Just because you can beat someone in a war or words does not mean that they will not turn around and beat you with a tire iron.
You don't understand. It's not a war of words or an oratory argument I'm talking about. I'm saying that if you learn to befriend people and make sure you are on their good side goes a long way even if you don't that like person or even loathe them. You would be able to get that guy to buy you a beer instead of chewing on some iron.
100% true.
There was a better quote (written by Heinlein) that I was going to post but I could not remember it. It had something to do with it being better to nod and smile at a crazy person rather than prove their crazy thought to be false and have them take revenge on your for proving their beliefs false.
Throughout life you'll see that a lot of people might be annoying, idiotic or not as smart as you, but you have to learn to hold your tongue if they, whether it be your boss or your teacher, are in control.
Exactly. Don't burn your bridges. When it comes to people in power above you, don't make it known that you don't like them or you consider them as an enemy.
Yeah it sucked what happened, but if you were in a work environment and were caught breaking the rules, you bet you will either get reprimanded or possibly fired.
I doubt that it was "convenient" that the dean had a meeting after school the day you were supposed to get your iPod back, it was probable scheduled weeks before your iPod was taken away. If it continues, however, I would suggest contacting the superintendent of your school district and explain the situation to him/her. If that does not work then contact your local ACLU office, the threat of litigation will make any public school district a pile of putty in your hands.
In Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), the Court stated that "students do not leave their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door." Tinker held that the wearing of armbands by students to protest the Vietnam War was constitutionally protected speech because it was political speech. Political speech is at the heart of the First Amendment and, thus, can only be prohibited if it "substantially disrupts" the educational process.
On the other hand, the Court noted in Bethel v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 682 (1986) that "the constitutional rights of students at public school are not automatically, coextensive with the rights of adults." The rights of students are applied "in light of the special characteristics of the school environment," according to the U.S. Supreme Court in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 266 (1988).
Glad to see some case law, is there anything more pertinent to personal property? All NYC public schools are required to band ipods and cell phones (but not hand held games). For the first half of last year we could bring ipods and cell phones because the principal just ignored the policy. However some sort of legal snafu brought this to light and now they have to enforce it. So should the Board Of Education be able to ban electronics, even if the principal of the school would rather allow them?
The short answer: From a legal standpoint, school employees are your parents while you are entrusted to their care. If they want to ban your stuff, they can do it. You are a second-class citizen.
I know it's a pain in the ass, but you are not endowed with all the rights of a person of majority.
So should the Board Of Education be able to ban electronics, even if the principal of the school would rather allow them?
Yes, they are the elected officials, not the faculty. What if the principal wanted everyone to wear uniforms, but it wasn't required by the school board? I think it would be best if the elected officials created the rules, not the faculty.
Yes, they are the elected officials, not the faculty. What if the principal wanted everyone to wear uniforms, but it wasn't required by the school board?
I don't think the uniform analogy is a fair one, they are both "rules" but I would rather appeal to elected officials about uniforms than have them set rules in stone and exert them on the student body. Logistically each tier should administrate the one directly below it (BOE > school administration > teachers > students). Issues should be addressed by escalating the problem to the next level, as in the legal system the BOE would have the last say.
I don't know what that is, and I don't care to find out.
Well, maybe you shouldn't be slinging around the legal citations then. Shepardizing a case means looking through the Shepard's books or an online service like Lexis or Westlaw to see whether your case is still good law. You can find all kinds of cases out there that'll tell you all kinds of outrageous things. That's one of the reasons you need to Shepardize your cases - to see if they've been overruled, distinguished from other cases, or limited in some other way.
For instance, just a quick check shows that none of your cases was totally overruled, but Tinker was questioned by one case, criticized by 4 cases, and distinguished in 146 cases; Bethel was distinguished in 38 cases; and Hazelwood was questioned in one case and distinguished in 64 cases.
Shepardizing a case means looking through the Shepard's books or an online service like Lexis or Westlaw to see whether your case is still good law. You can find all kinds of cases out there that'll tell you all kinds of outrageous things. That's one of the reasons you need to Shepardize your cases - to see if they've been overruled, distinguished from other cases, or limited in some other way.
That's neat. Where can you get access to these books?
Shepardizing a case means looking through the Shepard's books or an online service like Lexis or Westlaw to see whether your case is still good law. You can find all kinds of cases out there that'll tell you all kinds of outrageous things. That's one of the reasons you need to Shepardize your cases - to see if they've been overruled, distinguished from other cases, or limited in some other way.
That's neat. Where can you get access to these books?
Well, maybe you shouldn't be slinging around the legal citations then. Shepardizing a case means looking through the Shepard's books or an online service like Lexis or Westlaw to see whether your case is still good law.
Oh, then yes, I did do that. I did not know it was called Shepardizing. You don't have to be such a bastard.
My problem is I have no problem telling people what I think of them. This is one of those people you can't stand to be around because they emanate an aura of injustice, and that is what I meant by calling him an 'ass bag'. I may have burnt my bridge with this teacher, but I can destroy any respect the students at the school have for him. I'm not saying that I'm going to do anything of the sort, but the option is open to me and my indigence at this situation and teacher is fueling my desire for revenge. I know if I actually hurt him, I'll be expelled but civil disobedience is the best way to make my point and not get in trouble. The fact that the students have little say in the politics and bureaucracy of the schools inner workings is complete BS. I truly believe that if the intelligent students have a say, than the school could be run more efficiently and still be a successful learning environment. I want a place where I could learn, how and as fast as I want. I hate being told what I can and can't do. I typically don't get caught doing things I'm not supposed to but when I do get caught, shit hits the fan.
No, that would be stupid on my part. I'm saying that the adults care more about stuff happening than what the students want to do. I respect that opinion but if students could have an active role in the politcs problems like this could be easlily avoided and the deans could deal with more pressing matters.
I respect that opinion but if students could have an active role in the politcs problems like this could be easlily avoided and the deans could deal with more pressing matters.
Ahhh so like the Student Government right? What are the pressing platforms the students are pushing for these days in the schools? No homework? Three-day weekends? Two hour lunch periods? No offense, but the children have no idea of the complexities and commitments of running any sort of government system.
I'm saying that the adults care more about stuff happening than what the students want to do.
It's a school! Of course the people running it want you to actually do stuff, actually pay attention, actually learn. You know what majority of students want, NO SCHOOL!
Well, this kind of thing is difficult, but in my opinion the only time confiscating something like that is a good idea is when it's disrupting someone else's education.
If it's only disrupting your education, then it's something that needs to be discussed between the student, teacher, and parents.
I respect that opinion but if students could have an active role in the politcs problems like this could be easlily avoided and the deans could deal with more pressing matters.
Ahhh so like the Student Government right? What are the pressing platforms the students are pushing for these days in the schools? No homework? Three-day weekends? Two hour lunch periods? No offense, but the children have no idea of the complexities and commitments of running any sort of government system.
Andrew, there's no need to resort to infantilizing Xenoc like that, or students in general. Student government and other programs to get kids involved are wonderful; part of what school should be about is encouraging civic responsibility and being active in the community. Young people have lots of potential to do something meaningful in their schools and neighborhoods, if only they're given the proper support, room, and guidance to do so. How else will they learn about those "complexities and commitments" if they are never allowed the chance to try to run a government system?
Not all students are laze-abouts concerned only with being irresponsible. In fact, I would say most aren't. There were many people in my high school who were very committed and community-oriented, because our school encouraged it as a good thing, and did most everything it could to make opportunities available to students. Yet if kids are put into a heavily regulated environment that many times fails to engage them, what do you expect except that they would ride a system they hate for all it's worth? By demeaning Xenoc and students as a whole with your comments, you're only reinforcing their irresponsibility by keeping them locked in the same trap. High school students are perfectly capable of understanding complex topics and issues. The new generation that's grown up with the internet is more connected, savvy, and aware than ever. The school environment needs to change to reflect that, by giving them at least some say in how the school functions. Would they have carte-blanch to do whatever they want? No. But rather than giving themselves two-hour lunches, no homework, and all the other bullshit you suggest, it's more likely they'd tackle issues like censorship in school newspapers, privacy and free speech issues, and student rights. But apparently, challenging the hierarchy is far too repulsive and dangerous an idea to people like you and school administrators, so you perpetuate it by infantilizing the kids. An approach like that does not help our youth.
Uglyfred makes a good point here. It is important that students learn about issues such as government, and, with a bit of guidance, a lot could be done.
There are loads of important issues that students actually do take an interest in. Given the proper means to do so, students would certainly be willing to tackle them. I think a good one is copyright; it's an issue that affects a lot of students, and informed discussion (not the mockery that the RIAA would love them to have) would be one of the great things that could come out of such a venture.
Uglyfred, you know that comment was mostly made in jest, right?
But apparently, challenging the hierarchy is far too repulsive and dangerous an idea to people like you and school administrators, so you perpetuate it by infantilizing the kids. An approach like that does not help our youth.
Oh, so I'm the bad guy for saying he is an idiot for getting caught breaking the rules? I agree with you on most points, although I think you are a bit lofty when you say most kids would tackle issues such as censorship and student rights. Like I said, the system is not perfect.
But let's be honest, Xenoc did not get in trouble for fighting for student rights or freedoms. He got caught listening to an iPod during school. Silly rule? Maybe, but he is there to learn, not enjoy the latest Pokemon soundtrack. All I'm saying is that if you want to fight back against the "man", at least do something that is worth it. Like all the kids who protested Tooky Williams death sentence at my high school a couple years go.
Also, maybe I'm just jaded, but all my Student Government did when I was in high school was concern themselves over which theme to pick for prom, planning pep rallies, or creating posters to cheer on the (insert sport) team. It was just a popularity contest as there is no real power in the group. If you really wanted to do something you would attend school board meetings, volunteer at voting booths, or help campaign for local government candidates; all things which I worked on during my time at school.
But let's be honest, Xenoc did not get in trouble for fighting for student rights or freedoms. He got caught listening to an iPod during school.
True. No offense meant to Mr. Noc, but the iPod listening is not a protected right.
Also, maybe I'm just jaded, but all my Student Government did when I was in high school was concern themselves over which theme to pick for prom, planning pep rallies, or creating posters to cheer on the (insert sport) team. It was just a popularity contest as there is no real power in the group.
Also true. The only thing I'd add is that most people in Student Government are really there to build their resumes.
Also, maybe I'm just jaded, but all my Student Government did when I was in high school was concern themselves over which theme to pick for prom, planning pep rallies, or creating posters to cheer on the (insert sport) team. It was just a popularity contest as there is no real power in the group.
My student government was even more pathetic. Not only was their only real power over "themes of things," but most of their decisions were overruled out-of-hand by the school for various reasons anyway. My senior class's song, flower, and a few other of those utterly silly things were denied and arbitrarily changed by the administration.
At least it wasn't a popularity contest. Freshmen tended to vote, since they didn't know better, but anyone who had been at the school for more than a year didn't even bother, and no one campaigned.
The only thing I'd add is that most people in Student Government are really there to build their resumes.
Same was SADD and the National Honor Society. They were worthless organizations that accomplished nothing at all. In fact, almost every "club" in the school consisted of the same group of students whose parents were pushing them to have a nice long list of "extra-curricular activities" for their university applications. As a result, every club was the same.
The really funny thing was that, at least with RIT and CMU, they couldn't have cared less about most of the things that high school guidance councilors and overactive parents thought mattered for college resumes...
Comments
There was a better quote (written by Heinlein) that I was going to post but I could not remember it. It had something to do with it being better to nod and smile at a crazy person rather than prove their crazy thought to be false and have them take revenge on your for proving their beliefs false.
Yeah it sucked what happened, but if you were in a work environment and were caught breaking the rules, you bet you will either get reprimanded or possibly fired.
In Tinker v. Des Moines (1969), the Court stated that "students do not leave their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door." Tinker held that the wearing of armbands by students to protest the Vietnam War was constitutionally protected speech because it was political speech. Political speech is at the heart of the First Amendment and, thus, can only be prohibited if it "substantially disrupts" the educational process.
On the other hand, the Court noted in Bethel v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 682 (1986) that "the constitutional rights of students at public school are not automatically, coextensive with the rights of adults." The rights of students are applied "in light of the special characteristics of the school environment," according to the U.S. Supreme Court in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 266 (1988).
So should the Board Of Education be able to ban electronics, even if the principal of the school would rather allow them?
I know it's a pain in the ass, but you are not endowed with all the rights of a person of majority.
For instance, just a quick check shows that none of your cases was totally overruled, but Tinker was questioned by one case, criticized by 4 cases, and distinguished in 146 cases; Bethel was distinguished in 38 cases; and Hazelwood was questioned in one case and distinguished in 64 cases.
The fact that the students have little say in the politics and bureaucracy of the schools inner workings is complete BS. I truly believe that if the intelligent students have a say, than the school could be run more efficiently and still be a successful learning environment. I want a place where I could learn, how and as fast as I want. I hate being told what I can and can't do. I typically don't get caught doing things I'm not supposed to but when I do get caught, shit hits the fan.
If it's only disrupting your education, then it's something that needs to be discussed between the student, teacher, and parents.
If it isn't disrupting anyone's education......
Not all students are laze-abouts concerned only with being irresponsible. In fact, I would say most aren't. There were many people in my high school who were very committed and community-oriented, because our school encouraged it as a good thing, and did most everything it could to make opportunities available to students. Yet if kids are put into a heavily regulated environment that many times fails to engage them, what do you expect except that they would ride a system they hate for all it's worth? By demeaning Xenoc and students as a whole with your comments, you're only reinforcing their irresponsibility by keeping them locked in the same trap. High school students are perfectly capable of understanding complex topics and issues. The new generation that's grown up with the internet is more connected, savvy, and aware than ever. The school environment needs to change to reflect that, by giving them at least some say in how the school functions. Would they have carte-blanch to do whatever they want? No. But rather than giving themselves two-hour lunches, no homework, and all the other bullshit you suggest, it's more likely they'd tackle issues like censorship in school newspapers, privacy and free speech issues, and student rights. But apparently, challenging the hierarchy is far too repulsive and dangerous an idea to people like you and school administrators, so you perpetuate it by infantilizing the kids. An approach like that does not help our youth.
There are loads of important issues that students actually do take an interest in. Given the proper means to do so, students would certainly be willing to tackle them. I think a good one is copyright; it's an issue that affects a lot of students, and informed discussion (not the mockery that the RIAA would love them to have) would be one of the great things that could come out of such a venture.
But let's be honest, Xenoc did not get in trouble for fighting for student rights or freedoms. He got caught listening to an iPod during school. Silly rule? Maybe, but he is there to learn, not enjoy the latest Pokemon soundtrack. All I'm saying is that if you want to fight back against the "man", at least do something that is worth it. Like all the kids who protested Tooky Williams death sentence at my high school a couple years go.
Also, maybe I'm just jaded, but all my Student Government did when I was in high school was concern themselves over which theme to pick for prom, planning pep rallies, or creating posters to cheer on the (insert sport) team. It was just a popularity contest as there is no real power in the group. If you really wanted to do something you would attend school board meetings, volunteer at voting booths, or help campaign for local government candidates; all things which I worked on during my time at school.
At least it wasn't a popularity contest. Freshmen tended to vote, since they didn't know better, but anyone who had been at the school for more than a year didn't even bother, and no one campaigned. Same was SADD and the National Honor Society. They were worthless organizations that accomplished nothing at all. In fact, almost every "club" in the school consisted of the same group of students whose parents were pushing them to have a nice long list of "extra-curricular activities" for their university applications. As a result, every club was the same.
The really funny thing was that, at least with RIT and CMU, they couldn't have cared less about most of the things that high school guidance councilors and overactive parents thought mattered for college resumes...