I felt the need to reply to last month’s staff editorial regarding the student who lost his senior year for bringing a rifle onto school property. There is no doubt that he exercised very poor judgment that day, but I feel that his punishment was disproportionate to his “crime” and it wasn’t “justice,” as the editorial so strongly asserted. 

Yes, he broke a rule; he brought a gun to school. But after an investigation, the District confirmed that he clearly had no malicious intent and was not a threat to students or faculty. If his intentions were so innocent then why was his punishment so severe? Our new Superintendent may be trying to send the message that Rockwood doesn’t take this controversial issue very lightly.

But why couldn’t 15-30 days of OSS have been used to accomplish this? It would have been more than sufficient to show that the District takes guns seriously. It would have also shown-perhaps even more importantly- that district officials genuinely consider all of the factors involved. From what other students have said, the senior involved is not a troublemaker and has had very few to no run-ins with the school before. So why was he punished as if he has been a problem more times than can be counted on our Superintendents fingers? 

He never was a legitimate threat to the school in January and will likely never be. The time he has already spent out of school has been an adequate punishment and he should be allowed to return.

-Sara Williams (11)