Quote from: punaperson on Today at 11:00:11 AM
I think some are questioning the apparent advocacy of the "walkout" by administrators and other staff that seems to belie a bias/prejudice/hypocrisy because they would not be so accommodating if the students were to stage an identical event having a "conservative" political theme (such as Second Amendment rights or "Pro Life", etc.).
I am not blinded, but in total agreement of the potential bias you speak of. However, it just seemed the prevailing attitude in this thread is one of either disallow the protest and/or demand for the punishment of those students who partake in the walkout; which to me goes against the spirit of free speech.
I don't believe either Ghandi or King asked that the laws and rules be changed so that they could demonstrate and not face consequences, whereas some of these students, backed by administrators and other bureaucrats want to bend the existing rules, but likely just for this "approved" topic.
The fact that there appears to be a sliding scale is nothing new in regards to gun rights in Hawaii. However, focusing energy against the walkout itself, is just not the right way to go about it. All it will do is foster the incorrect notion that Second Amendment supporters are one-track minded individuals who care only about threats to their guns and not the threat of gun violence in schools.
Sorry if this is late to the discussion, I type...very...slowly.
Very respectfully disagree with you Kuleana, you make a good argument. Really had to think about this one.
As was stated before, the right to free speech is guaranteed and all of us agree, support and practice that daily. What is annoying is that the DOE is selectively endorsing an anti-2a speech (and also endorsing incorrect information) by removing all reasonable consequences. I mean consequences which could be considered a punishment but I think of them to be slightly different. If you want to skip class to exercise free speech, then I don't want you thrown in jail, expelled or tazed, but I expect the class to continue as normal. The student will miss attendance and be put in detention, miss the content of today's lecture and possibly receive a poor grade on that subject if they later fail the quiz/test. When the DOE stops classes and helps to organize the walk out, they are endorsing the political view and removing the reasonable consequences. The students are kids, so we should all try to remember how we thought back then...super impulsive and always up for a "field trip". We would hope, however, that the adults in charge would hold themselves to a higher standard and teach the kids some responsibility for their actions. Furthermore, by proposing that there be no consequences for exercising free speech in school, we could effectively end education as we know it. Everyday, many students would feel the need to "exercise" that right without fear of any consequences. "I want to go protest such and such, I am leaving. Mr/Mrs. Teacher, you must now stop class for x minutes so I can speak freely." Next student does the same etc...class never resumes.
We are indeed concerned about ALL violence in schools (guns, knives, clubs, fists, cyber, everything) , not ONLY concerned with gun violence nor do I think that guns are a root cause of violence in schools (or anywhere for that matter). Should we feel better if the 17 dead were killed by a knife? a hammer? a vehicle? a bomb? a fire? If students were murdered with another tool, would we sit back and say "well, at least he/she didn't use a gun." The concern is not because they are blaming guns...it is because they are incorrectly/unfairly blaming guns. If a gun were capable of getting up and shooting someone on its own (sarcasm, yes) then I would support banning guns. There was a cartoon that I found silly but still makes a good point.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/31/7b/9c/317b9c84e4c9122713c0ba6aa72c86f9.jpg