Is this appropriate for a High School yearbook

[Redneck Socialist]

Poll question: Is this appropriate for a High School yearbook

Bit of an uproar here in the Live Free or Die state.

Londonderry school photo may lead to suit

LONDONDERRY — A Londonderry High School senior may wind up suing the district after the administration denied his request to use a picture with a trapshooting gun on his shoulder as his yearbook photo, said Penny Dean, the student’s Concord-based lawyer.
(snip)
“It was the opinion of the school that it would not be an appropriate picture for his yearbook,” Greenberg said yesterday. “Taking into consideration all the things that have happened with school violence, it’s not appropriate even though skeet shooting is a fine hobby.”

Full article here: http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44483

I think its OK, but I can understand why some folks are wound up about it.

On edit: typo

[Goldmund]

1. I think it's totally appropriate.

It's always good when you can tell an asshole just by looking at his picture.

[Redneck Socialist]

2. Why is he an asshole? n/t

[Goldmund]

6. It's more an aesthetic than an ideological argument.

It repulses me. This is the only picture of him most of his classmates will have to remember him by -- and the way he wants to be remembered is as a guy with a lethal weapon on his shoulder. It's incredibly corny to me -- beyond any pro- or anti- gun debates.

[Redneck Socialist]

11. OK n/t

[slackmaster]

33. My reaction is completely different than yours

It repulses me.

That's your personal issue. The image doesn't bother me at all. I was taught safe gun handling at age 10, so someone in his mid-teens with a shotgun broken open (i.e. clearly unloaded) and pointed in a safe direction looks normal and reasonable to me.

Whether or not the image is appropriate should IMO be a matter of school policy. Whatever that policy happens to be, it needs to be expressed clearly and applied consistently. If they end up printing it, that boy is the only one who will have to live with any consequences. It will be his free choice.

He's not doing anything illegal, immoral, or improper. The photo is well-composed and tasteful.

[Goldmund]

39. Cool

I never said it wasn't my "personal issue". And I wholeheartedly think it should be his "free choice", as I've indicated in all of the posts on this thread. And me, personally, when I look at that picture, I think "asshole".

You know, not every thread and every argument and every post has to be based on deep ideological thinking. I've clearly said, all along, that I would let him publish the picture, and what I would think of it. I'm just a guy from a different world than the guy in the picture, and that's totally cool. Not everything I say is meant to be a philosophical or an ideological argument in concert with some uber-consistent paradigm... I'm not a robot, I'm human. And I've had a few shots.

What an asshole.

[DHard3006]

35. lethal wespon?

No it is how the person uses it that makes it lethal. Cars are lethal weapons when used to kill with.

[Goldmund]

38. Do they manufacture cars for the purpose of killing?

What an old, rusty, argument. You arm is, by that definition, a lethal weapon.

[MrSandman]

40. I think that gun was manufacured to...

Break clay.

[DHard3006]

46. Cars like firearms are manufactured to do what the owner wants

You argument is the old lie. Here is the definition of arms for you:

noun (plural arms)

weapon: a weapon, especially one used in warfare ( often used in the plural )

Now I do believe cars or as they call them now military vehicles would be classified as arms.

Not to mention that the gang bangers use cars as weapons when they do their drive-by killings. The interesting fact about gang bangers and a drive by killing is. When then the gang banger gets out of prison for this crime, the gang banger can still drive and own a car but not a gun. Both weapons were used to kill a person and yet the right to bear arms is the only thing the gun haters want to take from the gang banger killers after release from prisons.

[kwolf68]

7. I don't know

The possibility that someone may have been a victim of gun violence in that school should be taken into account.

In addition, as the school said, with the spate of gun violence in our schools should be partly the impetus to limit the deification of guns to some extent.

[kwolf68]

4. Haha

Continued perpetuation of the plan to glorify guns in our culture.

[Redneck Socialist]

5. There's a plan?

How'd I miss out on that?

[Goldmund]

10. Call it "cultural offensive" if you don't like "plan".

But please, don't pretend like you don't know what he said.

[Redneck Socialist]

14. If by glorify...

you mean that they are featured prominently in popular culture (usually in an absurd fashion) I guess I would agree.

Generally I see them as a tool or a piece of sporting equipment.

[Goldmund]

16. And you don't...

...think that guns have anything to do with perceptions of masculinity, power and even freedom, in a big part of our culture? You don't think that guns hold a different place in our consciousness than do, say, golf clubs or voleyball nets?

[Redneck Socialist]

20. I think those perceptions have been attached to them.

Personally, I don't make those associations. For me a gun is a piece of equipment that allows me to participate in a recreational activity that I enjoy. I do think popular culture often portray guns in an unrealistic manner and at times glorifies both them and violence in general. Some of the RKBA crowd do rhetorically link guns and freedom. The rhetorical excesses of a particular group shouldn't be extended to our culture as a whole. That there is a controversy over this kid's photo points out the fact that many people are uncomfortable with guns and even the most benign portrayals of them.

[Goldmund]

25. Of course, not everybody who owns a gun is a gun nut.

And I'm sure you're not, and that's not what I was implying. The "particular group" you're talking about is (IMO) simply the activist arm of a cultural phenomenon that is much wider. No way could, for example, the assault weapons ban be allowed to expire in a culture that has -- to borrow your term -- a "realistic" idea about guns. This is a very deep phenomenon that isn't restricted to guns but to the culture of fear and flaws in American political thinking in general. For example, in countries (like the UK) which have far stricter gun regulations than we do, there are consistently far less murders and accidents caused by fire arms. And yet, "what are you going to do if an intruder breaks into your house" seems to be the beginning and end of discussion to many people (equivalently to "do you want more money in your pocket" being to many the same question as "should taxes be lowered"). That is a cultural phenomenon, not merely a political one.

I do distinguish between cultural phenomena and individuals -- I've had many religious friends, for example, whose religiousness I liked -- even though I think that organized religion is a very negative cultural phenomenon.

Same with guns. I'm not throwing labels or stereotyping. I'm sure that many people have their own reasons which I'm even prepared to accept. But I firmly believe that were guns simply a "piece of equipment for recreational activities" in our cultural consciousness like they are in yours, there would be far less gun ownership, gun glorification and even gun-based sports than there are. The number of gun owners is far bigger than the number of active hunters or shooters. The number of hunters is far bigger than it would be were it not associated with feelings of power and masculinity (there would still be hunters, for sure).

[Redneck Socialist]

29. You are certainly correct about the culture of fear...

and to a certain extent guns are tied to the mythos of the rugged individual that we have created for ourselves. The idea that people shouldn't look to, or count on the government to protect them is pretty widespread. It definitely contributes to the "I need a gun to protect myself" thinking that spurs many people to go out and buy one.

BTW I didn't think you were implying I'm a gun nut.

[kwolf68]

12. You didnt

Just open your eyes. People LOVE guns...Gun nuts are completely freaked out. I really believe its a psychological problem. Hey, if you want to carry guns around fine...I own guns myself and was a pretty good shot, but I don't have a single picture of me with a gun...except a pic in front of a gun cabinet.

[slackmaster]

32. Ironic comment from someone who is MOONING us all!

:dunce:

[enfield collector]

36. John Kerry has posed repeatedly with a shotgun. does that make

him an asshole as well?

[Goldmund]

37. No

1) You can't win the presidency without the asshole vote.
2) This is the one and only picture of this guy that most of his classmates will have to remember him by. If John Kerry made his public persona unseparable from guns I'd be the first to say he's an asshole. A few pictures of himself with a few guns was just for the NASCAR dads who wanted proof that he has a sizeable dick so they're not embarrased to vote for him.

[FatSlob]

48. I see a responsible young man who will likely be...

a pillar of society. He must be responsible to have been entrusted with such an expensive firearm.

[markus]

3. I don't understand why

It's not like he's a pre-schooler.

If they're prepared to ban all other photographis of sports from the yearbook, sure, fine.

[eurolefty]

13. I don't understand either.

Left wing morans are as annoying as right wing morans...

[Goldmund]

15. I wasn't being fecitious when I said "it's appropriate"

I don't support banning the picture at all. I don't support banning any pictures or any information. I still think the guy's an asshole, and I think he should be allowed to convey whatever he wants to convey. People like me will be repulsed and think him an asshole, and some other people will dig it, while some will be unaffected. That's fair.

[Burma Jones]

8. Jeez, so what, it ain't like he's wearing a sheet and a hood

or an SS uniform. This, as well as kids getting expelled for tylenol or other manifestations of hysterical reactions to kids, is way, way out of hand. IT IS A PICTURE OF SOMEONE THAT LIKES SKEET SHOOTING - THAT'S ALL.

[stinkeefresh]

9. I'm a pacifist - and born in NH

and I think this looks totally normal. I don't even think he looks like an asshole. I think he looks like a quiet, possibly lower-class kid.

This doesn't say "school shooting" to me at all. It says rural school system.

[Demit]

18. why lower-class? just curious

And, the gun is for skeet-shooting. Is there any remote possibility someone would go on a rampage with a gun used for skeet shooting? I don't really see any looming menace in this photo...

[gatlingforme]

49. interesting observation. how do you get lower class out of a photo

like this? My observation of your post shows a bit of ignorance, I surmised this by the fact that you can't distinguish class affiliation by a photo.

[MrBenchley]

17. Where's his trench coat?

[NV Whino]

19. Question?

Does the school have classes in skeet shooting?

[Redneck Socialist]

21. It didn't say in the article

but somehow I doubt it.

[NV Whino]

22. Well, then, I think it is inappropriate for a year book

[MsUnderstood]

23. Lets imagine for a moment

that the school actually has a POLICY on what it deems appropriate for the school year book.

If so, shouldn't we review the policy before we say Yea or Nay to the photo?

Let's assume the policy says something to the effect of "we have the right to refuse publication"

Then it doesn't matter what we call offensive, it is in the hands of the school board (kinda like the idea that communities determine what is pornographic).

[Redneck Socialist]

26. The policy is not made clear from the article

The school has an "zero-tolerance policy on violence, drugs and alcohol"
and I gather that is what they are using to reject the photo. Though apparently "Seniors are allowed to submit their own photos for the yearbook..."

I certainly agree the school can set pretty much whatever standards it wants and furthermore the kid certainly should have known that any depiction of a gun was going to get a rise out of somebody.

I just don't see that photo as violent in anyway and think it should be OK. :shrug:

[MsUnderstood]

28. Guns are not violent?

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people"

Obviously, used in the correct context (just like alcohol and drugs) guns can be a great benefit to society. . .but what message do you want to send to the other students?

And what do you do next year when joe blow comes in with his dead rabbit and shotgun? Or when Sally comes in sporting her Guns that she uses in target practice?

Sad but true, you have to constantly worry about the exceptions. Although this picture is harmless, it sets up a precent that if you allow this gun, you have to allow all guns or face discrimination charges.

[Redneck Socialist]

30. Personally I'd be OK with the examples you gave

I would also be OK with the school making a blanket no guns in the yearbook policy. I'd think it was silly, but that is their prerogative.

"...what message do you want to send to the other students?"

That skeet shooting is perfectly acceptable and that not every depiction of a gun is negative.

[NV Whino]

27. Good point

[MrSandman]

42. Schools here don't have classes...

But some have riflery teams. SSAC supports intermural competition.

[petronius]

24. I would say it's appropriate, but it depends on context a bit

If he actually is a skeet shooter, and this is something that is important to him, then I would imagine that his classmates already know, and that is part of how they'll remember him.

On the other hand, if he's just trying to sneak a gun into a yearbook photo (and sneaking stuff into the yearbook is a time-honored tradition) out of machismo or to take a poke at the administration, then I would say keep it out.

[slackmaster]

31. The gloves are ALL WRONG!!!

I don't care for the haircut either. Other than that there is nothing wrong with the photo.

[skippythwndrdog]

47. I dunno about the gloves.

He's probably gotten a little anal about his trap gun. If it's a higher end one, he may have worn them to keep oil off the finish. I've seen stranger things.

Pop has some collectibles that NEVER get touched directly by human hands. He always picks them up with a rag or gloves.

[Fescue4u]

34. Why not? Its perfectly legal

Sounds like a todo over nothing.

[Trashman]

41. I see nothing wrong here

He looks friendly and well groomed. Probably a good kid.

BTW, at first I thought it might resemble a young Bill Clinton.

[-..__...]

43. Talk about knee-jerk reactions...

not just by school officials, but by people responding here as well.

Who the fuck is anyone to pass judgment about him being an "asshole" because he enjoys trap shooting? Likewise, anyone trying to justify the omission of the photo under the guise of "school violence" and/or "zero tolerance" is simply grasping at straws for PCs sake.

It would be one thing if the kid was dressed in cammies and pointing the gun at the camera, or if there was any element of racism or sexism in the photo, but there isn't.

The kid just wants to have his picture published of himself showing his favorite activity.

The school should do the right thing by either...

Allowing the kids picture in the yearbook as is.

Or.........

Make it cut and dry across the board for all students: Only happy, smiling well-groomed headshots of students will be allowed... no "props", no having fun, no activity, no individuality, no enthusiasm.

Just smile and say "cheese".


I hope the kid, his parents and lawyers put the smack down to the school district and/or board of education.

[MrSandman]

44. I didn't make it clear. H*ll yes its appropriate.

It is not illegal. It is not violent. I did vote yes in the poll.

It affronts the sensibilitities of those who would like to pretend that guns and violence are synonomous.

[skippythwndrdog]

45. Appropriate

IT's a picture of a kid with one of the necessary tools for pursuing his favorite sport (or at least on of his favorites). Where's the problem? I'm a huge basketball fan. Go ahead try to convince me that competitive basketball is never a dangerous sport. Same thing for football or any other sport that requires the participants to use their bodies in some form to stop the opposing team from scoring. Hell. Football, rugby, boxing, wrestling, judo, and several other sports require violent physical contact as part of the game. Anyone who tells you violent physical contact isn't a part of basketball is lying.

The only dangers in competetive or non-competetive shooting are hearing loss and mabe a few bruises from recoil if the proper safety procedures are followed. Those risks are minimized with proper hearing protection, which is required at every range I've ever visited, and a padded trap vest. Oops. I forgot the occasional pinch when closing a chamber with your hands in the wrong position.

It's (the trap gun) only a perceived evil by those who would strip us of our rights.

Regarding previous posts: The kid is no more an asshole than the school's starting quarterback that likely appears in the same yearbook with his arm cocked and holding a football.

[grannylib]

50. I see no problem with it; I would have no problem even if it were a

different (legal) gun. What if the kid hunts? So what? Can't he have that shown as an interest?
Now if it were an assault weapon and he were aiming at someone, that'd be a little different.
This? No problem here.

[goju]

51. Yes, No, Maybe

The only thing I find offensive or inappropriate is that he has a thousand dollar shotgun at that age. And he could lose the whole "Orvis" upland game/skeet outfit. THAT is inappropriate. :)

No problem with the picture. It portrays responsible gun handling and its probably very important to the lad to be remembered as a "good guy" and proud representative of shooting sports. I only wish high schools would extend the same editorial "concern" to similarly controversial subjects like profane gestures.

[mdbeliever]

52. Where to draw the line

I think it's okay if there's no clear policy-if wants to look attractive to the NRA crowd, that's his business. But at some point there are "props" that could be pretty questionable.

[j_carters_neighbor]

53. No Way

I do not feel guns of any kind have a place in our schools. For to long guns have been a part of the education system in this country. I personally believe that nobody other than on duty police and deployed military members (who are on legal deployments, not chimpies profit trips) should have access to guns. How can we ever teach our children to live peaceful lives when from the age of four they are being taught that guns are a good way to deal with your problems. Maybe one day this country will learn, maybe the children will be able to live without fear one day.

[p0sitivevibez]

54. wtf!

That should defintley be allowed. It is not obscene, offensive, and hes a TRAP shooter. Wow, that school has gone too far.

[goju]

55. Update on the story, School editors discuss flap over yearbook gun photo

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showfast.html?article=44841

Gotta read it all to do it justice.

[goju]

56. A few thoughts

“I didn’t think it was a bad photo, but I knew right away that it didn’t belong,” Malone said yesterday during an hour-long interview with six of the yearbook’s 10 editors. “You can’t bring a gun into school, and the yearbook is school property. You just can’t put that in the yearbook.”

What about history books? I guess those will be next?


Said Toni Runci, the yearbook’s chief editor, “At first, I didn’t have a problem with the picture; I didn’t think anything negative of it . . . But (then) I realized it would cause controversy, and cause debate.

Yes, lets not subject our young adults to anything that might inspire debate :eyes:

Although Dean argues that Douglass’ First Amendment rights are being infringed upon, the editors contended that having a gun is a “privilege, not a right.”

Oh, is it? What the hell are they teaching in this "school"?

“Since Columbine happened, and 9/11 happened, there’s a greater sensitivity, especially on school property,” Taylor said.

School property? I doubt he brought the shotgun on campus to have the photo taken. So what school property is he referring to? The yearbook that students must purchase? Or the photo that was taken off campus?