Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've taken a little time to read the Court's decision on strip searching the 13 year old girl for "aspirin" (yeah I know it was Ibuprofen, but I call any pain killer taken in pill form "aspirin") and I was appalled at a couple of things.
1. There is apparently some discussion among "serious" people about exactly "when can adults strip search a kid?". How about NEVER you f'ng morons! I don't have kids but I can't imagine any parent, on hearing that a teacher, principal or other school employee did this not going down to the school with either a ball bat or attorney (or both!) in tow.
2. Since it's illegal to own, view or transmit electronic or photographic images of minors in "undressed" state, how come it's not illegal to put them in that condition? And why aren't the school employees now under the jail, or (since it happened 5 or 6 years ago) now registered as sex offenders?
3. Reading Justice Thomas' comments in his (sole) dissenting opinion makes me more firm in my opinion that this guy never should have been confirmed.
4. Justice Thomas (for perhaps the first time since he rose to the Court) didn't vote in lockstep with Justice Scalia. OTOH the Scalias have several kids (5 I think) who all were 13 at one time and he does not seem like the kind of guy that would have tolerated this kind of bushwa from a school employee without bloodshed. Although Scalia's kids went to Catholic schools so they may not have been strip searched but they might have gotten some serious "whacks" for acting up. And worse ones when they got home.
5. In addition to his idiotic ruling on this case, Thomas then wrote that the majority ruling would, "now tell kids exactly where they can hide contraband". What adult seriously thinks that they could teach a kid anything about deviousness?
5. In addition to his idiotic ruling on this case, Thomas then wrote that the majority ruling would, "now tell kids exactly where they can hide contraband". What adult seriously thinks that they could teach a kid anything about deviousness?
Discuss please.
golfgod
Well, you have a point. Most every law in this great land is "gamed".
And then, one game leads to another.
Hide the aspirin could easily progress to hide the salami.
This search had little to do with drugs and a lot to do with power. Some school administrators are simply insecure wimps that must be able to bully the students lest the administrator be held accountable for a student carrying "drugs" in their skivvies. In this case the administrator combined bullying with a bit of salaciousness. If the search had included “body cavities” it would have been assault and battery if not rape.
While I would not go as far as punching the creep out, I would work to see him fired and ostracized from the community.
Well, you have a point. Most every law in this great land is "gamed".
And then, one game leads to another.
Hide the aspirin could easily progress to hide the salami.
Thats part of the game of enforcing the law though. When people deciede that its ok to violate civil liberties in order to win the game, we have taken a severe hit to our foundations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
