Free Speech violation-bong hits 4 jesus
- Thread starter mouth_my_nuts
- Start date
The only thing I see wrong about this whole situation is the punishment. The kid is responsible for taking it as far as the supreme court, but in reality the punishment that the principle gave is the cause of him taking it so far. Right? This is a good example of how fucked up our schools are, and how they think. So thats the punishment *established* for *breaking rules* in a place of EDUCATION, in reality, the principle can *give* whatever punishment that she thinks is fit. So you're agreeing that because the kid promoted drug use at school, he shouldn't be allowed back in school for 10 days? That's obviously what fueled his whole violation of civil rights attitude, is it not? Ultimately, its his fault-theres no argument there, but its the principles fault that it went as far as it did because of how she handled it.
My final project for my first year of law school was to get this case, all the related case work, and then present my case in front of a panel of pennsylvania district court judges as if it were the Supreme Court. I basically had to argue this case in front of a mock supreme court.
This took place off school property, the kid was 18 years old, he hadn't come to the school that day at all, he was standing across the street, all the students in attendance were permitted to leave, it was sponsored by Coca-cola (one main argument was that people would misinterpret this as school approved), and there were full out fist fights and distractions going on the whole time, completely unrelated to this persons sign. When the teacher walked off school property to tear up the dude's sign, he started quoting Benjamin Franklin and his right to free speech. The teacher made him come back onto school property where she basically told him he didn't have any rights.
My main argument was that the school shouldn't be the thought police. People should have the right to make their opinion heard, and by making their opinion heard, they open the doors for debate. If someone wants to talk about marijuana, they can do so openly in a way that allows teachers and other students to refute what they say, thereby allowing someone to grow as a person. The worst thing you can do is censor something, make it taboo, and then don't allow society at large to debate on the issue. Once someone is trapped in a black box with nobody else's thoughts but his own, that's when the real danger occurs.
This took place off school property, the kid was 18 years old, he hadn't come to the school that day at all, he was standing across the street, all the students in attendance were permitted to leave, it was sponsored by Coca-cola (one main argument was that people would misinterpret this as school approved), and there were full out fist fights and distractions going on the whole time, completely unrelated to this persons sign. When the teacher walked off school property to tear up the dude's sign, he started quoting Benjamin Franklin and his right to free speech. The teacher made him come back onto school property where she basically told him he didn't have any rights.
My main argument was that the school shouldn't be the thought police. People should have the right to make their opinion heard, and by making their opinion heard, they open the doors for debate. If someone wants to talk about marijuana, they can do so openly in a way that allows teachers and other students to refute what they say, thereby allowing someone to grow as a person. The worst thing you can do is censor something, make it taboo, and then don't allow society at large to debate on the issue. Once someone is trapped in a black box with nobody else's thoughts but his own, that's when the real danger occurs.
The law is that you are only allowed to punish an act like this if the principal feels that the act would cause a disturbance. If she felt there would be a disturbance, she is allowed to use swift action to stop it. Not only was there no disturbance, but she admitted herself that she foresaw no disturbance whatsoever. So by her own admittance she had no right to punish the kid.
Please tell me your presentation was better than what you gave us. Can you post up excerpts from it?
While it did take place off school grounds (across the street) it was still sanctioned as a SCHOOL EVENT, and since it was sanctioned as a school event, he was subjected to school rules. Do you understand what school sponsered means? School sponsership in this case means the school is sanctioning the event and giving it the stamp of approval for the students and staff (which happened during school hours.) This is DIFFERENT from a BUSINESS (coca-cola) sponsering the event by pumping millions into the marketing campaign. The age of the child is of no concern here, because he is still subjected to school rules while he is a student.
Walked off school property at a school sanctioned event...asked for the sign and was not given the sign when she was asked. Clearly this kid overstepped his bounds.
It was a school sanctioned event, across the street from the school and the event took place during school hours. She was within her right to do so.
If you want to start a debate do so. Go join a policy debate team and go about your business. Spending your morning making a sign and talking about bong hits for jesus is not the proper forum for making your opinion heard.
And "BONG HITS 4 JESUS" does NOT provide such a forum, so what exactly is your point?
The courts debated on it. Aagain, the sign itself (meaning the actual sign) was not designed to cause anyone to debate the issues of marijuana. What part of the sign would lead a reasonable/sane person to believe it was stirring a debate or was a precursor to a debate?
Is this what you argued in front of your audience?
Please cite the source where you got this info from, because I'm reading 2 documents that say something entirely different.
While it did take place off school grounds (across the street) it was still sanctioned as a SCHOOL EVENT, and since it was sanctioned as a school event, he was subjected to school rules. Do you understand what school sponsered means? School sponsership in this case means the school is sanctioning the event and giving it the stamp of approval for the students and staff (which happened during school hours.) This is DIFFERENT from a BUSINESS (coca-cola) sponsering the event by pumping millions into the marketing campaign. The age of the child is of no concern here, because he is still subjected to school rules while he is a student.
Walked off school property at a school sanctioned event...asked for the sign and was not given the sign when she was asked. Clearly this kid overstepped his bounds.
It was a school sanctioned event, across the street from the school and the event took place during school hours. She was within her right to do so.
If you want to start a debate do so. Go join a policy debate team and go about your business. Spending your morning making a sign and talking about bong hits for jesus is not the proper forum for making your opinion heard.
And "BONG HITS 4 JESUS" does NOT provide such a forum, so what exactly is your point?
The courts debated on it. Aagain, the sign itself (meaning the actual sign) was not designed to cause anyone to debate the issues of marijuana. What part of the sign would lead a reasonable/sane person to believe it was stirring a debate or was a precursor to a debate?
Is this what you argued in front of your audience?
Please cite the source where you got this info from, because I'm reading 2 documents that say something entirely different.
I'm not a big fan of know-it-alls coming onto the site, with low blows such as "please tell me your presentation was better than what you gave us" or tongue in cheek little quips that make you seem smarter than everyone else. You want to dissect what people have to say, by all means go for it. I stopped posting in forums like this because of people like you. I saw an issue that I spent months learning and decided to give everyone a little summary in the 2 minutes of free time I have when I'm not gainfully employed. Of course the post immediately following mine was a reminder of why I don't post on this forum.
You're an intelligent person Heresy. Maybe one day you'll be mature also. Or at least respectful.
And just for the record, sponsorship IN THIS CASE means that the event bears the imprimatur of the entity endorsing it. Are you telling me Juneau Douglas High School on its own sponsored the entire 2002 Olympics in Salt Lake City? That's one hell of a high school.
You're an intelligent person Heresy. Maybe one day you'll be mature also. Or at least respectful.
And just for the record, sponsorship IN THIS CASE means that the event bears the imprimatur of the entity endorsing it. Are you telling me Juneau Douglas High School on its own sponsored the entire 2002 Olympics in Salt Lake City? That's one hell of a high school.
Well I'm not a big fan of wanna be law students coming on the site and making a mockery of intelligence. I mean after reading your post I'm now leaning towards forsaking law school all together and now want to be a common idiot and circle jerk mascot like nhjosmith. I mean seriously. thats the only way to go around these parts.
I'm doing it now. Thanks.
No, you got ran off the board, and it is obvious it wasn't by people who are like me. If it were done by people who are like me you wouldn't even be posting here. In fact, they would probably have found your body when the tide came in because you would have commited suicide due to the fact that your precious posts were ripped and tarnished.
But don't worry, you can still off yourself and things will be back to normal as usual.
I am so tired of you people giving victory speeches and telling us about your time. Listen, no one cares about your time, and I have pulled a hectic schedule also, but do you see me ranting about it?
And your two minutes was a waste of my time, and if I had to do it all over again, I would go back and not reply because that was two minutes I could have spent praying for nhjosmith to "accidently" slip and fall on the edge of a marble table.
Flattery will get you nowhere with me. Find another tactic.
Are you insane? Seriously is something wrong with you?
Do you not understand this? Stop wasting our time and learn to forsake your place in life as the harbinger of stupidity. Your time would have been better spent attacking the typo than asking me questions. Like yourself, I too have to read cases/briefs, but it pains me to see someone such as yourself come here and make a mockery of all that is remotely right within the CJ system.
Now since I'm in a giving mood. I'll go ahead and give you this link which I posted. Make sure you read pages 1 - 10 and you'll find the answer around 6-7. You'll see how the school "sponsored" it.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-278.pdf
I'm doing it now. Thanks.
No, you got ran off the board, and it is obvious it wasn't by people who are like me. If it were done by people who are like me you wouldn't even be posting here. In fact, they would probably have found your body when the tide came in because you would have commited suicide due to the fact that your precious posts were ripped and tarnished.
But don't worry, you can still off yourself and things will be back to normal as usual.
I am so tired of you people giving victory speeches and telling us about your time. Listen, no one cares about your time, and I have pulled a hectic schedule also, but do you see me ranting about it?
And your two minutes was a waste of my time, and if I had to do it all over again, I would go back and not reply because that was two minutes I could have spent praying for nhjosmith to "accidently" slip and fall on the edge of a marble table.
Flattery will get you nowhere with me. Find another tactic.
Are you insane? Seriously is something wrong with you?
Do you not understand this? Stop wasting our time and learn to forsake your place in life as the harbinger of stupidity. Your time would have been better spent attacking the typo than asking me questions. Like yourself, I too have to read cases/briefs, but it pains me to see someone such as yourself come here and make a mockery of all that is remotely right within the CJ system.
Now since I'm in a giving mood. I'll go ahead and give you this link which I posted. Make sure you read pages 1 - 10 and you'll find the answer around 6-7. You'll see how the school "sponsored" it.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-278.pdf
The bright idea....
You must feel I actually do know everything, and like I told someone else here, I can't help it because I'm the only polymath you have encountered. Now instead of utilizing antiquated sermons to point the finger at me, why don't you stick to the topic at hand? I'll tell you why, it's because you really don't have a leg to stand on here.
Stop wasting our time replying if you aren't going to address the case and the issue at hand.
You must feel I actually do know everything, and like I told someone else here, I can't help it because I'm the only polymath you have encountered. Now instead of utilizing antiquated sermons to point the finger at me, why don't you stick to the topic at hand? I'll tell you why, it's because you really don't have a leg to stand on here.
Stop wasting our time replying if you aren't going to address the case and the issue at hand.
Galactus was a bit before my day old timer, but ill chalk the insults up to a combination of you being humbled at the thought of actually being an intern at your age and feeling emasculated by someone who had a contrasting opinion than you and was already in law school; heresys dream. So i forgive you.
Rewrite your argument in a respectful manner and I'd love to get into an adult debate. Of course you yourself said this is not a forum for debate, as thought all of these issues were in black and white and contained no ideological thinking. Remember I said "adult" debate though. I did not say "mental meathead" "intellectual bully" or "individual who spends his free time on the internet speaking down to people even though if he did it in real life he'd either get his ass kicked or have no friends cuz that's just not how people work".
You gotta understand man, that I have a life outside of the internet, so I don't need to get into a pissing contest with someone sans dick. I'd love to discuss this with someone intelligent. Just not at the expense of appeasing someone who thinks he's better than others. You can either have a brain above your neck or a penis, but not both. I'll reply to a meaningful response, but I'm done with this thread otherwise.
You gotta understand man, that I have a life outside of the internet, so I don't need to get into a pissing contest with someone sans dick. I'd love to discuss this with someone intelligent. Just not at the expense of appeasing someone who thinks he's better than others. You can either have a brain above your neck or a penis, but not both. I'll reply to a meaningful response, but I'm done with this thread otherwise.
My faithful servent....most schools worth their salt require you to do internships for credit/hours, and most crime labs require the same thing. What does an internship have to do with anything? Emasculated? It is about time you've learned a new word, and why would I feel such a thing when he has basically said nothing? If law school were my "dream" you still wouldn't have a point, and I suggest you look into all the threads where I said law school was NOT my choice of higher education and profession outside of audio engineering. Thank you, now bow down and welcome me back slave.
:H:
:H:
First of all, you don't tell me what to rewrite. You've had plenty of time to say what you wanted to say, so I have no reason to rewrite anything. In addition, if I felt the person were being blatently disrespectful, I wouldn't ask them to rewrite shit. I'd just go along with the flow or not respond.
Where did I say or imply this was not a forum of debate? i said spendinging your time making the sign and talking about it meaning "referencing" or "suggesting it" is not the proper forum. That statement has NOTHING to do with US or THIS forum.
It is obvious that you want my attention, and here you are stooping to tactics one of my stooges would be reluctant to implement. Listen, you do NOT want to debate this topic, for if you wanted to debate this topic, you would have already created a foundation for doing so. Instead, you want to run amuck, call me a bully, talk about free time, and present the preposterous claim that I would be assaulted for speaking my mind in public. Next you wrap your lunacy up with some claim that I don't have friends--which is even more incredulous considering I get down with people here OFFLINE.
So if you have a life outside of the net why do you even suggest I rewrite anything? If I were going to play the "I have a life card" I surely wouldn't ask a person to rewrite anything. In fact, I'd just leave the shit alone and go about my business. However, in your infinite wisdom you can't see that deep down you actually DON'T want to talk about this issue and will blame ME for YOUR lack of knowledge and info pertaining to the case.
You imply I am these things yet you want me to rewrite what I have said so you can speak? LOL! Do you realize what you're saying?
Baiting tactices don't work son. You NEVER wanted to discuss this issue in depth.
Where did I say or imply this was not a forum of debate? i said spendinging your time making the sign and talking about it meaning "referencing" or "suggesting it" is not the proper forum. That statement has NOTHING to do with US or THIS forum.
It is obvious that you want my attention, and here you are stooping to tactics one of my stooges would be reluctant to implement. Listen, you do NOT want to debate this topic, for if you wanted to debate this topic, you would have already created a foundation for doing so. Instead, you want to run amuck, call me a bully, talk about free time, and present the preposterous claim that I would be assaulted for speaking my mind in public. Next you wrap your lunacy up with some claim that I don't have friends--which is even more incredulous considering I get down with people here OFFLINE.
So if you have a life outside of the net why do you even suggest I rewrite anything? If I were going to play the "I have a life card" I surely wouldn't ask a person to rewrite anything. In fact, I'd just leave the shit alone and go about my business. However, in your infinite wisdom you can't see that deep down you actually DON'T want to talk about this issue and will blame ME for YOUR lack of knowledge and info pertaining to the case.
You imply I am these things yet you want me to rewrite what I have said so you can speak? LOL! Do you realize what you're saying?
Baiting tactices don't work son. You NEVER wanted to discuss this issue in depth.
