Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP Update: They're going to need a bigger detention all. More than 100 kids walked out.

So they'll open a few more classrooms for detention or stagger when the kids serve their detention.

And make more staff stay late.

So, yeah, the kids have the last laugh. This isn't much of a consequence.

School should have empowered the kids, not tried to suppress them. It was a bad move. Everyone is on the same side with this -- restrict guns.

I am in favor of gun control, but obviously everyone in the country is not on the "same side" on this issue. The school cannot pick and choose when to enforce their rules. They hav eto consistent, even if the teachers/administrators personally agree with the walkout.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP Update: They're going to need a bigger detention all. More than 100 kids walked out.

Good. They should understand that actions have consequences. What is wrong with detention if you are defending your principles. Seems like a good solution to me. Win/win.

And the school will understand that their actions have consequences, too. Threatening detention won't stop these kids, and now LCPS has to house them all.

"House" them all? Good lord! Exactly how long is this detention?

"Provide space for; accommodate"--did you seriously not know this definition?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I told her part of civil disobedience is accepting consequences for actions. But part of me is curious whether I can override the school's discipline here? I'm kind of pissed off at the school for not giving an alternative outlet for kids to express themselves. So, I'm torn as I really want to make my displeasure to the school known and make it clear I don't recognize their authority to discipline my child in this matter. I consider the detention to be unlawful detainment. Any suggestions?

(Under normal circumstances I wouldn't do anything like this, but I take great offense at LCPS suppressing student walkouts).

I don't get it. Are you saying that school administrations should pick and choose over what issues kids should be allowed to violate the rules to support?

If another child supports the Constitutional protection of gun rights, and decides to walk out over it next week, should the school punish her and not your child?

+1. The administration of the school cannot "take a side" or encourage or discourage students with regard to specific forms of activism, or advocate through their actions a specific political viewpoint. Students with differing views might feel they are compelled to participate if their are perceived as supporting a point of view. It is fine to encourage students to be actively engaged in politics, but the school must continue to enforce their rules about leaving class, skipping school, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Future social justice warriors of America!

Terrifies you, doesn't it? These kids are far more powerful than the NRA's money. No wonder the right is losing its collective shit.

We're coming for you in November. You're done.

Republican here who favors gun control.

I wish these kids were more powerful on this issue, but they're not. However, it's not because of the NRA's money; it's their loyal membership base. You could have the NRA spend not one dollar on campaign donations, and they would be just about as powerful with consistent Facebook and social media messaging. They simply have a very devoted base that is willing to hold their elected leaders accountable to this one particular issue.

I think there base is eroding.

On this issue alone, I wish it were, but I don't think so. I end up talking to so many young people who have become big time gun enthusiasts and are more passionate about it than the old folks who just wanted to be able to hunt and maybe keep a pistol at home ever were.

Keep in mind how much the goal posts keep moving on this one. In the 80s and 90s, people were arguing about handguns and the Brady Bill. Now, nobody's even talking about handguns. They're a given. No, we're trying to just think about limiting access to very powerful, very rapid-firing rifles -- machine guns, for all intents and purposes. (And yes, I know that technically machine guns produced after 1986 are illegal, but bump stocks can go a long way to closing the gap.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Future social justice warriors of America!

Terrifies you, doesn't it? These kids are far more powerful than the NRA's money. No wonder the right is losing its collective shit.

We're coming for you in November. You're done.

Someone is wound up! But no, they can't beat the NRAs money.

The NRA seems to think they can. It's the only way to explain their sheer panic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Future social justice warriors of America!

Terrifies you, doesn't it? These kids are far more powerful than the NRA's money. No wonder the right is losing its collective shit.

We're coming for you in November. You're done.

Republican here who favors gun control.

I wish these kids were more powerful on this issue, but they're not. However, it's not because of the NRA's money; it's their loyal membership base. You could have the NRA spend not one dollar on campaign donations, and they would be just about as powerful with consistent Facebook and social media messaging. They simply have a very devoted base that is willing to hold their elected leaders accountable to this one particular issue.

I think there base is eroding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP Update: They're going to need a bigger detention all. More than 100 kids walked out.

So they'll open a few more classrooms for detention or stagger when the kids serve their detention.

And make more staff stay late.

So, yeah, the kids have the last laugh. This isn't much of a consequence.

School should have empowered the kids, not tried to suppress them. It was a bad move. Everyone is on the same side with this -- restrict guns.

Hardly, half of America disagrees. The other half of America thinks we should take the criminals off the streets instead.

Agreed w/ PP. If everyone were on the same side, there'd be no need for a walkout.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP Update: They're going to need a bigger detention all. More than 100 kids walked out.

So they'll open a few more classrooms for detention or stagger when the kids serve their detention.

And make more staff stay late.

So, yeah, the kids have the last laugh. This isn't much of a consequence.

School should have empowered the kids, not tried to suppress them. It was a bad move. Everyone is on the same side with this -- restrict guns.

This is where you get into trouble.

Anonymous wrote:OP, I think you're missing a big opportunity here to teach your child about constructive civic action. The decision not to excuse students who walk out from detention was not made by the individual school administrators, it was made at the superintendent level and the individual school administrators don't have the authority to override that. So crow all you want about how the kids have made those administrators' lives more difficult, but you're targeting the wrong people here. If you daughter really wants to take this issue on, I would encourage her to sit down this afternoon and write a well-reasoned email to the superintendent's office explaining why she feels an exception should be made this event (as a way to guide her, you could point out that the superintendent's office has issued a statement explaining the decision, so a well-reasoned email would be one that responds directly to that statement).

If that doesn't change their minds on the detention, she could then decide to speak at the next school board meeting, explaining why she feels this situation warrants an exception and asking that the detention be removed from the students' permanent records. Sure, this doesn't change that they had to serve the detention and one detention isn't going to make or break anyone's record, but it would be a way of continuing to stand up on the issue, and if the administration were to agree to remove this incident from students' records, it would be significant precedent for responding to future demonstrations.

Teach your child how to make a difference, not just how to send mommy running to the school to get him/her out of trouble.

Does it? Why?

OP, I think you're missing a big opportunity here to teach your child about constructive civic action. The decision not to excuse students who walk out from detention was not made by the individual school administrators, it was made at the superintendent level and the individual school administrators don't have the authority to override that. So crow all you want about how the kids have made those administrators' lives more difficult, but you're targeting the wrong people here. If you daughter really wants to take this issue on, I would encourage her to sit down this afternoon and write a well-reasoned email to the superintendent's office explaining why she feels an exception should be made this event (as a way to guide her, you could point out that the superintendent's office has issued a statement explaining the decision, so a well-reasoned email would be one that responds directly to that statement).

If that doesn't change their minds on the detention, she could then decide to speak at the next school board meeting, explaining why she feels this situation warrants an exception and asking that the detention be removed from the students' permanent records. Sure, this doesn't change that they had to serve the detention and one detention isn't going to make or break anyone's record, but it would be a way of continuing to stand up on the issue, and if the administration were to agree to remove this incident from students' records, it would be significant precedent for responding to future demonstrations.

Teach your child how to make a difference, not just how to send mommy running to the school to get him/her out of trouble.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I told her part of civil disobedience is accepting consequences for actions. But part of me is curious whether I can override the school's discipline here? I'm kind of pissed off at the school for not giving an alternative outlet for kids to express themselves. So, I'm torn as I really want to make my displeasure to the school known and make it clear I don't recognize their authority to discipline my child in this matter. I consider the detention to be unlawful detainment. Any suggestions?

(Under normal circumstances I wouldn't do anything like this, but I take great offense at LCPS suppressing student walkouts).

Good I am happy she got detention for waking out of class/skipping class...

When I went to school and I skip class I got detention for it why will your snowflake be any different?

NP. Because you have implied throughout this thread that she deserves to be treated like one.


Why are you calling my child a snowflake?

I've done no such thing. Look, if you cannot demonstrate basic reading comprehension, perhaps internet forums are not a place for you?

Why have you implied that your child should not be given a detention for clearly breaking the rules?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Future social justice warriors of America!

Terrifies you, doesn't it? These kids are far more powerful than the NRA's money. No wonder the right is losing its collective shit.

We're coming for you in November. You're done.

Someone is wound up! But no, they can't beat the NRAs money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Future social justice warriors of America!

Terrifies you, doesn't it? These kids are far more powerful than the NRA's money. No wonder the right is losing its collective shit.

We're coming for you in November. You're done.

Republican here who favors gun control.

I wish these kids were more powerful on this issue, but they're not. However, it's not because of the NRA's money; it's their loyal membership base. You could have the NRA spend not one dollar on campaign donations, and they would be just about as powerful with consistent Facebook and social media messaging. They simply have a very devoted base that is willing to hold their elected leaders accountable to this one particular issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Future social justice warriors of America!

Terrifies you, doesn't it? These kids are far more powerful than the NRA's money. No wonder the right is losing its collective shit.

We're coming for you in November. You're done.

+1
Just read what GOP operatives are saying about PA-18. They are f-cked.