|
| Thread: How much control should public schools have over student behavior? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted February 06, 2013 01:53 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 01:58, 06 Feb 2013.
|
Another example. Liberalism gone wild. Destroying the hearts, minds, and future of our kids. No freedom of thought. No freedom to play. They must become mindless, braindead, indoctrinated puppets. Kids in the US are so much better off if you can send them to a private school rather than to an indoctrination center that the public schools are.
Clicky
Quote:
A Colorado second-grader may be suspended from his elementary school after he disobeyed a key rule of no weapons, real or imaginary, when he tossed an imaginary grenade Friday during recess and went, 'pshhh,' to indicate that the imaginary device detonated, KDVR.com reported.
Alex Watkins,7, who attends Mary Blair Elementary in Loveland, said he was playing the game "Rescue the World." He plays the role of a heroic soldier out to rid the world of an evil threat.
His duties led him to throw the imaginary grenade into a box he pretended contained evil forces. He said he didn't make any threats and was playing by himself, KDVR.com reported.
The school has a list of 'absolutes' that states no weapons, even if they're imaginary. A phone call Tuesday morning from FoxNews.com to the school was not immediately returned.
"Honestly, I don’t think the rule is very realistic for kids this age," Mandie Watkins, Alex's mom, told KDVR.com. "I think that when a child is trying to save the world, I don't think he should be punished for it."
Alex, for his part, told the station that he can’t believe he got "dispended."
____________
Revelation
|
|
Vindicator
Supreme Hero
Right Back Extraordinaire
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 02:03 AM |
|
|
This is kind off topic, but wouldn't liberals be more open-minded about the situation and let the kid do that? I mean, the word "liberal" doesn't envision a totalitarian dictatorship to me.
Joonas, about the whole laptop thing. What about dress code? Do you think people should be able to wear shirts with whatever designs they want on them? It's clearly not the school's property, right? His choice, isn't it?
____________
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 02:12 AM |
|
|
Unless the school's rules forbid a student from wearing something then yes, they should be allowed to wear what they want.
Obviously anything against the law is against the law.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 03:14 AM |
|
|
@JoonasTo
Quote:
School issued laptop is the same as school issued books. School is the owner not the possessor. Same thing if you buy a car ang give it to your son. Your name is in the owner spot on the registration but as the possessor is your son, your son is the one with the rights and responsibilities regarding the car. He will pay the taxes, insurance and drive it wherever he wants.
This is about as wrong as it gets. If I buy the car, it is ME who the bank will come after in the event I fail to pay the loan, not the person who is driving it.
Quote:
You can see him using the laptop at home so it's obviously his private one.
Not really. School can allow the students to take these computers home with them.
Quote:
If you give your car to your kid, with him as the possessor, or rent an apartment to someone, they are allowed to put up whatever posters they want on their walls/ceiling, unless you specifically specified that as forbidden in the terms for the possession. Wallpapers aren't any different, any reasonably reversible change to the possessed item is allowed by default.
This is really the crux of it (in bold). In a lease, you are given the property under certain terms, but you do not own the property. The lease is a legal document which says what you can and cannot do (and what the lease holder can and cannot do). In most cases, leasing an apartment allows you to decorate but you cannot make permanent infrastructure changes, and usually you cannot alter the outside appearance of the property. If the lease says you are not allowed to hang posters on your wall, and you do it anyway after signing the document, the lease holder has every right to demand you take posters down and evict you if you do not. (Leases also have to abide by certain rental laws, so when you draw up a lease you can't just put anything in there... but you get the idea.) This bizarre notion that occupying a property or having possession of property you do not own entitles you do to anything with it is... well... bizarre.
In the case of a school laptop, I suspect that the school loans them to students with certain conditions attached. There may even be a document that parents have to sign. I'm not really sure since when I went to high school we didn't have laptops. In fact, laptops didn't exist. Ugh. I'm dating myself. Anyway, there's almost certainly some document which stipulates the terms of use and almost certainly one of those terms is abiding by what kinds of software can and cannot be installed on the computer. In the end, these computers are supposed to be used for education, not for personal enjoyment.
(Just as a bit of comparison, I am issued a laptop as part of my employment, and my employer certainly has a whole lot of say over what I'm allowed to do with it - so much so that if I violate the rules severely enough I can be fired. My employer does physically restrict my ability to do certain things such as install software and access certain websites - HC, unfortunately, is currently among them - by the use of software controls. I think schools should do this as well, but they don't have the IT resources my employer does. Anyway, point is that my employer has complete say over what I do with my computer. They give me a lot of leeway, probably not by choice, but it's still their computer, and they can take it away from me or change the rules of the loan any time I wish. That's just life and the cost of using a computer for free....)
By the way, the simple fact of being a student brings with it certain obligations. There are a lot of things you aren't otherwise allowed to do in school. You can't just skip classes. Sometimes you can't wear what you want. You can't take a phone call in class. Etc. Abiding by rules that govern how school computers are used isn't really different.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 03:19 AM |
|
|
@Elodin
Quote:
Another example. Liberalism gone wild.
C'mon Elodin. This has nothing to do with liberalism. It's just a needless proliferation of zero tolerance policies in our school system and elsewhere due to the irrational belief that they will absolutely prevent unwanted endpoints. I agree that they're counterproductive and it would be much better if school administrators (and elsewho) would just learn to use their BRAINS when judging the permissibility of behavior, but not everything you don't like can be laid at the feet of democrats, you know. It's about liability, not politics.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 04:49 AM |
|
|
Actually it's more like treasure hunting for the next shock-value story and then applying the story to every individual of a liberal mindset. Elodin loves using shock-value stories as ammunition. Classic case of dehumanizing the opposition into being some sort of demi-human mob. "Student with a picture of a gun on laptop gets suspended. Oh how the sky is falling."
For every story of a student with a touchy wallpaper causing a stir, there are 1,000,000 students with touchy wallpapers that don't cause a stir. It's an isolated incident of over-reactive stupidity. **** happens. For these politicized issues, people need to take a step back, inhale some metaphorical weed, and calm the **** down. Give your girl oral sex, eat some BBQ bacon-wrapped shrimp, and watch Starship Troopers director's cut in the dark in your pajamas. Everything is going to be okay.
You don't really accomplish anything by digging up these stories and keelhauling them around the internet with your shining galleon of truth & justice. Almost all Democrats or gun-control proponents are going to agree that the school overreacted.
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 07:31 AM |
|
|
Apparently my posts have not been clear on my position if Corribus mistundestands them. I reread my posts once again but they still make sense to me. Perhaps my terminology is wrong? Holder might be a better term than possessor.
Quote:
This bizarre notion that occupying a property or having possession of property you do not own entitles you do to anything with it is... well... bizarre.
This was not my intended message. Rather it was this: "Any reasonably reversible change to the hold item is allowed by default."
Quote:
If the lease says you are not allowed to hang posters on your wall, and you do it anyway after signing the document, the lease holder has every right to demand you take posters down and evict you if you do not.
And if that clause about posters is not there he does not have the right to demand you to take them down and evict you. I thought this much was clear. Please point me out to what made you think I implied anything else.
Quote:
Quote:
School issued laptop is the same as school issued books. School is the owner not the possessor. Same thing if you buy a car ang give it to your son. Your name is in the owner spot on the registration but as the possessor is your son, your son is the one with the rights and responsibilities regarding the car. He will pay the taxes, insurance and drive it wherever he wants.
This is about as wrong as it gets. If I buy the car, it is ME who the bank will come after in the event I fail to pay the loan, not the person who is driving it.
If you have unpaied loans it's still the bank's car not yours. They are different matter than taxes and insurance.
At least here all taxes, insurance and running costs of the car are to be paid by the holder of the car, not the owner.
Quote:
Quote:
You can see him using the laptop at home so it's obviously his private one.
Not really. School can allow the students to take these computers home with them.
I mean't that it was privately lent for him, not for a group of students. It was in response to JJ questioning this issue.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 05:25 PM |
|
|
|
Does Elodin actually recognize the difference between american "liberals" and liberalism?
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 05:49 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 17:50, 06 Feb 2013.
|
Quote:
Does Elodin actually recognize the difference between american "liberals" and liberalism?
When I speak of liberals I am speaking of American liberals. And yes, American liberals are the ones responsible for suspending kids for drawing pictures of guns, cutting a piece of paper into a hangun shape and for having kids arrested for bringing toy guns to school. Lunacy.
Kids should not be taught that guns are bad but that there is a proper use for guns and an improper use for guns.
____________
Revelation
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 06, 2013 06:47 PM |
|
|
|
but there's no connection between american liberals and the ideology of liberalism!
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 02:21 PM |
|
|
After a 60 years of ideology, when does it matter that words had a meaning once upon a time? "Liberals" are per definition cancer of society, because no sane citizen is a "liberal". People identifying as such should be locked away in a mental asylum, because of what the group is and stands for. Its not a civil rights group for minorities, its not a group that wishes for long term policies, its just a populistic mish mash of media propaganda using a word.
And the same thing applies to the "conservative" side. Its not a real side, its just a media storm over something that was once a word. Are you a "conservative"? Yes? Please apply to the nearest mental institution. They won't help you, its not a part of the list of current defined mental illnesses.
In schools there is a different issue: Megalomaniac authority issue.
A teacher is a "authority figure". Are you suppose to question it? No. What happens? Said authority figure forgets what the actual authority consists of, do something stupid, and at some point somebody reacts and a external group gets involved. The school by default usually assumes the teacher is right, and starts doing what would be considered blackmail in the civilized part of society. So the student either budges, and nobody will know of the case, of the student object, most likely ending up with a uproar in the media because the Teacher overstepped its authority and the blackmail.
We have cases like this in Norway too, but we don't have a that willing media. So it never blows out to be a external case, unless its some prestigious school with a good history. That or its somebody who knows somebody who happens to have some words in with a news paper.
What is allowed or not at school is irrelevant if the problem is that the authority figures exert authority they don't have.
____________
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 06:23 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 18:23, 07 Feb 2013.
|
Quote:
"Liberals" are per definition cancer of society, because no sane citizen is a "liberal". People identifying as such should be locked away in a mental asylum, because of what the group is and stands for.
Funny, an islamist actually told me that once. He even cited an American author who had written an essay about it.
What you say might apply to American politics but in Europe, liberal refers to the ideology of liberalism and conservative refers to the ideology of conservatism (which is a pretty free-spirited movement if you ask me). In the US, this doesn't apply because of your isolation and the absencse of a parliamentary political system.
Question: Do you really live in Norway? I have a hard time believing that.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 06:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
but there's no connection between american liberals and the ideology of liberalism!
It depends on which ideology you are referring to. The economic liberalism is one of the US conservators religions (cool stuff - conservatism = liberalism). The political liberalism is a more complex matter. In any case, it's pretty naive to assume that Elodin has even the slightest idea of what these notions actually mean.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 06:40 PM |
|
|
|
Funny how the most important early thinkers of liberalism were brittish/american people like Adam Smith and John Locke, people who strongly influenced the US constitution. And now the people who so strongly worship that constitution bash liberals.
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 06:51 PM |
|
|
|
The Founding Fathers were (at least most of them) people with very progressive thinking for their age, some of them were very highly educated and are rightfully counted among the big names in the Enlightenment era. The liberalism (as pretty much all major Western political philosophies) is an European invention but at that point the US was considered among the most liberal states in the world (yeah, with slaves...). The people who chant the names of the Founding Fathers nowadays are usually exactly the opposite of their alleged idols.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 06:57 PM |
|
|
|
I think that many of their ideas are very progressive even by modern standards.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 07:10 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 19:11, 07 Feb 2013.
|
Quote:
Funny how the most important early thinkers of liberalism were brittish/american people like Adam Smith and John Locke, people who strongly influenced the US constitution. And now the people who so strongly worship that constitution bash liberals.
Yes, and unlike today's politicians they tend to disregard religion too. They've seen it for what it really is. Actually one of the greatest religion criticism I ever read is by one of them: Thomas Paine's Age of Reason.
Today all politicians suck up to religion, it's part of the game now to get the vote of masses.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 07:14 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 19:15, 07 Feb 2013.
|
|
Modern democracy does have its flaws...
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 07:29 PM |
|
|
Oh god, Xerox failed to read the post. Give him a cookie.
____________
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted February 07, 2013 07:45 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The Founding Fathers were (at least most of them) people with very progressive thinking for their age, some of them were very highly educated and are rightfully counted among the big names in the Enlightenment era. The liberalism (as pretty much all major Western political philosophies) is an European invention but at that point the US was considered among the most liberal states in the world (yeah, with slaves...). The people who chant the names of the Founding Fathers nowadays are usually exactly the opposite of their alleged idols.
It depends in what regard. Almost all of them were in agreement that flexible/"creative" interpretations of a document whose function was to serve as a doorstopper for bad or even tyrannical policy was very dangerous. That's why they designed a system where you would need a strong majority to hold a convention to make constitutional changes. Unfortunately, this didn't fully succeed. The Courts perform linguistic gymnastics to slip around the issue and the small majority is able to get its way. You can tell issues are sidestepped because the 2nd amendment - as irritably vague as it is - yet remains unchanged for almost 250 years. It gives me the notion that a full reset of government might be best in the long-term (short of a thermonuclear holocaust, that's probably not going to happen).
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
| |
|
|
