MySpace is Free Speech, Case Overturned

eldavojohn writes "The Indiana Court of Appeals has ruled that a judge violated the constitution after placing a juvenile on probation for an expletive laden MySpace entry on the principal. The court decided that the juvenile's free speech rights had been unconstitutionally revoked, and the original judge had suppressed politically motivated free speech since the comments were directly attacking school policy. I think we are starting to see a fine line develop online as it did with print — bullying & slander are punishable while we have to allow criticism of ideas no matter how harsh it is."

Comments

Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[gbulmash]

I think this deals more with the broader issue of whether schools can regulate or impose disciplinary actions related to a studen's off-campus activities. While it's long been shown that when students are on campus, they surrender a number of their constitutional rights (free speech, search and seizure, right to bear arms, etc.), the courts seem to be recognizing that just being a student doesn't make you a second class-citizen 24/7. And that has broader implications than just online activities.

- Greg

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[SgtPepperKSU]

Who says they don't work and pay taxes? You may have been able to get by without working, but not everybody is so lucky.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Crazy Man on Fire]

As a teenager, you have to work a whole bunch of hours to make enough to actually pay taxes. Sure, the take it out of your check, but you get all/most of it back at the end of the year when you file.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[meabolex]

While I believe the terminology of "second-class" citizen is probably not the best terminology, most people in high school are minors. Minors have their own legal status in most places.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_(law)

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Kadin2048]

While I agree that students should have rights, I have to ask: why shouldn't they be second-class citizens? They're not working and they're not nearly as capable as adults of making good decisions. I think "second-class citizen" is a rather good description of what they should be, as opposed to the "first-class citizens" who work and pay taxes for the upkeep of the city. The question, though, is about how many or how few rights second-class citizens should have.

I think the problem is that the U.S. legal system lacks the framework for dealing with anything besides two types of things: individuals, and property. Either you're an individual, and have rights, or you're property, and belong to somebody else.

There have always been questions as to the status of certain things: slaves, for example, were traditionally property, but later became individuals; animals, who arguably have certain independent characteristics, are still just property; and the current abortion debate is mostly an argument as to whether a fetus is an individual, or merely a woman's property.

The track record of the legal system at dealing with the grey areas isn't too great (cf. "3/5ths compromise," or the now-ridiculous limits on exactly how hard you can beat your wife). The solution here seems to be to clarify the status of minors as one or the other.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[ajs]

While it's long been shown that when students are on campus, they surrender a number of their constitutional rights (free speech, search and seizure, right to bear arms, etc.) ... uh, no. You don't surrender your right to bear arms in school. You surrender your right to bear arms by being a minor. Most states don't allow minors to get FIDs, and the Supreme Court has never even commented, as far as I know.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[colinrichardday]

Income taxes yes, but what about sales tax?

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[DragonWriter]

I think this deals more with the broader issue of whether schools can regulate or impose disciplinary actions related to a studen's off-campus activities.

I think you are wrong, because this case doesn't concern school disciplinary action at all. The only school involvement is that the questionable postings were seen and reported by a principal: the delinquency petition was not filed by the school, but by the state, and the authority for it was the state's general juvenile justice authority, not its authority over the school system. So its pretty hard to read this as dealing with the issue you want it to be about.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[superbus1929]

Because I'm uncomfortable with getting students comfortable with a system that, by default, orders them to assimilate solely based on how many taxes they pay. It's one thing for a student to want to buy a porno at 15, but to put a school's faculty above reasonable critique is too much. Our country allows us to critique our elected officials because they're elected; I do not want young people to get used to a fascist style of government because it's against our principles, and also because it takes away from the rights of parents to truly determine what is right for their kid.

In a perfect world, the kids parents would have blistered their asses, and this would not be necessary. But in a perfect world, parents wouldn't sue the school system because their kid is a fuck-up, either.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[wgaryhas]

What about teachers, principals, and other staff?

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[BlueTrin]

Here you go, you will start with teens, then you could also consider black and hispanics and start arguing about all the differences there are between them and others, continue on old people (come on we even pay taxes for them !!!) and even finish on women (maternity leave ?) ...

I would not rather live in your "ideal" democracy.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[DAtkins]

I've always wondered how that used to work. My step-father's high school had an indoor firing range; and people brought their guns to school on the bus. I think they had to turn them into the range master prior to going to homeroom. They obviously don't do that now, but I am curious when and how the policy change occurred.

Of course this was in rural Georgia (Athens-Clarke County) sometime in the 50's.

Anyhoo, it's not that you don't have a right to bear arms as a minor, just that those rights are severely restricted. And ownership is usually flat out (not that it kept any of my friends from "owning" a .22 or maybe a .410).

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[ThisNukes4u]

I worked 25-35 hours a week when I was 16 and 17, and out of a $400 bi-weekly check I paid at least $50-$100 in Social Security tax. Come tax day, I got $100 back both years. Bullshit you get it back, the government stole my money.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[drinkypoo]

Most states don't allow minors to get FIDs

FID? Flight ID? Free Induction Decay? Financial Institutions Duty? Functional Interface Drawing? Oh wait, there it is, Firearms Identification.

Guess what? FID is generally only required when purchasing a gun. SOME states require that you have a license to own a firearm, but not most.

In California, "A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To buy a handgun, a person must be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) possess an HSC plus successfully complete a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption."

It's worth mentioning that no minor without their majority can actually be said to own property anyway. Their parents/guardians can take it away at any time, so it's not really theirs. So the law focuses on providing access to minors. California law doesn't make it illegal to provide access to a firearm to a minor, but you can be guilty of a felony if a minor uses your gun to commit a crime.

Everyone surrenders their right to bear arms on a school campus except for active law enforcement, or military during the execution of orders. Even if you have a concealed carry permit it is not lawful to bring a gun to a school. This is interesting because at one time (IIRC, up until the early 1900s) California law explicitly protected your right to carry a gun on public property. That means schools, courthouses, et cetera.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[packeteer]

You are spot on. I am 16 years old working my first job and people would say i don't pay taxes. I pay all the taxes that apply to me. I do not pay income tax in my state but some states might be different. Also I pay into social security, medicare, and labor and industries taxes. Also, I my money to buy things that I pay sales tax on. I have perchased items that had been imported and might have had a tariff imposed. We all know that costs are passed onto the consumers so i was paying that tariff, therefore i was paying the government. By participating in the economy in any way you are paying taxes.

It's rediculous how as a 16 year old you can drive a car and pay taxes but can't vote. It is taxation without representation in my opinion and that is why the founders of this country took up arms and fought back. Ill stick with posting to internet forums myself but the whole thing is kind of rediculous.

Students are absolutly second class citizens. Remember also that many high school students are 18 years old and they still have the same lack of rights.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[drinkypoo]

Put another way, the right to "bear arms" does not mean the right to use weapons, but to own them. Most states don't allow minors to own guns as far as I know.

Minors don't really own any property unless they gain their legal majority through a legal procedure in the courts!

If you are a minor, your parents can take away any of your property, legally, at any time! Period, end of story.

This is one reason why we have things like trust funds. Let's say you have a billion dollars and want to give a million of it to your favorite nephew because he's just so darned cool, thus guaranteeing that if he is not amazingly mature he will grow up to be a trustafarian with no respect for anyone's property or person, or for the act of doing work, so that later when he grows up he squanders the family fortune instead of handing it down to his descendants. (I have actually witnessed this very thing, but names have been omitted and even genders have been changed to protect the stupid.)

Maybe their parents are great people, so you feel secure in giving the money to the child. That's nice, it can go in their (fictional and thus able to contain stupid-large sums) bank account which is in their name and that of their parents. But then their parents are hit by a bus and aunt shrew gets custody because she's a closer relative than you are. That money is now hers. She gains custody of the child's bank account at the same time she gains custody of the child, and can now spend the money as she sees fit. In theory it should be spent on the child's behalf, but I think we all know how that will go.

Minors cannot be held to a contract. Minors can not own property. Minors are fucking non-people under the laws of the United States, and AFAIK pretty much all of the states themselves as well.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Anonymous Coward]

It's rediculous how as a 16 year old you can drive a car and pay taxes but can't vote. It is taxation without representation in my opinion and that is why the founders of this country took up arms and fought back. Ill stick with posting to internet forums myself but the whole thing is kind of rediculous.

It's not that 'rediculous' in light of the fact that that right has been traded for special treatment. If you are mature enough to vote you should be mature enough to give up your special legal consideration -- in other words, no more child-labour protection, no more child-abuse laws, no more watered-down juvenile courts, no more watered-down juvenile punishments, no more reduced fair for government services, no more exemption from conscription or jury duty, no more obligation for your parents to take care of you, no more protection from prosecution, &c.

I'd be in favour of giving 16-year-olds the right to vote as long as they're OK with giving up all that stuff.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Prysorra]

I agree. However, you went to opposite direction as I do - end taxes for those unable to vote.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Workaphobia]

If, with the exception of slavery, we have failed to (or perhaps chosen not to) make such distinctions, what makes you think that this situation deserves an exception? What makes you think that eliminating gray areas in favor of giving everyone and everything either equal rights or no rights at all is desireable?

Do animals deserve the right to vote? Should elementary school students be allowed to get married? Are children property of their parents and should they be allowed to be beaten at will? If you can't answer yes to any of those then it's obvious that not everything/one should have or lack every right.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Belial6]

It is good to see that you agree whole heartedly with the parent poster, as we all know that complaining about spelling is an admission that all of the points are 100% correct.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[iphayd]

In ten years, you will think differently.

You are actually represented. And you are guaranteed the ability to vote after you turn 18*. If you are mature enough to vote, which you may or may not be. (I may or may not be, for that matter, but 18 at least guarantees a percentage is mature enough.) Now imagine if all you classmates, with their celebrity loving subculture, had the same right to vote. Imagine what would happen if Madonna (Paris Hilton is too young) got into the White House.

That's why there is an 18 year waiting limit on voting.

*Offer good in the USA. Offer is dependent on registration. Offer is also dependent on not being a felon.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[Sj0]

I recall a major point of contention being that women aren't eligible for conscription in the US. Apparently every man at 18 has to fill out his draft card just in case they bring back the draft, but women need not apply.

I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine what this means within the context of this discussion.

Re:Students Not Second-Class Citizens

[pedrop357]

Now imagine if all you classmates, with their celebrity loving subculture, had the same right to vote. Imagine what would happen if Madonna (Paris Hilton is too young) got into the White House.

Yeah, because we know that ALL teens would vote for a superstar and would have enough votes to override all adult voters.

Glad it was overturned, but...

[AaxelB]

It's too bad there's no fair way to clearly define that thin grey line, and it has to be taken on a case-by-case basis (Unless there's some method I'm missing).

The inefficiency of real justice is aggravating.

Good!

[mstahl]

I still remember what it was like to be a teenager, and one of the most frustrating things about it is the feeling of being disenfranchised. I don't think personal attacks and bullying are okay, and I recognize that the Internet is being used more and more frequently for this type of activity, but teenagers still need to feel like they have a voice.

Re:Good!

[jofny]

I dont like that phrasing...I think teenagers need to HAVE a voice. So much in our society right now is geared to making people FEEL LIKE they have a voice/choice while all the awhile guiding them down a preset path along which theyve unknowingly given away their choices and their say.

A small dose of optimism.

[PixieDust]

It's refreshing to see this occasionally happen. My teens aren't that far behind me, and I've gone rounds with various entities about similar things. It's nice to see things like this happen where it's recognized that damnit, in this country, we're SUPPOSED to be able to speak our minds.

The original case accused the girl in question of identity theft, because the page she posted on was supposed to be the Principal's page (it was created by someone else entirely). When all that was said and done, they had to save face somehow, and so prosecuted the person and declared her delinquent for being "obscene". Counter damages perhaps? I would sooooooooo go after them for that.

The rant was also not about the principal, but rather about school policy regarding body piercings. Oh how many times I was suspended for criticizing school policy, and faculty for stupidity. Although in some cases, motivating the student body to protest can be helpful. My high school once told us we couldn't bring our purses to school. 2 days of every girl in the school using tampons for hair rollers fixed that one. On the other hand, those of us who organized that, were suspended for a week for insubordination.

I love seeing cases like this stick it to the man. It's sad that the Constitution so often (aside from being trampled daily) doesn't seem to apply to anyone under the age of 18. With the advent of the internet, however, and online social societies of their own, teens seem to be able to fight for a few more rights, and correct a few more injustices than they were able to even just 10 years ago. That's a great thought. Bolstered by victories now, perhaps the next generation will be less inclined to just roll over while their rights are trampled on than the current generation.

Time will tell.

Re:A small dose of optimism.

[PixieDust]

Safetey pins, medical tape, belt loops, basically we wore the entire contents of our purses attached to our clothes, in our hair, anywhere we could get them to latch on. A friend of mine made what, i can only describe as a duct tape belt, with keyrings going through it that she could hang things on.

After 2 days the faculty caved, and let us carry our purses again (though they had to stay in our lockers, because then we wouldn't be able to shoot up the school with the guns we were all carrying in them). Then they started finding out who organized it, and suspended us for insubordination. About 3 weeks later, there was a sit-out at the school, which didn't end well (not for those of us organizing it).

Yea, I used to be a big pusher for people's rights not getting trampled. But after becoming so disillusioned in those years, then my stint in the Army, and current political happenings, it's enough that I'm willing to make /. posts.

It's sad really.

Safe Schools Act

[Eyezen]

They tend to get away with it because rightly are wrongly the schools invoke the Safe Schools Act when suppressing speech/activities outside the physical school environment.

The Safe Schools Act is to school age children what the Patriot Act is to the common citizenry.

Re:who gives a shit

[voice_of_all_reason]

Civics. You fail it.

Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inalienable_rights. If you do not agree to one of the founding ideas of our country, you are welcome to the door.

Re:Good

[pintpusher]

I think part of what you are experiencing is the natural progression from the apparent total freedom a child experiences to the much more restrictive life of an adult. All teens go through this. Its part of what drives teens to break away from the home and live an independent adult life.

You may respond "what restrictive adult life" but its true. We adults may appear more free than you (and in many respects we are), but we are burdened with self-imposed restrictions, societally imposed restrictions, burdens of responsibility etc that can strongly curtail that apparent freedom we have.

I recall that I was frustrated by visions of adults having the "Freedom" to drink, drive (not necessarily together), and all sorts of other fun stuff that I couldn't do. But, you know what, now that I'm an adult, I realise that those are largely the only freedoms we have that are worth anything. Free speech be damned, give me a beer and a woman!

Re:Good

[MacsSuck]

You will do as you're told till you're 18. Now get off the interweb!

Decided on the Indiana Constitution

[radarjd]

It's important to note that the Court of Appeals based the polical speech portion of its opinion on the Indiana Constitution and not the Federal Constitution. State Constitutions can allow greater freedom to the people that the Federal Constitution, but not less. In other words, it's possible this would have come out differently in another state. Of course, I'm from Indiana, so it applies around here.

Re:Decided on the Indiana Constitution

[Comatose51]

Uh... not sure about that but California law legalized marijuana but Federal courts said Federal law trumps it.

Re:Good

[lilomar]

Free speech be damned, give me a beer and a woman! Rarely has the current American public sentiment been so concisely put.

No, MySpace is not Free Speech.

[ScentCone]

MySpeech is a communciations method. You can use it in keeping with the First Amendment, or you can use it outside of those very real bounds. Saying "MySpace is Free Speech" is like saying "the sounds coming out of your mouth are Free Speech." Well, yeah, unless they're not. As in slander, fraud, incitement, conspiracy, threats, etc.

Re:No, MySpace is not Free Speech.

[radarjd]

You can use it in keeping with the First Amendment, or you can use it outside of those very real bounds. Saying "MySpace is Free Speech" is like saying "the sounds coming out of your mouth are Free Speech." Well, yeah, unless they're not. As in slander, fraud, incitement, conspiracy, threats, etc.

I think that's exactly what the case said. The Court considered at least one of the girl's postings:
Hey you piece of greencastle shit.
What the fuck do you think of me [now] that you can['t] control me? Huh?
Ha ha ha guess what I'll wear my fucking piercings all day long and to
school and you can['t] do shit about it! Ha ha fucking ha! Stupid bastard!
Oh and kudos to whomever made this ([I'm] pretty sure I know who).
Get a background.
formatting left as in the opinion.

The Court found that somewhere in there is a protected expression of displeasure towards the actions of a government actor -- that is, she was mad he banned wearing of jewelry in decorative piercings and expressed her thoughts on the matter.

It's not Shakespeare, but freedom can't only apply to those who speak eloquently.

Re:No, MySpace is not Free Speech.

[UnknowingFool]

MySpeech is a communciations method.

I am thinking that you are relying too much on the title of an article to imply it's meaning. Slashdot titles are limited in characters so submitters have to be as brief as possible. Sometimes being brief changes the meaning but there isn't much choice. You should RTFA. All it is saying is that anything posted or said on MySpace has as much protection as anything said in real life. Of course it includes the same limitations like libel and treason and harassment. The student was arguing her comments on MySpace were protected under the First Amendment guidelines of free speech as they relayed a criticism of her school's public policy on body piercings. She should not be punished criminally for expressing a political view point. The court of appeals agreed with her.

While we have little regard for A.B.'s use of vulgar epithets, we conclude that her overall message constitutes political speech.

This follows many court decisions that although some speech may be distasteful, they are protected. The US Supreme Court ruled in Hustler v. Falwell:

But in the world of debate about public affairs, many things done with motives that are less than admirable are protected by the First Amendment.

Childrens rights...

[bbambrey]

I have long been an advocate of children's/teens rights. They have thoughts, ideas and opinions like adults and have as much, if not more, to gain or lose from the decisions made. In regards to the US:

-We have and do prosecute children/teens as adults.
-Spend social security.
-Go to war.
-Enact laws on education. (including college funding and rules).
-Many states allow driving at 16.
-Some states consider 17 to be a legal adult.

The decisions we make can have very big impacts and yet we give no voice to children/teens? Why??? What could we do??

-Lower the voting age.
-Create children/teen lobbyist or activist groups.

I have yet to hear a good argument why we can't make these things happen. Why young adults/children/teens can't have more of a say.

If we can prosecute a teen as an adult then they should have a voice on how the laws impact their lives.

I welcome ideas...

/random thoughts.... and probably unorganized
//should probably get back to work
///did not proofread :)

Re:Childrens rights...

[astonishedelf]

There is one big difference between children on the one hand and women and blacks on the other. Being black or female (or possibly both) is a permanent state. Being a child is a transitional stage and is acknowledged as such. I would suggest that eighteen be the across the board age of majority. I suspect that there are good historical reasons why in some states the age for driving might well be seventeen. If you live in farm country, the ability to drive legally is probably much more vital than in New York city. There will always be regional variations that take account of local conditions. Chlldren lack the perspective that age and distance bring.

Re:who gives a shit

[geekoid]

Internet use: You fail it.

You were clearly flamebaited.

From your link:
BTW, if someone disagrees to the principle our diest founding fathers stated, they are welcome to do so. Expressing ones opinion is no reason to show them the door. In fact, it is directly against what you think you are fighting for.

Truly ironic.

doG oN!

Not a radical decision

[MikeRT]

The speech occurred off campus and wasn't illegal. Punishing the student for it was a violation of the US Constitution, and the judge ruled accordingly. Too bad the original district judge was too stupid to realize that.

Re:Good

[kebes]

While I agree that "being an adult" has many self-imposed restrictions (paying bills, holding down a job, taking care of dependents, being reliable, etc.), I have to disagree that an adult has less freedom than a teenager in high-school.

Frankly, alot of high-school was learning to fit into a mold (both for your peers and teachers), and following rules. Yes, to a certain extent you have to deal with those kinds of rules in "real life," but frankly I feel much more free and empowered now as an adult than I ever did as a teenager.

Part of it is financial independence, of course. But there's also much less fear of "not fitting in" or whatever. I mean, in high-school I would never mention to people that I played tabletop RPGs in my free time. Now, as an adult, I really don't care who knows (even though it is even less "normal" for an adult to play RPGs...). The restrictions of jobs and rent are nothing compared to the restrictions of high-school (and, for some people, their parents). Moreover, the very fact that these restrictions are self-imposed makes a huge difference.

All I can say to readers who are still stuck in High-School is: "Don't worry... Life gets better!"

On another note

[BlueTrin]

While I am quite happy to see freedom of speech win, I found this article, and was shocked by this part:

From MTV News:
One of the students named in the suit, Justin Layshock, 19, allegedly created an account in Trosch's name, in which he's described as "a big steroid freak" and "too drunk to remember" his birthday. The profile also suggested that Trosch smoked marijuana and kept a keg of beer behind his desk.

A different profile, created by student Thomas Cooper, also claimed Trosch was a fan of pornography, while a third, the work of brothers Brendan and Christopher Gebhart, depicted more graphic activities.

The fake profiles "went far and beyond what you would see on a bathroom wall in a school," Trosch's lawyer, John E. Quinn, told the AP. He added that the person behind a fourth MySpace profile, which he called "the most graphic and lurid of them all," has not yet been identified, but would be a party to the action if and when the person is.

Although I am for freedom of speech, this looks more like diffamation, I am sure that the myspace page about this girl has nothing to do with this case.

Although it is not related, I was wondering if you would agree that creating such a fake page could be categorized as diffamation and should be condemned, which is what Zonk is saying at the top of this page.

Re:On another note

[b0s0z0ku]

Although I am for freedom of speech, this looks more like diffamation, I am sure that the myspace page about this girl has nothing to do with this case.

Well, if it was obviously and patently fake, it could be considered a satire, and thus protected as free speech. Even if it was defamation, defamation is a _civil_ offense, not one that an adult would draw probation for. A lawsuit verdict or an injunction, sure; but not a criminal's sentence.

-b.

It's not that way in my state.

[AciesD]

At my high school a friend of mine was expelled his sophomore year for posting "hurtful" comments about a teacher on his blog. They expelled him based on precedent, or so said the school board. So apparently it has happened before. I hope this ruling will lead to some changes in other places.

Re:It's not that way in my state.

[pandrijeczko]

They were right expelling him. Sorry.

If you have a problem with a teacher, then it's a matter for you to discuss with your parents and the headmaster ("principal" in US speech) - it has nothing to do with the rest of the world.

How would you feel if you and I knew each other, we had a grievance over something and I went walking around the streets with a megaphone shouting out how much of a jerk you are? It's the same principle...

At the grand old age of 45, I'm now going to give you the best piece of advice you are ever going to hear, as it was told to me by one of my teachers:

"In life, you can do anything you like - but before you do anything, make sure you understand and are prepared to accept the consequences of doing it."

Re:Good

[Dragonslicer]

Minors can also not vote, drink, or run for public office.

In the United States, most of those aren't even 18. The legal drinking age (I believe in all states) is 21. You have to be 25 to run for the House of Representatives, 30 to run for the Senate, and 35 to run for President. 18 isn't the only somewhat-arbitrary age limit.

Delinquency charges == bullshit

[b0s0z0ku]

Translation: "we can't find an actual crime that would stick in a court of law in front of a competent judge or jury, so we'll charge her for not knowing her place in society (under the stomping feet of her elders)"

Catch-all laws like that annoy me, even if they were originally well meant.

-b.

Re:who gives a shit

[cHiphead]

The REAL irony is you yourself got superflamebaited! fantastical.

Cheers.

Re:who gives a shit

[libkarl2]

At the rate were going, there won't be any rights left to earn. They'll be gone. Then were all teenagers.

Except when we get in trouble. Then we will be tried as adults, and receive the maximum sentence for our heinous crimes against the ruling elite.

Seriously though, I have seen teenagers arrested, tried, (and punished) as adults for ticky tack offences you couldn't sucessfuly charge an adult for. Underage drinking (and voting) are punishable by law, but killing and dying is okay if you are in a combat zone.

But you are right; teenagers are a drain on society, along with the poor and disenfranchised.

Girl Smarter Than Principal

[nexuspal]

"Hey you piece of greencastle shit. What the fuck do you think of me [now] that you can['t] control me? Huh? Ha ha ha guess what I'll wear my fucking piercings all day long and to school and you can['t] do shit about it! Ha ha fucking ha! Stupid bastard! Oh and kudos to whomever made this ([I'm] pretty sure I know who). Get a background." Wow, to think that the principal became so enraged at this girls posting as to send her off to court! What a wimp! And guess what... She was right and WON!! NEENER NEENER!

Re:Good

[MorePower]

Adult life restrictive? I don't get how anyone can possibly be nostalgic about teenage life. It is all obligations and no rewards. You have far more responsibilies and obligations as a teen than as an adult. Basically as an adult I have to go to work and pay my bills (and this time of year, my taxes). And my bills actually get paid automatically, I just need to insure that my bank account stays topped off, so really doing my job is my only responsibility.

That would be the job that I can leave anytime I want if I find a job that's more to my liking. The one that I choose because I liked to technical and work/lifestyle aspects of. The one that pays me huge gobs of money because I once threatened to leave and work for the competition.

As a teenager, you have to go to school (under threat of criminal prosecution), do all your homework, do whatever chores your parents randomly assign, go to whatever lame weddings/reunions/family trips/etc. your parents randomly force on you. And for this you get no pay, own no property (except what your parents charitably give you, which they take away randomly) and you have to live with uncofortable relationships with your family that you can't leave or renegotiate in a house of their choosing in a city chosen for thier work/lifestyle ideals.

Screw all that! In the 16+ years since I turned 18, life just gets better and better. I live in a house that I chose, in a location that I chose, maintain what relationships I feel are worthwhile (which includes my parents, its much easier to live with them when I don't have to literally live with them), clean my home when I feel the mess bothers me more than the effort to clean it, own whatever property is valuable enough to me; all paid for by the job I chose under the conditions that I negotiated (and re-negotiated) from a position of strength.

I just don't see anything good about life as a teenager, which was living under constant threat of random punishment for not doing meaningless things you should never have to do in the first place. And getting nothing for it.

Age

[sacrilicious]

packeteer (566398) wrote:

I am 16 years old...

Quick back of envelope calculation: I joined slashdot in late 1999 and got #316896. I think membership is now up to 1.1 million. Assuming (perhaps wrongly) a linear rate of member accrual, I think that puts your number of 566938 at about five years ago... which would mean you started reading slashdot when you were 11. That rocks! :)