CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

This left me wondering what the heck this lady was on.

I will have wait and write a better reply. I'm still laughing so hard at this part of the write up and the jab at Burress.

An irate Staten Island mom blasted a grade school principal Wednesday for treating her son like a pint-sized Plaxico Burress after he brought a 2-inch-long toy gun to school.

[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang[/color]
[/font]

Several parents at the school felt the principal overreacted, including Kim O'Rieley - whose son was playing with Patrick in the cafeteria.

Her boy's Lego man was toting a tiny ax, which the principal deemed less threatening.

LOLOLOL. Wow. That's incredible. Talk about taking things too seriously. XD I mean, they basically almost suspended the kid for bringing a choking hazard to school. XDD

This is idiocy.

This is so hilarious. I'm somewhere between face palm and rolling on the floor laughing.

:lol::bang::lol:

So ridiculous

Wow......people...seriously?? xDDDDDD

What is this world coming to when common sense is getting flushed down the toilet?

How dare that principal pick on a Lego! Did she ever think it was part of a bigger scheme to help broaden childrens' imaginations!? Bah hum bug! If I still had my Lego pieces I'd tell my police man Lego what she did...

not that that there is a good chance of getting a serious injury.

After remember about that so called gun that Fish just link, I have two comments about this.

Where I did think the principal overreacted a little too much. But with all the shootings at schools now a days, its better to reacted then not reacted at all, but still overreacted in it and if she saw that it was a toy gun. No harm, no foul.


Also, lets not forget that was in New York and at Staten Island. So it was not far from the 9/11 site and people up there are still jumpy, even after all this time since 9/11 happen.

I'm not saying that the principal did the right thing as how she overeacted and we shouldn't live in fear, but we shouldn't let our guard down as well.


[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang [/color][/font]

That principal freako idiot should pull his head outta his [rectum] and get a clue. Makes me wonder if the other kid would get in trouble if our schools also had a history of disturbed rampaging schoolkids killing classmates and faculty with axes as well as guns.

Maybe if it did shoot real bullets.. xDDD Maybe, the principal was itching for.. something.. I dunno, but that is pretty our there o.O

Lego phobias are real people, do you see what it does to principals?

Justified? But Roy, it was . . . a lego.

Fish and Chips (post: 1371568) wrote:I'm not saying it's likely, I'm just saying it's possible.

lolololol hahahahaha maybe THAT'S what the principle was afraid of...but, seriuslly, the lego gun wasn't anything like THAT. People are just parranoid these days...if they were ever not paranoid in the first place....and for some reason, the people in the USA seem to be a little more paranoid than Canada...or is it just me?

So hmm. How many people here would be calling the principal an idiot and irresponsible if that had turned out to be a real gun and the kid had shot other kids? All of them? Most of them? "I thought it was a toy." Yeah, I bet a lot of people would be saying "What an idiot, he needs to get his head out of his [rectum] thinking it was just a toy, now kids are dead and it's his fault!"

Just throwing that out there.

people in the USA seem to be a little more paranoid than Canada...or is it just me?

Yes, we're so paranoid. I mean, it's not like this sort of thing has ever happened before or anything, right?

Nate (post: 1371621) wrote:So hmm. How many people here would be calling the principal an idiot and irresponsible if that had turned out to be a real gun and the kid had shot other kids? All of them? Most of them? "I thought it was a toy." Yeah, I bet a lot of people would be saying "What an idiot, he needs to get his head out of his [rectum] thinking it was just a toy, now kids are dead and it's his fault!"

Easy there, Kevin Lomax. It was 2 inches. Plastic. In the claw of a toy figure.

I'm not playing devil's advocate. I'm being serious.

Okay, I admit, after they found out it was a toy, they should have dropped it and just said "Please don't bring that toy to school anymore." I don't deny that.

But to use tired old phrases, isn't an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure? Isn't it better to be safe than sorry? Given that school shootings are not rare by any stretch of the imagination, it is his DUTY to investigate these kinds of things. If she didn't, she would be a terrible principal.

We also don't know the specifics. All the article says is, "He was playing at the lunch table and brought out the toy gun, and then the mother got a call from the principal." That's a pretty big gap in time there. No statement on whether it was a teacher or another student who said anything.

So know what probably happened? Some kid was watching them play and said something like "Cool he has a gun!" Some teacher overheard this. Said teacher went to the principal and said "This boy has a gun!" Principle went to investigate.

Now again, I do admit after they found out it was a toy gun, they did overreact. I do not deny this. But given that this is likely what happened (I really doubt a teacher or the principal saw the toy gun and went "Holy crap, a gun!"), how can you fault her? If a teacher came in and said "Someone in the cafeteria has a gun!" what kind of principal would she be if her response was "Ah it's probably just a toy, ignore it!" No, when you hear something like that, you have to act.

The response was perfectly appropriate. What happened after they found out it was a toy was not, but again, I'm not talking about what happened after, I'm talking about the initial response. And I think we can all agree that a principal who would not investigate a claim that a student had a gun should not be holding that job, especially if it HAD been a real gun and people had been injured.

Wikiwalker wrote:Justified? But Roy, it was . . . a lego.

Justified no as she did overreacted some. But look at Fish's link and see that is a working gun. How can the principal have known it was just a lego.

Like I said, if the principal had check it out and then saw that it was a lego. Then no harm and no foul as I said before and the principal should just told the boy to put it away.

It just kind of ironic that some have overreacted in calling the principal an idiot, irresponsible and she needs to get her head out of butt over a principal that may have overreacted a bit.

[font="Book Antiqua"][color="Red"]Col. Roy Mustang[/color]
[/font]

What is our world coming to when something as innocent as a lego get's a principal, a family, and the news hyped up. It's really sad when you think about it. A combination of ignorance, fear of the past, and bitterness of the past. I understand why the principal would be scared, but if they knew it was just a silly lego piece, then why didn't they just say "Don't bring that toy anymore." ? I mean sheesh! They didn't have to suspend and traumatize the poor boy.

Fish and Chips (post: 1371568) wrote:I'm not saying it's likely, I'm just saying it's possible.

Oh it is definitely possible. The principle wouldn't want him to put someone's eye out would he?

At some point it is just more effective to go on a mass murdering rampage with the cafeteria forks, though. Doubly so, when you think of the quality of the food served.

Nate (post: 1371643) wrote:I'm not playing devil's advocate. I'm being serious.

Okay, I admit, after they found out it was a toy, they should have dropped it and just said "Please don't bring that toy to school anymore." I don't deny that.

But to use tired old phrases, isn't an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure? Isn't it better to be safe than sorry? Given that school shootings are not rare by any stretch of the imagination, it is his DUTY to investigate these kinds of things. If she didn't, she would be a terrible principal.

We also don't know the specifics. All the article says is, "He was playing at the lunch table and brought out the toy gun, and then the mother got a call from the principal." That's a pretty big gap in time there. No statement on whether it was a teacher or another student who said anything.

So know what probably happened? Some kid was watching them play and said something like "Cool he has a gun!" Some teacher overheard this. Said teacher went to the principal and said "This boy has a gun!" Principle went to investigate.

Now again, I do admit after they found out it was a toy gun, they did overreact. I do not deny this. But given that this is likely what happened (I really doubt a teacher or the principal saw the toy gun and went "Holy crap, a gun!"), how can you fault her? If a teacher came in and said "Someone in the cafeteria has a gun!" what kind of principal would she be if her response was "Ah it's probably just a toy, ignore it!" No, when you hear something like that, you have to act.

The response was perfectly appropriate. What happened after they found out it was a toy was not, but again, I'm not talking about what happened after, I'm talking about the initial response. And I think we can all agree that a principal who would not investigate a claim that a student had a gun should not be holding that job, especially if it HAD been a real gun and people had been injured.

I can't think that anyone is really complaining because a principal did their job Nate.

There's some kid out there who managed to land their name on an FBI watch list, despite only being two years old at the time this became a problem six or so years ago. And no, their name wasn't Ibn Battuta or Adolf Killinguy, it's some common borderline white-bread American name. Regardless, obviously if this kid's name is on some list, airport security has to pay some attention. They don't have photographs, necessarily, or a timeline when these people were born, so of course they have to, and should, investigate it when something pops up. But the minute the realize he's just some kid, that should douse the fire alarm in their heads. Perhaps they'll still check him briefly because it's procedure, but by in large, the problem is over when you realize your potential terrorist threat is eight-years old. And a boy scout.

Instead I have to read some news article on the Internet about how this kid's family always has issues flying anywhere because every single time airport security treats the little guy like he's a major incoming threat, patting him down, frisking him aggressively even, delaying them long stretches of time with corporate red tape, continuously, for six years.

Meanwhile, elsewhere, some guy I imagine wasn't on a watch list tries to blow people up with his underwear.

Obviously if there's any kind of rumor or report that some kid brought a gun to school, they should investigate it. Nobody is saying they shouldn't investigate it. It's just that the minute someone, anyone, holds the assumed efficient killing machine between their thumb and forefinger and realizes it's plastic should cool the situation down before the principal has to detain some kid in the office and call their parents.

....but it was 2 INCHES LONG!

airichan623 (post: 1371717) wrote:....but it was 2 INCHES LONG!

THAT'S WHAT... nevermind.

The principle is a fine example of idiocy. I brought a Lego man with a sword to school when I was around 10 and did not get in trouble for it. The boy wasn't disobeying any rule whatsoever, so the principal overreacted and needs to apologize. Sheesh.

Common sense, where art thou?

Warrior4Christ (post: 1371740) wrote:Common sense, where art thou?

Nonexistent! Well... meaning common sense as an entity doesn't exist. =p

Fish and Chips wrote:I can't think that anyone is really complaining because a principal did their job Nate.

And yet, judging from the responses of everyone here, they're doing just that.

I haven't seen a single person besides Roy say "Gee, she had the right idea, but she took it a bit far." No, everyone seems content to say "HA HA SHE'S SO STUPID LOOK AT HER DUH IT'S A LEGO NOBODY HAS COMMON SENSE."

This isn't directed at you, Fish (far from it, you and Roy seem to be the only ones actually reading posts in it), but judging from people's responses even AFTER my post, it seems I'm merely posting just to read my own words. Everybody seems content to read the opening post, read the headline of the story, and then just say "She dumb, Legos are small, she dumb!"

It seems everyone here is content to think that the principal walked by him at a school lunch table, saw a Lego gun, and said "A gun, that's dangerous, he'll kill us all that psycho!" Despite the fact that this is obviously not what even came close to happening.

But I guess I'm just posting to see my own words again. I'm sure everyone will continue to ignore this and continue to laugh and attack a strawman without even trying to understand the situation. That's cool though. As the saying goes a horse can be led to water but they can't be forced to drink.

Obviously if there's any kind of rumor or report that some kid brought a gun to school, they should investigate it. Nobody is saying they shouldn't investigate it. It's just that the minute someone, anyone, holds the assumed efficient killing machine between their thumb and forefinger and realizes it's plastic should cool the situation down before the principal has to detain some kid in the office and call their parents.

And again, I agree wholeheartedly. But again, we don't know the whole story. As I pointed out, there's a sizable gap in the news article, which goes straight from "playing at the lunch table" to "kid's mother gets called." I already stated the steps that likely led to the kid being investigated, and the necessity in the principal having to act.

However, what else happened? I find it hard to believe that if a kid theoretically had a gun at school, that classes would go on as normal with nobody else paying attention. As soon as the principal heard the words "Student possibly has a gun" a lot of things could have happened. There could have been evacuations. There could have been a lockdown of the classrooms. These are things that need to be done BEFORE the investigation commences for the safety of the people in the building.

Even if it was a toy, the kid would still be indirectly responsible for causing a commotion and disrupting school work. Anyone who states that the kid should not be held responsible is admitting "The principal should not investigate rumors that a student has a weapon" because it necessitates that the work day be interrupted for people's safety. Even if the kid didn't mean to do this, it was his fault. Again, the principal COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN that it was a two-inch Lego gun when she first heard about it.

This is why I'm saying everyone seems to be saying the principal shouldn't have done her job, because they're all going "TWO INCH LEGO GUN ROFL SHE DUMB."

Now, should the kid be suspended for what he did? No, he shouldn't, and he WASN'T. The headline even says "nearly suspended" meaning he did not get suspended. It says he had to sign a paper but that's par for the course; you can't have an evacuation/lockdown of a school and then not mention it in paperwork as to what happened.

Maybe the principal is mean. Okay, fine. That is pretty bad. I had mean principals too and they sucked and also sometimes made me not want to come to school. I can sympathize with this! The principal should totally be nicer. But as far as I'm concerned, she is a good principal. She did what was necessary to protect lives. The kid said "I'm never bringing a toy to school again." GOOD. School isn't a place to play with toys ANYWAY. What was he doing with toys in school in the first place? Heck, he's lucky he got to keep the toy! I had a toy with me one day in second grade and the teacher took it from me because I was playing with it, and guess what? She kept it. I told my dad and know what he said?

"You shouldn't have brought a toy to school."

So this kid brought a toy to school. He caused a commotion because of what was probably (I don't know either, so I can only assume logically what happened) a misunderstanding. He was forced to take responsibility for the situation he created and plays victim, saying the "mean ol' principal" is out to get him.

And somehow the principal is the one who's to blame? Sorry, I don't buy it at all.

But I have a feeling nobody will pay attention to me yet again. Return to your normal strawmen attacks.

I read your posts and I can see your point but I still think that the principal owes the kid and his mother a freaking apology.