highschooler suspended after disarming gunman on bus.

[troy_mclure]

http://www.fox4now.com/news/local/194396721.html

FORT MYERS, Fla. - A 16-year-old Cypress Lake High School student, who wrestled a loaded revolver away from a teen threatening to shoot, is being punished.

According to the referral, he was suspended for being part of an "incident" where a weapon was present and given an "emergency suspension."

 

[onelochevy]

I cant even think of a response to this crap that doesnt involve curse words and alot of yelling on my part.

 

[1911Dave]

This country just sucks

 

[BenCarp27]

At the risk of sounding ill-hearted, I'm going to go on a limb and say that this school and any given New Orleans public school probably have a lot in common.
With that said, if the teen was involved in an altercation that one party decided to escalate, whether he wrestles away a pistol or not, he was still involved in an altercation.
The only probable difference here is that instead of fist fighting for five minutes, they had to disarm the one who "one-upped" the situation.
I know that makes me sound cold hearted, but I can't absolve a kid of his woes, when I truly believe he was just as much a part of the argument as the dummy with the pistol. Saving his own hide doesn't earn a free pass in my book.

 

[rocketsteve]

I heard this story on the radio this morning; TOTALLY ASININE on the part of the school district...

 

[oleheat]

Well..... that's not confusing.

 

[pyreaux]

I hate seeing this article repeatedly posted without thorough thought. The kid refused to support the investigation. Also the policy is to allow for time to ensure that the authorities involved can find out who the actual culprit was to prevent them from returning to school and completing whatever altercation was started because the authority took someone's (likely a childs) word for it. The kid should be rewarded, but I sure as hell want the school to know without a doubt which kid the gun belonged to before letting them back on campus.

From the article "According to the mother, the school suspended her son because he refused to cooperate in the investigation. She says he was scared."

 

[troy_mclure]

At the risk of sounding ill-hearted, I'm going to go on a limb and say that this school and any given New Orleans public school probably have a lot in common.
With that said, if the teen was involved in an altercation that one party decided to escalate, whether he wrestles away a pistol or not, he was still involved in an altercation.
The only probable difference here is that instead of fist fighting for five minutes, they had to disarm the one who "one-upped" the situation.
I know that makes me sound cold hearted, but I can't absolve a kid of his woes, when I truly believe he was just as much a part of the argument as the dummy with the pistol. Saving his own hide doesn't earn a free pass in my book.

3 kids interceded in an argument between the gunman and another. the 3 were not involved untill the gun came out.

 

[troy_mclure]

I hate seeing this article repeatedly posted without thorough thought. The kid refused to support the investigation. Also the policy is to allow for time to ensure that the authorities involved can find out who the actual culprit was to prevent them from returning to school and completing whatever altercation was started because the authority took someone's (likely a childs) word for it. The kid should be rewarded, but I sure as hell want the school to know without a doubt which kid the gun belonged to before letting them back on campus.

From the article "According to the mother, the school suspended her son because he refused to cooperate in the investigation. She says he was scared."

and if i were going to a school like that i would not cooperate either.

 

[Sully]

You can thank lawsuits for most stupid **** in this country

 

[Cat]

At the risk of sounding ill-hearted, I'm going to go on a limb and say that this school and any given New Orleans public school probably have a lot in common.
With that said, if the teen was involved in an altercation that one party decided to escalate, whether he wrestles away a pistol or not, he was still involved in an altercation.
The only probable difference here is that instead of fist fighting for five minutes, they had to disarm the one who "one-upped" the situation.
I know that makes me sound cold hearted, but I can't absolve a kid of his woes, when I truly believe he was just as much a part of the argument as the dummy with the pistol. Saving his own hide doesn't earn a free pass in my book.

I would agree with this.

Even in the '90s, if you were involved in any shape fashion or form, in an altercation, you received similar punishment. Perhaps not as much, or even a tenth of what the other person received. But you will be punished for being "in the fight" so to speak.

I really doubt this gunman came up, started waving a handgun and the guy tackled him from behind as being an innocent bystander. THAT would garner outrage and disbelief. The other just means he was involved in a situation that resulted in brandishing a firearm. We don't see where the principal says "good job, however that doesn't exclude you from what occurred up to that point." For all we know, this guy could have started the fight.

 

[Cat]

I hate seeing this article repeatedly posted without thorough thought. The kid refused to support the investigation. Also the policy is to allow for time to ensure that the authorities involved can find out who the actual culprit was to prevent them from returning to school and completing whatever altercation was started because the authority took someone's (likely a childs) word for it. The kid should be rewarded, but I sure as hell want the school to know without a doubt which kid the gun belonged to before letting them back on campus.

From the article "According to the mother, the school suspended her son because he refused to cooperate in the investigation. She says he was scared."

Okay. So he was an innocent bystander who grabbed the gun. Good job.

But considering the amount of confusion and seriousness of the situation, especially someone who isn't cooperating?

 

[Leonidas]

Okay. So he was an innocent bystander who grabbed the gun. Good job.

But considering the amount of confusion and seriousness of the situation, especially someone who isn't cooperating?

Ask ANY attorney. All of them will say, "Never talk to a cop." It might have been the smart thing for the kid to keep his peace.

 

[Cat]

Ask ANY attorney. All of them will say, "Never talk to a cop." It might have been the smart thing for the kid to keep his peace.

 

[king4456]

http://m.youtube.com/index?&desktop_uri=/

 

[Hitman]

I hate seeing this article repeatedly posted without thorough thought. The kid refused to support the investigation. Also the policy is to allow for time to ensure that the authorities involved can find out who the actual culprit was to prevent them from returning to school and completing whatever altercation was started because the authority took someone's (likely a childs) word for it. The kid should be rewarded, but I sure as hell want the school to know without a doubt which kid the gun belonged to before letting them back on campus.

Which is also why he got an 'Emergency Suspension' and not a by default 'Disciplinary Suspension' which he could have recieved for refusing to cooperate. Seems like they let him off with the Emergency one according to the articles on the story but the mom is still confused.

According to the mother, the school suspended her son because he refused to cooperate in the investigation.

 

[Peacemaker]

This country just sucks

The country doesn't suck, however, some of its citizens do.. Complete idiots... The kid deserves a medal..

 

[oleheat]

Ask ANY attorney. All of them will say, "Never talk to a cop." It might have been the smart thing for the kid to keep his peace.

I bet Bernie Goetz would agree with you on that one, today.