State’s Attorney Kevin Lyons isn’t charging an eight-year-old boy who brought an unloaded gun to school, but he is charging the gun owner with whom the boy lives.
Arwon Clark, 30, of 1401 NE Glendale Ave. will face charges of endangering the life or health of a child, a Class A misdemeanor, and failure to secure a weapon, a Class C misdemeanor.
This is the right move. Media reports indicate that the kid didn’t know what he was doing and was not bringing the gun to school with the intent to harm anyone. Specifically, he removed the magazine from the gun before bringing it to school (can’t hurt anyone with an unloaded weapon), he may have broken the magazine when he removed it, and he “showed it to a group of boys in the bathroom.” I think it’s pretty clear that he was not taking it to school to shoot anybody, but just to show it to his friends for whatever reason.
The adult in the household (nobody know what relation the man is to the boy, if any) is the right person to charge. Leaving a loaded gun where the kid can get to it is a recipe for disaster. The kid could have shot himself (or others) playing with the gun and trying to remove the magazine.
Apart from legal charges, however, the boy still needs to face school discipline for bringing a gun to school. Bringing weapons to school cannot be tolerated or excused. Even unloaded weapons could be used to intimidate since only the person holding the gun knows whether or not it’s loaded. According to the Journal Star, “Peoria Public Schools District 150 spokesman Chris Coplan declined to discuss specifics of the case Monday, saying generally that the boy would be subject to the same weapons policies as other students.”
The boy and his friends were lucky. If the father had left a round in the chamber, the gun could have still fired once, even with the magazine removed. I doubt the boy understood this.
I am a gun owner. All of my guns are under lock & key…and only I know where the key is [I keep it under my pillow].
My son knows that every weapon is to be treated as if it were loaded…no exceptions! Unfortuantely, this kind of thing happens all to often.
I am shocked by many of the commenter’s on the PJStar story who think the owner of the gun should not have been charged. Can’tunderstand how anyone could possibly think that. Like it’s perfectly acceptable to have loaded guns laying around the house within children’s reach.
Really, does anyone believe that the student didn’t understand what he was doing? Sure he may not have intended to harm anyone, but a 3rd grader, in today’s society, knows what bringing a gun to school means. He was showing off. Thank goodness, this time, the news found out about it and this offense wasn’t ‘hidden’ like the other guns, knives, etc. that have been brought into Franklin have been. I honestly believe the ONLY reason we know about this is because the teacher is a tenured teacher, and the principal couldn’t bully her like she was able to do with the non-tentured teachers that had weapons in their classrooms.
The gun was NOT loaded the clip was in the case with the gun(where else are you suppose to keep it) NO round in the chamber.
Will the child be EXPELLED under the district’s zero tolerance policy.
Paul the gun cannot fire if the clip is removed this is a built in safety feature.
third graders – never mind what society they live in – do not have a real appreciation of this situation. They are THIRD GRADERS. Not little adults. I’m sure “Teacher” is right about the teacher, but I hope they cut the child a break. Zero Tolerance = Zero Common Sense.
I think the District 150 has a zero tolerance policy. I would assume zero means zero without all the ifs and buts considered. It may seem harsh but it is the only to insure that everyone knows that rules are rules. That said, I do believe including toy guns in the policy is extreme–but this wasn’t a toy.
Eye in the Sky;
Unless your pistol is equipped with a magazine disconnect it will fire a loaded chamber with the magazine removed. You should always clear the chamber visually and with a finger tip when you unload it… lot’s of folks have had negligent discharges because they forgot to clear a semi-auto rifle or pistol and left a round “in the pipe”
a gun was brought to a school, and that is unacceptable no matter the intent. a statement that bringing a gun to school is unacceptable, has to be made here for all parents with guns in the house. charging an eight-year-old child wouldnt be proper, so the next logical choice is the parent. maybe next time the parent will be more responsible, and will educate their child about guns. we are very lucky an eight-year-old child somehow had at minimum, enough knowledge to take the clip out.
Too often District 150 cuts students a break–bad precedent. Whatever the rules are on the books, that’s the rule that should be followed. Some rules aren’t made to be broken. Please remember that many, many children (almost all) come to school every day without weapons. Yes, it’s unfortunate that an adult didn’t care enough to protect this child from the rule that is on the books. District 150 often has trouble adhering to the rules on the books. That’s why the district is in such a mess. Yes, we should have compassion for this child–and he/she will undoubtedly, if expelled, will be placed in a alternative setting–maybe the best lesson he will ever learn. If he isn’t asked to learn this lesson, a very different message will be sent to him and to all other children and their parents.
Some of you have never been around 3rd graders. I have at Tyng Primary. About 5 years ago, I had to disarm a 4th grader with a switch blade in the lunch room. I have seen 3rd graders that can swear at you that would make a sailor blush. Teacher knows exactly what she/he is talking about. They see it every single day. This little shit knew exactly what he was doing. Break the rules, and they are told the rules (they simply don’t care about rules because they live with idiots who don’t care) then live by the rules. Kiss him goodbye.
Gun owner and NRA Member, and I agree with the adult being charged and the child being expelled and sent to an alternative school until the beginning of the next school year. This would satisfy the rules, and give the child the opportunity to redeem himself having paid the consequences of being unable to finish the year with his classmates.
MANY students and their parents believe that rules are meant for OTHER PEOPLE. Why should they have to walk in a line, or take their hats off in the building? Why should they not be allowed to ROAM around the school at any time of day WITHOUT a visitors pass? Why can’t they pick their children up 15 minutes early EVERY day because they want to “beat the crowds”? Why shouldn’t the teacher give their child extra time to do an assignment given a week ago? This list could go on and on. I’m sure you are seeing the picture. SOME people think that because they have the SAME color of skin as the principal, they should get preferrential treatment……sometimes it is the case, other times NOT. Some parents think that if the teachers don’t bend over and kiss their rear ends, they will go TELL the superintendent on them and HAVE THEM FIRED. Yes, I have heard it all. Now, when parents start taking responsibility for THEIR actions (gun easily found by a child), MAYBE their children will too. Oh, yes, I forgot, they don’t have to……they get ONE MORE CHANCE…..when will society learn that if you make a STATEMENT in response to weapons at school the first time, there will be no more POTENTIAL catastrophes. I certainly will not bet any money on Peoria’s schools…..ticking time bomb for sure.
D150 Teacher, I think there are administrators of both races in District 150 who have adopted this permissive mindset. Quite honestly I believe these administrators believe they are helping kids by giving them all these breaks. That is a mindset that needs to be changed–but it is quite prevalent. All of the parental attitudes and/or expections that you mentioned are fostered by administrators who can’t or won’t be consistent. I firmly believe that if the rules were clear cut and followed–no exceptions–the parents and their children would conform. I’m not comfortable with the “same color skin as the principal” argument. That works both ways–both races. I have witnessed white kids getting preferential treatment by administrators (and maybe skin color was the same). I’m just not sure race is the deciding factor–I think it is more about principals being unable or unwilling to apply the rules to friends and favorites–and that has always happened and has little to do with color. So probably black principals have more black friends just as white principals had more white friends.
Sharon: I agree. I never stated WHAT skin color….could be purple.
I believe the Dist 150 high schools and some of the middle schools are completely out of control. The cursing that goes on to the teachers, numerous students able to roam the halls every day, the lack of total respect is all due to the lack of consistency with consequences. And the consensus is it isn’t just one school but many. You are right D150teacher, the students know that most of the time nothing will be done to them. This will continue unless administrators get a handle on these kids. Forget the parents helping out as most of them have the same mindset of their kids. And it is unbelievable how many parents have their student leave early from school for no particular reason. I don’t know how a teacher has any time to teach when they have to babysit all day long.
cttsp5 said: “I believe the Dist 150 high schools and some of the middle schools are completely out of control. The cursing that goes on to the teachers, numerous students able to roam the halls every day, the lack of total respect is all due to the lack of consistency with consequences. And the consensus is it isn’t just one school but many.” I don’t necessarily think that the admin think that they are doing the kids a favor. I feel they want to not know. Then they aren’t accountable. If you admit there is a problem, then you would be obligated to deal with it. Was is the official propaganda? There are no discipline problems in 150. I told some teachers we should go to a board meeting. Interupt whomever is speaking. Say the most foul vulgar possible profanity. Oh, and throw things at them such as pennies, crayon and ink pens. Would they say, “its ok they are staff and they have had problems or would they have campus police arrest all of us? Of course, this is why admin never just drops in, they are afraid
In my opinion there should be no lee way in this matter. Both the child and the parent should suffer the consequences. Both broke the rules. Parents, or whoever owns the gun, leaving weapons where children can find them. Children taking weapons to school knowing full well it is against the rules. A third grader knows the difference. If it causes the parent to have to go to the trouble of getting the child in another school that is their problem. But neither should be excused in any way. Also, making them adhere to the rules sends a message to everyone else that this will not be tolerated by anyone. Zero tolerence means zero tolerence. Commit the crime, pay the time. Rules are rules and they are NOT made to be broken. They are made to protect everyone.
I think it should be mandatory that every board member and the Superintendant & others on Wisconsin spend several days in each high school sitting in the deans office, walking the halls, in the lunch room, in a classroom, and etc. Then they need to move on to different primary and middle schools to observe those. I would also think that each candidate running for the school board would want to do this so they would see what the schools are really like and where some of the problems are. But you are right JANUS1975, they won’t; because they are afraid.
District 150 policy follows the Illinois School Code (including treating “look alike” firearms as weapons). The policy/School Code states that the student “shall be expelled for at least one calendar year, but no more that 2 calendar years.”
However, the policy and Illinois School Code also provide that the time period of expulsion can be modified by the Superintendent or School Board, on a case by case basis.
Even though suspension is required, it isn’t zero tolerance as the Superintendent or Board can utilize their discretion with respect to the “sentencing”.
The following Wikipedia article on zero tolerance in schools describes both claims for and against. However, the only research evidence listed is decidedly against, and the American Bar Association finds that minority students are most likely to suffer negative unintended consequences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_tolerance_%28schools%29
If the law states that the expulsion must be for at least one year, how can a lesser amount of time ever be up to the superintendent or board? Or is the time discretionary between one and two years? Jon, you seem to be mixing suspension and expulsion. If the law says “expulsion,” then how can suspension only be a consideration?
Yes, I should have said “expulsion” each time (as in “Even though EXPULSION is required….”)
The law specifically gives the superintendent and board the ability to CHANGE the amount of time (consider the 1-2 range a “guideline”, though I believe 2 years may be the max in any case.) Here’s a link to the Statute (you have to scroll down to Sec. 10-22.6(d)
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?DocName=010500050HArt.+10&ActID=1005&ChapterID=17&SeqStart=54400000&SeqEnd=76900000
Jon – you are always up on the School Code. What happens when a child is expelled for the school year and does not have the ability to gain admittance into an another school system — does District 150 still have a duty to provide tutoring, home-schooling assistance, anything???
“does anyone believe that the student didn’t understand what he was doing?”
teacher… what do you teach, and were you not required to take psychology and child development classes?
It is an absolute fact that an 8 year old DOESN’T understand the consequences of bringing a gun to school. They can’t. Their brains are incapable of formulating that proposition.
Being outside the school system for a year could be the best thing that ever happens to this or any other kid.
In keeping with Frustrated’s question, Jon: Someone on another blog has said that Quest Charter School has a demerit system that states that a student will be removed from Quest if he/she receives x number of demerits. I assume that is considered expulsion. Aside from the demerit question, what if a student is expelled from Quest? In District 150 after a student is removed from school for a specified time of expulsion (often just a semester), the student is allowed to return to the District 150 school. Now for my main question: If a student is expelled from Quest, does Quest have to accept the student after he/she returns from expulsion or does the student have to return to a regular District 150 school? Also, 5th, 6th, and 7th graders in District 150 probably are placed in an alternative site during expulsion. Does District 150 have to place those on expulsion from Quest since Quest has no alternative site? Financially speaking, wouldn’t Quest have been paid state per pupil money for an expelled student while he/she may actually be in a 150 alternative site?
Ok, an 8 year old doesn’t understand the consequences, but I can bet that this 8 year old knows what a gun can do. When I taught at Franklin my students told me how their dads were pistol whipped, shot, involved in shootings, etc. If this child was honest he would tell you he knows what guns are used for.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/374400/february-15-2011/mr–smith-goes-to-the-state-legislature–then-later-possibly-washington—ron-gould?xrs=share_copy
Colbert addresses the gun issue with Ron Gould’s new bill.
Arizona SB 1201
“If this child was honest”???
Charlie, You don’t think he might have lied to avoid getting into trouble? I have students who lie about much less to avoid getting into trouble.
I have little doubt that the statements the child made were untrue. Whether he was lying or being creative, I wouldn’t hazard a guess.
Most children lie to keep themselves out of trouble–even the best of them do that. Many adults do the same. It’s human nature–self-preservation. The truth is that this particular child did unload the gun–that does tell us that he was aware of some rules and/or that he really didn’t want to harm anyone. All those extenuating circumstances should not in any way preclude the punishment for the act of bringing a weapon to school. Our own speculations here prove that we can’t pin down motivation, intention, etc.–all we can judge is the act itself. That’s where District 150 frequently gets into trouble–trying to make decisions based on such “reading of the mind” excuses as “He really didn’t mean to do it, she was just being a kid, she had a bad day, etc.”
Frustrated – There is a bit of a difference in handling a suspension or expulsion depending on whether or not the student has a disability (and whether or not the actions by the student leading to the expulsion are caused by the disability). Assuming disability is not an issue, once a student is expelled, there is no requirement by the school district to provide ANY services. The district MAY refer the student to an alternative school, though not every region in the state has alternative schools and those that do might already be full.
http://www.illinoisprobono.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=4115
Sharon, regarding expulsions, as I told you before on Emerge’s blog,
“When it comes to discipline, Quest and other charter schools must follow the same rules as all public schools (such as due process)”
Quest’s policy states:
“Excessive suspensions or a level three offense may lead to expulsions. Expulsions are recommended by the principal and acted upon by the school board.”
Once the expulsion term is over for a student, he is treated like any other student. Specifically, the law states:
“Enrollment in a charter school shall be open to any pupil who resides within the geographic boundaries of the area served by the local school board.”
There are different alternative schools types. For example, Greeley is a REGIONAL alternative school that D150 runs (and is paid) for the Regional school district. It is thus open to other schools than just D150. The Illinois School Code has provisions for these regional alternative schools. (105 ILCS 5/13A)
I believe that the Knoxville Center was created under 105 ILCS 5/13B of the School Code. As I understand it, these types of programs are not required, though the state does provide funds for them (how much these days, who knows?) so IF a school district wants the funds, they need to comply with that particular section of the School Code.
The link I posted for Frustrated dealt with suspensions/expulsions for students without a disability. Here is the link for students WITH a disability.
http://www.illinoisprobono.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=4116
The author states:
“The school is required to provide services to your child with a disability that will enable your child to continue to participate in the general education curriculum and progress towards meeting the goals set out in the child’s IEP.
If your child brings weapons or drugs to school or to a school event, or causes serious bodily injury, the school may send your child to an “interim alternative educational setting” for up to 45 school days.”
Lastly, I’ve answered you before on how Quest is compensated. While I don’t have the specifics with me, the first year is a fixed sum. The following years, it is 85% of the district average per pupil cost – based on average enrollments at several different times of the year. As such, your concerns about Quest being paid for expelled students they no longer would have should be abated. Incidentally, that first year fixed payment is far less than 85% of the per pupil average.
Sharon, since you have such an interest in charter schools, alternative schools and suspensions/expulsions, I suggest, yet again, that you actually read the Illinois School Code on those issues.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=1005&ChapterID=17
D150 and Quest both have their policies listed on their websites, and the D150 policy manual is particularly helpful as it cites the applicable sections of the Illinois School Code for each policy.
Jon provided: The policy/School Code states that the student “shall be expelled for at least one calendar year, but no more that 2 calendar years.” and according to
Illinois Pro Bono organization: “The school is required to provide services to your child with a disability that will enable your child to continue to participate in the general education curriculum and progress towards meeting the goals set out in the child’s IEP. and . . .
If your child brings weapons or drugs to school or to a school event, or causes serious bodily injury, the school may send your child to an “interim alternative educational setting” for up to 45 school days.”
SO, if the young student that brought the gun to school has an IEP the school will not be permitted to expel the student for a period specified by the school policy/school code for such offense (1 to 2 years), but rather will be limited to 45 days during which time they will have to pay for a tutor.
Am I understanding that right Jon? Anyway, thank you for providing me with the information.
If the student has an established IEP, it must be a determining factor in how discipline is administered.
The IEP team has to do a review to determine if the problem behavior was related to the student’s disability. The school cannot exclude or expel a student for any behavior related to the student’s disability. However,they may suspend the student for a short time; and the school must still provide services.