Student Questioned on Anti-War Artwork

[chewie837]

The last line of the article sums up my views perfectly.

I don't believe the threat to the president was the issue. Violent minors are treated the same way wether they make a threat to students or teachers, or to the president. The teacher was just afraid of another messed up student opening fire with automatics in the future.

Personally I would love to see this challenged in the courts. Would it fall in the same category as flag burning as protected? Or would the violent content overrule that? I predict the former.

 

[Kore]

Okay, maybe it doesn't reflect it perfectly. How about: I don't think teenagers expressing violence in their anti war art is anything to worry about?

 

[LunarSolaris]

I guess that's what made it an interesting article for me (and something that I thought might be worthy of debate).

Syxx... to clarify just a bit for you - the U.S. constitution does, in fact, allow for freedom of speech and expression. However, that expression does have certain limits (that I believe that most would agree with for some obvious reasons). For example, it's illegal to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. While we have the freedom to say what we wish - if it causes overt harm to others in the expression, then it's illegal. Likewise, if someone makes an overt threat toward another person or a direct threat - that is also illegal. It's the later reason that this artwork was reported to school authorities & law enforcement was involved.

Also, just to clarify for everyone - I typed out this article as it appeared in the local Yakima paper from a few days ago. It wasn't a web article. Well... ok, so it's a web article now that I've uhhhhhhh, posted it on the web. :teeth:

My original question had to do with the response to the artwork and whether or not the action that was taken was appropriate or over the top. I guess to me it seems a little over the top to have had the Secret Service involved. It would have made more sense had it been dealt with on the level of the school instead of law enforcement involvement. It really makes me wonder if this would have been dealt with differently prior to the Patriot Act... and perhaps my intent was to sneak that in to begin with...

Mostly, I was curious as to other opinions.

 

[tydon]

Also, freedom of expression in schools is conditional.

It must not harm the learning enviroment, threaten the learning enviroment, or basically cause any problems in schools.

Not that this case applies to that, but I am just clarifying for the poster who was not sure on the constitution.

This was decided in a court case.

 

[eddy]

People i don't see how having a giant bush head on a stick is violent. . . unless it some how directly implied it was the actual decapitated head of George Bush, otherwise nothing violent about that.

 

[IDupedInMyPants]

I don't see why you need an act of outright physical violence to be worried about a kid's stability.

Granted going to the secret service was a bit overboard, but it's good that questions were asked and I like to think anyone in that teacher's situation would have asked similar questions.

 

[chewie837]

Also, freedom of expression in schools is conditional.

It must not harm the learning enviroment, threaten the learning enviroment, or basically cause any problems in schools.

Not that this case applies to that, but I am just clarifying for the poster who was not sure on the constitution.

This was decided in a court case.

The case I can think of is the one about suspending students for wearing the black armbands in school to protest the Vietnam War. Violated dress code was the excuse. I believe the opinion went something like 'The freedom of speech is not checked at the schoolroom door.'

But the TLO case might also factor, which established "reasonableness" as opposed to probable cause for searches in schools. Like I said, this would make a great court case.

 

[Plum]

I think Bethel SD v Fraser would be more applicable than the search and seizure issue in reasoning why this kid shouldn't necessarily be coming up with these pictures. It was eventually decided for that case that a school can limit typical freedom of speech even if the student isn't necessarily disruptive.

 

[tydon]

I was refering to the bethel case. His speech was offensive, and harmed the learning enviroment in the opinion of the judges. Basically, what Plum said with a limitation. The school must have a reason to limit speech. The reason could be stupid, but if they have it, generally its accepted.

 

[Vorzheva]

Ah..I had drawn some pictures once, some woman (Shi) holding a sword, and sephiroth. Didn't turn them in to the teacher, but they saw em. Also, I found this, I thought at the time, a...not sure how to phrase it, anyways, it delt with making a deal to lucifer, and a teacher saw that. I wear black, have for years and years, so that was another strike when they decided to have me talk to my guidence counselor. He thought I was a satanist (I'm atheist..same thing to a christian? ) He thought I was learning German so I could read devil incantations, (you should really learn Latin for that) *shrug* I think it's a bit over the top, but that's the way America is right now.

 

[LuckyDwarf]

Devil-bush+missiles, I don't understand any qualms over it. It isn't immediately violent (no blood, gore or physical violence), and is no different then what political satirists draw for the daily newspaper.

The boy is only 15-years-old, so there is still time to bend him to the will of our corporate masters. At his age it's not too late to lead them blindly. Political Satirists are most undoubtfully adults, which have found their paths. Just a disclaimer, I'm completely full of **** and this isn't serious, nor is it an attempt at humor. Weird... why am I even saying this? Hmm.. can't remember, too busy conforming to other peoples' ideas.

Lucky

 

[Josh]

I'm sure glad the teachers never found some of the drawings I made of them when I was in high school.

 

[Kore]

I'm sure glad the teachers never found some of the drawings I made of them when I was in high school.

Luckily I had no artistic talent whatsoever and while stick figure death is funny there's no way to say it was meant to be any specific person.

 

[AeroJonesy]

Luckily I had no artistic talent whatsoever and while stick figure death is funny there's no way to say it was meant to be any specific person.

Heh. I've spent hours in class devising ways for my stick figures to kill themselves. I'm totally not suicidal, it's just that stick people are all I can draw. And I found the class boring.

The toaster in the bathtub was classy.

As to this, I think the drawing is pretty violent. The only way you get someone's head on a stick is to kill them, decapitate them, and handle the severed head long enough to stab it through the neck, into the brain with a stick. The violence is certainly implied.

I just think it's kind of sad we have a kid drawing decapitation pictures of world leaders in class. This kid is pretty young. I wonder what influences him...

edit: It definitely needs to be emphasized that this wasn't some sketch in a notebook the kid made during class. He turned it into his art teacher, presumably for an assignment.

 

[Yaboosh]

Bethel was a student trying to win a Student Government election by spouting profanities and sexual innuendo to an auditorium full of fellow students.

The boy in this case was significantly less public about things. How did he disrupt learning? Pure speech, like that found in Tinker (black armbands protesting Vietnam) has been found to be protected, even while at school.

"The prohibition of expression of one particular opinion, at least without evidence that it is necessary to avoid material and substantial interference with schoolwork or discipline, is not constitutionally permissible."

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=393&invol=503

Now, this seems more akin to the recent diaries found by students with hitlists contained within, and about that, I know little. I am going to research it a bit though.

 

[bigD72]

Didn't read anything but the article in this thread...

I think the boy has a good head on his shoulders and a fairly nice working brain in that head.

As for the teacher and the cop, maybe they should have their heads impaled on sticks, because they don't one of the key forms of argumentation or attention grabbing known as over exaggeration or have never seen a political cartoon. Granted this is more extreme than a political cartoon, but once again over exaggeration.

 

[Plum]

After reading the article again, I noticed that I had managed to skip this: "The artwork was apparently part of an assignment to keep a notebook of drawings, according to Kevin Cravens of Richland, who said he was a family friend of the boy."

I was going on the assumption that since it was an art class assignment, it would probably be displayed. Sorry about that.

In that case, I only see Bethel as being applicable when it says that it's the duty of the school system to "inculcate the habits and manners of civility as values conducive to both happiness and to the practice of self-government" (the statement quoted it from some other source). Beyond that, they aren't very similar cases I suppose.

My earlier reading mistake threw me for a loop, so I'm not very certain any longer about the legal justification for the school's actions.