This. The inability to wear my hat pisses me off greatly.Carbonel said:I like hats.
This. The inability to wear my hat pisses me off greatly.Carbonel said:I like hats.
Maybe the bathroom thing is for people with disorders, after a certain amount of time of purging themselves they do it automatically, so they either get caught or the food is to far down the digestive track. It's still unfair though. That last one is bull though.danskrobut said:we had to ask to sit or stand, a boy and girl could not be in a room un suprivised, you had to wait an hour to use the restroom after meals, you ha to sign out to any where outside the main building, a staff member had to listen to conversations at all times
I thought that if you were under 18 years old (in USA) you were a second class citizen.Jinx_Dragon said:The story that goes with this wasn't from my country, but I do know the rules where quite the similar when I went to school. They can be summed up as: You can be punished for any action the school disagrees with, even if you where not on school property, dressed in a school uniform or even undertaking such actions during school hours. I kid you not, if you said something the principal didn't like you could still be suspended or even expelled as if you where saying such things on school property.
The story, again this was carried out in the USA, is simple: A handful of students hanged a banner ridiculing cannabis prohibition during the Olympic torch rally. "Bong hits for Jesus" was what the banner said, so it really isn't even a good protest against cannabis prohibition but clearly was just some mucking about. They, like other students, had been let out of class early to see the torch event and where standing on public owned property opposite the school grounds.
The US supreme court ruled that the school was in it's rights to punish free speech! This is twice made ridiculous as they where punished for violating a school rule even though the where NOT on school property and had been dismissed from school. Uniforms, didn't play a part seeing it was not Australia but a US school.
In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "This case began with a silly nonsensical banner, (and) ends with the court inventing out of whole cloth a special First Amendment rule permitting the censorship of any student speech that mentions drugs, so long as someone could perceive that speech to contain a latent pro-drug message."
He was backed by Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Those three should all be given metals or something, for standing up to the fact that even students should be covered by free speech. It is most disgusting, indeed, that the so called 'libertarian' judges all sided AGAINST the constitution.
This is what a cop told me about that rule. You are on school property from the moment school ends, until you walk through your front door. It is fucking bullshit though. And to all the people that got suspended fighting, why? Only idiots and cowards start fights where the teachers can see them. This is mainly aimed at people who started the fights.Jinx_Dragon said:The story that goes with this wasn't from my country, but I do know the rules where quite the similar when I went to school. They can be summed up as: You can be punished for any action the school disagrees with, even if you where not on school property, dressed in a school uniform or even undertaking such actions during school hours. I kid you not, if you said something the principal didn't like you could still be suspended or even expelled as if you where saying such things on school property.
The story, again this was carried out in the USA, is simple: A handful of students hanged a banner ridiculing cannabis prohibition during the Olympic torch rally. "Bong hits for Jesus" was what the banner said, so it really isn't even a good protest against cannabis prohibition but clearly was just some mucking about. They, like other students, had been let out of class early to see the torch event and where standing on public owned property opposite the school grounds.
The US supreme court ruled that the school was in it's rights to punish free speech! This is twice made ridiculous as they where punished for violating a school rule even though the where NOT on school property and had been dismissed from school. Uniforms, didn't play a part seeing it was not Australia but a US school.
Those three should all be given metals or something, for standing up to the fact that even students should be covered by free speech. It is most disgusting, indeed, that the so called 'libertarian' judges all sided AGAINST the constitution.In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "This case began with a silly nonsensical banner, (and) ends with the court inventing out of whole cloth a special First Amendment rule permitting the censorship of any student speech that mentions drugs, so long as someone could perceive that speech to contain a latent pro-drug message."
He was backed by Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
damn.............im going with option A and saying that all administrative employees are nazis and any teachers that agree are worse......Julianking93 said:"All students must refer to superiors as either Sir or Ma'am" I refused that one.
If you missed one homework assignment, you were forced to go to detention. If you didn't go to detention, you were sent to Saturday School. I never went to either and I was sent to both at least 30 times.
Boy's hair couldn't be past the collar. I had hair down to my chest at this time. Long, curly, light brown hair and no asshole was gonna tell me what to do with it.
Girls must always wear their hair in pony tails. What kinda bullshit is that??
Any food or drink was strickly prohibited in class rooms. Including water.
Girls may not have nail polish. I had polished nails. Dark blue. Rules didn't say anything about boys wearing nail polish.
And the worst one of all. (actually, 2 worst but their listed together) No backpacks are allowed on school grounds and lunches brought from home must be inspected before consumption.
What...The...Fuck?
This was all in Middle School. I don't even want to see the High School rules.
I had that rule in my high school, I know why its in place - How annoying (if your a teacher) would it be coming back to your lesson after lunch to have a load of pupils ask to use the bathroom. You've had like...an hour to use the loo, Instead you want to skive instead?Burst6 said:In my school they recently released a new rule saying that we can not go to the bathroom 5 minutes before class ends, in between classes, or for 5 minutes after class starts. That may not sound too bad but last year all my teachers.My teachers were pretty much nice people that liked to use humor a lot in the studies (and it worked too), but when someone asked to go to the bathroom they mutated into sadistic Nazi zombie pirate aliens with anger issues. 2 of them actually took points off for going to the bathroom, and only once a week too.
If i wanted to pee (and i usually did around 4th period), i either had to wait for 8th period(my orchestra AKA the class with a nice clean private bathroom), or had to survive the brain melting "glare" from the Nazi zombie pirate aliens. Getting into the bathrooms wasn't easy either, only 2 people in at a time and you had to show your ID. All because of those *******************ing crackheads that liked to do drugs in the bathrooms.
I would love to take your compliement, but just today one of my classmates got his nose broken in a fight.....That took place during class in the classroom. However it had nothing to do with their clothes.darkless said:Then you sir go to a very nice school and live in a very nice neighborhood it always happened and still happens where i live and went to school. I'm 21 and kids still slag me for the way I dress granted I'm a lot bigger than they are now so a good glaring ends it but it still happens.Shadowhatchi said:I hear this statement all the time, however I've never actually seen anyone get bullied for what they wear.....darkless said:My school had uniforms and you clearly have no idea just how much trouble the prevent, It practically erases a whole aspect of bullying, in that you cant get slagged for what you wear because everyone is wearing the exact same thing.Project_Omega said:Also the idea of unifors annoys me badly!
1. The off campus also didn't make sense to me but if your wearing uniforms it's making the school look bad and I do believe they have the right to punish if said students make the school look like it's full of trouble makers.Jinx_Dragon said:The story that goes with this wasn't from my country, but I do know the rules where quite the similar when I went to school. They can be summed up as: You can be punished for any action the school disagrees with, even if you where not on school property, dressed in a school uniform or even undertaking such actions during school hours. I kid you not, if you said something the principal didn't like you could still be suspended or even expelled as if you where saying such things on school property.
The story, again this was carried out in the USA, is simple: A handful of students hanged a banner ridiculing cannabis prohibition during the Olympic torch rally. "Bong hits for Jesus" was what the banner said, so it really isn't even a good protest against cannabis prohibition but clearly was just some mucking about. They, like other students, had been let out of class early to see the torch event and where standing on public owned property opposite the school grounds.
The US supreme court ruled that the school was in it's rights to punish free speech! This is twice made ridiculous as they where punished for violating a school rule even though the where NOT on school property and had been dismissed from school. Uniforms, didn't play a part seeing it was not Australia but a US school.
Those three should all be given metals or something, for standing up to the fact that even students should be covered by free speech. It is most disgusting, indeed, that the so called 'libertarian' judges all sided AGAINST the constitution.In dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens said, "This case began with a silly nonsensical banner, (and) ends with the court inventing out of whole cloth a special First Amendment rule permitting the censorship of any student speech that mentions drugs, so long as someone could perceive that speech to contain a latent pro-drug message."
He was backed by Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Knowing the way the people drive there its probably not. Youre likely just as dead with or without it.sagacious said:Well, at Purdue you can be pulled over for speeding on your bike, you can be pulled over for not having nightime running lights on your bike, but you CANNOT be pulled over for not wearing a helmet.
I'd have thought wearing a helmet was the most important one...
The USSR was not communist, this has nothing to do with them. They used the hammer & sickle because they were trying to implement a communist system. They were in the socialist phase, but then Stalin took over and bum-raped the whole thing and turned it into a totalitarian dictatorship.Fanusc101 said:Akai Shizuku said:I refuse to wear a uniform; to me it symbolizes subservience and being like everyone else...two things I am against.darkless said:My school had uniforms and you clearly have no idea just how much trouble the prevent, It practically erases a whole aspect of bullying, in that you cant get slagged for what you wear because everyone is wearing the exact same thing.Project_Omega said:Also the idea of unifors annoys me badly!
http://fc09.deviantart.com/fs27/f/2009/247/9/9/DIY_Hammer_and_Sickle_by_AkaiShizuku.jpg
I stitched a hammer & sickle into my mp3 player's wrist strap thing. I'm going to start arguments if anyone tells me to take it off, fascist bastards.
Wait, you stitched the symbol of the Soviet Union into your wrist strap, yet you oppose subservience and being like everyone else?
Sounds a bit *puts on sunglasses*....contradictory
YEEEAAH!