14 year old boy to get year in jail for wearing NRA T-shirt

[The2ndAmendment]

The 14 year old would not follow a simple order, then threatened the principal.

That is not how we handle dissent in this country.

He may gain some perspective and ethical reflection in his time at the home for teenagers who just don't get it.

I went back and looked at the OP link and it does not say he threatened the teacher!!

I don't think that's correct.

I suspect this is a pre-planned NRA protest, and he'd have been careful not to threaten or get belligerent in that case.

Then the judge will have to mine down to find out exactly what happened.

No, the Jury will decide what happens. Trial by you peers, not by tyrants.

 

[JakeStarkey]

MLK Jr, if he read 2nd Amendment's piece of crap comparing the boy's simple youthful hooliganism to the principles of nonviolent protest, would open a case of whoop ass on 2nd Amendment.

And 2nd Amendment does believe in change by violence. Go back and read 2A's postings.

Only if you start killing us first, it's called self-defense.

The only exception would be suspending the Constitution, or confiscating firearms, or abolishing trial by jury. Those are the only three events that would FORCE us to fire first.

Also, MLK had concealed carry, and the Deacons of Defense and Justice marhced alongside his marches with shotguns.

(1) if you are ordered to surrender and you refuse, we know what the final answer will be

(2) there is no "us" only "you"

Your armed MLK Jr, old WWMLKS (who would MLK shoot) means nothing to the discussion

 

[bripat9643]

First of all, this hasn't gone to court yet. I imagine the judge will dismiss the case. Secondly, what makes you think the arresting officer is a Democrat or Liberal? Do you know for certain?

The kid has the right to wear the shirt, just not in school. If he doesn't want to follow the rules, then the school can expel him. They just better be certain to not allow kids to wear any clothing that politicizes gun control in a favorable way.

Yeah, he'll never go to jail! They may expel him, but they're going to take a lot of flack for it. That shirt is very attractive and was carefully chosen, possibly. This may have been intended as a political case. Pre-planned.

If any 14 year olds are reading this, they've learned a lesson. You can break whatever rules you want as long as you find a political banner to wrap it in.

What they are learning is that government officials and their apologists don't give a crap about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I went back and looked at the OP link and it does not say he threatened the teacher!!

I don't think that's correct.

I suspect this is a pre-planned NRA protest, and he'd have been careful not to threaten or get belligerent in that case.

Then the judge will have to mine down to find out exactly what happened.

No, the Jury will decide what happens. Trial by you peers, not by tyrants.

Check the forum of justice and the presider as finder of law and fact in that state, please.

 

[bripat9643]

Then the judge will have to mine down to find out exactly what happened.

No, the Jury will decide what happens. Trial by you peers, not by tyrants.

Check the forum of justice and the presider as finder of law and fact in that state, please.

According to the common law, the jury is the final finder of law and fact.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, the Jury will decide what happens. Trial by you peers, not by tyrants.

Check the forum of justice and the presider as finder of law and fact in that state, please.

According to the common law, the jury is the final finder of law and fact.

Check the state code, common law boy; they would just laugh at you.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

No, the Jury will decide what happens. Trial by you peers, not by tyrants.

Check the forum of justice and the presider as finder of law and fact in that state, please.

According to the common law, the jury is the final finder of law and fact.

It was even made (restored as) the law of the land in New Hampshire in June 2012.

 

[bripat9643]

Check the forum of justice and the presider as finder of law and fact in that state, please.

According to the common law, the jury is the final finder of law and fact.

Check the state code, common law boy; they would just laugh at you.

Check the Constitution. It's based on common law.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

MLK Jr, if he read 2nd Amendment's piece of crap comparing the boy's simple youthful hooliganism to the principles of nonviolent protest, would open a case of whoop ass on 2nd Amendment.

And 2nd Amendment does believe in change by violence. Go back and read 2A's postings.

Only if you start killing us first, it's called self-defense.

The only exception would be suspending the Constitution, or confiscating firearms, or abolishing trial by jury. Those are the only three events that would FORCE us to fire first.

Also, MLK had concealed carry, and the Deacons of Defense and Justice marhced alongside his marches with shotguns.

(1) if you are ordered to surrender and you refuse, we know what the final answer will be

(2) there is no "us" only "you"

Your armed MLK Jr, old WWMLKS (who would MLK shoot) means nothing to the discussion

1) You really think even 50% of the United States armed forces would comply with the government? Do you even think 20% would comply with the US government?

2) Apparently the government has decided there's an "us." Ron Paul supporters, Occupy Wall Streeters, Sovereign Citizens, Gun Owners, Constitutionalists, are all considered "potential terrorists" by the FBI. In fact every group that seems to impede the "PROGRESS(ive)" of Big Gov seems to be labeled as a potential terrorist organization.

 

[Circe]

For some reason, I get the feeling you guys wouldn't be defending this if the image was of a crack pipe.

Most of the people who are defending the boy are libertarians, so yes they would.

I'm libertarian, but I wouldn't bother ---- a crack pipe is illegal. And it's about a bad, criminal practice, drugs and the drug trade. I wouldn't defend that.

But his shirt said, IIRC, "Protect Our Rights," and indeed, it is a mootable issue, being MUCH mooted, that the people have a right to own firearms under the Constitution. So there's two Constitutional issues: free speech and the right to firearms.

Seems worth defending to me.

 

[bripat9643]

For some reason, I get the feeling you guys wouldn't be defending this if the image was of a crack pipe.

Most of the people who are defending the boy are libertarians, so yes they would.

I'm libertarian, but I wouldn't bother ---- a crack pipe is illegal. And it's about a bad, criminal practice, drugs and the drug trade. I wouldn't defend that.

He's talking about a T-shirt with a picture of a crack pipe on it, not an actual crack pipe.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Only if you start killing us first, it's called self-defense.

The only exception would be suspending the Constitution, or confiscating firearms, or abolishing trial by jury. Those are the only three events that would FORCE us to fire first.

Also, MLK had concealed carry, and the Deacons of Defense and Justice marhced alongside his marches with shotguns.

(1) if you are ordered to surrender and you refuse, we know what the final answer will be

(2) there is no "us" only "you"

Your armed MLK Jr, old WWMLKS (who would MLK shoot) means nothing to the discussion

1) You really think even 50% of the United States armed forces would comply with the government? Do you even think 20% would comply with the US government?

2) Apparently the government has decided there's an "us." Ron Paul supporters, Occupy Wall Streeters, Sovereign Citizens, Gun Owners, Constitutionalists, are all considered "potential terrorists" by the FBI. In fact every group that seems to impede the "PROGRESS(ive)" of Big Gov seems to be labeled as a potential terrorist organization.

I know 99% of our military personnel will follow their lawful orders, and that they won't be relying on 'what's lawful' arguments from the reactionaries and militia nuts.

A BSA troop that decided to adopt reactionary thinking could be considered a Terrorist Youth Organization.

 

[boedicca]

This is child abuse. And consistent with the War On Boys & Men.

A similar story is the 5 year old who is getting a suspension on his record for bringing a toy gun to school to show a friend.

 

[Wake]

Enjoy slavery!

14-Year-Old Year in Jail Wearing NRA T-Shirt School | Complex

Anyway, they'll lock him up for your "Security." A nation of idiots.

This doesn't make sense. Putting a 14-year-old in jail for a year over a shirt? Aren't 14-year-olds too young to be put in jail?

If this is true, then I daresay it seems like another nail in the coffin of America.

 

[Circe]

Most of the people who are defending the boy are libertarians, so yes they would.

I'm libertarian, but I wouldn't bother ---- a crack pipe is illegal. And it's about a bad, criminal practice, drugs and the drug trade. I wouldn't defend that.

He's talking about a T-shirt with a picture of a crack pipe on it, not an actual crack pipe.

I was talking about a T-shirt with a picture of a crack pipe on it, too. I wouldn't bother: I'm no advocate for illegal, bad practices, and certainly not in the schools.

Legal and moral, okay: this NRA shirt is okay with me and the Tinker black armbands were also okay.

I don't think it should be illegal to defend a kid wearing such a shirt if someone wanted to, it's just not for me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The boy has the right to comply with directives from the teachers and staff, and if he and his family do not like them, they can complain to the board and file lawsuits.

They do not have a defense to act out inappropriately.

 

[Circe]

The boy has the right to comply with directives from the teachers and staff, and if he and his family do not like them, they can complain to the board and file lawsuits.

They do not have a defense to act out inappropriately.

There is no claim that I've seen that he did act inappropriately.

But I sure bet there are lawsuits flying through the air about this.

 

[bripat9643]

The boy has the right to comply with directives from the teachers and staff, and if he and his family do not like them, they can complain to the board and file lawsuits.

They do not have a defense to act out inappropriately.

A jury will decide that, not some government flunky, you fucking Nazi.

They are filing suits and also complaining to the board and going after the hide of that Nazi principle you admire so much.

 

[bripat9643]

The boy has the right to comply with directives from the teachers and staff, and if he and his family do not like them, they can complain to the board and file lawsuits.

They do not have a defense to act out inappropriately.

There is no claim that I've seen that he did act inappropriately.

But I sure bet there are lawsuits flying through the air about this.

Fakey always assumes that government officials can do no wrong and that sovereign citizens who exercise their rights are little better than terrorists.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Fakey always assumes that government officials can do no wrong and that sovereign citizens who exercise their rights are little better than terrorists.

bripat is always assuming that everyone is out to get everybody.

bripat despises the Constitution and American democracy, which is his great loss.

He does not understand our rule of law makes us much freer than any society bripat could create.