Holy Smokes!!! This country is off it's collective head.

[afong56]

Wow dude... First of all, get off the damn hippy G20 bandwagon! If you're in a public place where cop cars are being lit on fire, stores smashed in (in effect, a riot, no?) and you appear to be supporting it, and the cops say to leave, you LEAVE if you really are a peaceful protestor. You think you would know that it's not the image you want to be associated with, and you would leave so the cops could do their job of protecting people without your tofu eating ***** in the way.

Second of all. I grew up in a house with guns. I was exposed at a very early age. In fact, I have a picture of me at about 3 years old holding my dad's REAL shot gun with a few dead geese on the floor in front of me. Guess what? I grew up doodling guns, cars, bikes, whatever it was that a kid can be interested in.
Most of my friends were the same, we all grew up with guns in the house. And wow, not one of us died from a fire arm! I actually felt safer knowing that down stairs we had a case full of rifles and shot guns and that it was likely we were able to defend ourselves. In some house holds, guns are a common thing. I would think that any responsible parent that is also a gun owner would show and explain the gun to their kids, simply for safety reasons.

The guy has a case. I too have a "record". It's in the past, I paid my dues and I've been strait ever since. I managed to get my PAL after, have a military career etc. If I was arrested simply because I have guns and there are kids in the house and I f*$%#d up at some point in my past, I would be ******. Especially the humiliation of being arrested IN PUBLIC, put in to a cruiser in cuffs IN PUBLIC, taken away, being strip searched (I bet you have no idea how humiliating that is), and my kids being taken away with no explanation and then held for hours without being told why.
When I was arrested I was told out right why... I wasn't strip searched and was treated somewhat respectfully and I was actually guilty of something. This guy had done nothing wrong.

This is why I hate city people. Ignorant, selfish, self righteous jack offs.

i had no problem with them targeting the looters and black bloc. . .too bad the vast majority of people who got arrested were neither. . .pay attention next time, before you spout the usual empty neo-con rhetoric. . .

btw, lay off the ban-worthy insults of city people, you're making it personal, when it shouldn't be. . .fyi, i haven't lived in the city for over two decades. . .

Your kids pasted this stage a long long time ago mate so I stand by my original statement. Would you like to see my 6 year old's toy gun collection? He has 6 nerf guns and he loves each and everyone. His kid sister who's 4 also loves playing with them. Here's a news flash since it's been almost 10 years for you and your full time 4 year old experience. Kids at this age are attention whores and sometimes lie to get that attention. Accroding to your logic I can expect an anal probe if they ever draw a picture of there favorite toy and says "Daddy loves to point guns at us", lie and say it's a real gun.

if you have a criminal record with an assault charge, then yeah, you deserve extra attention. especially when it comes to kids. anal probe? probably too harsh. . .but definitely extra attention. btw, i have plenty of nieces and nephews still in that age category, so i see them all the time.

Sounds like my kids are about the same age range as yours, and if I was strip searched and locked up every time either of my sons drew weapons in school, I'd still be in there. Total nonsense locking up someone for what the child drew, in this case. There are way too many pansy *** oversensitive pussies in education. This could have gone nowhere if somebody had some ****ing common sense and just asked the kid if their father really had a gun. If yes, then dig in. According yo my kids kindergarten artwork, I have owned both light sabers and machine guns. And apparently we had pet dinosaurs.

i have a real problem with the fact that according to the accused, he was offered a job position in that school. i thought all workers (teachers, custodians, social workers, etc.) had to pass a criminal background check, and that it had to be clean. frankly, i would have a serious problem with anyone, and i mean anyone, with a criminal record having access to children, especially an assault conviction. i somehow doubt any of the parents in this thread would blithely discount that fact when it came to their own children.

still glad that protocol was followed. . .better safe than sorry, when it comes to children.

 

[BusaBob]

Originally Posted by mikbusa
Sounds like my kids are about the same age range as yours, and if I was strip searched and locked up every time either of my sons drew weapons in school, I'd still be in there. Total nonsense locking up someone for what the child drew, in this case. There are way too many pansy *** oversensitive pussies in education. This could have gone nowhere if somebody had some ****ing common sense and just asked the kid if their father really had a gun. If yes, then dig in. According yo my kids kindergarten artwork, I have owned both light sabers and machine guns. And apparently we had pet dinosaurs.



What this guy said.

Double and Triple that!!!

 

[BusaBob]

....I think the bulk of the problem here lies with CPA. But I don't think there is any one in particular the blame lies with, there is enough to go around.

I'm inclined to believe that a greater share lies with the teacher for starting the whole "sky is falling" nonsense over a drawing.


A side note on the absolutely absurd anti-gun culture we've devolved to: my sister and her husband were dragged into the administrator's office of my 3 year old nephew's daycare to be told that the daycare has a ZERO tolerance policy on violence. My nephew's "crime?" Holding his hand in the classic shape of a pistol and making "pew-pew-pew" noises. The administrator said that my nephew would be expelled if he did it again.

 

[BusaBob]

still glad that protocol was followed. . .better safe than sorry, when it comes to children.

perhaps...but it could have all happened with better discretion, respect and consideration for the "accused" given the circumstances.

 

[eastcoast_gsx]

I'm inclined to believe that a greater share lies with the teacher for starting the whole "sky is falling" nonsense over a drawing.

I don't think it was simply about the drawing, it seems to be more in response to the answers to the questions posed to the child.

As for the reaction to a 3 year old finger gun and "pew pew" that is absurd to the n'th degree.

 

[BusaBob]

I don't think it was simply about the drawing, it seems to be more in response to the answers to the questions posed to the child.

but why even question a 4 year old about such a drawing? and what were the questions asked and how?

 

[eastcoast_gsx]

but why even question a 4 year old about such a drawing? and what were the questions asked and how?

That's a good question

 

[mikbusa]

but why even question a 4 year old about such a drawing? and what were the questions asked and how?

Exactly!

Newsflash: 4 year olds are INSANE! They make up stories, and say all kinds of crazy ****. That's what being a kid is about.
Lead them at all and they'll admit to anything, and embellish stories. Good times.

 

[coyo]

I don't think it was simply about the drawing, it seems to be more in response to the answers to the questions posed to the child.

As for the reaction to a 3 year old finger gun and "pew pew" that is absurd to the n'th degree.

^^^ What he said.

 

[afong56]

perhaps...but it could have all happened with better discretion, respect and consideration for the "accused" given the circumstances.

could you clarify as to what greater discretion, respect, or consideration could have been afforded the accused? other than the strip search, which, given that it was a weapons call, i believe it is standard procedure. . .

afaik, it was the accused that made this whole incident public, and took it to the media. just exactly who is supposed to exercise greater discretion?

 

[braveheart]

afaik, it was the accused that made this whole incident public, and took it to the media. just exactly who is supposed to exercise greater discretion?

what an idiotic statement. making it public AFTER THE FACT. the fact that it happened is the friggin problem.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Man, I love National Post articles

First line, bias much?:
"Even in a country with gun laws as warped as Canada’s"

I see that as objective reporting.. Maybe a little low-key, but pretty accurate.

Exactly!

Newsflash: 4 year olds are INSANE! They make up stories, and say all kinds of crazy ****. That's what being a kid is about.
Lead them at all and they'll admit to anything, and embellish stories. Good times.

What they should have done was call the father and say "Your kid drew a picture of you holding a gun and we just wanna see what's going on there." He would have replied "Sometimes when my kid is scared, I scare away the monsters with my water pistol." That would have been the end of it. No need to turn a drawing into a Gestapo witch hunt.

 

[afong56]

what an idiotic statement. making it public AFTER THE FACT. the fact that it happened is the friggin problem.

get over yourself, buddy. read the freakin' post. he's asking for greater discretion.

do you understand that the root word of discretion is 'to be discreet'? how does the accused going to the media indicate that greater discretion is what the accused wanted?

absolutely nothing in how it was handled (prior to the accused going to the media with the whole affair) suggests that indiscretion by the authorities occurred.

"making it public after the fact" is STILL indiscreet. big time.

i also fundamentally disagree with you that it was a problem "that it happened". hope you are that blase with the safety of your own kids when police are investigating a weapons call with a man convicted of assault in their school. . .lol. . .such simplistic thinking.

 

[afong56]

What they should have done was call the father and say "Your kid drew a picture of you holding a gun and we just wanna see what's going on there." He would have replied "Sometimes when my kid is scared, I scare away the monsters with my water pistol." That would have been the end of it. No need to turn a drawing into a Gestapo witch hunt.

maybe so, but nothing i have read suggests that everyone involved did anything other than what is established protocol.

the level of responsibility that is assumed by the hands of those we put our trust and children in, is much higher than what we expect for average adults and citizens. for a very good reason.

a lot of what happened to this guy may come down to the classic 'cya' principle, but i doubt many parents would challenge procedures that increase the safety of their children in school. the only way this guy should have an issue is if he suffered unusual treatment in that standard protocol was NOT followed. . .again, nothing i've read suggests this was the case. i stand to be corrected on this, but i don't think he faced extraordinary treatment.

every gun related call at schools is treated (with good reason) very seriously. . .they conducted an investigation and interviews, and once they realized that it was a misunderstanding, they released him immediately, with an apology. it could have ended there, with limited public exposure. suddenly, he goes to the media and spreads his mug all over the press, then people are calling for greater discretion?

 

[eastcoast_gsx]

it could have ended there, with limited public exposure. suddenly, he goes to the media and spreads his mug all over the press, then people are calling for greater discretion?

Was it him that did? If it was pickup time at school there must have been allot of other people there who may have asked questions or demanded answers to a guy being escorted off property by police (maybe they waited for the public to clear before taking him out)

 

[afong56]

Was it him that did? If it was pickup time at school there must have been allot of other people there who may have asked questions or demanded answers to a guy being escorted off property by police (maybe they waited for the public to clear before taking him out)

that's purely speculation. and yes, my version is also speculative. in fact, it could just as likely have been an over-zealous reporter who was chasing chatter on the police band.

however, the fact that he agreed to be interviewed, posed for a press photo with his daughter, and opened up his life and this incident in a very public way, was entirely up to him. any hope of discretion was lost for good when he chose to do that.

 

[fastar1]

get over yourself, buddy. read the freakin' post. he's asking for greater discretion.

do you understand that the root word of discretion is 'to be discreet'? how does the accused going to the media indicate that greater discretion is what the accused wanted?

Buddy,

The lack of discretion from the police was a problem because it reflected badly on the guy in the public eye. There was no way to undo the damage other than to make the whole story public to show his side of the story. So yeah, he only went public after the fact like braveheart said. In any case, he is a private individual while the school board, FCS and the police are all public institutions, so it really should have been entirely up to him to decide what and how much was revealed, at least until they had probable cause.

Besides, discretion also means showing good judgement:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discreet

Not that the cops showed discretion in that sense either.

 

[mmmnaked]

This problem shouldn't have left the school office, period.

Those of you blabbing about proper procedures, discretion, blah blah are nuts. This "problem" should've at the most EXTREME come to a quick end with a conversation with police, in the school office. Everything that happened afterwards was complete horse****. Arrest, strip search, child services, house search; my god.

 

[afong56]

Buddy,

The lack of discretion from the police was a problem because it reflected badly on the guy in the public eye. There was no way to undo the damage other than to make the whole story public to show his side of the story. So yeah, he only went public after the fact like braveheart said. In any case, he is a private individual while the school board, FCS and the police are all public institutions, so it really should have been entirely up to him to decide what and how much was revealed, at least until they had probable cause.

Besides, discretion also means showing good judgement:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discreet

Not that the cops showed discretion in that sense either.

no one, including yourself, has demonstrated how he was treated in a fashion that was in any way different than established protocol.

no one, including yourself, has been able to substantiate how 'public' his incident was, prior to the press reporting it. all we have is his claim that he was publicly put down (i'm paraphrasing). . .whatever that means. it could mean that he was embarrassed that the same prinicipal that previously like him now saw him in a different light. it could mean that he lost face in front of the school secretaries, or his kids' teacher. we don't know, and he never qualified or quantified his statement in the press, unless there's a different news account that i missed.

so, what exactly are you basing your assessment that the authorities lacked discretion? (in either sense as you have defined it)

 

[mmmnaked]

so, what exactly are you basing your assessment that the authorities lacked discretion? (in either sense as you have defined it)

Discretion is the power or right to decide or act according to one's own judgment. In such a situation, officers have to use a great deal of their own discretion. There's no written protocol about what to do when "a child draws a gun in school". The situation easily should've dissolved inside that office, with a simple conversation. The cops made the wrong judgement in choosing to arrest this man and put in motion the ensuing events.