“Firearm Look-Alike”
As much as we support law and order, we’ve always believed that the one-size-fits-all approach of Zero Tolerance makes no sense. But now it’s being carried to really dumb extremes.
Consider, if you will, the case of Nathan Entingh, a ten-year-old fifth grader in the Columbus, Ohio, school system. He was suspended for making a gun shape with his fingers in science class, pointing them at a friend and saying, “Boom.”
Come on, folks! When are we going to stop being stupid about things like this?
If Nathan was being seriously disruptive in class, that would be one thing. But his suspension was due to producing in school “a firearm look-alike.”
Nathan is lucky the principal didn’t call in Columbus PD SWAT, because you know how easy it is to mistake those bent fingers for Glocks and Sig Sauers.
The question should be: How is this behavior damaging to the school environment or promoting violent ideation or behavior in children? And the answer is that it is not.
Does anyone think that playing with toy guns leads to committing crimes with real guns? Does anyone think it makes kids more violent? And if you think so, where are the studies and statistics to support that notion?
Does anyone think that pointing a finger in a gun-like gesture has any effect compared to the zillions of hours of violent video games most boys play by the time they’re young adults?
The punishment of adults can often be justified strictly in terms of retribution. If the punishment involves prison, simple warehousing of a dangerous offender offers sufficient logic. With teens, appropriate and effective punishment can be a gray area, depending on the offense. But when we punish preadolescents – whether at home, in school, or by the courts – there should be some positive, constructive and corrective goal in mind.
Does anyone think that singling out young Nathan and punishing him for something every one of us has done at one time or another is going to be beneficial or constructive to him or his classmates?
Does it occur to anyone that what Nathan did may be no more or less than an indication of imagination? I don’t think anyone from my elementary school class turned out to be a felon. But if we were handled the way Nathan is, the whole school – at least all of the boys – would have been suspended indefinitely.
School administrators need to direct their efforts in both education and discipline to where they are most effective and useful. And here’s one humble suggestion about how to know if they’ve made the right decisions:
Common sense.
Here is more information on the case.
http://www.post-gazette.com/local/city/2014/03/06/DNA-yields-arrest-of-neighbor-in-Wolfe-sisters-double-homicide/stories/201403060259
There are more questions about the post offense behavior. First why drive just one mile away in a stolen car? Particularly why did he go to places where he would be seen throwing away pieces of evidence? He could have gone home and thrown the items in the trash. Or at least thrown them away in places where there no visible cameras.
The timeline of the events is in this link.
http://www.post-gazette.com/image/2014/03/05/doublebig-png
The number of times that the door was opened and closed could imply more than one suspect. If she was meeting someone and let them in then two people left three minutes apart. However if the second time was her inviting the suspect inside then the last two times the door opened were the sister coming home and the suspect leaving 3 minutes later.
There also was a dna mixture. Which could mean more than one suspect assuming the other dna is not from one of the victims.
There is also timeline that was published about the case. Would John be interested in looking at this?
That would be good.
Yes, but how do we know it was the school who first talked to the press about the pointing the finger and not the parents going to the press saying that was why.
On a slightly related note, yesterday the NRA condemned Facebook for their press release stating they are tightening their policies and no longer going to allow sales of illegal unregistered firearms, which included assault weapons, on Facebook, saying it was a violation of the First Amendment. Why do they think that law outweighs the law saying you can’t sell guns illegally, and why do they waste their time defending those who sell illegal firearms? It only makes them less credible.
I agree with you Mark. Punishing this child for this is not going to beneficial or constructive for him or his classmates and may even create behavioral problems that didn’t exist before.
Playing with toy guns does not mean children will grow up and be violent.
When I was growing up we used to watch Westerns and we played cowboys and Indians, and we turned out alright.
Schools do not seem to be as much about education these days as they are about political correctness and propaganda.
A little common sense would be a plus in some of these situations, but unfortunately common sense isn’t very common.
Well said, Sherry.
Well, thing is, they’d told him to stop it three different days, according to the radio report I heard. So it was as much for disobeying them and being disruptive as anything.
If he was being disruptive in class, Cornerstone, that’s one thing, and should be addressed. But then they should tell it like it is and not try to hide behind this ridiculous firearm look-alike directive. When I was disruptive in class (I know, hard to believe!) the teacher would deal with it directly, as would my parents.
Thanks for the comment.