NRA to back (NH) student in yearbook photo fight

[Justice]

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/269/region/NRA_to_back_student_in_yearboo:.shtml

The student, Londonderry High School senior Blake Douglass, had requested a photo of himself with a shotgun slung over his shoulder be published in the school's yearbook.

The National Rifle Association and the Gun Owners of New Hampshire have agreed to support a Londonderry high schooler in a lawsuit, the student's attorney said.

The district's late-August nixing of Douglass' yearbook photo is not the first time the school's administrators have disallowed aspects of his hobby on campus. Douglass said assistant principals.
_____________

Trying to say pictures of shotgun show skeeting shooting hobby, just like pictures with musical instruments show hobby. The article doesn't say - but I think it is pretty clear that yearbook photos show what students do in school - school sponsored activities. I don't think the skeet shooting is school sponsored.

[maxsolomon]

1. quick, let's get kerry on record saying this is a stupid waste of $

and then use it as the centerpiece of a mass mailing scare campaign.

the NRA sucks.

[tekriter]

2. A couple of questions about this...

Since the yearbook normally include pictures of students doing non-school activities or hobbies, and the school solicits photos from students - "bring us pictures of what you do as a hobby, etc" ; then I'm with the NRA for the first time in my life. You can't accept a bunch of pictures of kids riding dirt bikes, playing frisbee, whatever, and tell this kid you won't include his.

But, if they didn't normally do this, and the kid just went to the yearbook staff and wanted a picture of himself, unsolicited, then I tell the kid to buzz off.

[progressivebydesign]

9. I can't believe I agree with the NRA on this, too...

Kerry, as a hunter, should side with the NRA on this. It's kind of a no-brainer... I mean, if it's a hobby, it's a hobby. It's not like his hobby is shooting people from a school tower! I understand the schools policies regarding weapons.. but horses and dogs are not allowed on campus, and many high schoolers have them in their photo.

Kids now supply their own photos for the yearbooks in their senior year.. this is a hard choice for the schools, I understand that with the fears of school violence.. but I side with the kid on this one.

[FlemingsGhost]

12. I can see it now: gangsta wannabes posing with their 9mms

"Of course, it's only a hobby. I shoot at the range on weekends."

(on edit: typo)

[DoNotRefill]

15. have you seen the pic in question?

That's hardly an Icy Hot Stuntaz photo....

[FlemingsGhost]

22. Looks like a great kid. Still, it's a zero-tolerance policy.

You would think he could have foreseen the controversy when, acting under a zero-tolerance policy, the school confiscated his gun magazines.

I don't necessaryily like the policy either, but most high school kids are itching to push the envelope regarding rules and regulations. It will only be a matter of time until someone finds a way to include a "hobby" that *someone* is going to find offensive.

Nip it in the bud, right now. If it is such a big deal, the community needs to discuss changing school policy. For now, rules are rules, and part of growing into mature, responsible adults is understanding ours is a society of laws.

[Arianrhod]

29. I don't believe in zero-tolerance policies

just because of cases like this one. The photo looks like anything you might see in a lifestyles-of-the-rich-and-famous magazine. In fact, his pose is similar to those seen in famous photos from the 1800s and the early 1900s. If the other kids are allowed to have photos of their hobbies, then he should be, too.

And, IMO, confiscating gun magazines is just wrong, unless he was reading them instead of listening to the teacher.

[DoNotRefill]

41. "zero tolerance" is idiotic.

I can understand having an actual zero tolerance policy for guns. But including photographs of guns? Including keychain squirt guns which look nothing like a gun? Including "finger guns" (fyi, a "finger gun" is when you point with your pointer finger, with your thumb in the air, a la Lynndi England-ing)? That's not "zero tolerance", that's an administration on crack.

[Flammable Materials]

16. I have a high school yearbook photo ...

... of myself in journalism class, with a small gun pointed at my head.

Granted, that was back in 1984 ..

[Flammable Materials]

17. So what if a kid wants to submit a photo in a trench coat with an Uzi?

Good for one, good for all.

[DoNotRefill]

18. I'd imagine....

that such a pic wouldn't be allowed because it showed anti-social behavior. That's not what this pic showed.

Imagine that it was a rope, not a gun. In one pic, a guy is using a rope to hold up his pants. In another, the rope has been fashioned into a noose. In one pic, there's an inherent threat, and in the other, there's no such threat.

[Flammable Materials]

26. Free speech is free speech.

What if she has the gun slung over her back, smiles real big, and holds up a copy of the Holy Bible?

Fuck this bullshit.

[DoNotRefill]

42. Free speech is NOT free speech

when you're talking about speech that is construed as a threat.

[Arianrhod]

30. Let them do it.

Maybe then the parents will become aware of what their children are into.

[madrchsod]

3. the school can ban anything

it wants to from their publication. there is no freedom of speech issue or anything else other than a "discrimination issue" (race etc,etc). another dumb ass thinking he`s the "man"

[Occulus]

27. Was he 18 when he submitted the photo?

If so, are you really willing to try to argue that a legal adult, in a public place, should have his Constitutional rights abridged in such a way?

If he wasn't 18, fine. You're right. But if he was.... the school should be required to shut up and take it. This would include tolerance on their part of his exercise of all his rights on campus with the exception of actual possession of a firearm.

If you are eighteen prior to graduation, I'm sorry, but the school should have to just live with it. This would include, for example, unedited/uncensored contributions to the school paper (including editorial contributions directly critical of teachers and/or administrative personnel), the right to be addressed as "Mr." or "Miss" or "Ms." by teachers or personnel, and indeed every other right we high school graduates take for granted.

We teach our freedoms by example in this country. If we don't, they're just silly words on paper which we're already conditioned to easily relinquish. "Anarchy" such as what my above proposition would likely (at least at first) somewhat result in- at least from the school's standpoint- would be an exercise in democracy anywhere else.

Also, don't try to tell me that they're there to learn, because what they're there for is of no significance regarding our civil rights. There are a lot of places we adults go to that have a specific purpose, but we don't expect our rights to be silenced or stifled while we're there. At the age of eighteen, the law recognizes us as adults with full Constitutional rights; public schools should be required to be bound by this also.

If graduating seniors were able to express themselves and speak out and be free of any repercussions for doing so, who knows? We might see a surge in the quality of the education being provided to all, as seniors begin questioning policies, procedures, curricula, and so forth. There are a lot of very intelligent kids out there, partly because we make them grow up so fast these days, and yet we're unwilling to treat them as adults in school when the law already says they are adults- who happen to be in school.

Good on him for challenging this, if he was 18 at the time the photo was submitted. As an adult, he deserves no less consideration.

[Arianrhod]

31. "...should have his Constitutional rights abridged ..."

Sorry, but there's no constitutional right to publish photos in a school yearbook. No school official attempted to take his gun away; they merely won't let him display it in their yearbook.

Because yes, although the yearbook is put together by the students, it still is the property of the school. Which is why the students pay the school to get copies of it.

Framing the gun discussion in such improperly understood terms as this is precisely why, IMO, it's such an irresolvable issue.

[Occulus]

37. Is the yearbook produced via public funds?

Oh, and we didn't pay the school when we got our yearbooks; we paid the printing costs. It was made clear; in fact, there was one year, IIRC, that the yearbook was in danger because the interests in it was so low they were having trouble covering the printing costs. Our school, IIRC, had nothing at all to do with the payment.

My high school could have 'banned' the yearbook, but all they would have been banning would have been the production and distribution. If the students had wanted to, they could have contacted the publisher directly- the name was well-known at my school.

Aside from that, the students, through their yearbook staff, could feasibly claim a copyright on the work. Furthermore, so could the publisher. That would be another wrench to throw into the works. If he wanted to, this student could drag this out and cost the school a lot more than simply allowing the phtoto would have, even in publicity. I'm betting that's something that's crossed his or his parent's- and hopefully the school's!- mind.

And even if you're right, ownership of the content in no way affects or abridges the student's civil rights if the student is over the age of eighteen at the time the content was contributed- particularly if the public school accepts public funding. It can't. To interfere with that, even in a public education setting, to my mind violates our equal protection statutes. I can't support that.

We have to be absolute on this- adults cannot, ever, under any circumstances save those in which they would do what was necessary anyway (i.e. natural disaster, national emergency, IOW, dire straits), give up their rights under the Constitution. We must grant those rights at the age of eighteen, public education notwithstanding. To do otherwise is simply hypocrisy.

We teach our students about their civil rights, often without even the most minimal unplanned exercise of the same. We never publicly teach our kids that sometimes authority is flat-out wrong... and yet, to survive as a free democratic society, we must.

And incredibly, some here seem to be defending this potential usurpation of the rights of a legal adult. Again, I'll stress: This all depends upon whether this student was a legal adult (18) at the time the photo was submitted for publication. If he was under the age of 18, however, the overall argument still has force- high school students 18 or over should be given all the legal rights of any other adult, regardless of the fact that they are "in school".

To accept the one-at least on this issue- is to accept consideration of the more. This is a very slippery slope. Do we really want to tell our children it's ok if they don't have some rights in some places, and that depending upon their 'status'? T

hat's what policies like these teach.

I was against things like this when I first found out about it before I got into high school fourteen years ago. I was somewhat bewildered "in my young mind" about why and how this was possible in a "free" society. Then I grew up and realized it's all about control.

Our student newspapers, for example, should be free, unfettered, uncensored, and unedited by the school's administration. That paper should be the students' voice. They don't get a vote, but every policy affects them. They should at least have an open outlet- yet many schools will not allow this. Maybe they don't want their internal errors and foibles known.

I don't know if any 18-year-old high school student has ever challenged such a policy on an equal protection basis. If not, this would be a very good angle to attack such policies from, if for nothing else than to change the rules in favor of those students who are legal, voting members of the adult public. As American citizens, they deserve nothing less.

[Arianrhod]

32. As to your adulthood argument, think of it this way.

If you are a professional photojournalist, you submit your work to an editor, who then either accepts it or rejects it. There are no constitutional rights involved in this process; rather, it simply is a matter of the publisher's right to solicit photos from whomever s/he will.

This is no different. The publisher (the school) has rejected the submission of the photographer (the student). End of discussion.

[Occulus]

38. Ah, but it IS different

the one is a job, the other is part of a class. The one does not understand that if a story goes in a certain direction it will be squelched. The other implies exactly that.

A newspaper, like the NYT or even your local 'paper of record', reporting about, say, massive prosecutorial misconduct, vs. a student paper doing (for example) an investigative report about grandiose ethics violations on the school board.

Which of the above will get published, and which will be suppressed, based upon the argument you've made?

That's the problem I have, and one among many when it comes to student rights. I've never, ever understood some of the limitations, like the 'zero-tolerance' laws, newspaper and yearbook editing, and a few other more minor issues. I really didn't understand it when I turned 18, was still in high school, and still had to be totally subservient while in the school.

What I was learning about our country and its history on my own and what I was being required to do were exactly opposed to each other. I didn't understand why then and I don't understand why now.

If you are 18, and you are still in high school, you still must have access to your full constitutional rights. If the school doesn't like that idea, they should just get rid of the paper and the yearbook. We simply can't compromise on this.

[Mz Pip]

4. If the school yearbook

has pictures of different activities the kids do then what's the big deal. It's skeet shooting for crissake. It's not like he uses an AK-47 for it or is posing with the head of some endangered species.

Though I do think having this go to court is really dumb.

MzPip
:dem:

[DU9598]

5. Right or privilege?

Is there a right to have your picture in a yearbook or is it a privilege subject to rules?

We have a privilege to drive a car on the highway, but there are certain rules about how we get to do it. But, if students get to pose with volleyballs, cars, cheerleading outfits, etc. then I think the kid has the right to pose with his bunny-killing gun. Big deal.

[progressivebydesign]

10. It's a skeet-shooting hobby... no bunnies are harmed. Only clay pigeons nt

[FlemingsGhost]

6. A yearbook chronicles one's achievements at school.

If the high school has a school-sanctioned shooting club, print the photo. Otherwise, to equate one's school experience with firearms is a colossal error in judgement.

(on edit: typo)

[Occulus]

28. You mean they're not being taught gun safety in school?

Why not? Exercise of our Second Amendment, in certain circumstances, can and does kill. We learn civics; why isn't gun safety a requirement for graduation?

Mounted, fixed guns that have rotation constraints. Everyone stands behind the line. This could quite easily be made totally safe.

Why don't we teach it?

[Arianrhod]

33. This article specifically states that these are photos of the

students' hobbies. That implies that they may be extracurricular.

[Indiana_Dem]

7. This is weird to hear. There's a girl here in my town who

had her senior pictures taken with the flag and her gun. Someone said she's a staunch Republican and wanted her picture that way reflecting her values. <shudder> That's really creepy and many of us mothers (even Republican ones) thought it was really odd.

[progressivebydesign]

11. The flag and gun things is SO over the top.. creepy!

Unless her hobby is shooting at flags?

[Indiana_Dem]

19. Heck I don't know her well enough but I do know her dad

is a state trooper.

[DoNotRefill]

8. You know things are getting bad when the NRA is....

sticking up for the First Amendment...

[progdonkey]

13. I support the school's decision

Allowing students to have pictures of their dogs or horses in the yearbook yet not allowing the same animals on campus is completely different from this issue. First of all, dogs, horses, and other animals are banned from campuses because some people are allergic; the animals may not be well-trained and the school would be filled with horse shit; the animals may get spooked and harm another student, etc.

Guns, however, are not allowed on campus for quite obvious reasons. Musical instruments don't kill people (insert bad joke here...), so the student's lawyer's likening of guns to musical instruments is quite ludicrous. Furthermore, most exposure that students would have to those musical instruments would be through the school, so it would be quite stupid of the school to sanction an activity but prohibit its portrayal in the yearbook. Likewise, the only extenuating circumstance is if the school has a skeet shooting club, but the article makes no mention of there being one.

Here's a question for those who are supporting the NRA in this: if the student's hobby were taxidermy and he wanted to have a picture of him holding up a dead squirrel that he had just picked off the side of the road, would the school be wrong in denying the picture? My point is that there is a limit to the creedence that a school should be expected to give to activities done outside of school, and that limit is simply good taste. I frankly find it to be in poor taste for someone to glorify firearms in an official school publication, and the school obviously agrees.

[DoNotRefill]

14. It'd depend on if it was a gory pic....

if it was a pic of the kid holding the stuffed squirrel after it was done, no problem. If it was a graphic pic of roadkill, problem. In this pic, the guy is handling the gun in a safe manner. It's an over/under shotgun (which is very unsuitable for criminal use unless you're a complete nutjob) that's broken open. It's not like he's brandishing the weapon in a threatening manner in the pic.

Tell us, is this pic "glorifying firearms"? Would it be unsuitable for a school yearbook if the guy next to Kerry was a student?

[despairing optimist]

23. And if Norman Bates's senior photo included his home-stuffed mom?

Well, he could submit an alternate of him behind the Bates Motel's front desk.

[Bluebear]

20. Could Columbine-style youth also submit gun photos?

This young man is a hunter I gather. If another student is just a 'gun fan' and wants to pose in trench coat and two guns would that be defended by the NRA? Just asking.

[DoNotRefill]

21. did you look at the pic upthread?

the guy's a skeet shooter. Look at the way he's dressed...slacks, an oxford, and a vest. His hobby is shooting at little pieces of clay thrown from a launcher to simulate game. It's a bloodsport, with the blood carefully removed so that all that's left is the sport. This isn't somebody out hurting little furry creatures for fun. His sport is all-around harmless.

[tekriter]

24. Besides, you ever tried to cook a clay pigeon?

Takes HOURS in the crock pot, and even then they taste like dirt.


:hippie:

[Bluebear]

25. Did you read my post?

Yes, I saw the picture. My question is if one would draw the line for a teen who fancies himself an outsider, obsessed with guns, long black trench coat? Where do you draw the lines? Just asking.

[Columbia]

34. Sounds like you have the line drawn pretty well yourself

[Bluebear]

35. I don't know about that

I guess I have not seen yearbook photos with people holding props, only headshots that one wants to forget 20 years later. :)

[drfemoe]

43. The "outsider" sport?

Skeet shooting is not "hunting". That's where the confussion entered.

[Huga Commie]

36. Well, no, I suppose not

Evil photos would have to be banned. Of course, guns are not just used for hunting or crime, but also for protection. I used one once (GASP!). I just pointed it and scared off a guy trying to break into my bedroom in my apartment. Nobody hurt tho. That's good.

[drfemoe]

39. redundant . n/t

[Huga Commie]

40. Nice Legs tho....

Don't see those on TV

[drfemoe]

44. Go fer it

or do you?

:hi: