It totally just hit me, the school probably didn't flinch at the idea that they were presenting illegal evidence because they were ZOMG CATCHING A KID TAKING DRUGS and saving America and its society or whatever. Can you imagine the look on the guy's face who first presented the picture when he found out it was candy?
That's what has been running through my head each time I read the article.
Jademonkey79 on
"We’re surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them."
School administrators jizz their pants for an opportunity to catch a kid doing drugs.
More to the point, school officials that think they might have found evidence of students using drugs, regardless of source, pretty much have to report it or they'll lose their jobs.
The information never should have been collected, but once it was they had a responsibility to follow it up. I haven't been following terribly closely, but I do know that any potential drug use by Philadelphia is a huge fucking deal regardless of who found out about it how. Administrators have lost their jobs by ignoring evidence, I can totally see the feeling of imperative to charge out after this, misguided as it is.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds.2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited February 2010
Now I'm thinking back to that case where the school in... Arizona was it?... strip searched that girl for Advil or whatever off-the-shelf stuff she was suspected of having.
School administrators jizz their pants for an opportunity to catch a kid doing drugs.
More to the point, school officials that think they might have found evidence of students using drugs, regardless of source, pretty much have to report it or they'll lose their jobs.
The information never should have been collected, but once it was they had a responsibility to follow it up. I haven't been following terribly closely, but I do know that any potential drug use by Philadelphia is a huge fucking deal regardless of who found out about it how. Administrators have lost their jobs by ignoring evidence, I can totally see the feeling of imperative to charge out after this, misguided as it is.
When I was in high school a law was passed in Washington Stated called the "Becca Bill". It made it a misdemeanor for anyone, and it explicitly included doctors, school counsoulers, psychologists and priests in confessional, to not report it if they learned of a minor planning illegal activity.
The pictures are only stored briefly on the laptop, then deleted after being sent to the server. While it's possible some detailed forensics could find something, it's not that likely, and I wouldn't be surprised if Mike Perbix just happened to wipe the server's drives for "routine maintenance" right after the first lawsuit hit. Hell, it's what I'd do.
That would be a shit bad idea.
Yeah I'm pretty sure tampering with potential discovery will get you in a pretty deep well of shit.
Obstruction of justice, among other things. And just because the Bush administration got away with it, doesn't mean a school administration will.
Now I'm thinking back to that case where the school in... Arizona was it?... strip searched that girl for Advil or whatever off-the-shelf stuff she was suspected of having.
Ibuprofen. And at least that case was ultimately ruled in her favor.
School administrators jizz their pants for an opportunity to catch a kid doing drugs.
More to the point, school officials that think they might have found evidence of students using drugs, regardless of source, pretty much have to report it or they'll lose their jobs.
[citation needed] If they consulted legal counsel, presuming he or she was competent, they'd know doing so was a felony and they couldn't punish the student regardless
If a priest in confessional hears someone confess to a murder he doesn't have to report it right?
As long as the confessor remains anonymous there isn't much the priest could do aside from, "Someone came here to confess to murder." I don't think the vow is broken.
Edit - And you're supposed to be anonymous going into the booth anyhow.
School administrators jizz their pants for an opportunity to catch a kid doing drugs.
More to the point, school officials that think they might have found evidence of students using drugs, regardless of source, pretty much have to report it or they'll lose their jobs.
[citation needed] If they consulted legal counsel, presuming he or she was competent, they'd know doing so was a felony and they couldn't punish the student regardless
Lower Merrion is a rich enough district that they probably have counsel on site. From what I've heard, directly from the Principal, they are constantly undergoing litigation from parents for various things.
Either a) this got acted on by spooked administration before they ran it past counsel or b) counsel told them that their liability was less from confronting the student than risking not with (apparently very weak) evidence of drug use.
Edit: as for a specific law to cite, I don't have one off hand. What I've got is a year of training in preparation for being at teacher in Philly during which time I've had "pursue drug/gang evidence or you'll lose your job" beaten into me from every angle. If it's not a statute, it's an unofficial policy.
So they called their parents and told them, all of the teachers, (and allegedly people not even employed at the school) that he's a drug dealer.
Why have these people not been punished?
Because there's a process for that?
Don't get me wrong, torches and pitchforks are great. If you're not actually trying to figure out where the system went wrong and fix it so it never happens again.
It just seems highly suspicious that they happened to catch him on camera at that specific moment doing something they thought was illegal. The odds have got to be tremendous.
Jademonkey79 on
"We’re surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them."
It just seems highly suspicious that they happened to catch him on camera at that specific moment doing something they thought was illegal. The odds have got to be tremendous.
I think there's some seriously fishy stuff going on here, and not just in terms of a massive violation of that student's rights.
The system as a whole should probably never have been put in place (finding those computers could have been more easily accomplished with GPS or something), but they need to figure out where it when horribly wrong. If they've got some asshole serpico teacher or tech guy, that needs identified so they can get rid of them.
It just seems highly suspicious that they happened to catch him on camera at that specific moment doing something they thought was illegal. The odds have got to be tremendous.
This is what I am trying to wrap my head around at the moment.
"Oh, looks like laptop B683 is missing, better turn on the webcam to see where it is."
I think there's some seriously fishy stuff going on here, and not just in terms of a massive violation of that student's rights.
The system as a whole should probably never have been put in place (finding those computers could have been more easily accomplished with GPS or something), but they need to figure out where it when horribly wrong. If they've got some asshole serpico teacher or tech guy, that needs identified so they can get rid of them.
I think you hit the nail on the head with where it went wrong: it never should have been implemented in the first place. A simple GPS or such in each one would have worked, or just, ya know, hold the students accountable for the laptops so if they lose it they pay a fine.
Edit: Not only that, but how the hell were they planning on locating the laptops with a webcam anyway? Ok, the webcam is pointing at a green wall, so now we just have to find a green wall and we'll know where the laptop is? Just seems like a silly goose idea to me.
So they called their parents and told them, all of the teachers, (and allegedly people not even employed at the school) that he's a drug dealer.
Why have these people not been punished?
Because there's a process for that?
Don't get me wrong, torches and pitchforks are great. If you're not actually trying to figure out where the system went wrong and fix it so it never happens again.
But you agree that someone in the system deserves a serious ass-forking?
I think there's some seriously fishy stuff going on here, and not just in terms of a massive violation of that student's rights.
The system as a whole should probably never have been put in place (finding those computers could have been more easily accomplished with GPS or something), but they need to figure out where it when horribly wrong. If they've got some asshole serpico teacher or tech guy, that needs identified so they can get rid of them.
I think you hit the nail on the head with where it went wrong: it never should have been implemented in the first place. A simple GPS or such in each one would have worked, or just, ya know, hold the students accountable for the laptops so if they lose it they pay a fine.
Edit: Not only that, but how the hell were they planning on locating the laptops with a webcam anyway? Ok, the webcam is pointing at a green wall, so now we just have to find a green wall and we'll know where the laptop is? Just seems like a silly goose idea to me.
Ten to one it was an administrator that saw the computers had webcams and thought "that's a piece of functionality we're paying for but not using, what can we do with it?"
So they called their parents and told them, all of the teachers, (and allegedly people not even employed at the school) that he's a drug dealer.
Why have these people not been punished?
Because there's a process for that?
Don't get me wrong, torches and pitchforks are great. If you're not actually trying to figure out where the system went wrong and fix it so it never happens again.
But you agree that someone in the system deserves a serious ass-forking?
Something went seriously wrong and a student's rights were violated. Whoever's fault this is has some well deserved procedural/legal pain coming.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds.2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited February 2010
It boggles my mind because I thought schools had already learned this lesson; behind every ridiculous expenditure, strip-search, and zero-tolerance policy has always been the "Don't fucking get sued" mentality. Permission slips, waivers, student handbooks, etc. etc. But apparently the school's only priority in handing out this kind of (mandatory) technology was "shit, these are pricey; make sure they can't be stolen. And if they are stolen, make sure we can see what the room they're in looks like!"
So they called their parents and told them, all of the teachers, (and allegedly people not even employed at the school) that he's a drug dealer.
Why have these people not been punished?
Because there's a process for that?
Don't get me wrong, torches and pitchforks are great. If you're not actually trying to figure out where the system went wrong and fix it so it never happens again.
But you agree that someone in the system deserves a serious ass-forking?
Something went seriously wrong and a student's rights were violated. Whoever's fault this is has some well deserved procedural/legal pain coming.
But would this pain include ass-forking? Because I bought a pitchfork recently, and haven't used it as much as I thought I would...
In all seriousness, I hope we can root out the problem, but I think it may be a systemic issue.
The first thing I thought when I saw this case was that my school district would be in the exact same kind of trouble if they had that kind of money.
Honestly, school districts in areas with money have so many superfluous administrators with enormous salaries that bullshit like this happens because someone sees the opportunity to be a hero and thus have their job for life. The reduction of teenagers' privacy and speech right over the past few decades has occurred due to the number of school administrations with too much money and not enough real shit to do.
Logical conjunction is an operation on two logical values, typically the values of two propositions, that produces a value of true if and only if both of its operands are true.
From the link^
bolded for emphasis
Assuming that modermott is using "=" for implication, then he means:
A ^ B -> C
Is equivalent to
~(A ^ v C
is equivalent to
A' v B' v C
Meaning C is true or A or B are false.
I have no clue what he is using this in his argument for, but there you go.
Guys, this discussion is ridiculous. As I said earlier, the sentence by itself is logically ambiguous. But its meaning within the context of the article is NOT ambiguous. There is nothing else anywhere in the article that indicates they had new information about how the evidence was gathered, only that they had new information about the school's capabilities.
What kind of a fucked up world are we living in where a kid is getting busted for eating Mike & Ikes?
That doesn't surprise me, I was accused of huffing fumes to get high because I left out some cooking spray I used to keep a pizza from sticking to the baking sheet. This was like 20 years ago. Shit never changes.
Yar on
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Schools like to stretch anything they possibly can.
I remember I wrote in the salt on a truck "I wish my wife was this dirty" as it was hilarious and covered in other witty graffiti. I got suspended for sexual harassment and vandalism.
The school staff went off on me saying if the principals wife had seen that she'd probably divorce him.
Funny thing is, he'd been sleeping with the accounting teacher and married her a year or two later. :rotate:
Mmmm... Cocks... on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited February 2010
Man, this is all the result of all that pro-action about teachers saving kids from their evil parents. It's not a bad thing, there are some shitty parents out there, but a lot of these people have zero perspective. Everything is a warning sign.
"OH GOD ARE YOUR PARENTS HITTING YOU?"
"Um, I got hurt in baseball practice. Ask Coa-"
"YOU CAN TELL US ITS OKAY"
"No seriously, right here on the school field w-"
"HOLD ON WE'RE CONTACTING THE POLICE"
My school had a thing where anyone carrying a bottle of water had to have it checked by teachers or security (we had three overweight people in golf carts acting as security), because they were SURE that some people had vodka in them.
Henroid on
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
My school had a thing where anyone carrying a bottle of water had to have it checked by teachers or security (we had three overweight people in golf carts acting as security), because they were SURE that some people had vodka in them.
Our school just had a flat ban on any screw-top bottles after some idiot brought booze in one (honestly, you can't wait until 3 pm to get hammered?), until years later when the student council pulled some kind of malarky and got the ban lifted.
So they called their parents and told them, all of the teachers, (and allegedly people not even employed at the school) that he's a drug dealer.
Why have these people not been punished?
Because there's a process for that?
Don't get me wrong, torches and pitchforks are great. If you're not actually trying to figure out where the system went wrong and fix it so it never happens again.
But you agree that someone in the system deserves a serious ass-forking?
Something went seriously wrong and a student's rights were violated. Whoever's fault this is has some well deserved procedural/legal pain coming.
But would this pain include ass-forking? Because I bought a pitchfork recently, and haven't used it as much as I thought I would...
In all seriousness, I hope we can root out the problem, but I think it may be a systemic issue.
It's definitely a systemic issue. In that the school systems think they can do whatever the fuck they want.
I think there's some seriously fishy stuff going on here, and not just in terms of a massive violation of that student's rights.
The system as a whole should probably never have been put in place (finding those computers could have been more easily accomplished with GPS or something), but they need to figure out where it when horribly wrong. If they've got some asshole serpico teacher or tech guy, that needs identified so they can get rid of them.
I think you hit the nail on the head with where it went wrong: it never should have been implemented in the first place. A simple GPS or such in each one would have worked, or just, ya know, hold the students accountable for the laptops so if they lose it they pay a fine.
Edit: Not only that, but how the hell were they planning on locating the laptops with a webcam anyway? Ok, the webcam is pointing at a green wall, so now we just have to find a green wall and we'll know where the laptop is? Just seems like a silly goose idea to me.
It should have been stopped a number of times even if we take their word for it
1- its a bad method for recovering stolen laptops. You wouldn't catch someone this way outside of CSI.
2- if they were determined to use it they should have consulted with a competent legal staff, who would have told them to include waivers/notifications/opt outs.
2a- they would have included waivers/notifications/opt outs
3- they would have consulted with a competent legal staff when they decided to start using it for other purposes or to start using the evidence retrieved using such techniques for other purposes.
Honestly, some people are just fucking stupid and local government tends to be full of such people. Local government is the lowest possible tier of politics, and school boards tend to be made up partially of professional educators and partially of these unsuccessful politicians. Its possible the guy teaching OptimusZed is just covering up for some of his subordinates fucking stupidity, but its more likely that he is also fucking stupid.
As a side note, its also fucking sad that Lower Merion decided to give out laptops in a town where most of the kids probably already have access to a computer and the internet when we live in a country where you many many children can't get up to date textbooks or textbooks untainted by evangelical denial of science or historical revisionism or reasonable facilities. I mean, its a good thing overall and I applaud them for what I assume was an attempt to improve the quality of education but the contrast is a bit fucked up.
I'm not sure why I'm saying fuck(ing) so much this morning.
A friend of mine was forced to see the school counselor during lunch because he wore a black overcoat to school one winter that he had gotten for christmas from his aunt. He was labeled as "troubled" as soon as he walked in the door with it on.
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Orochi_Rockman on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
A friend of mine was forced to see the school counselor during lunch because he wore a black overcoat to school one winter that he had gotten for christmas from his aunt. He was labeled as "troubled" as soon as he walked in the door with it on.
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Dude, after Columbine, I was labeled in the same manner because I had a long rain coat that wasn't quite a trench coat - people saw me with it prior to Columbine, and they were well aware of my wearing it when it rained. All of a sudden though, I was under watch from the staff and for a month had to go to the counselor once a week before I convinced him (in 8th grade terminology) that everyone was having a knee-jerk reaction to weather-appropriate clothing.
A friend of mine was forced to see the school counselor during lunch because he wore a black overcoat to school one winter that he had gotten for christmas from his aunt. He was labeled as "troubled" as soon as he walked in the door with it on.
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Dude, after Columbine, I was labeled in the same manner because I had a long rain coat that wasn't quite a trench coat - people saw me with it prior to Columbine, and they were well aware of my wearing it when it rained. All of a sudden though, I was under watch from the staff and for a month had to go to the counselor once a week before I convinced him (in 8th grade terminology) that everyone was having a knee-jerk reaction to weather-appropriate clothing.
In my school, there was a group of 5 friends who wore green bathrobes every day to school (no, I don't know why). After Columbine, Administration told them to either stop wearing the robes or put a note on them saying they weren't trenchcoats.
So of course, they each made up giant cloth notes that read THIS IS NOT A TRENCHCOAT and put them on their backs.
Those were dark times for anyone who didn't fit in. It was pretty incredible how almost every school turned into a weird Big Brother situation with everyone watching the nerdy kids with suspicion. Playing Doom and listening to anything even relating to metal was considered a warning sign.
Jademonkey79 on
"We’re surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them."
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
A friend of mine was forced to see the school counselor during lunch because he wore a black overcoat to school one winter that he had gotten for christmas from his aunt. He was labeled as "troubled" as soon as he walked in the door with it on.
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Dude, after Columbine, I was labeled in the same manner because I had a long rain coat that wasn't quite a trench coat - people saw me with it prior to Columbine, and they were well aware of my wearing it when it rained. All of a sudden though, I was under watch from the staff and for a month had to go to the counselor once a week before I convinced him (in 8th grade terminology) that everyone was having a knee-jerk reaction to weather-appropriate clothing.
In my school, there was a group of 5 friends who wore green bathrobes every day to school (no, I don't know why). After Columbine, Administration told them to either stop wearing the robes or put a note on them saying they weren't trenchcoats.
So of course, they each made up giant cloth notes that read THIS IS NOT A TRENCHCOAT and put them on their backs.
... I'm pretty sure bathrobes are fairly goddamn obvious in not being trench coats. That is the dumbest thing.
Honestly, some people are just fucking stupid and local government tends to be full of such people. Local government is the lowest possible tier of politics, and school boards tend to be made up partially of professional educators and partially of these unsuccessful politicians. Its possible the guy teaching OptimusZed is just covering up for some of his subordinates fucking stupidity, but its more likely that he is also fucking stupid.
That's what's so vexing, because my mom was on the school board when I was in High School, and I know they consulted their lawyer before they did anything. You would think the turning on and off of webcams from a remote location would be something they would bring up to the lawyer before allowing it to be done. You're right though, most of the people in lower government really have no true credentials, its just a local popularity contest sadly.
A friend of mine was forced to see the school counselor during lunch because he wore a black overcoat to school one winter that he had gotten for christmas from his aunt. He was labeled as "troubled" as soon as he walked in the door with it on.
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Dude, after Columbine, I was labeled in the same manner because I had a long rain coat that wasn't quite a trench coat - people saw me with it prior to Columbine, and they were well aware of my wearing it when it rained. All of a sudden though, I was under watch from the staff and for a month had to go to the counselor once a week before I convinced him (in 8th grade terminology) that everyone was having a knee-jerk reaction to weather-appropriate clothing.
In my school, there was a group of 5 friends who wore green bathrobes every day to school (no, I don't know why). After Columbine, Administration told them to either stop wearing the robes or put a note on them saying they weren't trenchcoats.
So of course, they each made up giant cloth notes that read THIS IS NOT A TRENCHCOAT and put them on their backs.
... I'm pretty sure bathrobes are fairly goddamn obvious in not being trench coats. That is the dumbest thing.
Would the reverse have been true? What if you'd worn a suit jacket with "This is a trenchcoat" written on the back in glitter?
Rhesus Positive on
[Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
0
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
A friend of mine was forced to see the school counselor during lunch because he wore a black overcoat to school one winter that he had gotten for christmas from his aunt. He was labeled as "troubled" as soon as he walked in the door with it on.
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Dude, after Columbine, I was labeled in the same manner because I had a long rain coat that wasn't quite a trench coat - people saw me with it prior to Columbine, and they were well aware of my wearing it when it rained. All of a sudden though, I was under watch from the staff and for a month had to go to the counselor once a week before I convinced him (in 8th grade terminology) that everyone was having a knee-jerk reaction to weather-appropriate clothing.
In my school, there was a group of 5 friends who wore green bathrobes every day to school (no, I don't know why). After Columbine, Administration told them to either stop wearing the robes or put a note on them saying they weren't trenchcoats.
So of course, they each made up giant cloth notes that read THIS IS NOT A TRENCHCOAT and put them on their backs.
... I'm pretty sure bathrobes are fairly goddamn obvious in not being trench coats. That is the dumbest thing.
Would the reverse have been true? What if you'd worn a suit jacket with "This is a trenchcoat" written on the back in glitter?
Reminds me of the girls at my middle school who got expelled like 9 months after Columbine. They were joking and one giggled and said "I'm gonna kill you". Everyone around agreed that she was joking, but Zero Tolerance.
Posts
That's what has been running through my head each time I read the article.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The information never should have been collected, but once it was they had a responsibility to follow it up. I haven't been following terribly closely, but I do know that any potential drug use by Philadelphia is a huge fucking deal regardless of who found out about it how. Administrators have lost their jobs by ignoring evidence, I can totally see the feeling of imperative to charge out after this, misguided as it is.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
When I was in high school a law was passed in Washington Stated called the "Becca Bill". It made it a misdemeanor for anyone, and it explicitly included doctors, school counsoulers, psychologists and priests in confessional, to not report it if they learned of a minor planning illegal activity.
Obstruction of justice, among other things. And just because the Bush administration got away with it, doesn't mean a school administration will.
Ibuprofen. And at least that case was ultimately ruled in her favor.
Steam: pazython
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
As long as the confessor remains anonymous there isn't much the priest could do aside from, "Someone came here to confess to murder." I don't think the vow is broken.
Edit - And you're supposed to be anonymous going into the booth anyhow.
Either a) this got acted on by spooked administration before they ran it past counsel or b) counsel told them that their liability was less from confronting the student than risking not with (apparently very weak) evidence of drug use.
Edit: as for a specific law to cite, I don't have one off hand. What I've got is a year of training in preparation for being at teacher in Philly during which time I've had "pursue drug/gang evidence or you'll lose your job" beaten into me from every angle. If it's not a statute, it's an unofficial policy.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Why have these people not been punished?
Don't get me wrong, torches and pitchforks are great. If you're not actually trying to figure out where the system went wrong and fix it so it never happens again.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
The system as a whole should probably never have been put in place (finding those computers could have been more easily accomplished with GPS or something), but they need to figure out where it when horribly wrong. If they've got some asshole serpico teacher or tech guy, that needs identified so they can get rid of them.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
This is what I am trying to wrap my head around at the moment.
"Oh, looks like laptop B683 is missing, better turn on the webcam to see where it is."
*Sees the kid eating candy*
"WHOA ITS IN THE HANDS OF A DRUG DEALER!"
PSN: rlinkmanl
I think you hit the nail on the head with where it went wrong: it never should have been implemented in the first place. A simple GPS or such in each one would have worked, or just, ya know, hold the students accountable for the laptops so if they lose it they pay a fine.
Edit: Not only that, but how the hell were they planning on locating the laptops with a webcam anyway? Ok, the webcam is pointing at a green wall, so now we just have to find a green wall and we'll know where the laptop is? Just seems like a silly goose idea to me.
PSN: rlinkmanl
But you agree that someone in the system deserves a serious ass-forking?
Steam: pazython
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Which are disgusting, but that's irrelevant.
3DS FC: 4699-5714-8940 Playing Pokemon, add me! Ho, SATAN!
Mike & Ikes are a gateway candy to Good & Plentys.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Just weird.
But would this pain include ass-forking? Because I bought a pitchfork recently, and haven't used it as much as I thought I would...
In all seriousness, I hope we can root out the problem, but I think it may be a systemic issue.
Steam: pazython
Honestly, school districts in areas with money have so many superfluous administrators with enormous salaries that bullshit like this happens because someone sees the opportunity to be a hero and thus have their job for life. The reduction of teenagers' privacy and speech right over the past few decades has occurred due to the number of school administrations with too much money and not enough real shit to do.
That doesn't surprise me, I was accused of huffing fumes to get high because I left out some cooking spray I used to keep a pizza from sticking to the baking sheet. This was like 20 years ago. Shit never changes.
I remember I wrote in the salt on a truck "I wish my wife was this dirty" as it was hilarious and covered in other witty graffiti. I got suspended for sexual harassment and vandalism.
The school staff went off on me saying if the principals wife had seen that she'd probably divorce him.
Funny thing is, he'd been sleeping with the accounting teacher and married her a year or two later. :rotate:
"OH GOD ARE YOUR PARENTS HITTING YOU?"
"Um, I got hurt in baseball practice. Ask Coa-"
"YOU CAN TELL US ITS OKAY"
"No seriously, right here on the school field w-"
"HOLD ON WE'RE CONTACTING THE POLICE"
My school had a thing where anyone carrying a bottle of water had to have it checked by teachers or security (we had three overweight people in golf carts acting as security), because they were SURE that some people had vodka in them.
Our school just had a flat ban on any screw-top bottles after some idiot brought booze in one (honestly, you can't wait until 3 pm to get hammered?), until years later when the student council pulled some kind of malarky and got the ban lifted.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
It should have been stopped a number of times even if we take their word for it
1- its a bad method for recovering stolen laptops. You wouldn't catch someone this way outside of CSI.
2- if they were determined to use it they should have consulted with a competent legal staff, who would have told them to include waivers/notifications/opt outs.
2a- they would have included waivers/notifications/opt outs
3- they would have consulted with a competent legal staff when they decided to start using it for other purposes or to start using the evidence retrieved using such techniques for other purposes.
Honestly, some people are just fucking stupid and local government tends to be full of such people. Local government is the lowest possible tier of politics, and school boards tend to be made up partially of professional educators and partially of these unsuccessful politicians. Its possible the guy teaching OptimusZed is just covering up for some of his subordinates fucking stupidity, but its more likely that he is also fucking stupid.
As a side note, its also fucking sad that Lower Merion decided to give out laptops in a town where most of the kids probably already have access to a computer and the internet when we live in a country where you many many children can't get up to date textbooks or textbooks untainted by evangelical denial of science or historical revisionism or reasonable facilities. I mean, its a good thing overall and I applaud them for what I assume was an attempt to improve the quality of education but the contrast is a bit fucked up.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Like Henroid said, these people just have no real world perspective on well, anything.
Dude, after Columbine, I was labeled in the same manner because I had a long rain coat that wasn't quite a trench coat - people saw me with it prior to Columbine, and they were well aware of my wearing it when it rained. All of a sudden though, I was under watch from the staff and for a month had to go to the counselor once a week before I convinced him (in 8th grade terminology) that everyone was having a knee-jerk reaction to weather-appropriate clothing.
In my school, there was a group of 5 friends who wore green bathrobes every day to school (no, I don't know why). After Columbine, Administration told them to either stop wearing the robes or put a note on them saying they weren't trenchcoats.
So of course, they each made up giant cloth notes that read THIS IS NOT A TRENCHCOAT and put them on their backs.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
... I'm pretty sure bathrobes are fairly goddamn obvious in not being trench coats. That is the dumbest thing.
That's what's so vexing, because my mom was on the school board when I was in High School, and I know they consulted their lawyer before they did anything. You would think the turning on and off of webcams from a remote location would be something they would bring up to the lawyer before allowing it to be done. You're right though, most of the people in lower government really have no true credentials, its just a local popularity contest sadly.
PSN: rlinkmanl
Would the reverse have been true? What if you'd worn a suit jacket with "This is a trenchcoat" written on the back in glitter?
Reminds me of the girls at my middle school who got expelled like 9 months after Columbine. They were joking and one giggled and said "I'm gonna kill you". Everyone around agreed that she was joking, but Zero Tolerance.