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.
Since 1996 (well over 15 years ago) even spring assisted pocketknives have been exempt from the switchblade laws, and there is literally no limit on length. Those knives, all typically tools of the "trade" types, are all 100% legal in California. Weird.
This was 1995, I believe, I'll have to confirm that with him. I told you, it was a long time ago.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
BTW, switchblades are frequently prosecuted under the "dirk,dagger" clause and as such, it would be a felony in California. You did say it was LA right? And that he was being "railroaded". That is weird, if they were really trying to railroad him, why would they let him off on a misdemeanor? Odd. Especially since said knife would HAVE to be produced during trial, and how the knife laws in California are distinctly lenient.
Yep, LA. His lawyer worked out a deal with the DA, that if he pleaded no contest and did a bunch of community service that they would charge him with a misdemeanor. Not sure if that was done by a judge or what, I'm not familiar with that kind of procedure. He should never have been stopped in the first place. Apparently the detective in charge at the Wilcox station when they brought him in was not happy. His words were "I can't believe they bought you in for this".
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
Hmmm, if it walks like a duck....
What does that mean?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
You have not shown that schools are being adversely effected by losing that 8% of the parent population that are felons. Please support this assertion you make over and over again.
It's not JUST the 8 percent felons that they lose. In struggling schools in struggling neighborhoods, people are not going to get involved with the police just because. maciesmom actually explained it very well up thread. I realize none of these issues exist in your bubble where they haven't just laid off the entire staff apart from the teachers and principal. There are not volunteers lined up around the block here. We don't even know if we'll have a school to go back to because there's NO ONE TO STAFF IT. But let's go ahead and scare the parents off with fingerprinting and stuff. Good plan.
This was 1995, I believe, I'll have to confirm that with him. I told you, it was a long time ago.
Convenient.
Quote:
Yep, LA. His lawyer worked out a deal with the DA, that if he pleaded no contest and did a bunch of community service that they would charge him with a misdemeanor. Not sure if that was done by a judge or what, I'm not familiar with that kind of procedure. He should never have been stopped in the first place. Apparently the detective in charge at the Wilcox station when they brought him in was not happy. His words were "I can't believe they bought you in for this".
Even more so
Quote:
It's not JUST the 8 percent felons that they lose. In struggling schools in struggling neighborhoods, people are not going to get involved with the police just because. maciesmom actually explained it very well up thread. I realize none of these issues exist in your bubble where they haven't just laid off the entire staff apart from the teachers and principal. There are not volunteers lined up around the block here. We don't even know if we'll have a school to go back to because there's NO ONE TO STAFF IT. But let's go ahead and scare the parents off with fingerprinting and stuff. Good plan.
Prove it. Prove that schools that have these programs have less volunteers than before.
Really to keep your children safe you should never let them out your front door and encounter any other human being. Better to never let them talk to anyone who has ever done something wrong, certainly those people have nothing to teach us. Keep your halo polished, and by all means keep them away from the churches! Those pews are packed with hypocrites and moral deviants.
That is a PARENTS prerogative, not the schools. If YOU choose to let your kids hang around with people with felony drug conviction that is absolutely your right. But it is not your right to decide that other people's children have to be chaperoned by them.
I do not support background checks for anybody, ever, for any reason. We have become slaves to the background check mentality. Gotcha has become out biggest growth industry, large comporations harvest, for huge profits, tidbits about perfectly harmless people and destroy their lives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
LOL! Carrying a POCKET knife is not a crime.
Why on earth is it OK to have children chaperoned by a person who once carried a 3-1/2 in blade knife in his pocket, but not one who once carried a 4-inch blade in his pocket? What has that told you about the suitability of that person to chaperone children?
When I was in school, I had a 5 inch swhtchblade in my fishing tackle, which I took to school (for reasons you 21st-century pedagogues would never believe if I told you). In the 21st Century, I'd have been "caught" for that, and charged with a felony, and adjudged mentally incompetent for not knowing the difference between right and wrong (as defined by the moral length of a pocket knife blade), and 60 years later, I still don't know right from wrong, I guess. Where would that put me in your Background Check? An unacceptable danger to your kiddies?
Our district requires fingerprints, a background check, a TB test, and in-depth interviews with three personal references. I don't know where the line is drawn as to who passes and fails as my husband and I both passed without issue. I will have to look it up, but I have never heard a complaint from anyone, so I assume the rules are fair. The checks/tests are completely at the expense of the volunteer.
These safety measures have certainly not had an affect on the number of volunteers. We have many parents who are happy to undergo the needed procedures in order to volunteer.
Not true. In my state volunteers are not given a drug test. It is not even part of the federal standard for screening of volunteers. As a matter of fact, I could not find a single parent volunteer background check that included a drug test. Could you please provide a link of any place where that is a requirement?
If you are suggesting that volunteers with old drug convictions should be drug tested, and regularly, then I am much more okay with them volunteering in the school.
So now, the human resources personnels time has to be spent on a background check, drug test, etc. just so felons with drug convictions should have access to other people's children? Why is that? Shouldn't the expense be on the person with the conviction instead of the school district? Maybe they can pay the police to do that level of background check and drug testing.
Uh, maybe you are unaware but people with those types of drug convictions are barred from holding licenses like teaching ones in most states. The people who do the hiring in a public school do not have the discretion to supercede the department of education in a state and therefore have no training on who should or should not be allowed to volunteer in the classroom with such a felony.
Says your version of "common sense". You don't seem to get it. Many other parents would find it common sense to keep felons out of the classroom. In fact the majority of them.
You realize we are talking about "volunteers" right? People who hand out crepes and read books while the TEACHER does the TEACHING. I hate to burst your bubble but there is no one volunteer who is NECESSARY to the school, let alone the 8% who are felons.
If that 8% can't volunteer IN the classroom, there is a line of people behind them who can.
Given that you think administrators are making judgements about hiring employees with felony drug convictions when they are NOT, maybe you should re-think that. And given that those self same administrators are the ones who have instituted those no felons allowed policies, why are they not then qualified to just say, no felons allowed. You do realize it is administrators who enact these volunteer guidelines right?
Depends on what capacity the person is volunteering in here. To do menial things in the classroom I don't think requires any real rigorous screening, but in a position where you have students in your charge, like a chaperone, you have to undergo full screening just like an employee of the district. The form on the website is very basic and does not include either the drug testing consent or the fingerprinting consent, but I know you have to do both.
And here, you do not have to pay for your own background check and/or drug testing. And yes, that's what human resources and those in administrative positions do...screen and hire people. That includes drug tests and background checks. That is their job. And NO, I am not talking about teachers obviously...we're talking about parent volunteer workers. At my dd's school, the principal hires the workers, but the district handles all the paperwork including background checks. That means someone at the district level has to give the ok to hire someone based on the information they receive. And I did mention that I worked with someone who had a felony DUI conviction, so obviously, they are not using a one-crime-fits-all blanket in this district.
And "just so felons can have access to other people's children?" Really? I love the way you word things. Yeah, I'm sure that's the very reason "felons" are lined up at the door of every elementary school in the country to volunteer...for access to other people's kids. More likely that it's a "parent" wanting access to "their own" child, and maybe even wanting to help their own child's class and teacher. I know that sounds a lot less sinister and dramatic, but much more realistic.
Any district has the right to say no felons allowed at all. My district uses discretion, and I'm sure this isn't a unique idea.
And most parents want to keep the threat of harm away from their children. Some administrators don't see decades old convictions as a threat.
And maybe volunteers are necessary in your district, but many posters have illustrated districts that are struggling, understaffed, underfunded, and in desperate need of help. Parental involvement is beneficial to the students, the school, and the district in many ways. Different districts with different needs have different methods of achieving this. Glad there's a line of people waiting to volunteer in your area, but that's not the case everywhere. And I do know if my child's classroom could benefit from much needed help from a parent volunteer, I would not be the one to go screaming bloody murder over the possibility that the parent reading to my child committed a crime 20 years ago that is totally unrelated to violence, abuse, or the person that is sitting there reading today. However, I would have higher standards for anyone responsible for transporting my child away from school, and I am glad that our district does do drug AND background checks for chaperone volunteers.
Is it? Well you'll just have to take my word for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714
Prove it. Prove that schools that have these programs have less volunteers than before.
According to you, the paperwork alone is a nightmare, and therefore you have no - or rare - parent volunteers in your classroom. So if you don't have them when you've parents around the block, because it's a paperwork nightmare for your administrators, what makes you think parents in neighborhoods that are at war with the police are going to waltz over to the local station and get fingerprinted?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkb0714 This notion that there are these hordes of SAHMs in the classroom is bizarre to me.
Maybe it is a regional difference but parents are rarely allowed to volunteer in the classroom, they would have to get fingerprinted/background checked every year and it becomes a paperwork night mare for the school to keep track of who is or is not allowed in the classroom. On the rare occasion it is allowed, volunteers are not allowed in their own kids rooms.
Depends on what capacity the person is volunteering in here. To do menial things in the classroom I don't think requires any real rigorous screening, but in a position where you have students in your charge, like a chaperone, you have to undergo full screening just like an employee of the district. The form on the website is very basic and does not include either the drug testing consent or the fingerprinting consent, but I know you have to do both.
I would tend to agree with you about things like office help, or PTA event not needing testing. But again, the burden you are placing on the district, or at least ones in my state is well outside the scope of what a typical school can manage.
Quote:
And here, you do not have to pay for your own background check and/or drug testing. And yes, that's what human resources and those in administrative positions do...screen and hire people. That includes drug tests and background checks. That is their job. And NO, I am not talking about teachers obviously...we're talking about parent volunteer workers. At my dd's school, the principal hires the workers, but the district handles all the paperwork including background checks. That means someone at the district level has to give the ok to hire someone based on the information they receive. And I did mention that I worked with someone who had a felony DUI conviction, so obviously, they are not using a one-crime-fits-all blanket in this district.
You appear to be missing the point. Or rather both of them.
1. Typically administrators do not choose whether or not to hire people with felonies (btw DUI is not a felony in many states) in most places as that is an issue for the state. So you are now adding an entirely knew aspect to jobs that people have decided that the best THEY can handle it, is to exclude the felons.
You say it should be up to administrators, but then when admins choose to exclude felons you disagree. Which is it? Why should they be forced to take on responsibility, for which they have no experience or training?
Quote:
And "just so felons can have access to other people's children?" Really? I love the way you word things. Yeah, I'm sure that's the very reason "felons" are lined up at the door of every elementary school in the country to volunteer...for access to other people's kids. More likely that it's a "parent" wanting access to "their own" child, and maybe even wanting to help their own child's class and teacher. I know that sounds a lot less sinister and dramatic, but much more realistic.
Access to their own children? Why not wait until they are at home. If you want to read a book to Johnny, do it at home. I thought this volunteerism was about helping the school? Now it is about your own child? Which is it? Because if it is about your own child, help them at home. If it about helping the school, do so in a way in which felons are not in the classroom.
Quote:
Any district has the right to say no felons allowed at all.
Actually some states, like Mass, require criminal checks and set standards, like excluding felons, that supersede the district.
Quote:
My district uses discretion, and I'm sure this isn't a unique idea.
Nope, not a unique idea, just a declining one. More and more districts and states are choosing safety for their students. In the currentclimate how could they not?
Quote:
And most parents want to keep the threat of harm away from their children. Some administrators don't see decades old convictions as a threat.
Haven't seen any evidence of such. Again do you have a link?
Quote:
And maybe volunteers are necessary in your district, but many posters have illustrated districts that are struggling, understaffed, underfunded, and in desperate need of help. Parental involvement is beneficial to the students, the school, and the district in many ways. Different districts with different needs have different methods of achieving this. Glad there's a line of people waiting to volunteer in your area, but that's not the case everywhere. And I do know if my child's classroom could benefit from much needed help from a parent volunteer, I would not be the one to go screaming bloody murder over the possibility that the parent reading to my child committed a crime 20 years ago that is totally unrelated to violence, abuse, or the person that is sitting there reading today. However, I would have higher standards for anyone responsible for transporting my child away from school, and I am glad that our district does do drug AND background checks for chaperone volunteers.
No one has shown, at all in this thread, that keeping felons out of the classroom, is negatively effecting volunteerism rates in schools who have decided to err on the side of caution.
IBKO714-
I haven't read this entire thread- but did you say you carry some sort of knife with you?
In our district carrying any type of knife is automatic expulsion. It could be a plastic knife. No one is allowed to have one- (maybe the cafeteria and maintenance people). But teachers, students etc. are not allowed to carry a knife.
Two years ago a senior had car trouble. Brother was home from college for spring break- so she took his car- he had a sword on the backseat. Guess what- a staff member saw it and she was expelled. How rediculous was that? She didn't even know it was in the backseat.
and why my friend would u not want the background of somebody that is going to spend the day with your kids?
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.
