School Board Bans Yearbook Photo Of Student Posing With Shotgun
LONDONDERRY, N.H.-- The school board has voted to ban a photo of a student from the senior section of his high school yearbook because he is posed with a shotgun.
They didn't ban the photo, they only said it had to be in the sports section of the book where it belonged.
If a senior submitted a photo of themself in a football uniform or swimsuit for their senior picture, I'd hope they could bar it from the senior photo section of the book as well.
Since when does every student get to decide where pictures in the yearbook go? It's a fine photo for the sports section, but they still need an appropriate senior photo.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 09:10am.]
Nice of crabhole to dismiss the fact that the school board's policy manual says school sponsored publications will be free from all policy restrictions.
I'll have to remember that crabhole will always fail to comprehend what's printed in front of him.
"I'd want the one of me in a scuba outfit on the front cover."
I want to be dressed as a riverboat gambler. Black suit, black hat. Bolo tie with a rattlesnake clasp. Clint Eastwood style cigar. Lucky pair of graveyard boots.
So let me get this straight. In crabhole's world, you can walk down main street unrestricted sticking a needle in your arm BUT a high school senior IS restricted where his/her class picture can go in a yearbook even though the school board's very own policy manual states school publications are FREE from ANY restrictions.
They didn't ban the photo, they only said it had to be in the sports section of the book where it belonged. crabgrass 10/13/04 9:08am
You appear to have some difficulty in comphrehension.
They didn't ban the photo,
From the story
Last month the yearbook staff, adviser, principal and superintendent chose to bar the photo from the yearbook, saying the firearm was inappropriate.
They banned it.
Because the student chose to make trouble, (which you consider wrong for people not you), they now decided
But Tuesday's unanimous vote also backed a compromise: Blake Douglass can have the photo published in a "community sports" section, and a new photo -- without the gunbut featuring other elements of skeet and trap shooting -- can appear in the seniors' section of the Londonderry High School yearbook
Oh yeah, the compromise still bans the photo
. He can have the photo published in the sports section only if the dread shotgun is digitally replaced by a walkie talkie.
They didn't ban the photo, they only said it had to be in the sports section of the book where it belonged.
I worry about your self-loathing issues. That's the only explanation why you have adopted the personahere of a stupid lying scumbag.
But Tuesday's unanimous vote also backed a compromise: Blake Douglass can have the photo published in a "community sports" section, and a new photo -- without the gun but featuring other elements of skeet and trap shooting -- can appear in the seniors' section of the Londonderry High School yearbook.
speaking of reading comprehension,this clearly says that he can have the photo, gun and all, published in the community sports section where if belongs.Actually, I'd think that othe sports pariphernalia would be just as inappropriate. I'm not sure the compromise was a good idea.
And not only that, he can have his picture in the senior section with other skeet parapernalia, just not the gun. It's like saying that his senior photo can be posed in front of a tennis net, but he shouldn't be holding a tennis raquet. Now, if if they let other senior photos have students with their sporting props, maybe he has a point. Otherwise, put it in the proper section. No banning, no restriction, just good editing of the yearbook that is, after all, for everyone. I mean, if you have a green Bay fan submit a photo of himself with a cheese head for his senior picture, you don't put it in with all the other students' pictures that actually took their picture seriously and want their yearbook to look like a proper yearbook, do you?
It was just an innappropriate picture for THAT SECTION of the yearbook. They are still going to put it in the yearbook, gun and all, just not in the formal senior pictures section.
Yeah. I screwed up. It's early here. I still need coffee 'kay.
But despite what you think is appropriate to make it "look like a proper yearbook" (you really ARE a bit priggish, ya know?), those of us who have been following the original storyknow
Londonderry High School allows seniors to submit their own yearbook photos. Photos often show students posing with musical instruments or vehicles.
allows seniors to submit their own yearbook photos. Photos often show students posing with musical instruments or vehicles.
If they are supposed to submit these picture for the express purpose of being used as the Senior picture and not just allowed to submit their own photos for use somewhere in the book, if other sudents have their Senior Picture as a hobby photo, then the kid certainly has a case.
The funny thing is, the kid has obviously gone to a great deal of trouble to have the photo taken correctly. Holding the broken down gun over the shoulder of his skeet sweater just screams "responsible". It's obviously a sport that he takes quite seriously as a sport. It's not a picture of bubba taking potshots at the neighborhood cat in the back yard. That they are allowing it in the sports section alone validates this very thing.
What if the token black at the school submits a photo of himself in full gangsta regalia brandishing a glock? I wonder.
But if this is the way they are supposed to use the Senior Picture, then the kid has a valid case.
Seniors in High School hunt. Would they have preferred a picture of him next to a freshly gutted deer?
Nice. Bet you didn't even think about what you were saying when you posted that, did ya?
Just a thought.
My school had a few token blacks and if the school had had such a policy, he probably would have done just that, for a laugh. He was a funny guy that way.
You don't think there are any black kids in gangs?
It was a racialcomment, but not a racist one. It mearly recognise a racist situation that already exists. I wasn't making any judgements on it, only wondering what kind of judgement the fools on this particular school board would have made about it.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 05:08pm.]
"Kerry's support for the recently expired ban on assault weapons, legislation that would have put a federal tax on ammunition or would have outlawed a type ofarmor-piercing bullet used by some deer hunters, is an example of why Kerry is wrong for gun advocates, LaPierre said."
and:
"But Northland Democrats, who later rallied in the same room as the NRA, said La-Pierre was carefully manipulating the facts about Kerry's voting record. Kerry's support for banning armor-piercing bullets, commonly called "cop-killer" bullets, is an example of the NRA's spin, said state Sen. David Tomassoni, DFL-Chisholm.
"'I don't know what the NRA is thinking," Tomassoni said. "Unless the deer now have Kevlar and that's why we need the Kevlar-piercing bullets."'
Rick: I think PETA is raising money for those Kevlar vests that fit the deer. They want to even the playing field this deer season.
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Oct 14, 2004 at 07:08am.]
School Board Bans Yearbook Photo Of Student Posing With Shotgun
LONDONDERRY, N.H.-- The school board has voted to ban a photo of a student from the senior section of his high school yearbook because he is posed with a shotgun.
http://www.wftv.com/education/3804944/detail.htmlÂ
Oh my, not an evil Gun! We can't even have a picture of one. We must protect their innocent minds!
Â
I hope his attorney and the NRA bury that school.
They didn't ban the photo, they only said it had to be in the sports section of the book where it belonged.
If a senior submitted a photo of themself in a football uniform or swimsuit for their senior picture, I'd hope they could bar it from the senior photo section of the book as well.
Since when does every student get to decide where pictures in the yearbook go? It's a fine photo for the sports section, but they still need an appropriate senior photo.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 09:10am.]
No restrictions on drug use but crabhole sees restrictions on photos...amazing!
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
No restrictions on drug use but crabhole sees restrictions on photos...amazing!
Heh.
"Only from the mind of.... Crabby"
correct location in a yearbook is now "restrictions"
why even bother having an editor?
nice to see you guys dismiss a unanimous school board vote though.
I'll have to remember that the next time a school board wants to ban a book from a library.
I actually agree with you on this one, Crabby.
Torp makes a great point though. Don't you think?
Nice of crabhole to dismiss the fact that the school board's policy manual says school sponsored publications will be free from all policy restrictions.
I'll have to remember that crabhole will always fail to comprehend what's printed in front of him.
Â
I don't see anything so bad about that kid's picture. If he's proud of his shotgun I'd say place it in there for posterity.
He's the one who's going to have to look at it for the rest of his life. Earnest Hemingway, he ain't.
But schools get sued for things like that these days. It may happen here.
But what the hell, it's only taxpayer money.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Oct 13, 2004 at 10:28am.]
They haven't restricted anything, only asked that it be put in the proper section of the book.
nice to see you guys dismiss a unanimous school board vote though.
I think the Reichstag was often unanimous after January 1933. And probably the politburo.
So, laws aren't alwaysright?
the hell you say.
So, laws aren't alwaysright?
I have said that many times. Most frequently when the federal court's rule in areas where the federal government has been given no jurisdiction.
Like medical marijuana for instance.
Free from ALL policy restrictions, crabhole. What part of ALL don't you understand?????????
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
I guess that if we each get to decide where our pictures go, I'd want the one of me in a scuba outfit on the front cover.
There was no "restriction" here. The photo is just being put in it's proper section.
Like medical marijuana for instance.
The "proper" section would be where the kid wants it. Free from ALL policy restrictions.
"I'd want the one of me in a scuba outfit on the front cover."
I want to be dressed as a riverboat gambler. Black suit, black hat. Bolo tie with a rattlesnake clasp. Clint Eastwood style cigar. Lucky pair of graveyard boots.
Man, I'd be lookin' good...
I'd want one of me wearing a codpiece and purple velvet hat, placed in between the pictures of the girl's volleyball and field hockey teams.
So let me get this straight. In crabhole's world, you can walk down main street unrestricted sticking a needle in your arm BUT a high school senior IS restricted where his/her class picture can go in a yearbook even though the school board's very own policy manual states school publications are FREE from ANY restrictions.
"shut the fuck up" - Torpedo-8
Another surrender by the pinko pacifist.
Torpedo-8 10/13/04 1:03pm
Were you expecting something else?
You appear to have some difficulty in comphrehension.
From the story
They banned it.
Because the student chose to make trouble, (which you consider wrong for people not you), they now decided
Oh yeah,
the compromise still bans the photo
. He can have the photo published in the sports section only if the dread shotgun is digitally replaced by a walkie talkie.
I worry about your self-loathing issues. That's the only explanation why you have adopted the personahere of a stupid lying scumbag.
It reads to me like he can have his gun in the sports section.
A walkie-talkie would look kinda strange.
You use that in skeet shooting? I thought you just yelled "Pull!" and they launched the little round thing out there.
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Oct 13, 2004 at 02:11pm.]
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
speaking of reading comprehension,this clearly says that he can have the photo, gun and all, published in the community sports section where if belongs.Actually, I'd think that othe sports pariphernalia would be just as inappropriate. I'm not sure the compromise was a good idea.
And not only that, he can have his picture in the senior section with other skeet parapernalia, just not the gun. It's like saying that his senior photo can be posed in front of a tennis net, but he shouldn't be holding a tennis raquet. Now, if if they let other senior photos have students with their sporting props, maybe he has a point. Otherwise, put it in the proper section. No banning, no restriction, just good editing of the yearbook that is, after all, for everyone. I mean, if you have a green Bay fan submit a photo of himself with a cheese head for his senior picture, you don't put it in with all the other students' pictures that actually took their picture seriously and want their yearbook to look like a proper yearbook, do you?
It was just an innappropriate picture for THAT SECTION of the yearbook. They are still going to put it in the yearbook, gun and all, just not in the formal senior pictures section.
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 02:15pm.]
Yeah. I screwed up. It's early here. I still need coffee 'kay.
But despite what you think is appropriate to make it "look like a proper yearbook" (you really ARE a bit priggish, ya know?), those of us who have been following the original storyknow
[Edited by on Oct 13, 2004 at 02:49pm.]
That didn't stop Steven Spielberg from releasing ET - The ExtraTerrestrial - The Director's Cut
There's another movie I won't see.
My God are you screwed up, crabhole!!! Community Sports without the gun. Gun and all in the Community Sports.
Why do you refuse to address the no restrictions policy of the school board??
"Quit talking to me crabgrass" - Torpedo-8
If they are supposed to submit these picture for the express purpose of being used as the Senior picture and not just allowed to submit their own photos for use somewhere in the book, if other sudents have their Senior Picture as a hobby photo, then the kid certainly has a case.
The funny thing is, the kid has obviously gone to a great deal of trouble to have the photo taken correctly. Holding the broken down gun over the shoulder of his skeet sweater just screams "responsible". It's obviously a sport that he takes quite seriously as a sport. It's not a picture of bubba taking potshots at the neighborhood cat in the back yard. That they are allowing it in the sports section alone validates this very thing.
What if the token black at the school submits a photo of himself in full gangsta regalia brandishing a glock? I wonder.
But if this is the way they are supposed to use the Senior Picture, then the kid has a valid case.
Seniors in High School hunt. Would they have preferred a picture of him next to a freshly gutted deer?
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 04:48pm.]
anyone explain to them about the football team yet?
What if the token black at the school submits a photo of himself in full gangsta regalia brandishing a glock?
Nice. Bet you didn't even think about what you were saying when you posted that, did ya?
Just a thought.
My school had a few token blacks and if the school had had such a policy, he probably would have done just that, for a laugh. He was a funny guy that way.
[Edited by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 05:03pm.]
Just a thought.
AÂ racist one.
How do you figure?
You don't think there are any black kids in gangs?
It was a racialcomment, but not a racist one. It mearly recognise a racist situation that already exists. I wasn't making any judgements on it, only wondering what kind of judgement the fools on this particular school board would have made about it.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by molegrass on Oct 13, 2004 at 05:08pm.]
Yeah Dan, everyone knows that black people dress like "Gansta's" and carry Glocks.
Some do (white kids too!), others might see that policy as a way to poke fun at people because of it.
Besides yourself crabhole, how many token stoners were in your school?
Why do you keep trying to talk to me if you don't want me to talk to you?
Kerry a threat to heavily-armed deer hunters
"Kerry's support for the recently expired ban on assault weapons, legislation that would have put a federal tax on ammunition or would have outlawed a type ofarmor-piercing bullet used by some deer hunters, is an example of why Kerry is wrong for gun advocates, LaPierre said."
and:
"But Northland Democrats, who later rallied in the same room as the NRA, said La-Pierre was carefully manipulating the facts about Kerry's voting record. Kerry's support for banning armor-piercing bullets, commonly called "cop-killer" bullets, is an example of the NRA's spin, said state Sen. David Tomassoni, DFL-Chisholm.
"'I don't know what the NRA is thinking," Tomassoni said. "Unless the deer now have Kevlar and that's why we need the Kevlar-piercing bullets."'
Rick: I think PETA is raising money for those Kevlar vests that fit the deer. They want to even the playing field this deer season.
[Edited 3 times. Most recently by on Oct 14, 2004 at 07:08am.]
"There is nothing John Kerry will do to take guns away from hunters," Huntley said.
Now who in their right mind would believe this?
People who don't buy into scaremongering.
No. Only the gullible.
You're the gullible one, jethro. LaPierre is a huckster. He's even on Pay-per-view like Vince McMahon, Summerslam and Extreme Fighting.
He debates that woman from the Yewnited Nashuns.
[Edited 4 times. Most recently by on Oct 14, 2004 at 08:56am.]