Originally Posted by
subzero
"In general, we wouldn't suspend a student for doing something heroic. However, today this student took it upon himself to physically assault an armed gunman putting himself, students, and faculty members at risk. Due to this unfortunate complication and in compliance with our policies regarding student and staff safety, we must suspend this student immediately."
When they're making statements saying that 'generally' they wouldn't do something, something happened here that they didn't like. What was the problem? If the kid did something wrong, they've got nothing to worry about. 'Generally' is also highly subjective and we have no idea what sort of 'heroics' they would allow. It sounds good, but what does it really mean?
What are the school officials disputing? The number of people involved in taking the kid down? You can't just dispute someone's claim by saying, "They're wrong and that's the bottom line cause Stone Cold said so!" I know if I were getting heat for something like that and the kid in question did something that warranted a suspension, I'd step up and say, "Hey, this other kid had a knife. He went up behind the guy with the gun and stabbed him, taking him to the ground, and then disarming him. We have to suspend him for having a weapon on school grounds despite the fact that he took out an armed threat." I don't know of any law that prevents a school from making a statement regarding a suspension, but I guess there could be something somewhere.
What is in dispute is why the student was suspended. Consider an alternative situation: There are 3 black students at the school. One of them is suspended without a full explanation, and theorizes it was because he is black. The existence of multiple other students who are black makes this explanation disputable.
Not sure what being in a police car has to do with anything. If he has to be interrogated, they're gonna do it wherever it is they need to. In a situation like this, yeah, I'd say it's perfectly reasonable to expect the kid to have to give his side of the story. If the police are satisfied with his story and he's committed no crimes, what problem does the school have if not the simple fact that the kid was involved in an incident? If the kid beat the living shit out of the dude with the gun, MAYBE, they've got something. That's a bit of a gray area legally. Personally, I believe if you're waving a gun around at people, you get what you get and suck it up.
I don't know what specifically the school had in mind, but I can think up a lot of plausible problems including the claimed reason that he was disrespectful. That's not a crime (hence no arrest), but it can absolutely get a student suspended.
All I can go on is what we've been told. Again, the secrecy on the part of the school officials is a bit of a warning sign to me. If the kid did something wrong, all they have to do is come out with it. To me, not doing so seems to indicate fear of further backlash. I'm not unreasonable, but I am skeptical. This country is far too litigious and overly-sensitive about certain things for me to simply accept these sort of statements at face value. We're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty here... they aren't proving anything and their secrecy only hurts the way I'm going to see the situation.
It sounds like you're saying the student is innocent until proven guilty and the school has to prove their innocence. That doesn't strike you as problematic?
Originally Posted by
diethx
Don't make me hurt you. Why can I not find you on FB? I know your full name and I know we have friends in common. -.-
I am no longer on FB, hence your seeing me some time ago, but it makes me smile that you looked.
Hasta pronto, porque la vida no termina aqui...
America, stop pushing. I know what I'm doing.
+5 Nipples of Greater Bloodletting
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
