Jump to content

George Hopkins - soothsayer


Recommended Posts

For reference: August discussion of Cadets and the "implements of war".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... The school can't prohibit a t-shirt with a handgun pointed at the viewer that says, "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" worn by a deranged-appearing student and allow this dad's daughter to have an NRA t-shirt with an image of a gun...

Sure they can; it is called context and common sense. For example: A shirt with a silhouette of someone using a rifle to blow the head off another human is not the same as a shirt with a Marine Corps logo and a silhouette of a Marine holding a rifle standing guard over the American Flag. The idiocy of 'no tolerance' creates situations like the child who was instructed by his teacher to draw a picture of what his dad does for a career, and that child is subsequently ejected from school for drawing an Army Man holding a rifle.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, speaking of the need for " consistency ", wouldn't it be a step in the right direction for progress to let the local taxpayors, local school officials, parents, students, administrators to decide LOTS of issues for themselves, not only " dress codes" ? If we are in suppport of local decision making for appropriate "dress codes", can we likewise be in support of lots of other decision making powers to be made at the local community level as well, instead of those decisions being made by faceless bureaucrats thousands of miles away from these local communities ?

Yes, absolutely. Fortunately I'm not hearing a clamor in Washington for national standards on dress codes or marching unit color guard equipment. I for one am happy to refrain from giving them any ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all fine. I just wanted to know I could go to bed without waking up to find the head of one of my prized race horses in bed with me.

No, you're still getting the horse's head in your bed. It was already scheduled for next Thursday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago my color guard girls made posters for recruiting, one of which had a picture of a color guard rifle on it. They were not allowed to use that poster, due to the "violent nature" of the poster. :glare:

Years ago? How many years? You see, you're risking bursting the bubble of the anti-PC crowd, by suggesting that America isn't being ruined by a new PC trend, but rather that such things have always happened from time to time. This, after all, is just one case, and the knee-jerk compulsion to falsely extrapolate from a single case to the state of society in general is a way of life for some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is 2013, don't we think that if a Corps that is sensitive about some reaction to toy wooden rifles in their Corps ( that they've had for over half a century with no complaints ) might also be sensitive then to their name " the Cadets ", as well as their military style uniform choice, and its depiction as a " Corps " ? How many self described and named " Cadets" units that don military style uniforms utilize " curly thingys " in their marching ? How incongruous is that ? Also, what should the " 7th Regiment " Corps do ? drop their rifles and go with " curly things " only too for their " 7th Regiment Corps" ? This whole thing is so silly to me. If you don't like wooden faux toy rifles in your Corps... ( silly non issue to me)... then just go all the way and be true and consistent to it all... drop the phoniness name of being " the Cadets " wearing military style uniforms, with military bearing, military salutes by the DM, etc and still calling yourself a " Corps ", with a " Guard " etc. Either you are full in, or you are all out. Don't be half arse, imo, which only confuses most of the public at large because you are apparently confused now and in some sort of identity flux and apparent uncomfortableness with your unit's 75 year long classy traditional " Cadet- Style" visual look image to a few misguided folks now among the public at large.

will you stop trying to inject logic and common sense into drum corps?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you're still getting the horse's head in your bed. It was already scheduled for next Thursday.

But Boo's birthday is tomorrow, Saturday. The present will be late!!!

(from the Colts, I imagine, but we'll let him guess which one.)

Edited by drilltech1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the CBS article:

The shirt had a gun on it, which is not allowed by school police.
The school police are presumably employed by the district, and follow standards set forth by the district, which likely trumps what the principal might want to do. This transfers the blame from the principal to the school board, but doesn't eliminate the issue itself.
Here's the uncertainty: We don't know the stated policy on guns and gun imagery. If the policy bans likenesses or imagery, then the decision is not surprising. The policy may go too far, but they would have had to put in a specific exception for police, hunting or military references. It appears they didn't, or the principal didn't know it.
As to the guard rifles, any policy would need specific exceptions for security guard guns, police guns, and the color guard. If so, the dad is going to lose (after blowing some of the school budget on legal fees).
But ultimately, who cares what one principal did? Don't infer societal trends from case studies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...