Other State Durand third-grader's father sues school over right to wear hat depicting AR-15 rifle

[RX-79G]

Way to hit all the current talking points, I applaud you. I'm going to assume that you are college educated, probably highly so, without any kids. Broad assumption and I apologize if I am wrong. But, there is a definitive pattern that most can clearly see, even predict, if they haven't been to higher education. You know, people who have to experience things to understand them, not just get told things and pass a test.

I'm 50, have served in two war zones, own a business, have lived in all parts of the US, traveled broadly and am married for the second time. I shoot, reload, compete with firearms and bow. I've been an athlete, worked in a lab, been poor and saw someone shot at a gun show. How much life experience does I have to acquire before you treat me with the respect I extend to you?

 

[American123]

I picture of a gun is not a gun, any argument that centers on "no weapons on campus" means no pictures of weapons either, is retarded.

This type of stupidity is what leads kids to get suspended over a pop tart.

 

[kmk1012]

I'm 50, have served in two war zones, own a business, have lived in all parts of the US, traveled broadly and am married for the second time. I shoot, reload, compete with firearms and bow. I've been an athlete, worked in a lab, been poor and saw someone shot at a gun show. How much life experience does I have to acquire before you treat me with the respect I extend to you?

Kids? That's all that really, really matters. If you don't have them in your home or have ever had them the zero life experiences can give a person standing on then subject with any authority.

 

[kmk1012]

I picture of a gun is not a gun, any argument that centers on "no weapons on campus" means no pictures of weapons either, is retarded.

This type of stupidity is what leads kids to get suspended over a pop tart.

Or a finger, LOL

 

[Koda]

I don't know what "equally applied" means.

equally applied means just that, either allow all political expressions or none. I don't know anyone whose against teaching kids empathy for more different kinds of people but like it or not some groups have become politicized. The rules here are selectively enforced; Why are the schools prohibiting expressing support for a constitutional right (2A), support for police (Thin Blue Line) but allowing support for BLM or Pride flags to teach elementary kids... children.... "they" can choose to be a different gender or no gender at all..... so then tell me how these other groups are not politicized?

 

[American123]

Or a finger, LOL

I had a funny chat with a dad who also worked in education. He said they were really anti-gun so they wouldn't even let his young son play with nerf guns or toy guns. He then shared how ultimately he understood how absurd his stance on that was when his young boy took his leg, held it at a 90 degree angle and said, "leg gun pew pew pew" and pretended to shoot things with this extended leg.

Combative arms are inherently interesting to many boys, there's some genetic history there.

Hoplophobia is for the weak minded, the education system seems to attract the weak minded. What they should do is an entire about face on firearms and schools and have firearm proficiency and safe handling of be a course required to graduate.

 

[RX-79G]

Kids? That's all that really, really matters. If you don't have them in your home or have ever had them the zero life experiences can give a person standing on then subject with any authority.

When did you read that I have zero life experience with kids? I've been a classroom volunteer, substitute teacher, god parent, etc. You don't have to be chef to understand how food tastes. You're making a ridiculous argument - especially when you consider how all parents start out - childless. If you are to be believed, new parents shouldn't be trusted with children.

 

[American123]

equally applied means just that, either allow all political expressions or none. I don't know anyone whose against teaching kids empathy for more different kinds of people but like it or not some groups have become politicized. The rules here are selectively enforced; Why are the schools prohibiting expressing support for a constitutional right (2A), support for police (Thin Blue Line) but allowing support for BLM or Pride flags to teach elementary kids... children.... "they" can choose to be a different gender or no gender at all..... so then tell me how these other groups are not politicized?

Yep, had plenty of co-workers wearing the BLM shirts, but imagine if I wore an "NRA" shirt prominently. Ha!

 

[P7M13]

Yep, had plenty of co-workers wearing the BLM shirts, but imagine if I wore an "NRA" shirt prominently. Ha!

After wearing it for a few days, my work asked me to stop wearing my NRA hat. The reason cited was that, "some other employees feel intimidated by it."

 

[The B]

I don't know why people keep saying that. I absolutely support freedom of speech from government intervention (except for perjury and the like). Why is it you can't understand the difference between opposing bad speech in society and government intervention? How much clearer could I be?

well thats not at ALL the way i read you in that other thread. if youre saying your objections to hate speech are personal sentiment and not a desire to leave ultimate discretion of what is and isnt legal speech in otherwise nonviolent expression to fickle and often stupid humans, then i agree entirely. i support the nazis' legal right to sig heil and smoke meth all goddamn day and night... and day, and night, day, another another night. if i happen to punch a punkass bich nazi in the face, thats got nanado wittem laws or govmnt. thats me punkin a punk. no sir dont need em cops - we got other avenues available.

Let's put this another way. Your kid should be able to wear a shirt that says "Support 2A", and someone else's kid should be able to wear a shirt that says "I"m pro life". But maybe guns and pictures of aborted fetuses are both inappropriate.

fine w me. or none are allowed to wear anything but a white polo, khaki trousers, and gray deck shoes over white sox.

 

[RX-79G]

equally applied means just that, either allow all political expressions or none. I don't know anyone whose against teaching kids empathy for more different kinds of people but like it or not some groups have become politicized. The rules here are selectively enforced; Why are the schools prohibiting expressing support for a constitutional right (2A), support for police (Thin Blue Line) but allowing support for BLM or Pride flags to teach elementary kids... children.... "they" can choose to be a different gender or no gender at all..... so then tell me how these other groups are not politicized?

I don't know of anyone banning support for 2A. A gun is not a right, it is an object and objects have no rights. People do.

BLM is a slogan supporting the seemingly trampled rights of a particular US minority group. Thin blue line could be viewed as support of police, but it was coopted by the Unite the Right rallyists as yet another white supremacist symbol and is often used as a rejoinder to BLM. As if black lives mattering is a concept incompatible with supporting policing. And it isn't.

So, the obvious solution is to allow kids to wear slogans and phrases that support what they say, rather than use symbols like pictures of guns or defaced flags. "I support my local PD". "Black lives matter". "I believe in Jesus".

 

[RX-79G]

well thats not at ALL the way i read you in that other thread. if youre saying your objections to hate speech are personal sentiment and not a desire to leave ultimate discretion of what is and isnt legal speech in otherwise nonviolent expression to fickle and often stupid humans, then i agree entirely. i support the nazis' legal right to sig heil and smoke meth all goddamn day and night... and day, and night, day, another another night. if i happen to punch a punkass bich nazi in the face, thats got nanado wittem laws or govmnt. thats me punkin a punk. no sir dont need em cops - we got other avenues available.

What is "legal speech" is different than what is acceptable speech on a privately owned website. I support the right of Facebook to not allow certain things to be published just like I support the right of a restaurant to not allow weapons. Facebook or Twitter are not the government, and free speech is freedom from the government. 2A is freedom to bear arms, but not to bear them on my property.

 

[Koda]

I don't know of anyone banning support for 2A. A gun is not a right, it is an object and objects have no rights. People do.

BLM is a slogan supporting the seemingly trampled rights of a particular US minority group. Thin blue line could be viewed as support of police, but it was coopted by the Unite the Right rallyists as yet another white supremacist symbol and is often used as a rejoinder to BLM. As if black lives mattering is a concept incompatible with supporting policing. And it isn't.

So, the obvious solution is to allow kids to wear slogans and phrases that support what they say, rather than use symbols like pictures of guns or defaced flags. "I support my local PD". "Black lives matter". "I believe in Jesus".

well, thats just moving the goalpost.... "gun rights" IS a 2A thing as the arms object in common use is the gun.
BLM is a fine cause, but they became political when they campaigned for defunding the police (and to some extreme, "ACAB")... defunding is a political concept. The (Thin Blue Line flag is just a symbol for) the Blue Lives Matter movement, was never about racism regardless of what the racists use it for Blue Lives Matter has never been a racist movement.
Discussing the differences of these movements like this only validates the politicization of these causes and groups and the unequal support for expressing them in schools. They are political, if the schools allow one they have to allow all, or none.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

What is "legal speech" is different than what is acceptable speech on a privately owned website. I support the right of Facebook to not allow certain things to be published just like I support the right of a restaurant to not allow weapons. Facebook or Twitter are not the government, and free speech is freedom from the government. 2A is freedom to bear arms, but not to bear them on my property.

When Facebook and Twitter accept "advice" from the federal government (see Biden's new disinformation committee) on what to censor they become an arm of the government. The government cannot censor free speech even by proxy.

And BTW, last time I read constitutional law, it said speech included images, actions, and even money. In Tinker v. Des Moines In 1969, where students were suspended from school for wearing black arm bands to protest the Vietnam war the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of the students. The high court agreed that students' free speech should be protected and said, "Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates."

This is the right to free speech that my generation fought and died in the streets for (see Kent State).

 

[RX-79G]

well, thats just moving the goalpost.... "gun rights" IS a 2A thing as the arms object in common use is the gun.
BLM is a fine cause, but they became political when they campaigned for defunding the police (and to some extreme, "ACAB")... defunding is a political concept. The (Thin Blue Line flag is just a symbol for) the Blue Lives Matter movement, was never about racism regardless of what the racists use it for Blue Lives Matter has never been a racist movement.
Discussing the differences of these movements like this only validates the politicization of these causes and groups and the unequal support for expressing them in schools. They are political, if the schools allow one they have to allow all, or none.

It is interesting you think that "they" campaigned to defund the police but blue live matter didn't associate itself with racists.

Do you see the interesting way you cluster people? Do you really believe ALL supporters of BLM want to defund the police, and NO supporters of blue lives are racists?


Like I said, get away from symbols and use words. It encourages reading and thinking. Symbols seem to prevent it.

 

[RX-79G]

When Facebook and Twitter accept "advice" from the federal government (see Biden's new disinformation committee) on what to censor they become an arm of the government. The government cannot censor free speech even by proxy.

Of course they can. Do you know what an obscenity law is? And the government can advise private citizens about whatever it wants. How to start a business. How to rotate crops. Free speech is not a bar on the government talking about speech, just denying it by law.

And BTW, last time I read constitutional law, it said speech included images, actions, and even money. In Tinker v. Des Moines In 1969, where students were suspended from school for wearing black arm bands to protest the Vietnam war the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of the students. The high court agreed that students' free speech should be protected and said, "Students don't shed their constitutional rights at the school house gates."

This is the right to free speech that my generation fought and died in the streets for (see Kent State).

Sure. And everyone also knows that schools still have a legal right and obligation to censor the exercise of some speech in schools. Black arm bands were a form of protest that were banned because they were protest. A picture of a gun is not primarily a symbol of a civil right. It is also a symbol of the military, of violent crime, etc. Context matters.

 

[Koda]

It is interesting you think that "they" campaigned to defund the police but blue live matter didn't associate itself with racists.

Do you see the interesting way you cluster people? Do you really believe ALL supporters of BLM want to defund the police, and NO supporters of blue lives are racists?


Like I said, get away from symbols and use words. It encourages reading and thinking. Symbols seem to prevent it.

Lets not gaslight false presuppositions about how I "cluster people". This might be why some here suggest your trolling.
I personally am open to discussions and learning more perspectives on subjects, so lets start with showing me where the Blue Lives Matter movement associated themselves with racists? Please cite a source that doesn't say the racists associated the symbol as evidence cause that in itself doesn't make the Blue Lives movement the same. If the Blue Lives movement was started by racists then I will cede that example, but that still wouldn't invalidate the schools favoring some political groups over others.

Here is an article explaining the BLM advocates to defund the police

Here's What Black Lives Matter D.C. Is Calling For, And Where The City Stands

Ahead of Saturday's massive protests, the local chapter laid out its demands for change and action.

www.npr.org

 

[RX-79G]

Lets not gaslight false presuppositions about how I "cluster people". This might be why some here suggest your trolling.
I personally am open to discussions and learning more perspectives on subjects, so lets start with showing me where the Blue Lives Matter movement associated themselves with racists? Please cite a source that doesn't say the racists associated the symbol as evidence cause that in itself doesn't make the Blue Lives movement the same. If the Blue Lives movement was started by racists then I will cede that example, but that still wouldn't invalidate the schools favoring some political groups over others.

Here is an article explaining the BLM advocates to defund the police

Here's What Black Lives Matter D.C. Is Calling For, And Where The City Stands

Ahead of Saturday's massive protests, the local chapter laid out its demands for change and action.

www.npr.org

I'm not gaslighting you. I'm pointing out how you wrote a few sentences. When you wrote about BLM, you made all people associated with BLM responsible for the actions of those that want to defund the police.

When you wrote about blue lives, you excluded supporters that are racist as not real blue lives supporters.

All BLM supporters don't want to defund the police. But some do.
All blue lives supporters aren't racists. But some are.

Whatever you believe, you might consider writing in a way that doesn't suggest that you think some people have a uniform POV and other people do not. Because no group sees everything the same way. Especially when neither is a formal group at all.

 

[Koda]

I'm not gaslighting you. I'm pointing out how you wrote a few sentences. When you wrote about BLM, you made all people associated with BLM responsible for the actions of those that want to defund the police.

When you wrote about blue lives, you excluded supporters that are racist as not real blue lives supporters.

All BLM supporters don't want to defund the police. But some do.
All blue lives supporters aren't racists. But some are.

Whatever you believe, you might consider writing in a way that doesn't suggest that you think some people have a uniform POV and other people do not. Because no group sees everything the same way. Especially when neither is a formal group at all.

I never associated -all- people with BLM as responsible for the actions of those that want to defund the police.

I never excluded Blue Lives supporters that are racists.

Please, I ask you dont make false presuppositions of my comments like that, Im not going to participate in that type of debate.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

Of course they can. Do you know what an obscenity law is? And the government can advise private citizens about whatever it wants. How to start a business. How to rotate crops. Free speech is not a bar on the government talking about speech, just denying it by law.


Sure. And everyone also knows that schools still have a legal right and obligation to censor the exercise of some speech in schools. Black arm bands were a form of protest that were banned because they were protest. A picture of a gun is not primarily a symbol of a civil right. It is also a symbol of the military, of violent crime, etc. Context matters.

Of course I know what an obscenity law is. Do you want to have a full discourse on 1st year con law? Obscenity laws are applied consistently and across the board to everyone, for one thing. They are not selectively applied to students. And as for government advice, the USSC has ruled that when a private company functions as an arm of the government, that is, becomes a "state actor" it falls under the same constitutional constraints as the government, and can be sued for violation of civil rights.

The rest of your post is nonsense and wishful thinking. Nice try, but you really don't have a clue what you're talking about, legally.