8th grader arrested,suspended for NRA tshirt

[PrincessKsMom]

Any study clearly designed to reach a specific conclusion is automatically questionable.

Edit: and your connection between this study and the school policy is at best a stretch.

So then you would also dismiss any studies that are funded/backed by the NRA out of hand as well?

 

[disneydee6]

I suppose every school has different policies. But in the schools I've taught in, if you are wearing something deemed inappropriate by teacher or staff (because of the language, showing too much etc), you must put it inside out or have a parent bring you a new shirt to wear. There is no argument over policy, teacher says its a problem or distraction, shirt is not allowed, end of discussion. First amendment rights yes, but they also have to school policies they must obey too, you can't say or wear whatever you want without risk of suspension. If, for example, (again, don't know the backstory here) he gave the staff member a problem about taking the shirt off, they have a right to take disciplinary action.

 

[Becky2005]

I haven't read everything but I'm going with the he was asked to either change his shirt to his gym shirt, turn it inside out, etc... and didn't so there had to me more to the story.

Even grade schoolers know not to wear/bring anything resembling weapons to school here (there is always a debate if a light saber is a weapon come Halloween time but...).

My son wore a shirt that had lights on it.....he was asked by 1 teacher to turn it off, so he did! The other teachers were fine with it (actually a few of them thought it was pretty cool -- the choir teacher loved it and one of his other teachers actually turned off the lights so they could all see it better but that was one of his smaller type classes that tend to be more flexible). If he hadn't complied when the one teacher asked him to turn it off, then I fully would expect him to get in trouble as it would be considered a disruption.

 

[Granny square]

So then you would also dismiss any studies that are funded/backed by the NRA out of hand as well?

Anyone can make statistic say what they want. Even the NRA

The NRA would certainly only quote the studies that say what they want them to say also. But at least they don't pretend to be non biased. Or without agenda.

 

[foreUT]

If this has been posted previously, my apologies, but w West Virginia in the 4th Circuit, it would seem the school district would be bound by this decision:

Some courts apply the Tinker standard to determine if school officials can regulate student clothing. This standard asks whether school officials can reasonably forecast whether the student expression will cause a substantial disruption or material interference with school activities. For instance, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently struck down a portion of a school’s dress code in Newsom v. Albemarle County School Board that prohibited clothing depicting weapons.
The controversy arose after school officials forced student Alan Newsom to quit wearing his National Rifle Association T-shirt, which depicted three silhouettes of men holding guns and bore the message “NRA Sports Shooting Camp.” The school policy prohibited “messages on clothing, jewelry, and personal belongings that relate to … weapons.”
In its December 2003 decision, the 4th Circuit determined that the policy was too broad and was not necessary to prevent disruptions at school. The court explained that the language of the school dress code would prohibit clothing bearing the state seal of Virginia, which depicts a woman holding a spear, or clothing bearing the athletic mascot of the University of Virginia, which contains two crossed sabers.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/clothing-dress-codes-uniforms

IMO, the school district isn't speaking about their "policy" because they had an attorney explain the First Amendment to them.

 

[DEA]

Pt looked for studies that replicated what they wanted to say and promote.

Show me a study that says there is more gun violence in areas where hunting and guns at the norm. IF the presence of guns or gun pictures makes for more violence this should be easily proven.

Well... no. That would not be an experimental study. If people were exposed to guns, they were more violent than if they were exposed to sports equipment in one study. That is the way you draw a conclusion in experimental research: keep everything else the same, and vary one condition. If there is a difference between the experimental and control conditions, then you have isolated the most likely cause.

To use a less loaded example: Say one group of people is shown a picture of the moon on the wall. Another group is shown a picture of a kitten. Each group of people is randomly assigned to each condition. Later, both groups are asked for the name of a laundry detergent. The group shown the picture of the moon says "Tide" twice as much as the group that was shown the picture of the kitten. Would it be fair to say that, because the only difference between the groups was the picture each group was shown, seeing a picture of the moon made people think of tides, making "Tide" a more available answer when asked for the name of a detergent?

(Note that this is similar to, but not as complex as, a study by Nisbett and WIlson, 1977.)

 

[sam_gordon]

If this has been posted previously, my apologies, but w West Virginia in the 4th Circuit, it would seem the school district would be bound by this decision:



http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/clothing-dress-codes-uniforms

IMO, the school district isn't speaking about their "policy" because they had an attorney explain the First Amendment to them.

If I'm reading the part you quoted correctly though, the 4th Circuit said the school policy was too broad in it's definition. So if another school has a more narrow policy... ? Something's not right here. I can't say what I want to say.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

So then you would also dismiss any studies that are funded/backed by the NRA out of hand as well?

Any study from either side will obviously promote the data that best makes their case.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Don't have the link, but Yahoo is reporting the kid is back at school with his shirt today.

 

[chobie]

If this has been posted previously, my apologies, but w West Virginia in the 4th Circuit, it would seem the school district would be bound by this decision:

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/clothing-dress-codes-uniforms

IMO, the school district isn't speaking about their "policy" because they had an attorney explain the First Amendment to them.

All that decision says is that it is likely he would prevail on claim that the policy was over broad. It did not rule that banning shirts with guns was per se unconstitutional.

That case is about injunctive relief.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

1. It's not my study. It's over 50 studies in the extant scientific literature.

2. If the image of a gun increases the level of violent actions, as the studies show, then having that image on a shirt that is seen by a class full of students (or multiple classes of students), then does it not make sense that seeing the imagery of a gun would increase violent actions? So, it is not just portraying violence, it is, in fact, leading to an increase in violent behavior.

3. Regarding your analogy: I do not know the literature on this as well as I know the literature on the gun issue. The studies I do know suggest that the material has to be sexually explicit to lead to outcomes that are generally considered negative (early activity, casual and/or unprotected activity). So, unless the imagery were explicit, I do not see why it would be a concern for the school.

You can believe what you want about how one would respond to the picture. It still doesn't make the connection.

Even if a picture of a gun would in fact make me feel more violent, that still does not make a static picture of a gun a "portrayal of violence". A picture of someone being shot? Now that would be a portrayal of violence.

 

[foreUT]

If I'm reading the part you quoted correctly though, the 4th Circuit said the school policy was too broad in it's definition. So if another school has a more narrow policy... ? Something's not right here. I can't say what I want to say.

There is a four-prong test that is cited in the article, the last, of which, is: minimal infringement on the First Amendment rights of the student. So, it appears that what is considered "minimal" to one observer, might not pass that test with another. Probably, like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[foreUT]

All that decision says is that it is likely he would prevail on claim that the policy was over broad. It did not rule that banning shirts with guns was per se unconstitutional.

That case is about injunctive relief.

Which side would you wish to be arguing, though?

 

[Gumbo4x4]

All that decision says is that it is likely he would prevail on claim that the policy was over broad. It did not rule that banning shirts with guns was per se unconstitutional.

That case is about injunctive relief.

Agreed

 

[disneydee6]

The officer, he told me to sit down and be quiet. I said, `No, I'm exercising my right to free speech.' I said it calmly," he said.

From Huffpost.

Surrrre he did. Quoting the constitution to a police officer, this kid is no victim. No doubt he was being calm and respectful. After not complying with teachers and administrators, he declares that he 'calmly' exercised his right to free speech to an officer. I'm sorry, but this kid is pointing the finger, saying everyone else was yelling, but HE alone remained calm in the situation, it's bologna. Yes, the schools policy is broad, but he could also have complied, especially when their policy states that shirts 'displaying violence' are not allowed. It has a gun on the shirt, and the judgement is at the discretion of the TEACHERS and ADMINISTRATION, whom he was admittedly argued with!

What he doesn't realize that he's doing by quoting 'free speech' whenever it suits him, is that the school will have to create MORE policies and rules regarding clothing. THIS is why teachers have such hard jobs these days. Instead of his gunslinging father asking his son "why didn't you listen to your teachers when they asked a simple request?" he asks, "how can we publicize the NRA in public schools and at the same time, disrespect teachers, administration, and police officers?" SMH

 

[Planogirl]

I don't understand why it would ever be OK to use schools as a place to push an agenda. I didn't want anyone trying to influence my son at school and it didn't matter if it was a teacher or fellow student. Schools should be places to learn, not to make political statements.

And yes, guns are all about violence. What else would they be about?

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Surrrre he did. Quoting the constitution to a police officer, this kid is no victim. No doubt he was being calm and respectful. After not complying with teachers and administrators, he declares that he 'calmly' exercised his right to free speech to an officer. I'm sorry, but this kid is pointing the finger, saying everyone else was yelling, but HE alone remained calm in the situation, it's bologna.

Actually, I believe he only implicates the original teacher as "causing a disturbance", not the officer nor the principal. For that matter, he didn't specifically say the teacher yelled, only that it was the teacher who caused a scene.

Now, how he approached it from HERE is another story altogether. If the principal said to turn it inside out he should have, and when the officer said to sit down, he should have. And then the next step is to take it to the school board for them to either clarify or amend the current policy.

From today:

http://www.kval.com/news/national/J...p-over-NRA-shirt-back-in-class-204138751.html

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) - A West Virginia teenager returned to class Monday wearing the same National Rifle Association T-shirt that led to his suspension and arrest after he refused a teacher's order last week to remove it.

Other students across Logan County wore similar shirts, which display the NRA logo and a hunting rifle, to school in a show of support for 14-year-old Jared Marcum, said his lawyer Ben White.

White said school officials told him on Monday that Marcum's one-day suspension was appropriate because the Logan Middle School eighth-grader was being disruptive. White disputed that position, saying Marcum was exercising his free speech rights and did not disrupt anything.

"Their version is that the suspension was for disrupting the educational process, not the shirt," White said in a telephone interview.

"I don't see how he materially disrupted the educational process," he said.

Logan County Schools Superintendent Wilma Zigmond didn't immediately return a telephone message Monday

Marcum's stepfather, Allen Larieris, said Sunday that the teen was waiting in line in the school cafeteria last Thursday when a teacher ordered him to remove the T-shirt or turn it inside out.

White said Marcum was expressing his support for the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms by wearing the shirt, which he said did not violate the school's dress code.

"We at this point believe that Jared acted as mature as a 14-year-old child can act with the pressure that was put on him," White said.

Logan County Schools' dress code, which is posted on the school system's website, prohibits clothing and accessories that display profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases. Clothing displaying advertisements for any alcohol, tobacco, or drug product also is prohibited.

Logan police arrested Marcum, 14, after he was sent to the school office and again refused to remove the shirt. Marcum has said that he was arrested on charges of disrupting an educational process and obstructing an officer, though White said Monday that the Logan County prosecutor's office is reviewing the case to decide whether to proceed.

The Associated Press typically does not identify juveniles who face criminal charges, but Marcum and his family wanted his name and case known.

 

[Granny square]

I don't understand why it would ever be OK to use schools as a place to push an agenda. I didn't want anyone trying to influence my son at school and it didn't matter if it was a teacher or fellow student. Schools should be places to learn, not to make political statements.

And yes, guns are all about violence. What else would they be about?

Well, half of the meat our family eats is killed with one of those guns. So while I suppose that is violence I don't have an issue with it.

Considering they probably have the whole week of deer gun off because of the teacher union I think it is silly.

The schools are chalk full of agendas. I'd rather people speak their minds than not. I love that others wore their shirts too.

 

[sunshinehighway]

"We at this point believe that Jared acted as mature as a 14-year-old child can act with the pressure that was put on him," White said.

Uh huh. That sounds a little different than what the earlier articles said. Sounds like he changed his tune a little after meeting with the principal and maybe seeing that cafeteria video.

 

[foreUT]

I don't understand why it would ever be OK to use schools as a place to push an agenda. I didn't want anyone trying to influence my son at school and it didn't matter if it was a teacher or fellow student. Schools should be places to learn, not to make political statements.

And yes, guns are all about violence. What else would they be about?

Hunting, self-defense, marksmanship? Should they ban cars on shirts, too? They can certainly be used "violent[ly]". I may be naive, but I can't imagine a teen in ms being "influenced" by a t-shirt image of an object, based on how much of the darker side of society they are bombarded with on a daily basis.