You can't actually cancel your subscription. It's delivered by the USPS as bulk/junk mail. The post office will not stop delivering it even if you request.

BS reporting by the Banner. If I paid for my subscription I'd surely cancel it

this is such a total joke. this isn't about malicious content, it is about an upset parent w2ho doesn't want their kid dragged thru the mud even though the kid should have been arrested for what they did. 5 day suspension? kid should be in rehab.

I agree with Shannon. this is a farce. and so is the PB for caving to calls from a parent. or anyone else for that manner.

"is vandalism legal?"

Legal - no. Accepted in SVHS - yes. No criminal charges have or will be made in this case.

The people involved have made restitution but our HS was vandalized. Were the kids who trashed BK let off with a slap of the wrist. No - they were fully prosecuted as well as required to make restitution to the school.

is vandalism legal?

drinking is not worse than vandalism but in this case it was a minor who was drinking and that makes it illegal. i wonder if the school ever find out were the minor got a hold of the alcohol.

Drinking is not worse than destroying someone else's personal property. Who are you harming? This is dumb. Maybe it's personal favoritism or is it really school policy? What's so bad about drinking a beer at a football game or whatever it was? That's normal. People drink at sports events all the time. Sure, it shouldn't be allowed at highschool but nowhere near as bad as stealing and destroying thousands in personal property. Sounds like favoritism and unfairness. Or maybe just another case of political correctness gone mad. Trying to teach kids that drinking is bad. Stealing and destroying is ok. Just call it a "prank". Silly kids.

This is directed towards WHS 2004.

Learn the facts before you weigh in on a subject. The cell phones did not belong to the "spoiled brats" Scotts Valley students. I'm not going to waste my time attempting to educate you here.

You've embarrassed yourself and the WHS class of 2004 with your ignorance. Hey, here's a question for you: Is is better to be "spoiled" or stupid?

Still don't see anything that contains personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs.

Google the article title and click the "cached" link and you'll find the letter. I don't understand why the PB is publishing and then censoring this letter...makes no sense at all. Don't read this!

Commentary: Is drinking on campus really worse than vandalism and theft?

by Shannon Malliet Nov 26, 2010 | 35 views | 1  |  | 1  |  | 

I was recently told a story about a high school junior who was caught drinking at the school during the Scotts Valley High homecoming game and is now suspended from participating in sports, as well as other school activities, until the season is over.

At first glance, one might say, OK, the offense does deserve punishment — some might argue that for a first offense three months seems severe, but OK, fair enough, that is the school’s policy.

I also heard about three freshman students from the school who have admitted to vandalizing the locker room at the school on that same night, homecoming night, and causing not only complete embarrassment for the community and school, but reportedly hundreds or possibly thousands of dollars’ worth of damage to personal property. What is the punishment for those kids? Only three days suspension from school, but they are still allowed to play sports this season.

Drinking on campus gets you suspended for five days and banned from sports and activities for three months, and major vandalism gets you three days’ suspension from school but no suspension from sports or other activities. Really?

So, what we are telling the kids in the Scotts Valley community is that it’s worse for an individual to drink on campus than it is to do thousands of dollars of damage to other people’s personal belongings and humiliate the school and community. Really?

I, for one, think we are sending completely the wrong message to our kids.

The punishment for vandalism should be at least as severe — and, in my opinion, should be more severe — than for drinking.

So I really have to ask the administration, the athletic director, the team coaches and the district, do you really think drinking on campus deserves a more severe punishment than theft and vandalism? That is what you are telling the students at your school by suspending someone from playing on a sports team for drinking but allowing the student who has admitted to vandalism to continue to play. I know there are policies and procedures, etc. But let’s face it: Facts, policies and procedures are not always written to cover every incident.

I am not saying the one for drinking should be allowed on the team necessarily, but certainly there should be more parity in the punishments. Either both should be allowed to play or neither — but make it fair and send the right message to your students.

Shannon Malliet is a Scotts Valley resident.

Editor’s note: In fact-checking the length of suspensions at Scotts Valley High School, the principal could not comment on specific cases but said suspensions for the offenses described are typically five days for drinking on campus and three days for vandalism.

See, that was the whole point of the original letter. Punish the drinker the same as the vandal. The drinker got much harsher punishment than the vandal.

maybe it was after i posted this:

« WHS Class of 2004 wrote on Thursday, Dec 02 at 01:25 PM »

i say punish the little alcoholic just as much as the so called vandals... alcoholism and drug abuse is in my opinion more important subject since its a everyday society issue now a days...

yes they are kids, yes they made a bad choice and now they have to suffer the consequences and hopefully learn from their mistakes to never do anything stupid like that again.

The damages done to the electronics (that were not supposed to be in school grounds to begin with) are mining-less. i thought schools in general don't allow personal devises because it distracts the person using them and the the rest of the class (the teacher taking time to tell the student to put the cellphone away, to stop texting, bla bla bla) besides most cellphones have insurance. pay de stupid $50 bucks deductible and shut up you rich spoiled brats. (unless its an iphone witch you deserve to pay so much being the rich spoiled brat you are it shouldn't be a problem getting a new one)

i don't believe in school suspensions. what, give them a vacation for their actions. heck no! keep them in school in the gym or auditorium or some were, give them twice as much homework and also Saturday school.

the article was about the school policies but it got out of subject when the parents are upset for their kids being made fun of. shut up and move on. its not the end of the world. and focus on the initial subject school policy.

What exactly was malicious in the original article?