He wasn't arrested for the shirt. He was asked to remove the shirt because it was causing a disruption at school. He was arrested for disoderly conduct when he refused to comply with school rules and caused an even larger disruption.
Yes, however, the fact still remains that the school administration caused more disruption than the kid wearing the shirt would have in the first place.
The kid and his dad should both be in jail. We don't need folks like this representing us.
The kid should be in jail for what, exactly? Violating some arbitrary rule set up by a state-run institution that he is has no choice in going to, and then resisting the idiocy? If anything, we need more people representing us like that. More people who say "enough is enough!" to the state, instead of just bending to every whim of government administration.
Nothing new here, students have never been allowed to bring anything to school that caused a disruption. The definition of what disrupts has changed with the times. 40 years ago kids were routinely sent home when boys had hair too long and girls with skirts too short.
So? Are you suggesting that just because boys are allowed to wear long hair in school nowadays that we should encourage the suppression of political thought because it's not "proper"?
If they had done what this kid did they would have been arrrested too.
I have some serious doubt about that, but even if that's true, it doesn't make it any more right.
The things that caused a class disruption in 1970 and 2013 are far different. The long hair and short skirts wouldn't raise an eyebrow today. Shirts with unpopular messages will. I would have been sent home for that T-shirt in 1970 too. Not because of the message, but because T-shirts were only allowed in gym class. We were expected to dress better in regular classes.
Like it or not an NRA shirt is going to cause problems just as much as a GAY PRIDE shirt or a PETA shirt. None are allowed, and with good reason. It has nothing to do with gun rights or 1st amendment rights. We all have 1st amendment rights, but that does not give us the right to force others to hear our message. He can excercise his 1st amendment rights away from school. Doing it at school is interfering with the right to an education of every other kid.
Do you know what one of the primary purposes of school is? It goes far far beyond just learning history, science, math, and English. One of the main goals that schools have are to socialize kids and get them ready for the adult world. How do you think stifling political opinion for the sake of "not being disruptive" is going to change them as adults? Do you think they're going to say to themselves "Oh, well I shouldn't have been wearing that shirt at school, because it was interfering with the other kid's education." or "If I show this political opinion, I'm going to get arrested." I see tons of people complaining about how "kids these days only care about themselves" and how they aren't involved or interested in politics, yet applaud schools for pulling stunts like this.
Furthermore, the kid wasn't forcing people to hear his message, he was wearing a shirt. He wasn't going around with a megaphone to people's ears saying "YAY NRA", he was wearing a piece of cloth with his opinion on it. At no point did he start shoving the shirt in people's faces, he simply wore something that reflected the way he felt. As I said before, the real disruption was caused by the school administration causing as much fuss as they have been. Yet, I haven't heard you complain about them interfering with the right to education to those kids at the school.
Schools have often left dress codes vague and used the "class disruption" clause in there and trusted kids and parents to use some common sense. Stunts like this are why many schools are requiring uniforms. If parents cannot use common sense, then even the right to choose your own clothes are taken away.
Common sense to you is very obviously different than common sense to me. Common sense to you seems to suggest that everything a kid wears must be completely neutral and not in any way distract other kids, while common sense to me suggests that teenagers need to have leeway in determining what they wear to prepare them for their adult life. Sure, some things like graphic images or slogans should still not be allowed, but that's a far cry from wearing a shirt with a political opinion on it.
This is exactly where this is going. If he is allowed to wear the NRA shirt, you set a precident. The next kid who wants to show up in his GAY PRIDE or PETA shirt has to be allowed to wear it too.
As well they should. Schools and the government on the whole have no place in telling kids what political opinions are acceptable, and which are wrong.
Then how many will be arrested/ hospitalized after the brawl in the cafeteria.
This very much reminds me of the argument that anti-gunners always use when a state is considering concealed carry. "It'll be the wild west" ect. ect. You know who should be punished for starting the theoretical brawl in the cafeteria? The person who threw the first punch. If their self control is so poor that they start a fist fight over differing political opinion, then obviously their problems can't be solved by having people not wear shirts stating their beliefs around them.
They will all be wearing khaki's and polo's in the school colors next year. No options, no NRA shirt, no camo, no jeans. Just what a committee picks out for you to wear.
So your solution to this is to allow kids to have freedom, but not too much freedom, just enough to give them the illusion that they actually have some free choice in the matter.
I take it back, this seems like the perfect way to get them ready to live in today's political and societal climate.
Unfortunately mine would be FUD.
