The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 17, 2018, 02:00 PM   #1
In The Ten Ring
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
Way to go New Jersey!

NJ school suspends students for going to a gun range and posting pics of it.

https://ijr.com/2018/03/1076494-hs-s...egal-firearms/

Bigger thing to consider. How to shun all gun owners from everything.

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/...+Guerrillas%29
In The Ten Ring is offline  
Old March 17, 2018, 02:03 PM   #2
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,924
Time for a lawsuit.

Ironically, even the ACLU would probably step up to the plate on this. Punishing kids for engaging in completely lawful activity off school property and not on school time can't be legal/constitutional.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 17, 2018, 02:09 PM   #3
In The Ten Ring
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
Let's hope so Aguila but the fact remains, legal action is costly, tiring, emotionally hard, and tends to take a very long time to get results. When one is suing the state, it can take years to get anywhere.

NJ doesn't have to win the case, they just have to make it very frightening to live openly as a gun owner and for these kids, they may have done just that.
In The Ten Ring is offline  
Old March 17, 2018, 02:17 PM   #4
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,924
That's why I hope the parents approach groups such as the Second Amendment Foundation, the NRA, and even the ACLU. The ACLU has been known to take cases such as this, where the laws or regulations covering something generally in line with the ACLU's general political orientation are so egregiously restrictive that even the ACLU can't stomach them. This would seem to be such a regulation. It can't (I sincerely hope) be legal for a school board to regulate what hobbies students can engage in and what inanimate objects they can legally possess when they are not in school and under direct control of the school, acting in loco parentis. When the kids are under the control of their own parents, in loco parentis does not apply.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 05:45 PM   #5
lockedcj7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2007
Posts: 1,208
The lawyer for the ANJRPC has it exactly right and the denials from the school official are meaningless since they are based on semantics. The policy is clearly unconstitutional and the lawyers for the district are busy telling the administration that as we speak.

Denying a student a free and appropriate public education for an unconstitutional reason constitutes an unlawful taking since education has value. Cases based on this angle have already been to court and our district lives in fear of them.
__________________
To a much greater extent than most mechanical devices, firearms are terribly unforgiving of any overconfidence, complacency or negligence.
lockedcj7 is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 08:04 PM   #6
JWT
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 16, 2007
Location: Southern Arizona
Posts: 3,861
Trying to make it against school regulation when students participate in a lawful activity during non school hours is even more inane than NJ usually gets. The administration andscholboardshould have to make a public apology to the suspended students.
JWT is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 08:29 PM   #7
tynman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 361
Yes NJ is the worst when it comes to gun laws. They are 2 steps away from telling all of us legal gun owners that we cant buy any more guns.. The new govn we now have is talking about making our 15 round mag illegal cause we only need 5 round mags.. Dont ask me what we would have to do about revolvers... But NJ is only holding me here against my will for 2 more years... Then off to a free state..

I did just hear that the school has backed down because of the threat of the lawsuit. And thats good but the problem is there wont be a story on the news or internet how the school backed down or how it was in the wrong for getting involved in there students personal life when there is nothing wrong. So with that said the damage is already done.
tynman is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 08:36 PM   #8
In The Ten Ring
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
tynman,

I hope your next state treats you well. Let NJ sink.

Great to hear the school rethought their actions.

It's going to take social media competition to get the honest word out.
In The Ten Ring is offline  
Old March 18, 2018, 09:34 PM   #9
Tuzo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 797
Lacey township kids prohibited from hunting

NJ allows hunting beginning age 10. According to the Lacey township education system kids are not allowed to hunt because hunters use weapons such as shotguns and bows during the academic year. If a Lacey township student brings home a deer or duck and tells their friends about it the student is subject to discipline.

A sad and poorly executed application of zero tolerance.
Tuzo is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 12:10 AM   #10
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,924
A NJ gun rights organization has entered the arena:

http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/20...tudents_a.html
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 03:00 AM   #11
In The Ten Ring
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
And now the school is denying it happened......a common tactic when spineless leaders are exposed.

Looks like a win for the students and a win for freedom of expression.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/18...nge-photo.html
In The Ten Ring is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 03:19 AM   #12
AzShooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2006
Location: Surprise, Az.
Posts: 564
I escaped from NJ 40 years ago. I'm now living in Arizona where you can still walk around with a gun on your hip or concealed without a permit. I've seen more than one manufacturer move here in the past few years because of our gun friendly policies. Come on out. It's a great place to live, no snow to shovel and you can't miss all the sites in the state.
AzShooter is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 03:58 AM   #13
In The Ten Ring
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 26, 2018
Posts: 380
One of the most fun GF's I've ever had lived in NJ.....I told her up front I would not visit her there because of NJ's ban on basic human rights. We've since stopped going out and she's moved...to GA and plans to get her CCW. (I suspect she'll still vote Dem all the way though, which is why southern cities tend to run blue).

AZ has the added benefit of your vehicles not rusting.
In The Ten Ring is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 06:00 AM   #14
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,064
If it had been my child, I'd have had a lawsuit filed before officials could say "punitive damages." I haven't done the research to determine what all has been litigated as against schools, but I think the ANJRPC has it nailed down pretty well. I can't see any way that it's legal and constitutional for a school to penalize students for going to a range that's off school property, during non-school hours, with their parents, and engaging in a constitutionally-protected activity, in the absence of any threats or other illegal behavior. I'll be watching this one. School overreach has bothered me for a long time.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 07:18 AM   #15
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,070
As Spats notes there would have been a lawsuit. Actual damaged would be noticeable: the stress and emotional damage caused would have required me to move out of state, take a lower paying job, and expect full compensation for the damage to my career plus punitive damages. The problem of course is administrators will not care because the damages will come from the school district and not them personally.

While I get that people live there for other reasons and travel there for other reasons a very public "boycott New Jersey" campaign seems in order.
Lohman446 is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 07:37 AM   #16
wwhitman
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 17, 2018
Posts: 13
They should have suspended kids who ditched class to go to the so called protest.
wwhitman is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 08:20 AM   #17
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lohman446 View Post
. . . .The problem of course is administrators will not care because the damages will come from the school district and not them personally. . . .
Typically, punitive damages in civil rights litigation is leveled at the individual, not the employing entity. That said, if there's some kind of insurance or risk management program or policy, the parties can restructure the damages so as to absorb that cost. If the individual's behavior was particularly egregious, the program will not do so. Then again, if the individual's behavior was particularly egregious, the policy may throw the individual to the wolves and refuse to defend them.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 09:30 AM   #18
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee
I'll be watching this one. School overreach has bothered me for a long time.
What I find extraordinary is that the school administrators thought it would be a good idea to prevent these students from sitting for their advanced placement tests. In my state, it is a requirement of an AP class that the student take the standardized AP test at the end; that's what makes it an AP class.

By preventing the students from taking a required test, have they screwed up their record irreparably?
zukiphile is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 10:08 AM   #19
Aguila Blanca
Staff
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 12,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by In The Ten Ring
And now the school is denying it happened......a common tactic when spineless leaders are exposed.

Looks like a win for the students and a win for freedom of expression.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/03/18...nge-photo.html
Not so fast. The article says the school claims "Information posted on social media is incorrect.” It doesn't say the students weren't suspended, and it doesn't say the suspensions (if they happened) have been or will be reversed and deleted from the students' records. We need more information.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 10:35 AM   #20
Lohman446
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,070
Quote:
it doesn't say the suspensions (if they happened) have been or will be reversed and deleted from the students' records
Would not entirely solve the issue after the fact
Lohman446 is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 11:31 AM   #21
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by zukiphile View Post
What I find extraordinary is that the school administrators thought it would be a good idea to prevent these students from sitting for their advanced placement tests. In my state, it is a requirement of an AP class that the student take the standardized AP test at the end; that's what makes it an AP class.

By preventing the students from taking a required test, have they screwed up their record irreparably?
It's also my understanding that AP tests are not free, and they're not cheap. Potentially, school administrators have injured these students and their parents: (1) financially; (2) in terms of their academic record; (3) in terms of college prospects. Heck, if I were a plaintiff's lawyer, I'd be arguing that their lifetime earning potential had been irreparably harmed.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 12:43 PM   #22
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,064
It appears the policy has been changed: http://anjrpc.site-ym.com/general/cu...RPCWinsReLacey

You can find the new policy in the student handbook here: https://www.laceyschools.org/lths
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 12:47 PM   #23
JERRYS.
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 23, 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,363
this will go nowhere. the kid will go back to school, have a stain on his record through no fault of his own, and the school gets to say oops, sorry.
JERRYS. is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 12:55 PM   #24
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,064
Given the change in the policy, I'd be willing to bet that any mark on the students' records will be wiped clean. If the school district wipes this from their records and makes arrangements for them to take those AP exams, then it at least has an argument that they haven't suffered any cognizable injury. No cognizable injury = no standing = lawsuit dies in its tracks.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Old March 19, 2018, 12:56 PM   #25
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 3,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry
this will go nowhere. the kid will go back to school, have a stain on his record through no fault of his own, and the school gets to say oops, sorry.
I can't promise you that your prediction will be wrong, but the following militates against that result.

The school change in policy so quickly when challenged can indicate that they didn't engage in sufficient consultation before in forming the policy and implementing it, or they did consult sufficiently but proceeded irresponsibly anyway, and they knew they were wrong.

This could have been a mere fender bender, an overstep taken tentatively, announced and retracted before the harm was imposed. Instead, the school seems to have realised it was in a fender bender, then run to the car it hit to set it on fire. Some functionary thought it would be clever to use all of his very modest power to do irreparable harm.

Since there is money in that kind of malice, it may not just blow away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats Mcgee
Given the change in the policy, I'd be willing to bet that any mark on the students' records will be wiped clean. If the school district wipes this from their records and makes arrangements for them to take those AP exams, then it at least has an argument that they haven't suffered any cognizable injury. No cognizable injury = no standing = lawsuit dies in its tracks.
Emphasis added. That would make the most sense if possible.

I don't know how this works now. My recollection is that I had to go to a local college to take this, as if AP testing wasn't run by the school in which the class is given, but by some other authority.
zukiphile is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10996 seconds with 8 queries