Of course they were, so what? Non-stupid people don’t let themselves being baited into doing something ridiculous and indefensible even if they know for a fact they’re being baited.
Yes, it should. What it should do is to teach the students who are annoyed by the incendiary behavior about the principles of freedom of speech, individual rights, and the rule of law.
The message that aggression, harassment and bullying are not appropriate responses to incendiary behavior is more important than the desire to punish rude little cocknockers for engaging in incendiary behavior.
What every other student in the school should have done to the flag-fappers is walk up to them with a big smile and wish them “Happy Cinco de Mayo!” Preferably in Spanish.
Right. It’s obvious that these kids were trying to troll other students, but that’s one of those things that high school students do. You send a teacher over to make sure it doesn’t go too far; you don’t make headlines by making a ridiculous ruling.
Because they were in school. Rah rah First Amendment. Let 'em wear it on the sidelines of the CdM parade or to work or to wherever else they want to express their pride in America and love of being an asshole. But in a school environment, the administration has a responsibility to prevent incidents.
That’s pretty much all that needs to be said, I think. Now these asshats are made to look like victims.
That’s exactly what happened. Had they not been dressed as trolls, had they been calling out “Hey spic, go back to Mexico!” a teacher would have told them to cut it the fuck out. If they still kept saying it, they’d get sent to the principals’ office, etc.
Yet they continue to let, nay, require that every room have an American flag displayed. Maybe they should have removed them all, in case there was an “incident.”
The school is administered by fuckwits.
Sure, but not at the price of unfairly harassing students who aren’t directly harming anybody else.
Suppose a gay student in a conservative Christian-majority school wore a “Rainbow Pride” t-shirt to school on Valentine’s Day or something. Should the administrators tell him to change his shirt to reduce the chances of outraged homophobes beating him up? I think that would be appalling too.
True, which is why had they worn shirts that said “Mexicans all suck” the administration would have been correct to take action, even though an adult citizen has every right to wear such a shirt under the First Amendment.
But you still have to have actual provocation beyond “knowing” the students had sinister motives for an otherwise innocent action. Punishing a student for wearing an American flag is indefensible because…wait for it…that’s the country we live in.
Shouting racist insults, or even wearing a shirt with racist insults on it, is significantly different from just wearing a shirt with an American flag on it. Even if the wearer’s intent to insult is precisely the same.
There are certain types of offensive trolling and baiting that you can get away with, and certain types that you can’t. The test should be whether the offensive action is something directly harmful and offensive in its own right, and wearing an American flag shirt doesn’t fall into that category.
No, it’s not what happened. They were toeing the line, but unless there’s more to the story, they didn’t cross it. Mass-wearing of American shirts in protest is not that disruptive.
And even though it’s not directly on point, if we’re talking about the inciting of violence (or even a disruption), I should point out that most everyone has a hard time overcomming Brandenburg’s “imminent” barrier.
I don’t know the flag-wearing kids’ “real” motivation was. But…
If you read the comments from the Mercury News and San Jose political blogs, it’s clear that some residents have a problem with the city cancelling community events (4th of July celebration, Tapestry Arts Festival, Christmas In The Park), while still making a big deal over Cinco de Mayo celebrations.
Bong Hits 4 Jesus.
But once again, here we are assuming we know why the administrators did what they did. There aren’t any comments from the school’s administrators in the article. There is the teensy blurb about how the District doesn’t agree with the school administration’s interpretation of policy. But what policy? Policies on bullying? Policies on decorum? Policies on dress code? Policies on distractions?
Of course the media plays this like it’s a politically correct thing. It also prints quotes that support that interpretation. We are to fill-in the blanks with very limited information. We are to assume the kids innocently wore flag shirts. We are to assume motive for what the administrators did. All we have are the students’ side and some unclear stuff from the district thrown in for “balance”.
Now, the school administrators should respond to disruptive situations as consistently as they can across the board. Responses to taunts should be the same regardless of the nature of the taunt.
The way around this “political correctness run amok” accusation is to be able to demonstrate that the issue is not the flag on the shirt, but the threat of disruption to the school day and general desire to not allow taunting/bullying in the school.
All the rest is just a distraction.
The best analogy I can see for this is being sent home because you’re not wearing green on St. Patrick’s Day. (And my being a non-conformist, I usually don’t wear green on Mar. 17 anyways, simply because I’m a non-conformist (and not because I’m not Irish, or because I don’t own many green clothes (both are true))
And that’s scary …
I’m not going to try to research this past the following, but California Education Code Section 48950 provides in relevant part:
I think that only applies in Berkeley, though. 
Man, this is stupid. I actually have several friends who went to Live Oak, but that would’ve been over 20 years ago. It is located in an area that is a lot more Hispanic than it was a generation or so ago (maybe 2 generations).
Cinco de Mayo-- another manufactured holiday. Me, I don’t need no stinkin’ excuse to drink. If I wanna drink, I’m gonna drink!
I used to be a non-conformist. But then I noticed most of my friends were, also, and I didn’t want to be just like everyone else.
Doesn’t Morse stand pretty narrowly on drug use grounds?
Reminds me of my college, where classes are still scheduled as normal on Presidents Day (a federal holiday) yet we have the day off on Cesar Chavez Day. What the fuck?