by minimus 57 Replies latest jw friends
I disagree with curfews. Shouldn't parents be the ones to, you know, parent?
So, are you going to turn a blind eye to the child delinquents, the property damage, and the public nuissance caused by inadequate parents? Of course parents should be the ones keeping their kids in line. The simple fact is that many do not and will not. The problem then becomes a public one.
Yes, Doe, they would. Haven't you heard of all the zero tolerence bullsh*t?
Kids get into serious trouble for doing childish things. One kid at my daughter's school had to go to Alternative School because she had Advil in her purse. That's against their "drug" policy.
Some of the silly stuff my friends and I did back in the day would land us in serious trouble nowdays.
Kids should not have medications at school without a note from their parents, and/or a prescription on file. I agree with that policy.
Now, there may be some fourth amendment issues here regarding how the Advil was found. Ordinarily, a school does not have the right to go rifling through a person's purse without some specific suspicion supported by probable cause.
The problem with too many rules and laws is that all you need is one overzealous cop and he can "legally" enforce something that does not use common sense .
A law might say 55 mph is the limit to drive. A cop could concievably ticket you for going 3 miles over the limit. Dumb!
Now, there may be some fourth amendment issues here regarding how the Advil was found. Ordinarily, a school does not have the right to go rifling through a person's purse without some specific suspicion supported by probable cause.
The drug dogs will be in my kid's school this week. The administration can search anything at anytime. (Unless the kid's father is a cop or lawyer).
one overzealous cop and he can "legally" enforce something that does not use common sense
Yep.
A few years ago in the UK we had something similar introduced under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. At the time their was alot of criticism of restricting mainly teens liberty, even though it could be applied to anyone.
Under the Act if anyone or a group of people acted antisocially, and it must be proven over a long period, they would be given an Anti Social Behavioural Order (ASBO) by the courts restricting movement. Many ASBO's were given to youths, in particular restricting groups of more than two or three youths from 'hanging around' certain areas where it has been known youths have caused trouble, or they may restrict certain troublesome youths with a curfew. In some cases they were applied to sections of known troublesome areas.
At the time it was introduced i was one of the ones agaist what i saw as restricting liberty.
But then one was introduced at a shopping precinct near to my fathers, where sometimes up to 50 youths would congregate at night. Over a six month period no more than 3 youths could be grouped together otherwise they could be taken to Court, for which there would be serious consequences. During that period many on my fathers estate felt safe to venture to the shops in the evening, the crime was reduced to almost zero and the neighbourhood became peaceful again. Since that time the youths have dispersed and there is no need for the ASBO to be applied, the neighbourhood is relatively peaceful again.
I think for such a thing as these ASBO's which in effect are curfews does affect an individual's liberty, but that has to be balanced against the liberty of the general public's need to feel safe and more importantly be safe in their communities.
Paul
The drug dogs will be in my kid's school this week. The administration can search anything at anytime.
Not true. There are limitations on what a school can do. There have been fairly recent cases regarding this. As far as drug sniffs, that has been held to not be a search for the reason that supposedly the only thing a dog detects is contraband. There is no expectation of privacy in contraband. If a dog signals during a sniff, then the school has probable cause to initiate a search.
A law might say 55 mph is the limit to drive. A cop could concievably ticket you for going 3 miles over the limit. Dumb!
Years ago, I remember when Clinton got a ticket when he was governer for going 57 in a 55 here in Arkansas!!!
I honestly thought all communities had curfews for teens.
A law might say 55 mph is the limit to drive. A cop could concievably ticket you for going 3 miles over the limit. Dumb!
At what point should violation of a law subject the violator to enforcement of that law, in your opinion?
There may be limitations but most people wouldn't call them on it. Yes, the dog gives them probable cause. Dogs are honest folk. They are just doing their job.
It pisses me off that my daughter has to be drug tested to run track and play basketball. The kids that are into sports aren't the stoners!
