Students Suspended for Legally Shooting Guns at Gun Range

[GrinderCB]

I heard this morning about this one. Extreme government overreach. Can't wait for the lawsuit on this one. Schools have no authority over students away from school, whether they're breaking the law or not. It'll also be interesting to see if any of the more left-leaning courts will uphold the school statute. I don't see how this could possibly go in the favor of the school district.

 

[nonobaddog]

I thought they already changed their policy and un-suspended the kids - or doesn't that matter?

 

[churchmouse]

I thought they already changed their policy and un-suspended the kids - or doesn't that matter?

They should have never been called up on this from the beginning. What happens legally off school grounds is not under their authority.

 

[nonobaddog]

They should have never been called up on this from the beginning. What happens legally off school grounds is not under their authority.

Yes, that is obvious, but can the parents still pursue their lawsuit? I hope they can and do.

 

[churchmouse]

Yes, that is obvious, but can the parents still pursue their lawsuit? I hope they can and do.

Good point but the issue remains of an over reaching Admin. in the school.

 

[jaybus]

Not sure if thats considered a binding contract or not

Good question. New Jersey minors may only enter contracts in special cases; property sales when a minor spouse and for buying insurance. It would seem that a signed rule book is not enforceable, but who knows what a liberal judge may determine?

 

[Dirtebiker]

I think the label is "Bully"

You should know!

 

[churchmouse]

You should know!

 

[JettaKnight]

I thought they already changed their policy and un-suspended the kids - or doesn't that matter?

They did. Most INGO'ers just read the OP then chime in w/o reading the followup messages.

 

[HoughMade]

Superintendent claims that the suspensions were not related to the policy we've all been talking about. However they changed the policy.

Let's be clear- the Superintendent CAN NOT- no ambiguity, he cannot state why the kids were suspended under federal educational privacy law. The kids and their families, on the other hand, can say whatever they want and I assume that they are giving an honest account of what they think is behind this...though I would prefer to see the paperwork, not the allegations. Even if the school thinks what the family is putting out there is inaccurate, the school cannot respond with what it claims the suspension was for...if indeed, it was for something different.

The Superintendent got about as close as he could by stating what the suspension was not for which was the "no firearm" policy.

Clearly, it was a illegal, overbroad policy that needed to be changed. Whether this incident just brought that to light or whether it was actually at the center of the suspensions...I'm still waiting to see. As unsatisfying as it may be, it may never be publicly known unless the families choose to make the actual paperwork public.

 

[bgcatty]

It’s only going to get worse in the communist libtard snowflake populated state of NJ now that a new libtard Democrap Governor has taken over in New Jersey.

 

[Jludo]

Superintendent claims that the suspensions were not related to the policy we've all been talking about. However they changed the policy.

Let's be clear- the Superintendent CAN NOT- no ambiguity, he cannot state why the kids were suspended under federal educational privacy law. The kids and their families, on the other hand, can say whatever they want and I assume that they are giving an honest account of what they think is behind this...though I would prefer to see the paperwork, not the allegations. Even if the school thinks what the family is putting out there is inaccurate, the school cannot respond with what it claims the suspension was for...if indeed, it was for something different.

The Superintendent got about as close as he could by stating what the suspension was not for which was the "no firearm" policy.

Clearly, it was a illegal, overbroad policy that needed to be changed. Whether this incident just brought that to light or whether it was actually at the center of the suspensions...I'm still waiting to see. As unsatisfying as it may be, it may never be publicly known unless the families choose to make the actual paperwork public.

It's alright we got 10 pages of jabs in. Feels like the conservative virtue signaling ha

 

[HoughMade]

...Feels like the conservative virtue signaling ha

As a conservative, I hate to admit it, but it’s true. It happens a lot on all sides. If we are predisposed to believe it, no need for verification. My point is that it may be as originally reported, but it may not be. We have no way of knowing at this point. With that being the case, we should dial back the vitriol until there are more facts.

 

[churchmouse]

As a conservative, I hate to admit it, but it’s true. It happens a lot on all sides. If we are predisposed to believe it, no need for verification. My point is that it may be as originally reported, but it may not be. We have no way of knowing at this point. With that being the case, we should dial back the vitriol until there are more facts.

Agreed "But"......yes the "but"....In light of how the system seems to work these days it is very much in line with other school decisions. Just seems to be more of the same. And what ever comes out publicly will most likely be spun up to fit the school's narrative.

But you are right. Now, who do we believe.

 

[nonobaddog]

I bet the suspension was for the firearm pictures and the superintendent is now lying his butt off and trying to cover it.
Anyone that would make a policy like that is very capable of denying the truth along with the Constitution.

If there really were some other valid reason for the suspension - they would still be suspended.

 

[tr1gg3r]

It’s only going to get worse in the communist libtard snowflake populated state of NJ now that a new libtard Democrap Governor has taken over in New Jersey.

I don't know. Seems rather lateral when compared to the former regime.

 

[HoughMade]

Agreed "But"......yes the "but"....In light of how the system seems to work these days it is very much in line with other school decisions. Just seems to be more of the same. And what ever comes out publicly will most likely be spun up to fit the school's narrative.

But you are right. Now, who do we believe.

Suspensions can only be handed out if a modicum of due process is afforded and the minimum level of due process is knowing what you were suspended for and, usually, some form of ability to have an informal hearing.

So, my question remains. What does the paperwork say? What were the original reasons given for the suspension?

Like I said, the policy was overbroad and needed to be changed. However, while stranger things have happened, the Superintendent is talking like a guy who has the documentation to back up that that suspension was for another reason, not like someone caught with his "pants down". Granted, suspension decisions are not normally made at the superintendent level, so who knows what happened before he was made aware of the incident?

...and even if the suspension was due to the bad policy, I don't know where people get the idea that this would be a big dollar case. Generally speaking, no serious injury or damages, no big money...and the schools have insurance for this.

 

[nonobaddog]

Due process probably means the principal said "You're suspended". The super and bored of education probably only got involved when the backlash started.

From - https://www.app.com/story/opinion/readers/2018/03/21/lacey-students-suspension-guns/444784002/
"They initially were suspended for five days, but after the school district was threatened with a lawsuit from a gun organization, the in-school detention was rescinded and erased from the students' records, making it look like the three days they served in detention never happened"

 

[Crittersdad]

 

[HoughMade]

Due process probably means the principal said "You're suspended". The super and bored of education probably only got involved when the backlash started.

From - https://www.app.com/story/opinion/readers/2018/03/21/lacey-students-suspension-guns/444784002/
"They initially were suspended for five days, but after the school district was threatened with a lawsuit from a gun organization, the in-school detention was rescinded and erased from the students' records, making it look like the three days they served in detention never happened"

Well now I'm confused- was it a suspension, in-school suspension or detention?

...and the general public has no right to know what went on with particular student's discipline.

The students and their people, however, can release whatever information they have. It would be very interesting to see the letter.