Current Affairs Ok, that zero-tolerance policy crap has gone too far.

In Riverside, California, two students went to the San Bernadino Mountains and came back to Ramona High School with their pickup truck full of "stuff". They were suspended for an unknown amount of time from school that day because they had a "fight" with the "stuff" in the back of the pickup.

That "stuff" was snow.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/24/ap/strange/mainD8FVNPR86.shtml

This further proves my theory that the government is trying to turn us all into mindless zombies who won't think for themselves or fight back. When I start getting money, I'm outta this country.

 

It was a disruption to the learning environment, yes, but that doesn't change the fact that suspending someone for having a snowball fight on school grounds is unreasonable for a first offense. The most they should have gotten for a first offense was I.S.S., with a harder punishment with more offenses.

Probably either Japan, Britain, Canada, Australia, or somewhere on the open sea. All countries have their problems but if I get a boat and sattellite internet and the phone service through internet thing, I can stay out at sea for a very long time and not have to worry about other people.

 

I think it's overreaction, plain and simple. They suspend children for throwing snowballs because it's... what? Dangerous? Hardly. I mean, if the kid outs ice or a rock in the snowball I can understand, but as long as no one gets hurt it's only innocent fun.

People are just getting too stringent about these things, and they go overboard on everything on the belief that it's "for the best."

At this rate, kid's will eventually be forced to come to school as disembodied floating brains, because anything else is "a thread to the other children"

-.-

PS: The first time I've hit 3000 posts on any forum, I feel so proud.

 

I can understand what the princible was saying, in that a snowball could have hit somebody that was not involved and started a fist fight or something, not to mention that if their was still some snow left then it would be a massive distraction to the students. That could be grounds for suspenstion, although the news report doesn't say how long they were suspended for.

In E-B's first post it says that they were expelled, if this was the case then there would probably be uproar over it. I won't go so far as to say that the schools in america are tring to turn their students into zombies, but if people are coming in looking to cause a distraction and to make a show of themselves then something has to be done to get the point across that it will not be tolerated and should not be done again.

 

No, it was not. I stand with the students on this. It's obvious that the principal flew off the handle and overreacted for a first offense that had good intentions behind it. The students didn't mean any harm by thier actions, they were vandalizing nothing, and were trying to promote a positive experience at the school. A snowball being a 'dangerous weapon' is a matter of personal opinion to begin with. Are they going to suspend student because the statue of David in their school report was considered pornography rather than art? I'm not sure how you see the Neece's decision to suspend them as being rational. There were no rules stating that something as innocent as snowballs were considered 'weapons'- Were the kids supposed to read the principal's mind and divine that snowballs were no better than guns and knives in his book?

Plain and simple he lost it in a knee-jerk reaction. This decision is unfair to them and the school he's supposed to represent. It sends a negative message to the community. What should have been a rap on the nuckles has suddenly become a firing squad. It's unfortunate because it really does discourage other kids from trying to do anything that might 'break the mold' because the principal can not only shoot it down, but skew the rules about so he can suspend them as well.

A more prudent principal, had he felt the same way about snowballs, would have taken them aside and reprminded them, letting them know what he considers snowballs to be, and cut them loose. God knows they weren't bringing knives or guns to school. I see this as him flexing his muscles as a principal, rather than considering the students and the learning environment he claims to care for. There were better ways he could have handled it.

You don't need money, you need training. Honestly I'm considering going to work at a Nuke plant in Australia or up north in Canada when I get out. This country and all its BS is starting to seriously tax whats left of my 'patriotism'.

~W

 

...

Stupid confusing synonyms. I don't really know how long they were suspended, but the article just said they were suspended so it's possible that they were completely expelled. Then again, if that were the case they would have probably said that. So, I have no idea how long they were suspended.

I'm gonna go edit that out now.

Actually, I have something that I'm gonna finish hopefully within half a year and when I finish that, I'll never have to have a job.

 

Really, sounds cool. This guy did sorta step over the boundaries. If the kids were fighitng with knives or rocks or something, an object that could seriously hurt someone, then yeah, he did the right thing. But these were SNOW BALLS. Give me a break.

 

Umm i have lived in many parts of canada.. And From my experience in school growing up.. Snow Ball Fights have never been allowed..

Have you ever had a snowball in the face.. it Hurts.. Some kids have had eyes put out because of it.. Yah i have been in a lot of snowball fights in my time but the last thing teachers want to do is have to call someones parents and tell them there kid lost an eye while at school.. And odds are those kids only got a couple day suspension.. Now if it was like a month or more then that would be stupid and uncalled for..

I know what they did was supose to be harmless fun.. But snowball fights are not always that harmless..

 

The prospect of injury, not necessarily the actual act of injury, has always been a right for punishment. That is why people can be imprisoned for attempted murder. It would be rather ****ed up if the jury said "Well, no one actually died, so it's okay, we'll let him go". Not to mention as per my experience, schools will have certain rules on situations like that already. If they went out of their way to break those rules then they deserve the punishment. They can swear up and down that they only wanted to have fun but we don't know what was fully intended. As Kame and Ciel put it, those things can hurt, even if nothing is in them. It's like what Dane Cook said about tickling; it starts out fun, but usually ends up horribly. People tend to get too carried away and they can't help themselves and they throw a snowball too hard at the wrong person and BAM, nailed in the back of the neck or in the face. I wish this kind of rule was enforced in my school when I was in highschool, though, for the assholes who brought in snowballs to the gym locker room and threw them at people while they were changing.

And wert; have fun living in a kangaroo pouch, chucking a boomerang at tasmanian devils for your dinner.

 

99% of the time a snowball fight is meant to be just fun, and I'd be very surprised if these kids had anything other than a little fun in mind. I do believe that it was a bad idea to take the snow to school, but when deciding their punishment the principal should have considered intent as well as results.

I think these rules are too strict, sometimes...

Ahh the stereotypes.

 

The things that happen in school. Good times. I agree with a suspension but it never said for how long.

How long was the suspension? Longer then a few days yes Zero toleance went to far.

 

LMFAO
you are taking the piss right??!!!!11 that is totally stupid. The world is totally screwed up now!
what the???
whats so dangerous? 'the boys where jailed for putting a teacher in hospital with a severe case of brain freeze'(sarcasm for the drier members of bjp)'
oh man that is totally a piss take

 

I guess I stand alone on this one.

This is where personal experience is coming in. I grew up about 20 mins from Riverside. Snow, at best, is something most students will only see on TV once a year at around Christmas time. It's not something most (if any) students in So Cal are familiar with. We're not Canadians, we haven't lived around it our whole lives. All we know about snow is what we see in the movies and modern media- that it's soft and fun to play with. There are no established rules regarding snow simply because the very prospect of it being available was deemed absurd. What I fail to see in Ciel's argument is what the 'message' is.

Ignorance to the "dangers" of snow may not be an excuse, but there are extenuating circumstances. Imagine if you caught a two year old playing with firecrackers. You never told him he should never touch them, he doesn't know any better. For the entirety of his life he was unaware the firecrackers are a 'no-no' thing- You never addressed it. You wouldn't punish him to his room for three days because of it, would you? It's like whipping your puppy black and blue because it pooped on the floor of the house for the first time.

For someone FROM Southern California, who used to live RIGHT NEXT DOOR to where it happened, the 'message' is clear- Several students tried to do something positive in a school in an area with enough problems with gangs, violence, sex, drugs and other 'pleasant' aspects of life, and their principal shot them down and suspended them. Their 'positive' idea was destroyed simply because of one uptight man who was more concerned with his career than the children at fault. It's clear as day from someone from that area he was covering himself in a spastic reaction. He was more worried about what might have come of it from an administrative standpoint and 'failed safe' by doling out an unnecessary punishment. If he wanted to give out a clear message he should have simply told the students don't do this again. If they did, THEN they would be knowingly breaking the rules and THEN a punishment such as suspension would be justified. Just like if you caught your kid playing with firecrackers a second time after you told him not to, you would dish out a more harsh punishment. He's no longer ignorant to the fact, he knowingly defied you. If you tell the kids not to bring snow to school (they'll treat it the same as any other weapon) they're not going to, especially if they have to go through all that trouble to get it. It's not worth the wasted effort.

For god sakes are we really forgetting that the students were trying to improve the quality of life, improve the atmosphere of their school? It's not like they were living in a pleasant suburb in the middle of some utopia. Riverside is a sh*t hole. They were trying to do something positive, FOR the school in an area where negativity is the norm. You should NEVER punish those who try to bring about positive change, especially in an instance like this when they violated NO established rules- only the whim of their principal.

I suppose I'm so vehemently against the school because I've got some experience in this. I know what its like to have people with positions of authority fly off the handle at people who were only trying to do good. These kids were trying to make positive change in their school and I fail to see why the severity of their repercussions is as 'necessary' as you make it out to be. Maybe, Miz Ciel, you can clarify what the 'message' is, for me, and explain why it was 'necessary' to punish students trying to bring about positive change. I don't see the rationale.

~W

 

That is bull crap. There punishment was way out of line. If no rules were stated that playing with snow is going to get you suspended than it is just an a-hole principal. I think a detention or a warning ,not even going as far as ISS in this issue. Yes, I can see that a snowball "could" in someway be harmful, but come on. If you pull kids out of school, only hurting there grades and such is stupid for just playing with a snowball.
People shouldn't be goofing around at school that is understanable. Maybe if the student had been throwing snowballs inside the school than they should have got suspended, but for simply playing with snow outside of the school and getting in trouble is bull.
If the kids had been having a hardcore snowball fight and had been throwing them and hitting cars than that is differnt. I just think it is the fault of a tight-wad principal.