Less Zero Tolerance my behind!!!

[Racket_Man]

It seems that the Zero Tolerance policies have been eased at bit esp from the Federal level, BUTit seems that the states and lolcalities have not gotten the message yet.....

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/despite-easing-of-zero-tolerance-rules-some-schools-still-quick-to-suspend-expel/19671641

OK the first topic of the article I can somewhat get. a 7 year old brings what appears clearly to be a toy gun to school and gets suspended/expelled (a little harsh to be sure)

but the article goes on to list some of the more outrageous things that CHLDREN have been expelled/arrested/suspended for including this one which is a total WTF????

A 12-year-old in Inverness, Fla., was arrested, cuffed and taken to jail for stomping in a puddle to splash his classmates.

and the infamous one:
A 6-year-old in North Carolina was suspended for kissing a girl.

In a different case, 8-year-old David Morales wanted to honor American troops in June, so he wore a camouflage hat that he had decorated with an American flag and small plastic Army figures. His school in Coventry, R.I., banned it, deciding it violated a zero-tolerance policy for weapons because the tiny soldiers held guns. It told the family it would be OK if he replaced the figures with ones that didn't have weapons.

Still, Samuel was not allowed to register for school this fall, and since his parents didn't want to send him to an alternative school for "at-risk" students, he has been homeschooled for the past year.




article for the last one with a picture of the hat
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/17/mom-ri-school-bans-patriotic-hat-small-army-figures-glued-holding-guns/

yes the school district objected to little GREEN TOY ARMY MEN!!!!!

and WHAT THE HELL is this "at-risk" school BS concerning an 8 year old with little green army men????? it's not like the kid came to school fully dressed in BDU
s with a bandolier full of genades, a combat knife, camo painted face, and an M-16 strapped to his back and a backpack fullof ammo and smoke bombs.

I think some districts have their heads so far up their asses with this zero tolerance rule BS.

[Andara Bledin]

Zero Tolerance is just an excuse for administrations to turn off their brains instead of doing their jobs.

It's already far too late for this imbecilic and dangerous policy to be stamped out.

^-.-^

[radiocerk]

And I'm pretty sure it's time to look at zero-tolerance policies and see that they don't work. I mean, we've all noticed how well the anti-bullying policies have worked at some schools lately.

[Rageaholic]

Holy shit

•A 12-year-old in Inverness, Fla., was arrested, cuffed and taken to jail for stomping in a puddle to splash his classmates.Do I even need to describe how effed up this is?

•An eighth-grader in Virginia was suspended for taking a knife from a suicidal friend and putting it in his locker for the day.

Yeah don't even think about trying to intervene. Just let the school handle it! They handle everything else so well! :rolleyes:

Did they even take into account that it was the was suicidal friend who had the knife in the first place?

•A 14-year-old in Florida went to jail as an adult for six weeks after being accused of stealing $2 from a classmate.

He should have got school detention or something, but jail? Jesus Christ, it's 2 dollars! TWO DOLLARS! Why get the police involved over two dollars!!!!

I know those are all extreme examples, but it really is out of control. It's like the police jailing someone because he ran a stop sign once. This is an accurate analogy because in two of these stories the police did get involved.

Instead of focusing on such trivial stuff on dishing out harsh punishments, why don't they do something about bullying, depressing, peer preasure, and other REAL problems that negatively affect students. Instead, those problems get ignored because Jimmy was late for class or Tommy brought a toy gun to school. Kids are still assholes to one another, and students are even more negatively affected over super strict rules.

[Andara Bledin]

Here's another one to get the blood boiling.

Vice Principal has 13 year old student strip searched for contraband over-the-counter ibuprofin (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html).

^-.-^

[Sage Blackthorn]

Tyranny in any form should never be tolerated by a people who consider themselves free.

[MadMike]

Zero Tolerance is just an excuse for administrations to turn off their brains instead of doing their jobs.


I've always said it should be called what it is -- Zero Intelligence. They don't want to have to think, so they institute these idiotic policies so they don't have to. After all, it's so much easier to suspend both people who were in a fight, instead of try to figure out pesky details such as, did the one person jump the other person completely unprovoked? Was the other person defending himself or did he antagonize the other person?

In the real world, even killing another person isn't black and white. There are certain cases where it's perfectly legal to do so, such as self-defense.

As far as the kid in the original post who is now being home-schooled, that may be the best thing for him. We seem to have too many idiots these days trying to "educate" our kids.

[Rageaholic]

Here's another one to get the blood boiling.

Vice Principal has 13 year old student strip searched for contraband over-the-counter ibuprofin (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html).

^-.-^

Reminds me of that thong search several years ago. 4th admendment rights aside, isn't that.. ugh... I don't know...

SEXUAL ABUSE

Sickos.

[KitterCat]

What’s even more f’d up in the 13 year old strip search is the fact that the courts gave qualified immunity to the people who striped her saying that “clearly established law did not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment”. So yah so long as you suspect a kid of having “drugs” on their person and document it a teacher can have a kid striped.

Not only do you have to wonder that school administrators are smoking you have to wonder what some judges are taking as well.

[McDreidel09]

Here's another one to get the blood boiling.

Vice Principal has 13 year old student strip searched for contraband over-the-counter ibuprofin (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html).

^-.-^


I remember having to smuggle in ibuprofin in high school. I put mine in a clean and empty lip stuff container in my purse. It was seriously the dumbest thing ever. You could even get in trouble for having freaking MIDOL on your person.

[blas87]

Uh no. It cannot be ok to strip search a young kid just because in your own mind and *authorita* beyond a shadow of a doubt that kid has contraband on him and her!

[Andara Bledin]

You could even get in trouble for having freaking MIDOL on your person.
Welcome to the world of Zero Tolerance, where even a prescribed inhaler can be kept in a locked cabinet and only accessed by visiting the school nurse and hoping she's in her office.

I'm just waiting for the first kid to suffer some egregious harm from this policy and sickened that it's going to have to come to that before these ZT zealots can be forced to pull their heads from their asses.

^-.-^

[MadMike]

What’s even more f’d up in the 13 year old strip search is the fact that the courts gave qualified immunity to the people who striped her saying that “clearly established law did not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment”. So yah so long as you suspect a kid of having “drugs” on their person and document it a teacher can have a kid striped.


So if you're a teacher and want to grope some little kid, all you have to do is "suspect" that there are drugs. Just wow. :mad:

If that happened to me when I was a kid, I'd scream "pedophile" loud enough for everyone to hear.

[McDreidel09]

Welcome to the world of Zero Tolerance, where even a prescribed inhaler can be kept in a locked cabinet and only accessed by visiting the school nurse and hoping she's in her office.

I'm just waiting for the first kid to suffer some egregious harm from this policy and sickened that it's going to have to come to that before these ZT zealots can be forced to pull their heads from their asses.

^-.-^

Oh tell me about it! We only had two nurses for the entire school district, so there were days where the nurses weren't even there at all! Of course, the nurses couldn't work separately (district decision). I remember one time, I had to excuse myself from class because I felt so much pain and people were telling me that my face was extremely pale. I went to the Health Center only to find the lights off and the door locked.

[Plaidman]

Wow. For all my hatred of middle/high school years, they were at least you know, smart about medication. People were allowed asprin. People were allowed inhalers. People were allowed perscribed medicine. (There was a girl that helped robbed someone, and ended up getting shot in the face and lost her eyesight that had high dosaged pain killers).

I guess I got to give them credit for that area. Bastards.

[Greenday]

http://www.app.com/article/20101026/NEWS04/101026016/Police-Conn-woman-gave-son-weapons-for-school-

New case. Kid gets bullied. Mom thinks giving her kid a BB gun and a knife to protect himself is a great idea. Mom should rightfully go to jail. Kid goes to school and turns weapons over to school. Doesn't try to use the weapons or hide them. He just hands them over to the school. Now he faces getting expelled.

[Greenday]

You mean the student who was also connected with prescription painkillers (that a student reports made him sick) knives, and alcohol both on and off school property?


Thats not a very good example, it was completely justified.

How do you figure? The principal had an administrive assistant, a.k.a. a secretary, and the nurse strip search a student. They have no right to search her like that. They hold no position within the law and have no legal standing that'd give them the right to perform a strip search. The ONLY people who have that legal ability are the police and the school clearly overstepped it's boundaries in abusing its role as authority figures.

How would you like it if your boss gave you a strip search because you were discovered to have some pain pills?

[Greenday]

...I just posted a story about a kid who was given weapons by his mom and he instantly turned them in, which is exactly what we tell kids to do if they find weapons. He did the right thing, did nothing wrong, and may be expelled for it.

[Greenday]

I agree that one is outrageous. Its like the newstory I heard a few months ago where a member of the military in Britain found a shotgun in the woods and turned it in to the police and was arrested. Its insane that the officials would punish people for doing the right thing, and that is not what rules or punishment is suppose to be about.

It's what zero tolerance is doing. Listening to NJ's main radio station the other day, they were talking about this. One story involved a kid who was given a completely deactivated grenade and turned it in to the school. He got expelled. Another story was a kid who, on the way to school, found a broken gun (so broken it would be impossible to fire) right outside the school. He picked it up, brought it to the office, handed it over immediately...then got expelled.

[telecom_goddess]

It's what zero tolerance is doing. Listening to NJ's main radio station the other day, they were talking about this. One story involved a kid who was given a completely deactivated grenade and turned it in to the school. He got expelled. Another story was a kid who, on the way to school, found a broken gun (so broken it would be impossible to fire) right outside the school. He picked it up, brought it to the office, handed it over immediately...then got expelled.

wtf? That's insane and frankly just encourages me to not report or turn in anything.

[Greenday]

wtf? That's insane and frankly just encourages me to not report or turn in anything.

You can bet your ass if I ever have kids, I'm going to tell them that if they find a weapon on the ground, just ignore it and let someone else get expelled for doing the right thing.

[blas87]

Here, here. I can't agree more.

It seems like it's hurting people instead of helping, to do the right thing nowadays.

[protege]

It seems like it's hurting people instead of helping, to do the right thing nowadays.

Yep, and then the people who came up with the Zero Tolerance bullshit...will be the first ones to bitch when something happens :rolleyes:

[KitterCat]

You mean the student who was also connected with prescription painkillers (that a student reports made him sick) knives, and alcohol both on and off school property?


Thats not a very good example, it was completely justified.

I think your thinking of a different case. This one involves a girl (Savana Redding) who’s school mate (Marissa) after being found with prescription-strength ibuprofen accused Savana of having given her the pills. Savan, a student who had no disciplinary record, denied knowledge of having the pills and let them search her belongings and outer cloths. They didn’t find anything so the vice principal had her strip in front of the school nurse and another assistant.

Yah even the thought of having ibuprofen, the equivalent of two Advil’s, can get you a strip search! A drug that you cant get even get high off of. Fun times fun times. Welcome to a pedophiles wet dream where so long as you put in the proper paperwork to say that you think the kid has drugs - not even illegal drugs, just drugs you can have them striped.

Whats sicker still is that the first time the suit by Reddings mother was placed it was dismissed. An appeals panel said that her fourth amendment rights weren’t violated. It took going to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals before the courts said it was a violation of her rights. So you really do have to wonder what the heck are school administrators taking along with court judges, because its certainly not ibuprofen.

[Greenday]

So yeah, saying she was strip searched for over the counter drugs is like saying WWII started because Hitler said mean things. It requires ignoring alot of other stuff that happened.

It still ignores the fact that the school had no authority to perform a strip search and the only reason they wouldn't know this is because they'd have to be complete morons meaning they are too incompetent to be teaching the youth.

[Greenday]

Except it took several appeals to find they didn't have the authority so that means several court systems are just as incompetent, or they follow the law of the country and not the law of sensationalism.

I'd vote incompetency.

[KitterCat]

Your ignoring the other half of that sentence.

She admitted owning the planner, but said that she had lent it to her friend Marissa and that the contraband was not hers.

Think about what your saying Cactus Jack. Your implying that’s it perfectly fine for a school to strip a child, not because they’re even worried about illegal drugs, but because they’re carrying pain medication that you cant even get high on. It’s the rule its self that’s wrong, its why this tread has even been started. People are tired of Zero Tolerance rules.

What was missing from the suspected facts that pointed to Savana was any indication of danger to the students from the power of the drugs or their quantity, and any reason to suppose that Savana was carrying pills in her underwear," Justice David Souter wrote in Thursday's majority opinion.

“The self-serving statement of a cornered teenager facing significant punishment does not meet the heavy burden necessary to justify a search accurately described by the 7th Circuit as ‘demeaning, dehumanizing, undignified, humiliating, terrifying, unpleasant [and] embarrassing’. Justice Kim McLane Wardlaw

Having a students (Marrissa and Jordan) trying to get out of trouble by blaming some one else saying that they got the pills from you and oh btw you went to a party where there was alcohol wouldn’t be what most people would consider enough evidence to justify a strip search. It would be akin to having a coworker get in trouble with your employer and trying to blame you for having gotten them the advil but you went to a party that weekend as well. Though in that case I don’t see two grown adults letting some one strip search them for it.

Ms. Redding said she had served only soda at the party, adding that her accuser was not there. At the dance, she said, school administrators had confused adolescent rambunctiousness with inebriation. “We’re kids,” she said. “We’re goofy.”

[Greenday]

But the school should have known they had no legal grounds for strip searching a student. The correct action, as any competent person knows, is to call the cops when you find drugs on someone (Even though it was some ridiculously weak stuff that no one would pay for).

[KitterCat]

You can get high from prescription pain killers.
As an example of zero tolerance gone wrong this is a horrible one. It requires us to assume that the school only punished her for the over the counter pain meds and not for having prescription meds, weapons, and distributing the meds. .

There are of course many drugs that can make your high. Ibuprofen is not one of them. You can get the same result of taking an 800mg ibuprofen by taking 2 400 mg or 4 200mg over the counter pills. If parents can tell the difference between a child having ibuprofen and vicodin why cant school staff?

As for the strip search, it would appear there was some legal merit to performing it but in the end it was found to have been wrong. If the school were to strip search her after this finding on the same evidence it would definitely be a violation of her rights.

And reasoning like this is why you have outrage. If an adult on the street decided to strip a child because they thought they might have pain pills on them they’d be on a sexual predators list and multiple charges to their name. Why is it ok if a teacher does it?

Well of course. Nobody who gets caught with narcotics actually own them. Don't you know everything that is illegal belongs to somebody's friend and they just happen to have them in their possession or in something they own. The friend was also searched and the logical conclusion would be that they were in on this together.

Yah I know, we’ve got to crack down hard on those honor students. Doesn’t even have any disciplinary reports, but dame the kids who have been getting into trouble ousted her. Gotta believe the trouble makers since they’d never lie. Gotta enforce now that Zero Tolerance will be enforced and bang into the little cretins’ that there is no difference between any type of drug. A drugs a drug and all your getting is tea.

[Greenday]

Since it took appeals for it to be found that the school couldn't strip search her it would appear that the school is suppose to have a better legal understanding then the court system.

And since the superior court said, "Hey, you screwed up morons" and overturned it, it proves that the original judge was a moron.

I don't expect school staff to be as knowledgeable of the law as Supreme Court judges, but it doesn't take much knowledge at all to know that unless you have some kind law background, strip searching a minor without giving her being to give legal permission since she's a MINOR is completely illegal. And if you want to get techincal, it's also illegal search and siezure (I know getting into the Constitution is a toughy for a lot of people, but again, if these people are teaching our children and don't even know up to the Fourth Amendment...holy shit).

[Greenday]

In this case, yes, the original judge was a moron. It's right there in the Fourth Amendment.

[Plaidman]

New Jersey v. T. L. O. could be used to argue the search. It stated that searches in school without warrants do not violate the 4th amendment.

Great way of quoting something while not affirming to what happened.

It's true that searches in school without warrants do not violate the 4th amendment in that case.

The difference is in that case, it was a search of her purse was found reasonable, after catching them smoking in the bathroom, while in this case, they made the girl get fucking naked.

There is a huge difference between a search of a purse, and making a girl get naked.

[Greenday]

Great way of quoting something while not affirming to what happened.

It's true that searches in school without warrants do not violate the 4th amendment in that case.

The difference is in that case, it was a search of her purse was found reasonable, after catching them smoking in the bathroom, while in this case, they made the girl get fucking naked.

There is a huge difference between a search of a purse, and making a girl get naked.

This. The stated case does not set a precedent for strip searches.

[Greenday]

That was found to be true but only after several appeals.

Meaning as we got to the most competent judges who have really proven to know the law.

[Greenday]

So we get back to the obvious point, school officials don't have as much experience reading and interpreting the law as the judges in the high courts. The fact that the lower courts agreed with them however shows there was merit to their actions.

Except the higher courts disagreed with them shows there really was no merit to their actions.

[Greenday]

Your example isn't a moral issue so I don't really agree with it. It also has nothing to do with performing unconstitutional acts. I mean, haven't they always taught at least the Bill of Rights in schools or is this just a recent thing that they started teaching it?

The fact that it took that long for someone to say, "Hey, you can't strip children naked without legal authority/permission" is pathetic.

[Plaidman]

So Cactus Jack, judging from your other posts, I guess this means if your daughter, (if you have one, but for this argument, lets say you do), say she's 14. Goes to school with some cough drops because of her throat.

Teacher see's this, stripes her naked to check for more cough drops, then rapes her, then people don't belive her so the teacher is giving a slap as a punishment from whatever minor trail he has. (Based on your views on the punishment the high school basketball star did in the cheerleading thread)

You still going to force her to go that school and tell her tough shit because hey, the teacher had every right to get her naked to check for drugs? That what your saying?

Awesome to know that you belive that bill of rights allows teachers to strip kids naked on a whim.

I really hope you don't work with kids.

[Greenday]

3. This case has proven that teachers legally cannot perform strip searches, something that was not proven before this case. The actions proceeding the case amazingly enough happened before the case because time machines do not exist.

Laws/rules generally come as a result of people doing stupid stuff. There had been no law specifically saying that teachers cannot perform strip searches of students because before now, no teacher was dumb enough to do something like that.

That doesnt change the fact that this is a no brainer:

Not your kid.
You aren't a legal authority.
Don't strip the kid naked.

[McDreidel09]

In high school, we were informed of our rights as students. Here were the rights:

1)Our lockers, backpacks, cars, and purses are open to be searched if there is a reason why they need to be searched. These reasons might be :
-A tip was given that you may have contraband
-The drug dogs that come through once a month indicate that there may be the presence of illegal drugs
-You are reasonably suspected to have contraband

2) Strip searches are only allowed to be performed by a police officer of the same sex. You are to be detained in the principal's office until said officer arrives. Your parents will be informed of the search.

[Andara Bledin]

You mean the student who was also connected with prescription painkillers (that a student reports made him sick) knives, and alcohol both on and off school property?
From an article on the This is True blog (http://www.thisistrue.com/blog-zt_v_savana_redding_a_court_decision.html), "Redding, an honor student who had never been in trouble before..."

The only word the school had ever had of Redding having ever done anything all came from a pair of students who were at that time in trouble for the very thing they went after Redding for.

From a court summary, also quoted in the TiT article:
Inexplicably, although Marissa was the one found with the pills, the search conducted on Marissa was less intrusive than that later conducted on Savana, whose only link to the pills was Marissa's uncorroborated "tip." School officials asked Marissa only to lift her shirt, not to remove it entirely, as they did with Savana. The third student suspect was a boy named Chris. He was the only student suspected of the same infraction that day not required to strip for the school officials' inspection.

When speaking of the unreliability of your example, maybe you should try doing the same.

Except it took several appeals to find they didn't have the authority so that means several court systems are just as incompetent, or they follow the law of the country and not the law of sensationalism.
In that I do agree. Several court systems are just as incompetent.

You can get high from prescription pain killers.
I like how people throw out the phrase "prescription painkillers" instead of "prescription strength Advil." A classic bit of propaganda. People don't usually think of "prescription painkillers" as just being higher doses of common over the counter options; it's designed to make people think of narcotics and other stringently-controlled substances.

So we get back to the obvious point, school officials don't have as much experience reading and interpreting the law as the judges in the high courts. The fact that the lower courts agreed with them however shows there was merit to their actions.
Then they should be erring on this side of the line and not the other.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

1. I think by cough drops you mean prescription drugs that made other kids ill after taking them and weapons
Allegedly made other kids caught red-handed with contraband ill. And why was it that the boy who had pills found on him wasn't also searched?

^-.-^

[KitterCat]

Sorry it took me a while to find the transcript of the case. So here you go, what was found on the classmates and presented to Savana was “four white prescription-strength ibuprofen 400-mg pills, and one over-the-counter blue naproxen 200-mg pill, all used for pain and inflammation”

Naprexen incase you need to know is equivalent to asprin. So she got strip searched for a high dose of ibuprofen and asprin. Neither can get you high.

Per the court “Be-cause Wilson knew that the pills were common pain relievers, he must have known of their nature and limited threat and had no reason to suspect that large amounts were being passed around or that individual students had great quantities.”

http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/drugpolicy/saffordvreddingscotusruling.pdf

Going by your reasoning it would be ok for the school to strip any kid down for fear that they’ll pass out advil, because it’s a rule. Doesn’t matter if the rule is just, it’s a rule and we’re to follow them wither they make sense or not. I have to ask, do you ever wonder why more people are going for home schooling now than they did a decade ago?

[Andara Bledin]

Aside from having alcohol and cigarettes at a dance. She also owned a binder with knives and drugs in it. More then enough evidence for reasonable doubt.
She was alleged to have had parents that hosted a party with alcohol by a same teen that alleged she was the source of the pills. Hardly a reliable source by any measure.

She owned a binder. The binder had knives in it. The binder, with the knives in it was in the possession of the other teen who alleged she was the source for the contraband. Again, hardly a credible witness.

Also I like how people throw out "honor student" like its a get out of free card, but rage about if an athlete gets less then the maximum sentence plus 20 lashes. Double standard much?
It, along with the unblemished record within the school system, show a mark of character.

You shouldn't do something just because several judges believe it is legal. You should make sure to ask every judge in America before doing anything.
Short answer to a ridiculous statement: Yes.

If a person is too ignorant to figure out whether or not something might be considered a violation of a basic right, then maybe they should just avoid being in a position of such responsibility.

^-.-^

[Greenday]

I'm not sure if I can simplify this any more.

What could possibly make school staff think they had the legal right to strip search a child without legal representation or permission from the parents?

You'd have to be a moron to think it's okay. (so before you post, yes, those judges who ruled it okay are morons)

[blas87]

If I had a kid and they were being strip searched without my permission, there would be heads rolling. I can almost promise I did not mean that facetiously.

My parents would have done the same for me. They even told me if I were ever involved in anything with the principal or the police, to talk to them first and not answer any questions. One time the school cop would NOT let me call my mom before he started questioning me about a hit and run car accident that I was the prime suspect for (don't even get me started on that story, I wasn't even there when it happened). The school cop called my mom AFTER he questioned me and she tore him a new asshole. He's just lucky he called my mom first and not dad.

[McDreidel09]

You call them morons but you can't understand the concept that if something is ruled a certain way in court then it is legal until it is overturned.

Legal =/= Smart.

What they did was moronic, even if it was considered legal before being overturned.

[Andara Bledin]

I think trying to get drug dealers out of school before their drugs make more people ill is a smart move, but I suppose some people don't think drugs that make students sick is a big deal.
First off, stop lumping all drugs together.

It's idiotic, knee-jerk, Big Brotherish antics like this that leave kids dying because they can't have their inhalers on their person while in school.

OTC an prescription versions of OTC pharmaceuticals that have no value as recreational narcotics should never be lumped in with that looming specter of "evil drugs" that you keep pointlessly trying to invoke.

The administration in this case had decided the girl was guilty based on the allegations of two proven offenders and nothing else. And in their mad witch hunt, they took thing way too far by any rational standards because they couldn't admit that maybe the kids that had already broken the rules might have lied and they were wrong.

Your blind support of authority to the exclusion of all else including common decency is truly disturbing.

^-.-^

[Greenday]

I can just picture the conversation now:

Principal "What are you doing with these drugs?"
Proven Trouble Kids "They aren't ours. They are, uh, Innocent Girl's!"
Principal "Oh, well that makes sense."

[blas87]

That was just beyond ridiculous. Greenday has made some very good points in this thread, and the above....exchange between Officer Greenday and Johnny Buttfuck is just.....wrong.

[Greenday]

I can imagine Greenday as a cop

Johnny Longlegs: You caught me coppa. Fine, I'll come clean, I've been dealing drugs for Tony Marmaluke. Check the car, its registered to him and you can find the entire stash in the trunk

Officer Greenday: Just because you say you work for Tony Marmaluke how do I know for sure? He's only been accused of crimes, they never managed to catch him red handed? I hear he was an honors student in school.

Johnny Lonlegs: What, really? Didn't Tony the Snitch come to you also saying that Tony Marmaluke is behind this entire drug empire?

Officer Greenday: Just because a couple of people I don't like independently tell me the same story that doesn't mean I'm going to go around investigating it all willy nilly. What if one day in the future a judge declared investigations to be unconstitutional. I can be thrown in jail for doing things that will one day become unconstitutional.

Johnny Lonlegs: No you can't.

Officer Greenday: Yes I can. I know more about the constitution then every judge in America.

Hey! I would NEVER use the phrase "willy nilly" in a sentence.

[Greenday]

His main argument that judges that he disagrees with are morons and school officials should know what judges will decide before the case is brought to them.

If a judge doesn't know the Constitution, I think that definitely qualifies them to be called a moron.

If I pull out a gun and shoot someone in front of a large crowd, wouldn't you expect me to be arrested and thrown in jail? I'm pretty sure you'd call me an idiot if I said, "Hey, how was I supposed to know the judge would say I was wrong?" Ignorance of the law does not excuse them breaking the law. And you'd have to be ignorant to think as an adult with no powers from the law that you have the right to strip search a child without anyone's permission.

I would be extremely happy to call any person involved with this case who claimed that they didn't know it wasn't okay a moron to their face.

[the_std]

But they didn't break the law. The law was changed after the fact. Nowhere did it say that strip searches where prohibited. Under your thinking everybody who drank when the drinking age was 18 should have been arrested when it was changed to 21

Correction. The law didn't change. The interpretation of the law did.

[FArchivist]

I think some districts have their heads so far up their asses with this zero tolerance rule BS.

The main problem with zero tolerance policies is that they allow NO room for discretion. That's how you get problems like this. Unfortunately, zero tolerance didn't evolve because administrations wanted to make it easy for them. It was actually demanded by the public in the early 1990s. We have to get tough on crime, three strikes, zero tolerance for offenders, yadda, yadda....and the legislators did exactly what the public wanted.

Unfortunately, the public was unaware of a little thing called "Unintended Consequences". (As usual.)

But then, I am old enough to remember when everyone was clamoring for this. *sigh*

[HYHYBT]

No; SOME people were clamoring for this, and it "tough on crime" always sounds good in campaign ads, regardless of what, if anything, the candidate does to deserve the label. It happens in other areas, too; it's not that different than when, a few governors ago, one pushed through a law (or possibly separate laws, but at the same time) requiring fewer students per classroom and cutting funds for teacher pay simultaneously. That way he could look good on both education and the budget, sticking city and county governments and their school boards with the blame when they were forced to raise property (etc) taxes to cover the difference.