• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

High school student expelled for off campus firearms in truck

Sons of Liberty

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
638
Location
Riverside, California, USA
imported post

Yes, it seems that the school board exercised action beyond its authority. As I see it, this kid's family has several options (IANAL):

1. Sue the school district (and each board member personally?). File an injunction against the school board's action. Finding the money to pursue this path is usually an obstacle.

2. Campaign to elect board members who do not share these views. Perhaps running family members against the incumbents. After all, it sounds like it'sa hunting community.

3. Private school. $$

4. Home school. (Personally, I find this option more and more attractive as I hear howbiased and closed mindedour education systemhas become.)
 

oc4ever

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
280
Location
, ,
imported post

Well ,the kid was not on school property

He did not have a prohibited concealable weapon

It was not loaded

He broke no law

Thats what he did right, and should be the end of it.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
except he and his parents made two major mistakes...

The gun should have been home,and the parents more in control of the weapons
(what 16 year old goes shooting before school class???)

He did allow the police to search his car/truck, which he should have refused to do.

Now he has no school to go to anymore.....predictable.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I like guns for self protection, and I used to hunt. But I sure would not like any 16 year old (and his friend) bringing them to school. Just too many bad situations with students and guns that have occurred.They end up being used for perceived self protection,not hunting. At a high school, that is only going to be tragic.

At first I was outraged at the school board, but the "father" in me thinks the kid needs way more parental control exercised in this child's life before tragedy strikes.
 

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
imported post

oc4ever wrote:
Well ,the kid was not on school property

He did not have a prohibited concealable weapon

It was not loaded

He broke no law

Thats what he did right, and should be the end of it.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
except he and his parents made two major mistakes...

The gun should have been home,and the parents more in control of the weapons
(what 16 year old goes shooting before school class???)

He did allow the police to search his car/truck, which he should have refused to do.

Now he has no school to go to anymore.....predictable.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I like guns for self protection, and I used to hunt. But I sure would not like any 16 year old (and his friend) bringing them to school. Just too many bad situations with students and guns that have occurred.They end up being used for perceived self protection,not hunting. At a high school, that is only going to be tragic.

At first I was outraged at the school board, but the "father" in me thinks the kid needs way more parental control exercised in this child's life before tragedy strikes.
Are you clinical? In a bunch of states, schools CLOSE DOWN when deer or turkey season starts. That is just the way it is. This kid didn't have that option so he went before school. Good for him, he should be praised instead of thrown under the bus.

A responsible 16 year old with a gun is not an issue. The kid is nearly an adult and obviously knows what he is doing and has been trusted enough by his parents to utilize such a weapon.

I would love to see where these weapons were used in "perceived self-defense"

Just to let you know, there is no legal minimum age in California to get a CCW permit...
 

oc4ever

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
280
Location
, ,
imported post

Pullnshoot, I am not "clinical", and you should be ashamed fora cheap comment like that. I have enough wisdom and can see both sides of this story.

Name one California public school that closes down for bird hunting season; your not really serious about that are you?

You write and speak as if you are a smart young man.

I can only also assume, because of your age,you do not have children in school,and must be lacking a lot of life experience in general, and regarding raising of children in particular. Have your ever witnessed someone that has bleed to death in front of you from a gunshot wound for just being at the wrong place at the wrong time? I have, and understand the tragedy that ensues fo rall of the family that are left behind.

You would better understand why that board acted (wrongly) the way they did, but with their heart and best intentions for the larger student body.

Maybe the parents will get a lawyer and sue and win 3 or 4 years from now when the kid should be in college instead of his mother home schooling him.

The fact that the kid might be mature enough to hunt, does not relieve him( and his parents )for not demonstrating good common sense and allowing him and his buddy to wander to school with multiple shotguns and ammo. Remember, at 16 years old, mommy and daddy are still civilly liable for all of"Johnnnie's "little gun mistakes killing things he was not supposed to. The parents should have set down hard and strict rules about weapons; and bringing them to high school is right on the top of no-no's.

This whole issue is all about basic right and wrong things to raise your child to do,and if the parents can't control that behavior, the school board thought it must. Guns and high school students, just don't mix very well.
 

wewd

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
664
Location
Oregon
imported post

He didn't bring any guns to school. This was not "show and tell". They were locked in his truck, unloaded, well off school property. He knew that he could not legally bring them onto school property, and he didn't try. You can't be any more responsible than that. And with hunting being as popular as it is in that community, he may not have been the only one with a shotgun in his truck. When my dad was going to school in Idaho and Washington back in the 50's and 60's, kids would bring their rifles and shotguns to school during hunting season and keep them in their lockers during class so they could go out and hunt after school. Every schoolboy also had a pocketknife. Nobody ever got shot or stabbed; it wasn't even conceivable. The only mistake the kid made that day was his admission and consent to a search of his vehicle. Zero tolerance policies are asinine and defy any sort of logic or reason, but that is to be expected when the people who enact and enforce them are completely devoid of both.
 

oc4ever

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
280
Location
, ,
imported post

Wewd, don't get me wrong. It was opening day of bird season, and I understand that this schools zero tolerance policy for guns was way overblown and the kid got a very tough excessive penalty. He was not on school property , but close enough,( I will assume on the street next to school )for the police dogs searching the school parking lots to hit on his car. You have to know khigh school students go out to their cars during breaks to drink/smoke dope, or generally do something they know they can't do on school property, and thats why they park off campus. I did.:lol: Having a gun "real handy" is a explosive mixture.

A much less severe penalty, or just a warning, should have been in order. I was raised in Imperial County, one of the best dove hunting areas around. I got my car license at 15 years old because of working on a family farm. I understand rural living. There was no way I would have asked my parents to go to school with a shotgun after hunting on opening day. You just did not do that ,and there was none of this zero torrerance BS to deal with then. No, this kid was not a gang member in LA, but neither were the ones in Columbine. When our society has the ability to distinquish the difference, we can let the good 16 year olds take all the guns with them to school they want. I still think the parents(allowing) and kid yo take a gun to school used extremely bad judgement.

If you look at a aerial of the school (google earth) it is obvious he was parked directly next to the school by the tennis courts. 203 N Murdock Ave, Willows, CA.
 

Poblacht32

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
78
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, ,
imported post

lil_freak_66 wrote:
foundthis over from my NRA group on myspace.

i think its from this state,as most of the comments are from california.

didnt see it on the first page,and im pressed for time so im posting it here.



http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_13831318




wtf is being done about this?? im all the way in MI and im pissed about it.

"In addition to the Education Code, the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995 bars possession of firearms within 1,000 feet of a school, but there are exceptions for private property and for lawful transportation of non-concealable weapons."

So does this mean that you can drive by a school when you're open carrying in your vehicle just going from point A to point B? The statement above in bold kind of confuses me.

I can't open carry in myvehicle because there's 5 schools in the area live in. No matter where I goI'm too close to a school in the part of the city I live in.
 

wewd

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
664
Location
Oregon
imported post

The state defines a concealable weapon as a handgun, revolver, or other firearm with a barrel shorter than 16". Anything not in those categories would be a non-concealable weapon, and would not therefore be required to be in a locked container when transported through a school zone.
 

Poblacht32

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
78
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, ,
imported post

wewd wrote:
The state defines a concealable weapon as a handgun, revolver, or other firearm with a barrel shorter than 16". Anything not in those categories would be a non-concealable weapon, and would not therefore be required to be in a locked container when transported through a school zone.
Ok I see! Thanks for the info.
 

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

oc4ever wrote:
Wewd, don't get me wrong. It was opening day of bird season, and I understand that this schools zero tolerance policy for guns was way overblown and the kid got a very tough excessive penalty. He was not on school property , but close enough,( I will assume on the street next to school )for the police dogs searching the school parking lots to hit on his car. You have to know khigh school students go out to their cars during breaks to drink/smoke dope, or generally do something they know they can't do on school property, and thats why they park off campus. I did.:lol: Having a gun "real handy" is a explosive mixture.

A much less severe penalty, or just a warning, should have been in order. I was raised in Imperial County, one of the best dove hunting areas around. I got my car license at 15 years old because of working on a family farm. I understand rural living. There was no way I would have asked my parents to go to school with a shotgun after hunting on opening day. You just did not do that ,and there was none of this zero torrerance BS to deal with then. No, this kid was not a gang member in LA, but neither were the ones in Columbine. When our society has the ability to distinquish the difference, we can let the good 16 year olds take all the guns with them to school they want. I still think the parents(allowing) and kid yo take a gun to school used extremely bad judgement.

If you look at a aerial of the school (google earth) it is obvious he was parked directly next to the school by the tennis courts. 203 N Murdock Ave, Willows, CA.


Let's take this thinking one step further.

The law PC 626.9 states that you can't open carry a handgun withing 1,000 feet of a school zone.

You are walking down the street, just one block away from the 1,000 foot mark, lets say 1,250 feet. Close enough. Let's charge you with a violation of PC 626.9.

The school stated that itacts legally in the place of the parents (loco parentis) from the time the child leaves his home until he reaches the school, and then from the time he leaves the school until he reaches home. So based on the schools definition, if the kid had left his house, gone duck hunting, then parked 15 miles from the school and walked the rest of the way, they would still be in the right if they expelled him if a cop from another county found the car with the gun in it.

This is just stupidity on the part of the school.
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

Decoligny wrote:
oc4ever wrote:
Wewd, don't get me wrong. It was opening day of bird season, and I understand that this schools zero tolerance policy for guns was way overblown and the kid got a very tough excessive penalty. He was not on school property , but close enough,( I will assume on the street next to school )for the police dogs searching the school parking lots to hit on his car. You have to know khigh school students go out to their cars during breaks to drink/smoke dope, or generally do something they know they can't do on school property, and thats why they park off campus. I did.:lol: Having a gun "real handy" is a explosive mixture.

A much less severe penalty, or just a warning, should have been in order. I was raised in Imperial County, one of the best dove hunting areas around. I got my car license at 15 years old because of working on a family farm. I understand rural living. There was no way I would have asked my parents to go to school with a shotgun after hunting on opening day. You just did not do that ,and there was none of this zero torrerance BS to deal with then. No, this kid was not a gang member in LA, but neither were the ones in Columbine. When our society has the ability to distinquish the difference, we can let the good 16 year olds take all the guns with them to school they want. I still think the parents(allowing) and kid yo take a gun to school used extremely bad judgement.

If you look at a aerial of the school (google earth) it is obvious he was parked directly next to the school by the tennis courts. 203 N Murdock Ave, Willows, CA.


Let's take this thinking one step further.

The law PC 626.9 states that you can't open carry a handgun withing 1,000 feet of a school zone.

You are walking down the street, just one block away from the 1,000 foot mark, lets say 1,250 feet. Close enough. Let's charge you with a violation of PC 626.9.

The school stated that itacts legally in the place of the parents (loco parentis) from the time the child leaves his home until he reaches the school, and then from the time he leaves the school until he reaches home. So based on the schools definition, if the kid had left his house, gone duck hunting, then parked 15 miles from the school and walked the rest of the way, they would still be in the right if they expelled him if a cop from another county found the car with the gun in it.

This is just stupidity on the part of the school.


Yes it is ridiculous how the school acts. I remember we would have fights after school like at a park a long ways from the school yet they could still punish the kids if they had just walked from school. Hell, they punished my ex's little sister for having a picture of her at a party with a beer on her myspace.
 

Streetbikerr6

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
389
Location
Folsom, , USA
imported post

Decoligny wrote:
oc4ever wrote:
Wewd, don't get me wrong. It was opening day of bird season, and I understand that this schools zero tolerance policy for guns was way overblown and the kid got a very tough excessive penalty. He was not on school property , but close enough,( I will assume on the street next to school )for the police dogs searching the school parking lots to hit on his car. You have to know khigh school students go out to their cars during breaks to drink/smoke dope, or generally do something they know they can't do on school property, and thats why they park off campus. I did.:lol: Having a gun "real handy" is a explosive mixture.

A much less severe penalty, or just a warning, should have been in order. I was raised in Imperial County, one of the best dove hunting areas around. I got my car license at 15 years old because of working on a family farm. I understand rural living. There was no way I would have asked my parents to go to school with a shotgun after hunting on opening day. You just did not do that ,and there was none of this zero torrerance BS to deal with then. No, this kid was not a gang member in LA, but neither were the ones in Columbine. When our society has the ability to distinquish the difference, we can let the good 16 year olds take all the guns with them to school they want. I still think the parents(allowing) and kid yo take a gun to school used extremely bad judgement.

If you look at a aerial of the school (google earth) it is obvious he was parked directly next to the school by the tennis courts. 203 N Murdock Ave, Willows, CA.


Let's take this thinking one step further.

The law PC 626.9 states that you can't open carry a handgun withing 1,000 feet of a school zone.

You are walking down the street, just one block away from the 1,000 foot mark, lets say 1,250 feet. Close enough. Let's charge you with a violation of PC 626.9.

The school stated that itacts legally in the place of the parents (loco parentis) from the time the child leaves his home until he reaches the school, and then from the time he leaves the school until he reaches home. So based on the schools definition, if the kid had left his house, gone duck hunting, then parked 15 miles from the school and walked the rest of the way, they would still be in the right if they expelled him if a cop from another county found the car with the gun in it.

This is just stupidity on the part of the school.


Yes it is ridiculous how the school acts. I remember we would have fights after school like at a park a long ways from the school yet they could still punish the kids if they had just walked from school. Hell, they punished my ex's little sister for having a picture of her at a party with a beer on her myspace.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

If the school were actually acting in loco parentis with regard to students parking off-campus, it would have told him "No!" to begin with. Not later, once the police need something to hurt him with.

By their logic, they could claim to be acting in loco parentis anywhere and everywhere, regardless of the facts. :quirky

Either you're playing the role of parent, or your not. Clearly the only person in position to play parent for students off school campus, is a parent.
 

lil_freak_66

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
1,799
Location
Mason, Michigan
imported post

Streetbikerr6 wrote:
Yes it is ridiculous how the school acts. I remember we would have fights after school like at a park a long ways from the school yet they could still punish the kids if they had just walked from school. Hell, they punished my ex's little sister for having a picture of her at a party with a beer on her myspace.

its very ridiculous,i actually was threatened with expulsion in my freshman year in highschool for having myspace pictures of me with a charles daly shotgun,which was all black.

they tried claiming it was a threat,because i had gotten onto myspace during computers class and it was my display picture,which the teacher saw.

nothing anywhere written by me had stated a threat,nor implied one either.

that took 6 months of work to get sorted out.

this student obviously took measures to make it legal,parking off campus,unloaded and probably encased firearms.

another thing to consider is this.

he may have had to consent to a search,i know my school has(or had,i amunsure,i switched after the aforementioned incident)a policy that if you refuse to consent to a vehicle search they can and often will suspend you for 2-4 school weeks,not allow you to take your vehicle to school,and if you are a bad student they have been known to just do end of the year expulsions.

im not sure how it is there,but thats something he may have had to consider,not thinking that anything like this could happen because of the lawfully owned firearms.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,221
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

The County Board of Education has just overturned the expulsion.

http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_14247428

Quote: Willows High School Principal Mort Geivett said the education board's decision may handcuff school officials' ability to keep campuses safe. "A decision like this today clearly compromises the safety of our kids," he said.

This principal needs to be FIRED. I grew up in the next town up I-5 from Willows, my late wife was from Willows, I lived and worked in the next town down the road. In that community firearms in the hands of young hunters is an acceptable and normal part of daily life.

There is a lot of talk in the Chico-ER (newspaper) article comments about how they hope the "kid learned his lesson". I hope so too. The government IS NOT your friend, NEVER consent to ANYTHING, and "stand up for your lawful rights and you'll be labeled a troublemaker".

Now it's time for the civil suit for violation of civil rights. Let's see......

1) Unauthorized seach (K9 sniffing) of vehicles outside the school property.

2) Unlawful request by school to run the license plate of the vehicle.

3) Local PD running the plate for the school without proper legal authority.

4) Intimidation/color of authority in intimidating the student to "consent" to a search of his vehicle.

5) Long term (October/November until now) unjustifiable expulsion.

6) Attorney's fees

7) Defamation of character

8) Mental anguish

Part of any settlement should include the termination of the principal, termination of any and all private contract "searches" (K9 or otherwise), letter of appology from the school district, and a letter of appology from the PD for violating the law and running the individuals license at the request of a non law enforcement entity without due process.



I think the entire student body (with drivers licenses) should get locking firearms racks and park off campus with their hunting shotguns or rifles in the rear window. Oh the horror!!!!!
 

N6ATF

Banned
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,401
Location
San Diego County, CA, California, USA
imported post

We-the-People wrote:
The County Board of Education has just overturned the expulsion.

http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_14247428

Quote: Willows High School Principal Mort Geivett said the education board's decision may handcuff school officials' ability to keep campuses safe. "A decision like this today clearly compromises the safety of our kids," he said.
No, it protects the safety of kids from treasonous pieces of human excrement like you, Mr. Geivett. You're lucky treason is not prosecuted when it comes to criminals in government.
 

inbox485

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
353
Location
Riverside County, California, USA
imported post

There is a mile long thread on this at http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=251093.

To sum things up:

- The student was in possession of a firearm while going to school which is a violation of a zero tolerance policy.
- The school policy has jurisdiction any time a student is going to, coming from, or at a school activity whether on school grounds or not.
- The dog that sniffed the truck was neither owned nor handled by any form of law enforcement. It was a private security company that was soliciting the school to use their services.
- The company notified the principal who then matched the license plate to the student and pulled the student out of class.
- The student volunteered that he had guns in the truck and gave permission to search the vehicle.
- The principal seeing that the student had been in possession of the firearm on the way to school was required by law to suspend him and recommend expulsion.

I'm glad he got reinstated, and I wish the principal had not been so enthusiastic about kicking the kid out, and I wish the district didn't take so long to hold what should have been a next day hearing. But it was the student that violated the school code, and it was the student that volunteered information and consented to the search.

The dog handler didn't break any laws by walking through a public parking lot to see if the dog detected anything. Supplied with probable cause that a school code had been violated, the principal didn't violate the student's rights by pulling him out of class to ask what was in his truck that set the dog off. The principal also didn't force the student to volunteer that he had a gun in his truck and he only saw the gun when the student showed it to him. The principal should have been more understanding and dragged his feet on the disciplinary matter and the district should have made the issue a moot point within a day or two, but the source of the issue is that the kid screwed up and has been cleared. If only 626.9 violators could get off on having made an innocent mistake.
 

inbox485

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
353
Location
Riverside County, California, USA
imported post

We-the-People wrote:
Now it's time for the civil suit for violation of civil rights.  Let's see......

1) Unauthorized seach (K9 sniffing) of vehicles outside the school property.
Walking a dog past a car in a public parking lot is perfectly legal. And it was a private company not even employed by the school, so your tax dolors were not involved.

2) Unlawful request by school to run the license plate of the vehicle.
It was on file with the school as part of the students parking permit.

3) Local PD running the plate for the school without proper legal authority.
Local PD didn't run the plates.

4) Intimidation/color of authority in intimidating the student to "consent" to a search of his vehicle.
The student volunteered the information and was fully corporative. The principal was free to ask. The student was free to not answer.

5) Long term (October/November until now) unjustifiable expulsion.
Discipline was done per school code requirements.

6) Attorney's fees
Good luck

7) Defamation of character
Perhaps I missed where the school lied about anything.

8) Mental anguish
Getting busted tends to do that even if you didn't intend to do something wrong.

I think the entire student body (with drivers licenses) should get locking firearms racks and park off campus with their hunting shotguns or rifles in the rear window.  Oh the horror!!!!!
Good luck
 
Top