Public schools

Girl Kicked Out of School for Red(ish) Hair

|

Rylee Mackay with her red hair
Credit: The Spectrum/NYDailyNews.com

Sporting hair that looks completely natural to the untrained eye, a ninth grade student was nonetheless sent home from class by the vice principal of Hurricane Middle School in Utah for violating the school's dress code, which bans "extreme hairstyles and colors." She was later permitted to return, although she did nothing to change the deep auburn color of her hair.

The report is another addition to these gems from the past few weeks:

If school is supposed to prepare you for the real world, what lessons are we teaching children by acting like this? Clearly, that obeying the letter of the law is far more important than getting an education or (God forbid!) expressing yourself.

By contrast, suspending Brandon Guzda, a high school student from New York who posted an insulting comment about a teacher on Twitter, may seem like overkill—but at least has sound justification.

"I thought I could say what I want on Twitter in the luxury of my own home," Guzda said.

Sure, you can say it, but you will have to face the consequences. Word travels fast online, and once you say something it's impossible to unsay it. Employees have lost jobs for venting about their bosses via social media. Better to learn this lesson now than later.

There will always be debate over what constitutes a sufficient punishment for breaking a rule. However, most of these students weren't doing anything wrong. 

NEXT: 2012 DA14 Will Avoid Impact With Earth

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. All perfectly clear examples of “Fuck you, that’s why” in action.

    1. Because shut up.

      1. No, you shut up.

          1. I’m no racist, I have friends who happen to be black. You commie.

            1. Your black friends aren’t authentically black because no real black person would be friends with a racist.

              1. AH HA! So you are a commie. Just as I thought.

                1. That’s all you have is ad hominems and personal insults. How dare you call me a communist, there is nothing wrong with communism it is a legitimate viewpoint.

                  1. Especially if you’re a murderous savage – but only if you murder with good intentions.

                  2. lol, what is wrong with both of you. Too much Archer.

    2. Rudy Giuliani explains the situation quite well: “Schools exist in America and have always existed to train responsible citizens of the United States of America.”

      The first responsibility of a free citizen is to obey authority, because “Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.”

      I loathe Giuliani, but respect him somewhat for his honest expression of the statist concept of freedom and the objective of state schools.

  2. Remember kids, exploiting the deaths of children for gun control is the height of political and social responsibility. Even mentioning that a woman recently died during an a late term abortion is a “criminal violation of her privacy”.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..ml?hpid=z4

    1. Regardless of your opinion on abortion, it sounds like it really was a criminal violation of her privacy.

      1. I am not seeing how. If that was, then the endless pictures of the dead kids from Newtown should be as well.

        1. Someone released legally protected information about her medical history. If that wasn’t her husband, someone is going to have some HIPAA problems.

          1. True. But that wasn’t the WAPO’s real bitch. They just don’t want anyone talking about any downside to abortion. Had such a violation occurred in support of something they liked, they would be exploiting the hell out of it.

            1. I assume that the Washington Post is also concerned about the abortionist’s potential violations of HIPPA:

              “In July, 2012, Operation Rescue filed a formal complaint with the Environmental Crimes Unit and released edited video and photographic evidence that showed GRHS and Carhart engaged in the illegal dumping on a routine basis. Evidence included:

              “1. Documents containing private patient information concerning birth control prescriptions and abortion procedures, as well as copies of patient driver’s licenses.”

              I’m sure the Washington Post will be right on that, just as soon as they’ve investigated the abortionist’s links to Kathleen Sebelius:

              http://www.lifenews.com/2013/0…..-abortion/

          2. It’s just John, Nicole. When the law supports his POV he goes full rule-of-law on you, but when the law doesn’t support his POV he conveniently forgets that there’s any such thing as HIPAA. Also, partisan hackery, Red Tony, etc.

            1. Yeah, Tonio that is why I agreed with her above and admitted that yet it was true and that was a HIPPA violation. I don’t really care if you agree with me. It is not like you are interesting or smart enough for me to value your opinion. But I would appreciate if you would try to at least read and understand what I post. I know that might be difficult for you. But give it a try.

              Let met try it again. The point is that the WAPO is only concerned about HIPA in this case because they don’t like what the case says about abortion and want it to go away. But if the woman had died of a gunshot wound, they could not have cared less about her privacy.

              I am not going law and order on anyone. I am pointing out WAPO’s hypocrisy. Everyone on this thread including Sloopy, and Virginian seemed to have understood this point. Is there a reason why you couldn’t? Are you tired today? Are you just not very bright? Did someone named John beat you up and take your lunch money once so you just cant’ help but say stupid things when in the presence of someone with that name?

              1. Everyone on this thread including Sloopy, and Virginian seemed to have understood this point.

                That’s like the worst backhanded compliment I’ve ever received. Thanks, I guess?

                1. I didn’t mean it as a backhanded compliment sloopy. I meant it as “including two people who don’t always agree with me” not “including two people are are really dumb”.

                  Sorry if it came off as saying the latter.

                  1. I have hope for you John. Because I also used to randomly devolve back to my days of being a Republican. And I was a good one. I could talk for hours on how we needed to march from the Levant to the Himalayas, purging the Saracen the whole way. I was all for National Guard troops rotating patrol duty at the Mexican border. I knew that the Patriot Act kept us safe from terrorism. I knew that the left sought nothing less than the total destruction of the Constitution and the free market.

                    Okay, well that last one I was actually right about. But not the other stuff.

                  2. It didn’t really. I’m just fucking with you a little.

          3. What the people reporting it should have done is get a police officer from the Seattle area to go in to the doctor’s office and ask for it without getting a warrant. Apparently that’s perfectly legal and in no way a violation of HIPAA rules.

            1. Exactly, sloopy.

            2. Nein. They should have made her records the material focus of a labor dispute.

              1. Ooh, then they could have stalked her at will if they were part of a union.

            3. OK, IANAL, and I’m only familiar with the parts of HIPAA that apply to caregivers, so dunphy’s actions may have been perfectly legal under HIPAA. The pharmacist’s actions not so much. So what dunphy did was get a pharmacist to expose him/herself to civil and possibly criminal liability. But as dunphy pointed out at length he (dunphy) did nothing wrong.

              I really hope that someone covered by HIPAA goes down for spilling confidential info to warrantless cops. Not out of any animus towards caregivers, but all it takes is one person losing their license and livelihood and then the info is going to dry up for Constable Dunphy and those like him.

              1. Well that was a well reasoned (drink!) and thoughtful comment. Just where the hell do you think you are, Tonio?

              2. OK, IANAL, and I’m only familiar with the parts of HIPAA that apply to caregivers, so dunphy’s actions may have been perfectly legal under HIPAA.

                I appreciate that response, but R C Dean went to great lengths to explain the illegality of dunphy and how what he did was involve himself in a conspiracy among a few other offenses involved in transmitting the information to another party. His actions were never ruled legal, they were simply ignored by a happy prosecutor and incompetent defense attorney.*

                *Assuming the story ever happened at all.

              3. But as dunphy pointed out at length he (dunphy) did nothing wrong.

                Well, as long as you think there’s nothing wrong with a cop inducing somebody to break the law.

                1. Well, as long as you think there’s nothing wrong with a cop inducing somebody to break the law.

                  I think there’s a term for that.

              4. Thanks guys. I meant that somewhat sarcastically, and had forgotten about the conspiracy angle.

          4. Even if its a HIPAA violation, its almost certainly not criminal.

            1. The article asserts this:

              Unless someone inside the clinic contacted the antiabortion groups, the only other possible source of such sensitive information is the hospital.

              Err, no. There is one person who has perfectly legal access to the information, every right to release it publicly, and I could kind of see holding a grudge over this:

              Her husband. Means, motive, opportunity, all in one neat package.

              1. Also RC, I am not as familiar with HIPPA. But under the privacy act, your privacy rights die with you. Dead people’s records are not covered under the privacy act. Is that not true with HIPPA?

                1. HIPAA: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

                  Don’t worry, I work in a medical office and do the double-p single-a thing all the time. It makes way more sense in terms of English spelling conventions.

                2. John, under HIPAA records are still private for 50 years after the patient’s death.

                  It used to be forever, but they just rolled it back to 50 years.

                  1. You mean O.J. Simpson has to wait another 31 years to get the medical records that might help him find the real killer? That’s fucking crazy!

                    1. A nice one.

        2. Well, you can not stoop to their level, or you can say sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

          I mean, my own political hot button is guns. The media published the personal information of concealed carry permit holders. So in response, people were posting the personal information of the reporters, editors, and publishers. Then all of a sudden the scum discovered the importance of privacy.

          I don’t know what the right answer is. I can see both sides here having good points.

          1. Well, the thing about releasing permit-holders’ (note: in NY, at least, this was not necessarily CCW holders, but pistol permit holders) info is that (a) those are by definition public records and (b) that is exactly why gun rights advocates don’t think they should be public records.

            In this case, it seems clear that some legally private medical records were released illicitly.

            I think privacy is important in both cases, but WRT guns, many locales are starting from a place where records are not private and we should argue that they should be. But medical records are and should be private and I think we should want to protect that regardless of the politics of an issue like this.

            1. Yeah, I get what you’re saying. The whole abortion thing pisses me off because everybody agrees that most of the time abortion is bad, but some see it as a necessary evil. I think deregulating the pill, allowing paid adoption, and perhaps some kind of X-Prize for an artificial womb would slow abortions down to those genuine cases of medical necessity or horrific incest/rape situations. But instead of working to find solutions that will lower demand for abortion, they just want the government to wave a magic wand and ban it. Because that always works.

              1. I go back and forth on deregulating the pill. The pill actually does have some nasty side effects for women. Some women, especially ones with heart conditions probably shouldn’t be taking it.

                I understand the argument that everything should be over the counter. But that is not what we have. So the question is is the bill the kind of drug that has enough side effects that it is a good idea to be monitored by a doctor if you are taking it. I don’t know to be honest, but I am not sure the answer is so clear cut.

                1. i’d split the difference and put it behind-the-counter. not a script, but a talk with the pharmacist.

                2. The pill actually does have some nasty side effects for women. Some women

                  True, but so do peanuts.

                3. everything should be over the counter. But that is not what we have. So the question is is the bill the kind of drug that has enough side effects that it is a good idea to be monitored by a doctor if you are taking it.

                  You really think that because some drugs are regulated other drugs must also be regulated, even though no drugs should be regulated?

                  Why?

                  1. You really think that because some drugs are regulated other drugs must also be regulated, even though no drugs should be regulated?

                    Because if we are going to have rules, they ought to at least be coherent.

                    1. Ahh. Rule of Law. Someone linked this to me last night.

                      http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj…..ythWeb.htm

                      If you’ve admitted that these regulated drugs shouldn’t be regulated to begin with, but say some should be regulated because they are worse than ones that are, there’s an argument to be made that makes things even less coherent.

                      None of these drugs are as dangerous as antifreeze and that’s OTC.

                4. The pill actually does have some nasty side effects for women.

                  This is true. However, do you know how you actually get the pill?

                  Go to doctor. They take your BP. They ask if you smoke. They ask if you want the same brand as last time.

                  That’s it. The BP check is the only “exam.”

                  Not having this OTC, or at best behind-the-counter, is a complete fucking racket.

                  1. Thanks for femsplaining. I’m just coming off my “all drugs should be deregulated totally” wild eyed anarchism. But I’m glad there isn’t a good reason for the Pill not to be OTC.

                    1. I think you should get right back on your wild eyed anarchism.

                    2. I’m just coming off my “all drugs should be deregulated totally” wild eyed anarchism.

                      Oh no, why? I’m not!

                  2. The BP check is mandatory with every office visit for every patient, at least from my doc.

                5. I go back and forth on deregulating the pill. The pill actually does have some nasty side effects for women. Some women, especially ones with heart conditions probably shouldn’t be taking it.

                  I understand the argument that everything should be over the counter. But that is not what we have. So the question is is the bill the kind of drug that has enough side effects that it is a good idea to be monitored by a doctor if you are taking it. I don’t know to be honest, but I am not sure the answer is so clear cut.

                  Yeah, and alcohol is high risk (higher even than normal) for people with certain medical conditions. Tylenol’s side effects are so bad, it probably wouldn’t pass FDA review if it was submitted today.

                  Congratulations on making Gil Kerlikowske’s job easier.

                  It’s just John, Nicole. When the law supports his POV he goes full rule-of-law on you, but when the law doesn’t support his POV he conveniently forgets that there’s any such thing as HIPAA. Also, partisan hackery, Red Tony, etc.

              2. But instead of working to find solutions that will lower demand for abortion, they just want the government to wave a magic wand and ban it. Because that always works.

                Not all of them, just the ones who don’t want government to wave a magic wand and subsidize it.

            2. http://www.weeklystandard.com/…..00264.html

              I think publishing the gun owners’ names may have been illegal.

              1. I read about that last week, John, and I thought it was confusing. Basically, they say they are public records, but that doesn’t mean you can actually publish them. Which doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense. And it appears they would still be available for people to request if they wanted to know them, like, “just for funsies” or something.

                1. It doesn’t make sense to me either. That is why I said “I think it may”. I am not sure.

                  1. The VA Assembly passed a law this session making them private records. Obviously a smart idea, because if you have a list of people who own guns available to everyone with an Internet connection, crooks can find which houses to stay away from, or choose which houses to hit with lots of firepower and take guns away from. People are going to die from this in NY, either homeowners or burglars. It might have already happened.

                    1. The danger is them robbing your house when you are not there. Guns are fabulous things to steal and fence. Most houses in a given neighborhood have pretty much the same stuff. Knowing which houses have guns in them to steal is very valuable information. Publishing the list, sets people up to be robbed.

    2. Everyone knows it’s only proper to talk about gun regulation when children aren’t being shot.

      1. Actually, every sane person knows it’s never proper to talk about gun regulation since the topic was put to bed in 1789.

        1. “The most extreme opinion is the correct one, and no debate is allowed.”

          The hallmark of a free society right there.

          1. We had plenty of debate, and even put some things into practice. They didn’t work. You should get over it and move on instead of whining about how we those talks didn’t come to the conclusions you like.

          2. Shall not be infringed. Debate how that means “may be infringed.”

            1. “Well-regulated militia.” Debate how that means “maximum gun ownership by random individuals no matter their training or sanity.”

              1. Obviously, you have no idea what the definition of “regulated” or “militia” are/were.

              2. 1) The second amendment does not make the right to bear arms contingent on being in a militia.

                2) As sloopy mentioned, you have no idea what the words “well-regulated” and militia meant. “Well-regulated” did not mean “well-controlled by the government.” It’s funny you mention training, because the Founders explicitly stated that everyone having the right to bear arms was the means to having a “well-regulated” (i.e. disciplined, trained, etc) militia. Militia simply meant (and even today, by law, it still means) any man of military age.

                1. I like how hoplophobes always gloss over the “necessary to a free state” bit. That makes it pretty fucking crystal clear that the 2A isn’t for there for hunting.

                2. I didn’t say well regulated meant “by the federal government.” But individuals owning personal arsenals because they harbor paranoid fantasies clearly does not fit the definition.

                  1. “A well-read Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read Books, shall not be infringed.”

                  2. How many firearms someone owns is irrelevant to how well-regulated the militia is (though people with more are probably better with them). And the average murderer isn’t a gun nut with huge arsenals at his house

          3. This shows your complete lack of honesty when it comes to this debate. If there is anyone here who still takes you seriously, even as a voice of opposition, you just made it clear they are fools to do so.

            Thanks for clarifying that you’re no better than some smug lefty pissing all over the comments section at Democratic Underground.

            1. The above is a reply to Tony’s comment from 11:43 AM. For some reason the re-posting of his comment did not come through.

              1. It was a direct response to his comment in the thread, seemed pretty clear to me.

        2. I have no problem with idiots talking about it. It’s when they stand on piles of corpses dishonestly claiming that their pet regulation would have saved these children and demanding that it be passed right now or else you want children to die that it becomes unseemly. And it becomes even more unseemly when they hold a public witch trial and then hold another one when the first isn’t hysterically sanctimonious enough for them. But no actual human being would ever do that, right Tony?

          1. If you want nothing to change, then you are tacitly endorsing the levels of gun deaths in this country. You are saying it is an appropriate price to pay for the freedom you think we are owed.

            1. The same is true re: support for dronez

            2. If you want nothing to change, then you are tacitly endorsing the levels of gun deaths in this country. You are saying it is an appropriate price to pay for the freedom you think we are owed.

              Or, we’re saying they have nothing to do with each other evidenced by the much higher rates of violent crime in nations where guns are strictly regulated or banned.

              1. Sloopy, the problem is you guys care about different things. T o n y (and liberals in general) cares about “gun deaths”, whereas you care about “violent crime”. The liberal mindset is that it’s better for 3 people to be stabbed and beaten to death than for 2 people to be shot to death. Also that you should punish people who aren’t doing any killing for what the killers did.

            3. Nope, you’re still taking it for granted that increased regulation would reduce the number of gun deaths in this country, which is largely what is under debate.

              But you know that.

              1. That’s why I was vague–I don’t know how to reduce gun deaths. I just know that the NRA and its minions of parrots don’t want to do anything whatsoever.

            4. What a dishonest pile of shit you are.

              We should make the sex illegal. If you disagree, then you are tacitly endorsing the current levels of rape in this country.

              Of course, the trend in this country for multiple decades has been less gun control, and violent crime is going down, so yeah, fuck you.

              Your intestinal derpitude is staggering.

            5. You are such a disingenuous fuck.

              The only reason our “gun deaths” numbers are high is because that is the weapon of choice for suicides.

    3. I wonder if the author has the same HIPAA concerns when it comes to all the mental health talk WRT firearm regulation

      1. Imagine my surprise to discover the author’s lack of concern for Adam Lanza’s HIPAA rights.

  3. Until we get full on school choice where parents can tell these tyrants “fuck you that is why”, I am really starting to think the answer to it is for parents to just kick these people’s asses. I thought for a while, the internet would end this by threat of embarrassment and shame. But clearly they are incapable of being embarrassed. So until we can just close down these places, I am open for suggestions on how to deal with them.

    1. we’re just opting out. my wife absolutely believes in public education, but after a few months of sending her stuff like this and “teach to the test” mentality, she’s bailed. it’s Catholic school or another private school.

      it was this article that finally did it.
      http://tinyurl.com/bxtx25c

      1. NoVa buddy how did *that* article work? The author was saying that, because of NCLB, schools have been forced to cut back on socialist indoctrination to teach more math and language skills. She says that like it’s a bad thing, which is strange.

  4. And how is that lovely young woman only in the 9th grade? She looks like she is 20 and not in a bad way.

    1. Some teenagers can look a lot older. I once saw a 7th-grade girl that looked…. developed enough to be at least a freshman in high school. During that period of my life I looked like i belonged in elementary.

      1. darius have you informed everyone at H&R of your criminal record as required under Megan’s Law?

        1. Yes, with pictures and they all said they would have hit that.

      2. Pic orr it didn’t happne! LOL!

        pedobot.uk.org

      3. a 7th-grade girl that looked…. developed enough to be at least a freshman in high school

        So I was hanging out in the chat room of a dating site (aka meat market) located in Hungary. This nick comes on and according to the public data, she’s 13. She says hi and I make a snarky remark about senior preschoolers being allowed on site. ‘She’ starts to get ‘flirty’, and eventually says: “but I’m a very well developed 13 years old!” So I say: “if you’re so well developed, tell me: what is the age of consent in Hungary?” (it is 14). ‘She’ immediately disappears.

        I would bet a month’s salary that ‘she’ was a cop trolling for ‘pedophiles’.

      4. So she looked 14-15 instead of 12-13? Not exactly earth shattering.

        1. No, she was 13-14 and looked 15-16. At that age range, there’s a big difference in both looks and legality.

        2. Yeah, not a big difference.

          1. First, there is a big different from a girl just going into puberty and one a couple of years later in appearance. Second, 16 makes someone legal for sexual conduct in most states, also a big deal.

    2. More at the Daily Mail.
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..-hair.html

      1. She is not as pretty in those picture. But she still looks a lot older than 14.

    3. Teenage girls nowadays grow up incredibly quick and are often incredibly slutty. There has never been a better time in history to be a 19-year-old high school dropout with a Camaro and a fake ID.

      1. I was born at just the wrong time. The 80s were a lousy time to be young. AIDS and the backlash against the fun people had in the 70s really sucked the fun out of life.

        1. Not to mention the way better music of the seventies.

          1. I seem to recall that it was possible to listen to ’70s music well into the ’80s through the magic of audio recordings.

        2. Ah, the eighties. Politically correct puritans to the left of me, fundamentalist puritans to the right.

          1. here I am, stuck in the middle with Bob Dylan.

  5. By contrast, suspending Brandon Guzda, a high school student from New York who posted an insulting comment about a teacher on Twitter, may seem like overkill?but at least has sound justification.

    That “sound justification” rings a little hollow when he’s required by law to show respect for people who make a living imprisoning innocent children.

  6. Can someone explain to me how that girl is a 9th grader? She literally looks 25 to me. If I was a bartender and she ordered a drink from me it would never occur to me to ask for ID

    1. I know. That girl needs to be kept at home. She could get a lot of people in trouble.

    2. The pics I saw of her when this was a story on Yahoo yesterday made her look a lot younger than that one.

      1. Maybe they caught her at just the right angle. Regardless, when she grows up, she is going to be quite attractive.

    3. just wait until she is 25. Then she’ll look 40.

      1. “50 is the new 40 for men. 50 is still 60 for women.”

      2. ^this

        In one of her pictures she already had smile lines.

        Generally, the young hot ones look washed up by the time they’re in their 20s. The late bloomers look hot later because they didn’t spend their youth partying.

    4. Also had the same thought.

  7. If school is supposed to prepare you for the real world, what lessons are we teaching children by acting like this?

    The kids are being taught that those in positions of authority are very often wrong.

    1. God willing it turns them into future libertarians. Unfortunately most of them will probably become wards of the state or the one’s administering the beatings.

      1. Why would experiences like this turn them into something they’ve never heard of?

        1. LOL Mad Max is Anarchists, Star Trek is socialist. LOL ROADDZZZZZZ.

          1. I … don’t get it.

            1. People have actually used Star Trek has an example of how socialism works better then anything else.

              I don’t get it either.

              1. What those people don’t realize is that Star Trek and Idiocracy are different views of the same reality.

                The 0.01% of people that are naturally ambitious and intelligent go to space to get the fuck away from the 99.99% of people that are fat lazy retards.

                1. Also, socialism is just fine and dandy when you can get anything you need out of a box on the wall.

                  1. Yeah, kind of like The Culture novels. I mean, yeah cool and all, but when you have omniscient morally perfect AIs to make all the hard calls, and tech that makes everything basically free yeah then socialism is no problem.

                    So if we get angels to make decisions, and wizards to magic all the stuff we need into existence, socialism works.

              2. Oh. Well, my point was just that most kids have never heard of libertarianism and would have no reason to become part of a movement they’ve never heard of.

              3. Well given the technology levels portrayed in Star Trek Socialism is a natural result and actually would probably work.

                See the problem with Star Trek is that it is a post scarcity society, they have easy reliable portable anti matter reactors providing effectively unlimited energy and then replicators to turn that energy into anything they would want.

                This means that the problems that markets are designed to solved (efficient allocation of resources) are effectively solved by technology (there are no limits of resources availabe so everyone can have everything they want).

                Something looking very much like socialism would be a natural outgrowth of this type of society

  8. If school is supposed to prepare you for the real world, what lessons are we teaching children by acting like this?

    I believe this is what is known as a “rhetorical question”.

  9. “I thought I could say what I want on Twitter in the luxury of my own home,” Guzda said.

    Sure you can, Kid.

    1. I love that “in the luxury of my own home”.

  10. What do you mean they’re not being trained for the real world?

    They’re being taught that “wrong” means “offending someone with power” which is totally preparing them for dealing with the police or an asshole boss in a world where rules are squishy and punishment is arbitrary.

    1. Thoughts are bad and they should be ashamed.

  11. If school is supposed to prepare you for the real world, what lessons are we teaching children by acting like this?

    Justice is a crap shoot. Fairness is a myth. You owe the Almighty State everything; It owes you nothing. Oh, yeah, and because FYTW.

  12. Remember, the people doing this are all Democrats.

    1. I would be surprised if the officials in Utah are Democrats.

      1. Eh, public education….no matter where you are, there’s going to be a lot of them there. 90% of them are women with education degrees. If Obama ever wanted to, he could literally walk into any public school in the country, point to the hottest teacher, and have her blow him in the bathroom. Hell, they’d compete for the honor.

    2. I doubt it. Republicans love arbitrary authority too.

  13. Prepping our future to OBEY.

  14. Fuck you,
    That’s why. That’s what
    You’ll learn at public school.
    And piss-poor economics, too.
    Kid lib.

    1. Red hair, green hair
      It matters not to me
      All that counts
      And what school amounts is
      You submit to state authority

  15. Did anyone watch the CNN video and see that principal? He’s got some extreme facial hair going on there.

    1. And also says some really stupid stuff.

  16. Sure, you can say it, but you will have to face the consequences. Word travels fast online, and once you say something it’s impossible to unsay it. Employees have lost jobs for venting about their bosses via social media. Better to learn this lesson now than later.

    Um, there’s a big fucking difference in a voluntary employer/employee relationship and a forced relationship of public school/student. And the rules for conduct of a student shouldn’t be anywhere close to those set by an employer and entered into voluntarily by their employee.

    Sorry, John, but I totally disagree with this paragraph until the day comes when a public school education is not mandated by the state (for those not able to afford homeschooling/private schools).

    1. Teachers, excuse me, educators, are just handing down the fucking speech codes they learned in college.

      1. At least in college they had free speech zones. These kids don’t enjoy that luxury in their own home.

        Fuck these nannies. I’ll never voluntarily send my kid to a public school.*

        *My two oldest are in public school because my ex-wife will not let me send them to private school or homeschool them even if I pay 100% of the cost because it “would be unfair to their stepbrothers and stepsister”.

        1. At least in college they had free speech zones

          and none of them saw the irony

        2. Ah yes, everyone must be equally poor off.

    2. Yep. It will be a bright, shining day when every government school student tweets daily, “Fuck off, slavers! And yes, I mean all y’all prison guards.”

    3. Technically, there is a choice of going to a non-public school. He also did say that the punishment was overkill. Let’s not raise a generation of kids thinking they can do whatever they want with no consequences.

      What happens when you consistently call the police a bunch of useless fuckbags, then one day you need their help for something? Should they hold what you said against you? No. Will they? Almost guaranteed.

      1. What happens when you consistently call the police a bunch of useless fuckbags, then one day you need their help for something?

        I can’t think of any reason I’d even need the police. If someone breaks into my home, I can defend it (if I’m there). If I have a dog problem, I can shoot it myself. If my property is stolen, I can hire a private investigator. If I am involved in a traffic accident, I can exchange information and seek recompense in the courts.

        The only reason I would call the police is if I felt suicidal.

        1. The only reason I would call the police is if I felt suicidal.

          Or if, for some reason, I really wanted to have my entire life ruined and perhaps not die.

        2. I suppose I’ll let you get away with avoiding the point because what, at this point, difference does it make.

        3. You forget that sometimes you need a police report for insurance purposes. But you can usually do those kinds of things over the phone.

    4. Seriously. And why the hell do you care what some twerp says on Twitter? Your job is to teach. You are not the moral guidance, or the inspiration in their lives. You convey information and skills to them. If they’re disruptive in class, kick them out.

      What pisses me off about most teachers is they have this crusader thing, like they watched Stand and Deliver and decided to give speeches and “break through” to the children. Fuck that. That guy (forgot his name) was not a great teacher because he made speeches, he was a great teacher because his students could do fucking calculus in May when they couldn’t in September.

      Do your fucking job. You’re not supposed to be their friend, their mentor, their shoulder to cry on. You’re supposed to teach them the subject you were hired to teach.

      1. ^^THIS^^

        There was about a 500 post thread a few months ago about the dipshit redneck dad who shot his daughter’s laptop because she “disrespected him on facebook”. I was of the opinion that her blowing steam on facebook is what kids do. Everyone blows off steam and bitches to their friends. If you are kid it is usually about your parents and your teachers. If you are an adult, it is usually about your boss.

        I don’t look at something on Twitter or Facebook as the same as saying something to someone’s face, especially when it involves kids. So what asshole, your kid or your students don’t always like you and tell their friends about it. Big fucking deal.

        1. A lot of teachers are in it for the petty power. There is no other job where they give someone just out of college absolute power over 20 or 30 people.

          1. Sure there is – the military.

            A dumbass teacher at least (probably) won’t get you killed or captured. A Lieutenant thinks that’s his whole job.

        2. If you want to bitch about somebody behind their back then doing it right out in the open isn’t the way to go. There is nothing private about Twitter or Facebook. Generally, if you put something there then everyone can see it.

      2. Wrong. Teachers are heroes. So are police officers, fire fighters, and EMT’s. Also, doctors and nurses. And building code inspectors. And meat/poultry inspectors. Basically, anyone on a government payroll is a hero.

        The sooner you fucking peasants understand this, the better this country will be.

        1. Don’t forget the auto workers. And I mean only the unionized ones. RtW operations and independent workers are either greedy capitalists or an exploited underclass misled by false consciousness instilled in them by the Koch Brothers and Fox News.

      3. Without fail, the worst teachers I had were the ones who wanted to “make a difference”.

  17. What the people reporting it should have done is get a police officer from the Seattle area to go in to the doctor’s office and ask for it without getting a warrant. Apparently that’s perfectly legal and in no way a violation of HIPAA rules.

    But if a police officer does it, it’s not illegal; you know, just like selling heroin, or guns. Or beating up female bartenders because they have committed a discrimination crime by trying to refuse to serve an alcoholic.

    1. I’ll never forget that night when the local cops decided to get loaded at the bar in the restaurant where I worked. I could see how distraught the poor bartender was. I mean, you’ve got these guys who are disrupting the place, driving out customers, but what can you do? They’re on-upping each other on stories of dealing out violence, clearly loving every second of choking and clubbing people, and what can you do? Ask them to leave? Refuse to serve them? Call the cops? Basically the bartender was held hostage until they decided to leave. It was pretty scary.

  18. Let’s not raise a generation of kids government employees thinking they can do whatever they want with no consequences.

    Too late.

  19. Who can be against stamping out any signs of individuality? Come on Comrades, get with the pogram.

      1. I think pogram is a good portmanteau.

    1. The New Soviet Man isn’t going to create himself.

  20. “The 2nd grader who was suspended for playing with an imaginary grenade and “trying to save the world.””

    I agree with the points they are making, but Reason should not use this example. This kid was not suspended for throwing imaginary grenades, but for throwing rocks. And it was a 2hour IN SCHOOL suspension. I know this because my kid attends a school in the district, and there was a lot of reporting and a school-board investigation and disclosure about it.

    There has been a lot of back and forth he-said-she-said reported on this, but after weeks of information it appears to me (and again, I tend to side against schools) that the mother is an attention whore who has a history of publicity stunts like this.

    Sure, there is a dispute about whether or not the kid was really throwing rocks, but if he really was throwing rocks at other kids, this punishment isn’t nearly as crazy reason implies…it is probably about right.

    1. Well, we just need to ban rocks then.

    2. In school suspension is the best punishment ever. It’s quiet study time without the teacher bothering you, and a chance to make friends with the principal.

  21. Wonder why home schooling is getting more common?

  22. if he really was throwing rocks at other kids, this punishment isn’t nearly as crazy reason implies…it is probably about right.

    Back when Fred Flintstone and I were terrorizing the elementary school playground, the entirety of the “punishment” would have involved one of the teachers saying, “HEY! Knock it off.”

    1. Wasn’t there a time when simply telling the parents that their kid was misbehaving like that sufficient to ensure punishment?

      Today it seems like the parents would be aghast that their precious snowflake did something wrong and would try to diagnose him/her with some disorder.

    2. Hey, I remember getting hit in the head during a rock fight at recess. I went and got it stitched up and we all got yelled at by the teacher and that was that…no more rock fights. We were forced to resume our “smear the queer” games for violent entertainment and exercise. And yes, bones were broken and eyes were blackened in those games with nary a complaint from parents.

      Kids today aren’t pussies, but their parents sure as shit are.

      1. The schools don’t want to get sued. That’s what it comes down to. Kid gets hurt and the parents sue the school. That’s why kids can’t hardly play outside anymore. Kid skins his knees on the neighbor’s driveway and the neighbor gets sued.

        The trial lawyers and the judges who entertain these lawsuits should be lined up and shot.

      2. Well, considering that things like health insurance and broken arms cost 800x as much as they used to and often lead to investigations by the empire-building bureaucrats at CPS, I can kind of understand why parents are reluctant to allow anything that would harm their children. As usual, the primary cause of pussification is overbearing government.

        1. It’s a vicious cycle, as pussification is also the primary cause of overbearing government.

  23. because it “would be unfair to their stepbrothers and stepsister”.

    Weeping Jesus.

    I can’t believe you were able to restrain yourself from pushing her in front of a train.

    1. I’m an ardent supporter of the California HSR project for just this reason, even though I fear it will not be completed in time.

  24. By contrast, suspending Brandon Guzda, a high school student from New York who posted an insulting comment about a teacher on Twitter, may seem like overkill?but at least has sound justification.

    “I thought I could say what I want on Twitter in the luxury of my own home,” Guzda said.

    Sure, you can say it, but you will have to face the consequences. Word travels fast online, and once you say something it’s impossible to unsay it. Employees have lost jobs for venting about their bosses via social media. Better to learn this lesson now than later.

    There is no justification for this. Brandon tweeted these things at home–not at school. What he was doing did not interfere with school in any way. Oh, the teacher had every right to be annoyed, and he might even choose to speak to Brandon about it, but he had no right to bring in official punishment. The school has no right to punish you for telling people you don’t like your teacher in your home.

    And equating theis to works perpetuates the perversion of the teacher/student relationship. In the teacher/student relationship, the teacher is theemployee, not the employer. They’re doing a job for the student. If this relationship could be re-affirmed, we might see some improvement in our schools.

  25. “equating theis to works”

    Jeez.

    ‘equating this to work’

  26. I’ll accept them taking my guns before they can take my redheads.

    1. You have more than one? Glutton for punishment?

      1. Give me all the redheads.

        Well, that’s not quite true. Give me half of the redheads. But let me pick which half.

  27. Oh, the memories….
    Eleven years ago this week, my son was sent home from middle school for showing up with his hair colored blue, in violation the school rule forbidding unnatural, extreme, and/or distracting hair color. They were quite stern with me, promising suspension for as long as it took for him to comply.

    I was polite and deferential in reply, assuring them that it was with the sincerest regret that I had to point out that:

    1. They were addressing the wrong person, since it wasn’t my hair under discussion, it was his, and
    2. If the ban was on unnatural/distracting/extreme hair color, they also needed to send home any olive-skinned girls with white-blonde bleached hair, for starters.

    That was the Thursday before Presidents’ Day; the following week was February school vacation, after which he returned to school, the entire subject having been conveniently forgotten.

    The upside of sending your kids to public school is the wealth of opportunities offered for helping them recognize and stand up to arbitrary, illegitimate authority.

  28. Sure, you can say it, but you will have to face the consequences. Word travels fast online, and once you say something it’s impossible to unsay it. Employees have lost jobs for venting about their bosses via social media. Better to learn this lesson now than later.

    A teacher is nothing like a boss at a private employer.

    A teacher is like a town mayor or a police officer or a municipal garbage man.

    So basically you’re saying that it’s important for kids to learn the lesson that they shouldn’t criticize their mayor, the police, or the city’s garbage service online.

    Is that really what you mean?

    1. My younger daughter had a third grade teacher assure the class that our sun is the largest star in the Milky Way. My son’s sixth grade teacher dated the attack on Pearl Harbor as 12/7/1942. My older daughter was scolded by a seventh grade English teacher for bringing in age-inappropriate dirty books of no literary value for reading Lolita and The Killer Inside Me to read during free-reading period. I don’t believe there is any argument to be made for encouraging uncritical or respectful deference to the adults in charge simply because they are the adults in charge.

    2. My younger daughter had a third grade teacher assure the class that our sun is the largest star in the Milky Way. My son’s sixth grade teacher dated the attack on Pearl Harbor as 12/7/1942. My older daughter was scolded by a seventh grade English teacher for bringing in age-inappropriate dirty books of no literary value for reading Lolita and The Killer Inside Me to read during free-reading period. I don’t believe there is any argument to be made for encouraging uncritical or respectful deference to the adults in charge simply because they are the adults in charge.

      1. Fucking squirrels.

  29. If school is supposed to prepare you for the real world, what lessons are we teaching children by acting like this?

    that the real post-911 world is run by government jackholes who have no perspective on risk or safety, and that when they get out of school, they’re facing a very ugly existence full of warantless wiretapping, random drone killing and secret kill lists.

  30. By the way, that’s Clairol #56. Exact same color my ex-wife favored.

  31. It’s like blackface for non-gingers.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.