Absolute zero tolerance policies are disastrously bad. The purpose of a school isn’t to protect children (though of course I’m happy that they do a very good job of that). The purpose of a school is education, and absolute zero tolerance grinds that to a halt. At that point, you don’t have a school any more; you have protective custody in a prison.
If we just had the drawings to go on, and had to decide between the two scenarios “kid really likes video games” or “kid is seriously mentally disturbed”, then yes, maybe the “kid really likes video games” might be the the more plausible explanation. But given both the drawings and, you know, the fact that he actually went on a real-life murderous rampage, I think that the “seriously disturbed” possibility just might be slightly more plausible.
He had YouTube video channels, at 10yo. Kid stuff talking to the camera. Sweet voiced articulate. In one he Talked about his video game collection and trips to the UP of MI. One with a few friends shooting hoops. Like he was the video editor.
[quote=“nelliebly, post:302, topic:955493”] I
expect that after this, schools across the country will be more vigilant about checking backpacks under similar circumstances.
[/quote]
I also expect that this will have little overall impact, While the one thing that would have an impact—making firearms less available to everyone—nothing will be done about that.
I actually more or less agree with that, even though I seemed to be advocating it. The reality is that it’s rare and impractical to implement “absolute” zero tolerance. What I’ve really been saying is that schools around here take student safety very, very seriously, even over seemingly minor offenses. This has certainly been the policy advocated in the Toronto District School Board Safe Schools Foundation Statement, the only deviation from absolute zero tolerance is that school officials are now permitted to consider mitigating circumstances.
But schools do have a solemn responsibility to protect students against bullying, harassment, racism, and certainly against injury or death. It may not fit the classical concept of “education” but it’s a fact of life, because there’s no one else to do it, and obviously some students can be extremely disturbed and (especially in high school) potentially dangerous. Parents, teachers, law enforcement, and school board administrators are all on board with taking a hard line on this.
That does not help the staff when they are in the situation. Maybe it will be deemed legal, maybe not. They are in a gray area here. The DA is not advising them at the moment and they will be thinking they could get sued if they do that.
As you said, in the future schools are likely to be more aggressive about searching backpacks. But now we see another erosion of our rights and, as @MandaJo mentioned earlier in this thread, there is a hit to the child’s psyche when he/she is treated like a criminal in school.
All this in service to the almighty 2nd amendment right to have a gun.
My post was in response to those who wondered if the school had legal grounds to search Ethan Crumbey’s backpack. The DA said the school did have legal grounds. She is quite familiar with the circumstances, grey or otherwise. You want to argue there were no grounds? Take it up with her.
The search of a backpack does not necessarily mean the student is “treated like a criminal.” It depends on circumstances and on how the search is conducted.
Actually, the way I see it is that it’s your assessment that is wrong on many levels. Here are a few of them:
The school has no control over the proliferation of guns in the community, or over American gun culture. They can only control what happens within school property.
The policies I happen to be describing, because I know something of the school culture here, are those of the Toronto District School Board, which has no interest in the US 2nd Amendment or anyone’s alleged gun rights. Given that these policies are believed to be necessary and have been successful in a place where guns are not generally a problem and school shootings are almost unheard of, it would seem to me that similar policies are 1000x times more important where guns are, in fact, a significant risk.
No one here believes that strict enforcement of safety policies deprives anyone of their “privacy rights” beyond what is reasonably necessary to ensure a safe environment for everyone. How this is anything like being in prison is incomprehensible. If I still had kids in school I’d certainly be like virtually every parent, who would rather the kids have a safe, controlled environment instead of being put at risk every single day they go to school.
ETA: I’ll also note that this is getting off topic as it’s not really what this thread is about. It’s about the gross negligence of the parents and what I feel are well justified charges. In fact I tend to see this poor 15-year-old kid as a victim of both a depraved gun culture and incredibly bad parenting. Indeed if the school had done a little more digging and uncovered the information that was readily available, on social media and on the kid’s phone, they not only might have prevented the tragedy, but in my view Child Protective Services would have had grounds to remove the kid from those monsters.
The kid who fell on the floor in that video looks like he’s barely conscious. Like really drunk on alcohol or inhaled too much nitrous oxide. That video, whatever its purpose, does not show me a stoned on pot kid.
Do we have a problem with people bringing pipe bombs to school in this country? School shootings barely make a dent in the news these days; the only reason this one is doing it is because the parents went on the lam and are wanted for aiding and abetting. Someone explodes a pipe bomb in a school, people will have memorial issues of TIME Magazine about it.
And whatever he’s fucked up on, there’s no proof that it came from his parents.
What it does suggest, however, is that this was a fucked-up kid who should never have been allowed within 100 yards of a firearm.
In fact, if I were a pro-gun rights advocate, I’d be first in line fitting these parents for orange jumpsuits, to distance them in every way possible from the 99% of responsible gun owners.
Not a prison, but much like the military. They are in custody and subject to rules of behavior. There is little expectation of privacy in a public school. In this case the school administration could have asked the parents to search the kids’ property. It would distinguish them between investigating and participating in their child’s criminal behavior.
Nope: Students have a privacy right in their personal belongings, such as backpacks, and school officials must have “reasonable suspicion” before searching a student’s items.
