Should This Boy Have Been Suspended Over His Shirt?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/family/should-this-boy-have-been-suspended-over-his-shirt/ar-AAfo5cA?li=BBgzzfc&ocid=mailsignout/
* Pic & short video on link... Last week 24 students were suspended for wearing Confederate Battle Flag T-shirts *


When OREGON 8th-grader Alan Holmes was deciding what to wear to school one morning, he had no clue what a big deal it would be—and apparently it was a very big deal. So big that Holmes ended up getting suspended over it.

The shirt in question? It's a grey T-shirt printed with the words "Standing for Those Who Stood for Us," which seems like a typical patriotic shirt. But it was the illustration on the shirt that caught the school administrations' eyes. There's a pair of combat boots with a rifle standing inside which is holding up a helmet—aka a traditional soldier memorial. While there's nothing wrong with honoring soldiers, the picture of the rifle is against Dexter McCarty Middle School policy which states "clothing promoting alcohol, drugs, tobacco, or violence" and "clothing containing objectionable language or symbols, including weapons" are prohibited on school campus.

The principal then gave Holmes the option of either changing his shirt or facing an in-school suspension, and Holmes chose the suspension. From the boy's perspective, he can't understand what the big fuss was about. He was just trying to support his older brother, who is a Marine. As Holmes tells KATU, "I was just upset. I was heartbroken. My brother, he means everything for me. Just being able to help and give back to the people who fought and died for us it just makes me feel good."

And he understands why such a rule is in place, especially in light of a slew of recent school shootings, but maintains that the image on his shirt "isn't relating to violence."

What do you think? Did the principal did the right thing?

I have a dedication for that Principal!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbaQcp8f500

OREGON:... AGAIN.
Another... Isolated & separate incident? Hhhaa.. I think not. We could bring up all the threads & news links from the pass 6-9 months to prove otherwise.
This state is targeted as anti administration aka: Anti Obamanation. Wake up people.


* Coming to a state & a Walmart near you *

If I could've come up with a word that rhymes with vagina, I would've already written a poem about that principal.


I could see suspended, for carrying a weapon. But for wearing an 'in memorium' tee-shirt?

The dirty hippies are still protesting Viet Nam.

Good for the kid....there's hope yet.




He has more balls than the principal...

http://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/family/should-this-boy-have-been-suspended-over-his-shirt/ar-AAfo5cA?li=BBgzzfc&ocid=mailsignout/


* Pic & short video on link... Last week 24 students were suspended for wearing Confederate Battle Flag T-shirts


There is NO law, that says people can NOT own or wear or display a Confederate Flag.
* No matter if they have been removed from Government or State buildings or not *

What's next? The American Flag?
Too late..there are places you can not do that either.. Apartments in Florida.. They were threaten with eviction. And you can't wear it certain parts of Texas (public schools) on Cino De Mayo day. Students were suspected for that.

Cinco de Mayo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinco_de_Mayo/

Public Schools are NOT PUBLIC anymore.



What next ? Bumper sticker banning?

The idiots who run these schools never cease to amaze me in regards to the concept of flawed logic.

So no clothes that have a violent image. Hmmmmm. I guess then ANY school jersey for a contact sport meets the criteria. IF you engage in say wrestling for the school, it's a violent sport. If your team is good at it, any opponent who sees your team jersey is supposed to quake in their booties when they see it. Thus, your school name is synonymous with violence, and any clothing with the school name is now verboten.

Football? Field Hockey? Ice Hockey? All contact sports. even traditional non-contact sports have violent overtones. Tennis and badminton? They have a 'smash'! Swimming? You have a 'cannonball' right? Track and field? OMG there are 'weapons' all over the place! Giant spears (javelins), obsolete cannon balls (shot putting), flying saucers of uncontrolled trajectories in the hands of minors (discus), batons made of aluminum as blunt force objects for the relay team, and even the track shoes themselves!!! The horror of spiked shoes, sharpened to a razor edge, easily used to puncture an opponent!

Even, *sigh* cheerleaders uniforms have to go. These sweet little ladies, a boon to hormonal young men everywhere have to be reined in. Why? Well are they not the single largest group on campus that incite people to violence? 'Beat em!' 'Kill em!' 'Crush em!' 'Smash em!' is their mantra of unceasing human carnage. How much longer can such delightful packages of feminine athleticism be allowed to corrupt their fellow students with clarion calls of unbridled destruction?!!!

So you school board idiots, are we REALLY getting rid of all the weapons or images of them in school, OR is it just the ones you don't like?

with a $15 hour minimum wage who needs school

Yes for suspension, if he refused to change the shirt. The policy is very clear. There is a dress code and we all have to follow it.

kids are the easiest to train in libtardness, scare the kids and they will be scared as adults...

I don't think an 8 year old woke up that morning and said to himself "today I'm going to wear this t-shirt to support my older brother!"

I think this:

is just a bunch of bs, a story concocted after the fact to try and get out of any kind of punishment, to manipulate emotions.

I think the kid is a normal kid that likes guns and soldiers and violent video games and wants to look cool and powerful more so than an 8 year old. So he likes to dress that way, that makes him feel cool and good.
He didn't care about policy and probably didn't know it.


If it was school policy, then yes.
If policy isn't what is liked, then change it.


I think this is just another case of "I want to do whatever I want to do. Oh, there's too many laws, I don't know them, and I'm being punished for it? Well....uh...it's for the troops! It's for the children! It's for family! Yeah! That's what happened! So you see, I shouldn't be punished....uh...Imma hero! I'm the little guy against The Man! I'm a martyr and symbol...so you guys should go do something about it and stuff while I just f off and go do whatever I want."

I think this whole thing should be dropped.
And then hand the kid all of the rules and policies of the school, and then the principal follows the little bastard around and punishes the kid for each and every infraction no matter how small.

Actually the t-shirt doesn't feature a 'weapon', it features a Fallen Soldier Battle Cross. That would be the actual interpretation of a helmet, sitting atop a soldiers rifle, and positioned behind a pair of empty boots.

The t-shirt however INCORRECTLY displays a magazine inserted in the rifle. The rifle normally is displayed minus the magazine in order to represent that it is no longer being wielded by the soldier who had carried it.

If however images of a 'weapon' are banned, then no pictures of cars, planes, trucks, boats, and motorcycles are allowed either. ALL have been used as a weapon to kill people with.

Same goes with t-shirts featuring lit candles (fire has been used to kill), no puppies (dogs grow up and can kill), no kitty cats (severe pet allergies can kill), and of course NO PICTURES OF FLOWERS on t-shirts!!! How many poisons come from flowers and other plants?

No pics of 'majestic' beasts like lions/tigers/elephants as all have killed.

You get the idea.

Just about ANYTHING has either killed a human on its own, or was used by one human to kill another. Rules like this lead to raising stupid children who lack the ability to think critically, and to question the imagined authority of closet facists who believe they know better than the rest of us what is 'acceptable' in society.

I'll decide for myself, thanks.

I think a number of people are blowing this out of proportion in various ways.

Most important starting point to deal with anything like this: it happened at a SCHOOL. A public school, yes? That puts different factors in charge of the situation than apply to regular public life, and they are NOT the ones the more paranoid people here and elsewhere like to pretend they are.

The politics involved are NOT the party-oriented, or Administration-oriented ones that some people want to pretend they are. The politics involved are the result of what might best be described as "national concerns in the news."

In this case, that concern is directly tied to the repeated incidents of children becoming violent and murdering fellow students and teachers with firearms. In every case, the largest element in the post-murder outrage, has always focused on whether the school authorities recognized and tried to deal with mounting evidence that the murderous child was drifting into dangerous actions.

The response of most schools, has been to make rules like this, and to enforce them VERY firmly.

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with whatever the political or personal intent of this or any example child might have been, for wearing a shirt with pictures of weapons on it.

It has 100% to do with the school administrators being able to present to the general public, that they are forthrightly taking pro-active action against even the possibility that a child is going to "go postal."

Additional point: how underage children behave in school has ZERO to do with Freedom of Speech issues. Underage children in schools do not have the same rights as adult citizens in private life situations. The rights of even adult citizens are not 100% the same at all times, and in all circumstances, and if you don't realize that, you haven't paid attention.

In this case, no, this has NOTHING to do with who's in the White House, NOTHING to do with what political party any of the participants support, and NOTHING to do with any "rights" anyone imagines the child has. It ESPECIALLY has NOTHING to do with whether or not this child was wearing the shirt to say nice things about his relatives in the military.

It is entirely about the fact that the school administrators know from paying attention to the rest of the world (as too many people here are failing to do), that they will be held publicly responsible for anything bad which MIGHT happen, should they fail to strictly enforce rules they made against things like images of weapons.

So calm the Eff down, this isn't a part of a wild insidious plot to overthrow ANYTHING.

he enforced policy, but not so rigidly as to not provide some compromise and options,, so


yes, he handled it perfectly,,,

there is no law, that's why he isn't in jail and this was not litigated

there were SCHOOL RULEs, that's why he had the option to change or be suspended

unless we are talking rugby,, most sports aren't violent, they are aggressive, there is a difference

violent: using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something. (MOST SPORTS HAVE PROTECTIVE GEAR TO PREVENT HARM)


aggressive: pursuing one's aims and interests forcefully,

yeah, my job doesn't allow sports jerseys, that's far from meaning that they will eventually not allow dresses or other types of clothes

its policy, you sign things saying you read policy and agree to adhere,, so adhere,,,

but im old school, school and work are places with a purpose that doesn't involve social or political expression,,(Different from religious conviction, which I believe is the same as a lifestyle choice and shouldn't be discriminated against)



they are there to learn, and or produce for an employer,, the rest can be done on personal time if its important,,