School student suspended for NRA pro-2nd Amendment T-shirt

"As you can see, there are two rifles on the back logo. When administrators asked him to either change the shirt or turn it inside out. When he refused to comply this time, he was given a one day in-school suspension." "Improper Dress: "Any clothing that is unsafe, in poor taste, distracting, or disruptive to the educational process or not in keeping with academic expectations... shirts with drug, alcohol or violence related sayings."" The problem with this is that there was no violation with the dress code that Grand Island High School enforces. A teacher commented about the shirt saying that it was the guns that were what caused her to say something. However, under Grand Island High School"s dress policy, it states that if it is unsafe, in poor taste, distracting, or disruptive to the educational process or not in keeping with academic expectations. The shirt was not unsafe, poor in taste, distracting, or disruptive to the educational process. The guns presented no threat due to lack of the encouragement of violence. It certainly was not poor in taste. And it was by no means distracting or disruptive during class or anytime throughout the school day. The only reason Shane Kinney, the 16-year-old sophomore from Grand Island [1], was asked to turn the shirt inside out or remove it was because the teacher simply did not like it. That"s it, nothing else. Now, just because the teacher doesn"t approve of it does not mean the school is obligated to request the shirt be covered up in some way. There was no violation in the dress code policy. "Guns are inherently violent. They are created for the purpose of inflicting damage upon something. A shirt with two guns on it, therefore, contains a violent object. There was no reason for the student to wear either shirt to school, especially since he had been told on other occasions beforehand to change." When you mention that guns are inherently violent, this doesn"t really prove a point. The gun is not the problem, it"s the person behind that gun. It is unfair to the gun to be portrayed as a "bad" thing. Without guns how would many Americans protect themselves? It"s similar to dogs. Say a student wears a shirt with a pit bull or some other dog that it inherently portrayed as a "bad" dog. It is not the dog, but the people who raise it. Another thing I may mention is that the school prohibits any sayings that may be violent. A gun is not a violent saying. It is not violent nor a saying. The NRA is about firearm competency, safety, and ownership, as well as police training, marksmanship, hunting, and self-defense training in the United States [2]. There was a purpose behind the shirt and why he wear it. First off, the shirt was a Pro- 2nd Amendment shirt, it is a shirt that shows his love of American heritage. The NRA is also a non-violent organization who has many youth programs. NRA Youth Programs offer many opportunities for youths who are interested in the shooting sports and our firearms heritage [3]. In addition, he wear the shirt because he, along with his parents, are proud that they are part of the NRA. "Drug-related shirts are expressive, but still not permitted. Schools are meant to educate, and they can do this best by creating and enforcing a safe and moderated environment." Drug related shirts may be expressive, however, they are encouraging bad behavior and would disrupt class order. If a student wear a drug related shirt, there is much certainty that it would be non-educational. The NRA is much different, they are an educational organization. Informing all ages about, as I mentioned before, safety, ownership, competency, etc. "By not complying to the request, the student was also being insubordinate. The request was completely reasonable (it didn't ask him to do anything irrational, harmful, or out of the ordinary)." "The school did not act outside of protocol, either. Everything they did was correct procedure according to their code and handbook." The request should not have even been presented. This is the problem. He never did anything wrong, as I have obviously mentioned earlier. Another thing I mentioned before is that the student did not violate any rules in the handbook. "Even if you argue that the student's rights were infringed upon, I can counter by saying that the rights are not universal. Children cannot purchase guns. Schools can search lockers without a warrant." I am unclear by your statement referring to children not being able to purchase firearms. If the point you are trying to reach is that if a minor cannot buy a gun then why can they wear a shirt with one on it? If this is what you mean then that is ludicrous. By those standards you are saying that a kid cannot wear a shirt with a dog simply because he or she cannot adopt one. "Or, I can argue that since it is the school's property, under the supervision of the administrators, that free expression is not protected. It was decided by the Supreme Court that expression wasn't Constitutionally protected on private property in the case Hudgens vs. National Labor Relations Board." Okay, this case that you provided is irrelevant to the topic. There was a public disturbance, along with trespassing [4]. It was an obvious ruling. May I mention that the school actually wasn"t even worried about the guns on his shirt, but the words on his shirt. They asked him to put duct tape over something that is in the Constitution! That is absolutely absurd. How can you justify those actions? Also, he had worn shirts before with guns on them and no one said a thing. But as soon as he wear a shirt with the NRA on it he was instructed to cover up the words. I am unsure by what words he was supposed to cover up. If it was indeed the "2nd Amendment Shall not be Infringed" or if it was the logo NRA with that writing. Either way it was an unnecessary action. [1] As you can see, I have contradicted all main points made by my opponent and added some of my own. Thank you and I look forward to the next round. [1] http://www.foxnews.com... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] http://youth.nra.org... [4] http://www.casebriefs.com...