts and coke and all that ooey-gooey goodness and only a few people, like yours truely, has turned into a human-shaped piece of lard.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top