WTF is up w/LiveJournal? *kicks it*

[apocalypsos]

Anyway, I've heard of principals acting like morons, but this is ridiculous. Dude, if you're going to expel the kid who throws a pie in your face at an event you signed up to participate in, save yourself the extra paperwork and don't sign up. Sheesh.

Comments

Re: Aha. A little digging

[issendai.livejournal.com]

I know it will be--but why should it be? Is a crime less wrong because the criminal is good at his day job? Can good writers get away with plagiarizing every once in a while because they're so good the rest of the time? Justice is supposed to be blind, not blinded.

Re: Aha. A little digging

[nute.livejournal.com]

Apples and oranges. Nothing wrong with favoring the good students over the slackers. At least until the system gets fixed. There's a correlation to behavior and grades, and while not every 4.0 student is a role model, and not every failing student is a delinquent, the connection is often there.

If it was, say, a student who was barely passing - the odds would be a lot greater that they intended to hurt the principal out of spite and frustration, a desire to lash out. A student who's doing exceptional (seeing that a 3.4 these days is not only acceptable, but exceptional. Feh.) would have no such reason.

Re: Aha. A little digging

[issendai.livejournal.com]

There's a correlation with officially recognized delinquency and grades, which is strengthened because when "good kids" get taken in for drug abuse, drunk driving, vandalism, and even rape (remember the Spur Posse? All but one were acquitted), they're far more likely to get let off the hook.

A correlation between dumbassery and grades? Not so strong. Grades measure intelligence, not wisdom. What the kid did didn't require a criminal mind or even a hooligan streak; it required him to embrace his inner moron for a minute. At 15, the inner moron is real close to the surface.

So: Why should what the kid did be any less wrong because he makes good grades?