Racoon Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 heres a Social Problem that seems to be getting pervasive. This came to my attention from Eugene, Oregon; traditionally democratic Hippies :D The Crux of the Argument is: Do schools have the right to expell students who E-Mail Hateful, Racist, or Threatening remarks to other students when it occurs OUTSIDE of school property and not from school computers??? The Law seems to be a little Murky.Schools suggest they can and should to prevent violence from occuring.Some Lawyers say that infringes on 1st Ammendment rights of Free Speech! Still up in the air ;) :eek: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 no way, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Murky indeed. I wonder how they justify expelling students if these acts have nothing to do with school activities. But I can see the school's point though, that they want to set an example. It is however slightly out of their jurisdiction, so to speak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffy Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 How would you define Online Bullying, Racoon? Does the First Amendment protect any statements you might make? The question is relevant to schools because it is important to understand that the Constitution *only* restricts the actions of government, and the public schools are a part of the government (although some strict constructionists do not believe that the Constitutional restrictions hold for states except in cases that impinge upon interstate commerce!). Independent groups are free to restrict speech for any reason on their own property. Disregarding the legal issues, do you think its a good idea from a moral or karma standpoint to simply say anything to anyone that you want to? Sometimes it looks like I'm on a ship of fools, :eek:Buffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racoon Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 How would you define Online Bullying, Racoon? Does the First Amendment protect any statements you might make? According to the News Report,Students made/have made threatening and/or Racial remarks to other fellow students.And it happens not unfrequently.As school bullying usually does at that age... and now with students almost all online at times... The school is trying to defend its position of saying yes "for the safety of the students and to maintain a healthy environment"And they have suspended and expelled students already 1st Ammendment lawyers are saying "No, unless the aggressor actually follows through with assault" and "Free speech can be anything including Racist/sexist/threatening remarks so long as its not being said on school grounds" Thus the Quandry???... The law as "they" put it was "Murky" The people in Eugene are notoriously liberal. :eek: and perhaps it might not have raised the same Ire as it might have in less tolerant communities. Should Schools have the right? under those circumstances? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racoon Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Disregarding the legal issues, do you think its a good idea from a moral or karma standpoint to simply say anything to anyone that you want to? There are Morals to consider when talking to people.anything to anyone is pretty darn vague. :eek: ;) I can't be responsible for someone elses interpretations or "reactions" to what "I" say and vice versa I am pretty thick skinned though, so thats just me :D some people are so easily offended at some things that to me it doesn't really matter.Unless its a Libel case :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
learnin to learn Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 I dont think that the kids should get suspendend or expelled just becuase they were not at school or at a school event when they send the emails.But, An counseloradmistrator should get involved in some form. Like having the school counselor talk to the child who sent the email. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Why should this be treated any differently than any other form of hateful communication off school grounds? If Jim-Bob calls Leroy a derogatory name in the Quickie Mart, should the school expel him? If Tonya sends Blaine a certified letter calling him a homo, should she be expelled? In what way should the online component be treated any differently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrmdave Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 I don't see this as a free speech issue - threatening remarks are illegal, to a degree. Free speech isn't absolute. However, as much as schools think that they have complete juristiction over a child's life, they do not. They only have the authority to deal with problems that occur in school. They do have a responsibility to deal with known problems, however - they should report them to the proper authorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 I don't see this as a free speech issue - threatening remarks are illegal, to a degree. Free speech isn't absolute. However, as much as schools think that they have complete juristiction over a child's life, they do not. ...I don't think this is a "liberal" versus "conservative" issue either, as something similar came up in a conservative Texas town recently. Actually, all towns in Texas are conservative except Austin, which is the state capitol. I'm wondering if it isn't a political move by members of the school board or local dept of educ. "Look at me! I'm tough on crime! When I'm up for election as Judge, remember all the 5th graders I sent to reform school for calling their schoolmates buegers (which is a hateful racist term in 14th Century French literature)." It may also be an attempt to forestall litigation. A lot of this is happening. Some kid gets socially bruised or abused and the parents sue the school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Schools and society already extend an envelope of safety far bigger than the school grounds. They provide bussing where bus stops and busses are treated as school property. They provide crossing guards to insure safety for from traffic. These guards are also custodians of insuring that kids stay within rules as outlines by the schools (waiting to cross, etc). Traffic laws are built around busses having right of way with traffic yeilding and stopping when the lights are on. Speed limits are adjusted in school zones during school hours. Drug laws are tougher in school zones in some states. And sex offenders may not live near school grounds in some states. All of these are protections that are essentially extensions of the school as defined by law in the name of safety for kids. Schools also take social issues seriously. If a student is being threatened by another outside of school, that certainly effects the dynamics inside of school. So threats of any type between pupils of the same school are taken seriously by the school in the name of keeping an environment where people do not feel threatened. Threats that are heresay are tough to take acion on, but good administators will lay down the law short of punishment to help keep the peace. Documented threats are appropriatly dealt with by any good school. You cannot have students fearful of attending school. It all comes down to shame. It often seems nobody is ashamed of anything anymore. One student is a punk who is emailing threats to another. Instead of his parents being ashamed of that behavior, and correcting that behavior in partnership with the school, they DEFEND it by sying that the school has no business getting involved! Like those creeps in CA who's kid was fighting with the Taliban. "Oh, we just are so happy that he is expressing himself." Shame for acting shamefully is missing from society. This should be a non-issue. I would kick a lawyer's *** if he came to my house and offered to defend my kid from suspension after said child had been caught threatening someone and then got punished for it. You don't learn good and bad by justifying every damn reprehensible action that somebody doesn't have the impulse control to prevent themselves from doing as excercising "freedom". Uh... I feel fine. Much better now. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Nobody is ashamed of anything anymore.Careful with the statements framed in the absolute JunMod... :D Some are... Personally, I'm ashamed of humanity as a whole, but since I'm included within that group it's causing me some dissonance. :eek2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 ...It all comes down to shame. Some aren't ashamed of anything anymore. ...Rat on! Rat on! Tell it like it is! I'm with Big Dog! Any "kid" under a certain age [you pick it] who engages in anti-social behaviour--the kid AND the parents should stand before a judge and be sentenced to serve some public activity. Parents should be held at least partially accountable for the snot-slinging of their precious widdle darlings!! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Careful with the statements framed in the absolute JunMod... :naughty: Some are... Personally, I'm ashamed of humanity as a whole, but since I'm included within that group it's causing me some dissonance. ;)Point taken. It slipped past me. I have edited the post. Thanks Editor Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Lol... just couldn't pass up the rare opportunity to give you a hard time for one of your posts. :naughty: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Rat on! Rat on! Tell it like it is! I'm with Big Dog! Any "kid" under a certain age [you pick it] who engages in anti-social behaviour--the kid AND the parents should stand before a judge and be sentenced to serve some public activity. Parents should be held at least partially accountable for the snot-slinging of their precious widdle darlings!! :naughty:As one who has stood before a judge in such a situation, and still pays with both time and money for the ruling from the bench, I can attest to the success of such a system. And although I continue to be essentially penalized for an action in which I took no part, and it would seem wholly unfair the level to which I have personally paid and suffered, I am content that I made the right decisions, and it is doing the most good for my kids in the long run to see the example I am setting than to see someone taking any available means to duck from legal obligations. I was fortunate to have an excellent and creative magistrate presiding over the case. An example of her rulings includes a child who was chronically truant. After mother and daughter appeared before the judge several times over a couple of years the judge sentenced the mother of the child to attend school with her daughter until she could demonstrate perfect attendance for a given period. After 3 days the daughter had no more issues with attending school. Seems that parenting suddenly became a priority for mom. I hope to discuss such things as jurist prudence and mandatory sentencing in another thread someday. But I just don't have the energy to follow that too right now. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Hmm... Anonymity+Audience=? Goes to lack of accountability. On the other hand, I don't want to make forum trolls felons, or at least most of them. TFS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.