Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

jaybeezo t1_jdcm927 wrote

The kid was on some kind of disciplinary plan that required him to be frisked every morning at school. He had likely threatened this exact action towards staff/students.

So everyone, including this kid's parents, knew he was a risk. Was he still able to get one of his parent's guns or did he score it on the street?


skytomorrownow t1_jdcqj3j wrote

> The kid was on some kind of disciplinary plan that required him to be frisked every morning at school. He had likely threatened this exact action towards staff/students.

I'm curious why these kinds of students cannot simply expelled? Once you need to frisk someone, that seems to be adequate grounds for them to simply be removed for safety reasons.


Scribe625 t1_jdd86li wrote

I work at a school and can attest it's ridiculously hard to expel a student and it's impossible if the student has any kind of IEP or a 504 plan because they're considered special education students and there's a ton of regulations schools have to follow for those kinds of students. I've had students violently assault staff members without any consequences because the administration is only allowed to suspend them from school 10 days total for the year so the administration feels they have to choose those days wisely, which the student knows so they know they can just keep assaulting people and have no reason to stop.

To expel a student for behavior issues requires the school to find and pay for their education somewhere else. Unfortunately, these few available alternative schools are selective and will then insist after a while that the student is ready to return to regular school since there's always a wait list and they want to free up a spot for another student. Then the student returns, can't cope with the regular school and does something that gets them kicked out and placed in a different alternative school. It's a horrible cycle and the returned students are usually more dangerous because they want to do something to get themselves out of the regular school again. I've had newly returned students try to commit suicide at school because they can't cope in a regular education system, and it's frankly terrifying as an educator.


EchoStellar12 t1_jddny8g wrote

You can absolutely suspend students with IEPs and 504s for more than ten days. You are required to hold a manifestation hearing and a superintendents hearing prior to giving more than ten. Purpose of the meetings is to prove, one way or the other, if the actions were a result of their disability and if the accommodations/modifications/programs outline in the IEP/504 have been adequately provided.

Source: Am special education teacher, have sat in on several of these meetings, had a student removed from school for the remainder of the year after making a threat in September.


dthornbu t1_jde1alj wrote

Fellow special ed teacher here, you are spot on, the only issue is if the manifestation hearing finds that the discipline issue was a result of the disability, that's when it gets murky (so I have been told, I have never seen it first hand).


EchoStellar12 t1_jdeuphi wrote

That's absolutely true, but typically it's a question of "does the kid know right from wrong?" The answer is generally yes, even if the student is classified emotional disturbance.


insidiousapricot t1_jdgynpj wrote

Damn I got expelled in 7th grade because a forgotten tiny cheap pocket knife, one of those ones with a toothpick that isn't even as sharp as scissors, fell out of my pocket changing for swimming. I was a good kid never any issues and good grades. They sent me to some program with other expelled kids who were actual troublemakers. And they told them I was a smart kid before I got there so they were making fun of me the moment I walked in lmao. Good times!


skytomorrownow t1_jddvir7 wrote

Thank you for the insight. It seems like school districts need more funding for building and employees. That seems to be a core issue across the country.


KulaanDoDinok t1_jdcriq5 wrote

No Child Left Behind Every Child Succeeds Act. A child can’t be expelled without finding an alternative.


DTFH_ t1_jdcw848 wrote

That's not quite the full truth, they can be expelled BUT the school loses funding for that student and is required to pay for an alternative, so this school like all do the calculus and 99% of them choose to keep funding rather than send the student out of district and potentially be on the hook to pay more than the student generates in district. Basically profits over people at work yet again.


Banshee3oh3 t1_jdcxk3h wrote

As someone who has lived in Denver since conception, East is a MASSIVE high school. Probably one of the biggest in Colorado. Keeping 1 student that might bring in 1/5000 the budget at the expense of every else’s safety is pretty dumb. Not only that, but East is also pretty wealthy in comparison to other public Colorado schools. No excuses here not to expel him. It’s more about how Denver sacrifices the future of everyone for a select few disasters.


DTFH_ t1_jdcxvxo wrote

From Denver too and they may only bring in 1/5000 but the alternative could cost 4/5000, so a net loss, this is not specific to Denver but to all education in all states. With this in mind you'll understand how this totally 'unexplained' tragedy keeps playing out time and time again with a new shooter in another state.


Banshee3oh3 t1_jdcydv1 wrote

I just explained how this entire thing could have been prevented. Stop trying to save every single kid. I’m sorry but some kids just have it made to end up in a cell or a ditch. That’s the reality. Expel students who are deemed a legitimate threat, and stop searching them every day. That only agitates the situation.


DTFH_ t1_jdcz7a7 wrote

Student safety does not matter, only cost; the motto in this country is 'money over people'. That's why HS graduation rates are at all time highs while reading scores of those graduating are at all time lows. The courts have ruled teachers are not entitled to safety and the police are not there to protect the people.


Banshee3oh3 t1_jdczps0 wrote

Yeah sadly… The entire public education system is on a whole other level of screwed. Maybe appropriately adjusting student costs to be equal with budget increases per student would fix this. Right now, the cost to keep a student enrolled is lower than the budget increase you get from 1 student. That means it’s ALWAYS a net positive to keep them in school, or what was simplified in the past as, no child left behind. Another policy paved with good intentions that have led to hell.


DefinitelyNotAliens t1_jddbz6i wrote

Curious, why doesn't Denver schools have an alternative school in-district?

My much smaller school district had an alternative school so they didn't expell them, they just moved to self-paced alternative schools. They can go there to continuation high schools voluntarily or the day schools non-voluntarily. We have both. Day schools are for behavioral and attendance issues.

One of our continuation schools has a full preschool program for free for students and takes babies 6+ weeks, so kids can finish their high school at an accelerated pace or catch up and get daycare. Have a diploma, not a GED. Totally free. They even hold parenting classes. If you enroll your child there one class per day is in there learning parenting skills.

They also have a at-risk student school for habitually truant/ violent students who didn't or won't divert into continuation schools and an online school platform for kids who are sick or dealing with other issues and can't attend on campus. You can also get shoved there pending explusion and movement into alternative programs.

Like, why wouldn't Denver have alternative programs? It costs the district here, not their original school. The state gives extra funding for it, even.

My city is smaller than Denver, too.


DTFH_ t1_jddcpy0 wrote

They very well could have alternative schools but that does not mean if alternative schools have the resources to students, and what I have seen is that many alternative schools could be 8 to 10 times the cost, meaning the district would have to cover that student at that price with parental approval for the student to be transferred. So if the parent has been involved and been a roadblock every which way the school can't do anything besides keep them in district.


DefinitelyNotAliens t1_jddl2xx wrote

We have two versions, the 'parent/ student agree' version which is usually like some truancy, minor behavioral or just... traditional school didn't work version. We also have the "you're at this school now, don't end up in prison" version. They're two separate campuses.

The "you're a danger" version is not in any way, shape or form a parental choice. You will go there. The regular school is no longer an option.


DTFH_ t1_jddpepv wrote

The latter requires an educational lawyer to act on behalf of the school, which the school will again avoid at all costs especially if the parent or guardian is not on board and/or is actively being a roadblock to proper placement which is not uncommon. You will go there pending proper paperwork.


BestCatEva t1_jde08n8 wrote

I’ll wager you’re not in the US Southeast. I remember this ‘up North’ but nothing like this exists in many, many states.


ComprehensiveAdmin t1_jdd1t0q wrote

It has absolutely nothing to do with funding.


DTFH_ t1_jdd4ksg wrote

Sure what's your analysis? I understand it as relating to NCLB in that students are entitled to an education or being provided an alternative at the schools expense.


ComprehensiveAdmin t1_jdd4u9f wrote

It’s the expulsion process itself, and the look for districts when they expel students.


DTFH_ t1_jdd5mg6 wrote

How do you think somehow schools districts all across this county came to the same conclusion regarding expulsion, if expulsion is not related to funding as per NCLB's requirements?


Faptain__Marvel t1_jddxpl3 wrote

Then there is the race thing. Predominately white school districts booting predominately young black men always causes problems.


jereman75 t1_jdd8a31 wrote

Everything has to do with funding.


ComprehensiveAdmin t1_jddd987 wrote

I tend to agree with you on this in about every situation, but not this one. I would be curious if this student was on an IEP. That is typically the primary reason students with extreme behaviors are not expelled. Trust me when I tell you that a few thousand dollars in funding for one kid isn’t going to be the deciding factor in whether to expel or not.


robexib t1_jddf68v wrote

Eh, depends.

I was damned near expelled after a series of terrorist threat allegations that were proven in a courtroom later to be falsified as a means to have me expelled. The reason for the accusations?

I was attempting to talk to a guidance counselor. Seriously.


SOUTHPAWMIKE t1_jdemv14 wrote

Jesus. You can't just drop a bomb like that in here without any follow up. I'd love to know more, but obviously please don't talk about anything you aren't comfortable with.


robexib t1_jdesk9s wrote

So, in my school district, the administration were seemingly on the cut when it came to admitting students as special education students, whether they needed it or not. Apparently, a chunk of that funding was lost if any of those students were to transition out of special education for any reason.

I wanted out. My parents wanted me out. The guidance counselor's office were aware of my situation, but couldn't do much. The only folks who had any issue were in the administration, and were either principals or vice principals. I needed their permission to take standard education classes, which would be invariably denied. No reason given. This is in direct violation of IDEA, BTW.

So, I'd go behind their backs and try to talk to counselors regardless. It'd take maybe a day before the pricipal found out, bring me into his office, pull some bullshit allegation about I'd threaten to blow up the gym or shoot up a classroom and use that as the reason to suspend me, and have my changes to my schedule and IEP reverted.

The superintendent was fully aware this was happening and did nothing. I don't have evidence for it, but I suspect he was on the take.

This is why I'm generally against increasing funding for schools. Far too many administrators take far too much for their own personal gain, and teachers, students, and other actually useful staff get very little of that money.


SOUTHPAWMIKE t1_jdeu4ct wrote

That's fucking horrendous, but not surprising. I know for a fact that districts get more funding per Sped student, and yeah, many of the admins I worked with also tried to push kids onto IEPs for those extra dollars.

You said the charges got thrown out in court, and I'm glad they did. Did anyone who put you in this situation ever face consequences?


robexib t1_jdf6sv4 wrote

Principal got slapped with a restraining order. About it.


Lesmiserablemuffins t1_jdfxz78 wrote

Any extra money for SPED is used to... fund sped lol. Special education is not cheap and schools really do not get enough funds to run these programs at a minimal quality, much less somehow siphon that money into other things


SOUTHPAWMIKE t1_jdfzllv wrote

I'm not implying that anything was being used or spent inappropriately where I worked, but I'm also not trying to call u/robexib a liar. I was also always told that we get special state funding for our SPED Program, (which I was involved in occasionally spending to address SPED needs) but also general use ADA funding, and we got more per child w/ special needs.

But I was in IT, not SPED or Finance, so I don't really know.


robexib t1_jdgb4hq wrote

Right, it's generally the case that the schools that comply with ADA and IDEA are supposed to get extra funding in order to assist students who have special needs, like access to speech pathologists or medical professionals with training in the issues faced by a student. It's also, in part, meant to give teachers a financial incentive to take on special education students.

The extra funding isn't the issue by itself. It's the fact that schools make it far too easy to skim off the top and get away with it without involving a courtroom.


just-why_ t1_jdeghmt wrote

No child left behind was so poorly implemented and funded that the US ditched it, and rightfully so.

I went to school during that. It was a disaster.

The schools didn't get proper funding or backing to pull it off properly.


thatisnotmyknob t1_jdcregm wrote

Because you can't just expell a kid and be done with them. The school system still needs to educate them. It's cheaper to frisk them than pay some outside specialized program to take them.


ADarwinAward t1_jddcbix wrote

Colorado doesn’t even allow students to be expelled for more than a year.

Law here

Explanation here


DefinitelyNotAliens t1_jddc8cp wrote

My district just runs those alternative programs in-district and gets state funding for them.

Colorado seriously doesn't pay for alternative schools?


dryopteris_eee t1_jddcte5 wrote

I know for a fact that there is an alternative high school in Fort Collins, so if there aren't any options in Denver, that would be pretty wild.


ErectionDenier2024 t1_jddrfyq wrote

Hell, there was an alternative school or two down in Canon City back when I lived there, and that was in the 90s-2000s.

There's no way they don't have at least ONE alternative school in Denver.


Psychological-Cod231 t1_jddc0hs wrote

Probably some handwringing about the school to prison pipeline.


fvb955cd t1_jdddtz9 wrote

The obvious solution to all of this is more restorative justice sessione between two soon to be murder victims, the murderer, and a random teacher who took a two hour online class on how to conduct restorative justice sessions. Absolutely no need for anything else, not social workers or psychologists or police, nope, those are all bad


DarkMasterPoliteness t1_jddsirc wrote

Yes restorative justice caused this and not lack of gun control


fvb955cd t1_jddux17 wrote

It's not inconsistent to want gun control and also have the sense that school districts have utterly failed at implementing any sort of functioning behavior modification system that is acceptable to progressives. Schools can't help with gun control. School administrations are directly responsible for keeping their students safe and part of that means controlling students with disciplinary measures.


DarkMasterPoliteness t1_jddxwue wrote

You’re just making wild assumptions though. We know for a fact a gun was involved. Everything you’re saying is just wild speculation that fits your worldview


meatball77 t1_jde6506 wrote

They're just expelled to a different type of school if they are. Kids have a right to be educated. If he'd been at Wendy's rather than a school. . . .

This is the best thing (outside of taking the guns away) that could have been done. I suspect they prevented something much worse from happening.


TheFormless0ne t1_jdcojvk wrote

Doesn't matter, because doing nothing about it will lead to this again and again


damagecontrolparty t1_jdcpdyy wrote

Why was he still allowed in school if he required that kind of "safety plan"?


DTFH_ t1_jdcwwou wrote

Because funding is tied to the student, they can be expelled BUT the school loses funding for that student and is required to pay for an alternative, so this school like all do the calculus and 99% of them choose to keep funding rather than send the student out of district and potentially be on the hook to pay more than the student generates in district. Basically profits over people at work yet again.


KimJongFunk t1_jdcqwto wrote

Not sure about everyone else (or maybe my home life and environment were really that shitty) but when I was a teenager I knew exactly where to go to buy a gun on the street and roughly how much it would cost. It wasn’t exactly a secret that a certain neighborhood was rough and you could purchase guns, drugs, booze etc from the people hanging outside a particular convenience store.


billpalto t1_jdd152d wrote

I went to an elementary school that had grades 1-8. There were so many gangs and knife fights that the school cafeteria didn't have any knives at all, not even butter knives.

That was in 1964.

School shootings weren't a thing back then, at least not yet.


Miketogoz t1_jdddn8q wrote

Huh, really? As a non-American, I've read someone else talk about how Columbine changed everything. What's your thoughts on how and when things changed?


frodosdream t1_jddohxu wrote

Not the person you replied to, but IIRC "Columbine changed everything" generally means "raised widespread public awareness" for what had always happened occasionally and then vastly increased in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and then expanded again in the 2000s. There was a brief lull in the late-90s and then Columbine took place on April 20, 1999 ushering in the present epidemic of school shootings.

Others have correctly pointed out that while there was often school violence, mass school shootings were far rarer in the 1960s and 70s even though firearms were much easier to obtain then, and poverty rates were worse than today.

Many things changed in America since that time and no one knows if there was one cause or many. But it's interesting that the 1980s saw the birth of the internet, while the 1990s saw the first widespread social media. This same period also saw an enormous increase in psychiatric drugs prescribed for school children. The early 1980s also saw the infamous crack epidemic which fostered the explosive spread of modern gang culture.

Much later, President GHW Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, which has caused so many schools to end expulsions for behavioral problems (and to lower educational standards for test scores). Many educators discuss the negative impact of NCLB over on r/teachers. But there are probably other factors equally significant as all these; we only know that kids snap more violently and resort to guns more quickly now than they did two generations ago.

From the late 1980s to the early 1990s the United States saw a sharp increase in gun and gun violence in the schools. According to a survey conducted by The Harvard School of Public Health "15% said that they had carried a handgun on their person in the past 30 days, and 4% said that they had taken a handgun to school in the past year." a sharp increase from just five years earlier. By 1993, the United States saw some of the most violent time is school shooting incidences. ... (then) the late 1990s started to see a major reduction in gun related school violence, but was still plagued with multiple victim shootings.

Edit: a word


Miketogoz t1_jddz2t4 wrote

Fascinating read, thank you. I was really under the impression that shootings were a thing in the US since public schools, honestly. I can now better understand why the problem is so divisive.

I think you deserve more lines, but the only thing that comes to my head is that the sense of defeat on dealing with this issue is what has made me believe it was a thing since the 19th century.


Castelpurgio t1_jdelf2p wrote

Hey, somebody my age! Yeah in he seventh grade one of my best friends was expelled for stabbing the principal and the math teacher. It was over a false graffiti accusation he was about to be punished for. We were all telling them it wasn’t him but they wouldn’t listen.


pkdickfan t1_jddcwy6 wrote

A safety plan like this can also be written for a student that has at one point discussed suicide. So, he may not have been perceived as a threat to others.

Schools are not adequately funded to have full time school nurses in many cases, let alone mental health professionals. And even if they do have those professionals, it is likely a case load that is beyond absurd.


raider1v11 t1_jddn0fy wrote

Kick that kid the fuck out. Also, what's up with the parents? I'm sure they are paragons of virtue.


St3phiroth t1_jde48ei wrote

We used to live in the neighborhood near that high school. It would be incredibly easy to get a gun on the street if he had some money.