Shocking and dangerous (Sheridan, Cody: insurance, home, purchase)

[Ct_bow]

Originally Posted by green_mariner

And yet, government is necessary.

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary" - James Madison

Agreed, but government must be controlled by the people. You cannot leave government to control itself because it will consume everything like an out of control fire.

[Happy in Wyoming]

Originally Posted by Ct_bow

Agreed, but government must be controlled by the people. You cannot leave government to control itself because it will consume everything like an out of control fire.

There is no question that it has been in control in this country since 1933. Civil servants have become masters. All the citizens can do is fight its most unreasonable incursions into our lives. But fight we must lest we become nothing but slaves.

[countryboy73]

Not a Wyomingan, but I intend to relocate to one of three states including Wyoming. I would not send my children into the school environment with instruction to speak disrespectfully about their teachers and those in authority, as that will not only get the kids in trouble, but likely alienate them from their peers, who will not even begin to understand what just happened. In addition, while I have taught my children to think for themselves and to think critically about what they are being told, I have taught them to respect authority for its position and what it can do to them- if for no other reason. Respect, not necessariiy obey, but at least know what it can do to you.

But, I agree that we MUST not allow the further infringement of our rights or those of our children. What we have seen over the last half century and more has been the incremental slide into tyranny, and it has to stop somewhere. The trick is, how do we get it done? We won't get it done by alienating our neighbors. If we as a united people do not stand up and demand better, we will lose our liberty. There are people who want to take it from us, and they are working hard at it. If we do not get committed to stopping it, we will lose. The most committed side wins. As displayed in this thread, most Americans do not yet truly feel that their liberties are in danger. This is normal. Jews in Germany never thought it would come to a gas chamber or an oven, even when men with guns were loading them onto cattle cars. Solzhenitzyn wrote about how Russians wished from the camps that they had fought the government when the troopers came for them.

Until a majority of Americans understand how much we have already lost, and how much we stand to lose, we will not effect a change in government. Calling them Marxists and commies when they don't even understand what you think they have done wrong, will never gain you any friends or a listening ear. Of all America did wrong in Vietnam, they did one thing right. They knew they had to win the hearts and minds of the people if we were to win. They failed in the execution of that, and so will we, if we attempt to beat our opinions into our neighbors. The fact that the Constitution is under attack and has been for some time is indisputable, but unless America understands the value of the rights delineated therein, no amount of preaching, much less angry rhetoric or name calling will change anything except to further alienate those who value it from those who would, but don't know to.

[ElkHunter]

I think we need to get back on track of what specifically is happening in Wyoming. I would hate to move this thread to the Political arena.

When I was in High School, drug dogs were brought in and paraded by all the lockers, while we were in class. Somebody in a classroom would see the approach and word would get out, usually after the fact. At that time I thought it was illegal search, but the charter, or agreement with the public school was that they could search lockers, it was just a fact. If a dog alerted on a locker, a staff member would pull you out of class so that could open your locker and allow them to search. I never had an alert on my locker so I don't know what the proceedure was to get you to open it.

Then I went into the military and drug dogs were commonly used, but in training commands and aboard ship. But, as we all know, in the Military, you are no longer subject to the Constitution, you are subject to the "Uniform Code of Military Justice." Different set of rules.

I think it could be better handled. I don't think searching lockers, or lock down is warrented. But I wouldn't mind if they had drug dogs at the entrance as you walked by. We have a drug problem in Wyoming and if there is something, that doesn't infringe upon your rights, but can slow down the drug problem, I am all for it.

The drills of lockdown for an armed intruder, are drills that are fine by me. As I said before, we did duck and cover because it was a threat. We had fire drills because fire is a threat. Same with bomb threats. Having Lock down is also because of a threat. Nothing wrong with it.

[countryboy73]

Armed intruder lockdown drill are mere prudence on the part of school officials. I will be the last to argue that such things are unconstitutional. In fact, I am part of a 5-member crisis management team at my church, charged with planning and training for such events(along with tornado, earthquake and fire response plans). And combating the negative influence of drugs in our society, especially among our youth, is paramount. But it has to be done in a way that does not set a precedent for abuse of power by government, aka in a Constitutionally- acceptable manner. Perhaps rather than preemptive searches of all students' property at our schools, we need to put our heads together to figure out where these kids get the drugs to begin with, and go hard on the sources, instead of slapping their hands and turning them loose. I do not know what the solutions are, but I know that abandoning the Constitution has unintended consequences, and we always end up losing when we do it.

[georgiainwyo]

As others have said, lockdown drills are just that, drills. They are to prepare staff & students in case of a real threat.

As for the drug/firearm dogs, the only reason we have them come to our school is that (believe it or not, even in a tiny town with a school of 120 students K-12) there were a handful of high school kids who were involved with drugs. It is not the government's decision to bring them in, unless you call school administrators "government". Our superintendent or principal contacts the local L.E.A. to bring in the dog about twice a year now. It works the same way it did when EH was in school. If a dog alerts to a locker or to a vehicle, the student is pulled out of class to go open it and gives permission for it to be searched. Simple enough. If this is what it takes to keep drugs out of our schools, I'm all for it. Sure, if kids want them bad enough, they will get drugs outside of the school. However, if they are not here it lessens the possibility of the drugs getting into the hands of younger children, especially as our building is K-12 and every student knows every other student in every grade. I don't see this process as being unconstitutional at all. If there is reasonable suspicion the dogs come. If the kid is guilty, they get caught. Enough said.

[wyolady]

Originally Posted by WyoEagle

Lockdowns and drug dog searches have been going on since I was in high school. This is nothing new and this is nationwide.

Thanks WyoEagle. I was starting to think I lived in the twilight zone. Drug dog searches have also been going on since I was in HS. I guess the words lockdown misled people. Teachers are encouraged to keep kids in the classroom while drug dogs search lockers. Funny thing is? If the kids have drugs on their person or backpack that is in my classroom? The drug dogs don't find it.

[ElkHunter]

This kind of reminded me of what happened a few years ago in Sheridan.

Sheridan has an organized Senior Skip day at the park. The teachers set up and do all the cooking for a bar-b-q. Soccer, softball, sack races, etc... One year the principle saw a senior go to his car, grab something and tip it up, put it back and come back over to the picnic. He immediately called the cops and wanted EVERY Senior breathalized by the PD and told the kids, if you don't submit to the test, I will suspend you for 3 days and you will miss finals being held tomorrow, so you won't graduate. My daughter was one of the smart kids that refused the breathalizer test.

That evening, we called a special meeting of the school board. The principle was told to either retract his orders, or seek employment elsewhere.

Drug dogs are kind of the same thing, in a way. Because one Senior was suspected of drinking, all seniors were supposed to be tested. Isn't that saying that everybody is guilty until proven inocent? Doesn't it fall under illegal search and seizure to search each person, even with a dog, without any kind of proof of wrongdoing? It's a very fine line that gets crossed all the time.

[tasha998]

Originally Posted by ElkHunter

This kind of reminded me of what happened a few years ago in Sheridan.

Sheridan has an organized Senior Skip day at the park. The teachers set up and do all the cooking for a bar-b-q. Soccer, softball, sack races, etc... One year the principle saw a senior go to his car, grab something and tip it up, put it back and come back over to the picnic. He immediately called the cops and wanted EVERY Senior breathalized by the PD and told the kids, if you don't submit to the test, I will suspend you for 3 days and you will miss finals being held tomorrow, so you won't graduate. My daughter was one of the smart kids that refused the breathalizer test.

That evening, we called a special meeting of the school board. The principle was told to either retract his orders, or seek employment elsewhere.

Drug dogs are kind of the same thing, in a way. Because one Senior was suspected of drinking, all seniors were supposed to be tested. Isn't that saying that everybody is guilty until proven inocent? Doesn't it fall under illegal search and seizure to search each person, even with a dog, without any kind of proof of wrongdoing? It's a very fine line that gets crossed all the time.

I agree.

[Happy in Wyoming]

Originally Posted by ElkHunter

This kind of reminded me of what happened a few years ago in Sheridan.

Sheridan has an organized Senior Skip day at the park. The teachers set up and do all the cooking for a bar-b-q. Soccer, softball, sack races, etc... One year the principle saw a senior go to his car, grab something and tip it up, put it back and come back over to the picnic. He immediately called the cops and wanted EVERY Senior breathalized by the PD and told the kids, if you don't submit to the test, I will suspend you for 3 days and you will miss finals being held tomorrow, so you won't graduate. My daughter was one of the smart kids that refused the breathalizer test.

That evening, we called a special meeting of the school board. The principle was told to either retract his orders, or seek employment elsewhere.

Drug dogs are kind of the same thing, in a way. Because one Senior was suspected of drinking, all seniors were supposed to be tested. Isn't that saying that everybody is guilty until proven inocent? Doesn't it fall under illegal search and seizure to search each person, even with a dog, without any kind of proof of wrongdoing? It's a very fine line that gets crossed all the time.

This is what everyone needs to do. You solved the problem not by begging or compromising but by letting this man know that the taxpayers are his bosses.

The most disturbing information I've gotten on this thread is that on the day of a shooting more than 2000 miles away they locked down the school for several hours (that's not a drill) and searched for drugs and weapons. I'd like to know what they searched and how. I assume that they would intimidate the students as the principal tried to do in Sheridan.

I wish we could get some local posters who have children in Cody schools but are not employees of the school district.

I'd love to rep you for your courage but my previous rep was too recent.