If a student was read a Miranda type warning it would just further fluster them and escalate the situation. Since the student is not being arrested, they should not be read their Miranda Rights. In addition, the principal does not have the authority to read these rights to a student. A student should not be read their Miranda Rights during the time of questioning over a disciplinary
Broken Arrow should not establish honor codes I believe that we shouldn’t have honor codes in schools. Honor codes suspend students on acts of cheating and plagiarism. Well what about those students who have never broken a rule in their life? They didn’t even know they were plagiarizing, should they get suspended and have that on their permanent record for the rest of their lives? “They are used to punish well-meaning rule-followers for minor infractions yet, because they rely on reluctant
No student would want to stand up and give a speech about why that is wrong to say.That’s because no one would want to be seen as a social threat. The threat the son of George and Hazel, Harrison showed. To overthrow the government, the society, the rules society has made, and trying to do the right
Football players should not be punished for their opinion and issue in which they protest in the United States because it brings awareness to society issues, use social status, and even though people disagree that the protest should not happen during the National Anthem. However, it the best time to show the fans what issues they are protesting. This act of protest is nothing new to America, but it has only just become an outrage due, to the involvement of the president and many other average citizens that claim it to be an unfit way to protest. The first instance of this act dates all the way back to World War II, when the Supreme Court voted down a demand that the flag should be saluted during the Pledge of Allegiance (Sachs 1). Then time goes by until 1996 when basketball star Abdul-Rauf was suspended for the length of one game, due to him refusing to stand for the national anthem for a religious purpose.
School prayer is illegal, so having a school officiated prayer can lead to fines and other litigation. Not everyone agrees that school prayer should be banned however. Some say that banning prayer is illegal. They claim that, thanks to the first amendment, that prayer being banned is a violation of religious rights. Of course, banning prayer is illegal, which is why prayer is not banned, but prayer led by school officials or prayers officiated by the school are.
Ignoring someone is ignoring an opportunity of education, how else will you learn what everyone wants and find the best solution to everyone's problems if you're not even willing to hear what they have to say. V. Is there any form of speech that is illegal? A. Yes, there are quite a few forms of speech that is illegal. For example, it is illegal to incite a riot.
Some people may say that cyberbullying outside of school is not the schools problem and can violate some rights. In Source B, the source was about how schools had no authority to discipline a child for harassment off-campus. The constitution states that, “Congress should make no aww.. Abridging the freedom of speech” which states that they cannot punish you for something that is in the constitution. Courts ruled that a school could not discipline a student for inappropiate off-campus student speech. (Source B) It also states that some students and parents have successfully argued that cyberbullies violated civil or criminal laws by inflicting a hate crime.
The people of the United States wanted to end the Vietnam War and so they began protesting. They began ignoring what the officials wanted and worked towards organizing sit ins to allow freedom of speech whether it was in a work place or a school. The people of the organization (typically a school) would request all participants in the Vietnam War in whatever way they were involved, they had to stop and allow the student to speak their mind and ensure that there would be no behavior that would lead to the Vietnam War developing further. Although the US government had to stay involved, as they did not want North Vietnam to take over South Vietnam through the spread of communism. The previous conflict that the US had with the USSR about the spread of communism was already lost and a great deal of tension for the US.
"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity,"- Nelson Mandela. This quote refers to Fortas' and Black's story about students that wear armbands to school. A student's rights should not be taken. The school officials took their rights away by making them take off their armbands or receive suspension. It was not a burden to anyone else.
I do not think that they are being disrespectful towards the military or the flag because that is not what they are protesting against. They are simply trying to bring awareness to an issue that has been affecting the United States for awhile now. Instead of trying to understand their position, some people are retaliating and even going as far as booing at them during the anthem. I do not believe that that is productive in any way when trying to fix the issue. As a country, we need to try to understand why some people feel like there is social or racial inequality and work together to begin getting rid of this
In fact, the prospect of guns in the classroom is more likely to cause professors to keep the conversation tepid and avoid certain controversies; everyone else will watch what they say, how they say it and to whom. This would be quite the opposite of the open and transformative exchange that universities have made it their mission to offer. There is a further point. As we saw in the aftermath of the Ferguson and Staten Island police incidents, and earlier with the Occupy Wall Street movement, university campuses are places where political protest takes root. Perhaps colleges are not quite the haven for political protest that they once were -- like, say, in the 1960 's.
Stricter gun laws would not benefit America because they would restrict the rights of citizens, restrict the reliability and freedom citizens deserve, and would do nothing to prevent killings from occurring. Recently, laws have been established within states that mistreat
Only constitutional amendment should the power to enact such guidelines that deal with censorship (O`Brien, 508). It is not rational to allow governments to ban certain expressions because they are not appealing to some people. If such an act is allowed, than freedom of speech and press guaranteed by the 1st Amendment becomes useless, and that every material could be banned based on this test. People cannot be punished for expressing their views just because those views might not be appealing to some judge or jury (O`Brien, 508).