Madness after girl, 4, draws gun pic at school

Status
Not open for further replies.
ShawnC, this incident happened in Canada not here in the US. When it comes to firearms, they have much "laxer" needs for things such as "probable cause" and the likes. Their Magistrates could care less about the peoples rights when it comes to firearms because they, in general, do not want the people to even have firearms. Pay attention because things such as this are already beginning to happen here in the good old USA. The court of "public opinion" has sent many innocent people to prison here. The times of "innocent before proven guilty" is fast becoming a thing of the past here in this country.
 
I have been telling everyone I know about this since I first heard about it. I am well aware that this sort of nonsense can happen here, and does. The case in my previous post proves it. If you don't point out the pure stupidity in the logic defending that behavior, then all is lost. No American should be defending this travesty I don't care what country it happened in. If an ally democracy right on our border can let this happen, tjhen can we really be that far behind. Open your eyes, people.

I don't usually rant, but this sort of thing just drives me insane.
 
He was put in handcuffs and strip searched based on a picture by a four year old and a statement about "bad guys" and "monsters". Are you really defending that? Really?
BG is a fairly well travelled acronym around here. Do a forum search for the use of the word "goblin" and enlightenment will come soon enough. :cool:

Unless of course, those posters are indulging in fantasy statements about having and using guns... Wouldn't necessarily put it past them.

Sent using Tapatalk
 
Commenting on comments is next to useless.

To put this in sequence from the various news reports:

Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, Feb 2012.

Four year old Neaveh Sansone drew a picture of a gun at school. When a teacher asked about the gun, the girl replied, "That’s my daddy’s. He uses it to shoot bad guys and monsters."

So the school staff called Child Welfare to report a gun in the house accessible to children.

Alison Scott, executive director of Family and Children’s Services:
“From a public safety point of view, any child drawing a picture of guns and saying there’s guns in a home would warrant some further conversation with the parents and child.”

Insp. Kevin Thaler, Waterloo Regional Police: The police received information that
“a firearm was in a residence and children had access to it. We had every concern, based on this information, that children were in danger.”

...some further conversation with the parents and child...

As routine, Jessie Sansone arrived at school to pick up his kids and was summoned to the principal's office where three officers were waiting. He was arrested at the school for "possession of a firearm", handcuffed and taken to the police station where he was strip searched.

Steve Zack, school principal:
“Police chose to arrest Jessie here. Nobody wants something like this to happen at any time, especially not at school. But that’s out of my hands.”

The authorities took the three children from the school to Family and Children’s Services to be interviewed. Police went to his home and took his wife to the police station. Hours later, Sansone was released with no charges, but was asked to consent to a search of his home. The search of the house (while wife Stephanie was being questioned at the police station) turned up no evidence of an actual violation.

Insp. Kevin Thaler:
"What we were investigating was a drawing of a handgun at the school and subsequently through the investigation, the officers identified the weapon that was being drawn was, in fact, a replica toy gun in the residence."

Clear plastic toy gun that fired plastic darts!

Stephanie (Jessie's wife):
``I just think they blew it out of proportion. It was for absolutely nothing. They searched our house upside down and found nothing. They had the assumption he owned a firearm. The way everything happened was completely unnecessary, especially since we know the school very well. I don’t understand how they came to that conclusion from a four-year-old’s drawing.’’

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/...at-school-after-daughter-draws-picture-of-gun
Dianne Wood, Waterloo Region Record, "Kitchener dad arrested at school after daughter draws picture of gun", The Star, 24 Feb 2012

http://www.anorak.co.uk/313388/news...daughter-draws-picture-of-gun-at-school.html/
"Dad arrested and strip-searched after daughter draws picture of gun at school", Anorak

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2012/02/27/pf-19433936.html
Kris Sims, Parliamentary Bureau, "Kitchener officials sticking to their guns", Canoe Network, February 27, 2012

==========================================

My impressions lean to sarcasm:

The evidence for all this was a 4-yo girl's drawing and her explanation: "That’s my daddy’s. He uses it to shoot bad guys and monsters."

One would think that the police could have searched their records to see if Sansone had been involved in any shootings of bad guys. Or does Canada have a closed season on monster hunting?

Everyone in this fiasco (school, child welfare, police) ran on autopilot following the manual (see quotes above and amplified in the stories linked) without stopping to think.


---------------------------------------

Added: Sansone admitted in at least one of the newspaper interviews that he had an assault and attempted burglary conviction five years earlier (when he was 21); however, the school, child welfare and police were not quoted as even mentioning that as a reason.
 
Last edited:
Canada is a nice place to visit, but this school over-reacted. Even fearful anti-gun folks should at least ask questions.
In suburban Chicago, we got a phone call from the school when my son complained about an abrasion from "my dad's gun" after he scraped his hand cocking the BB gun I received on my 7th Christmas. "Just checking" the Principal said. Seemed to be an over-reaction.
The article mentioned that the response was based on more than the picture. The parents seem to be taking it fairly well. Anyone hunted in BC? Whenever I cross the border, they as,k if I'm carrying a knife. How do you hunt Canada?
 
I'm so glad I live in Tennessee.

When my son was in first grade, the wife and I went to parent/teacher night. We all sat at our child's desk while the teacher went through the spiel. My wife opens my sons desk and recoils in horror when she sees a drawing that my son made. It is a drawing of a bomber flying over the school and carpet bombing it.

She figured he'd be expelled for life. Come to find out there was an assignment called "finish the story". The story was about a school that had a mouse that they couldn't get rid of...and the kids were supposed to draw an ending that would get rid of the mouse problem.

I thought it was a great solution. Nobody ever said a word about it...I guess it all depends on how uptight the culture is.
 
BG is a fairly well travelled acronym around here. Do a forum search for the use of the word "goblin" and enlightenment will come soon enough. :cool:

Unless of course, those posters are indulging in fantasy statements about having and using guns... Wouldn't necessarily put it past them.

Sent using Tapatalk
You'll have to be clearer. Are you suggesting that the four year old girl is a frequent poster here? Or maybe she frequents other boards? Or maybe, based on some posts on this forum, the Canadian authorities would have the right to search someone's house?
If there was a point in your response, I'm afraid I missed it.
 
You'll have to be clearer. Are you suggesting that the four year old girl is a frequent poster here? Or maybe she frequents other boards?
Sorry, I would have thought that the comparison would have been obvious, given the comment about the forum posters posting fantasy talk.
Those posters do have guns, and use language similar to that which the girl used. They bear a striking resemblance to what a child might hear from a parent who does own a gun.

Sent using Tapatalk
 
The real problem with suing is that the taxpayers pay. No one involoved on the goverment side will lose their job. They were just following SOP. Until those involved can get sent to jail or be personally sued nothing will change.
 
There is nothing to sue about with this situation. The little girl made it clear there was a gun, and apparently that she had access to it. Of course, no one clarified what kind of gun, because everyone freaked. People do that.

I know this family was traumatized. I know that, given the outcome, the school overreacted. I hope they are doing okay, and if I were them, I'd consider moving to someplace else if possible and leave those morons in the past...but I digress.

From the teacher/school's point of view, if Daddy kept a loaded gun in reach of his 4 year old, and she told them as much...and that night the little girl went home and got scared and tried to fight off monsters and mistakenly shot someone, that teacher would have wondered "what if." Teachers by and large do in fact care about their students and their students' well being. If they suspect abuse or a lack of safety at home, sometimes they act - sometimes they're wrong.

It was all a complete misunderstanding, and it's pretty insane how it all came about. But, accidental shootings involving children do occur, and unsecured loaded guns in a home with children DO exist.

I just wanted to throw a comment in here about how the teacher and school honestly felt the child was in danger with an unsafe home, and acted accordingly - i'd rather they make mistakes than just not care and have a child endure abuse or neglect. Because abuse and neglect does happen, and it's sad a child has to deal with it.

Now I'll leave you folks to continue going on about liberals and liberal educators.
 
A four year ord girl is not capable of making ANYTHING "clear". The authorities had the reponsibility to corroborate the allegation (which they MAY have coerced out of the girl). The rights of the accused are also to be held as high as any unsubstanciated allegation. While cause for concern, and further investigation, a four year old's word is not enough to arrest, or search, in any known free society. How did they know it wasn't a perfectly legal airsoft gun? (Obviously, they didn't "know" anthing.)
 
at 4 years old my daughter knew not to touch a firearm, and knew they were not toys,
at 5yrs, she started shooting a .22 Cooey with supervision,
my daughter by the time she was 4 had been along on several moose and elk hunts,
at 12 yrs , she shot a B&C Muley with a .308 Norma Mag at 220 yards,
at 12 yrs, she could bugle elk as good as myself,

she hunts and shoots to this day
she is now married and has a 5 month old son, my grandson,

so,with her blessings and my own, HE will have the same opportunities she and myself have enjoyed,,

in spite of ignorance and paranoia !
 
I don't agree with the actions taken in this case by the school or police as the child did nothing to indicate she had access to an unsecure firearm. However, many posters act as though a disturbing number of kids don't die from unsecured firearms every year. You may be responsible, keep your guns secure and teach your kids not to touch them but believe it or not many don't. A simple google search will bring up incident after incident. So while the actions in this case were completely unwarranted there is a valid reason for teachers and police to be on the look out for dangerous situations.
 
...the teacher and school honestly felt the child was in danger with an unsafe home, and acted accordingly - i'd rather they make mistakes than just not care and have a child endure abuse or neglect. Because abuse and neglect does happen, and it's sad a child has to deal with it.

Ever heard of the slippery slope? Of course you have.

If a teacher in Canada can raise an alarm and cause the havoc we saw here over a child drawing a picture of a gun, and a teacher/inspector in North Carolina can rob a child of her lunch because the "state" knows better than her mother what she should eat, what else can the teachers and schools do? Or better, what can they not do?

I'm of course not advocating child neglect or abuse, but we have to be rational about how we manage our vague suspicions about it. In neither of theses cases was there any credible evidence of neglect or abuse.

It's time to rein in the anti-gun paranoids and the nutrition nazis.
 
A four year ord girl is not capable of making ANYTHING "clear". The authorities had the reponsibility to corroborate the allegation (which they MAY have coerced out of the girl). The rights of the accused are also to be held as high as any unsubstanciated allegation. While cause for concern, and further investigation, a four year old's word is not enough to arrest, or search, in any known free society. How did they know it wasn't a perfectly legal airsoft gun? (Obviously, they didn't "know" anthing.)
Interesting moving of the goalposts, but the acquiescence regarding the statements being similar to true statements by posters is sufficient.

beatledog7 said:
Ever heard of the slippery slope? Of course you have.

If a teacher in Canada can raise an alarm and cause the havoc we saw here over a child drawing a picture of a gun, and a teacher/inspector in North Carolina can rob a child of her lunch because the "state" knows better than her mother what she should eat, what else can the teachers and schools do? Or better, what can they not do?
Those two bolded comments are only reconcilable in a self-contradictory perspective. The implication is that if those aforementioned cases are not prohibited, then it will open up even greater powers to them. That implication fits the very definition of slippery slope.

JustinJ said:
I don't agree with the actions taken in this case by the school or police as the child did nothing to indicate she had access to an unsecure firearm. However, many posters act as though a disturbing number of kids don't die from unsecured firearms every year. You may be responsible, keep your guns secure and teach your kids not to touch them but believe it or not many don't. A simple google search will bring up incident after incident. So while the actions in this case were completely unwarranted there is a valid reason for teachers and police to be on the look out for dangerous situations.
Well put.
 
Those two bolded comments are only reconcilable in a self-contradictory perspective. The implication is that if those aforementioned cases are not prohibited, then it will open up even greater powers to them. That implication fits the very definition of slippery slope.

Yes, it does, which makes me wonder you say it is in any way self contradictory. Perhaps I should have should said, "or worse." By "better, " I meant a better question.

My point was quite simple: give the school an inch, it takes a mile. Say one overreach is ok, and they all are. Result: the schools get to tell parents how to rear their children.

I have an issue with JustinJ's comment:

I don't agree with the actions taken in this case by the school or police as the child did nothing to indicate she had access to an unsecure firearm. However, many posters act as though a disturbing number of kids don't die from unsecured firearms every year. You may be responsible, keep your guns secure and teach your kids not to touch them but believe it or not many don't. A simple google search will bring up incident after incident. So while the actions in this case were completely unwarranted there is a valid reason for teachers and police to be on the look out for dangerous situations.

In bold are statements saying the teacher/school/police were out of line. In italics, an assertion that posters who say they were out of line are being naive and that teachers and police need to act in this manner.

Which is it?
 
Don't kid yourself--this country has large groups of people that want guns made illegal.
I don't trust our goverment anymore---those days are over.
 
People tend to go crazy and act without thinking because they are either whipped into a frenzy with PC talk or actually have an agenda to cure the world of what they consider wrong (and that's giving them the benefit of doubt).

At work we had someone come around lecturing about being on guard against signs of violence and eradicating threats. An employee under me had a common exhibit in his cubical displaying various caliber bullets. (I live in an outdoor sport intensive area.) Some employee reported it to Human Resources and I ended up defending him based upon the theory that a bullet without a gun could not reasonably constitute a threat. I won and I think HR was looking for some way they could drop the issue without violating the political correctness of it all, but the sheer simple logic of such an argument apparently didn't occur to them, or they feared raising it.

Ideologues bolster their positions by inflaming others to whip them into a frenzy. At that point you end up with 'zero tolerance' and reason is abandoned. People in positions of responsibility often react without thinking or sometimes even exaggerate things to bolster their ego. This is when we have events like a child being expelled for drawing a gun (it happens not just in Canada but here, the bastion of liberty) and a completely benign person being strip searched ostensibly for the safety of police officers (of course this is a ruse to justify a rough application of law enforcement).

These sorts of things are crimes against humanity and our human rights but also a precursor to totalitarianism, for left unchecked the decline will continue. This trend could possibly be buffered by holding those who make these decisions to react accountable by penalizing them should they err.
 
Canada has gone the way of Europe with most things related to guns. It is ashame because the great white north has mostly wilderness which is unpopulated. Combine this with the nanny state mentality of the typical "educator" and the fun begins.
 
In all honesty, I don't disagree with what the school did. What sucks is that the father was arrested without due process. I might not like a call from my kids school asking about my guns, but I'd take that call over an unlawful arrest any day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top