Massachusetts School Principal flunks Rorschach test...Hoooooweee !!!

[waka1 28]

MEDFORD, Mass. (WHDH) -

The father accused of making verbal threats and showing his gun permit to his son’s principal in Arlington will not face charges.

Robert Goodwin reportedly went to the school after the principal raised questions about a drawing the man's son made.

The principal said the boy had drawn a phallic symbol , but 40-year-old Robert Goodwin said his son had actually drawn a gun similar to one he’d seen in ‘Despicable Me.’

Goodwin then reportedly took out his gun permit and the principal notified police.

“Our system of justice is great because it gives us the opportunity to get to the truth,” Goodwin’s attorney Mark Miliotis said.

When questioned under oath, the principal told a clerk magistrate he did not feel threatened.

The clerk denied a criminal complaint against Goodwin and the Arlington Police Chief said he would respect that decision and not press charges.

[Peikko 1,575]

Whatever, a non story - even if it was a phallic symbol, so what? Boys do know they have a ####### and are interested in them, so why is drawing representations of parts of the anatomy against school rules and considered peculiar? I don't understand the context for bringing out a gun license in such a scenario though. It does make the dad look a bit dippy, what was his point? "My son couldn't possibly have drawn a #######, he prefers guns?'

[waka1 28]

Whatever, a non story - even if it was a phallic symbol, so what? Boys do know they have a ####### and are interested in them, so why is drawing representations of parts of the anatomy against school rules and considered peculiar? I don't understand the context for bringing out a gun license in such a scenario though. It does make the dad look a bit dippy, what was his point? "My son couldn't possibly have drawn a #######, he prefers guns?'

I believe what was not said in the article, was the 'Principal' confused phallic with gun and felt 'threatened', thus called the police...

Whatever,

'Zigmund F.'

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

MEDFORD, Mass. (WHDH) -

The father accused of making verbal threats and showing his gun permit to his son’s principal in Arlington will not face charges.

Robert Goodwin reportedly went to the school after the principal raised questions about a drawing the man's son made.

The principal said the boy had drawn a phallic symbol , but 40-year-old Robert Goodwin said his son had actually drawn a gun similar to one he’d seen in ‘Despicable Me.’

Goodwin then reportedly took out his gun permit and the principal notified police.

“Our system of justice is great because it gives us the opportunity to get to the truth,” Goodwin’s attorney Mark Miliotis said.

When questioned under oath, the principal told a clerk magistrate he did not feel threatened.

The clerk denied a criminal complaint against Goodwin and the Arlington Police Chief said he would respect that decision and not press charges.

The anti-gun wackos just get wiered and wierder. If it had been a phalic symbole with a rainbow flag, that said I support gay rights, the son probally would have gotten and freedom and courage award

[Peikko 1,575]

The anti-gun wackos just get wiered and wierder. If it had been a phalic symbole with a rainbow flag, that said I support gay rights, the son probally would have gotten and freedom and courage award

I am sorry, but did you actually read the original article? The reason the boy was NOT in trouble was because the father proved to his satisfaction that the drawing was of a gun and not a phallic symbol as the principal had thought. Drawing phallic symbols is clearly some kind of offense, though why is completely beyond me. So, well done for creating a straw man that you have torn down quite emphatically. Now, how about a comment on the actual article with the actual facts as they were presented?

[Peikko 1,575]

I believe what was not said in the article, was the 'Principal' confused phallic with gun and felt 'threatened', thus called the police...

Whatever,

'Zigmund F.'

What was said in the article was that the boys father was brought in to see the principal because of a drawing of a suspected phallic symbol. The father pointed out that the suspected phallic sybol was in fact the drawing of a gun from a film. That should have been the end of it, and more or less was. The threat, such as it was, had nothing to do with the drawing, it was the presentation of the gun permit into the scenario. The principal felt that producing the gun permit was a threat. My question, why did the parent produce his gun permit? Any ideas on that fact?

[Peikko 1,575]

No ideas why a parent produced his gun permit in the course of the interview?

[waka1 28]

No ideas why a parent produced his gun permit in the course of the interview?

What I have no idea about is why your nose is so out of joint over such a ridiculous article....?

I joined VJ 2 weeks ago to get help and help others on this journey called life...

Let it go...

If not for my sake, for others....

Recess is over,

Rob187

[Peikko 1,575]

What I have no idea about is why your nose is so out of joint over such a ridiculous article....?

I joined VJ 2 weeks ago to get help and help others on this journey called life...

Let it go...

If not for my sake, for others....

Recess is over,

Rob187

Let what go? What others sake is at issue? I asked a perfectly reasonable question based on an article you thought was worth commenting on which you can answer or ignore. However, instead you presume to post about my state of mind as guessed at by you. Which is in fact the more unreasonable?