Pupil seemingly expelled for reporting illegal immigrant

[The Rich Port]

As I have said earlier, chances are he had meetings with school officials in an effort to deal with his behavior, and he refused to back down or cooperate, leading to harsher punishment.

From how I understand punishments go, or for atleast my school is you give a relatively minor punishment then you up it if he's caught again. I didn't see them do that for this instance.

Do you know for a fact this isn't repeat behavior?

Because I can't find any other information.

In fact, I'm starting to think this is a fake story.

[Holy Tedalonia]

From how I understand punishments go, or for atleast my school is you give a relatively minor punishment then you up it if he's caught again. I didn't see them do that for this instance.

Do you know for a fact this isn't repeat behavior?

Because I can't find any other information.

In fact, I'm starting to think this is a fake story.

You sure, as fake as the story saying Trump was a Starburst candy?

[Wallenburg]

As I have said earlier, chances are he had meetings with school officials in an effort to deal with his behavior, and he refused to back down or cooperate, leading to harsher punishment.

From how I understand punishments go, or for atleast my school is you give a relatively minor punishment then you up it if he's caught again. I didn't see them do that for this instance.

That's probably because "High School Puts Racist Teen in Detention" doesn't make headlines.

[Ifreann]

Re-fucking-lax. The little jerk didn't get sent to prison. He was expelled. You get re-accepted to schools.

Thought it would have to be a pretty forgiving or pretty desperate school. Maybe the Reform School or the Boot Camp will take him, because judging by his behavior, he desperately needs them.

Expulsions stay on record don't they? And he didn't do a crime or anything in school

Chat shit, get banged.

[Holy Tedalonia]

From how I understand punishments go, or for atleast my school is you give a relatively minor punishment then you up it if he's caught again. I didn't see them do that for this instance.

That's probably because "High School Puts Racist Teen in Detention" doesn't make headlines.

Typically journalists back track their history though. It would've been discussed if it was existent.

[Ultramarr]

Expulsions stay on record don't they? And he didn't do a crime or anything in school

Chat shit, get banged.

As if you banged anyone. People have different definitions of "chat shit" so I can go around beating up communists and leftists because "chat shit get banged". The slogan is used in prisons and by thugs although I doubt your a criminal just saying it behind a computer

[The Rich Port]

http://www.newsweek.com/neo-nazis-threa ... led-798814

Didn't even notice Newsweek covered this yesterday, adding lots of new details that may or may not be accurate.

[Wallenburg]

From how I understand punishments go, or for atleast my school is you give a relatively minor punishment then you up it if he's caught again. I didn't see them do that for this instance.

Do you know for a fact this isn't repeat behavior?

Because I can't find any other information.

In fact, I'm starting to think this is a fake story.

Well I'll be damned:
https://squawker.org/culture-wars/high- ... ite-claim/

[The Rich Port]

Do you know for a fact this isn't repeat behavior?

Because I can't find any other information.

In fact, I'm starting to think this is a fake story.

Well I'll be damned:
https://squawker.org/culture-wars/high- ... ite-claim/

I already posted that. Besides, Squawker sucks. The Newsweek article is the most current.

Chat shit, get banged.

As if you banged anyone. People have different definitions of "chat shit" so I can go around beating up communists and leftists because "chat shit get banged". The slogan is used in prisons and by thugs although I doubt your a criminal just saying it behind a computer

Ultramarr: "I don't know how colonialism or allusions work".

[Vassenor]

Do you know for a fact this isn't repeat behavior?

Because I can't find any other information.

In fact, I'm starting to think this is a fake story.

Well I'll be damned:
https://squawker.org/culture-wars/high- ... ite-claim/

Wow the dogwhistles in that article.

EDIT:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/squawker/

Squawker is a news and opinion website that claims to be a fact checker, especially of the mainstream media. In reality this is a website that promotes conspiracies with an extreme right bias. We have decided to classify this website as questionable versus a conspiracy-pseudoscience site due to the extreme political bias that always favors the right and discredits the left. An example of a conspiracy article is one entitled: Is Obama Plotting A Second Civil War? EX-Aide Says Yes, Obama Still Thinks He’s The President. There isn’t evidence that Obama is plotting anything or thinks he is still President. The primary source for this story is Dick Morris and Infowars. A conspiracy takes a story such as Obama holding meetings each day and opines a much more sinister plot. This is a classic example of conspiracy and also propaganda. In order to keep this short I will just summarize that this website is very anti-Islam and openly declares them an enemy. They also have a ridiculous article using skewed stats that show men are raped by women at an equal rate as women. Overall, this is an extreme right wing biased website that promotes propaganda and conspiracy. (8/10/2017)

WELP.

[Proctopeo]

Well I'll be damned:
https://squawker.org/culture-wars/high- ... ite-claim/

Wow the dogwhistles in that article.

EDIT:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/squawker/

Squawker is a news and opinion website that claims to be a fact checker, especially of the mainstream media. In reality this is a website that promotes conspiracies with an extreme right bias. We have decided to classify this website as questionable versus a conspiracy-pseudoscience site due to the extreme political bias that always favors the right and discredits the left. An example of a conspiracy article is one entitled: Is Obama Plotting A Second Civil War? EX-Aide Says Yes, Obama Still Thinks He’s The President. There isn’t evidence that Obama is plotting anything or thinks he is still President. The primary source for this story is Dick Morris and Infowars. A conspiracy takes a story such as Obama holding meetings each day and opines a much more sinister plot. This is a classic example of conspiracy and also propaganda. In order to keep this short I will just summarize that this website is very anti-Islam and openly declares them an enemy. They also have a ridiculous article using skewed stats that show men are raped by women at an equal rate as women. Overall, this is an extreme right wing biased website that promotes propaganda and conspiracy. (8/10/2017)

WELP.

Don't worry, Newsweek said the same thing as the title of that article does.

[Wallenburg]

I know Squawker is shit, but it seems far more practical for them to dig into the left over this instead of insist that it is a fake story. I dunno. It doesn't help that you don't have any real news outlet talking about this.

[Ultramarr]

Well I'll be damned:
https://squawker.org/culture-wars/high- ... ite-claim/

I already posted that. Besides, Squawker sucks. The Newsweek article is the most current.

As if you banged anyone. People have different definitions of "chat shit" so I can go around beating up communists and leftists because "chat shit get banged". The slogan is used in prisons and by thugs although I doubt your a criminal just saying it behind a computer

Ultramarr: "I don't know how colonialism or allusions work".

I do and I think colonialism was a good thing

[The Rich Port]

Don't worry, Newsweek said the same thing as the title of that article does.

Newsweek is a liberal rag /I'm An Alt-Right I'm So Cool Look At Me

I know Squawker is shit, but it seems far more practical for them to dig into the left over this instead of insist that it is a fake story. I dunno. It doesn't help that you don't have any real news outlet talking about this.

Exactly why I think this is a fake story. Look at my other posts. I found a story that's identical to this one from many months ago.

[Kernen]

Expulsions stay on record don't they? And he didn't do a crime or anything in school

Schools are perfectly within their authorities to punish online harassment and threats of violence.

In the US, they can only do so as long as there is a reasonable nexus between the school and the activity. Under Tinker and Frasure, a lack of nexus means the school can't do anything. That nexus is loosely defined, but it generally isn't enough that two students interact in some way online. The learning process has to be actively and proximately interrupted.

School probably done screwed up.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Expulsions stay on record don't they? And he didn't do a crime or anything in school

Schools are perfectly within their authorities to punish online harassment and threats of violence.

That's a fairly broad interpretation of at least American jurisprudence on the matter. I think you'd be right to say that where there is a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption to the school's pedagogical mission then the School can take action, but otherwise you're going to have a very tough time with off campus speech. If he was dumb enough to post these things using school resources then the school wouldn't have much trouble, but if this kid was just sitting alone in his room at home posting it the 1st Amendment's protections are stronger. The school has to make the case that they reasonably forecast substantial disruption unless they acted, so they're confined more or less to the potential for violence line of argument.

Kernen: Yes, the nexus issue is there too but the fact that he targeted a student may help satisfy that. Depends on what circuit you're in.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

That's a fairly broad interpretation of at least American jurisprudence on the matter. I think you'd be right to say that where there is a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption to the school's pedagogical mission then the School can take action

Which is odd because in almost any other context, schools aren't allowed to punish students for something they might do.

Nor should they be. "Pre-crime" is considered a dystopian concept for a reason.

[Mallorea and Riva]

That's a fairly broad interpretation of at least American jurisprudence on the matter. I think you'd be right to say that where there is a reasonable forecast of substantial disruption to the school's pedagogical mission then the School can take action

Which is odd because in almost any other context, schools aren't allowed to punish students for something they might do.

Nor should they be. "Pre-crime" is considered a dystopian concept for a reason.

The general thought is that students surrender some degree (though not all) of their 1st amendment protections once they step through the schoolhouse gates, as the Courts like to put it. Obviously the issue becomes what happens when the speech is off campus, but its effects can be felt oncampus? That is more or less what is happening here per my understanding. The Circuit courts aren't all aligned on how to handle this.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Which is odd because in almost any other context, schools aren't allowed to punish students for something they might do.

Nor should they be. "Pre-crime" is considered a dystopian concept for a reason.

The general thought is that students surrender some degree (though not all) of their 1st amendment protections once they step through the schoolhouse gates, as the Courts like to put it. Obviously the issue becomes what happens when the speech is off campus, but its effects can be felt oncampus? That is more or less what is happening here per my understanding. The Circuit courts aren't all aligned on how to handle this.

They shouldn't need to be. Pre-crime is an even more idiotic idea than censorship.

[Holy Tedalonia]

Well I'll be damned:
https://squawker.org/culture-wars/high- ... ite-claim/

Wow the dogwhistles in that article.

EDIT:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/squawker/

Squawker is a news and opinion website that claims to be a fact checker, especially of the mainstream media. In reality this is a website that promotes conspiracies with an extreme right bias. We have decided to classify this website as questionable versus a conspiracy-pseudoscience site due to the extreme political bias that always favors the right and discredits the left. An example of a conspiracy article is one entitled: Is Obama Plotting A Second Civil War? EX-Aide Says Yes, Obama Still Thinks He’s The President. There isn’t evidence that Obama is plotting anything or thinks he is still President. The primary source for this story is Dick Morris and Infowars. A conspiracy takes a story such as Obama holding meetings each day and opines a much more sinister plot. This is a classic example of conspiracy and also propaganda. In order to keep this short I will just summarize that this website is very anti-Islam and openly declares them an enemy. They also have a ridiculous article using skewed stats that show men are raped by women at an equal rate as women. Overall, this is an extreme right wing biased website that promotes propaganda and conspiracy. (8/10/2017)

WELP.

Obama is obviously planning to start civil war 2

[Mallorea and Riva]

The general thought is that students surrender some degree (though not all) of their 1st amendment protections once they step through the schoolhouse gates, as the Courts like to put it. Obviously the issue becomes what happens when the speech is off campus, but its effects can be felt oncampus? That is more or less what is happening here per my understanding. The Circuit courts aren't all aligned on how to handle this.

They shouldn't need to be. Pre-crime is an even more idiotic idea than censorship.

Well it isn't a crime. The justification is more or less in line with the theories of attempted crimes, you took a substantial step and didn't distance yourself from it. In this case the student "said" the words, so that itself is the negative action. The after-effects are divorced from the act itself, the school being unable to act unless substantial disruption actually occurs seems counterintuitive. If I tell a school that I'm going to plant a bomb and they can't take any action against me until I do it we'd be living in a very strange world.

Does anyone know if the student used school resources to post this stuff or posted while on campus?

[Donut section]

Which is odd because in almost any other context, schools aren't allowed to punish students for something they might do.

Nor should they be. "Pre-crime" is considered a dystopian concept for a reason.

The general thought is that students surrender some degree (though not all) of their 1st amendment protections once they step through the schoolhouse gates, as the Courts like to put it. Obviously the issue becomes what happens when the speech is off campus, but its effects can be felt oncampus? That is more or less what is happening here per my understanding. The Circuit courts aren't all aligned on how to handle this.

The thing is the only evidence we have for evidence of any wrongdoing is two posts, one is a comment after a migrant bashed an old woman and the other has no context and while if he said it to someone in person it could definitely be a threat, but online it could be an offhand comment or Dark humour banter.

There's no evidence of him posting either to anyone connected to his school or elsewhere.

[Mallorea and Riva]

The general thought is that students surrender some degree (though not all) of their 1st amendment protections once they step through the schoolhouse gates, as the Courts like to put it. Obviously the issue becomes what happens when the speech is off campus, but its effects can be felt oncampus? That is more or less what is happening here per my understanding. The Circuit courts aren't all aligned on how to handle this.

The thing is the only evidence we have for evidence of any wrongdoing is two posts, one is a comment after a migrant bashed an old woman and the other has no context and while if he said it to someone in person it could definitely be a threat, but online it could be an offhand comment or Dark humour banter.

There's no evidence of him posting either to anyone connected to his school or elsewhere.

That's the argument you'd have to make to the Court, that there was no nexus to the school and additionally that any forecast of substantial disruption was unreasonable.

[Katganistan]

Illegal immigration is not a criminal offense

Illegal immigration is not a criminal offense

No, the disincentive should be on reporting illegal immigrants
Illegal immigrants should be helped to become legalized without being deported.

Illegal immigration is not a criminal offense? I'm sorry, I don't think I understand your logic here

Then go back an reread the thread. It's been explained a dozen times.

Literally nobody has said he was expelled for expressing unpopular ideas. Threats are not 'unpopular', they are criminal. Big difference.

If you don't see that difference, you don't see that difference, but deliberately collapsing the distinction between the two in an attempt to make a bogus culture wars point is not going to go down well here.

OK but I really thought thoughtcrime was a 1984 thing...

Sorry, when you publicly announce that you want to rape and torture people, and there is a reaction to it, that's not 'thoughtcrime'. That's presenting a clear and present danger.

For God's sake, everyone complaining of First Amendment rights -- they do NOT protect you from the consequences of making threats, or of slandering or libeling people. They protect you from being arrested for saying, "Down with President Josiah Bartlett! Vote him out of office!!!!"

A school needs to be a safe environment in order for students to learn. When one is threatening immigrants on line and actually has taken the steps to make another student's life hell just for kicks, the school has an absolute duty to protect their other students. You don't think other students would be afraid that he'd make their families' lives hell by accusing them of being illegal immigrants (whether true or not) just because he had an axe to grind?

Not sorry to see him expelled. His presence in the school would have been detrimental to the school community and other students' ability to concentrate on their studies.

Incorrect. Most terrorist attacks in the US have been white males, nominally Christian.

No mostly Islamic as they are political attacks. They have been school shootings done by mentally ill people who were often white or black but that's not terrorism

I'm not going to bother debating this idiocy given I already gave links to a metric fuckton of google links which actually show what I asserted, and you're just thowing around baseless accusations.

No mostly Islamic as they are political attacks. They have been school shootings done by mentally ill people who were often white or black but that's not terrorism

Let's see your data then.

I'd like to see it as well, given I gave mine.

[Des-Bal]

Sorry, when you publicly announce that you want to rape and torture people, and there is a reaction to it, that's not 'thoughtcrime'. That's presenting a clear and present danger.

For God's sake, everyone complaining of First Amendment rights -- they do NOT protect you from the consequences of making threats, or of slandering or libeling people. They protect you from being arrested for saying, "Down with President Josiah Bartlett! Vote him out of office!!!!"

A school needs to be a safe environment in order for students to learn. When one is threatening immigrants on line and actually has taken the steps to make another student's life hell just for kicks, the school has an absolute duty to protect their other students. You don't think other students would be afraid that he'd make their families' lives hell by accusing them of being illegal immigrants (whether true or not) just because he had an axe to grind?

Not sorry to see him expelled. His presence in the school would have been detrimental to the school community and other students' ability to concentrate on their studies.

"Threatening immigrants online" is a woeful mischaracterization. We have seen evidence of exactly one threat directed at an unknown person in an unknown context that doesn't appear to be particularly serious. Further, unless you're arguing that he made the report in bad faith there is absolutely no reason to factor that into any decision to punish him.