Posted on 06/25/2009 10:41:17 AM PDT by Darren McCarty
Thank you for the additional information. There tends to be more to cases like this than reported by our incompetent reporters.
We all talk big about the framers and “original intent”. So exactly *which* founding father would have said this was permissible by ANY government agent, much less by a school marm?
This is closer to China 2009, than to Philadelphia 1776.
I beg to differ. The drugs were to be distributed at lunch and they didn’t know if she had taken any. Her safety became an issue. See my other post about calling the cops. It then becomes a cavity search. They also had a similar experience with this and the student nearly died.
So it must suck to be a diabetic who needs insulin shots or a kid with asthma and not be able to use an inhaler because “prescription” drugs are banned.
No, it is not. All the "issues" you listed are just "blowing smoke".
Government officials do NOT have the power to strip search my child. I'm glad the Supreme Court has told them that, before there was a possiblity that I might have to. I would have been no where near as polite as they.
I would have been just as disgusted by one idiot...but three, all in the same place, and later backed up by their superiors......amazing. Makes me want to lock my kid up in a closet until they're 40.
You're not implying that boy's SHOULD be strip searched at school, are you?
How about: A student should never be subject to being strip searched by the public schools?
By school officials?
Yes.
Ask any street cop if such a case would lead to a body cav search. Weak case, even if it was crack rather than ibuprofen. Find crack on person “A” who says i got it from person “B”? You better not be strip and cav searching person B based on that. And past behavior won’t justify the present case either.
At best it might, by jail personal, if she was
*already* being booked.
Well, if you read Thomas’s dissent and the context of the events, it makes a whole lot more sense than it does in this newspaper article, which seems intentionally written to distort what actually happened. This was not some girl using OTC ibuprofen for a common cold, but an apparent trader and abuser of prescription drugs and alcohol, and it sounds like there was a lot of that going on at that school, and that this girl had been previously involved in it. This was NOT a case of teachers harrassing a girl using an OTC drug for legitimate purposes, but a case of teachers trying to stop widespread drug abuse in a school of early teens.
Take it down a notch. I’m not “blowing smoke”. I’m sharing with the members of this site the issues that were brought up during oral arguments. As an example.... Did you know that the girl who implicated Redding also had a weapon (a knife)? This principle didn’t know who had what or who had taken, or might be taking, drugs that have serious side effects. Surprise! The media did not cover this case well.
Ok, the school officials call the cops because you want the cops not the teachers to do the strip search, and in the meantime the Muslim youth unleashes the anthrax and 200 students are killed.
“If the kid were a Muslim youth suspected of having anthrax hidden in his underwear, would Thomas’s critics object to a strip search?”
16 year old girl, stripped by the government. Anthrax? Please get serious, actionable intel on a *terrorist* attack is not the same as a girl giving another ibuprofen.
(which she didnt anyway,, the first girl lied) Also, i suspect an Al Queda attack anthrax would be dealt with by law enforcement, not by the school marm.
This is an outrage, the parents should have been called. In Loco Parentis is NOT carte blanche,,,it means “in the place of parents”. It does not give the school the RIGHT to do dire things most any parent would forbid. Ask your friends with kids.
Let me be clear. I’m not arguing for the cavity search. I’m sharing with the rest of you what was discussed during oral argument. Sheesh. Relax people.
I think that because of the way this story was written, people are comparing it to those cases where school officials expel a student from school for bringing a one-inch G.I. Joe “gun” to school and claim its in violation of a zero-tolerance anti-gun policy. But it isn’t comparable to that at all. This school had a serious problem with drug abuse, both prescription and OTC drugs, and this girl seemed right in the middle of it. As Thomas points out, this decision tells students exactly where they can safely hide illegal drugs.
You are wrong. calling the cops most assuredly *would not* have resulted in a cavity search. Dream on. That wouldn’t happen without a warrant, or unless she was being processed into a jail or lockup.
Might not have been covered in debate class. But still, like i said, ask the next random cop you see. Prepare to get laughed at.
But if that's the case, then a horny perverted teacher could force a student strip, get naked, and inoculate himself from criminal prosecution by saying he was checking for drugs?
I have kids. One was arrested once for shoplifting, and was handcuffed. I didn’t like the looks of that, but she’d broken the law and that’s what they do when you break the law. All you folks make it sound like the teachers did this search for some kind of cheap thrill.
“They also had a similar experience with this and the student nearly died”
Then im sure they called paramedics immediately? They just wanted to find the goodies. This was a power mad principal, nothing more. And why again were the parents not called? It was a critical emergency,,but one that didnt need cops or paramedics?
I agree with Ginsberg and Stevens here. While Thomas is a good writer, I could not disagree more with his decision. I think this comes from two philosophies. Thomas believes schools being parents outside of the home. I believe public schools are agents of the government before anything else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.