Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MissEdie

This kid is obviously a little idiot, yet I do not understand why he was arrested. The article did not say he became violent or agitated or that he attacked anyone. He wore the shirt under another shirt so he knew very well it was something to be hidden and something that could cause conflict.

He is a troublemaker and deserved to be sent home but I don’t understand upon what grounds he was arrested. I agree with the person up-thread who would put them all in uniforms. Put them all in school uniforms and that will end any such nonsense, as well as a host of other silliness. I was always of the opinion that school uniforms were just a band-aid on a larger problem and would make no difference one way or the other. That is, until one local school went to uniforms 10 years ago. In one year they went from being the tail to being the head, academically.

Ten years later, you could remove the uniforms and mix them with students of other schools and you can still pick these students out from the rest. They will be the ones that when asked a question will reply, “yes sir, no sir”. I suppose I was wrong about school uniforms.


26 posted on 04/05/2008 2:37:57 PM PDT by WildcatClan (Don't blame me...............I supported Duncan Hunter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: WildcatClan
He is a troublemaker and deserved to be sent home but I don’t understand upon what grounds he was arrested.

I'm kinda with you. The article is a little light on details. But it does say he was charged with "disturbing school." I didn't know that was a crime, but I guess it is in that jurisdiction.

As you can see from my earlier post, I would have to agree that, at a minimum, he was guilty of that.

28 posted on 04/05/2008 2:45:21 PM PDT by TontoKowalski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: WildcatClan
This kid is obviously a little idiot, yet I do not understand why he was arrested. The article did not say he became violent or agitated or that he attacked anyone.

Salem precedent. You are guilty if your mere presence disturbs emotional teenagers.

32 posted on 04/05/2008 3:44:32 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (NO.. I don;t tag sarcasm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson