If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Herald)   Reminding the students you teach that they are also protected by the 5th amendment? That's a suspendin'   (dailyherald.com) divider line 156
    More: Asinine, Batavia, chief academic officer, John Dryden, current affairs  
•       •       •

15639 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 May 2013 at 4:41 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



156 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-26 08:25:31 PM  

Kahabut: A school, like any other property is subject to it's own rules, and nothing changes that.


And schools, as government actors, have to comply with the Constitution in setting their rules. It's not like 'any other property' in that respect. Or a lot of other respects. Even disregarding that, school rules aren't supposed to apply to a protest off of school property while school was not in session. But you know, fark those kids.

If you give even a tiny shiat about the 1st Amendment, Morse v Frederick was an abomination.
 
2013-05-26 08:28:06 PM  
As a school psychologist, I understand why the school did the survey.  I looked it up (they gave the publisher name, was pretty easy from there to find the one that fit the description) and it seems like a quick way to catch kids who might be falling under the radar but might need some support.  Given all the content the website says it covers in 34 questions there can't be more than a few about substance abuse.  It's just one symptom of larger issues a teen might be having with depression or anxiety, or just a bad peer group or poor decision making.  I can see how this survey could be useful, in an ideal situation where everyone is honest and the data is used correctly.

Having said that, I don't blame kids for lying on it, and I understand the teacher's actions.  I only work with kids one-on-one, and we have rules about confidentiality, which means there are lines at which we keep things private and lines at which I have to tell their parents.  The discussion of this, and the work I do to build trust, gets the kids to tell me all kinds of things I can't believe they'll admit to an adult.  But on a survey that will go to god-knows-who at the school?  I can't imagine a lot of them would admit their behavior.  Why would they?  If they know their behavior needs to change and they want to talk to an adult about it, they'll talk, not mark it on a survey.  If they don't want it to change, why incriminate themselves?
 
2013-05-26 08:31:22 PM  

phalamir: It is jargon-speak for socialization, which schools are supposed to impart unto students


They do. Look at all the articles about teachers "socializing" with students - seems like there are two or three per week here. American public schools can't even teach kids how to read - why would their instruction in socialization be any better?
 
2013-05-26 08:33:29 PM  

Kahabut: That is pretty idiotic. I mean you. A school, like any other property is subject to it's own rules, and nothing changes that.


When insulting the intelligence of someone else, it is a good idea to form your sentences properly. Otherwise, the effect might not be what you intended.
 
2013-05-26 08:35:54 PM  
This crap has been going on in the public schools since the 1960s.  Corrupt surveys are given to the children with the idea of soliciting bad answers, then the "data" is compiled and used to lobby government for changes in public policy.  They not only anticipate students lying, they count on it, to skew the answers further.

Some of these were so bad that even 5th graders were refusing to take them, because even they could tell that they were designed for evil purposes.  A teacher told me of one sample question to white, suburban, middle class students:

"How often do you use heroin?  a) Once a month, b)  Several times a week, c) Once a week, d) Several times a day, e)  Once a day, f)  Every now and then, g)  Almost never, h)  never."

The correct answer for most students on a 50 question survey was almost always h), except for a few thrown in to bust up the pattern.  It asked about several drugs, alcohol, tobacco, sexual activity, shoplifting, gang membership, etc.
 
2013-05-26 08:39:03 PM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: fusillade762: OgreMagi: Any Pie Left: In an era where students can have their bags and lockers searched at will, and even be strip-searched, we're  only upset about a bullshiat survey form?

A locker is school property, so I guess there is no expectation of privacy.  But a backpack is personal property and should be protected.  You don't shed your Rights when you enter the school grounds.

Oh but you do. Any activity that can be in some way construed as "interfering with the educational process" can be banned.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 364x273]

Morse v. Frederick

No First Amendment rights for you. Not yours.

I was flabbergasted when the courts ruled against the student.  But they also think a corporation is a person, so I guess I should have expected this.

Corporations are people.
Students aren't.
Got it.

That is pretty idiotic.  I mean you.  A school, like any other property is subject to it's own rules, and nothing changes that.

Ever walked into a court room, federal building of any kind?  You were searched.  Maybe more than once.  Did you cry about your rights?  How about flying?  Still think that is how it works?  Well, that's because your education came from the internet, and the internet as a whole is retarded.


Just because it is happening does not make it right.
 
2013-05-26 08:40:06 PM  

phalamir: Gyrfalcon: phalamir: taurusowner: Gyrfalcon: social-emotional learning standards set by the state.

That phrase alone is one of the biggest reasons why this nation is doomed....and that a little reset might be a great thing. "The state" has grown far too big for anyone's good.

Really?  Because my N Florida rural redneck school in the 70s and 80s did this.  It was called "teaching you manners", and I don't seem to recall parents being up in arms that the school wasn't Thunderdome

But you didn't have to take a test for it. There weren't state standards for it. How the hell do you have "state standards" for "social-emotional" skills, even assuming there are any?

Okay - in more detail: When I was in elementary school, my report card had two parts.  There were the letter grades for my courses.  there was also a section with various social standards listed.  they were stuff like "Knows how to share", and "Speaks at an appropriate volume" and "Plays well with others".  For each, I got a :) or a :| or a :(.The teacher basically decided, upon watching me over the six-week period for the report card, how well I was meeting basic social standards.  They weren't graded, but my parents made sure I understood that Bad Things would happen to me if I didn't shape up.  And I am sure that the kids who did badly in academics, who also had lots of :( s were the ones who got the behavioral classes with the Evil biatch.

They are not doing a standardized test of handshaking protocol, but gross measurements of how students are developing socially and emotionally.  There is a good bit of literature and research on what a third-grader, or an eight-grader, or a HS senior should be like if they are properly socialized; and teachers are trained to realize what a properly socialized student looks like - and what a badly socialized one is like.  Bad socialization often lines up with learning problems and/or home issues.  Being able to apply a standardized rubric to that can help identify prob ...


You can explain why all you want; but the concept of having STANDARDIZED STATE GUIDELINES for APPROPRIATE SOCIAL/EMOTIONAL BEHAVIOR is very bad; and the idea of having a STATEWIDE TEST for it is even worse.

And yes, yes they are doing a standardized test of protocol. They're doing the test every year and comparing the results to previous years. And the intent is to see which kids are having problems and preemptively treat them--not which kids are reaching out for help and then what techniques might or might not work. What if a kid doesn't want help? What if the enforced help turns out to be more of a problem than the kid was in before? There may be a "good bit" of literature on what a "properly socialized" student should look like--but who gets to select that literature and decide what the standard is? The....school district?
 
2013-05-26 08:49:52 PM  

profplump: worlddan: My gut reaction is that the state probably has a legal right to force them to take the survey

Under what authorizing legislation?


They are juveniles so by definition this applies (wiki link).  The reason I made the comment about my gut is because this area is an endless source of litigation in educational law and I do not pretend to know it all. In some situations juveniles have more rights than adults and in other cases less. The school administration is arguing that they have the right to know for the health and safety of the school. My guess is that most judges would look on that explanation favorably and align themselves with the school as the local parent as opposed to the school as agent of the state.
 
2013-05-26 08:51:09 PM  
Meh, it was pounded into me in public schools in the '80s that minors do NOT get Constitutional rights, their parents hold those rights for them and the schools assume custodial control of the kids (including those rights) while the kids are attending said schools. Thus, schoolkids do NOT have the right to free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, can be searched as the school administration decides is appropriate, and so on, and that if this was not the case then schools simply could not exist because their very nature would violate the rights of kids.

But kids have no rights. That is why in juvenile court it is the parents who plead guilty or not guilty for their children. This is even true when the parents themselves press charges against their kids.
 
2013-05-26 09:06:15 PM  

OgreMagi: Just because it is happening does not make it right.


Well now, that's a whole different argument isn't it?  I mean, we could debate the FACTS all day, but if you want to talk about what is right, well lets do that instead.  I just assumed we were talking about reality.
 
2013-05-26 09:11:58 PM  

cptjeff: Kahabut: A school, like any other property is subject to it's own rules, and nothing changes that.

And schools, as government actors, have to comply with the Constitution in setting their rules. It's not like 'any other property' in that respect. Or a lot of other respects. Even disregarding that, school rules aren't supposed to apply to a protest off of school property while school was not in session. But you know, fark those kids.

If you give even a tiny shiat about the 1st Amendment, Morse v Frederick was an abomination.


You seem to be under some mistaken impression that the 1st gives you a right to enter private property and do as you damn well please.  I don't recall that being the reality of how that law is enforced.

School rules applying off campus during non school hours IS an abomination, but that's not what I was talking about.  My statement is pretty clear about school property.  HOWEVER, I will admit I didn't read up on the case, and I support the assertion that the finding by the court was terrible.

It doesn't change the fact that school buildings are subject to whatever rules the school board wants to make.  That isn't even against the law.
 
Ni
2013-05-26 09:12:22 PM  

Radak: This is not a criminal case.  Fifth amendment right does not apply.  That being said, any student certainly has the right to call bullshiat on a survey and refuse to answer.


You're right, They can call BS. The 1st amendment guarantees that freedom of expression also applies to compelled speech.

It's just not a bill of rights issue.

How is it anyone can call BS without persecution? Oh yeah, the bill of rights. Now I remember.
 
2013-05-26 09:15:10 PM  
The InBloomdatabase probably needs some sample datapoints to reliably identify groomable kids, before access is given to buyers
 
2013-05-26 09:17:28 PM  

Ni: Radak: This is not a criminal case.  Fifth amendment right does not apply.  That being said, any student certainly has the right to call bullshiat on a survey and refuse to answer.

You're right, They can call BS. The 1st amendment guarantees that freedom of expression also applies to compelled speech.

It's just not a bill of rights issue.

How is it anyone can call BS without persecution? Oh yeah, the bill of rights. Now I remember.


Wait, so you imagine a high school student saying that "this test/form/survey/thing is bullshiat and I'm not going to participate"... and you imagine the school saying what exactly?  That's fine timmy just go home?

How about an F, is that persecution?  Don't get too excited by that bill of rights, it rarely applies within the walls of a school, and for good reason.  These are children, they can barely dress themselves, and they sure as hell don't have adult judgement.
 
2013-05-26 09:25:45 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org
"Have you ever tried sugar...or PCP?"
 
2013-05-26 09:27:05 PM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: Just because it is happening does not make it right.

Well now, that's a whole different argument isn't it?  I mean, we could debate the FACTS all day, but if you want to talk about what is right, well lets do that instead.  I just assumed we were talking about reality.


I'm going to have to go on the assumption that you have never actually read the Constitution.
 
2013-05-26 09:30:08 PM  

OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Just because it is happening does not make it right.

Well now, that's a whole different argument isn't it?  I mean, we could debate the FACTS all day, but if you want to talk about what is right, well lets do that instead.  I just assumed we were talking about reality.

I'm going to have to go on the assumption that you have never actually read the Constitution.


I took civics class too kiddo.  The difference is, I live in the real world.  NOT the one written about in the Constitution of the United States.  (over 200 years old and it wasn't taken literally even then)

Do I like that situation? NO.  Is it reality anyway, yes it is.
 
2013-05-26 09:34:28 PM  

Vangor: On any forms I have given my students, I have always assured them of the right to privacy either by explicitly stating any forms with possibly embarrassing data is anonymous or lack of requirement to complete forms with marked data. Neither is a Fifth Amendment rights issue, merely treating people with the respect deserved. You know what has happened? In well over a thousand forms, no one has declined to answer honestly.


How do you know?
 
2013-05-26 09:35:55 PM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Just because it is happening does not make it right.

Well now, that's a whole different argument isn't it?  I mean, we could debate the FACTS all day, but if you want to talk about what is right, well lets do that instead.  I just assumed we were talking about reality.

I'm going to have to go on the assumption that you have never actually read the Constitution.

I took civics class too kiddo.  The difference is, I live in the real world.  NOT the one written about in the Constitution of the United States.  (over 200 years old and it wasn't taken literally even then)

Do I like that situation? NO.  Is it reality anyway, yes it is.


You are the problem.  You read it, and think it's worthless because it was written 200 years ago.  You are the reason we are losing our rights.  You are the reason the politicians and the police think they can do whatever the hell they want.  Fark you.
 
2013-05-26 09:45:27 PM  

OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Just because it is happening does not make it right.

Well now, that's a whole different argument isn't it?  I mean, we could debate the FACTS all day, but if you want to talk about what is right, well lets do that instead.  I just assumed we were talking about reality.

I'm going to have to go on the assumption that you have never actually read the Constitution.

I took civics class too kiddo.  The difference is, I live in the real world.  NOT the one written about in the Constitution of the United States.  (over 200 years old and it wasn't taken literally even then)

Do I like that situation? NO.  Is it reality anyway, yes it is.

You are the problem.  You read it, and think it's worthless because it was written 200 years ago.  You are the reason we are losing our rights.  You are the reason the politicians and the police think they can do whatever the hell they want.  Fark you.


I'm guessing you're a kid.  Only kids think they know everything, and how it should work and utterly disregard the reality of it.  (alternately, you could be mentally challenged)

The politicians think they can do as they please because ... when was the last time you voted?

Right.

And the police, because when was the last time you served on a citizen review board?

Right.

I've done both this month.  Please shut the fark up until you have the chops to play the game.
 
2013-05-26 09:50:25 PM  

Kahabut: You seem to be under some mistaken impression that the 1st gives you a right to enter private property and do as you damn well please. I don't recall that being the reality of how that law is enforced.


I'm not under that impression, besides which, schools are not private property. And they were not on school grounds. They were on a public sidewalk. School had been released to give students the option of attending the parade, but it was not mandatory.

Kahabut: It doesn't change the fact that school buildings are subject to whatever rules the school board wants to make. That isn't even against the law.


School buildings are subject to rules, yes, but those rules must be in compliance with the US and State Constitutions, because Schools, and School Boards, are public actors, and the property is owned by the government (making it public property). With private property, you are perfectly free to do something like throw anybody wearing an Obama or a Bush tee shirt off your property. A school, as a public actor bound by the 1st amendment, is not allowed to do that. You're free to toss black people or Muslims out (unless your private property is a public accommodation, in which case the Civil Rights Act applies) . A school is not allowed to do that. It is in no way whatsoever private property, nor do the same rules apply.
 
2013-05-26 10:13:59 PM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Just because it is happening does not make it right.

Well now, that's a whole different argument isn't it?  I mean, we could debate the FACTS all day, but if you want to talk about what is right, well lets do that instead.  I just assumed we were talking about reality.

I'm going to have to go on the assumption that you have never actually read the Constitution.

I took civics class too kiddo.  The difference is, I live in the real world.  NOT the one written about in the Constitution of the United States.  (over 200 years old and it wasn't taken literally even then)

Do I like that situation? NO.  Is it reality anyway, yes it is.

You are the problem.  You read it, and think it's worthless because it was written 200 years ago.  You are the reason we are losing our rights.  You are the reason the politicians and the police think they can do whatever the hell they want.  Fark you.

I'm guessing you're a kid.  Only kids think they know everything, and how it should work and utterly disregard the reality of it.  (alternately, you could be mentally challenged)

The politicians think they can do as they please because ... when was the last time you voted?

Right.

And the police, because when was the last time you served on a citizen review board?

Right.

I've done both this month.  Please shut the fark up until you have the chops to play the game.


I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.
 
2013-05-26 10:21:49 PM  
Every high school should have a social studies teacher like him.
 
2013-05-26 10:30:24 PM  

OgreMagi: My stepdaughter fit that description perfectly.  She was one of the worse liars that I ever had the displeasure of listening to.  It wasn't just the completely unbelievable BS that came out of her mouth, she also had a certain tone of voice that she used whenever she was lying and ONLY when she was lying.  I believe the thinking is, "if I act very serious he'll believe me."  Now I understand what my dad meant by "don't use that tone with me!"

After being a parent to her, I called my dad up and asked him why he let me live and apologized for the crap I put him through.


Children are grandparents' revenge.
 
2013-05-26 10:30:41 PM  
If I had that survey when I was in school I would have filled it out to make it look like I was chugging vodka and snorting coke off hookers every night, why do they think they'd get anything useful from this?
 
2013-05-26 10:37:36 PM  
Radak: Fifth amendment?  I'm gonna go with no.
"...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..."
This is not a criminal case.  Fifth amendment right does not apply.  That being said, any student certainly has the right to call bullshiat on a survey and refuse to answer.  It's just not a bill of rights issue.


Wrong answer, but thanks for playing. Do send us a post card from prison when you're convicted based on the confession you made before you were arrested.

You always have constitutional rights, they don't just kick in when you get arrested. The fifth amendment is the reason you never have to talk to the police, regardless of whether you're under arrest or not.

Any kid that answers "yes" to any of the "have you used drugs or alcohol" just handed the government (in the form of the school) a written confession to breaking the law. The cops could arrest them and then it's a little late to take the 5th.
 
2013-05-26 10:43:41 PM  
Sooo, if I say I smoke weed, am I automatically not social...like I Bogart or something? That's just wrong...smh...
 
2013-05-26 11:24:51 PM  

Kahabut: And the police, because when was the last time you served on a citizen review board?


The vast majority of citizen review boards are a dog and pony show.  Typically, only cases the DA's office or the City choose will be brought to them.  They have no power to compel a review.  Also, they usually do not have investigation powers.  The only evidence presented is by the police department and/or the DA's office.  In other words, the people being investigated can choose if they want to be investigated and get to decide what evidence is presented.   Most review boards meetings are not open to the public, so there is no transparency.  Finally, they are usually only advisory.  The police department is free to ignore them if they wish.

A proper citizen's review board would include the following:

1. The board can choose any case.  The city, police, and DA's office have no say.
2. The board retains an investigation arm that answers only to the board.
3. Meetings are public.
4. The decision by the board is binding.
5. Members are chosen by lottery from the list of volunteers*.  The police, city, and DA's office do not appoint (which is currently the norm).

* Volunteers must meet the same criteria required to vote in local elections
 
2013-05-26 11:47:27 PM  
...and stories like THIS are why teachers need unions...
 
2013-05-26 11:55:23 PM  
There is no constitution in this country anymore. You think otherwise you are a fool.
 
2013-05-27 12:15:55 AM  

Indolent: phalamir: Indolent: FTFA: "The survey is part of measuring how students meet the social-emotional learning standards set by the state."

Social-emotional learning standards?  WTF is that about?

Do you act like a normal person of your age-group. "Social" meaning you can interact with others in an appropriate manner, and "emotional" that your emotional responses are appropriate to situations.  If, upon meeting a person for the first time, you scream in homicidal rage and start fling your own feces at them, yelling "I will gut you with my bare hands and then use your stomach as a cum-receptacle", you have not met the social-emotional learning standards (not even of pre-K {unless your pre-K is run by Tartars}).

It is jargon-speak for socialization, which schools are supposed to impart unto students

Yeah I know and that's fine.  WTF is the state doing setting a standard for that?


Brainwashing kids to be mindless drones. What did you think they were doing? Educating?
 
2013-05-27 12:49:30 AM  
All I can say is The Hunger Games.

School Administrators are The Capitol.
 
2013-05-27 12:59:26 AM  

OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.


So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.
 
2013-05-27 01:06:24 AM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.

So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.


This isn't a democracy.  I thought you said you took a civics class.  If you had, you would know this.
 
Ehh
2013-05-27 01:06:41 AM  

dj_bigbird: social-emotional learning standards

What the fark does that even mean in English?


The greeks don't want no freaks.
 
2013-05-27 01:07:34 AM  
This shiat extends beyond school into the workplace.   Our office once circulated "anonymous feedback" questionnaires among the staff.  We walked in to find the papers on our desks with the instruction: "Nobody has to identify themselves, we'd like you to be truthful with your constructive comments".


Then we notice each form has a unique number printed oh so tiny on the back, almost microprinting, in faint pencil.  The bastiges were going to track each suggestion/feedback/comment to its source. Everybody was tipped off and the forms all came back with an identical, completely neutral statement on each one.  No more surveys.
 
2013-05-27 01:11:34 AM  

OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.

So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.

This isn't a democracy.  I thought you said you took a civics class.  If you had, you would know this.


First, I never said this was a democracy.

Second, you vote, other people vote, someone counts, the winner is the one with the most votes.... what do you call that?
 
2013-05-27 01:14:30 AM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.

So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.

This isn't a democracy.  I thought you said you took a civics class.  If you had, you would know this.

First, I never said this was a democracy.

Second, you vote, other people vote, someone counts, the winner is the one with the most votes.... what do you call that?


Representative democracy, aka, a republic.
 
2013-05-27 01:16:11 AM  

OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.

So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.

This isn't a democracy.  I thought you said you took a civics class.  If you had, you would know this.

First, I never said this was a democracy.

Second, you vote, other people vote, someone counts, the winner is the one with the most votes.... what do you call that?

Representative democracy, aka, a republic.


So, is that hair split well enough for you?
 
2013-05-27 01:19:17 AM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.

So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.

This isn't a democracy.  I thought you said you took a civics class.  If you had, you would know this.

First, I never said this was a democracy.

Second, you vote, other people vote, someone counts, the winner is the one with the most votes.... what do you call that?

Representative democracy, aka, a republic.

So, is that hair split well enough for you?


I'm not splitting hairs.  A pure democracy would be the worse possible system.  It would be rule by "American Idol Vote".
 
2013-05-27 01:25:01 AM  

OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: Kahabut: OgreMagi: I always vote.  Unfortunately, the same crooks keep getting re-elected.  Probably because of people like you because "they are tough on crime."

They don't have a citizen's review board in my town.  In Los Angeles, where I am original from, the review board has been subverted by the police and the union, so it is effectively useless.

So wait, the democratic process is working as advertised.  You just don't represent the majority.  Which is exactly what I said in the other thread.

Eh.  Screw you kiddo.  Tyranny of the masses.

This isn't a democracy.  I thought you said you took a civics class.  If you had, you would know this.

First, I never said this was a democracy.

Second, you vote, other people vote, someone counts, the winner is the one with the most votes.... what do you call that?

Representative democracy, aka, a republic.

So, is that hair split well enough for you?

I'm not splitting hairs.  A pure democracy would be the worse possible system.  It would be rule by "American Idol Vote".


Isn't that what you accused me of just up thread?
 
2013-05-27 01:58:16 AM  

MyToeHurts: I junderstand teachers and school officials concern about the childrens wefare. But it seems they should have known better than to think it would be OK to collect potentially damaging info without making sure the kids and parents were made fully aware.


But they did. They sent a letter home saying that participation was optional with an opt-out letter to be returned to the school.

The problem here was really that they didn't do good job of letting teachers know what was coming down the pipe.

The money they spent on this survey would have been better spent just letting the kids know it's ok to talk to counselors about your problems.
 
2013-05-27 02:10:28 AM  

dj_bigbird: social-emotional learning standards

What the fark does that even mean in English?


It means "Goodthink" - check your Newspeak Dictionary.
 
2013-05-27 02:26:46 AM  

OgreMagi: I'm not splitting hairs.  A pure democracy would be the worse possible system.  It would be rule by "American Idol Vote".


Sanjaya for president!!!
 
2013-05-27 04:29:59 AM  

Kahabut: OgreMagi: fusillade762: OgreMagi: Any Pie Left: In an era where students can have their bags and lockers searched at will, and even be strip-searched, we're  only upset about a bullshiat survey form?

A locker is school property, so I guess there is no expectation of privacy.  But a backpack is personal property and should be protected.  You don't shed your Rights when you enter the school grounds.

Oh but you do. Any activity that can be in some way construed as "interfering with the educational process" can be banned.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 364x273]

Morse v. Frederick

No First Amendment rights for you. Not yours.

I was flabbergasted when the courts ruled against the student.  But they also think a corporation is a person, so I guess I should have expected this.

Corporations are people.
Students aren't.
Got it.

That is pretty idiotic.  I mean you.  A school, like any other property is subject to it's own rules, and nothing changes that.

Ever walked into a court room, federal building of any kind?  You were searched.  Maybe more than once.  Did you cry about your rights?  How about flying?  Still think that is how it works?  Well, that's because your education came from the internet, and the internet as a whole is retarded.


Right. If the students don't want to abide by the school's policy, they can just go elsewhere!
 
2013-05-27 05:13:27 AM  

Phins: Wrong answer, but thanks for playing. Do send us a post card from prison when you're convicted based on the confession you made before you were arrested.


Given that I don't live anywhere close to the US, this doesn't really apply anyway.  That's also the reason I wasn't aware of the broader application of the text in the amendment.  I have studied the US constitution somewhat, but obviously not the extent to which later Supreme Court decisions have interpreted this particular aspect of it.

Any kid that answers "yes" to any of the "have you used drugs or alcohol" just handed the government (in the form of the school) a written confession to breaking the law. The cops could arrest them and then it's a little late to take the 5th.

Is this true?  Does the US have use laws rather than just possession laws?  I understand that if one is caught actually under the influence, there may be some laws there, and certainly if one is caught with a bag of crack in his pocket, there's a law there.  But has a person actually broken a law by saying, "I had a bag of crack in my pocket two weeks ago"?
 
2013-05-27 06:29:47 AM  

Radak: But has a person actually broken a law by saying, "I had a bag of crack in my pocket two weeks ago"?


No. However, they have confessed to breaking the law two weeks ago.
 
2013-05-27 07:03:22 AM  

untaken_name: Radak: But has a person actually broken a law by saying, "I had a bag of crack in my pocket two weeks ago"?

No. However, they have confessed to breaking the law two weeks ago.


Er, I misspoke.  I should have written has a person broken a law by saying, "I smoked crack two weeks ago", getting back to my question as to whether or not consumption laws exist.
 
2013-05-27 07:24:25 AM  

Radak: untaken_name: Radak: But has a person actually broken a law by saying, "I had a bag of crack in my pocket two weeks ago"?

No. However, they have confessed to breaking the law two weeks ago.

Er, I misspoke.  I should have written has a person broken a law by saying, "I smoked crack two weeks ago", getting back to my question as to whether or not consumption laws exist.


How would you smoke crack you weren't in possession of? There's no need for consumption laws because it's impossible to consume drugs without possessing them.
 
2013-05-27 12:52:46 PM  

ClavellBCMI: If Clarence Thomas had his way, none of those students would have any Constitutional rights until they hit their 18th birthday.


FTFY
 
Displayed 50 of 156 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report