Should kid at CHS with toy gun have criminal charges filed against him?

dave said:

How are minors made aware of this law?

Probably the same way they're made aware of any law?  And it's in the Code of Conduct, which they receive every year, including the relevant legal references.

Ok.  I never received codes when I served my time at MMS and CHS.  Not that I would have read them probably.  But I also didn't bring my plastic M16 to middle school because I had to carry a trumpet (the fake gun was a S.W.A.T. edition sold by either Eva's Toys or the Five and Dime shop, I forget).    I also had a real appearing musket from Williamsburg with decent trigger action and gun powder tabs to make it sound off and smoke a bit.    Everyone is so on-edge these days, understandably, of course, even if gun crimes are half of what they were when I had my fake guns.   Earlier this year a first grader in Colorado was sent to the police for pointing a finger gun at a kid and saying bang.  (A finger gun is a gun made with one's own hand, it's not a new type of weapon that shoots plastic fingers as ammo.)     

There are fake guns that look exactly like or very closely like real guns  Kids have been shot/killed by police because they thought they were real. This type of "toy" can be very dangerous. We don't even know when it was discovered to be fake or what the child was doing with it (I.e. Such as making threats). It's naive to suggest it was just a toy since that implies it was a harmless mistake. We don't know that and it could have caused a very dangerous situation.

Can I ask why that kind of "toy" is even legal? If it can get a kid killed by police who think it's the real thing, how could this possibly be a good thing for a child to have???

The bigger question is, why are the guns themselves legal? 

PeggyC said:

Can I ask why that kind of "toy" is even legal? If it can get a kid killed by police who think it's the real thing, how could this possibly be a good thing for a child to have???

ctrzaska said:

dave said:

How are minors made aware of this law?

Probably the same way they're made aware of any law?  And it's in the Code of Conduct, which they receive every year, including the relevant legal references.

Typically, a 15 year old knows not to bring a fake gun to school.

dave said:

Earlier this year a first grader in Colorado was sent to the police for pointing a finger gun at a kid and saying bang.  (A finger gun is a gun made with one's own hand, it's not a new type of weapon that shoots plastic fingers as ammo.)     

Thank God he didn't wrap a rubber band around his fingers.  

deborahg said:

The bigger question is, why are the guns themselves legal? 

PeggyC said:

Can I ask why that kind of "toy" is even legal? If it can get a kid killed by police who think it's the real thing, how could this possibly be a good thing for a child to have???

Bigger, yes, and completely different. While I would be totally on board with legislation that would make it tougher to get assault rifles and other serious weaponry, I think it's a totally separate issue that children have access to things that LOOK just like those weapons. I'm taking one issue at a time here. Why on earth do we start indoctrinating our kids to WANT these things by letting them have fake ones that look just like the real thing???

Replica guns are legal because the movie industry requires them.

Herr Schmidt,

Thank you.

TomR

Sometimes fake guns are used in robberies instead of real guns, as they are cheaper and somewhat safer, but frighten people just the same.

Intent should count for something. In NJ a BB gun would meet the definition of a firearm.

It amazes me that young girls being sexually assaulted triggers a request for a powerpoint by the victim with the attacker but a kid with a toy gun goes to Essex County Jail.

Not saying he shouldn't be charged. But if the idea is that the district was compelled to report it, leading to charges, they are also compelled to report sex assaults. 

One kid ends up in Kearny the other nothing.

One kid has no victims, a pretend weapon- jail, life potentially ruined with criminal charges.

Other kids real victims, real assault, real forced sexual contact- nothing.

someone could commit an armed robbery with a plunger handle too.  That statute is in all likelihood void for vagueness as no one knows what an "imitation firearm" is.  Our legislature hard at work.

What were the other charges?

Don't know since he was a minor, and records aren't open, right?

Jackson_Fusion said:

Intent should count for something. In NJ a BB gun would meet the definition of a firearm.

It amazes me that young girls being sexually assaulted triggers a request for a powerpoint by the victim with the attacker but a kid with a toy gun goes to Essex County Jail.

Not saying he shouldn't be charged. But if the idea is that the district was compelled to report it, leading to charges, they are also compelled to report sex assaults. 

One kid ends up in Kearny the other nothing.

One kid has no victims, a pretend weapon- jail, life potentially ruined with criminal charges.

Other kids real victims, real assault, real forced sexual contact- nothing.

agreed.   this is an example of the school to jail pipeline.   overreaction and severe penalties should not substitute for teaching and disciplining minors in a way they can learn there are consequences to actions.

I can't see any outcome of this issue where the health and well being of one of the students in our community - albeit one who brought a scary looking, illegal toy to school - is going to be improved.   We typically take the worst case action and bring it to the nth degree, costing us in our pockets at the end of the day for services we never needed.

Very true, hoops.

Once again, when dealing with minors, there is virtually *no* detailed public information available. This is by law and not due to a whimsical and/or malicious withholding of infomation by CHS authorities. 

Whatever fantasies we are all spinning about what occurred in this case, it seems counterproductive to rush to judgment about the way the administration, law enforcement, and others are handling it. 

Sorry to repeat myself, but this thread is starting to remind of similar "break out your torch and pitchfork" moments based on complete lack of information/spreading of misinformation in recent years. 

deborahg said:

Once again, when dealing with minors, there is virtually *no* detailed public information available. This is by law and not due to a whimsical and/or malicious withholding of infomation by CHS authorities. 

Whatever fantasies we are all spinning about what occurred in this case, it seems counterproductive to rush to judgment about the way the administration, law enforcement, and others are handling it. 

Sorry to repeat myself, but this thread is starting to remind of similar "break out your torch and pitchfork" moments based on complete lack of information/spreading of misinformation in recent years. 

I enjoy a good tongue clucking at the unenlightned as much as the next guy, but if you're hoping that the people paying for the schools and police department who have kids in the district are going to stop talking about, questioning, and debating the reaction to a simulated weapon being brought into a school you're bound to be disappointed.

And as a "by the way"- the school's duty of privacy does not extend to generally reporting on incidents without attaching student names. This came up in the sexual groping discussion months ago- the school tried to tut tut that they were unable to discuss the incident because of privacy laws, and then reversed course and addressed the specific incidents, as they are most certainly permitted to do.

A hypothetical- if a minor blew up a garbage can and got arrested for it, do you really believe the school and police department are barred from acknowledging the incident?

And if they're not, would they be barred from describing the incident ("a student threw a firecracker in the garbage.")? Of course they aren't.

You are free to disagree of course, and if your view is still to suggest that residents leave these issues strictly to the purview of government functionaries, without review or discussion by citizens, "no".

no...he should however be penalized at school. Suspension, detention or extra work such as a longgggg essay.

Jackson_Fusion said:

You are free to disagree of course, and if your view is still to suggest that residents leave these issues strictly to the purview of government functionaries, without review or discussion by citizens, "no".

My takeaway from deborahg's comment was not that she would "leave these issues strictly to the purview of government functionaries," but that she objected to a "rush to judgment." There's a difference, it seems to me, that allows room to be cautious about the latter and let a continuing investigation proceed (it may be that the "numerous charges" aren't yet known because they haven't been filed yet) short of advocating a strict abnegation of public curiosity, discussion and oversight.

I understand that this is the internet, where people don't typically wait for info before expressing an opinion.  But I guess what I don't get is why people immediately jump to the conclusion that the school district is hell bent on destroying a kid's life by overcharging him with criminal complaints.  "Showing someone a toy gun" can be anything from "hey, look at this cool toy" to brandishing a toy that looks exactly like a real weapon to terrorize or rob someone.  So until we know more about what really took place, how do we know whether or not the charges are appropriate?

ml1 said:

I understand that this is the internet, where people don't typically wait for info before expressing an opinion.  But I guess what I don't get is why people immediately jump to the conclusion that the school district is hell bent on destroying a kid's life by overcharging him with criminal complaints.  "Showing someone a toy gun" can be anything from "hey, look at this cool toy" to brandishing a toy that looks exactly like a real weapon to terrorize or rob someone.  So until we know more about what really took place, how do we know whether or not the charges are appropriate?

Thank you.

@ml1 @daveschmidt and @peggyc, thank you. @JacksonFusion, Dave is correct. I have three kids in the district and am not known for being shy about "weighing in." But wild speculation and inflammatory language aren't the same as "talking about, questioning, and debating."

ml1 said:

I understand that this is the internet, where people don't typically wait for info before expressing an opinion.  But I guess what I don't get is why people immediately jump to the conclusion that the school district is hell bent on destroying a kid's life by overcharging him with criminal complaints.  "Showing someone a toy gun" can be anything from "hey, look at this cool toy" to brandishing a toy that looks exactly like a real weapon to terrorize or rob someone.  So until we know more about what really took place, how do we know whether or not the charges are appropriate?

exactly! thank you.

It is New Jersey law, you cannot bring a toy gun to school, you will be charged. It is also school policy. You have the school and the state. Maybe there needs to be a reminder at the beginning of the school year. I am sure a lot of students don't know this. Hell the adults don't know it and I am sure that many students are not diligently reading the handbook

h4daniel said:

It is New Jersey law, you cannot bring a toy gun to school, you will be charged. It is also school policy. You have the school and the state. Maybe there needs to be a reminder at the beginning of the school year. I am sure a lot of students don't know this. Hell the adults don't know it and I am sure that many students are not diligently reading the handbook ">

Great, another example of supposed adult legislators doing the exact wrong thing for the people they represent.   Of course not all laws on the books are enforced to the letter of the law.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rmad9etKHGE

deborahg said:

@ml1 @daveschmidt and @peggyc, thank you. @JacksonFusion, Dave is correct. I have three kids in the district and am not known for being shy about "weighing in." But wild speculation and inflammatory language aren't the same as "talking about, questioning, and debating."

I suppose we simply have different definitions of "wild speculation and inflammatory language". The discussion seems pretty tame. 

kids can't play with toy guns on school grounds but if we have a war they're forced to play with real ones.  

This isn't Sierra Leone.