For arrest records in general, no one has access to that kind of information except law enforcement and NSA types. Convictions would be a different story, but even a misdemeanor conviction in this case would be eligible to be sealed after the student becomes an adult. So even assuming conviction here, the likehilood is very high that the student would be able to answer no to questions on applications asking if he's ever been convicted. Basically I'm trying to say I don't think there's a lasting consequence of a conviction from a legal or employment view.
Oxajil said:
If he threw a cup, a knife, a stick, a phone or something else, yes I could definitely understand, but a paper airplane?
It seems I regard what happened more like a poke of a stick in the eye than just a piece of paper or crumpled paper ball. I asked myself what would I think if it was a crumpled paper ball instead of paper airplane, and found myself thinking arrest would not be appropriate. I think it is because when I think of paper airplane, I think of sharp angles and edges and points. In contrast, I don't think sharp when I think of paper ball. So it is troubling that my reaction would change by imagining the paper airplane as paper ball. If I pretend it was a paper ball, then I agree with comments of over reaction and over the top. But when I switch it back to paper airplane, or to something else like paper clip or pencil, I still think arrest is appropriate. If I am overestimating the harm from a paper airplane hitting eyes, then I can see that I am wrong. I will ask the opinion of an eye doctor, because I am influenced by possible eye injury.
Joe said:
I think a reasoned response would be that it was an accident. The student was unlikely to have such expert control over the paper plane that he intended to hit, and succeeded in hitting, the teacher in the eye. That shows no intent to cause harm. A paper plane is not a dangerous weapon. It is not a weapon at all.
This was not an accident. The student was aiming for the teacher's head.
Beau said:
I cannot fathom how anyone who isn't hysterical would think that being arrested and charged with a criminal act is just punishment for what happened.
I don't think I'm hysterical, though I'm willing to look at your definition of it to see if I fit.
Nienna said:
To my mind, anyone who would support something like this is, in fact, supporting a police state.
I don't think I support a police state. However, if your definition of police state supporter is someone who supports arresting a 17 year old student for aiming a paper airplane at a teacher's head that hits the eye, then by your definition I am police state supporter.
Beau said:
It's almost like people who feel this way have forgotten what it was like to be a teenager. Children going through adolescence do a lot of things they'll later regret, but remembering what we were like at the age should temper our reactions to their behavior and understand that most of the time it is not a sign of pathology. It's just a child going through the bumpy teenage years, as we all have.
I have not forgotten what it was like to be a teenager. In my high school, no one threw anything at teachers. Maybe I was in a good neighborhood but I don't think that affects the appropriate consequence. I don't give teenagers a pass to physically hurt others. Talking back and defiance is understandable. Physical harm is not.