They were suspended over guns!

[Rogue Cock]

I typically try to be objective, which is why I'm not on the "Incarcerate Brandon Miller" bandwagon. But, yes, many in our fan base would be calling for these guys to be banned from the game of football forever if they played at another SEC program.

Did they break rules? Absolutely. Should they be punished? Absolutely. The questions are: What is the appropriate punishment? Can they be punished appropriately and still be allowed to play football here? If they deserve a second chance at another school, why not a second chance here?

The key for me here is that they weren't doing anything with the gun(s). It was in his room. He wasn't carrying it around campus. The gun was never pointed at anyone. They weren't shooting the gun. We don't even know if it was loaded. I am NOT defending him having the gun on campus, but there are degrees of wrong.

Would an appropriate punishment be a 6-game suspension? I think that kind of suspension shows it was taken very seriously. It's not a token 1-game suspension for a game against an FCS opponent. 6-games is a pretty stiff penalty but still allows them to remain part of the program and gives them the chance to get back on track. It's an appropriate balance of justice and mercy.

I tend to agree. My opinion is that whichever player brought the gun on campus should recieve the same punishment as any other student who did the same. The other two who, from my understanding, simply tried to help a teammate get out of trouble deserve a lesser punishment.
u
Sorry, missed your later post in which you said pretty much the same.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I don't think you can do even that with our policy. Obviously the bigger issue is throwing it out the window and trying to hide it. IMO that tells me they knew they shouldn't have it, i.e. they knew better.

Certainly. There's no excuse for them having the gun on campus, and they obviously knew they shouldn't, but the reason for the having gun in the first place is worth knowing. Were they otherwise in legal possession of the gun and just had it on a campus for a couple days until they could store it somewhere else? Or are they just keeping guns in their room. Either way, they knowingly broke the rule and should face whatever penalty is mandated. Again, it's a matter of whether or not they just did something really, really, really, really stupid of if they did something nefarious.

 

[18IsTheMan]

From the Student Handbook that is online:

Here are the Weapons, dropping items out of windows, false statements defined in the Handbook. These were the charges listed by the police in the news report

It also states the university could make their finding before or after the off campus authorities. The Handbook does not list the punishments for these offenses



D. Weapons
Prohibited behaviors include unauthorized possession of weapons including firearms or weapons of any kind including but not limited to knives, slingshots, metal knuckles, razors, paintball guns, BB guns, and air pistols; even if permitted by law. Authorization for possession of a firearm on campus or in campus controlled facilities is only available from the university president or designee.



F. Disruptive Activity Prohibited behaviors include:
1. Interfering with or disrupting the normal activity and operations of the university or its educational mission, programs, or events
2. Conduct that causes or provokes a disturbance that disrupts the academic pursuits of others
3. Behavior in a classroom or instructional program that interferes with the instructor or presenter's ability to conduct the class or program, or the ability of others to profit from the class or program
4. Intentional obstruction which unreasonably interferes with freedom of movement (including but not limited to pedestrian or vehicular obstruction)
5. Throwing or dropping objects or substances out of buildings.
6. Non-compliance with reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on expression.
7. Failure to leave immediately when asked to disperse by university or law enforcement officials.

I. Compliance with General Laws and Arrests
1. Violations of any federal, state, or local laws may be subject to disciplinary action. A disciplinary action imposed by the University may precede and/or be in addition to any penalty imposed by an off-campus authority.
2. Arrests by law enforcement agencies outside of USC’s Division of Law Enforcement and Safety must be reported by the student to the Office of Student Conduct within 72 hours of arrest.
J. Dishonesty and Theft
Prohibited behaviors include:
1. Theft of any kind, including seizing, receiving, or concealing property with knowledge that it has been stolen

2. Sale, possession, or misappropriation of any property or services without the owner's permission
3. The sale of a textbook by any student who does not own the book
4. Dishonest or fraudulent behavior in any oral or written transaction with the
university
5. Dishonesty or misrepresenting the truth before a hearing of the University, or
furnishing false information or withholding information to any university official
which interferes with university processes or procedures
6. Forgery, alteration, or misuse of any document, record, or officially issued
identification information from University processes and/or officials
K. Misuse of Identification or University Resources

In the absence of a defined penalty, I do think intent and motive are key here. WHY did they have the gun? WHAT they were planning to do with it? Did they think they could keep it on campus for a few days before moving it somewhere off-campus and not get caught? Or were they just planning to keep it on campus indefinitely? Were they also in possession of ammo?

 

[18IsTheMan]

It may very well be that they need to be permanently expelled from school and thus off the team. But I don't think it HAS to be that way depending on all the facts.

In general, I'm not in favor of extra penalties just because. If they pay for their crime through a fine or whatever is mandated by the legal system, I don't know that this offense means they have to have their rest of their lives taken away from them.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

Certainly. There's no excuse for them having the gun on campus, and they obviously knew they shouldn't, but the reason for the having gun in the first place is worth knowing. Were they otherwise in legal possession of the gun and just had it on a campus for a couple days until they could store it somewhere else? Or are they just keeping guns in their room. Either way, they knowingly broke the rule and should face whatever penalty is mandated. Again, it's a matter of whether or not they just did something really, really, really, really stupid of if they did something nefarious.

There are definitely questions that still need to be answered. Hopefully they will be as this plays out, and whatever decision is made will be the right one.

 

[Sparklecity]

Yes. Once their legal situation is settled, is there reason they cannot be re-admitted as students? I don't have access to a University rule book, so I don't know if this infraction carries a penalty of never being able to be a USC student ever again.

I wouldn't let them back on campus. IF.... they came back to school and later shot up the dorm there would be hell to pay. You would never hear the end of it for letting them back on campus. The media and nation would be out for blood!

 

[Sparklecity]

I wouldn't let them back on campus. IF.... they came back to school and later shot up the dorm there would be hell to pay. You would never hear the end of it for letting them back on campus. The media and nation would be out for blood!

And rightfully so, this is your warning. Don't get it twisted, I own many guns and am pro gun but you must be a responsible gun owner and responsible gun owners don't take guns where they are not allowed or throw them out windows

 

[Forkcock]

Times have changed. My generation respected guns and knew how to treat them. Carrying a shotgun to high school was just an every day thing. We even took Hunters Education and shot target practice with .22 rifles during school hours. This was late 70's early 80's (Wade Hampton High in Greenville). Somewhere along the way, high school kids started being treated children. They then began acting like children. Look at where we are today. Just sayin.

 

[18IsTheMan]

I wouldn't let them back on campus. IF.... they came back to school and later shot up the dorm there would be hell to pay. You would never hear the end of it for letting them back on campus. The media and nation would be out for blood!

If shooting up campus is their goal (probably a stretch) kicking them out of school permanently wouldn't prevent them from coming back on campus and doing so.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

Times have changed. My generation respected guns and knew how to treat them. Carrying a shotgun to high school was just an every day thing. We even took Hunters Education and shot target practice with .22 rifles during school hours. This was late 70's early 80's (Wade Hampton High in Greenville). Somewhere along the way, high school kids started being treated children. They then began acting like children. Look at where we are today. Just sayin.

Graduated in 1991 from Columbia High. Guys had their hunting rifles on racks in their truck windows. No biggie back then.

 

[HillsToSea]

I wouldn't let them back on campus. IF.... they came back to school and later shot up the dorm there would be hell to pay. You would never hear the end of it for letting them back on campus. The media and nation would be out for blood!

So true

 

[HillsToSea]

Graduated in 1991 from Columbia High. Guys had their hunting rifles on racks in their truck windows. No biggie back then.

Yes. The difference is you never heard of them IN the schools

 

[athenscock3]

In my day, we openly carried our shotguns and rifles to high school. Nothing ever happened other than some afternoon hunting.

A lot of things have happened since our day and most of them not good. Too many school shootings to take a chance on having guns. Big liability for the university if things go wrong

 

[Psycock]

No excuse - weren`t up to anything good with one of those. They should be illegal anyway imo. Brandon Miller was given a pass at Bama that, to me, is inexcusable. These guys will be lucky if they are allowed to remain on the team. I trust Beamer but not some of the other people making decisions about who can play football for us that`s for sure. You`re welcome, Arkansas,

 

[Cocky99]

On campus AR15s are a huge NO NO. F***ing idiots. Send them to Alabama, where they could conduct a drive by shooting and still play.

 

[81 Alumnus]

In other news, we landed on the moon.

Actually, most of these knuckle-draggers don't believe that we did

 

[Forkcock]

No excuse - weren`t up to anything good with one of those. They should be illegal anyway imo. Brandon Miller was given a pass at Bama that, to me, is inexcusable. These guys will be lucky if they are allowed to remain on the team. I trust Beamer but not some of the other people making decisions about who can play football for us that`s for sure. You`re welcome, Arkansas,

Oh boy, here we go.

Why should they be illegal?

 

[Jonesz2]

Are you saying this is no big

 

[Jonesz2]

I don't think he is saying that.
I think he is saying that society is FAR worse now than it was back then, but anyone with eyes or a moral compass can see that....

Yeah. Back then they had Jesus.

 

[Jonesz2]

Everyone deserves a second chance. Everyone has done something stupid in their life.

 

[Lurker123]

Graduated in 1991 from Columbia High. Guys had their hunting rifles on racks in their truck windows. No biggie back then.

Graduated in 91 as well, (different HS), but my memory is different. I had older brothers and sisters who would talk about that, but I don't remember it myself. (Just my memory)

So I was curious, the ban of weapons on school property was passed in 1990. It was challenged and altered in 1995.

It does strike me as so very odd how schools survived the very commonplace possession of guns on campus. We're we really that different of people back then?

 

[Rogue Cock]

Graduated in 91 as well, (different HS), but my memory is different. I had older brothers and sisters who would talk about that, but I don't remember it myself. (Just my memory)

So I was curious, the ban of weapons on school property was passed in 1990. It was challenged and altered in 1995.

It does strike me as so very odd how schools survived the very commonplace possession of guns on campus. We're we really that different of people back then?

Much different time before video games, internet, 24 hours/day phone contact, 24 hour news, etc. Bad things happened but you didn’t hear about it an hour later and then over and over. And people didn’t get their 15 minutes of fame/infamy either. Graduated in 1980….very very different times.

 

[CockyCody]

I remember a guy in my Speech/Drama class giving a demonstration on skeet shooting that took place directly behind the school. It was common place back then for guys to go hunting before school and have their SG or rifle in the rack inside their truck. Yes, we were different people back then and I am sad that things and people have digressed over the years. I own several guns and one happens to be an AR. People make mistakes but with the way things are now, you can't make certain ones without all hell breaking loose. Pretty STUPID to have the AR at school and even MORE STUPID to try and be deceptive once you are caught red handed.

 

[Sparklecity]

Graduated in 91 as well, (different HS), but my memory is different. I had older brothers and sisters who would talk about that, but I don't remember it myself. (Just my memory)

So I was curious, the ban of weapons on school property was passed in 1990. It was challenged and altered in 1995.

It does strike me as so very odd how schools survived the very commonplace possession of guns on campus. We're we really that different of people back then?

Yes!!!

 

[Mauze1]

... when administrators didnt have to refer to a handbook before dishing out punishment and actually made decisions on their own.

Funny how since its inception, the Dept of Education at the federal level has done nothing to improve education.

Absolutely zero, after trillions.

 

[Blues man]

Absolutely zero, after trillions.

I know this, since it was created we've done nothing but spiral down the rankings worldwide. Falling like a brick. We were fine before that.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

I know this, since it was created we've done nothing but spiral down the rankings worldwide. Falling like a brick. We were fine before that.

All part of the plan my friend.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I know this, since it was created we've done nothing but spiral down the rankings worldwide. Falling like a brick. We were fine before that.

Huh? Y’all do know that each individual state determines the curriculum of the K-12 schools, approves the textbooks, and sets teacher certification standards.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Huh? Y’all do know that each individual state determines the curriculum of the K-12 schools, approves the textbooks, and sets teacher certification standards.

Who exactly again?

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

Huh? Y’all do know that each individual state determines the curriculum of the K-12 schools, approves the textbooks, and sets teacher certification standards.

It's almost as if we don't need a Federal Department of Education.... (we don't) (Just another Dept. for politicians to stuff their own pockets)

 

[Rogue Cock]

Who exactly again?

The state and to some extent each county therein….assuming that is what you are referring to.

 

[Rogue Cock]

It's almost as if we don't need a Federal Department of Education.... (we don't) (Just another Dept. for politicians to stuff their own pockets)

That argument has been made before many times.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

The state and to some extent each county therein….assuming that is what you are referring to.

School boards?

 

[Rogue Cock]

School boards?

Yep, though I’ve always understood the State Board of Education sets the general curriculum, graduation requirements, teacher certification, and the general approval of textbooks (or whatever they use know).

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

Graduated in 91 as well, (different HS), but my memory is different. I had older brothers and sisters who would talk about that, but I don't remember it myself. (Just my memory)

So I was curious, the ban of weapons on school property was passed in 1990. It was challenged and altered in 1995.

It does strike me as so very odd how schools survived the very commonplace possession of guns on campus. We're we really that different of people back then?

Just a matter of time before SCOTUS overturns all that nonsense.

Inside the US border, *anywhere* on the map = Constitutional to carry.

Gun Free zones inside the US border = Unconstitutional, period. Can't wait. People do not get to pick and choose when or *WHERE* evil shows up. And no, it's not remotely the same as yelling "fire" inside a theater. Inside the US border I have the right to protect myself with a firearm. Period. It's just a matter of time.... SCOTUS will make it right. Soon. Wait and see.

 

[Blues man]

It's almost as if we don't need a Federal Department of Education.... (we don't) (Just another Dept. for politicians to stuff their own pockets)

It was payback for the NEA endorsement of Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter needed it badly as it was the largest union in the country and Carter was on the ropes. Everyone knew it was an unnecessary bureaucracy but very few wanted to fight the union... and the dems certainly didnt want to hurt Carters chances of getting elected. It was the first time the union had ever endorsed a candidate and the politicians feared the power the union had developed. This was always about politics and power and never about the kids. This was about the grownups... just like the union of today, when their priorities became crystal clear when covid hit... and we know how that worked out for the kids.

 

[BetaLiberalCock1]

It was payback for the NEA endorsement of Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter needed it badly as it was the largest union in the country and Carter was on the ropes. Everyone knew it was an unnecessary bureaucracy but very few wanted to fight the union... and the dems certainly didnt want to hurt Carters chances of getting elected. It was the first time the union had ever endorsed a candidate and the politicians feared the power the union had developed. This was always about politics and power and never about the kids. This was about the grownups... just like the union of today, when their priorities became crystal clear when covid hit... and we know how that worked out for the kids.

I did not know that. (a little before my political awareness)

I liked the way Reagan handled the unions. Especially The Professional Air Traffic Controllers Association. They went on strike and Reagan just fired em'. All 11,345 of them. LMAO.

Don't want to work???? There's the door. Bye. And life went on just fine.........

 

[Blues man]

I did not know that. (a little before my political awareness)

I liked the way Reagan handled the unions. Especially The Professional Air Traffic Controllers Association. They went on strike and Reagan just fired em'. All 11,345 of them. LMAO.

Don't want to work???? There's the door. Bye. And life went on just fine.........

Agreed. Wish we had more like him. He did cut the dept's budget when he came in. Pretty ballsy move at the time. I cant blame congress for not wanting to fight the teachers union in their own districts tho. I dont believe that would have been a winning proposition for them individually. Now's a different story tho. The union is wounded. Their support is dwindling. Time to fight back and undo the bureaucracy that made them more powerful than ever... as soon as Joe is gone anyway.

 

[Thunderstick]

The next question is what we would be saying I'd this was georgia or Florida players? Or (gasp) clemson players?

We wouldn't have heard about it if it had happened at the University of Clemson.

 

[Gamecock Lincoln]

Depends on how the school's policy is written. Most schools (I would think) have a zero tolerance toward weapons regardless of intent. My workplace had this in place years ago. Bring a gun on site regardless of the reason and you are terminated immediately. This might seem harsh to some but we live in a different environment.