School Shooting in Michigan. 3 Teens DEAD. 1 15-yr old suspect in custody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WaPo now reporting the letter sent by the superintendent yesterday to parents outlining the chronology of events with this kid at the school. Apparently, the report by the teacher and meeting with parents that day all stayed at the guidance counselor level. The principal and VP were never looped in. Wow.

So the principal and AP claim.

How convenient.

+1. I've never heard of a teacher sending a disturbed kid to "the office" and they end up in a guidance counselor's office? Baloney. Who was calling the parents? Who met with the kid on Monday? Who met with the parents on Tuesday?

+2. I'm a teacher (granted I'm ES) and I'd go straight to admin with something like this, not guidance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Narrowing the timeline to Monday and Tuesday is misleading. There was a "dark cloud" hanging over the school for weeks and months leading up to this. The district wrote letters about the "rumors", see: https://oxfordhigh.oxfordschools.org/parents___students/building_communications/november_12__concerns_and_rumors

The district's administrative brass is a mile long list of six-figure salary highly credentialed "experts". Sorry, I'm not buying it that two uneducated low-life parents persuaded or successfully pushed back against the brass. The professionals failed the community, there is no other way to put it.

The superintendent was a deer in headlights at the very first press conference on Tuesday afternoon; he looked very "off". I suspected then he was fully aware he and his colleagues screwed up.

This is a weird assertion, for a school district that has all of 5 ES, 2 MS, and 1 HS. I very much doubt they have a "mile long list of six-figure salary highly credentialed experts" and I don't know what benefit you derive from lying about that.

In addition to the district, Oxford, having their own bureaucracy, there's also Oakland (County) Intermediate School District (ISD) above it with a massive bureaucracy. Yes, we are talking about a mile long list of six-figure edu experts. Plus this is the wealthiest county in Michigan, so you have another mile long list of mental and juvenile health experts at the county health department.

The ISD, like all ISDs in Michigan, serves totally different functions than the management of the district does (including but not limited to administering and staffing special education programs that are way beyond the scope of a 7,000-student district).

If you hate district-level bureaucracy and you aren't here arguing to abolish public schools (or are you?) you should like the ISD and want it to expand--it's what could replace district-level management.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

+1

EXACTLY. Meanwhile, terrorizing the rest of the school whenever they feel like it, which is too often. It is a dangerous situation, and the rest of the unsuspecting students should not be put in this dangerous (potentially lethal, as we see here) situation. BUT those parents want to censor and not warn anyone else - therein lies the exact problem ie: not telling the school they had a gun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

+1

EXACTLY. Meanwhile, terrorizing the rest of the school whenever they feel like it, which is too often. It is a dangerous situation, and the rest of the unsuspecting students should not be put in this dangerous (potentially lethal, as we see here) situation. BUT those parents want to censor and not warn anyone else - therein lies the exact problem ie: not telling the school they had a gun.

The parents are white very vocal trump supporters. Would you think there is a high probability they had guns at home?

[Anonymous]

Is there a reason that the board president could not have put out a condolence announcement? From what I'm reading, he/she and the entire board have gone to ground and can't be reached. Same thing for the principal and the two assistant principals under him. So the only drip out of the administration is essentially it's all the counselor's fault, i.e. cover their own butts while letting other's hang in the wind. These kids, their families and the teachers involved in the shooting deserve far better than this.

[Anonymous]

The superintendent intends to retire in January 2022?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The superintendent intends to retire in January 2022?

"I don't believe the spin that the school administration is putting on it. Superintendent is playing "cover his ass" so he can continue with his retirement plans in January. Not a single word from the Principal, nor from the School Board. No condolences, no words of unity, not a freaking thing from these people other than the self-serving video tape from the Super. None of them even showed up at the vigil on Friday."

Wow, just wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

+1

EXACTLY. Meanwhile, terrorizing the rest of the school whenever they feel like it, which is too often. It is a dangerous situation, and the rest of the unsuspecting students should not be put in this dangerous (potentially lethal, as we see here) situation. BUT those parents want to censor and not warn anyone else - therein lies the exact problem ie: not telling the school they had a gun.

Yes. My son was punched in the face in 5th grade. Obviously he knew who did it but the school would not officially name him to me. They would not tell us how he would be punished and he was not removed from the class so my son was not only robbed of receiving any justice but was forced to continue in a class with a child who had assaulted him. It is unconscionable! The privacy rights of the assailant took precedent over my sons rights and his well being. In the end we were forced to for lack of a better term, throw a tantrum to get him moved to a different class but still HE was the victim and he had to move. We sent him to private for high school where there is accountability!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

+1

EXACTLY. Meanwhile, terrorizing the rest of the school whenever they feel like it, which is too often. It is a dangerous situation, and the rest of the unsuspecting students should not be put in this dangerous (potentially lethal, as we see here) situation. BUT those parents want to censor and not warn anyone else - therein lies the exact problem ie: not telling the school they had a gun.

The parents are white very vocal trump supporters. Would you think there is a high probability they had guns at home?

+1

[Anonymous]

*precedence

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

+1

EXACTLY. Meanwhile, terrorizing the rest of the school whenever they feel like it, which is too often. It is a dangerous situation, and the rest of the unsuspecting students should not be put in this dangerous (potentially lethal, as we see here) situation. BUT those parents want to censor and not warn anyone else - therein lies the exact problem ie: not telling the school they had a gun.

Yes. My son was punched in the face in 5th grade. Obviously he knew who did it but the school would not officially name him to me. They would not tell us how he would be punished and he was not removed from the class so my son was not only robbed of receiving any justice but was forced to continue in a class with a child who had assaulted him. It is unconscionable! The privacy rights of the assailant took precedent over my sons rights and his well being. In the end we were forced to for lack of a better term, throw a tantrum to get him moved to a different class but still HE was the victim and he had to move. We sent him to private for high school where there is accountability!

So glad you got out of that school system. I wish everyone was able to afford private, because you know (as you stated) - they don't discipline, never mind move, the troublemakers. And yes, God forbid you say the troublemakers name. But you know what? Everyone knows who the class troublemaker's is - and who their parents are.

If you threw a fit, only imagine how much the troublemakers' parents throw fits. I am glad this subject is coming to light, because innocent children and innocent parents deserve to know - and most of all, deserve to be safe - and alive, at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the shooter HAND IN the paper that said, "I can't stop the thoughts. Blood everywhere. I want help" or did a teacher find/see it?

I did hear those statements were written on an assignment sheet he was supposed to complete.

If he handed it in before the crime, then I actually think he was hoping an adult would stop him.

Not sympathetic view, I am sure. But there was a moment in time that morning when everyone was still alive.

Okay, now that I have read the letter from the school, I no longer think the kid wanted to be stopped.

It seems he lied and said the drawings were for a videogame he was designing!

That poor counsellor, who apparently did not elevate this case. What a difficult job they have!!

+1

Exactly why the blame is much, much, much less on the school, than the vindictive and cowardly parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I actually decided NOT to be a pediatric therapist because I thought it would be so frustrating to know that (in many, not all) cases, the parents are driving the kid's problems...but you can't fix them!

+1

Amen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, every rationale possible is being used by the PPs in this thread to excuse the gun owners and their kid (the shooter) passing the blame to anyone else.

Not true. I blame:

The kid
The parents (maybe even more than the kid)
The school admin (for not calling police/searching the bag/sending the kid home)
The laws for giving this kid more rights than his fellow students.

I can blame many things at once. An absolutely tragedy that could have been prevented so many ways.

Tell me what rights this kid has that other kids do not. Name one.

You can't because this kid has no more rights than anyone else.

This kid has no more rights than any other kid. You sound like one of those insane anti-public school LCPS haters nutjobs. You are ignorant and don't understand the laws related to education. BTW if you are the same poster blaming IDEA and FAPE, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. FAPE AND IDEA have nothing to do with what happened with this kid and would not stop the school from sending the kid home.

So much ignorance posted here.

The push for the rights of troubled kids absolutely are the reason this kid was not told to go home with his parents. It’s the reason they were allowed to “decline” to take him home. And why the school didn’t search him. Schools searched lockers and bags all the time when we were kids. All they needed was an anonymous tip.

NP. How, precisely, is a school administrator supposed to force a parent to take a child home if that parent declines. Please explain with precision how that works both legally and logistically.

Suspend him for the safety of the student body and if they leave without him, he’s trespassing. Call. The. Police.

Are you really this simple?

What bizarre fantasy world are you living in? This never happened, not even in whatever imaginary world you think used to exist.

Stick to reality, please.

There was a different power dynamic. The school had the power and authority. Principals in the 70s did not play. If the parents wouldn’t take the kid. They would have had them escorted from campus. The litigious nature of our society and changes in law have made is such that schools are wary about exercising authority in situations such as this which is what got us here. It is my hope that this will help bring more balance back to the schools and recognize that kids that aren’t troubled have rights and need protection and care as well.

x100000

EXACTLY THIS.

PP is either obtuse or one of those parents (who wants to see how much the other parents know).

Yes, and the parents of the difficult kids either scream IEP! (if they have one) or BULLYING! (if they don’t) to get their way and not admit wrong doing from their child.

+1

EXACTLY. Meanwhile, terrorizing the rest of the school whenever they feel like it, which is too often. It is a dangerous situation, and the rest of the unsuspecting students should not be put in this dangerous (potentially lethal, as we see here) situation. BUT those parents want to censor and not warn anyone else - therein lies the exact problem ie: not telling the school they had a gun.

Yes. My son was punched in the face in 5th grade. Obviously he knew who did it but the school would not officially name him to me. They would not tell us how he would be punished and he was not removed from the class so my son was not only robbed of receiving any justice but was forced to continue in a class with a child who had assaulted him. It is unconscionable! The privacy rights of the assailant took precedent over my sons rights and his well being. In the end we were forced to for lack of a better term, throw a tantrum to get him moved to a different class but still HE was the victim and he had to move. We sent him to private for high school where there is accountability!

So glad you got out of that school system. I wish everyone was able to afford private, because you know (as you stated) - they don't discipline, never mind move, the troublemakers. And yes, God forbid you say the troublemakers name. But you know what? Everyone knows who the class troublemaker's is - and who their parents are.

If you threw a fit, only imagine how much the troublemakers' parents throw fits. I am glad this subject is coming to light, because innocent children and innocent parents deserve to know - and most of all, deserve to be safe - and alive, at school.

Well it helps to have $50k a year sitting around. There are millions of terrific kids who don’t have that luxury. Listen I get that kids aren’t perfect and my kids are far from perfect but they deserve to be seen and nurtured as much as any other kid. The pendulum has swung too far. The troubled kids need help but treating them with kid gloves isn’t helping them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This quote is for the PP who was trying to insist that troubled kids don’t have “more rights” than everyone else. So, literally the only reason he remained at school was because they didn’t want to send him, a teenager, home to an empty house. What were they afraid of? Teens are allowed to be home alone, so they clearly worried about something.

If they weren’t MORE worried about this kid, than the rest of the kids, then 4 children would still be alive. His rights superseded theirs.

"Given the fact that the child had no prior disciplinary infractions, the decision was made he would be returned to the classroom rather than sent home to an empty house," Throne said.”

+1

This is exactly what happens, and what eyewitnesses and families subjected to this behavior are saying. The assailant parents and the administration wants these behaviors swept under the rug, but it is only getting worse (obviously).