| David
Silverstein:
In the case of David Silverstein, 13, it can
be asserted that the boy’s actions were
a risk to those around him. Therefore, it would
necessary to penalize him. In accordance with
state law, whether a student is on or off campus
s/he should be aware of what is and what isn’t
dangerous. There severity of dealing with such
a case would directly depend on the severity of
the violation. Since, in accordance with state
law, the student is permitted to speak up for
his or her actions, the child’s innocence
or guilt can be determined; this is important
in deciphering the intentions of a student. In
the case of the 13-year-old under discussion,
the contraption was a ‘rocket’, it
can be said that the student had no intentions
of harming anyone. Hence, such explanations do
need to be given greater consideration before
referring the case to juvenile authorities. In
addition to this, the creativity of the student
needs to be accounted for as well. If students
do not venture out to create such scientific equipment
of their own, they would be inhibited. However,
in the light of possible disaster occurring through
such actions, it must also be realized that the
student could also be trying to defend himself
while possibly having other motives for creating
a dangerous piece equipment. In this consideration,
the background of the individual needs to be checked
upon, and appropriate measures could be taken
in this regard. Simply to refer the case to juvenile
authorities and ruin a creative student’s
regular life is uncalled for.
Bang-Bang, You're Brain-Dead:
In accordance with state and school law, simulated
weapons can be dangerous. However, in the case
of the three boys caught toying with water-pistols
in this case is yet another case of inappropriate
action against them. The authorities in charge
of these children fail to take into consideration
that it is not the students to blame for the encouragement
they receive; the encouragement from the entertainment
sectors of society. Hence, if state laws really
have to take concrete action against such behavior,
they must target the roots of the problem. At
the same time, rules are made to be a obeyed,
and if students are aware of these rules they
should have no excuses. Being caught on a or near
campus with simulated weapons is against school
policy in this case, and so, the concerned school
authorities must first of all give the students
a chance to explain themselves, and then proceed
with disciplinary measures. Immediate suspension
should not follow, as the students could have
been mistaken with the rules that apply to them.
However, students also need to be informed in
clear terms as to what they can do and what they
cannot. Failing to inform them is failure on the
part of educational authorities as well as legislators.
In clear terms, students who violate rules such
as the ones in this case, should only be subject
to penalization if they completely understand
their faults and provided that they were also
aware of it. Otherwise, suspending them and penalizing
them in any way is uncalled for. |