Is this nuts, or what??

[Carla_M]

Three 7th graders in Virginia Beach get suspended from school for the rest of the year because they were playing with Airsoft guns (toys) in one of the students yards while waiting for the school bus!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-suspended-school-toy-gun-family-property-article-1.1465745

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/24/7th-grader-suspended-for-playing-with-airsoft-gun-in-own-yard/

[Squirl]

"Because students were on their way to or at a school bus stop when they were struck by pellets, the school division has jurisdiction to take disciplinary actions against those students responsible for the disruption,"

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-suspended-school-toy-gun-family-property-article-1.1465745#ixzz2g0N0NvUW

Sounds reasonable.  The parents of those students getting harrassed could sue the school, and the school would likely be liable.  If there is a school bus stop at or near his house and instead of shooting pellets he was throwing rocks at other kids walking by, even if from his own yard he would have been suspended from school back when I was a kid.  Shooting rubber bands could also get you in trouble.

The other kids are required to walk by his house and take the bus every day.  They shouldn't have to be harassed.  If it was another adult harrassing children on their way to school, he would/should be in jail.  13 is old enough to know better.

In the course of the investigation, conducted in concert with a police officer and the school division Office of Safety and Loss Control, we identified the children who were firing pellet guns at each other and at people near the bus stop. Several students verified that they had been hit by pellets and had the marks to support their claims. In one instance, a child was only 10 feet from the bus stop and ran from the shots being fired but was still hit. Another student claimed to be shot in the back while running away during a previous incident Wednesday, Sept. 11. This child was also shot in the arm and head during Thursday's incident. I contacted the school division's Office of Student Leadership and School Board Legal Counsel for guidance. Because students were on their way to or at a school bus stop when they were struck by pellets, the school division has jurisdiction to take disciplinary actions against those students responsible for the disruption. There is an expectation that all students should be able to travel to and from school in the safest environment possible.

https://linmedia-cms.endplay.com/documents/234677/0/Principal%27s+response/f65e30ee-1e06-49a3-b212-30e18a55b6cb

So a half dozen kids, adults, and police, along with physical evidence, testified that the 13 year old was running around harassing other kids on their way to school, but the mother of the 13 year old swears he didn't.   Same thing I see on the news every night, what a "good boy" their son is when they are being hauled off to prison.

[Woodsrule]

The title of the post "Is this nuts, or what?" is right on the mark. I have been involved in similar cases while a police officer. School districts have become increasingly aggressive in determining what constitutes school property, a school "campus", etc... Attempting to extend school jurisdiction to any property to and from a school (this is the whole city or town where you live, by the way) is an intrusion into the student and parent's Constitutional rights. Before you howl about that kids don't enjoy these rights, let me suggest that they and their parents do.

Once, a principal wanted a student arrested because he brought a plastic knife to school to spread (horror of horrors!) peanut butter on his bread. This was in the early 90's, before the now common peanut allergy issue. When I told the principal he was free to suspend the 10 year old if he wished, I was not going to arrest a child for this "offense" He was upset because the school had a "zero tolerance policy" for weapons, so I told him that a plastic knife did not constitute a weapon in the absence of malice.  My decision stood; the principal filed a complaint against me, but it was summarily dismissed, for police enforce laws, not school edicts. Imagine if the police were charged with enforcing the myriad of rules that schools promulgate!

My point is that, if administrators want to extend their school "campus" to your yard, then let them try. If a crime occurred, the local police are equipped to address it. Just because children bully each other should not make us want to relinquish our rights like sheep. Would you allow your employer to extend the work "campus" to your yard and hold you responsible at work for actions committed at your home?

[Carla_M]

Woodsrule is seeing what I see. Schools over stepping their area of expertise, area of responsibility. The offense happened off school property. If laws were broken then the local police should be involved, investigating and prosecuting if deemed appropriate. I can't see how any school could be held responsible for anything a student does outside of the school premises, outside of the school jurisdiction. We might as well say that the school was responsible for the accident caused by the high school senior who ran into my truck when they were leaving school.

Maybe the teens involved are guilty, maybe they do deserve some punishment; not arguing that. I am arguing that the school has no right to exact penalties for any deeds perpetrated off the school grounds, in situations where the school is not directly supervising the students. That is a police matter, first and foremost.

[Huge29]

Carla states that it was an airsoft while the letter states a pellet gun, as the second poster smells of a liberal and likely does not know the difference between a knot in the wall and their own arse I will go with it being an airsoft; there is a huge difference, but I would not expect any liberal or school administrator to know the difference.  The difference is that of throwing rocks vs. throwing corn flakes almost. 

[Squirl]

Carla states that it was an airsoft while the letter states a pellet gun, as the second poster smells of a liberal and likely does not know the difference between a knot in the wall and their own arse I will go with it being an airsoft; there is a huge difference, but I would not expect any liberal or school administrator to know the difference.  The difference is that of throwing rocks vs. throwing corn flakes almost.

Well, that was certainly a pleasant description.  Wonderfully civil.

Pay attention.

I researched this before I answered.
 
The exact language of the airsoft ammunition is a "pellet." Heaven forbid people used proper English.  If you don't know that the exact make, model, and brand, just calling it a pellet gun to be generic is safer for legal liability reasons.  (Is Airsoft trademarked?) The letter was signed by the school administrator, but was likely drafted by the school's lawyers.  It is probably the reason they used proper terminology.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airsoft_pellets#Pellet_ballistics

Airsoft pellets typically leave small lesions (welts) on exposed skin with human targets.

My red ryder shoots smaller lighter BB's than what some airsoft guns shoot.  And I can tell you from experience getting shot with one isn't pleasant.

[Huge29]

My red ryder shoots smaller lighter BB's than what some airsoft guns shoot.  And I can tell you from experience getting shot with one isn't pleasant.

Do you understand Sectional Density and/or Ballistic Coefficient?  I will expect an answer of no.  I was a little harsh, but the point is not lost.  I may have miscredited who was using the term, the administrator did specifically say pellet gun.  "Pellet guns" are capable of shooting a .17 (some shoot .22 caliber now too) caliber alloy pellets at 1,200 fps and traditional lead pellets at 1,000 fps.  I own two of these; they recoil more than a 22 long rifle, no exaggeration and these are, by far, the most common types of pellet guns on the market today. However, air soft shoot generally around 300-400 fps.  The air soft pellets are generally around 0.2 grams (compared to a paintball weighing about 3 grams) resulting in muzzle energy of about 1J.  A pellet gun pellet usually weighs around 8 grains, which is about 5 grams (25x heavier than an air soft pellet).  So, combine 3x the velocity to 25x the mass and we now have energy of 15 J to 35 J or 11-25 ft lbs.  So, maybe they are just trying to sensationalize the event by calling them pellet guns, but if they are indeed air soft, we have another example of an idiot of academia being an idiot, no news here. 
Again, I did not word mine civilly and I apologize, but do you agree with this sort of thing?  It just gets me fired up and I react in an uncivil  manner when I see these types of stories.  Clearly, the kid needs a serious beating or something, but the punishment does not fit the crime and the school should not be in any way involved in this IMHO. 

[Squirl]

You seem to be hung up on that air guns can colloquially be called pellet guns because they shoot lead pellets.

Air guns and airsoft guns both shoot pellets and are both legally by definition "pellet guns."

Maybe it was a deliberate attempt to conflate the less powerful Airsoft pellet gun with the more commonly known air gun pellet gun to sensationalize it and make it more severe.  It may also be it was drafted by a lawyer who wasn't 100% what was used to shoot the other children.  The children just showed up to school with welts and said they were being shot.  So they used the generic term "pellet gun" because it can be used to cover many different types and they didn't want it to be confused with a firearm.

Thank god they didn't just use the term gun. 

I do know some basics on ballistics. 

I used the red ryder as an example because they have similar ballistics and results.  The average steel bb is .32 grams and has a muzzle velocity of around 240 fps.  While the average airsoft pellet is .2 grams (although more than half the list manufactured are higher), but it has an average muzzle velocity of 300-400 fps.  It also has a similar result when being shot (welts on the skin).  One pump on my crossman PC77 would have almost identical ballistics and results.

Maybe the kid was shooting a spring loaded daisy pistol.  I don't think anyone can prove exactly what it was after the fact.  This isn't a criminal case though.  The standard of evidence would be preponderance of the evidence.  It seems more likely than not he was shooting the other kids with something enough to leave a mark when they got to school.

Several students verified that they had been hit by pellets and had the marks to support their claims.

Not exactly cornflakes.

BTW your grain to gram conversion is a bit off.
1 Grain = 0.06479891 Gram

[Squirl]

Maybe I'm missing something here.  When I was growing up whenever you did something wrong while waiting at the bus stop, especially fighting with other kids, you got punished when you got to school.

But back then parents supported schools that punished kids, as long as it wasn't corporal punishment.

[Carla_M]

What is nuts here, is that anyone is still arguing on this topic. I was acting emotionally and in general overreacting and under researching as I made my original post. Why don't we all just let this topic die the death it richly deserves?

[Woodsrule]

Carla,

Your original post's message was well received an on point. The ensuing argument, while really interesting, about projectiles, feet per second and ammunition grains veered away from your point. The fact is, extending the school "campus" to anywhere and everywhere is a prime example of government creep. If a crime occurred, the police can handle the situation pretty easily and there's no need for school employees to insert themselves into places they don't belong - like someone's backyard.

"Because students were on their way to or at a school bus stop when they were struck by pellets, the school division has jurisdiction" Well, I humbly disagree. A school can ATTEMPT to control the behavior of children and parents outside of school, but if we allow them to do so, where will they stop? Maybe they will ban dodge ball, peanut butter, trans fats, sugared soda, tag, shirts that support the 2nd Amendment, riding a bike without a helmet,  and sledding without a helmet. Oh wait, they already did!!

[rick91351]

No Carla you did exactly right and your were set up - I read the exact article on Drudge - the headline lied - a lot of the article lied compared to what was published latter.  We accept we are not being lied to be the media.  I'm sort of like Squirl in fact I might have been a great paralegal digging and worming through stuff.  But I do not want have to dig and flesh out the truth in every stinking headline and article over my morning cup of coffee / cups of coffee this time of the year.

I might like to toss out there in the mix...........   

My dear old fashioned parents expected the schools to discipline us for our ill behavior be it mine or my brother's.  Then when we got home then we got it again - a lot worse than at school.  We were expected to behave as we were taught  24/7.  Be it at school, at home, at the park, playing or being with others.  When we got older when hunting and fishing and 'running around.'  Some place there was a change I think.  When I got to be parent with kids in school about 25 years ago  I heard from other parents they better not lay a hand on my kids.  I kept my parents philosophy kids this is the way it is......         

[NM_Shooter]

Am I too late to play?

In reading through the reports, the principal's included, it does not state whether those who were hit by the airsoft pellets were engaged in playing and shooting others.  Were the students who were hit and showed welts merely innocent bystanders?  Or were they in the yard playing army with some fun toys? 

If the boy was shooting others who were not engaged in playing with him, then he should be disciplined.  If those who were shot were playing and aware that they were targets and were not in objection, then the school should butt out.

I suspect from the lack of information the latter condition.