Don't mess with this New Jersey school board

I won't claim to be an expert, but a few people who have dug pretty deeply into Columbine have argued the "outsiders getting revenge" thing to be an urban legend. They claim the perpetrators were not regularly teased or in any way ostracized.

 

I don't have kids, but since I'm not an idiot, I don't think lawsuits are the answer to everything. Plus, I don't think it's a good thing to teach kids that they shouldn't have to take responsibility or do anything they don't like because they can just pay someone else to handle their problems. Doing that just causes them to grow up and post stupid, whiny shit on message boards.

 

Maybe, maybe not. The two people who could best answer that question are not here to do so. Honestly, we'll probably never know why they decided to go nuts.

 

Then what the AD should do is call the parents to notify them if he suspects they are doing something. Then, it's up to the parents to rectify the issue.

 

We can make educated guesses. I found the article I was thinking of:
http://www.slate.com/id/2099203/

Either way, referencing Columbine as to why schools should be out to keep kids from being ostracized is like referencing 9/11 as to why we need increased Canadian border security.

They seem related, but really, they probably aren't.

 

or sue the AD for slander

 

How is it slander? AD calls parent, tells them that their kid was at a party where there was alcohol. Parent then decides whether or not to confront kid.

 

being at the party? does that really warrant a phone call? guess i didn't understand you. i thought you were saying the AD is calling if the kid was drunk.

 

Yes, if there were kids at the party, then the AD should contact the parents. Unless the AD has indisputable proof that a specific kid was drinking, he shouldn't say that kid was drinking.

 

Baron: What happened to your mom was wrong, and it's good to know that in today's world someone would be called on the carpet about that. But as with the burn victims example, you're putting things that are beyond a kid's control right alongside what is just about the easiest thing in the world for them to control, maintaining their physical appearance.

tstumpf: Well, my parent/no-parent hypothesis of course yields to a teacher, who gets to see our kids for what they are instead of what we're dreaming they will be. Apologies.

 

Update on Hondo's original post:


http://www.northjersey.com/news/011310_Hasbrouck_Heights_mom_who_cursed_out_principal_pleads_not_guilty.html

 

To me, it shouldn't matter if a kid can control his appearance. The other kids shouldn't bother him. Of course, in reality, that doesn't happen.

An extreme example: It's like saying if a girl dresses in a provacative manner, she deserves to get raped. Sure, she can control what she wears. But at the same time, boys need to know that just because a girl looks like a slut doesn't mean that they can just have sex with them.