7th Grader suspended for Airsoft in his own yard

[Herluf]

According to the article,
http://www.wavy.com/web/wavy/news/lo...e-gone-too-far
It sounds like the shooters were on private property, but shot at kids who were at the school bus stop. Schools exercise quite a bit of authority at a bus stop so it seems reasonable to suspend the kids.

Airsoft is not a terribly dangerous toy, but an airsoft to the eye can blind you just like a BB. Can a kid avoid a school suspension by stepping off the bus stop onto a nearby yard and then pitching a rock at their classmate? I think not. These kids did just that, except the used airsoft instead of a rock.

Personaly I place most of the blame on the parents. If your kids are shooting other non-eye-protected children, then you've got something to answer for.

[jmr40]

I could understand if they were at the bus stop harassing other kids.

From the Fox story.

"children were firing pellet guns at each other, and at people near the bus stop." Delaney states in the letter that one child "was only 10 feet from the bus stop, and ran from the shots being fired, but was still hit."

Bus drivers, teachers, and school administrators are not only responsible for kids, but legally accountable for what happens from the moment they arrive at a bus stop in the morning until they return to their homes in the afternoon. There are strict guidelines that educators must follow in cases like this, if not educators can be fired or even jailed for falure. I have seen teachers arrested for using what they thought was "good judgement" rather than following the law. Anyone waiting at an area in the vicinity of where kids are picked up by a bus are "at a bus stop". You don't just draw a line and say something is OK here, and not OK 3 feet away, even if that 3 feet happens to be on private property.

Schools certainly have the right to discipline kids for something that happens at a bus stop just the same as at school. Nothing new here, kids have been suspended for bad behavior at bus stops for as long as we have been running busses. I'm aware of numerous cases going back as far as the 1960's.

Further more, from Airsofts website:

http://www.airsoftgi.com/index.php?cPath=139

No person may openly display or expose any imitation firearm (replica firearm), in a public place. The term "public place" means an area open to the public or exposed to public view and includes streets, sidewalks, bridges, alleys, plazas, parks, driveways, parking lots, automobiles, whether moving or not, and buildings open to the general public, including those that serve food or drink, or provide entertainment, and the doorways and entrances to buildings or dwellings and the grounds enclosing them.

and

you are familiar with all local laws in your area affecting your legal right to access airsoft products; that any products you buy are for your own private enjoyment and that you will NEVER share these products with a minor in ANY WAY.

To quote John Wayne, "Life is hard, if your stupid it is harder". Sounds to me like some kids and their parents are leaning a hard life lesson on what happens when you are stupid.

[Yankee Traveler]

It was at a school bus stop. The school is responsible for activites that happen there just as much as if it happened at school. This suspension will stand and hold up in any court.

Reading the OP made it sound as if it were far different than when reading the news in the link.

Given a choice between Fox and CNN I'll take Fox. But they can twist stories just as far from the truth as CNN when they want to

Agreed jmr40, hence the reason I posted further links as I found them. Fox had a spin, WavyTV 10 had another spin. The principals letter yet another. I am not trying to respin, but was quite furious when I read that the school had authority over a child in his own yard. That appears to not be the whole truth.

[Kimio]

We're all guilty of getting fired up while being caught up in the moment. I for one am guilty as charged for letty my emotions get the better of me before learning more and getting all the facts.

It's recognizing that, regardless of media outlet, said media outlet will typically have a spin on the story being covered, and we must all recognize that and try to discern what is true and what is not.

That said, with more information coming to light, I agree with what Jmr40 said. If the kids were firing at each other, that's fine, but as soon as they started pelting other students who were waiting for the bus and not involved with their play time, that's when things become a problem.

HOWEVER, I do NOT agree with the terminolagy used for their suspension. An Airsoft gun is not a firearm, never has been, never will be.

As such, I believe there needs to be some amendmants made to that, unless there is further information that we just are not aware of at this time.

[Wreck-n-Crew]

We're all guilty of getting fired up while being caught up in the moment. I for one am guilty as charged for letty my emotions get the better of me before learning more and getting all the facts.

Only guilty of believing what we read. We put trust in a news report. Not sure about you but I usually trust the source more for not doing things like this. This goes beyond spin.

Not sure about the reporter of the original story or if anyone we be held responsible. This just burns me that the shooting of other kids at a bus stop was left out.

[ClydeFrog]

I was thinking the school punishment was out of line until I heard all the facts.
The kids were playing with the BB guns near a school bus stop & pointed the guns at a few young kids who were injured.
The bus driver & school got upset over that.
The school policy does seem strict but the 7th graders were in the wrong.

[shortwave]

I've been in the habit for years now of not believing the media when they report a chain of events . Especially if what they are reporting on is an current, ongoing event.
Lets face it...it's a competition with most media. Gotta be first to get the story out. There is one that even boasts at the end of a story by saying something to the effect of, "and you heard it FIRST on #%$%% news".

Media, especially today, will report just about anything to grab our attention. Doesn't matter if they have researched their source's or not.
Doesn't matter if a statement was made by the Chief of Police or a street person that just fired a fix of heroin.

If the statement is 'juicy' they report it. Before checking whether statement or info is factual or not.

Too, they will take statements and turn around what someone has said to mean something totally different then it's original meaning. Word 'play'
by reporters is nothing new and is used to either make the story sound more exciting or to make the story coincide with that particular media outlets biased point of view on a particular subject.

Having had this happen, I can assure you, it leaves a very bad taste in your mouth when it comes believing what you hear on the news or speaking with reporters.

FWIW, IMO, not all news reporters do this type of 'slob' reporting but it seems to be an ever increasing trend that will continue to get worse until there are either laws put in place to stop it or some sort of independant 'overseeing' board/group developed that actually has some teeth via the courts to stop it. What is currently in place is surely not working.

In short, when I first see a new event reported on the news... the 'how it happened, why it happened, who's involved and the rest of the particulars of the event, I'll get from LE or officials after the dust settles that actually know.

If I want to speculate or make things up, I can do that on my own.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by ClydeFrog

I was thinking the school punishment was out of line until I heard all the facts.
The kids were playing with the BB guns near a school bus stop & pointed the guns at a few young kids who were injured.
The bus driver & school got upset over that.
The school policy does seem strict but the 7th graders were in the wrong.

I, too, fell prey to accepting at least the basic facts as presented in the article and I, too, am more than a little chapped that the article completely omitted mention of shooting at (and injuring) kids who were at the bus stop and who were NOT part of the consensual group.

That said:

I can understand the bus driver and the school getting upset. I do NOT understand how the school has any authority to do anything about it. If kids outside of the consensual play group were injured, then there are laws that cover such things: assault, reckless endangerment, things like that. Being off school property and not ON a school bus, this should have been a police matter rather than a school matter. The fact that the police were called and didn't take any action suggests that the police screwed the pooch, but I still don't see how it gives the school any authority to intervene.

[shortwave]

I do NOT understand how the school has any authority to do anything about it.

My sentiments exactly. Granted, the kids probably got off easier with the school handling things but still trying to figure out how the school had the authority to punish the kids when this seemed to be a LE issue.

[Kimio]

Punishment aside, the question is, does the wording and reasons for the suspension apply?

An airsoft gun is NOT a firearm, as such, the language used to describe the infraction does not accurately reflect the activities these children were involved in.

Discharge of a firearm is a very serious offense that can and most likely will follow them for the rest of their lives. In that case, the punishment does not fit the crime.

[JERRYS.]

school boards are elected by the people. now, who's fault is it?

[ClydeFrog]

I understand the intent of post 33 but in 2013, many school districts & "educators"(a label that can be applied to lunch room monitors to a super-intendant with a PhD) feel they can apply rules or SOPs to almost anything related to the school(bus stops, field trips, athletic events, etc). Lawsuits & bad PR/risk mgmt are what senior officials want to avoid most.

Not all parents are level headed or civil. Some may wig out over any incident.

It's not fair or practical but that's what it is.

[shortwave]

many school districts & "educators"(a label that can be applied to lunch room monitors to a super-intendant with a PhD) feel they can apply rules or SOPs to almost anything related to the school(bus stops, field trips, athletic events, etc). Lawsuits & bad PR/risk mgmt are what senior officials want to avoid most.

While I can see the school system performing CYA tactics on one side of the coin, it seems to me they would be opening up the doors for possible law suits on the flip side of the coin as well. If the parents of these guilty boys were to push the issue that the school can't punish the kids in any way since the guilty kids were not in school, were not doing a school activity or on school property during school hours things might get interesting.

[Herluf]

Shortwave,
It's going to go back to the issue of the bus stop as being functionally school property. The school establishes rules for children there and enforces them. The perps parents could force that particular issue, but the victims being on the school property would probably be enough to keep the judge from throwing it out on the basis of not being on school property.

[JimDandy]

School Property is not required for a school suspension. Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007)

Whether waiting not at a school bus stop for a school bus far enough away that children do not feel the need to actually wait at the bus stop is a school activity is debatable. But with Airsoft "guns" it would be a debate those children would lose.

Were this case to go to SCOTUS, I don't have a doubt in my mind they would find against the students, and they would use the currently limited Morse as the basis for another decision, or just expand Morse to cover these events.

I'm not entirely sure the Court wouldn't also do so if these events had occurred on a Saturday in July, by children who had just moved to the area and hadn't even registered for school yet.

Of course, this is based on Morse which I hope was a tough case, that made for, in my opinion, bad law

[Wreck-n-Crew]

If the parents of these guilty boys were to push the issue that the school can't punish the kids in any way since the guilty kids were not in school, were not doing a school activity or on school property during school hours things might get interesting.

Don't see that happening, There are rules for students of the Public School System which are written to protect students from the time they leave their home en route to school and until they get home.

Regardless of whether or not the shooters had left their home in route or not, they committed an infraction against someone who WAS. If they were not students (shooters) it would fall under criminal or civil actions.

The police, looking at the jurisdiction of the offense committed by Public school students against other students, after conferring with the school, determined it belonged to the school and that it fell under their rules and let them handle it.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Herluf

It's going to go back to the issue of the bus stop as being functionally school property.

That may be the issue, but I don't accept that a school bus stop, whether on a public street corner or in a resident's driveway, is in any way school property -- "functionally" or any other way. In my neighborhood the bus stops at the entrance to each cul-de-sac along the through street. Some of the kids walk to the stop, some who live father down are driven by a parent and wait in the family car. I don't think anyone in town would try to argue that a public street is "functionally" school property. It isn't.

[JimDandy]

And again, it doesn't have to be. It's a school function. Morse v Frederick happened across the street from the school.

Frederick’s argument that this is not a school speech case is rejected. The event in question occurred during normal school hours
and was sanctioned by Morse as an approved social event at which
the district’s student-conduct rules expressly applied. Teachers and
administrators were among the students and were charged with supervising them. Frederick stood among other students across the
street from the school and directed his banner toward the school,
making it plainly visible to most students. Under these circumstances, Frederick cannot claim he was not at school. Pp. 5–6.

And as I said earlier, not all of the details are the same, but given the mood of the country and the court, I don't see them finding for the kids. The Pro-2A Conservatives are more likely to rule for an ordered school system over the quasi-guns in the hands of children. The Liberals on the court are likely to rule against even pop-tart guns, and in favor of the village over the kids.

Being disenfranchised is costing kids today more and more rights. While I'm not in favor of enfranchising our kids, it's long past time we realize that while they are disenfranchised, it behooves us to bend over backwards to respect and defend their rights. They should not have less First Amendment protections in schools, they should have more.

[born2climb]

I have heard/read various versions, with various details, but it sounds to me, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that someone needs their brass kicked over this, whether it be the nosy neighbor, the principal who overstepped his bounds, or a myriad of other folks who showed pure ignorance in the situation.

[ClydeFrog]

This event & the complex issues around it reminds me of a www.youtube.com clip I watched.
A irate father of a toddler age girl stormed into a day-care/pre school center & beat up the young boy who was reportedly bullying his daughter.
It turned out that the father beat the wrong student!
The local police chief arrested the dad & told the media; "Even if he beat up the child who was bullying his daughter, he would still face criminal charges. That type of behavior is unacceptable & his actions were wrong."
The police chief was 100% right.
Schools & child care providers have many safety factors/risk mgmt issues in today's world.

[JimDandy]

That's not really on point however.

This boils down to whether or not the school had "jurisdiction". The local police certainly would have in both cases, and the father was arrested. The answer in this case is certainly less clear. We're missing a fairly relevant factor. We don't know how long before the bus arrived and/or was scheduled to arrive this happened.

We know it was long enough before hand, the children thought they'd be able to return the airsoft to their homes before getting on the bus. A child's sense of time is not always the best. At the extremes, if the bus was waiting at the stop, they were obviously in a school activity. On a Saturday evening at supper time, they're obviously not. The details here are obviously in between somehere, as the bus driver was able to report this up the chain, either from the witness accounts of the kids at the stop, or because he was there in time to see it happen. We don't know which.

[cookie5]

If the subject is as written , I $mell a lawsuit.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by JimDandy

And again, it doesn't have to be. It's a school function. Morse v Frederick happened across the street from the school.

Jim, I see what to me is a key difference between this case and Morse: "Teachers and administrators were among the students and were charged with supervising them." There are no teachers or administrators at a school bus stop. Even if you consider the bus driver to be an extension of school supervision, he or she isn't there until the bus arrives, so he or she does not and cannot in any way supervise what the kids are doing prior to the bus's arrival at the stop.

[Herluf]

I think there's a long history (though I don't know about legal precedent) for schools exercising disciplinary action over what happens while students are waiting for the bus.

I narrowly escaped detention for fighting while waiting at my middle school bus stop in the winter of my 7th grade. I think they took pity on me because I nearly got foot frostbite after fighting in the snowbank.

Not that this is precedent legally, and some folks (here and elsewhere) would of course disagree. However, it's not as though a school exercising authority over kids waiting at a bus stop is a new or unpracticed concept.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Herluf

Not that this is precedent legally, and some folks (here and elsewhere) would of course disagree. However, it's not as though a school exercising authority over kids waiting at a bus stop is a new or unpracticed concept.

Well, it's certainly a new concept to me. But ... I'm a senior citizen and I never had kids of my own. When I went to grammar and high school, it was a couple or more decades before the death of common sense.