Are we reading the same article? The one you linked doesn't indicate that pepper spray was ever allowed on campus, including the parking lot, and the board discussions centered around whether it should be allowed in the parking lot and how to deal with those students who may forget to take it out of their purse once reaching the campus.
We've had those very same discussions at my place of employment, regarding the very same item. Our site abuts a community park with approximately 7 miles of walking trails. As part of our Healthy Workplace Initiative, we encourage employees to use the trails during the workday, going so far as to provide our own path to meet up with the Community one. Several women have expressed concern about their safety while out on these paths and have requested the ability to carry pepper spray on their person during the workday and outside their vehicles. We of course agreed, but not without first discussing the pros and cons, as well as our liability on both sides of the issue. I think that's exactly what transpired in your article as well.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
The way they decided to deal with students who "forgot" to take it out of their bag and leave it in the parking lot was by removing it from the list of prohibited items altogether.
From the article:
However, board Chairman Josh Wagner pointed out that students aren’t likely to check their purses or bags to remove the spray every time they go to school – and then they would be found in violation of the policy.
...
Hughes pointed out that if the defensive sprays were taken completely out of the policy, then there would be no violation of policy if students forgot to remove canisters from their bags.
...
The board agreed to remove wording from its policy that referenced defensive sprays, and to add language prohibiting the sprays for students who are not in high school.
Yes, and they also said this:
So, that would lead me to believe (as previously mentioned) that the school board's intention was to allow self-defensive sprays on a portion of the school campus (the parking lot), which then led to discussion of how to deal with those students who forgot to take them out of their bags or purses when entering school buildings or attending school events such as football games.The policies in question are 5027 and 4333, which detail weapons and other threats to safety. Board member Travis Allen was in favor of allowing the canisters on school campuses, as long as they remained locked in student vehicles. However, board Chairman Josh Wagner pointed out that students aren’t likely to check their purses or bags to remove the spray every time they go to school – and then they would be found in violation of the policy.
I think they made the right choice.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
But by deciding to not include them in the weapons ban they effectively made it ok to bring them into the building.
Alan, to me it is clear what the intent of removing pepper spray from the list of prohibited weapons is. And how can you interpret it any other way in light of this comment by board member Charles Hughes.....
“Depending on how the courts rule on the bathroom issues, it may be a pretty valuable tool to have on the female students if they go to the bathroom, not knowing who may come in,” board member Chuck Hughes said in referencing concerns about HB2, according to the Salisbury Post.
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/new...#storylink=cpy
I'll add.....
After what he said sunk in, board member Chuck Hughes walked back his statement. Basically he said he misspoke and didn't mean to say what he said. By the way, is there some kind of epidemic of perverts and pedophiles running around the campuses of Rowan-Salisbury Schools? Hughes also promised to vote to put pepper spray back into the prohibited items list.........after he came to his bloody good senses.
I wonder how much transgender porn is being deleted from home computers in a North Carolina as we speak? I'm sorry, I had to throw that in.
"
Hughes walked back his statement on Wednesday, tellingBuzzfeed News that his comments were "inappropriate" and that he had been referring not to transgender students, but to "perverts and pedophiles taking advantage of this law in bathrooms."
Hmm, it sure seems to me that Mr Hughes' intent may have been colored by current events, although I'm not a guilt by association kinda guy so I'll take the stance that the rest of the school board was dealing with the same type of questions and concerns I deal with in my work life, some of which I've described above. Your mileage may vary.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Errrm,whilst I don't think thread drift is a bad thng... About Mr Khan finding MR Trump's offer a wee bit aff?,
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)