Ohio Student Suspended for Staying in Class During Walkout

[beagle9]

Only those who wanted to remain neutral and not be associated with either those perceived to be ‘gun nuts’ and not expressing sympathy for the dead, or those protesting, were in fact punished with suspension instead of being guaranteed their freedom to their stance.

You are wrong. In my son's school only those that choose to join the walkout faced any consequences, for everyone else the teachers stayed in their classrooms and taught.

But the thread isn’t about your son’s school. It’s about a kid who wanted to remain neutral instead of being forced into choosing sides not being allowed to, and being punished for that.

He was not punished for remaining neutral, he was punished for disobeying the rules, just like he would have been any other day of the year.

Do you think that students should have the right to just pick and choose whatever rule they wish to follow and never face any consequences?

He was punished for refusing to align with either of the two ‘choices’ because he didn’t want to be associated with supporting either of them.
If schools are going to host political events then they should at least have the decency to allow the students to express their views honestly instead of forcing them into picking one of two sides.

Study hall was not a "side" - it was an OPTION

Are you daft?

An option that should have never developed within the school day.

It was all knee jerk, and cooler heads should have prevailed.

 

[Hossfly]

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

He was given two choices, join the walkout or go to a designated room where there were school personnel. This is a reasonable choice.

It's not a reasonable choice if he did not wish to express himself that way. The fact is they did not allow him the freedom to express himself his own way as they did the other students.

Every student in the school was given two choices, that is not an unreasonable thing to do. The school has to maintain positive control over the children put in its charge during the day. That is why kids are not allowed to sit in classroom alone with no teacher any other day of the year.

Maintaining positive control would have been a moot point if they had just done it after school hours.

I have never seen or heard of school walkouts in my whole life. Of course, in my time the inmates didn't run the asylum.

 

[DrLove]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

 

[irosie91]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Maintaining positive control would have been a moot point if they had just done it after school hours.

True

 

[Tilly]

So you keep saying, but the point is there’s no excuse for offering only two choices and forcing the kids to align with one or the other.

It’s really very, very simple.

Please tell me what other possible choice there could be other than "join the walkout" or "do not join the walkout".

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

They did that, they provide teachers to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral. Those teachers were in a particular set of room that the student was supposed to go to if they did not wish to join the walkout. This student choose to ignore that rule and do his own thing. Thus he got punished.

Again, I ask you, are you forced to vote either Dem or Rep?

No, but I do have a particular place I have to go to cast my vote, I do not get to choose to do it from wherever I want. Should the state accomodate me and have supervised voting in any location I want them to?

What do you think they are demonstrating to these kids?

That everyone has to follow the rules, that this kid is not special.

If schools decide to hold political protests on school premises and in school time, then they should at least have the decency to cater to those who want to remain politically neutral. It really isn’t rocket science.

That is what they did. The set aside a designated space for those not wishing to join in the politically motivated walkout. What more should they have done?

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march. That’s a different thing entirely.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice.
Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

 

[beagle9]

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

He was given two choices, join the walkout or go to a designated room where there were school personnel. This is a reasonable choice.

It's not a reasonable choice if he did not wish to express himself that way. The fact is they did not allow him the freedom to express himself his own way as they did the other students.

Every student in the school was given two choices, that is not an unreasonable thing to do. The school has to maintain positive control over the children put in its charge during the day. That is why kids are not allowed to sit in classroom alone with no teacher any other day of the year.

Maintaining positive control would have been a moot point if they had just done it after school hours.

You can't get leftist to ruin their relax time after hours. They have to drag people kicking and clawing into their schemes in order to make a huge showing, so that is why it all went down in the way it did.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

They already have civics classes.

Education is about more than just book learning.

Sure, that's what education is. But what it is not about is promoting a political ideal in the classroom or on school grounds.

There was no political ideal being promoted, just the free exercise of their 1st Amendment rights.

Bullshit. They're calling for more gun control.

Some were, some were not.

This is from the Women's March Youth Empower section that organized this walkout:

THE PRIORITY POLICIES WE SUPPORT

• Banning Assault Weapons & High Capacity Magazines / S. 2095
• Expanding Background Checks to All Gun Sales / S 2009
• Passing Gun Violence Restraining Order Law / H.R. 2598 / S. 1212
• Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act / S.1856 / H.R. 1556

Here is the Link.

So whether or not some of the individual students were calling for more gun control, it was the whole point of the walkout.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So you keep saying, but the point is there’s no excuse for offering only two choices and forcing the kids to align with one or the other.

It’s really very, very simple.

Please tell me what other possible choice there could be other than "join the walkout" or "do not join the walkout".

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

They did that, they provide teachers to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral. Those teachers were in a particular set of room that the student was supposed to go to if they did not wish to join the walkout. This student choose to ignore that rule and do his own thing. Thus he got punished.

Again, I ask you, are you forced to vote either Dem or Rep?

No, but I do have a particular place I have to go to cast my vote, I do not get to choose to do it from wherever I want. Should the state accomodate me and have supervised voting in any location I want them to?

What do you think they are demonstrating to these kids?

That everyone has to follow the rules, that this kid is not special.

If schools decide to hold political protests on school premises and in school time, then they should at least have the decency to cater to those who want to remain politically neutral. It really isn’t rocket science.

That is what they did. The set aside a designated space for those not wishing to join in the politically motivated walkout. What more should they have done?

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice. Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

The school viewed the "not going to the walkout" as the neutral choice, which it was.

 

[DrLove]

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

He was given two choices, join the walkout or go to a designated room where there were school personnel. This is a reasonable choice.

It's not a reasonable choice if he did not wish to express himself that way. The fact is they did not allow him the freedom to express himself his own way as they did the other students.

Every student in the school was given two choices, that is not an unreasonable thing to do. The school has to maintain positive control over the children put in its charge during the day. That is why kids are not allowed to sit in classroom alone with no teacher any other day of the year.

Maintaining positive control would have been a moot point if they had just done it after school hours.

Do you remember the TIME of Stoneman Douglas shooting - never ignore symbolism.

 

[Esmeralda]

I made a couple comments earlier in this thread but when I was told I don't know diddily I quit posting in this thread after I realized nobody possessed facts and reasonable logic.

Jacob Shoemaker, the "kid who can't be left alone" is 18 years old. Therefore, he's an adult, registered with the draft and is an eligible voter. Tell me, does this adult have to be treated like a kindergartner. Does anybody have any more "educated responses?" What a crock of bull!

I believe he and his father have a pretty sound defense.

He is still a student in the school and has to follow the rules like everyone else. Being 18 does not give a high school the right to ignore the rules.

He could have fallen and hurt hims widdle self. I understand. my bad.

You are a moron. You have a picture of militar man as your avatar but do not understand the need to follow rules. Clearly, it is just some pic you found on the internet.

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

 

[beagle9]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

. Study halls have never been used in the way it was being used on this issue. The students should cry fowel for being forced to appear as if they were against the supporting of the families and victims over the tragedy that had taken place, when what they were protesting actually was the anti-gun protest or second amendment protest that evolved out of the situation.

 

[Esmeralda]

That's your opinion. Being a RWr you don't want kids to think about gun control issues.

First of all, don't presume to think you know that I am a "winger" of any kind, right or otherwise. Secondly, assuming that I don't want kids thinking about gun control is a gross misinterpretation. I have indicated in no way that I am against kids thinking about gun control so there's no justification for that assumption. My entire argument is that I don't think they should have held the protest on school grounds on school time. That's it.

It seems very appropriate to me as the kids who where mowed down were on school grounds during school time.

Don't be an idiot. That was beyond their control, this was not. It's not a valid excuse for interrupting regular school business with a political protest.

Political protest are a vital part of our system of government. What better way to learn about the 1st Amendment than to take part in what it guarantees you the freedom to do

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

It has to do with liability. The school is responsible for every kid. People are joking about something happening to him. Probably wouldn't. Most of us will never use most of the insurance we carry. It's there just in case. The school is liable for the safety of students. They must supervise them at all times. If something happened when the school was empty because all the teachers and students were at the rally, then the school would be found liable for that student if anything happened because he was left unsupervised. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. Probably nothing would happen, but in the event it did, the school would be liable.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

He was given two choices, join the walkout or go to a designated room where there were school personnel. This is a reasonable choice.

It's not a reasonable choice if he did not wish to express himself that way. The fact is they did not allow him the freedom to express himself his own way as they did the other students.

Every student in the school was given two choices, that is not an unreasonable thing to do. The school has to maintain positive control over the children put in its charge during the day. That is why kids are not allowed to sit in classroom alone with no teacher any other day of the year.

There are no finite number of choices for true freedom of expression. Either they are all given the choice to express themselves in their own way or they can all just go back to class.

That is just stupid. Kids are allowed a finite number of choices for true freedom of expression when it comes to what they were, what they say, what they bring with them to school. Or do you think there should be no rules in school and the kid should just do whatever they want?

Of course not. But if they could not guarantee that ALL students would be able to express themselves in their own way in this case then they should have cancelled.

 

[Esmeralda]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

. Study halls have never been used in the way it was being used on this issue. The students should cry fowel for being forced to appear as if they were against the supporting of the families and victims over the tragedy that had taken place, when what they were protesting actually was the anti-gun protest or second amendment protest that evolved out of the situation.

You KNOW NOTHING about schools. Study halls are very often used for this and similar purposes. You are an ignorant blowhard.

 

[Tilly]

So you keep saying, but the point is there’s no excuse for offering only two choices and forcing the kids to align with one or the other.

It’s really very, very simple.

Please tell me what other possible choice there could be other than "join the walkout" or "do not join the walkout".

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

They did that, they provide teachers to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral. Those teachers were in a particular set of room that the student was supposed to go to if they did not wish to join the walkout. This student choose to ignore that rule and do his own thing. Thus he got punished.

Again, I ask you, are you forced to vote either Dem or Rep?

No, but I do have a particular place I have to go to cast my vote, I do not get to choose to do it from wherever I want. Should the state accomodate me and have supervised voting in any location I want them to?

What do you think they are demonstrating to these kids?

That everyone has to follow the rules, that this kid is not special.

If schools decide to hold political protests on school premises and in school time, then they should at least have the decency to cater to those who want to remain politically neutral. It really isn’t rocket science.

That is what they did. The set aside a designated space for those not wishing to join in the politically motivated walkout. What more should they have done?

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice. Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

The school viewed the "not going to the walkout" as the neutral choice, which it was.

No it wasn’t. Not participating in the walkout is seen as being against the walkout, for whatever reason. The kids in that group were referred to as ‘gun nuts’ and as being uncaring about the kids who were killed.

I really don’t understand what you’re finding so difficult to understand here. You are familiar with YES/NO/DONT KNOW type surveys, yes?

If you provide only two ‘choices’ then you are polarising, pigeonholing and labelling the kids as for or against. Simple as. I don’t believe you don’t get this, so I’m not going to bother repeating it again.

 

[Esmeralda]

He was given two choices, join the walkout or go to a designated room where there were school personnel. This is a reasonable choice.

It's not a reasonable choice if he did not wish to express himself that way. The fact is they did not allow him the freedom to express himself his own way as they did the other students.

Every student in the school was given two choices, that is not an unreasonable thing to do. The school has to maintain positive control over the children put in its charge during the day. That is why kids are not allowed to sit in classroom alone with no teacher any other day of the year.

There are no finite number of choices for true freedom of expression. Either they are all given the choice to express themselves in their own way or they can all just go back to class.

That is just stupid. Kids are allowed a finite number of choices for true freedom of expression when it comes to what they were, what they say, what they bring with them to school. Or do you think there should be no rules in school and the kid should just do whatever they want?

Of course not. But if they could not guarantee that ALL students would be able to express themselves in their own way in this case then they should have cancelled.

It was a nationwide, in fact, international event: they are not going to cancel.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Two choices clearly weren’t enough. They should have provided supervision for those who did not fit into their two choices.
Are you forced to vote for one of two political parties or can you abstain or vote for an independent etc?
If schools are going to host political demonstrations, then they should respect the kids views. Things are rarely black and white, so it’s not difficult to anticipate that there will be some kids who agree with neither of the imposed two choices and don’t want to be forced to.

There were only two possible choices, join the walkout or do not join the walkout...what other possible choice is there?

Don't have a fucking walkout.

 

[Tilly]

He is still a student in the school and has to follow the rules like everyone else. Being 18 does not give a high school the right to ignore the rules.

He could have fallen and hurt hims widdle self. I understand. my bad.

You are a moron. You have a picture of militar man as your avatar but do not understand the need to follow rules. Clearly, it is just some pic you found on the internet.

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Then they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.