The device, as we’ve discussed in this thread, fits the state’s definition of a “hoax bomb” and I’m sure could reasonably be ruled to be in violation of school policy (although I’d like to see the actual policy). It mystifies me why the engineering/shop/science teacher in 1st period wasn’t more helpful to Ahmed. (S)He clearly saw no ill intent on the kid’s part, but also clearly saw the device as problematic to carry around in school. If s/he wasn’t going to kick it to administration as a potential rule violation, s/he probably should’ve confiscated the clock to return to Ahmed at the end of the day, or explained to him why it was provocative.
Probably wouldn’t have made a difference as far as the school rule violation, but I’d argue that Ahmed Mohamed’s ethnicity and religion were possible factors in the principal’s decision to involve law enforcement. Obviously, we can’t know this, but I wouldn’t poo-poo the notion. I think ‘Jimmy White’ would’ve likely faced a suspension and a call to parents to pick him up from school.
The LEO involvement might well be a requirement of some zero tolerance policy, but that’s not mentioned in the letter to parents from the school, and no one has mentioned it as a defense of the school’s actions, so who knows.
Frankly, i’m staggered that you can reach this conclusion.
The kids never represented the device as anything but a clock.
The first person he showed it to was the person probably most qualified to judge whether it was, in fact, a clock.
That person confirmed that it was, in fact, a clock.
He kept the device in his bag, rather than showing it around or leaving it in a suspicious location.
When it beeped, and he was asked about it, he said it was a clock, and when the person most qualified to judge the device was called in, he confirmed (once again) that it was a clock, and that he had already established its clockiness earlier in the day.
SlackerInc, you’ve gone meta-pathetic now. If you say douchebag shit, I’ll tell you why it is douchebag shit. If a bunch of assholes come and say the same shit, I am not compelled to repeat myself. Imbecile.
The clinical definition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder is a long way from “robust self regard.” Light years. Parsecs.
Even the layperson’sdefinition of narcissism, “the pursuit of gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one’s own attributes” is nowhere close to “robust self regard.”
No, you’re neither a Narcissist nor a narcissist. At most, you’re just another egotistical pedant trying to find a way to justify your egotistical pedantry.
Ha! Thanks. That was even reposted pretty recently in the thread, too.
There’s nothing I could find in the linked document, or in the school board’s policy documents, that would’ve mandated calling the police in this situation. Sharper eyes than mine might find such a mandate, but it doesn’t exactly jump out at me if it’s there.
So I’ll stand by my opinion that the LEO involvement was both unusual and uncalled for and requires some explanation other than “someone could theoretically mistake Ahmed’s clock for a bomb, even though we all know it isn’t and he never said it was.”
ETA: I think shop teacher’s evaluation was the right one, and that the school administration should’ve gone with a warning, counselling the student to avoid bringing personal ad hoc electronic projects to school, and let it go…
You both are being disingenuous or willfully obtuse. Said teacher told Ahmed not to show it to any other teachers! If no warning bells went off with this guy, and he just thought “cool, nice clock”, why would he say this?
Why would it matter what the kid said? Kids lie all the time to get out of trouble. Or, so what if he was even telling the truth, but THE THING COULD REASONABLY BE SEEN AS A FAKE BOMB. The rule doesn’t say “no fake bombs, unless you tell us that it’s a clock”.
It’s up to the school administration to determine if a rule had been broken. If the kid thinks the rule was unjustly applied to him, he can take the administration to court.
But just FTR, I did not come into this thread with animus against this kid. From the beginning, I thought I made it clear that I *identified *with him, having also been a prankster at that age. (In fact, someone dinged me for that, with something along the lines of “just because you were like that as a teen doesn’t mean he is”.)