Before we judge Lee for his writing, we have to know what the precedent was for acceptable writing in the past. VA Tech does not CHANGE what people can write. If the white kid who NAMED STUDENTS HE WOULD KILL AT HIS OWN SCHOOL AND IN THEIR PRESENCE was not arrested (and that, friends and neighbors, is what I would call a threat), then the VA Tech incident shouldn’t have changed things for Lee.

Cho (the VA Tech shooter) had a history of strange behavior and mental illness. Nikki Giovanni stated that she had him thrown out of her poetry class because other students were uncomfortable with him. Two female classmates reported him for stalking, but decided not to press charges. There is a trail with him.

Lee has never been in trouble before and has an A average.

If you can’t or won’t see the difference, you’re a moron.

For the last time before this thread drops off the page and I chose to forget it forever… If you make a threat of violence, there will be ramifacations. Call me when a First Amendment issue is posted.

However, if you’re going to kick him out, kick him out for his writing skills, not for the content. Damn…if this moron has a 4.2 then this country is in some major trouble. And don’t get me wrong, I don’t necessarily agree with what he wrote but I disagree with punishing him for what he wrote. At least he was being honest which is much more than what I can say for most of America’s writers.

Freakshow!!

If the student had anonymously or in a fit of anger said this directly to the teacher then yes, I would agree the threat is of concern. Yet, in a Creative Writing class where it is expected to be a work of fiction, then I really have reservations about using those same fictional words to persecute him. Especially when there was nothing else in this kid’s school record (we are aware of) to suggest he is a danger.

We have been focused on one sentence in a poorly written essay to condemn him. I want to think it takes more then that to criminalize a person. As I mentioned in #73, the journalist that wrote the story interviewed three experts. Each expressed some dismay that this should be considered a dangerous criminal act.

Stephan King taught English at a community college when he published his first novel Carrie 30 some years ago. Would you view it the same way if it was published today? (For any reader that didn’t read the book, it is about a High School girl with supernatural powers. She flips out during Prom Night when the school bullies do a nasty prank. Literally, she blows up the whole town, one piece at a time, including the High School. The movie had some decent special effects but missed the subtleties of the characters.)

No, not every single hostile act is truly wrong and criminal. Our dealings with others in society mean we must be able to accept that not everything will be a threat. I don’t want society to come to the point that I need to be extra careful not to bump into someone accidentally because it might be viewed as a threat and have a shoot out.

Now, let’s say you and I actually know each other and we get into a dispute over something (doesn’t matter what it is)… I’m angry and I say, “Fusion, don’t be suprised if someone breaks into your house and kills you.”

I obviously did not say, “I will break into your house and kill you.”

I ask you… Did I threaten you in that scenerio?

That teacher was not “inexperienced,” except in your little fantasy world.

Maybe you know how experienced she really is. The news article mentions she is in her first year of teaching. That doesn’t sound like experienced to me. But then maybe you know more. You may be psychic, or know her personally, or just like usual, throwing out shit you invented that doesn’t exist anywhere but your sick mind. Why use facts when you can just invent crap.

Anyone over the age of 6 who is not mentally retarded or psychotic knows without any doubt whatsoever that when any authority figure says “write / say / do anything you want to,” it always means WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT IS SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE, WHICH ARE KNOWN TO ALL.

Do you grasp that, you glue-sniffing, limp-dick imbecile? NO ONE BUT A MENTAL DEFECTIVE WOULD ASSUME DIFFERENTLY.

Gee, no, I don’t know that. So why don’t you tell us what is socially acceptable. Would it be that women have to wear dresses at least 2” below their knees? Would it be that you can’t describe a murder scene in an essay? Would it be that a student can’t wear a black armband to protest something they disagree with? Would it be close to treasonous to oppose the President’s view? What about an essay saying you would like to visit the leader of our worst enemy? What about showing a male breast, a female breast, or (gulp) genitalia? How about a discussion where the issue is tolerance of homosexual? If mass murder bothers you should we allow books that tell of killing everyone on earth excepting those on this boat? So please, PLEASE, tell us again what IS acceptable. We will never ever again make the unforgiving error of crossing the line. (/sarcasm)

Is it only you and neo-con fundys that want your social norms cast in concrete.

And BTW, who the fuck fed you the laughably idiotic idea that a threat has to be ‘direct’? Go learn something factual (for a change) about how ‘threat’ is defined under law, and while you’re at it, ‘intent.’

It sure isn’t your twisted idea. Obviously you have no idea what the law says about a threat. Please, PLEASE show me in his essay where he made an obvious or implied threat. Under the law, the threat must be obvious even if not explicit. He made no threat to the teacher. The reference (I assume) was after several sentences complaining about her cookies and teaching. In order to be a threat, the context must be taken into consideration.

So why don’t you take your own advice and learn a little about criminal law. Unless, your personal experience has given you a jail house lawyer’s …

With your inbred absence of any moral awareness and uncanny knack for cheering-on the wrong team, you really should’ve been a fuckin’ criminal defense lawyer. Seems like every time you open your PC piehole, it’s to spew another feeble excuse for some sorry fuckup, always absolving the mental / moral defective in question of all responsibility for brainless and / or evil deeds they themselves have deliberately perpetrated on others, and instead looking for sly, devious ways of passing the blame off on somebody else – usually, the real victim(s).

Seems that this kid isn’t the only one that has a hard time writing anything readable. They hauled this kid off to submit to counseling. This whole post of yours is so full of violent hatred YOU should be counseled. With all the vitriol you have spewed, you have yet to challenge anything specific. All you can do is scream invectiveness that I am wrong.

It takes a special sort of lint-brained bozo to continually fail to grasp what I, Jerk-Face, OFTLO, mark, Jägermeister, et alia have said, in our own ways.

Don’t insult these fine people. I respect all of them even if I occasionally disagree. You, on the other hand, will never be in their class. You insult them by your attempted inclusion. They are capable of making an argument and sticking to facts. You can’t.

Show me the threat in the essay. The news article interviewed THREE professionals who all felt the charges were silly. Or are they wrong too? Are they lint brained bozos? Or as the student said,:

Lee said Thursday he was “completely shocked” to be arrested Tuesday for his essay, especially because written instructions told kids not to “censor” what they wrote.
“In creative writing, you’re told to exaggerate,” said Lee. “It was supposed to be just junk. . . .
“There definitely is violent content, but they’re taking it out of context and making it something it isn’t.”

The story actually reminds me Minority Report too…

It takes a special sort of lint-brained bozo to continually fail to grasp what I, Jerk-Face, OFTLO, mark, Jägermeister, et alia have said, in our own ways.

That teacher was not “inexperienced,” except in your little fantasy world. She offered the same goddam assignment in the same way as countless tens of thousands of teachers have over X-knows-how-many decades – or centuries, more likely – to millions of students. There was no “loaded question,” you crosseyed dipshit. No fucking “rules changed.” What feeble crock of puke are you trying to feed us?

Anyone over the age of 6 who is not mentally retarded or psychotic knows without any doubt whatsoever that when any authority figure says “write / say / do anything you want to,” it always means WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF WHAT IS SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE, WHICH ARE KNOWN TO ALL.

Now go dust off your Reverend Al shrine and pray for a brain. Miracles can happen.

You make a good point in #68. Let’s not get carried away with the examples though. There was no other “crime” committed. He was in class, was told to write an essay, and did so. He made NO direct threat that he (or someone else) WOULD kill anyone.

As I said earlier, he followed what the inexperienced teacher asked for. She gave him a freedom ticket and then withdrew it because she didn’t like the results. It is wrong to make a judgement upon a loaded question where the rules changed.

In #69, clearly that would be a crime. To take any work of fiction and then turn it into a crime is punishable. In the essay, the only crimes are the bad writing and grammar.

Imagine if the student, instead of writing a threat against a specific person, he wrote a stick-up note for a bank. Describing exactly what the bank teller should do along with exactly what he would do if his directions were not followed.

After getting the “essay” back from his teacher, he uses it to rob a bank. He goes in, hands it to a teller, she pushes the silent alarm, and the kid is immediately arrested.

Here’s the important part: Could the kid argue as a defense any first amendment right to write the note? Nope. Could the kid argue as a defense that his teacher told him “not to censor” himself. Nope.

As I stated, there is no free speech right to commit crimes. Writing a threat against a teacher and then turning that note over to the teacher is an assault. And is no different from handing a note over to a bank teller.