Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As parents we were told that FCPS wouldn't condone nor stop kids from walking out. They did say that kids who miss class would be dealt with in the same way as any other unexcused absence.

In other words, kids are free to leave, but they face the consequences of missing class. I would rather the school not condone any walkout, regardless of the cause.

Some schools were more lenient, allowing 17 minutes, but any more than that is an unexcused absence.

I think it should be dealt with more harshly, kids should not walk out of school without penalty. They are free to protest, but do it on their own time not the schools time. As taxpayers, we are paying for teachers to be in school teaching them, so it costs us too.

I agree completely.

I do too. Especially the public schools are liable for the kids in the classroom - they cannot have them out and roaming without consequences. All publics handled this beautifully - they all posted what would be permitted, what wouldn't be, and what the consequences would be, so the children and parents could make their own decisions. A number of colleges said weeks ago that they would not hold the penalty against a junior or senior for walking out, so even if OPs get got a consequence, it won't matter to most colleges. Every school district and privates were very clear about procedures so OP and child should not have been surprised at all.

Anonymous wrote:As parents we were told that FCPS wouldn't condone nor stop kids from walking out. They did say that kids who miss class would be dealt with in the same way as any other unexcused absence.

In other words, kids are free to leave, but they face the consequences of missing class. I would rather the school not condone any walkout, regardless of the cause.

Some schools were more lenient, allowing 17 minutes, but any more than that is an unexcused absence.

I think it should be dealt with more harshly, kids should not walk out of school without penalty. They are free to protest, but do it on their own time not the schools time. As taxpayers, we are paying for teachers to be in school teaching them, so it costs us too.

I agree completely.

Anonymous wrote:Unlawful detainment? Please.

+1
The hyperbole is just too much.

As parents we were told that FCPS wouldn't condone nor stop kids from walking out. They did say that kids who miss class would be dealt with in the same way as any other unexcused absence.

In other words, kids are free to leave, but they face the consequences of missing class. I would rather the school not condone any walkout, regardless of the cause.

Some schools were more lenient, allowing 17 minutes, but any more than that is an unexcused absence.

I think it should be dealt with more harshly, kids should not walk out of school without penalty. They are free to protest, but do it on their own time not the schools time. As taxpayers, we are paying for teachers to be in school teaching them, so it costs us too.

Anonymous wrote:And, the child keeps walking and disappears. Who do you blame, then? Chances are you sue the school.

Its easier to blame the school and gun laws than to look at the real issues and we as parents step up and deal with the real issues.

And, the child keeps walking and disappears. Who do you blame, then? Chances are you sue the school.

As a parent you had a choice as well. You could have taken the day off to go get your child and sign them out of school. You choose not to do that and your child choose to participate anyway. Your child is a minor and in the schools care. The protest is to keep kids safe. They cannot keep kids safe if the kids walk out. Think about this logically. I think its interesting all the parents supporting the kids walk-out did not participate. How supportive are you if you did not do the walk out with your kids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she get detention for walking out?

Or did she get detention for not coming back in or for skrewing arpund instead of peacefully protesting?

I would go on a fact finding mission before raising hell at the school.

90 kids walked out. They stood quietly in front of the school for 17 minutes under supervision of school administrators. They were brought to the cafeteria and told they had to be punished. They could choose three lunch detentions, Saturday school or one after school detention. They are required to write an essay (mine will compare and contrast LCPS handling of today with neighboring districts.)

In other fact-finding news, I have determined that you are a twat.

Sounds like the school handled it well. I don't see the issue. They walked out of school, skipped class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

NP. Because the reason they are allowed to walk out is because they are constitutionally allowed to exercise their first amendment rights in this manner. I don't think they should be punished for something they are constitutionally allowed to do. I think an unexcused absence because they weren't in class should be what happens. The detention is punitive. Any civil rights lawyers care to opine on this

I must have missed that clause.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.

Different situation completely. Here's a quote from one news article:
https://www.aclu.org/other/tinker-v-des-moines-landmark-supreme-court-ruling-behalf-student-expression

The Court ruled that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and school officials could not censor student speech unless it disrupted the educational process.

In Tinker, it was just wearing an article of clothing that showed their support for a cause. I would say that children walking out of the school, leaving classes, in the OP's case, requiring a faculty member to accompany them and monitor 90 children leaving the building, would "disrupt the educational process."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

NP. Because the reason they are allowed to walk out is because they are constitutionally allowed to exercise their first amendment rights in this manner. I don't think they should be punished for something they are constitutionally allowed to do. I think an unexcused absence because they weren't in class should be what happens. The detention is punitive. Any civil rights lawyers care to opine on this

I must have missed that clause.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.

np. That's totally irrelevant. That only applies when it doesn't disrupt normal instruction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

NP. Because the reason they are allowed to walk out is because they are constitutionally allowed to exercise their first amendment rights in this manner. I don't think they should be punished for something they are constitutionally allowed to do. I think an unexcused absence because they weren't in class should be what happens. The detention is punitive. Any civil rights lawyers care to opine on this

I must have missed that clause.

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

NP. Because the reason they are allowed to walk out is because they are constitutionally allowed to exercise their first amendment rights in this manner. I don't think they should be punished for something they are constitutionally allowed to do. I think an unexcused absence because they weren't in class should be what happens. The detention is punitive. Any civil rights lawyers care to opine on this

They also have a constitutional right to bear arms. Does that mean that a child should not be penalized for carrying a gun into school? This argument is ridiculous. Yes, they have a right to civil protest. And I applaud them for doing so for a good cause. That said, there are school rules and regulations in place and the children violated those rules which include leaving class and the school unexcused. The school has responsibility for the minor during school hours. They are responsible for assigning appropriate discipline. Just remember that while you may approve of this act of civil disobedience, the school cannot discriminate against those individuals whose cause they approve of. They have to assign discipline as fairly as possible. The same punishment that they would assign to children going to a white supremacist rally they need to assign here.

I think the kids did the right thing, but I also think that they should accept the punishment as assigned.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

OP: I didn't write this, but schools exist to educate our children. This is an opportunity to encourage civic engagement. These kids are finally going to change our idiotic gun laws -- schools should be encouraging that, not suppressing it.

Opinion

Yes, a widely shared one. By the vast majority of the American people. According to the polling.

Pollster here. I can get a majority of people to say anything, based on who I talk to, and how I ask the question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

NP. Because the reason they are allowed to walk out is because they are constitutionally allowed to exercise their first amendment rights in this manner. I don't think they should be punished for something they are constitutionally allowed to do. I think an unexcused absence because they weren't in class should be what happens. The detention is punitive. Any civil rights lawyers care to opine on this

I must have missed that clause.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yup, I would just tell the kid that the cause was worth the detention and let him/her serve. I do think the school is shitty for giving them detention though.

Why?

OP: I didn't write this, but schools exist to educate our children. This is an opportunity to encourage civic engagement. These kids are finally going to change our idiotic gun laws -- schools should be encouraging that, not suppressing it.

Opinion

Yes, a widely shared one. By the vast majority of the American people. According to the polling.