Zero Tolerance gone crazy

Well, she's certainly learning about civics, isn't she???

David Erbas-White

This isn't really anything new. The Secret Service is obligated to investigate anything that could be construed as a threat to the president's life, even if it is a school paper written by a teenage girl. Something similar happened at my school when we had a letter-drive and somebody wrote someting to the effect of "bombing the White House." It wound up being nothing.

That said, the school should have talked to the student and/or parents first before notifying the authorities. In my school's case, the letter was anonymous and it was not the school who found the message in the first place.

Welcome back to Columbine. Nothing will ever be the same.

Alabama is very rigid where death threats are concerned, at any level. Every year, all students 1-12 receive a Code of Conduct handbook. They AND their parents must sign it and return. She knew when she submitted the paper what would happen.

They know there is NO tolerance and usually it's a just an easy way for the student to get out of school, or so they think. The problem is they don't realize what going to "alternative school" means. It's a boot camp as strict as any the military has and it's filled with problem students. Not much fun and she'll probably be there until she graduates or drops out.

It may be an over reaction but make no mistake, she knew exactly what would happen when she turned it in.

Randy

Another story of a school board going nuts! IMHO. I would like to start seeing these board members held to the same standards they set for students. I sure you would see some interesting things come up. I say this with some knowledge after working with these same boards across the country.

One would like to think so. However, having raised a few 14 year olds, I can assure you sitting down and intelligently evaluating the possible outcome of their actions is not a primary skill.

Since we're still mucking about trying to find as many people as possible to "blame" for 9/11, anyone in authority has one goal in any incident: escalate the issue to higher authority and get themselves out of the blame loop.

It's a federal offense to make a death threat against the president. It has nothing to do with school system policy.

If they arrested everyone who ever wished that "W" were dead, half the country would be in jail.

BTW, I once heard it suggested that capital punishment is an excellent way to implement term limits at all levels.

There's also the little matter of a teenager who thinks she should be allowed to commit murder. Even if she had never mentioned the president, the fact that she wants to be allowed two "freebies" when it comes to murder is deeply wrong.

The story as posted wasn't a death threat against any one. It was a childs wish that they could LEGALLY do something that she knew she couldn't. Would they have arrested her if her wish was to change drug laws so that she could smoke pot in school? Or if it was that she could drive before reaching 16?

I was just at a training seminar. The instructor pointed out that ethics is what you do when others ae watching, character is what you do when no one is watching.

Still, I think that just about every one has a list of people that they thing this world would be better off without. "W" and his cronies certainly do. And their list is a LOT bigger than two. And I'll bet that most of those on the list have "W" et al on THEIR wish lists. Pat Robertson called for a world leaders assination, and didn't get arrested.

Even Santa is "making a list and checking it twice" ...

It is illegal to make a threat against the president. Period.

It is not illegal to threaten to smoke pot, or to wish to smoke pot.

It is not illegal to threaten to drive before reaching 16, or to wish to drive before reaching 16.

As another example, if we're standing together and I pull my fist back as though I'm going to hit you, I have 'assaulted' you, even if I never lay a finger on you (that would be 'battery'). In that instance, my 'wish' is illegal.

I don't know why this concept is so hard to understand.

Again, it's not illegal (within the US) for someone to wish for ANOTHER world leaders assasination. Yes, that's a double standard -- but if you don't like it, lobby to change the law.

Frankly, I'm not happy with the way the law is written, as it seems more and more laws are being based on peoples intentions rather than their actions...

David Erbas-White

Code of conduct? Does the code spec lying in response to questions from teachers?

Granted, she's a clueless bint but punishing her for giving an honest answer to a question is the act of a coward.

TK

If you can twist that response into a death threat, you need to check yourself into a mental institution.

TK

There was a long standing formal US policy not to assassinate the leader of another country. Dubya rescinded that policy, allowing such assassinations.

Maybe. The other possibility is that she was just a bad or undesirable student, and the teacher seized her paper as an excuse to try and get her out of the class or school.

Just in the interest of having at least a few facts...

Took me a while to find this article. But it does a good job of showing the school's side of the case, and quotes the specific laws under which the girl was charged.

From the article:

So, with a mumbling "I dunno" kind of response, maybe the school officials felt the girl might actually pose a danger to someone. And of course once you escalate something, it gets escalated all the way -- because nobody wants to be the one that decides to give a break to someone who later turns out to be a psycho.

Personally I think the girl showed poor judgment to write what she did, and worse judgment in how she chose to respond to questions about her composition. I also think the school overreacted. But then, I don't know the girl, which presumably the school does.

So the school escalated things _after_ consulting the girl's parents and other authorities... Maybe there's more to the story than what's in the paper.

snip

The code of conduct applies to the students and is fully explained at the beginning of the school year, every year, in detail that a moron and their parents can understand. It was nothing new to either. The girl fully understood that she would get the reaction she got from the administration, which at the very least would be expulsion. She got what she wanted.

It is a well known fact here that if you want out of school all you have to do is imply a threat and you're gone.

Randy

Give that man a cigar...or at least an A8-3. ; )

Randy

How do you define "long standing?" From the founding of the United States in 1776 to 1976, political assassination was not addressed. President Ford issued an Executive Order (EO-11905) in 1976 which said, in part, "No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination." Presidents Carter (EO-1236) and Regan (EO-12333) both reaffirmed the ban. The Regan Executive Order was the last I could find to address the subject; it said, in part, "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."

I can't find any text of an EO by Bush on the subject, so I can't really say what he has or hasn't recinded, but personally, I would prefer to see surgical strikes against specific people than wholesale bombing of an area that the person may be hiding in. The latter leads to far too much colateral damage.

Another question that begs an answer is "What, exactly, constitutes an assassination?" If you are at war, where is the line between killing the enemy and assassination? If a US solder sees Bin Laden and kills him, is that an assassination?

Mario

If you really think this because someone's opinion or interpretation differs from yours, he is not the one who needs to be institutionalized.