🚀 go-pugleaf

"rex" <rexy@ij.net> wrote in message news:3fb64961_6@corp.newsgroups.com...
> As an attorney, I believe that government schools should be
unconstitutional
> under the Fourth Amendment ban of unreasonable searches. The recent
> police-state raid in Goose Creek, South Carolina is another in the growing
> list of proofs (with more at http://rexcurry.net).
>

We should put school l,ockers back on high school campuses, then we can
search them at will.

We give a student a locker in which he or she can store books and other
personal belongings. The locker is PUBLIC PROPERTY and not subject to the
same private property rights as clothing and backpacks and purses. The
school officials can open any locker at any time for any reason. Only the
stupid students will be caught with property in a locker that is banned at
school.



> Government schools have a special exemption under the 4th Amendment, a
> lowered standard that promotes police-state raids. A raid was caught on
> videotape when gun-toting police burst into a high school, ordering
students
> to lie flat on their stomachs in hall ways as they searched for drugs on
> Nov. 7, 2003. Police handcuffed anyone who apparently didn't comply
quickly
> enough. The tape showed police waving their guns and searching lockers.
>
> Worse still, the media reports that the school maintains constant video
> surveillance of students through various cameras available to police.
>

Isn't it sad that we have allowed the unlawful activities of some students
to take place for so long that we must resort to video feeds to protect the
other students.

We have spent so much time and energy telling students that they didn't have
to follow rules that now that they have no rules to follow, we have anarchy
on campus where bands of roving thugs terrorize the other students.



> During my legal career, parents have asked me if it is wise (or
> constitutional) for government to control everyone's education.
>
> Government schools create milquetoasts in the same way that Cuban schools
> create socialists. That is why parents leave their own children in
> government schools with constant video surveillance and police-state
> tactics. Government schools in the U.S. are different only in degree from
> schools in the former U.S.S.R.
>
> The 4th amendment should be improved to specifically include "schools"
with
> the same high standard given to homes. Of course, the only real solution
is
> to end government schools. Many parents have already rescued their
children
> from government schools in favor of the many better alternatives.
>

I do not agree. Our Public School system should be a microcosism of society.
Our public schools should demand the utmost in high moral behavior when our
children are in an environement where we have the slightest clue about what
they are doing. then, when they get out into the real world and find out
that the boundaries are somewhat broader, they are pleasantly surprised, and
we get a better class of citizen. What we have today is a public school
system that has virtually no rules, then we as a society have trouble
dealing with social malcontents that never learned any social
responsibility.



> The U.S. did not have government schools when the Fourth (and First)
> Amendment was written. If the authors of the Constitution had foreseen the
> government's education monstrosity then the Fourth Amendment would have
> included government schools, and the First Amendment would have banned
> Congress from the establishment of religion and education.
>
> The Constitution should be amended to include "education" next to
> "religion." The separation of school and state is as important as the
> separation of church and state. And for the same ideological reasons. The
> proposed constitutional amendment is discussed in detail at
> http://rexcurry.net .
>
> Even if an excuse could be made for the initial creation of some
government
> schools, their ongoing existence is proof of their ongoing failure to
> educate people to handle their own (or their childrens') educations
without
> government schools.
>
> The Post And Courier newspaper in Charleston reports that Goose Creek high
> school is one of the largest in the state with 2,760 students. It has an
> academic reputation as one of the Low country's best. But that doesn't
show
> from the subservient comments of the students and parents.
>
> The media reported that "the commando-style raid has parents questioning
the
> wisdom of police tactics." It is sad that no media reported that the raid
> has parents questioning the wisdom of government schools. And that is more
> proof that government schools are dangerous and must end.
>
> A media outlet reported that a parent said "I was just upset knowing they
> had guns put to their head and a K9 was barking at them and about to bite
> somebody. It was awful." Only through years of government schooling can a
> parent say such a statement and not announce that she is withdrawing her
> student from government schools. She did not even question the
> constitutionality of government schools per se.
>
> As if that weren't bad enough, the media reports that parents and students
> are already aware, and have done nothing about, the school's constant
video
> surveillance available to police. The paper quoted a law enforcement
officer
> as saying that he watched school surveillance tapes from four days that
> showed students congregating under various cameras, allegedly to avoid
being
> filmed. "They know where the cameras are. If they stand directly under
them,
> the camera's don't look directly down," the law enforcement officer told a
> paper.
>
> The 4th amendment states "The right of the people to be secure in their
> persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
> seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon
> probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly
> describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be
> seized."
>
> Police didn't find any criminals in the armed sweep nor any drugs. Goose
> Creek police and school administrators defended the draconian measures as
> necessary for crime prevention.
>

Well, maybe the action could have been done better. But, I leave it to the
schools themselves to determine if the action is needed. If they feel it is
needed, then there must be something going on that I don't know. And, if
there was something going on that I don't know about, and the school does
know but can't do anything about, then are my best interests being looked
after? No. I see no need to bind the hand of the school to ensure a safe
environment for my children, or your's. I especially see no need to bind the
hand of the school, then turn around and blame them for something that has
gone horribly wrong and now a kid lays dead on the playground or in the
hallways.