NationStates Jolt Archive

(Yes it's from Fox News website, and no I don't want to hear a bunch of well let's face it, political talking points that the Democrats and the left wing spoon fed you people with your oh so hilarious puns like "Faux" news. Try to act adult for once and read the article.)


MESA, Arizona — Officials at an Arizona school suspended a 13-year-old boy for sketching what looked like a gun, saying the action posed a threat to his classmates.

The boy's parents said the drawing was a harmless doodle and school officials overreacted.

"The school made him feel like he committed a crime. They are doing more damage than good," said the boy's mother, Paula Mosteller.

The drawing did not show blood, bullets, injuries or target any human, the parents said. And the East Valley Tribune reported that the boy said he did not intend for the picture to be a threat.

Administrators of Payne Junior High in nearby Chandler suspended the boy on Monday for five days but later reduced it to three days.

The boy's father, Ben Mosteller, said that when he went to the school to discuss his son's punishment, school officials mentioned the seriousness of the issue and talked about the 1999 massacre at Colorado's Columbine High School, where two teenagers shot and killed 12 students, a teacher and themselves. Mosteller said he was offended by the reference.

Chandler district spokesman Terry Locke said the crude sketch was "absolutely considered a threat," and that threatening words or pictures are punishable.

and what did the drawing looks like?

http://www.foxnews.com/images/305453/1_61_082207_gun_sketch.jpg

Linky! (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294145,00.html)

Yes, apparently school officials are now going overboard with the Zero Tolerance crap, by suspending children who *gasp* draw (badly done) pictures of guns! Oh no, not that, anything but that! Jeez, is it me are are people just getting stupider everyday? This is also why if I ever have children (yea when Hell freezes over), they will not go to a public school, they will go to a private school. I don't care if it does cost extra, I'm not exposing my children to this kind of stupidity that school administration apparently display on a daily basis.

It looks like a sideways skyscraper.

It looks like a sideways skyscraper.

Yeah if you tilt your head to the left, it looks like a skyscraper with an airplane sticking out of it.

Obviously the kid is a terrorist!

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

Kids doodle all the time, gods that's how I spent most of my school years.

(Yes it's from Fox News website, and no I don't want to hear a bunch of well let's face it, political talking points that the Democrats and the left wing spoon fed you people with your oh so hilarious puns like "Faux" news. Try to act adult for once and read the article.)



and what did the drawing looks like?

http://www.foxnews.com/images/305453/1_61_082207_gun_sketch.jpg

Linky! (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294145,00.html)

Yes, apparently school officials are now going overboard with the Zero Tolerance crap, by suspending children who *gasp* draw (badly done) pictures of guns! Oh no, not that, anything but that! Jeez, is it me are are people just getting stupider everyday? This is also why if I ever have children (yea when Hell freezes over), they will not go to a public school, they will go to a private school. I don't care if it does cost extra, I'm not exposing my children to this kind of stupidity that school administration apparently display on a daily basis.

Not worth a suspension. I'm not even gonna have kids, though.

Oh, it's definitely a gun, but I should have a thought that a 13-year-old would have had better artistic skills by that age. The school is obviously failing it's pupils with regards to art lessons.

I understand the general reason behind the suspension of the kid, but I don't think the Principal of that school does. You know if some kids starts frequently writing about killing theirself or others or other similar acts then you don't just ignore it as some sort of 'phase'. But equally you don't just suspend the kid without resorting to any other actions.

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

Thank god kids never play Cowboys and Indians, Cops and Robbers, or as soldiers. Too many guns involved there :rolleyes:

Kids doodle all the time, gods that's how I spent most of my school years.

true, but i think that if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags

i don't necessarily think the kid should have been suspended, but i do definitely think that he should be evaluated by a counselor

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

Oh please, it's a 13 year old kid drawing random things. I doodled all the time when I was his age. Now if he starts communicating threats, then I would be worried, but so far we haven't heard that he has communicated threats to anyone else in the school.

Thank god kids never play Cowboys and Indians, Cops and Robbers, or as soldiers. Too many guns involved there :rolleyes:

there's a large difference between playing games with fake guns and randomly drawing them in a school setting

Oh please, it's a 13 year old kid drawing random things. I doodled all the time when I was his age. Now if he starts communicating threats, then I would be worried, but so far we haven't heard that he has communicated threats to anyone else in the school.


if you know anything about art at all, you would agree that art is a very influential form of communication

like i said, i'm not necessarily saying he's a terrorist or anything, but i do think that this kind of behavior of randomly drawing dangerous items meant to kill people should at the very least be checked out by a counselor

true, but i think that if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags

Yeah, one time I drew a tank. THATS ALL THAT WAS DRAWN. This clearly raises red flags about my mental health at the time. Obviously I needed Ritalin, therapeutic counseling, and perhaps to be put on the FBI watch list!

there's a large difference between playing games with fake guns and randomly drawing them in a school setting

Where's the large difference? One is playing with fake guns and the other is drawing a fake gun

Yeah, one time I drew a tank. THATS ALL THAT WAS DRAWN. This clearly raises red flags about my mental health at the time. Obviously I needed Ritalin, therapeutic counseling, and perhaps to be put on the FBI watch list!

last i heard, students weren't bringing tanks to class to kill people


don't compare apples to oranges

If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.Are you high?

All little boys draw guns, pretend sticks and shit are guns, pretend to kill each other, play war and whatnot. It's part of being a boy. Granted, where I grew up, drawing guns would prolly have been seen as a bit girlish, but silly prejudice like that has at least eroded a little since then, and my mates' boys, at least, think it's perfectly normal to draw stuff. And they mainly draw guns, aliens killing people and stuff like that - just like every other little boy on the planet with access to paper and crayons.

Where's the large difference?

Drawing a gun is obviously communicating threats of course! Nevermind the fact that it's just the gun by itself, it doesn't show any glory or bloody scene.

true, but i think that if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags

i don't necessarily think the kid should have been suspended, but i do definitely think that he should be evaluated by a counselor

Seeing as I spent most of my english classes drawing guns, swords and cartoon faces, I dont really think its that worrying.

"Oh no teach, you can't give us a test today... I drew myself a gun and I ain't afraid to use it!"

"Ok class... just stay calm and listen to what he says, I don't want anyone getting hurt now..."

:rolleyes:

Where's the large difference? One is playing with fake guns and the other is drawing a fake gun

the difference is atmosphere



there is an atmosphere of levity when you're at home playing cowboys and indians, what have you


but i fail to see that there is a sustainable level of levity within a school setting to make it appropriate for a student to draw a handgun


are you really saying that if a student draws a gun in such a manner as this while in school, you don't think they should AT THE VERY LEAST be seen by a counselor, just in case?

true, but i think that if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags

i don't necessarily think the kid should have been suspended, but i do definitely think that he should be evaluated by a counselorNot really, no. Maybe the kid plays table-top games like warhammer, or plays video games. In which case he's just doodling things from the games he plays.

Even it draws quite a lot of guns it would make a lot more sense to ask questions first, like asking him why he's been drawing so many guns recently. If he gives you a dodgy answer then make him an appointment with the school counsellor, and only suspend him on the advice of the counsellor.

last i heard, students weren't bringing tanks to class to kill people


don't compare apples to oranges

Oh, but children ARE suicide bombers. And that "gun" looks like a skyscraper being hit with a jumbo jet to me. Would you not agree then that there is a credible terrorist threat presented here?

true, but i think that if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags

i don't necessarily think the kid should have been suspended, but i do definitely think that he should be evaluated by a counselor

Kids draw things all the time. Guns, knives, various other weapons, and even fluffy bunnies. Why does it matter if he drew a gun? Does it automatically mean that he wishes to use one against his classmates? OF course not. Does it even mean he is more likely to do that? Absolutely not.

In my school, a kid made his project for a tech class a 3d model of a gun. Is he violent? Is he going to go on a rampage? I doubt it.

if you know anything about art at all, you would agree that art is a very influential form of communication

like i said, i'm not necessarily saying he's a terrorist or anything, but i do think that this kind of behavior of randomly drawing dangerous items meant to kill people should at the very least be checked out by a counselor

I used to draw guns and things like that when I was his age, was I trying to communicate a threat? No, I was just fascinated with guns, and I liked how they work, how the rounds work, how everything works with firearms.

That was back when I was 13, I now have .22 semi automatic (home protection) and a handgun (with CCW) for protection away from home. I treat my guns like the potentially dangerous tools that they are, so do I sound like someone that needs to be checked out by a counselor?

the difference is atmosphere



there is an atmosphere of levity when you're at home playing cowboys and indians, what have you


but i fail to see that there is a sustainable level of levity within a school setting to make it appropriate for a student to draw a handgun

I think you're just an idiot who doesn't know anything about children, psychology, or education.

Seeing as I spent most of my english classes drawing guns, swords and cartoon faces, I dont really think its that worrying.

maybe, maybe not


i'm just saying it's not worth the risk of just simply shrugging one's shoulders over such a drawing and thinking 'boys will be boys'


things were different when you and i were in school, obviously in light of relatively recent activities involving guns on school property, there is a new culture among students determing that gun violence has now become an acceptable action to engage in

this isn't the case for a majority of students, but the percentage seems to be increasing as of late

and with such in mind, i don't think it's asking too much for school administrators to investigate a kid who randomly drew nothing but a gun one day

the difference is atmosphere



there is an atmosphere of levity when you're at home playing cowboys and indians, what have you


but i fail to see that there is a sustainable level of levity within a school setting to make it appropriate for a student to draw a handgun


are you really saying that if a student draws a gun in such a manner as this while in school, you don't think they should AT THE VERY LEAST be seen by a counselor, just in case?

No, because who is the drawling threating? How is a drawing of a gun threatening? Keep in mind that it's just the gun, there's no people in the drawing getting shot, there's no glory or bloody scene, it's just a gun. What is threating about the drawing?

the difference is atmosphere



there is an atmosphere of levity when you're at home playing cowboys and indians, what have you


but i fail to see that there is a sustainable level of levity within a school setting to make it appropriate for a student to draw a handgun


are you really saying that if a student draws a gun in such a manner as this while in school, you don't think they should AT THE VERY LEAST be seen by a counselor, just in case?

As a child I drew plenty of guns and tanks and bombs, etc. Surely living in Northern Ireland I was a prime target for investigation after that.

No I definitely don't think they should see a counsellor. I've seen a few myself and they aren't as effective as you think in either case.

and with such in mind, i don't think it's asking too much for school administrators to investigate a kid who randomly drew nothing but a gun one day

You think that a child sent to counselling won't be picked on by their peers?

maybe, maybe not


i'm just saying it's not worth the risk of just simply shrugging one's shoulders over such a drawing and thinking 'boys will be boys'


things were different when you and i were in school, obviously in light of relatively recent activities involving guns on school property, there is a new culture among students determing that gun violence has now become an acceptable action to engage in

this isn't the case for a majority of students, but the percentage seems to be increasing as of late

and with such in mind, i don't think it's asking too much for school administrators to investigate a kid who randomly drew nothing but a gun one day

From the news article it appears to be just one drawing, of a gun. It's not like he had a collection of these drawings or anything else. What if he drew a sword instead, should he still be sent to the school counselor to be 'checked out'?

the difference is atmosphere

there is an atmosphere of levity when you're at home playing cowboys and indians, what have you

but i fail to see that there is a sustainable level of levity within a school setting to make it appropriate for a student to draw a handgun

are you really saying that if a student draws a gun in such a manner as this while in school, you don't think they should AT THE VERY LEAST be seen by a counselor, just in case?

Have you ever been a kid? Most of my drawings from my elementary school class were of guns, swords, rockets, knives, bombs, explosions, tanks, fighter planes, usually all in the same picture directed at an unlucky stick guy. My classmates drew the same stuff and we used to compare with the teacher judging the best one. Thank God she wasn't weird enough to send us to counseling.

No, because who is the drawling threating? How is a drawing of a gun threatening? Keep in mind that it's just the gun, there's no people in the drawing getting shot, there's no glory or bloody scene, it's just a gun. What is threating about the drawing?

that's why i don't think he should have been suspended


but i do think he should at the very least be checked out by a counselor to determine his mental health, JUST IN CASE


i think it's a small thing to ask in light of what COULD happen if this kind of behavior is ignored and allowed to build up unsupervised until one day, snap

and then everyone is standing around scratching their heads saying "we just never saw it coming"

Have you ever been a kid? Most of my drawings from my elementary school class were of guns, swords, rockets, knives, bombs, explosions, tanks, fighter planes, usually all in the same picture directed at an unlucky stick guy. My classmates drew the same stuff and we used to compare with the teacher judging the best one. Thank God she wasn't weird enough to send us to counseling.

i've already addressed that


things are different now then they were when "we were kids"

see my previous post

Oh, but children ARE suicide bombers. And that "gun" looks like a skyscraper being hit with a jumbo jet to me. Would you not agree then that there is a credible terrorist threat presented here?

that would be for the counselor to decide, not me

No, because who is the drawling threating? How is a drawing of a gun threatening? Keep in mind that it's just the gun, there's no people in the drawing getting shot, there's no glory or bloody scene, it's just a gun. What is threating about the drawing?

isn't it obvious... the picture was 'aimed' at the teacher and other students. very threating indeed.


after all, those paper cuts can get very nasty... and imagine if it got infected... :eek:

i've already addressed that


things are different now then they were when "we were kids"

see my previous post

Depends on where you're from

Not really, no. Maybe the kid plays table-top games like warhammer, or plays video games. In which case he's just doodling things from the games he plays.

THAT is exactly what the counselor would probably rule it as then


i'm not saying that by sending him to a counselor we're sending him to prison


the counselor would evaluate his mental health, and if it really was just a harmless drawing, then that's it, nothing more would be done

how can you be against that?

Depends on where you're from

gun violence affects us all (this includes POTENTIAL), ESPECIALLY in the united states


remember, it only takes ONE person to loose control of themselves and start killing people


just one

i've already addressed that


things are different now then they were when "we were kids"

see my previous post

As I already posted, a kid at my school made a 3d model of a gun for a tech project this past year. He was never harassed or anything by the school. He was just a normal kid who is somewhat immature and would still make such creations.

THAT is exactly what the counselor would probably rule it as then


i'm not saying that by sending him to a counselor we're sending him to prison


the counselor would evaluate his mental health, and if it really was just a harmless drawing, then that's it, nothing more would be done

how can you be against that?

Why waste the kid's time, the counselor's time, and the taxpayer's money on such a trivial matter? No to mention the fact that every boy of his age will then have to be checked out for the same things.

THAT is exactly what the counselor would probably rule it as then


i'm not saying that by sending him to a counselor we're sending him to prison


the counselor would evaluate his mental health, and if it really was just a harmless drawing, then that's it, nothing more would be done

how can you be against that?

1. That kid will be picked on for being sent to a counsellor
2. There is a big risk of counsellors falsely 'diagnosing' the kid
3. There's a slippery slope feel to all of this

gun violence affects us all (this includes POTENTIAL), ESPECIALLY in the united states


remember, it only takes ONE person to loose control of themselves and start killing people


just one

Accompanied by a chain reaction that led up to the school shooting.

isn't it obvious... the picture was 'aimed' at the teacher and other students. very threating indeed.


after all, those paper cuts can get very nasty... and imagine if it got infected... :eek:


so i guess EVERY painting in history clearly has no more meaning behind it than the very paper it's painted upon?


don't be absurd


there are always meanings behind what we paint, it's an expression of something close to us

whether it was a harmless doodle or something more would be decided by the counselor

nobody's hurt or insulted, everyone wins

gun violence affects us all (this includes POTENTIAL), ESPECIALLY in the united states


remember, it only takes ONE person to loose control of themselves and start killing people


just one

You missed my point. You said things are different than when "we were kids". Depends where you spent your childhood

i've already addressed that


things are different now then they were when "we were kids"

see my previous post

Let's see:

maybe, maybe not


i'm just saying it's not worth the risk of just simply shrugging one's shoulders over such a drawing and thinking 'boys will be boys'


things were different when you and i were in school, obviously in light of relatively recent activities involving guns on school property, there is a new culture among students determing that gun violence has now become an acceptable action to engage in

this isn't the case for a majority of students, but the percentage seems to be increasing as of late

and with such in mind, i don't think it's asking too much for school administrators to investigate a kid who randomly drew nothing but a gun one day

You're kidding. No, really, you have to be fucking kidding me here. "Gun violence more acceptable"? Do you mean students saw school shootings and took, from that, that gun violence is more acceptable? Give me a fucking break. You've got to have better reasons than that to suggest a kid that drew a gun be sent to the counselor for a personality examination.

You missed my point. You said things are different than when "we were kids". Depends where you spent your childhood

not really


the culture of society is ever evolving, and is dangerously influential


do not think that an overall increase in gun violence within our general society can not affect people in even the smallest, safest of towns

nobody's hurt or insulted, everyone wins

The kid isn't hurt or insulted? And what about the 99.9999% of the other boys, who are also drawing guns? Should they also go to the counselor too?

Let's see:



You're kidding. No, really, you have to be fucking kidding me here. "Gun violence more acceptable"? Do you mean students saw school shootings and took, from that, that gun violence is more acceptable? Give me a fucking break. You've got to have better reasons than that to suggest a kid that drew a gun be sent to the counselor for a personality examination.


so are you denying the fact that gun violence is up, especially youth related?

not really


the culture of society is ever evolving, and is dangerously influential


do not think that an overall increase in gun violence within our general society can not affect people in even the smallest, safest of towns

You really don't get it. It's not an important point so i'll skip past it

not really


the culture of society is ever evolving, and is dangerously influential


do not think that an overall increase in gun violence within our general society can not affect people in even the smallest, safest of towns

A drawing of a gun is not in any way related to a tendency towards gun violence. If it were, every man would be a threat.

so are you denying the fact that gun violence is up, especially youth related?

No, I'm denying your very spurious correlation between a child drawing a gun and the possibility of that child actually engaging in gun violence. A rise in gun violence is no reason to screen every child that draws a gun for possible violent tendencies.

A drawing of a gun is not in any way related to a tendency towards gun violence. If it were, every man would be a threat.

What did I tell you about attending the radical feminist group? :p

Had to be done, back on topic.

so i guess EVERY painting in history clearly has no more meaning behind it than the very paper it's painted upon?of course... after all, all paintings/drawings of single weapons are hanging there on the wall 'Aimed' (read Pointing at, as in threatening) at the artists' rivals or if the artist is suicidal, it's pointing out at him/her. Art is a very vicious business you know. :p

hint. read my first post in this thread. :p

Why waste the kid's time, the counselor's time, and the taxpayer's money on such a trivial matter? No to mention the fact that every boy of his age will then have to be checked out for the same things.


i like how everything boils down to money


maybe it is a harmless painting, maybe it's not


the point is that we will really never know unless it's evaluated by a specialist, or until it's too late


just because YOU might have doodled pictures of guns before, doesn't mean that EVERYONE who does so is in their right mind

there are those who do seemingly normal things, but for completely different, and sometimes dangerous reasons


all that i'm advocating is protecting our kids by simply evaluating those that make doodles of dangerous weapons

that's it, that's my only point, and i am shocked how so many of you object to it like i'm trying to put the kid away for life

no one here has even THOUGHT that maybe, JUST MAYBE if such an initiative was in place, we would have less gun violence in our schools, it would be one less kid to burry tomorrow

but no, heaven forbid, think of the taxes

No, I'm denying your very spurious correlation between a child drawing a gun and the possibility of that child actually engaging in gun violence. A rise in gun violence is no reason to screen every child that draws a gun for possible violent tendencies.

then what's your solution to gun violence within America's schools?

i like how everything boils down to money


maybe it is a harmless painting, maybe it's not


the point is that we wil really never know


just because YOU might have doodled pictures of guns before, doesn't mean that EVERYONE who does so is in their right mind

there are those who do seemingly normal things, but for completely different, and sometimes dangerous reasons


all that i'm advocating is protecting our kids by simply evaluating those that make doodles of dangerous weapons

that's it, that's my only point, and i am shocked how so many of you object to it like i'm trying to put the kid away for life

no one here has even THOUGHT that maybe, JUST MAYBE if such an initiative was in place, we would have less gun violence in our schools, it would be one less kid to burry tomorrow

but no, heaven forbid, think of the taxes

Ok, ignoring the financial costs, what about the fact that almost every boy draws dangerous weapons? We can't check out almost every boy with the counselor. It is just not feasible

then what's your solution to gun violence within America's schools?

1) Stop naming the people who do this.
2) Stop airing their video ramblings.
3) Lock up the parents of kids who do this for life.


That's a start.

but no, heaven forbid, think of the taxes

I've given my reasons which had nothing to do with money. Nice of you to skip past them

I've given my reasons which had nothing to do with money. Nice of you to skip past them

i'm sorry, i'm doing the best i can replying to everyone's post, please be patient i will get to yours shortly

then what's your solution to gun violence within America's schools?

I'm no expert, but I think that there are probably solutions that don't involve suspending every kid who draws a picture of a gun (which is to say every male child).

If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

Why wouldn't he? There's a lot of time to kill in school. I drew all sorts of guns, knives, axes and various other weapons. Only I included the people on the bad side of the weapons. I didn't even THINK about connecting this somehow with actual people... it's just that: scribbling.

Ok, ignoring the financial costs, what about the fact that almost every boy draws dangerous weapons? We can't check out almost every boy with the counselor. It is just not feasible

then it should be done on a case by case situation then


i do agree that the school went overboard in suspending the child


all i'm saying is that in place of suspending students, they should be evaluated by a counselor, and then decide what actions would be appropriate, if any

then what's your solution to gun violence within America's schools?

Wait, what? Why are you still trying to tie this kid drawing a gun to gun violence? Really, what makes you associate drawing a gun to a propensity for gun violence?

Why wouldn't he? There's a lot of time to kill in school. I drew all sorts of guns, knives, axes and various other weapons. Only I included the people on the bad side of the weapons. I didn't even THINK about connecting this somehow with actual people... it's just that: scribbling.

to you it may be, but to someone else, it may not be


all i'm saying is that in light of the recent increase in gun violence within public schools, NOTHING is harmed by at least sending the kid to a counselor

Why wouldn't he? There's a lot of time to kill in school. I drew all sorts of guns, knives, axes and various other weapons. Only I included the people on the bad side of the weapons. I didn't even THINK about connecting this somehow with actual people... it's just that: scribbling.

Hehe I like it

then it should be done on a case by case situation then


i do agree that the school went overboard in suspending the child


Who decides which cases are appropriate for a counsellors attention?

then it should be done on a case by case situation then


i do agree that the school went overboard in suspending the child


all i'm saying is that in place of suspending students, they should be evaluated by a counselor, and then decide what actions would be appropriate, if any

But if this case warrants a counselor, doesn't every single case of a child drawing a weapon warrant an appointment with a counselor?

One World Alliance, you keep saying "Things have changed".

But the reality is quite otherwise. Gun violence is less than it was when I was in school in the 1970's and '80's. Acceptable behaviour codes have been tightened nationwide. Guns are now less available then when I was a student.

We have had a few nasty, tragic incidents, yes. But the real problem - is people like you.

You (and the idiots at this school) have become so oversensitized to the possibility of violence that you see it everywhere, in everything. You impose rules designed to ensure that there is no responsibility in enforcement - then wonder why kids see "responsibility" as a sick joke.

No, I guess things have changed. We're not allowing kids to be kids anymore.

my favorite doodle in HS used to be someone getting hung from a tree

Wait, what? Why are you still trying to tie this kid drawing a gun to gun violence? Really, what makes you associate drawing a gun to a propensity for gun violence?


well, obviously if someone is drawing a gun they like guns


and if they like guns..............


the point is that it could be absolutely nothing, a completely harmless doodle


but because NONE OF YOU have taken into consideration the kid's mental health, and the article didn't bother to offer it, everyone just thinks "well hell, i did that when i was a kid and i didn't shoot anybody"

but that's irresponsible to assume that just because YOU didn't shoot anybody, no one else who doodles gun will either

it's one of the most illogical things i've ever heard really


no one has really given a good reason as to why this kid should not have been to a counselor

here's the top reasons so far:

1. I doodled when i was a kid! -Well good for you
2. It would cost too much. -I'm sure the small cost that taxpayers would incure for securing our kids is, well, irrelevant
3. It would be impossible, there's too many of them. -Not really. Anyone who gets into trouble is usually sent to see some other higher authority before some kind of punishment is sentenced, so really, it would be the same.
4. It's a slippery slope. -You're right, just ask the Columbine victims, or the Virginia Tech victims, the list goes on and on. It can very easily start as just a seemingly harmless doodle, but it ends up deadly.

AND, no one has taken into account that perhaps such "doodles" were banned from the said school, and that the kid defied the school policy by drawing a gun anyways.

And if he defied the school on that front, then what else?

One World Alliance, you keep saying "Things have changed".

But the reality is quite otherwise. Gun violence is less than it was when I was in school in the 1970's and '80's. Acceptable behaviour codes have been tightened nationwide. Guns are now less available then when I was a student.

We have had a few nasty, tragic incidents, yes. But the real problem - is people like you.

You (and the idiots at this school) have become so oversensitized to the possibility of violence that you see it everywhere, in everything. You impose rules designed to ensure that there is no responsibility in enforcement - then wonder why kids see "responsibility" as a sick joke.

No, I guess things have changed. We're not allowing kids to be kids anymore.


actually, it's idiots like you who don't have their facts straight


gun violence has INCREASED, especially YOUTH RELATED


Click Here (http://www.neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/statistics.htm)

Who decides which cases are appropriate for a counsellors attention?

Another counsellor :-)

drawing a gun is nothing.

Yes, the kids mental state is important and if he is exhibiting potentially dangerous behavior (drawing a gun is far from it) then send him to a counselor.

I figure that the way journalists like to blow things out of proportion that if they did catch wind of any kind of bad behavior it would have been reported on.

But if this case warrants a counselor, doesn't every single case of a child drawing a weapon warrant an appointment with a counselor?

in my opinion, yes


but to appease tax obsessed citizens, it probably won't be


but the school administration would determine was case should involve a counselor


what i'm saying is that BEFORE the school just jumps the gun and suspends a kid (no pun intended) then the kid should be sent to a counselor first

and if the counselor deems it's just a harmless doodle, then back to class

well, obviously if someone is drawing a gun they like guns


and if they like guns..............


the point is that it could be absolutely nothing, a completely harmless doodle


but because NONE OF YOU have taken into consideration the kid's mental health, and the article didn't bother to offer it, everyone just thinks "well hell, i did that when i was a kid and i didn't shoot anybody"

but that's irresponsible to assume that just because YOU didn't shoot anybody, no one else who doodles gun will either

it's one of the most illogical things i've ever heard really


no one has really given a good reason as to why this kid should not have been to a counselor

here's the top reasons so far:

1. I doodled when i was a kid! -Well good for you
2. It would cost too much. -I'm sure the small cost that taxpayers would incure for securing our kids is, well, irrelevant
3. It would be impossible, there's too many of them. -Not really. Anyone who gets into trouble is usually sent to see some other higher authority before some kind of punishment is sentenced, so really, it would be the same.
4. It's a slippery slope. -You're right, just ask the Columbine victims, or the Virginia Tech victims, the list goes on and on. It can very easily start as just a seemingly harmless doodle, but it ends up deadly.

AND, no one has taken into account that perhaps such "doodles" were banned from the said school, and that the kid defied the school policy by drawing a gun anyways.

And if he defied the school on that front, then what else?

Then he has my unconditional support. Kids SHOULD defy authority. It's part of growing up, and realising that most authority is a sham and a lie.

As for the counsellor - oh, come off it! Those know-nothing idiots aren't psychologists or psychiatrists, they're mostly just teachers who took a psych minor at college. If the kid's really disturbed, it would have come out in behaviour and grades - not a doodle, and he'd have been seeing the counsellor regularly.

The reality is, unless there was a LOT more going on here, the entire thing should have been handled by the teacher saying "This is maths, not art class. Do your drawings on your own time."

well, obviously if someone is drawing a gun they like guns

and if they like guns..............

Then they'll get a gun legally, use it to hunt, and be responsible gun owners? C'mon, liking guns doesn't automatically equal gun violence and you know it


the point is that it could be absolutely nothing, a completely harmless doodle

but because NONE OF YOU have taken into consideration the kid's mental health, and the article didn't bother to offer it, everyone just thinks "well hell, i did that when i was a kid and i didn't shoot anybody"

but that's irresponsible to assume that just because YOU didn't shoot anybody, no one else who doodles gun will either

it's one of the most illogical things i've ever heard really
"We need to send every kid that draws guns to a counselor because gun violence is on the rise" is pretty damn illogical too, ya know. You need some kind of connection between gun violence and drawing guns, or at the very least a connection between drawing a gun and mental instability requiring counseling, but you haven't shown either of those. Right now, you sound more paranoid about guns than logical.


no one has really given a good reason as to why this kid should not have been to a counselor

here's the top reasons so far:

1. I doodled when i was a kid! -Well good for you
2. It would cost too much. -I'm sure the small cost that taxpayers would incure for securing our kids is, well, irrelevant
3. It would be impossible, there's too many of them. -Not really. Anyone who gets into trouble is usually sent to see some other higher authority before some kind of punishment is sentenced, so really, it would be the same.
4. It's a slippery slope. -You're right, just ask the Columbine victims, or the Virginia Tech victims, the list goes on and on. It can very easily start as just a seemingly harmless doodle, but it ends up deadly.
We've given reasons just as well supported as yours, which is to say they're not well supported at all. You want to raise the debate to be factual, start with your own suggestion and show some proof that a child that draws a gun is more prone to gun violence, and maybe people will take you a bit more seriously.

AND, no one has taken into account that perhaps such "doodles" were banned from the said school, and that the kid defied the school policy by drawing a gun anyways.

And if he defied the school on that front, then what else?
You love the slippery slope, dontcha? "He broke a rule about drawing, next he'll be violent, you just see!". Come one, I'm asking you here to show that a drawing is any indication of a child's propensity to gun violence. You seem so sure that you have to have something to back that up, right? So come on, show us that drawings can be linked to gun violence.

Then he has my unconditional support. Kids SHOULD defy authority. It's part of growing up, and realising that most authority is a sham and a lie.

As for the counsellor - oh, come off it! Those know-nothing idiots aren't psychologists or psychiatrists, they're mostly just teachers who took a psych minor at college. If the kid's really disturbed, it would have come out in behaviour and grades - not a doodle, and he'd have been seeing the counsellor regularly.

The reality is, unless there was a LOT more going on here, the entire thing should have been handled by the teacher saying "This is maths, not art class. Do your drawings on your own time."


i agree, defying authority is a part of growing up

but not in this particular context. there is a limit to that defiance, and that limit is being overstepped more and more everyday, and innocent students and faculty have died as of such

so no, when it comes to the kids precious right of acting up, i don't believe that should take precedent over people's LIVES

and i'm not talking about the school counselors as they are now, i'm talking about professional ones coming in from the outside

and uh, a child's doodles are PART of their behavior, so yes, it WOULD come out in their behavior, IE: randomly drawing dangerous weapons

and again, as i've stated before, it very may well be all harmless, but the flip side is true too, it may be very dangerous

and i see nothing wrong with school officials taking it upon themselves to find out if it's dangerous or harmless, because the school officials have an OBLIGATION to their students and their employees to KEEP THEM SAFE, and I think sending little timmy to see a counselor because of a weapon that he drew is a small thing to ask to ensure their safety

actually, it's idiots like you who don't have their facts straight


gun violence has INCREASED, especially YOUTH RELATED


Click Here (http://www.neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/statistics.htm)

You can't even get your data straight. Your link says nothing of the kind. In fact, the only comparative information it gives is that the number of students expelled for gun possession has DECLINED.

It's a nice bit of propaganda, but it doesn't say what you think it does. Try again.

then it should be done on a case by case situation then


i do agree that the school went overboard in suspending the child


all i'm saying is that in place of suspending students, they should be evaluated by a counselor, and then decide what actions would be appropriate, if any

Any action of any sort over any kid who draws images or guns, tanks or anything like that is a totally unnecessary. Aren't you guys allowed to own guns for simply being American?

So drawing a gun is a sign of danger, but going and buying an M-16 for "home defense" and teaching that same kid how to handle it makes total sense? This really does seem to be a case of 2 + 2 = 5.

You can't even get your data straight. Your link says nothing of the kind. In fact, the only comparative information it gives is that the number of students expelled for gun possession has DECLINED.

It's a nice bit of propaganda, but it doesn't say what you think it does. Try again.


okay, expulsion is not correlative to violence


there is a difference


but the point of the data is to show that gun problem is indeed a MAJOR problem in our schools

to deny that is to deny reality, and is frankly insulting to all those who DIED at the hands of fellow classmates who brought a gun to class


and you know, it's actually kinda funny

cause you state that it's idiots like me who overreact to students these days, but then you also say that gun crime has decreased


sooooooooooo, if we were to take you at face value, apparently, my overreacting kind are doing something right in reducing gun crime


either way, i'm right

but because NONE OF YOU have taken into consideration the kid's mental health, and the article didn't bother to offer it, everyone just thinks "well hell, i did that when i was a kid and i didn't shoot anybody"

Instead of speculating, do what I do, more versions of the story (http://www.google.com/search?q=suspended+gun+drawing&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a) if you need more information or hate the source.

Unless you can make some correlation between drawing a gun and gun violence other than they both involve guns suspending the kid is way too much.

If in the linked articles you can find some other reasons that the kid was suspended then you have a case. As presented, it's ridiculously paranoid.

There are thousands of things between drawing a gun and shooting up his classmates. You need to find those and point them out, not speculate on them.

I'd do this for you but I don't have time.

Then he has my unconditional support. Kids SHOULD defy authority. It's part of growing up, and realising that most authority is a sham and a lie.

As for the counsellor - oh, come off it! Those know-nothing idiots aren't psychologists or psychiatrists, they're mostly just teachers who took a psych minor at college. If the kid's really disturbed, it would have come out in behaviour and grades - not a doodle, and he'd have been seeing the counsellor regularly.

The reality is, unless there was a LOT more going on here, the entire thing should have been handled by the teacher saying "This is maths, not art class. Do your drawings on your own time."

I'd shake your hand if I could. Kids should be defying authority, as you said. And its up to kids to choose how they defy that authority, and if it means (badly) drawing a gun then so be it. I doodled plenty of images of guns, tanks, planes, burning buildings and whatnot in my notebooks at school and the only reason I did it was becuase I was bored, not disturbed. This is just another example of teachers getting worried by boys do things that boys have being doing forever, basically. If he was drawing flowers, or teddy bears, the teacher wouldn't have cared.

That's probably why the kid did it: boredom in class.

Instead of speculating, do what I do, more versions of the story (http://www.google.com/search?q=suspended+gun+drawing&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a) if you need more information or hate the source.

Unless you can make some correlation between drawing a gun and gun violence other than they both involve guns suspending the kid is way too much.

If in the linked articles you can find some other reasons that the kid was suspended then you have a case. As presented, it's ridiculously paranoid.

There are thousands of things between drawing a gun and shooting up his classmates. You need to find those and point them out, not speculate on them.

I'd do this for you but I don't have time.


Uh, i've made it very clear that I don't think he should have been suspended.

I don't know how much clearer I can make that.

If he was disturbed, people'd know it.

Uh, i've made it very clear that I don't think he should have been suspended.

I don't know how much clearer I can make that.

There's a whole other post there to respond to champ.

I'd shake your hand if I could. Kids should be defying authority for justified reasons, as you said.

I agree in general but i'd add one change to make my feelings more clear

That's probably why the kid did it: boredom in class.

I like how you said PROBABLY


he PROBABLY did it out of boredom


he PROBABLY meant nothing by it


it was PROBABLY just a harmless doodle



that's a lot of PROBABLIES


you see, like i've said before, because there is a chance that it might PROBABLY be something more than PROBABLY NOTHING, i see nothing wrong with having a counselor evaluate him

because you're PROBABLY right, it was PROBABLY nothing


but what happens if your probably came true, and it did turn out being something else?


the school has an obligation to keep its students and staff safe, and if it doesn't accept PROBABLY as a good enough reason to not take action, then so be it

because too many students have been killed or injured because their fellow classmate was overlooked by school officials because every sign that he gave was seen as being PROBABLY normal

Officials at an Arizona school suspended a 13-year-old boy for sketching what looked like a gun, saying the action posed a threat to his classmates.

:confused:

If he was disturbed, people'd know it.

.......................

okay

and perhaps that's what happened, people knew it, and thus suspended him



i like how everyone is assuming that this kid is sane, that he doesn't have any problems


why? because the parents stuck up for him? oh wow, there's a surprise


"There's no way our little johnny could hurt anyone!" Those words have never been uttered before


or how about "We never saw this one coming, he seemed like a normal kid."


NO ONE has even CONSIDERED that maybe there WAS a problem, and the school officials acted to their best discretion


hmmmmmmmmm

:confused:

nowhere in the article does it mention PREVIOUS behavoir of this kid




nowhere


and NO ONE on this forum has even CONSIDERED that



well, except me


way to go everyone for just being fed facts from a news station and not thinking outside of the box

I like how you said PROBABLY


he PROBABLY did it out of boredom


he PROBABLY meant nothing by it


it was PROBABLY just a harmless doodle



that's a lot of PROBABLIES


you see, like i've said before, because there is a chance that it might PROBABLY be something more than PROBABLY NOTHING, i see nothing wrong with having a counselor evaluate him

because you're PROBABLY right, it was PROBABLY nothing


but what happens if your probably came true, and it did turn out being something else?


the school has an obligation to keep its students and staff safe, and if it doesn't accept PROBABLY as a good enough reason to not take action, then so be it

because too many students have been killed or injured because their fellow classmate was overlooked by school officials because every sign that he gave was seen as being PROBABLY normal

I still believe that handing this kid over to a counselor will do more harm then good. He was basically identified as a threat to society.

"why did you do it?"
"Dunno"
"There must have been a reason"
"I just felt like it"

And before you know the counselor is going deep into this kids personal life and analysing everything bad that's ever happened to him.

It wouldn't get anyone anywhere.

And besides, what about artists who used produce paintings about battles in war? Were they disturbed?

NO ONE has even CONSIDERED that maybe there WAS a problem, and the school officials acted to their best discretion


YAY for unfounded speculation

YAY for unfounded speculation

you assume it's unfounded


did you see the kids personal report kept by the school officials?


do you know if this kid IS in fact a trouble kid?


do you know if this kid is the quiet type who sits alone at lunch and at recess and has social issues?

NO?

hmmmmm, now who is engaging in unfounded speculation?

I still believe that handing this kid over to a counselor will do more harm then good. He was basically identified as a threat to society.

"why did you do it?"
"Dunno"
"There must have been a reason"
"I just felt like it"

And before you know the counselor is going deep into this kids personal life and analysing everything bad that's ever happened to him.

It wouldn't get anyone anywhere.

And besides, what about artists who used produce paintings about battles in war? Were they disturbed?


you raise a good point

but any qualified counselor (i'm talking about real professionals, not the school counselors) would be able to know what to look for

it's not like their parents would be interviewing them

I'm using the facts I have from the sources provided. Therefore not unfounded

you are using very limited facts that don't touch upon what i mentioned, about the kid's past


you are just assuming he's a good kid


that is the very definition of unfounded, you don't know, and you have no facts to go with it


UNFOUNDED

hmmmmm, now who is engaging in unfounded speculation?

I'm using the information I have from the sources provided. Therefore not unfounded

What the fuck? Thats all 13 year old boys do; draw guns. Guns, spaceships, monsters, aliens, all sorts of shit like that. Mind you his drawings suck for his age. Nevertheless, I wouldn't have raised an eyebrow if he had an album of guns. They are cool, and relatively easy to draw/make up.

This is so stupid.

you assume it's unfounded


did you see the kids personal report kept by the school officials?


do you know if this kid IS in fact a trouble kid?


do you know if this kid is the quiet type who sits alone at lunch and at recess and has social issues?

NO?

hmmmmm, now who is engaging in unfounded speculation?

Damn, never seen a pot so determined to label a kettle black.

okay, expulsion is not correlative to violence


there is a difference


but the point of the data is to show that gun problem is indeed a MAJOR problem in our schools

to deny that is to deny reality, and is frankly insulting to all those who DIED at the hands of fellow classmates who brought a gun to class

True. It is a problem, and it does need corrective action. But overreaction to minor events wastes resources without creating a curative aspect.


and you know, it's actually kinda funny

cause you state that it's idiots like me who overreact to students these days, but then you also say that gun crime has decreased


sooooooooooo, if we were to take you at face value, apparently, my overreacting kind are doing something right in reducing gun crime


either way, i'm right

Unfortunately, no. If the actions you advise worked, I'd support you; you'd still be over-the-top, but I can easily forgive that in a policy that actually works.

The zero-tolerance and extreme action policies enacted by many school boards (for the best of reasons, I have no doubt) only serve to teach kids that the authorities are stupid and spineless, unwilling to take responsibility even for those things they are, in fact, responsible for. Massive overreaction merely drives home the lesson that, if you have a problem, don't you dare involve the adults in your life.

The reduction in violence in our schools overall is a very pleasant side effect of the reduction in violence currently being experienced by our entire society. Crime has been on a downturn since the early nineties (late eighties in some areas); overall violence is down; gun crime is down. (Needless to say, there are always "problem areas" that go against the trend - I am speaking of nationwide figures.) The reasons for this have been (among others) the rehabilitation and improvement of ghettoes and inner city depressed areas, and more effective and efficient policing methods.

Overreaction helps no one and may harm. A balanced, intelligent approach by the first responder, in this case the classroom teacher, can solve most problems before they ever need to leave the classroom.

True. It is a problem, and it does need corrective action. But overreaction to minor events wastes resources without creating a curative aspect.




Unfortunately, no. If the actions you advise worked, I'd support you; you'd still be over-the-top, but I can easily forgive that in a policy that actually works.

The zero-tolerance and extreme action policies enacted by many school boards (for the best of reasons, I have no doubt) only serve to teach kids that the authorities are stupid and spineless, unwilling to take responsibility even for those things they are, in fact, responsible for. Massive overreaction merely drives home the lesson that, if you have a problem, don't you dare involve the adults in your life.

The reduction in violence in our schools overall is a very pleasant side effect of the reduction in violence currently being experienced by our entire society. Crime has been on a downturn since the early nineties (late eighties in some areas); overall violence is down; gun crime is down. (Needless to say, there are always "problem areas" that go against the trend - I am speaking of nationwide figures.) The reasons for this have been (among others) the rehabilitation and improvement of ghettoes and inner city depressed areas, and more effective and efficient policing methods.

Overreaction helps no one and may harm. A balanced, intelligent approach by the first responder, in this case the classroom teacher, can solve most problems before they ever need to leave the classroom.


Okay, i don't know how much clearer to make my stance


I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED!!!!!!!


i have had that stance in ALL MY POSTS

i'm not advocating his suspension



i'm must simply saying, let a counselor look at him, if he's deemed fine, then send him on his way

no harm done, that's it

no suspension, nothing


everyone's happy, the students and staff will be safer, little timmy isn't suspended, and the school day goes on


BUT

if there IS something wrong with him, then whew, what a relief, we caught one BEFORE he started killing his fellow classmates


i mean, really, how can you object to that?


yes i agree that the school over reacted by suspending him, because, as i've always been saying, I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED

What the fuck? Thats all 13 year old boys do; draw guns. Guns, spaceships, monsters, aliens, all sorts of shit like that. Mind you his drawings suck for his age. Nevertheless, I wouldn't have raised an eyebrow if he had an album of guns. They are cool, and relatively easy to draw/make up.

This is so stupid.

EXACTLY! Boys do draw guns and weapons in their books at school. Its what we did. Not because we wanted to kill, or blow up the school, but because its fun and artistic. go here:

http://www.harrysnews.com/tgMenItsinTheirNature.htm

I once had drawn a picture of B-52 bombers dropping bombs on a burning building in the back of my maths notebook. No one who saw it (the guys who I sat next to, even the teacher on one occasion) cared. And BTW I haven't blown up any buildings lately.

Yeah, one time I drew a tank. THATS ALL THAT WAS DRAWN. This clearly raises red flags about my mental health at the time. Obviously I needed Ritalin, therapeutic counseling, and perhaps to be put on the FBI watch list!

That was probably years before Columbine and 20 other school shootings. Gun and Knife incidents happen monthly in schools - you just dont hear about them because its not "glamorous" enough for the media if no one is killed. Schools have to have "no tolerance" policys - so that its fair to all students... otherwise someone always pulls the racism or sex card and claims discrimination.

Damn, never seen a pot so determined to label a kettle black.

uhm, not really


YOU are the ones saying he's fine



I'M the one saying maybe he is, maybe he isn't, we don't really know because we don't have all the facts



I'M the ONLY ONE who is NOT engaging in unfounded speculation, because i'm the ONLY ONE who is asserting that ALL THE FACTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN investigated

true, but i think that if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags

i don't necessarily think the kid should have been suspended, but i do definitely think that he should be evaluated by a counselor

I dunno...I used to draw guns and daggers and swords ALL the time during school days...I used to actually etch/carve it in the wooden desk in my class...about a while back, I went to a Texas gun range and shot 100 rounds too.

I have never harmed anyone physically and I don't intend to.

I think this is overblown.

I dunno...I used to draw guns and daggers and swords ALL the time during school days...I used to actually etch/carve it in the wooden desk in my class...about a while back, I went to a Texas gun range and shot 100 rounds too.

I have never harmed anyone physically and I don't intend to.

I think this is overblown.

AGAIN


just because YOU didn't harm other people


doesn't mean NO ONE ELSE WILL


that's such a pathetic argument to make


so because you've never killed anyone, are we to assume that no one else will?



please


people are different, and even though they may engage in the same activities, IE drawing guns and swords, etc, it does not mean that it means the same to everyone

to most, it is a harmless activity

to others, it's a dangerous fuel to an evergrowing fire

you are using very limited facts that don't touch upon what i mentioned, about the kid's past


you are just assuming he's a good kid


that is the very definition of unfounded, you don't know, and you have no facts to go with it


UNFOUNDED

Phew thank god you used capital letters or I would have disagreed :rolleyes:

Okay, i don't know how much clearer to make my stance


I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED!!!!!!!


i have had that stance in ALL MY POSTS

i'm not advocating his suspension



i'm must simply saying, let a counselor look at him, if he's deemed fine, then send him on his way

no harm done, that's it

no suspension, nothing


everyone's happy, the students and staff will be safer, little timmy isn't suspended, and the school day goes on


BUT

if there IS something wrong with him, then whew, what a relief, we caught one BEFORE he started killing his fellow classmates


i mean, really, how can you object to that?


yes i agree that the school over reacted by suspending him, because, as i've always been saying, I DON'T THINK HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED

Yes, I got that, and I don't think you're a complete nutbag. I just feel that sending a kid to the counsellor is also something of an overreaction.

And to be fair, your last reply to me did seem to be defending the more extreme policies, at least partially.

nowhere in the article does it mention PREVIOUS behavoir of this kid




nowhere


and NO ONE on this forum has even CONSIDERED that



well, except me


way to go everyone for just being fed facts from a news station and not thinking outside of the box

you assume it's unfounded


did you see the kids personal report kept by the school officials?


do you know if this kid IS in fact a trouble kid?


do you know if this kid is the quiet type who sits alone at lunch and at recess and has social issues?

NO?

hmmmmm, now who is engaging in unfounded speculation?

you are using very limited facts that don't touch upon what i mentioned, about the kid's past


you are just assuming he's a good kid


that is the very definition of unfounded, you don't know, and you have no facts to go with it


UNFOUNDED

uhm, not really


YOU are the ones saying he's fine



I'M the one saying maybe he is, maybe he isn't, we don't really know because we don't have all the facts



I'M the ONLY ONE who is NOT engaging in unfounded speculation, because i'm the ONLY ONE who is asserting that ALL THE FACTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN investigated
For fucks sake, I gave you a fucking link to a search for other articles on the subject, I did the fucking work for you you lazy lazy fucking bastard.

You want to add additional information, look it the fuck up. I already did it for you, all you have to do is click and read.

Fuck. Horses and water, I tell ya...

Phew thank god you used capital letters or I would have disagreed :rolleyes:

nice

if you can't attack the content of the post, you can always attack its format

For fucks sake, I gave you a fucking link to a search for other articles on the subject, I did the fucking work for you you lazy lazy fucking bastard.

You want to add additional information, look it the fuck up. I already did it for you, all you have to do is click and read.

Fuck. Horses and water, I tell ya...


i'm sorry, i must have missed the link due to all the other posts i'm having to reply to

but seriously, calm down, i apologize for missing it


but that's not the point, the point is that no one else has bothered to research the issue further, and yet THEY ACT LIKE THEY KNOW for a fact that this kid was okay


I'M the one saying maybe, maybe not

i'm not making ANY firm assertion, other than WE DON'T KNOW

uhm, not really


YOU are the ones saying he's fine



I'M the one saying maybe he is, maybe he isn't, we don't really know because we don't have all the facts



I'M the ONLY ONE who is NOT engaging in unfounded speculation, because i'm the ONLY ONE who is asserting that ALL THE FACTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN investigated

You are asserting that this child may have a problem that needs to be investigated simply because of a badly drawn picture of a gun. You don't have any basis for sending a child to a counselor because of that picture, so you're speculation is unfounded.

EXACTLY! Boys do draw guns and weapons in their books at school. Its what we did. Not because we wanted to kill, or blow up the school, but because its fun and artistic. go here:

http://www.harrysnews.com/tgMenItsinTheirNature.htm

I once had drawn a picture of B-52 bombers dropping bombs on a burning building in the back of my maths notebook. No one who saw it (the guys who I sat next to, even the teacher on one occasion) cared. And BTW I haven't blown up any bridges lately.
have you ever played a game of 'confederacy'. Many a maths lesson was whiled away on that game. Here are the rules:

You have 1 piece of paper.
You need 2 players and a pen.
Draw a candle.
Give the pen to the other guy- his object is to draw something which will put the candle out.
Your object is to counter each step he makes to put the candle out.
Take turns, there are no limits.
You have 1 hour.

Thats it. That game used to get insane! Plus it would often involve mas stickman genocide, and all manner of violence. Thats a fact of life, the best way of putting out a candle in the face of sheer adversity is to use gross overwhelming-yet-creative violence.

i'm sorry, i must have missed the link due to all the other posts i'm having to reply to

but seriously, calm down, i apologize for missing it


but that's not the point, the point is that no one else has bothered to research the issue further, and yet THEY ACT LIKE THEY KNOW for a fact that this kid was okay


I'M the one saying maybe, maybe not

i'm not making ANY firm assertion, other than WE DON'T KNOW

You responded to a tangential portion of the post with the link.

And you're the one speculating. Everyone else is arguing the information available. If you want to argue circumstances it is up to you to look them the fuck up.

Thing is you might be right, the kid might have been a nutter and Fox didn't report that part.

The only way to know is to LOOK IT THE FUCK UP, until then you are the one speculating.

Yes, I got that, and I don't think you're a complete nutbag. I just feel that sending a kid to the counsellor is also something of an overreaction.

And to be fair, your last reply to me did seem to be defending the more extreme policies, at least partially.

my point is that though on the outside it may seem like an overreaction, what about to the staff?


what about to the teachers and students who are now having to face the cold hard reality that at any given time, one of their students can bring a gun into the classroom, and kill them?

in light of the recent events that have tragically unfolded in this nation, i don't see why people would object to at the very least just making sure that everything is indeed fine

when it comes to people's lives, i don't see how that's a problem

i do see that suspension is over the top, ONLY because it was done before any real evaluation was given to the boy

that was definitely unfair

have you ever played a game of 'confederacy'. Many a maths lesson was whiled away on that game. Here are the rules:

You have 1 piece of paper.
You need 2 players and a pen.
Draw a candle.
Give the pen to the other guy- his object is to draw something which will put the candle out.
Your object is to counter each step he makes to put the candle out.
Take turns, there are no limits.
You have 1 hour.

Thats it. That game used to get insane! Plus it would often involve mas stickman genocide, and all manner of violence. Thats a fact of life, the best way of putting out a candle in the face of sheer adversity is to use gross overwhelming-yet-creative violence.


a lesson plan is a lot different than a random drawing


surely even you can see that

You are asserting that this child may have a problem that needs to be investigated simply because of a badly drawn picture of a gun. You don't have any basis for sending a child to a counselor because of that picture, so you're speculation is unfounded.

absolutely

if a member of the staff, IE the teacher who deals with these kids MORE THAN SO THAN THE PARENTS, feels threatened by what one of their students has done, i see no reason why that kid shouldn't be seen by a counselor

have you ever played a game of 'confederacy'. Many a maths lesson was whiled away on that game. Here are the rules:

You have 1 piece of paper.
You need 2 players and a pen.
Draw a candle.
Give the pen to the other guy- his object is to draw something which will put the candle out.
Your object is to counter each step he makes to put the candle out.
Take turns, there are no limits.
You have 1 hour.

Thats it. That game used to get insane! Plus it would often involve mas stickman genocide, and all manner of violence. Thats a fact of life, the best way of putting out a candle in the face of sheer adversity is to use gross overwhelming-yet-creative violence.

No I never played it, didn't know the game existed until I read your post. But you've given a good example of how drawing weapons is just good fun and nothing more. And yes as you said it is creative.

You responded to a tangential portion of the post with the link.

And you're the one speculating. Everyone else is arguing the information available. If you want to argue circumstances it is up to you to look them the fuck up.

Thing is you might be right, the kid might have been a nutter and Fox didn't report that part.

The only way to know is to LOOK IT THE FUCK UP, until then you are the one speculating.

okay, you're link was to google

wow, what profound wisdom


i am arguing this case by the article that this thread was founded by, AND SO IS EVERYONE ELSE

no one is yet to actually link a REAL article that may counter what has been said thus far

No I never played it, didn't know the game existed until I read your post. But you've given a good example of how drawing weapons is just good fun and nothing more. And yes as you said it is creative.

clearly there is a difference between a lesson plan and a random drawing


if you can't even see that, then it's hopeless

The kid drew a picture of a gun. Just like ANY OTHER CHILD WOULD DO.

OWA, seriously, if you think a kid drawing a picture of a gun (that wasnt being fired or shown as killing anyone) makes him a school shooter then I think its YOU who needs counsilling.

clearly there is a difference between a lesson plan and a random drawing


if you can't even see that, then it's hopeless

Yes it is hopeless. I can't see the problem in kids drawing guns and other weapons. As I said in an above post: why is it so wrong for a kid to draw a gun, but when he's 18 he'll be allowed to own an assault rifle for "home defense" and no one questions it. How can that be rational?

my point is that though on the outside it may seem like an overreaction, what about to the staff?


what about to the teachers and students who are now having to face the cold hard reality that at any given time, one of their students can bring a gun into the classroom, and kill them?

in light of the recent events that have tragically unfolded in this nation, i don't see why people would object to at the very least just making sure that everything is indeed fine

when it comes to people's lives, i don't see how that's a problem

i do see that suspension is over the top, ONLY because it was done before any real evaluation was given to the boy

that was definitely unfair

"when it comes to people's lives, i don't see how that's a problem".

Well, there's the crux of the matter, I think.

The fact is, it's an unpleasent and occasionally hostile world out there, and we aren't doing the kids any favours by trying to shield them from that. Yes, a kid could bring a gun to school and start a rampage. It's happened.

What, three times in the past decade? Out of how manyschools?

The fact is, these kids are in more danger of being hit by their own school bus than shot by a classmate. But by playing up the danger, overreacting to tiny incidents, the teachers are creating climates of fear and distrust.

If they're causing these kids to be unable to BE KIDS, then all of these overreactions - right down to overuse of counselling - aren't part of the solution. They're part of the problem!

The kid drew a picture of a gun. Just like ANY OTHER CHILD WOULD DO.

OWA, seriously, if you think a kid drawing a picture of a gun (that wasnt being fired or shown as killing anyone) makes him a school shooter then I think its YOU who needs counsilling.

have you not read my other posts?

i'm not saying he's a school shooter


i'm not even saying that he meant anything by the doodle


but i am saying that school officials should have the right to at least send the boy to a counselor if they really feel that he is a threat to the rest of the school


if everything is really A-okay, then the counselor would say so and nothing further would be done

THAT is all i'm saying

i have agreed that suspending him just because of the drawing was overreacting, and shouldn't have been done

okay, you're link was to google

wow, what profound wisdom


i am arguing this case by the article that this thread was founded by, AND SO IS EVERYONE ELSE

no one is yet to actually link a REAL article that may counter what has been said thus far

Google is a tool we use to find many more sources for the story to support our speculation.

Welcome to the internet.

After scanning the articles myself, there is no history of trouble from the kid and no evaluation given. In a lot of reports it seems that he was drawing a laser gun. Your speculation is unfounded in any of the articles I read and in fact often supports that the suspension was only because of a tolerance policy and the kid didn't have a history of discipline or mental issues, granted that at least this is coming from the parents.

Devils advocate is one thing, but you have to work at it a little. Just a little, half a fucking calorie typing in a damn Google search.

so are you denying the fact that gun violence is up, especially youth related?

actualy its going down. there are just a few more well known examples. I'll post a link to the USDJ report on it.

"when it comes to people's lives, i don't see how that's a problem".

Well, there's the crux of the matter, I think.

The fact is, it's an unpleasent and occasionally hostile world out there, and we aren't doing the kids any favours by trying to shield them from that. Yes, a kid could bring a gun to school and start a rampage. It's happened.

What, three times in the past decade? Out of how manyschools?

The fact is, these kids are in more danger of being hit by their own school bus than shot by a classmate. But by playing up the danger, overreacting to tiny incidents, the teachers are creating climates of fear and distrust.

If they're causing these kids to be unable to BE KIDS, then all of these overreactions - right down to overuse of counselling - aren't part of the solution. They're part of the problem!


this has actually been the first real intellectually stimulating post that i've yet to see thus far in this thread

you do make a good point


a great point, an excellent point!


and i'm almost inclined to agree with you


however, just as the school officials overreacted, there is such a thing as underreacting, by not doing anything at all

by simply shrugging our shoulders and saying "kids will be kids", we turn our backs on real red flags and troubling signs and then when it all comes to a screeching halt and another school shooting occurs, everyone wonders how it all happened

perhaps the kid shouldn't have even been sent to a counselor

perhaps

but i still think that the school officials reserve the right to at the very least send him to a counselor if they really deem him a threat to the rest of the school

they do have an obligation to the students and staff after all

have you ever played a game of 'confederacy'. Many a maths lesson was whiled away on that game. Here are the rules:

You have 1 piece of paper.
You need 2 players and a pen.
Draw a candle.
Give the pen to the other guy- his object is to draw something which will put the candle out.
Your object is to counter each step he makes to put the candle out.
Take turns, there are no limits.
You have 1 hour.

Thats it. That game used to get insane! Plus it would often involve mas stickman genocide, and all manner of violence. Thats a fact of life, the best way of putting out a candle in the face of sheer adversity is to use gross overwhelming-yet-creative violence.

clever... First time i've heard of this game.

Google is a tool we use to find many more sources for the story to support our speculation.

Welcome to the internet.

After scanning the articles myself, there is no history of trouble from the kid and no evaluation given. In a lot of reports it seems that he was drawing a laser gun. Your speculation is unfounded in any of the articles I read and in fact often supports that the suspension was only because of a tolerance policy and the kid didn't have a history of discipline or mental issues, granted that at least this is coming from the parents.

Devils advocate is one thing, but you have to work at it a little. Just a little, half a fucking calorie typing in a damn Google search.


actually, the school officials have not revealed (pursuant to federal law) if the child had a discipline record.

and the argument that he just moved is void, he could have very well had a large disciplinary record at his old school, who knows

and only one article that i've read so far says it was a laser, every other one just says gun

and again, as i made clear before, i already know what the parents had said about their little boy

it's what ANY parent would say


so quite jumping down my fucking throat over your pathetic attempts of making me look bad because i didn't google every single fucking article that every single news network released on the story

and no one, NO ONE else is referencing any other article, and THEY'RE the ones making the firm assertion that everything is fine


i'm the only one saying we don't know enough facts

and yes, after reviewing your oh so insightful google search, that still stands

we don't know all the facts

I know it only goes up to 2001, but it still shows that gun crime in his age group has been dropping. USDOJ table for Gun Crimes by age group 191-2001 (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm)

Yeah, one time I drew a tank. THATS ALL THAT WAS DRAWN. This clearly raises red flags about my mental health at the time. Obviously I needed Ritalin, therapeutic counseling, and perhaps to be put on the FBI watch list!
For once I agree with Greater Trostia. One World Alliance, you are being absurd. Think about this. It is, whether you like it or not, totally normal for a kid to doodle and draw a picture of a gun. Even if you find that weird, who are you (or even this school) to say what kids can doodle and what they cant....it's not like he's drawing nazi images or anything offensive...it's just a gun.

Ever watched like power ranges or something? :eek:*GASP*...Weapons!:rolleyes:

I know it only goes up to 2001, but it still shows that gun crime in his age group has been dropping. USDOJ table for Gun Crimes by age group 191-2001 (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/frmdth.htm)

thank you for actually posting real results, not just a google search


i was under the impression that the opposite was true, clearly i was incorrect


however, that doesn't really change much of anything


gun crime is still a problem, and perhaps it is from "overzealous" zero policy initiatives that the gun crime is decreasing

very interesting

Fox News...who also believes Maple Story is excessively violent.

I used to draw swords all the time. Then it moved to me drawing people heads being impaled on sticks. Oh I drew crosses too. Those things are pretty damn violent you know. Better watch out for me!:mp5::gundge::sniper:

.......................

okay

and perhaps that's what happened, people knew it, and thus suspended him



i like how everyone is assuming that this kid is sane, that he doesn't have any problems


why? because the parents stuck up for him? oh wow, there's a surprise


"There's no way our little johnny could hurt anyone!" Those words have never been uttered before


or how about "We never saw this one coming, he seemed like a normal kid."


NO ONE has even CONSIDERED that maybe there WAS a problem, and the school officials acted to their best discretion


hmmmmmmmmm

Well, most people who knew Seung-hui Cho (the V-Tech shooter) could tell he was disturbed.

actually, the school officials have not revealed (pursuant to federal law) if the child had a discipline record.

and the argument that he just moved is void, he could have very well had a large disciplinary record at his old school, who knows

and only one article that i've read so far says it was a laser, every other one just says gun

and again, as i made clear before, i already know what the parents had said about their little boy

it's what ANY parent would say


so quite jumping down my fucking throat over your pathetic attempts of making me look bad because i didn't google every single fucking article that every single news network released on the story

and no one, NO ONE else is referencing any other article, and THEY'RE the ones making the firm assertion that everything is fine


i'm the only one saying we don't know enough facts

and yes, after reviewing your oh so insightful google search, that still stands

we don't know all the facts
The facts are available, everyone else argued the article you argued contingency. If you're going to do that then you have to find some support.

Otherwise you're going to get it for pulling shit out your ass.

Like I said, devils advocate is one thing, and a good thing in a debate, but you have to work a little if you want to do it.

There will be a public hearing on the 29th.

Every indication, and the only thing officials have pointed to is the threat issue (and yes, they are forbidden from specifics, but given what we know-the parents haven't indicated anything and the school did not force or recommend evaluation, either indicates that they did not see him as the mental health threat that your supposition implies or that rather than overreacting they are actually negligent in not recognizing an at risk youth and in fact further alienating him.)

So, given the information available your conclusion is unlikely.

Well, most people who knew Seung-hui Cho (the V-Tech shooter) could tell he was disturbed.

true


but that's my point


no one knows if this kid is disturbed or not, because none of the news outlets have divulged his disciplinary history

this has actually been the first real intellectually stimulating post that i've yet to see thus far in this thread

you do make a good point


a great point, an excellent point!


and i'm almost inclined to agree with you


however, just as the school officials overreacted, there is such a thing as underreacting, by not doing anything at all

by simply shrugging our shoulders and saying "kids will be kids", we turn our backs on real red flags and troubling signs and then when it all comes to a screeching halt and another school shooting occurs, everyone wonders how it all happened

perhaps the kid shouldn't have even been sent to a counselor

perhaps

but i still think that the school officials reserve the right to at the very least send him to a counselor if they really deem him a threat to the rest of the school

they do have an obligation to the students and staff after all

Oh, I absolutely agree. And if a classroom teacher detects any pattern of behaviour that suggests a problem, they SHOULD send such a child to counselling. That's what the counsellor is there for, after all, and despite my earlier disparaging of them, they are better than nothing.

My problem lies with the increasing number of incidents where single incidents get blown entirely out of proportion. Now, I know you find the school's actions in this case as absurd as I do. I'm just saying: one incident does not a pattern make. Yes, we don't know if there were any previous problems due to the brevity of the report. But if there were no such problems, then to my mind, this should have needed nothing more than a little remedial attention from the teacher, who also should have perhaps quietly made a note of the incident - in case it became the start of something more.

For once I agree with Greater Trostia. One World Alliance, you are being absurd. Think about this. It is, whether you like it or not, totally normal for a kid to doodle and draw a picture of a gun. Even if you find that weird, who are you (or even this school) to say what kids can doodle and what they cant....it's not like he's drawing nazi images or anything offensive...it's just a gun.

Ever watched like power ranges or something? :eek:*GASP*...Weapons!:rolleyes:
When I used to be a children's performer dressing up like Ninja Turtles and going to kids birthday parties (invited) I'd always chuckle to myself when parents would tell me not to make balloon nunchucks and swords. "We don't like violence and weapons." I always wanted to lean in and go, "You know I'm a Ninja Turtle, yes? That that ship pretty much sailed already?" and "It's a freakin' balloon. It won't even harm another balloon..."

Oh, I absolutely agree. And if a classroom teacher detects any pattern of behaviour that suggests a problem, they SHOULD send such a child to counselling. That's what the counsellor is there for, after all, and despite my earlier disparaging of them, they are better than nothing.

My problem lies with the increasing number of incidents where single incidents get blown entirely out of proportion. Now, I know you find the school's actions in this case as absurd as I do. I'm just saying: one incident does not a pattern make. Yes, we don't know if there were any previous problems due to the brevity of the report. But if there were no such problems, then to my mind, this should have needed nothing more than a little remedial attention from the teacher, who also should have perhaps quietly made a note of the incident - in case it became the start of something more.


i fully agree with you


but no one has bothered to present it like that


i've been presenting it in the light that none of the news articles about this subject really give us any necessary specifics about the situation. So my point is that if the kid did have a history of disciplinary action or of acting weird, then the school should do something.

suspending him is too harsh, but who can blame them for at the very least checking the situation out to make sure it's all good?

that's my point, but you have these holier than thous in here who don't bother to actually read what i'm writing, and they go off on these rants and ravings about i did this and kids do that and no one ever shot anyone. that's all good, but they have no idea what this kid has done in the past, if this kid's teachers always thought of him as a loner, as a quiet kid who keeps to himself. That usually fits the profile of a troubled kid, and then when he one day draws a gun in class, completely random out of the blue, well it would sure make me wonder too

i fully agree with you


but no one has bothered to present it like that


i've been presenting it in the light that none of the news articles about this subject really give us any necessary specifics about the situation. So my point is that if the kid did have a history of disciplinary action or of acting weird, then the school should do something.

suspending him is too harsh, but who can blame them for at the very least checking the situation out to make sure it's all good?

that's my point, but you have these holier than thous in here who don't bother to actually read what i'm writing, and they go off on these rants and ravings about i did this and kids do that and no one ever shot anyone. that's all good, but they have no idea what this kid has done in the past, if this kid's teachers always thought of him as a loner, as a quiet kid who keeps to himself. That usually fits the profile of a troubled kid, and then when he one day draws a gun in class, completely random out of the blue, well it would sure make me wonder too

Good; I always enjoy finding common ground with another poster. Now, I will take my leave, for it is 4am and I am tired. Bon Nuit.

actually, it's idiots like you who don't have their facts straight


gun violence has INCREASED, especially YOUTH RELATED


Click Here (http://www.neahin.org/programs/schoolsafety/gunsafety/statistics.htm)

Nicely done. I came across that page myself when looking for statistics. I disregarded it as useless because it doesn't give a history of any increase or decrease, it just reports the current numbers (as well as some editorializing to fit their argument). Here's a gem I particularly enjoyed:

"In one year, more children and teens died from gunfire than from cancer, pneumonia, influenza, asthma, and HIV/AIDS combined."

They missed mad cow disease and lightning bolts, too. I mean seriously, how many kids do you know of that died of pneumonia? How about car accidents? You know, something that actually kills a lot of young people every year, albeit not as sensationalized by national media...

As such, take a looksee here: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/gvc.htm#guns And yes, that's the U.S. Department of Justice website.

In particular, these blurbs: "Since 1994, violent crime rates have declined, reaching the lowest level ever in 2005.

"Homicide rates recently declined to levels last seen in the late 1960s."

"Assault rates declined since 1994."

"The proportion of serious violent crimes committed by juveniles has generally declined since 1993."

Note the accompanying graphs if you're a visual type. Here's a quick quote from the Wikipedia article for "School Shooting":

Princeton's Katherine Newman points out that, far from being "loners", the perpetrators are "joiners" whose attempts at social integration fail, that they let their thinking and even their plans be known, sometimes frequently over long periods of times. The shootings seem as though an attempt to adjust their social standing and image, from "loser" to "master of violence."

So, the generally accepted cause of school shootings is the earlier alienation of the perpetrators from their peers. And you want to cart them all* off to counsellors. I'm sure that'll fix up that alienation real nice; the counsellor's office is a veritable social club in high school... Not only would your method do no good, it would actually contribute to the problem.

*And I do mean ALL. As everyone else in this thread has said, you'd have to go a hell of a distance to find a 13-year-old boy who didn't draw some kind of weapon in class, so your idea of having something like THIS as a starting point for "problem children" is needlessly wide.

Seriously, you're basically advocating sending EVERY SINGLE thirteen-year-old boy to the counsellor's office. Does that make any sense to you? No. That's how much sense you're making to everyone else.

For once I agree with Greater Trostia. One World Alliance, you are being absurd. Think about this. It is, whether you like it or not, totally normal for a kid to doodle and draw a picture of a gun. Even if you find that weird, who are you (or even this school) to say what kids can doodle and what they cant....it's not like he's drawing nazi images or anything offensive...it's just a gun.

Ever watched like power ranges or something? :eek:*GASP*...Weapons!:rolleyes:


okay, seriously, evaluate the situation


you have no idea what this kid is like

you have no idea if this kid is prone to aggression, or sudden violent mood swings

you have no idea what kind of medication this kid is on, if any

you have no idea what his disciplinary history includes

you have no idea what other possible red flags he may have raised to his teachers in the past, and this gun doodle was just the last straw

you have absolutely, positively no idea about ANYTHING other than that some kid was suspended because he drew a gun

that's all you know

and my point, is that yes, it was obviously an overreaction by the school


HOWEVER

because we don't know all the facts, I don't see anything wrong with the kid at the very least going to see a counselor

do you? given that you have no idea what this kid is like?

and yet everyone else in this thread, who know nothing more than you mind you, believe 100% that there is no way this kid should have gone to see a counselor, or anything else

think about it, and then tell me again, that I'M the one being absurd

okay, seriously, evaluate the situation


you have no idea what this kid is like

you have no idea if this kid is prone to aggression, or sudden violent mood swings

you have no idea what kind of medication this kid is on, if any

you have no idea what his disciplinary history includes

you have no idea what other possible red flags he may have raised to his teachers in the past, and this gun doodle was just the last straw

you have absolutely, positively no idea about ANYTHING other than that some kid was suspended because he drew a gun

that's all you know

and my point, is that yes, it was obviously an overreaction by the school


HOWEVER

because we don't know all the facts, I don't see anything wrong with the kid at the very least going to see a counselor

do you? given that you have no idea what this kid is like?

and yet everyone else in this thread, who know nothing more than you mind you, believe 100% that there is no way this kid should have gone to see a counselor, or anything else

think about it, and then tell me again, that I'M the one being absurd

Okay. So you think potentially dangerous students should be sent to see a counselor. That isn't unreasonable. BUT, the way I see it, you have been saying this kid is potentially dangerous because he drew a gun, and nothing more. If there were other red flags, then he should have been sent to see a counselor when those flags occurred. Not now, as this gun drawing means absolutely nothing. It is not, even when combined with any the kid may have done in the past, even remotely indicative of a threat. It would be like sending a kid who was a major asshole to other students to a counselor for playing tag, because it shows that he may want to hunt down and catch human prey. It is something almost every kid does, disturbed or not, and therefore, even if combined with past actions, warrants no investigation IMO.

Okay. So you think potentially dangerous students should be sent to see a counselor. That isn't unreasonable. BUT, the way I see it, you have been saying this kid is potentially dangerous because he drew a gun, and nothing more. If there were other red flags, then he should have been sent to see a counselor when those flags occurred. Not now, as this gun drawing means absolutely nothing. It is not, even when combined with any the kid may have done in the past, even remotely indicative of a threat. It would be like sending a kid who was a major asshole to other students to a counselor for playing tag, because it shows that he may want to hunt down and catch human prey. It is something almost every kid does, disturbed or not, and therefore, even if combined with past actions, warrants no investigation IMO.

I second that.

Okay. So you think potentially dangerous students should be sent to see a counselor. That isn't unreasonable. BUT, the way I see it, you have been saying this kid is potentially dangerous because he drew a gun, and nothing more. If there were other red flags, then he should have been sent to see a counselor when those flags occurred. Not now, as this gun drawing means absolutely nothing. It is not, even when combined with any the kid may have done in the past, even remotely indicative of a threat. It would be like sending a kid who was a major asshole to other students to a counselor for playing tag, because it shows that he may want to hunt down and catch human prey. It is something almost every kid does, disturbed or not, and therefore, even if combined with past actions, warrants no investigation IMO.


my point that i have been making through all of this is that we don't know all the facts

Also, the school officials reserve the right to protect their students and staff

on top of that, if the school officials felt that this drawing in any way posed a threat to the school, then i think that yes, he should have been sent to go see a counselor

i have always maintained that suspending him soley for the drawing was absurd and an overreaction

however, i have also maintained that the fox news story was faulty in that it did not give us any context as to what else went on behind the drawing

such as behavior patterns, etc.

and because of such, there is no way anyone can argue that this kid DID NOT pose a threat, because not enough evidence has been brought forward to suggest that he was by any means "normal"

and because i do firmly believe that the school officials have an obligation to ensure the students' and staff's security, sending this child to a counselor would not be overreacting, it would just be a good way to "make sure" everything really is fine

that's my point

Argh, silly me. I had this tab open, got sidetracked somewhere else, and replied without finishing the thread. So whenever that other post goes through, it's big and mostly already-gone-over. :(

my point that i have been making through all of this is that we don't know all the facts

Also, the school officials reserve the right to protect their students and staff

on top of that, if the school officials felt that this drawing in any way posed a threat to the school, then i think that yes, he should have been sent to go see a counselor

i have always maintained that suspending him soley for the drawing was absurd and an overreaction

however, i have also maintained that the fox news story was faulty in that it did not give us any context as to what else went on behind the drawing

such as behavior patterns, etc.

and because of such, there is no way anyone can argue that this kid DID NOT pose a threat, because not enough evidence has been brought forward to suggest that he was by any means "normal"

and because i do firmly believe that the school officials have an obligation to ensure the students' and staff's security, sending this child to a counselor would not be overreacting, it would just be a good way to "make sure" everything really is fine

that's my point

Why should this kids background info about his life be brought to national attention?

Imagine the headline:

A 13 year old in Arizona drew a gun in his notebook. He's been suspended for five days because he could, but probably isn't, planning to kill his classmates in a bloodied orgy. He did once hit his bother but this is hearsay and more investigations will follow. His classmates have been questioned about whether or not he may be a threat, does he show any signs of "unorthodoxy" and is he basically a doubleplusungood human being? One girl said he was "gross" because he once burped in class, but she couldn't idenify any other antisocial behaviour.

A real threat to society.

Why should this kids background info about his life be brought to national attention?

Imagine the headline:

A 13 year old in Arizona drew a gun in his notebook. He's been suspended for five days because he could, but probably isn't, planning to kill his classmates in a bloodied orgy. He did once hit his bother but this is hearsay and more investigations will follow. His classmates have been questioned about whether or not he may be a threat, does he show any signs of "unorthodoxy" and is he basically a doubleplusungood human being? One girl said he was "gross" because he once burped in class, but she couldn't idenify any other antisocial behaviour.

A real threat to society.


his background info means disciplinary history, such as what the school has on this kid. Completely professional, completely relevant. And completely needed in order to make any assertive postition in this debate. At least if you are completely ruling out any action taken with the student.

his background info means disciplinary history, such as what the school has on this kid. Completely professional, completely relevant. And completely needed in order to make any assertive postition in this debate. At least if you are completely ruling out any action taken with the student.

couple of points.
1) his background is not the Public's business. So it doesn't have to be revealed.

2) if you agree that not enough info is available, how can you insist that this student "needs counciling"?

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

Hardly. I drew guns throughout elementary school. Usually they were attached to Robocop or something, but they were drawn.

I've never brought harm to another human being, let alone with a gun.

Hardly. I drew guns throughout elementary school. Usually they were attached to Robocop or something, but they were drawn.

I've never brought harm to another human being, let alone with a gun.

not everyone who draws guns harm others

just as not everyone who draws guns DON'T harm others


just because you didn't do it doesn't mean other people wont, you aren't the role model for every single person. people react differently to doing different things


so get over yourself, that was a totally worthless point

people always draw stuff that they see
like in games me and my friends always drew stuff from games like axes and swords and dont say that the times have changes this was 2 years ago when we were 15 and no one said i was a threat or any of my freinds

As information of the child's background or mental stability is lacking, let us for arugments sake, assume there were zero previous "red flags". One World Alliance, do you then feel drawing a picture of a gun, alone, would warrent a visit to the counselor?

As information of the child's background or mental stability is lacking, let us for arugments sake, assume there were zero previous "red flags". One World Alliance, do you then feel drawing a picture of a gun, alone, would warrent a visit to the counselor?


if that's the case, then no i don't think he would need to visit a counselor

Quite frankly, the picture looks like a stick man trying to pull over a building if you look at it the right way...

Who can tell where he got his inspiration from? Will he be trying to pull over buildings by himself? Is this his secret ambition? Does he want to turn green and be called kluH ehT? :gundge:

IMO the whole idea of suspending a student for making a picture in class is blowing the whole thing OUT OF PROPORTION and any punishment for this behaviour should only happen if the kid is
a) Drawing in class so much that he is not paying attention at all, never knows what the class is about, never does homework etc,
b) Repeatedly drawing explicit threats to people around him. This would be something along the lines of drawing classmates dying etc, especially if he draws himself doing it or watching. This would be the sort of thing which would be apparent if he LABELS the people or it is OBVIOUS that they are certain members of the class by drawing distinct features.

If he is doing these sorts of things then the teacher should warn him, then send him to the principle who would probably not want to waste his time and send him to the councillor and the councillor will (according to my experience with them) do bugger all except talk about stuff and ask deep emotional questions which 13 year-old boys aren't interested in.

I draw attention to the fact that without people who draw weapons and dead bodies then the world would sadly be deprived of about 90% of the computer games industry and a significant proportion of the film industry :eek: .

Oh and OWA, your post about the inherent unknowableness of the whole issue highlights a flaw in your position. What if it isn't the last straw?
And if the kid was disturbed (or suspected disturbed), why isn't it mentioned in the article?

not everyone who draws guns harm others

just as not everyone who draws guns DON'T harm others


just because you didn't do it doesn't mean other people wont, you aren't the role model for every single person. people react differently to doing different things


so get over yourself, that was a totally worthless point

For my generation that's like saying not everyone who breathes harms others, and not everyone who breathes doesn't harm others. My male classmates and I grew up on a steady diet of Robocop, GI Joe, Terminator, Mortal Kombat and god knows what else. We're there bad apples? Yeah, there always are, but that's not because we were exposed to this sort of stuff. It's because we are people.

So, get over yourself, that was a totally worthless post.

Oh and OWA, your post about the inherent unknowableness of the whole issue highlights a flaw in your position. What if it isn't the last straw?
And if the kid was disturbed (or suspected disturbed), why isn't it mentioned in the article?

First of all, that's been my ENTIRE position throughout this whole debate. My position is that maybe he's okay, maybe he's not

WE DON'T KNOW

and because of that, i believe that the school officials should have at the very least sent the kid to go see a counselor, because they obviously felt threatened by what the kid did


I DO NOT THINK HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED


EVERYONE ELSE are saying that 100% WITHOUT A SHADOW OF A DOUBT this kid should NOT have seen a counselor, and that NOTHING should have been done in this situation.

THOSE are the people you should be pointing your righteous little finger at, not me. I'M the one saying we don't know for a fact.

And the reason why nothing was said of the kid's mental history is because that's privileged information, and do you really think the parents would let that be released? That would totally contradict their picture that they've painted of their innocent little son being victimized by the big bad public shool system. And the School isn't releasing the kids disciplinary history because they are trying to keep this professional, and don't think that it would be right to let EVERYONE know what this kid has done, including his classmates.

So that's the reason the info is lacking in all these news reports. Honestly, dont just take what's hand fed to you by these news stations, you need to think outside of the box

if that's the case, then no i don't think he would need to visit a counselor

OK, I wasn't sure if you were saying; "maybe he has previous issues, and this picture could signal something developing into (more) threatening behaviour" or just that "drawing a gun signifies potential threatening behaviour". I now believe you were saying the former, and as such, whilst I don't totally agree with it, see your reasoning behind it. I'm willing to accept that as your opinion without the need for further debate from myself on this issue. :-)

For my generation that's like saying not everyone who breathes harms others, and not everyone who breathes doesn't harm others. My male classmates and I grew up on a steady diet of Robocop, GI Joe, Terminator, Mortal Kombat and god knows what else. We're there bad apples? Yeah, there always are, but that's not because we were exposed to this sort of stuff. It's because we are people.

So, get over yourself, that was a totally worthless post.

you're position is that there is nothing wrong with this kid because there was nothing wrong with you or the people you grew up with. What a completely closed minded viewpoint of the world.

NEWSFLASH, there's different people with different mindsets than you or the small amount of people you grew up with

:eek:

yes, it's true


so when you try and defend someone who you know NOTHING about by giving anecdotal evidence about you and your friends, well, how arrogantly presumptuous of you

my point is that yes, the mainstream of boys and even some girls draw weapons and play with fake weapons and such

why, boys even sometimes pretend to kill each other when they play their games

THE POINT, however, is that since we do NOT know all the info with this situation, we cannot make mere conjecture that this kid is mentally stable, or that the school officials had NO OTHER reason for suspending him than the drawing

remember the news networks that you get your info from RELY on sensationalism in order to keep you coming back for more

so yes, believe it or not, they didn't give you all the facts of the story

SO, because of such, it is completely stupid of you to say "well i drew guns when i was a kid, therefore this kid is fine" because you have NO IDEA about this kid's history, NO IDEA what his personality is like, NO IDEA how many other possible red flags he's raised in the past

all you know is that a long time ago, you drew a picture of a gun, and you've never killed anyone

well good for you

What the fuck? Thats all 13 year old boys do; draw guns. Guns, spaceships, monsters, aliens, all sorts of shit like that. Mind you his drawings suck for his age. Nevertheless, I wouldn't have raised an eyebrow if he had an album of guns. They are cool, and relatively easy to draw/make up.

This is so stupid.

Hey, I used to draw battleships, does this mean I should have joined the navy? Or tried to torpedo Faslane Naval Base? Hmm, my calling in life, missed.

Also, capslock and the enter key are designed to be used in moderation and where it is grammatically neccesary. Thank you.

What the hell? I swear thats all I ever sketched back in primary school.

true


but that's my point


no one knows if this kid is disturbed or not, because none of the news outlets have divulged his disciplinary history

Well, the people who know him'll know.

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

For the same reason kids drew bombers, swastikas, guns, and people's private parts thirty years ago....

....because doing something naughty is funny.....
....because they are bored and entertaining themselves....
....because they are creative....

well, obviously if someone is drawing a gun they like guns


and if they like guns..............


the point is that it could be absolutely nothing, a completely harmless doodle


but because NONE OF YOU have taken into consideration the kid's mental health, and the article didn't bother to offer it, everyone just thinks "well hell, i did that when i was a kid and i didn't shoot anybody"

but that's irresponsible to assume that just because YOU didn't shoot anybody, no one else who doodles gun will either

it's one of the most illogical things i've ever heard really


no one has really given a good reason as to why this kid should not have been to a counselor

here's the top reasons so far:

1. I doodled when i was a kid! -Well good for you
2. It would cost too much. -I'm sure the small cost that taxpayers would incure for securing our kids is, well, irrelevant
3. It would be impossible, there's too many of them. -Not really. Anyone who gets into trouble is usually sent to see some other higher authority before some kind of punishment is sentenced, so really, it would be the same.
4. It's a slippery slope. -You're right, just ask the Columbine victims, or the Virginia Tech victims, the list goes on and on. It can very easily start as just a seemingly harmless doodle, but it ends up deadly.

AND, no one has taken into account that perhaps such "doodles" were banned from the said school, and that the kid defied the school policy by drawing a gun anyways.

And if he defied the school on that front, then what else?

So because I doodled horses, I'm Catherine the Great?

well, obviously if someone is drawing a gun they like guns


and if they like guns..............


the point is that it could be absolutely nothing, a completely harmless doodle


<b>but because NONE OF YOU have taken into consideration the kid's mental health, and the article didn't bother to offer it, everyone just thinks "well hell, i did that when i was a kid and i didn't shoot anybody"</b>

but that's irresponsible to assume that just because YOU didn't shoot anybody, no one else who doodles gun will either

it's one of the most illogical things i've ever heard really


no one has really given a good reason as to why this kid should not have been to a counselor

here's the top reasons so far:

1. I doodled when i was a kid! -Well good for you
2. It would cost too much. -I'm sure the small cost that taxpayers would incure for securing our kids is, well, irrelevant
3. It would be impossible, there's too many of them. -Not really. Anyone who gets into trouble is usually sent to see some other higher authority before some kind of punishment is sentenced, so really, it would be the same.
4. It's a slippery slope. -You're right, just ask the Columbine victims, or the Virginia Tech victims, the list goes on and on. It can very easily start as just a seemingly harmless doodle, but it ends up deadly.

AND, no one has taken into account that perhaps such "doodles" were banned from the said school, and that the kid defied the school policy by drawing a gun anyways.

<b>And if he defied the school on that front, then what else?</b>

You would have a point if a doodle was the only way of proving that someone is potentially a school shooter. That is not the case. In fact considering how many people do draw doodles of guns and various weapons, it is close to useless for determing wether someone is going to grow up to shoot someone. If a child had a habit of drawing violent doodles along with other personality issues (withdrawness, depression, angry outbursts, etc), then seeing a counseller would not be a bad plan.

In school, I am expected to keep my the top shirt button done up. Most people dont bother. They are breaking the school rules in exactly the same way. Its hardly indictive of wether they will become a criminal.

nowhere in the article does it mention PREVIOUS behavoir of this kid




nowhere


and NO ONE on this forum has even CONSIDERED that



well, except me


way to go everyone for just being fed facts from a news station and not thinking outside of the box

That's right: The news reports did not say he was disturbed. So automatically, you think he is. And you admit that rather than considering the facts, you would rather make them up.

Do you see why no one is taking these hysterical posts seriously? The sky is not falling -- it was just an acorn.

So because I doodled horses, I'm Catherine the Great?

... or Lady Godiva... I guess it really depends on who you ask tho. :p

you assume it's unfounded


did you see the kids personal report kept by the school officials?


do you know if this kid IS in fact a trouble kid?


do you know if this kid is the quiet type who sits alone at lunch and at recess and has social issues?

NO?

hmmmmm, now who is engaging in unfounded speculation?

Show us where YOU have access to this information.

you are using very limited facts that don't touch upon what i mentioned, about the kid's past


you are just assuming he's a good kid


that is the very definition of unfounded, you don't know, and you have no facts to go with it


UNFOUNDED
As are your assertions that he's a budding mass murderer. You have no information to support that. Except the facts from the news station that you said you were ignoring to 'think outside of the box' (aka make a statement about his mental state on less than no information.)

thank you for actually posting real results, not just a google search


i was under the impression that the opposite was true, clearly i was incorrect


however, that doesn't really change much of anything


gun crime is still a problem, and perhaps it is from "overzealous" zero policy initiatives that the gun crime is decreasing

very interesting

The major part of your assertions has been proven incorrect. I'd say that does change quite a bit. Assumptions are not facts.

okay, seriously, evaluate the situation


you have no idea what this kid is like

you have no idea if this kid is prone to aggression, or sudden violent mood swings

you have no idea what kind of medication this kid is on, if any

you have no idea what his disciplinary history includes

you have no idea what other possible red flags he may have raised to his teachers in the past, and this gun doodle was just the last straw

you have absolutely, positively no idea about ANYTHING other than that some kid was suspended because he drew a gun

that's all you know

and my point, is that yes, it was obviously an overreaction by the school


HOWEVER

because we don't know all the facts, I don't see anything wrong with the kid at the very least going to see a counselor

do you? given that you have no idea what this kid is like?

and yet everyone else in this thread, who know nothing more than you mind you, believe 100% that there is no way this kid should have gone to see a counselor, or anything else

think about it, and then tell me again, that I'M the one being absurd

You're assuming he's dangerously disturbed when quite a few of us, some actively involved in child development and education, are telling you this is normal. And you are not even considering the stigma, the rumors, and the general disruption it will cause to send someone to counseling for no reason. People get bitched out for the clothes they wear -- you don't think that little Johnny's going to get harassed for going to the school psychologist?

Geez -- if they're nothing wrong with the kid, that would really not be helpful to his mental and emotional health.

You're assuming he's dangerously disturbed when quite a few of us, some actively involved in child development and education, are telling you this is normal. And you are not even considering the stigma, the rumors, and the general disruption it will cause to send someone to counseling for no reason. People get bitched out for the clothes they wear -- you don't think that little Johnny's going to get harassed for going to the school psychologist?

Geez -- if they're nothing wrong with the kid, that would really not be helpful to his mental and emotional health.
not only that, but little Johnny will forever be questioning if an idea or a particular thought is "normal" or not.

This is definitely an overreaction on the part of the school board. But when you look at the kind of people who become school teachers in the US and the general treatment of education, not to mention the sue happy culture they have, maybe it's a bit more understandable. A lot of CYA.

But it's still an overreaction.

This is definitely an overreaction on the part of the school board. But when you look at the kind of people who become school teachers in the US and the general treatment of education, not to mention the sue happy culture they have, maybe it's a bit more understandable. A lot of CYA.

But it's still an overreaction.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. :(

But when you look at the kind of people who become school teachers in the US

What kind of people become school teachers in the US?

I don't know, I had a habit of drawing planes and tanks and missiles ...

What kind of people become school teachers in the US?

hopeless optimistics?

hopeless optimistics?

Feels that way sometimes.

;) I've been having fun -- I bought a new schoolbag, and supplies, and can't wait to find out my schedule.....


....heh, you'd almost think I'm a student.

What kind of people become school teachers in the US?

In general? Overworked, underpaid, disrespected, sue-vulnerable people who have to listen to an administration that can't find it's backside with both hands and a culture of anti-education.

Makes it easy to overreact.

Honestly Kat, I thought you would have known that by now. What did you expect me to say? :p

Personally, I would think that if the teachers had any sense they would simply make a note of the drawing and perhaps watch the child's behavior without making an embarassing scene out of the matter.

And if the child were unstable humiliating him over his doodle certainly wouldn't help the matter (whether he was sent to a counselor or suspended).

Also, boys take an interest in a few things:

1. Shit that blows up
2. Guns
3. Any mixture of one and two
4. Cars
5. Sports
6. Dirty magazines under their matresses

Look at me, I'm 16 and I am currently sitting in my bedroom with four airsoft gun rifles and an airsoft pistol in my car which I take to school every day. My science teacher used it to shoot my math teacher in the parking lot last year. Does that make me unstable? No.

Just putting things in perspective. Hes just a regular boy, no need to wet our pants over it.

In general? Overworked, underpaid, disrespected, sue-vulnerable people who have to listen to an administration that can't find it's backside with both hands and a culture of anti-education.

Makes it easy to overreact.

Honestly Kat, I thought you would have known that by now. What did you expect me to say? :p

Funny, I've never been sued, nor has any of my colleagues.
LOL and I spend a lot of time NOT listening to the administration, precisely because it can't find its backside with both hands.

If the only thing this kid did was draw a picture, they're idiots. Hell, I have my students write short stories -- do you know how many stories I get about gang members, organized crime, psycho murderers, and war? If I sent everyone who wrote about those to the counselor there'd be three kids sitting in class and the rest in the counselor's office.

You HAVE to use some common sense.

Personally, I would think that if the teachers had any sense they would simply make a note of the drawing and perhaps watch the child's behavior without making an embarassing scene out of the matter.

And if the child were unstable humiliating him over his doodle certainly wouldn't help the matter (whether he was sent to a counselor or suspended).

Also, boys take an interest in a few things:

1. Shit that blows up
2. Guns
3. Any mixture of one and two
4. Cars
5. Sports
6. Dirty magazines under their matresses

Look at me, I'm 16 and I am currently sitting in my bedroom with four airsoft gun rifles and an airsoft pistol in my car which I take to school every day. My science teacher used it to shoot my math teacher in the parking lot last year. Does that make me unstable? No.

Just putting things in perspective. Hes just a regular boy, no need to wet our pants over it.

Boys like things which make loud noises and look really dangerous, hence the facination with weapons when they are young.

I remember when I was in first grade or so (that's 6 years old for you europeans) and we were in Kuwait driving the Iraqi army out. I'd been watching the reports on the news and I drew a picture of an american plane shooting down iraqi aircraft. (I was a bloodthirsty little child, but what little boy isn't?) Far from suspending me for drawing a violent and potentially threatening image, the picture was taken and posted on the wall in the front office.


This is the most absurd action taken by a school that I have ever heard of, bar none. The teacher and principal obviously have very little experience or expertise in dealing with young boys. Boys like violence, it's in their nature.

are you really saying that if a student draws a gun in such a manner as this while in school, you don't think they should AT THE VERY LEAST be seen by a counselor, just in case?
and with such in mind, i don't think it's asking too much for school administrators to investigate a kid who randomly drew nothing but a gun one day

You continuing, and seemingly hysterical, assertion that this kid needs to see a counselor simply and only because he drew a gun suggests to me that it's you who need counseling for your hoplophobia.

no one has really given a good reason as to why this kid should not have been to a counselor

No one has given any reason he should.

When I used to be a children's performer dressing up like Ninja Turtles and going to kids birthday parties (invited) I'd always chuckle to myself when parents would tell me not to make balloon nunchucks and swords. "We don't like violence and weapons." I always wanted to lean in and go, "You know I'm a Ninja Turtle, yes? That that ship pretty much sailed already?" and "It's a freakin' balloon. It won't even harm another balloon..."

That's right up there with my mother's story about how she was determined that I'd never play with violent toys. That lasted until my first Lego set, when I instantly set about buil;ding the guns, tanks, bombers, etc. that were verbotten.

Funny, I've never been sued, nor has any of my colleagues.


I said sue vulnerable. You know, when one kid does something bad, parents almost always come after the teachers. I didn't say sue-magnets.


LOL and I spend a lot of time NOT listening to the administration, precisely because it can't find its backside with both hands.


I didn't say they took it to heart did I? Only that they had to suffer through it. :p


You HAVE to use some common sense.

Not so common anymore unfortunately.

Reads...

Faux News

Stops reading...

You[r] [One World Alliance] continuing, and seemingly hysterical, assertion that this kid needs to see a counselor simply and only because he drew a gun suggests to me that it's you who need counseling for your hoplophobia.

He didn't say that;

As information of the child's background or mental stability is lacking, let us for arugments sake, assume there were zero previous "red flags". One World Alliance, do you then feel drawing a picture of a gun, alone, would warrent a visit to the counselor?

if that's the case, then no i don't think he would need to visit a counselor

I wouldn't usually do this, but I can't help but feel a lot of people who are debating with One World Alliance aren't reading what he's actually written. It's resulted in him repeating himself several times, and this thread is about twice as long as it need be.

He's clearly stated that he does not feel drawing a picture of a gun alone requries counseling.
He's clearly stated that he feels the suspension was an over reaction.

What he then has said, is that there maybe previous problems with this kid, which the news article has failed to mention, for legal and/or sensationalism reasons. This is not a totally unreasonable scenario. Now, hypothetically, if this was the case, and there were previous problems, then prehaps counseling wouldn't be as extreme as some have suggested, or even a good idea. That is all he has said.

I myself do still not totally agree with this view point, but I can accept it as a reasonable differing opinion.

Overreation is an uber-understatement.It was a really crappy doodle.ZFriends and I used to draw our own comics.Comics with guns,knives,swords ect. Teachers never saw them.No one ever overreacted.Marvel comics,we liked them.Do you know how bloody Marvel Comics are?Very.Who cares.These people just wanna crush the first amendment. I really don't like these people.There teaching degrees should be revocked.Apparently they didn't pass 5th,7th,8th grades or high school.

Guns are fun to draw,becuase they are easy to draw.If schools are concerned about mental health--"ahh he will kill us all,he made two rectangles and a semi-circle!!!!!" why don't they encourage his artistic(non)talent by letting him draw guns.Stop suspending kids for doodling and maybe they'll learn something!

My comment probably won't help here, and may have been mentioned mid-thread (which I only skimmed) but here goes...


What do you suppose Fox New's reaction would have been if the picture had included, say, a sketch of George Bush on the receiving end of a bullet from the gun?

I would hazard a guess that they would then be in support of the school's reaction. But in reality, would that have been any different/worse than what the kid had already drawn?

Just a thought.

He didn't say that

OWA most certainly did.

See the quotes I used.

In your first quote of him, he asks a question, he does not make a statement. In the second, he says; "and with such in mind", which makes the statement conditional.

I myself was unsure whether he felt drawing a picture of a gun would need a trip to the counselor, which is why I asked him to clarify his position. He since has done this, and very clearly stated that he felt that drawing a picture of a gun alone did not warrent counseling. Therefore, any previous implications he may have made suggesting this can be dismissed.

In your first quote of him, he asks a question, he does not make a statement. In the second, he says; "and with such in mind", which makes the statement conditional.

I myself was unsure whether he felt drawing a picture of a gun would need a trip to the counselor, which is why I asked him to clarify his position. He since has done this, and very clearly stated that he felt that drawing a picture of a gun alone did not warrent counseling. Therefore, any previous implications he may have made suggesting this can be dismissed.

OWA may have hedged previous statements to the effect that this child needed counseling for simply and only drawing a gun, but that does not excuse the continued, hysterical hoplophobia.

Ad hominem isn't an argument.

Ad hominem isn't an argument.

Hmmm... is it an ad hom to say the poster in question is engaging in hysterical hoplophobia if the argument being made is that the poster in question appears to be a hysterical hoplophobe?

Feels that way sometimes.

;) I've been having fun -- I bought a new schoolbag, and supplies, and can't wait to find out my schedule.....


....heh, you'd almost think I'm a student.

the best teachers are ones that can empathise with their students. :p

Hmmm... is it an ad hom to say the poster in question is engaging in hysterical hoplophobia if the argument being made is that the poster in question appears to be a hysterical hoplophobe?

You didn't manage to correctly assess his argument, which is why you initally, incorrectly, thought he felt the kid needed to see a counselor, soley due to drawing a picture. This occured due to you not reading the thread fully and/or correctly, as such you have failed to attack his argument at all, only question his intergity, ad hominem.

You didn't manage to correctly assess his argument, which is why you initally, incorrectly, thought he felt the kid needed to see a counselor, soley due to drawing a picture. This occured due to you not reading the thread fully and/or correctly, as such you have failed to attack his argument at all, only question his intergity, ad hominem.

Please stop abusing logical fallacies, they didn't do anything to you.

You didn't manage to correctly assess his argument, which is why you initally, incorrectly, thought he felt the kid needed to see a counselor, soley due to drawing a picture. This occured due to you not reading the thread fully and/or correctly, as such you have failed to attack his argument at all, only question his intergity, ad hominem.

I did not fail to attack his argument because I never attacked it to begin with. My argument from the start was simply that OWA's statements were indicative of hoplophobia, for which I suggested he needed counseling.

May I suggest you take your own advice and read my posts.

You didn't manage to correctly assess his argument, which is why you initally, incorrectly, thought he felt the kid needed to see a counselor, soley due to drawing a picture. This occured due to you not reading the thread fully and/or correctly, as such you have failed to attack his argument at all, only question his intergity, ad hominem.

I think you're OWA's puppet.

Please stop abusing logical fallacies, they didn't do anything to you.

Insightful.

I did not fail to attack his argument because I never attacked it to begin with. My argument from the start was simply that OWA's statements were indicative of hoplophobia, for which I suggested he needed counseling.

May I suggest you take your own advice and read my posts.

So you didn't attack his argument, just called him hysterical and in need of counseling, my mistake.

I think you're OWA's puppet.

I think you should write less, think more.

I think you're OWA's puppet.

Aha. Good call on that. Reviewing, I suspect you are correct.

I think you should write less, think more.

If I didn't, I would have wasted more words on you than you were worth.

Insightful.

Actually yes, it was.

So you didn't attack his argument, just called him hysterical and in need of counseling, my mistake.

Seeing as hoplophobia is an irrational fear of firearms, and OWA (you?) seems to have exhibited such, and counseling seems to be much more appropriate for someone exhibiting an irrational and hysterical fear than a boy drawing a firearm, then yes.

I think you should write less, think more.

LOL

If I didn't, I would have wasted more words on you than you were worth.

Waste a few more, and you might actually be on topic at your next attempt.

Seeing as hoplophobia is an irrational fear of firearms, and OWA (you?) seems to have exhibited such, and counseling seems to be much more appropriate for someone exhibiting an irrational and hysterical fear than a boy drawing a firearm, then yes.

I know perfectly well what hoplopobia is, and no, I am not OWA. Also, unless you're a psychiatrist, and psychiatrists determine phobias and the need for counseling purely by (incorrectly) reading a few posts on a forum, then your anaylsis is somewhat limited.

If there was anything wrong with the kid then the article would have mentioned it.

If there was anything wrong with the kid then the article would have mentioned it.

Exactly. If he was violent at school, they would have said so.

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

What does it matter? He has the constitution given right to draw any damn thing he wants. Speaking as someone who scores left of Gandhi on that political compass test, zero intelligence (sorry I mean zero tolerance) policies are crap.

OWA, and your puppet, give it up. By assuming he has problem sbecause th arctile didn't say, is like me assuming you do because your profile on the forums doesn't say so don't.

Personally, I would think that if the teachers had any sense they would simply make a note of the drawing and perhaps watch the child's behavior without making an embarassing scene out of the matter.

And if the child were unstable humiliating him over his doodle certainly wouldn't help the matter (whether he was sent to a counselor or suspended).

Also, boys take an interest in a few things:

1. Shit that blows up
2. Guns
3. Any mixture of one and two
4. Cars
5. Sports
6. Dirty magazines under their matresses


You forgot sports that involve cars that blow shit up with guns.

wow, amazing. Someone has the nerve to suggest that maybe, MAYBE there might be more to the story than we know, and instead of leaping to one conclusion we should remain open minded, and he gets pounced on by you people like a bunch of wild hyenas.

All someone said is that there MIGHT be more going on here than we know and maybe it's justified to at least send him to a councilor to see why he was drawing guns in school, and you people have somehow twisted and turned that into him claiming that this kid is a psycho mass murderer and call him hysterical. And when someone agrees with him you dismiss this as a puppet because oh no, nobody else could possibly agree with someone who dares challenge your opinion

Seriously, what is going on here? Have people turned so afraid of counter opinion that if someone offers the mere suggestion that their not completely founded opinion just might not be right, you fly off the fucking handle? Shameful

Someone has the nerve to suggest that maybe, MAYBE there might be more to the story than we know

All someone said is that there MIGHT be more going on here than we know and maybe it's justified to at least send him to a councilor to see why he was drawing guns in school

No, you are mis-interpreting what he said.

He said,

"if a kid just randomly doodles a gun, and we're not talking about a small insignificant part of a larger painting/doodle, we're talking THAT'S ALL THAT WAS DRAWN was a gun, i think that should raise a few red flags"

This has nothing to do with "there might be more to the story than we know." This has to do with his interpretation that drawing a gun = raising a "red flag."

What red flag? Why? Did you get sent to the counselor for drawing things in school? Did anyone else? Is drawing a gun a symptom of psychological disorder? Christ no.

Then there is:


"i don't necessarily think the kid should have been suspended, but i do definitely think that he should be evaluated by a counselor"

This is not "maybe it was justified." This is "definitely should be evaluated." You'll note the difference in "open mindedness" involved in "maybe" and "definitely." Or, I guess you won't.

This is utter nonsense. School counselors are there to evluate PROBLEMS and last I heard, drawing a gun (or any other object) is not in an of itself a red flag, or a problem, or a symptom of anything at all.


Seriously, what is going on here? Have people turned so afraid of counter opinion that if someone offers the mere suggestion that their not completely founded opinion just might not be right, you fly off the fucking handle? Shameful

Good question, what IS going on here? Are people so afraid of mass-media publicized school shootings that a DRAWING of A GUN is enough to set off "red flags" in your fear-driven minds and you fly off the handle, self-righteously incriminating anyone who dares suggest you (and the school in question) are overreacting?

It's pretty fucking shameful.

I was wondering why there was a price tag on the gun.

OWA, and your puppet, give it up. By assuming he has problem sbecause th arctile didn't say, is like me assuming you do because your profile on the forums doesn't say so don't.

If, when you say OWA's puppet, you are referring to me, then perhaps you would care to point out excately where I have assumed that this child does have a problem, please, quote me. If you are unable to do this, then perhaps it is you who should be less presumptuous?

completely lacking from this article (what can one expect from Fox news?) is any form of context.

Why did the kid draw the picture? Was it a class assignment? Was it random?


If it was random, then it really does have to make you think, why the hell was he drawing a gun for no reason?

That certainly can be very disturbing, in light of recent events.

I draw guns in school. Sure it's just me thinking up new NS weapons, but still...

(Yes it's from Fox News website, and no I don't want to hear a bunch of well let's face it, political talking points that the Democrats and the left wing spoon fed you people with your oh so hilarious puns like "Faux" news. Try to act adult for once and read the article.)



and what did the drawing looks like?

http://www.foxnews.com/images/305453/1_61_082207_gun_sketch.jpg

Linky! (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294145,00.html)

Yes, apparently school officials are now going overboard with the Zero Tolerance crap, by suspending children who *gasp* draw (badly done) pictures of guns! Oh no, not that, anything but that! Jeez, is it me are are people just getting stupider everyday? This is also why if I ever have children (yea when Hell freezes over), they will not go to a public school, they will go to a private school. I don't care if it does cost extra, I'm not exposing my children to this kind of stupidity that school administration apparently display on a daily basis.

Yea, ditto here, if I can afford it when that day comes.

It looks like a sideways skyscraper.

LOL yeah it does kinda look like a sideways skyscraper.

Yeah if you tilt your head to the left, it looks like a skyscraper with an airplane sticking out of it.

Obviously the kid is a terrorist!

LOL :D

Anyone read Little Nick? The doctor also drew guns whn he was seriously annoyed about the class. Sofa king what?

Applying the same rules to me, I would've been suspended more than a dozen times in my youth.

Why I drew those pictures (mostly tanks and tanks pwn guns as we all know) is beyond me, but I know that I harboured little anger towards my classmates.

Applying the same rules to me, I would've been suspended more than a dozen times in my youth.

Why I drew those pictures (mostly tanks and tanks pwn guns as we all know) is beyond me, but I know that I harboured little anger towards my classmates.
I drew guns and grew up to be a pacifist.

Overreation is an uber-understatement.It was a really crappy doodle.ZFriends and I used to draw our own comics.Comics with guns,knives,swords ect. Teachers never saw them.No one ever overreacted.Marvel comics,we liked them.Do you know how bloody Marvel Comics are?Very.Who cares.These people just wanna crush the first amendment. I really don't like these people.There teaching degrees should be revocked.Apparently they didn't pass 5th,7th,8th grades or high school.

The irony, it burns.

I think you're OWA's puppet.

Aha. Good call on that. Reviewing, I suspect you are correct.

OWA, and your puppet, give it up. By assuming he has problem sbecause th arctile didn't say, is like me assuming you do because your profile on the forums doesn't say so don't.

Extraordinarily doubtful. The styles are different, which anyone can see. Mod tools also tell me the likelihood of their being the same person is vanishingly small, so kindly DON'T accuse people simply because they agree with someone you disagree with.

Lisa "Jake 'Toilet' Boyman" Simpson: What are you drawing?

Nelson: A robot with guns for arms shooting a plane made out of guns that also shoots guns.

- The Simpsons

You forgot sports that involve cars that blow shit up with guns.

Did you ever play Twisted Metal?

You complete in a demolition derby tournament of heavily armed cars, last one functioning is the winner.