RW’s: because children have freedom of speech, does that mean kids should own guns too?

[Billy000]

The lockers belong to the institution just as the lockers belong to the institution of a private school.

But a private school is not subject to constitutional rights; neither is a public school because a child doesn't have that protection.

Good god dude. The point boils down to this: a child can’t be charged with a crime for simply saying something.

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

We've already demonstrated that they don't.

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

 

[Billy000]

The lockers belong to the institution just as the lockers belong to the institution of a private school.

But a private school is not subject to constitutional rights; neither is a public school because a child doesn't have that protection.

Good god dude. The point boils down to this: a child can’t be charged with a crime for simply saying something.

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

If that were true, a child could tell his teacher to go F himself and the school would not be allowed to retaliate in any way. However we both know that isn't true. If a child would do such a thing, he would be kicked out of class, suspended or even expelled depending on the tolerance of the school.

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But a private school is not subject to constitutional rights; neither is a public school because a child doesn't have that protection.

Good god dude. The point boils down to this: a child can’t be charged with a crime for simply saying something.

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

If that were true, a child could tell his teacher to go F himself and the school would not be allowed to retaliate in any way. However we both know that isn't true. If a child would do such a thing, he would be kicked out of class, suspended or even expelled depending on the tolerance of the school.

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

 

[Billy000]

Good god dude. The point boils down to this: a child can’t be charged with a crime for simply saying something.

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

If that were true, a child could tell his teacher to go F himself and the school would not be allowed to retaliate in any way. However we both know that isn't true. If a child would do such a thing, he would be kicked out of class, suspended or even expelled depending on the tolerance of the school.

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

 

[bripat9643]

But a private school is not subject to constitutional rights; neither is a public school because a child doesn't have that protection.

Good god dude. The point boils down to this: a child can’t be charged with a crime for simply saying something.

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

We've already demonstrated that they don't.

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

No it isn't. Your employer is not the government. If he fires you, you can get another job. On the other hand you don't have a choice about paying for public schools, and there is only one public school system in town.

 

[Billy000]

Good god dude. The point boils down to this: a child can’t be charged with a crime for simply saying something.

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

We've already demonstrated that they don't.

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

No it isn't. Your employer is not the government. If he fires you, you can get another job. On the other hand you don't have a choice about paying for public schools, and there is only one public school system in town.

A child can be expelled from one school and enroll in another.

 

[bripat9643]

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

If that were true, a child could tell his teacher to go F himself and the school would not be allowed to retaliate in any way. However we both know that isn't true. If a child would do such a thing, he would be kicked out of class, suspended or even expelled depending on the tolerance of the school.

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

Yes they are "legal" punishments. They are litigated all the time. bonehead. Private firms are not the government. They are not bound by the Constitution.

 

[bripat9643]

An adult can't be charged with a crime for saying something outside of a physical threat against another such as saying you want to see the President or Congress person dead. But if they fined you or stop you from expressing yourself on other matters, that would be a violation of your rights.

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

We've already demonstrated that they don't.

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

No it isn't. Your employer is not the government. If he fires you, you can get another job. On the other hand you don't have a choice about paying for public schools, and there is only one public school system in town.

A child can be expelled from one school and enroll in another.

I'm not sure how that works, exactly, but he can't enroll in the school nearest to his home again. The government has precluded that option. It's still a punishment to be expelled. Furthermore, it goes on the kid's permanent record, which is another form of punishment.

 

[Billy000]

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

If that were true, a child could tell his teacher to go F himself and the school would not be allowed to retaliate in any way. However we both know that isn't true. If a child would do such a thing, he would be kicked out of class, suspended or even expelled depending on the tolerance of the school.

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

Yes they are "legal" punishments. They are litigated all the time. bonehead. Private firms are not the government. They are not bound by the Constitution.

And yet you can’t explain the legal distinction between a kid being expelled and an adult employee being fired from their job.

 

[Billy000]

Yes, granted threats are illegal, but what matters is that adults and children have the same 1st amendment rights.

We've already demonstrated that they don't.

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

No it isn't. Your employer is not the government. If he fires you, you can get another job. On the other hand you don't have a choice about paying for public schools, and there is only one public school system in town.

A child can be expelled from one school and enroll in another.

I'm not sure how that works, exactly, but he can't enrol in the school nearest to his home again. The government has precluded that option. It's still a punishment to be expelled. Furthermore, it goes on the kid's permanent record, which is another form of punishment.

Expulsion is not a legal punishment. The kid does not have to commit a crime to be expelled.

 

[bripat9643]

If that were true, a child could tell his teacher to go F himself and the school would not be allowed to retaliate in any way. However we both know that isn't true. If a child would do such a thing, he would be kicked out of class, suspended or even expelled depending on the tolerance of the school.

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

Yes they are "legal" punishments. They are litigated all the time. bonehead. Private firms are not the government. They are not bound by the Constitution.

And yet you can’t explain the legal distinction between a kid being expelled and an adult employee being fired from their job.

I already told you the distinction. In one case the government is doing it. In another case a private company is doing it. We have a choice about who we work for. We don't have a choice about following government rules and regulations.

 

[Billy000]

Suspension and expulsion are not legal punishments. No crime has been committed if they simply say something.

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

Yes they are "legal" punishments. They are litigated all the time. bonehead. Private firms are not the government. They are not bound by the Constitution.

And yet you can’t explain the legal distinction between a kid being expelled and an adult employee being fired from their job.

I already told you the distinction. In one case the government is doing it. In another case a private company is doing it. We have a choice about who we work for. We don't have a choice about following government rules and regulations.

And once again I have to explain to you that it being a government institution is a moot point because private schools have the same power. In the adult world, a private business has the right to fire someone for something they said. They also have the authority to search someone’s workspace because the workspace technically belongs to them.

 

[bripat9643]

We've already demonstrated that they don't.

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

No it isn't. Your employer is not the government. If he fires you, you can get another job. On the other hand you don't have a choice about paying for public schools, and there is only one public school system in town.

A child can be expelled from one school and enroll in another.

I'm not sure how that works, exactly, but he can't enrol in the school nearest to his home again. The government has precluded that option. It's still a punishment to be expelled. Furthermore, it goes on the kid's permanent record, which is another form of punishment.

Expulsion is not a legal punishment. The kid does not have to commit a crime to be expelled.

I don't know what you believe this term "legal" means. The punishments are authorized by law and therefore "legal." The only distinction you're making is the degree of the punishment. Getting a parking ticket means you violated the law. Building a house that doesn't have the mandated distance between electrical outlets is also a violation of the law.

 

[bripat9643]

Of course those are punishments. If they are not punishments, then what are they? It's a retaliation by the school for a student breaking the rules of that school.

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

Yes they are "legal" punishments. They are litigated all the time. bonehead. Private firms are not the government. They are not bound by the Constitution.

And yet you can’t explain the legal distinction between a kid being expelled and an adult employee being fired from their job.

I already told you the distinction. In one case the government is doing it. In another case a private company is doing it. We have a choice about who we work for. We don't have a choice about following government rules and regulations.

And once again I have to explain to you that it being a government institution is a moot point because private schools have the same power. In the adult world, a private business has the right to fire someone for something they said. They also have the authority to search someone’s workspace because the workspace technically belongs to them.

I give up. You may not understand the issue, but everyone reading this thread does by now. However, they aren't as dumb as you.

 

[Billy000]

No, you did not. Why? Because children have the same LEGAL protections as adults when it comes to the 1st amendment. An adult getting fired is no different than a kid getting expelled.

No it isn't. Your employer is not the government. If he fires you, you can get another job. On the other hand you don't have a choice about paying for public schools, and there is only one public school system in town.

A child can be expelled from one school and enroll in another.

I'm not sure how that works, exactly, but he can't enrol in the school nearest to his home again. The government has precluded that option. It's still a punishment to be expelled. Furthermore, it goes on the kid's permanent record, which is another form of punishment.

Expulsion is not a legal punishment. The kid does not have to commit a crime to be expelled.

I don't know what you believe this term "legal" means. The punishments are authorized by law and therefore "legal." The only distinction you're making is the degree of the punishment. Getting a parking ticket means you violated the law. Building a house that doesn't have the mandated distance between electrical outlets is also a violation of the law.

And how does all that differ from a private business’s rights over an employee?

 

[Billy000]

They are not LEGAL punishments. Just as it isn’t a LEGAL punishment to suspend or fire an employee.

Yes they are "legal" punishments. They are litigated all the time. bonehead. Private firms are not the government. They are not bound by the Constitution.

And yet you can’t explain the legal distinction between a kid being expelled and an adult employee being fired from their job.

I already told you the distinction. In one case the government is doing it. In another case a private company is doing it. We have a choice about who we work for. We don't have a choice about following government rules and regulations.

And once again I have to explain to you that it being a government institution is a moot point because private schools have the same power. In the adult world, a private business has the right to fire someone for something they said. They also have the authority to search someone’s workspace because the workspace technically belongs to them.

I give up. You may not understand the issue, but everyone reading this thread does by now. However, they aren't as dumb as you.

Oh, Patty. You know I’m right. Just accept it.

 

[Zander]

To all the gun grabbers:

 

[Zander]

Sorry libtards, but kids do own guns ....

 

[Billy000]

Sorry libtards, but kids do own guns ....

Um yeah kids can hold guns lol. That doesn’t mean they bought them.

 

[BlackSand]

Now, I know your answer to that is “no”, but think about this: what does that say about the 2nd amendment’s limitations? Doesn’t that mean gun control already has a legal precedent? If you think current gun control laws are illegal, then WHY would giving guns to kids be an exception when we think about the legal bounds of the constitution? After all kids are not at all mentioned in the amendment.

There is no minimum age for the possession of a long gun under federal law ...

.