the classroom blog for Kelli Nørgaard's 2Y English class
at Herning Gymnasium in Herning, Denmark
24 November 2009
The First Amendment
Think about what your group discussed regarding the First Amendment rights of people of the United States. Think about this from both a pre-Columbine and post-Columbine perspective as you answer this question from chapters 1-3 of Big Mouth & Ugly Girl.
In your opinion are Matt's rights being violated?
Why or why not?
Post your opinion as a comment to this blog post before class on Thursday, 26 November.
Yes. Matt's rights are being violated, but not in the sense of the First Amendment. He was arrested accused of a possible school massacre and not of "abridging his freedom of speech..."- This fact makes me look upon it as two completly different things.
Yes. I think that Matt's rights are being violated, because he has the right to say what he want, but I also believe that you need to think of how your words could effect other people and what reaktion your words might get.
I think Matt's rights are being violated. The detectives bring him with them, and he doesn't even know why. He assumes that something bad has happened. He's right about that fact though, someone has placed a bomb at the school, and he gets the blaim for it, and he can't do anything about it.
I believe that Matt’s rights are being violated, but I cannot see that this violation has a clear connection to the First Amendment. He is brought in for questioning on a very doubtful testimony. Some girls had overheard one of Matt’s conversations where he had said something about "blowing the school up". This could very easily have been taking out of a completely different context.
There is a Supreme Court ruling from 1919 where a young Socialist named Schenck printed and distributed leaflets, criticizing the draft under World War I, was sentenced to 9 months in prison. Even though he argued that it was his right to do so under the First Amendment, an unanimous Supreme Court ruled that; "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.". The Schenck Case served as a presedent for many years, basically saying that anyone who presented a "clear and present danger" against the public welfare, could not be protected by the First Amendment. Thus, in my opinion, Matt's statement is a clear and present danger, considering the place he uttered it. If he had done so in Denmark it wouldn't have been taken seriously, but in a US high school cafeteria, that is not the case.
i think matts rights are being violeted, because i think the girls has misundertstood his words about blowing up the school.Maybe they haven´t heard the hole conversation.
I can't see a clear connection to the first amendment. I do think Matt's rights are being violated because he's being arrested based on a rumor. When the police come he has no idea what's going on, and I believe, according to Miranda vs. Arizona, that is a violation of his rights.
I think, that Matt´s rights are not violated, as far as I´ve read. Maybe his rights will be violated later on, but I don´t know if that happens. The reason for believing, that Matt haven´t has his rights violated is, that for example, when the men asked him to follow them, he did it out of free will. He spoke as he liked to, he was where he wanted to etc.
I don't think that Matt's right are being violated. Because the police believed he had planned a bomb at the school and if he had it was good that they arrested him so the school didn't get bombed.
i dont think Matt´s rights is being violated, and I can´t see a clear connection, between Mark´s arrest and The first Amendment. But we dont know much about the case; we only hear that some girls speak about what they might have heard from somewhere.
I don't know if his rights is violated because in one way it's okay, because it's better to arrest one person too much than take the risk. But they don't know about it's true, then he is a kind of violated.
I think Matts rights are being violetet, because the girls who turned him in, did not hear the context, so he was taken out of context. He could have meant something much less violent.
I think Matt´s rights are being violated, because the detectives arrest him for something they don´t know is true. The girls rumor about Matt don´t have to be true. And Matt also have the right to know why they arrested him. - Cathrine
I dont know if his rights are being violated.It's actually not a fact that he's arrested. He's just asked to follow the men suits. But when you hear it from Ursula's point of view it could look like he's arrested and thereby his rights are violated.
The first amendment allows Matt so say anything he wants. So in that way his rights are violated. But the first amendment isn't the only law in America, so he can easily have did something wrong without braking that one law.
I don’t think Matt’s rights are being violated. Yes, he has the right to speak freely. But there are still consequences. If he, even as a joke, said that he would blow up the school, then I think the police have the right to arrest him and interrogate him. And I’m pretty sure the laws in many U.S states allows them to.
I think that Matt’s rights are being violated and overlooked. The police and the school should not accuse him of such a tremendous accusation, before checking up on the story’s background. Beside the first amendment is fully ignored, and that must never happen, in my depenion! In this case they didn’t need to suspend him from school, or drag him through questioning, if they just had done som background checking first. Dum dum police people ;-)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYes. Matt's rights are being violated, but not in the sense of the First Amendment. He was arrested accused of a possible school massacre and not of "abridging his freedom of speech..."- This fact makes me look upon it as two completly different things.
ReplyDeletemette.
Yes. I think that Matt's rights are being violated, because he has the right to say what he want, but I also believe that you need to think of how your words could effect other people and what reaktion your words might get.
ReplyDeleteI think Matt's rights are being violated. The detectives bring him with them, and he doesn't even know why. He assumes that something bad has happened. He's right about that fact though, someone has placed a bomb at the school, and he gets the blaim for it, and he can't do anything about it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Matt’s rights are being violated, but I cannot see that this violation has a clear connection to the First Amendment. He is brought in for questioning on a very doubtful testimony. Some girls had overheard one of Matt’s conversations where he had said something about "blowing the school up". This could very easily have been taking out of a completely different context.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere is a Supreme Court ruling from 1919 where a young Socialist named Schenck printed and distributed leaflets, criticizing the draft under World War I, was sentenced to 9 months in prison. Even though he argued that it was his right to do so under the First Amendment, an unanimous Supreme Court ruled that; "the most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.".
ReplyDeleteThe Schenck Case served as a presedent for many years, basically saying that anyone who presented a "clear and present danger" against the public welfare, could not be protected by the First Amendment. Thus, in my opinion, Matt's statement is a clear and present danger, considering the place he uttered it. If he had done so in Denmark it wouldn't have been taken seriously, but in a US high school cafeteria, that is not the case.
i think matts rights are being violeted, because i think the girls has misundertstood his words about blowing up the school.Maybe they haven´t heard the hole conversation.
ReplyDeleteI don't know. We don't know much about this case yet and the police might have a good reason to arrest him. If he was a threat he should be arrested
ReplyDeleteI can't see a clear connection between The First Amendment and the arrest of Mark
ReplyDeleteMaja Nees
I can't see a clear connection to the first amendment. I do think Matt's rights are being violated because he's being arrested based on a rumor. When the police come he has no idea what's going on, and I believe, according to Miranda vs. Arizona, that is a violation of his rights.
ReplyDelete- Emma.
I think, that Matt´s rights are not violated, as far as I´ve read. Maybe his rights will be violated later on, but I don´t know if that happens. The reason for believing, that Matt haven´t has his rights violated is, that for example, when the men asked him to follow them, he did it out of free will. He spoke as he liked to, he was where he wanted to etc.
ReplyDeleteRina Vijayasundaram 1.y
I don't think that Matt's right are being violated. Because the police believed he had planned a bomb at the school and if he had it was good that they arrested him so the school didn't get bombed.
ReplyDeletei dont think Matt´s rights is being violated, and I can´t see a clear connection, between Mark´s arrest and The first Amendment. But we dont know much about the case; we only hear that some girls speak about what they might have heard from somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if his rights is violated because in one way it's okay, because it's better to arrest one person too much than take the risk. But they don't know about it's true, then he is a kind of violated.
ReplyDeleteSteffen 1.y
I think Matts rights are being violetet, because the girls who turned him in, did not hear the context, so he was taken out of context. He could have meant something much less violent.
ReplyDeleteI think Matt´s rights are being violated, because the detectives arrest him for something they don´t know is true. The girls rumor about Matt don´t have to be true. And Matt also have the right to know why they arrested him.
ReplyDelete- Cathrine
I don't think his rights have been violated. But If he was arrested because of a rumor i think they were.
ReplyDeleteI think it is a trick q, because you dont hear if matt really says he whats to bomb the school, maybe it is just something people made up.
ReplyDeleteBy Mathias Gorm Petersen
I think that if have said that he would bomb the school. he should be arrested. but not if it was taken out of contekst. his rights have been violated
ReplyDeleteI dont know if his rights are being violated.It's actually not a fact that he's arrested. He's just asked to follow the men suits. But when you hear it from Ursula's point of view it could look like he's arrested and thereby his rights are violated.
ReplyDeleteI think Matt´s rights are beeing violated. I do not think that anyone should be arrested, or questined one such a thin basis
ReplyDeleteThe first amendment allows Matt so say anything he wants. So in that way his rights are violated. But the first amendment isn't the only law in America, so he can easily have did something wrong without braking that one law.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think Matt’s rights are being violated. Yes, he has the right to speak freely. But there are still consequences. If he, even as a joke, said that he would blow up the school, then I think the police have the right to arrest him and interrogate him. And I’m pretty sure the laws in many U.S states allows them to.
ReplyDeleteI think that Matt’s rights are being violated and overlooked. The police and the school should not accuse him of such a tremendous accusation, before checking up on the story’s background. Beside the first amendment is fully ignored, and that must never happen, in my depenion! In this case they didn’t need to suspend him from school, or drag him through questioning, if they just had done som background checking first.
ReplyDeleteDum dum police people ;-)