ecoli Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 My mother is employed at a high school to do home tutoring. Basically, people who are out of school for long periods of time still need an education, obviously, so the school sends home tutors to the kids houses. For the most part, these kids are either too sick to go to school (usually with an physical malady but sometimes psychological) or the kids got suspended for misbehaiving. Her most recent case got me pretty angry. A group high school kids (I believe they were all female) was caught driving recklassly on school property. The school gave them breathalizers and it turns out all but one of them was legally intoxicated (the sober one wasn't the one driving, alas). The school gave the ones that were drunk 1 week of suspension, and the sober one didn't get in trouble at all. One of the girl's family decided to take advantage of the situation to get a headstart on their vacation to Florida (I'm guessing disneyworld). Now, here's my problem with this. In the state of NY, driving while intoxicated before your 21 results in a suspension of your drivers liscence for a year. A second violation and your liscence is suspended until your 21 (or at least 1 year). This is not including fines, etc. But, because the school didn't call the police, they get away scott free, except for a week off from school (which I doubt these girls see as punishment anyway). This doesn't make any sense to me. The school have notified the police when they caught them. They broke the law and the school should have been obligated to allow the civil courts take action against them. What gives the school power to come up with their own (and surely useless) punishments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Amen. I would even suggest "obstruction" in this case. What about the good samaritan law? Aren't they obligated to report this? School punishments are a joke. I'm having problems with my 13 yr old, who is basically a carbon copy of myself, because he wants to be class clown. He keeps getting detentions of various kinds for silly little behavior problems. To the point he's getting suspended from school. None of those tactics worked on me when I was a kid. None of those punishments were a deterent. It's worth it to get detention and make pretty girls laugh. And suspension? What a joke. The only thing that worked on me was corporal punishment. When I decided to show off, a swift trip to the hall with a paddle on my ass straightened me right out. It wasn't worth it anymore. They end up laughing at you instead too. It worked great. But it's not allowed anymore. The liberals and lawsuits have driven out the only effective punishment for cut-ups. It sounds like schools have lost their proverbial balls when it comes to disciplinary action. Now we have to drug our kids up with ritalin so they won't embarrass the teacher when they "pursuade" children to behave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edtharan Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 I am not sure of the laws in America, but from what I knwo of the laws here in Australia, the schools do not have the ability to bring legal action against the children. Even their breathalizer may not be able to be used in a case against them. However, if the school had imediately called the police and the police had breathalized them, then they would have been subject to legal action. It is the fact that the school is not a law inforcement agency, is the reason that they are restricted to what legal action they could take. At most the school might be able to bring a case of vandalism and trespass (and maybe reckless driving) on the children, but, unless the police had administered their own intoxications tests, the children could not be brought up on charges of drink driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Life's great isn't it. Maybe the girls were good looking and the teacher didn't want to take the matter further. And besides, if they were only doing 5mph then, although they're a bit drunk, it's nothing terrible. They were on private (school) land and not the main road afterall. But hey, I agree with you! What can ya do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 i always liked the psychological torture of showing them uncensored photographs of drunk driving accidents. put them right off trying it again. if they ain't reduced to tears increase the gore level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 i always liked the psychological torture of showing them uncensored photographs of drunk driving accidents. put them right off trying it again. if they ain't reduced to tears increase the gore level Yeah, we used to have to watch these films in Driver's ED. And that's without even establishing any criminal drinking and driving behavior. Of course, most of us thought these movies rocked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane_alien Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 obviously not the ones i've seen then. theres the movies everyone thinks rock because there a crushed up car and then theres to ones of the bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dak Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 as 4nums pretty much allready said, school property isn't the road, so -- if the us law is like uk law -- they couldn't technically be done for drink driving, as they weren't driving on a road whilst drunk. tbh, theres something disturbing about the fact that, were they not drunk, there'd be no problem with schoolgirls driving. they dont strike me as old/mature enough to be in charge of potentially fatal machines. and, whilst i'll admit that this is anecdotal, the one time in america that i had a lift from a school kid kinda confirmed my fears. ****ing terrifying. and the fact that it felt like we were steaming down the motorway on the wrong side didn't help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5614 Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Ah, that explains it Dak! They weren't really drunk, they were driving on the *real* side of the road! Americans Love from, The British! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 obviously not the ones i've seen then. theres the movies everyone thinks rock because there a crushed up car and then theres to ones of the bodies. Yeah, it's the ones with the bodies that we saw. Of course, they were still rather tame compared to faces of death. I'm sure you've got some gorey ones in mind. The ones we watched didn't have any dead kiddos or anything heart wrenching. Just raw meat photographed from the 60's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 obviously not the ones i've seen then. theres the movies everyone thinks rock because there a crushed up car and then theres to ones of the bodies. I loved the one with the bodies, especially the crushed skull with the brain smeared out through the cracks, and the scorched AND eviscerated one, and the one where the guy's upper body was basically a lumpy reddish smear across the ground. That video had me revved up all day. "Wow, when I get a car, I'll have the power to do THAT to someone!" But yes, the school thing, it was on their property, and their students, so taking a more educational jurisdiction over the whole thing was probably just ALOT less of a hassle than going the legal route (or maybe they just did it that way because they didn't think it was bad enough to put them through the legal punishments, or yeah, maybe they were jsut cute), and I'd say what they did was within the realm of reasonability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 They should be punished as anyone else would be punished. If someone brings a BB gun to school or a boy grabs a girl's breast, then they take it to the police. If it had been four black kids from a gang, they would be in jail now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 I loved the one with the bodies, especially the crushed skull with the brain smeared out through the cracks, and the scorched AND eviscerated one, and the one where the guy's upper body was basically a lumpy reddish smear across the ground. That video had me revved up all day. "Wow, when I get a car, I'll have the power to do THAT to someone!" Awesome...if I wasn't already married I'd propose... If it had been four black kids from a gang' date=' they would be in jail now.[/quote'] Right on. The good ole american double standard retains its sheen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Instead of corporal punishment, I'm a fan of the old forced labor model. Give them stupid uniforms and send them to work (without pay, of course) for the janitorial staff. Effective, and useful. But maybe that's just the liberal in me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 Instead of corporal punishment, I'm a fan of the old forced labor model. Give them stupid uniforms and send them to work (without pay, of course) for the janitorial staff. Effective, and useful. But maybe that's just the liberal in me... I don't know that it's liberal, but it's a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted October 5, 2006 Share Posted October 5, 2006 I'm a fan of the old forced labor model. Give them stupid uniforms and send them to work (without pay, of course) for the janitorial staff. Effective While I'm a fan of corporal for crimes that could potentially hurt someone (such as this) manual labor is certainly a far more realistic punishment than just giving them a week-long break. They should be punished as anyone else would be punished. If someone brings a BB gun to school or a boy grabs a girl's breast, then they take it to the police. I would agree, except that it did occur on their property. I would say that gives them say as to whether or not they want to press actual charges or press the matter. And with the particular type of incident, I'd say the school's decisions and whatever punishments some of the parents might press would likely be adequate. If it had been four black kids from a gang, they would be in jail now. How about, rather than saying we should mistreat everyone equally, we work at treating the gangbangers more FAIRLY... then again, rather than make them simply innocently black, you suggested they are gang-members, which suddenly changes the idea of fairness a little, doesn't it? Almost seems a little funny to me you felt you had to throw in that bit... lastly... If someone brings a BB gun to school or a boy grabs a girl's breast, then they take it to the police. in light of the recent events across the us, you'd have to be an idiot to just nod away at a kid who brings a projectile weapon, even a minor one, as for the girl, sexual abuse is a far cry above generic adolescent wrecklessness, and does have a direct victim, rather than just in theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 6, 2006 Author Share Posted October 6, 2006 School punishments are a joke. I'm having problems with my 13 yr old, who is basically a carbon copy of myself, because he wants to be class clown. He keeps getting detentions of various kinds for silly little behavior problems. To the point he's getting suspended from school. Being suspended for behavioral problems is one thing (and I agree that school punishments are a joke these days). But breaking a civil law is quite another. If I had the time or vested interest in the case, I'd go for obstruction of justice... but I'm not a lawyer. I am not sure of the laws in America, but from what I knwo of the laws here in Australia, the schools do not have the ability to bring legal action against the children. Even their breathalizer may not be able to be used in a case against them. However, if the school had imediately called the police and the police had breathalized them, then they would have been subject to legal action. The police should have been called first, definately. I wonder why they weren't and why the school saw fit to adminish their own punishments when (I believe) they had no right to do so. I would agree, except that it did occur on their property. I would say that gives them say as to whether or not they want to press actual charges or press the matter. And with the particular type of incident, I'd say the school's decisions and whatever punishments some of the parents might press would likely be adequate. This would make sense if it had happened on private land. But, this was a public school road, paid for with public taxes. Clearly, no place is more qualified for the juristiction of civil law. They should be punished as anyone else would be punished. If someone brings a BB gun to school or a boy grabs a girl's breast, then they take it to the police. Absolutely. I don't understand the double standards, especially since this can easily be seen as the recklass endangerment of life. I should also mention, that one this one peice of property, there are actually three schools. An elemtary, middle and high school. So, there was also the potential for them to run over some elemtary school kid, while drunk driving. If it had been four black kids from a gang, they would be in jail now. Very true. But, that's white, upper-middle class suburbua for you. I wonder what would have happened if it had been one of the two black kids in the school? Who, ironically enough, as foster kids from Brooklyn, are responsible for some of the 'gang' activity going around the school (as rumor has it). If, you can consider 14 yr olds vandalizing school property and getting into fight with other 'gangs' as real gang activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 But breaking a civil law is quite another. If I had the time or vested interest in the case, I'd go for obstruction of justice... but I'm not a lawyer. I'm probably a little bit of an anarchist, but I don't feel the legal way is always the best &/or most practical, or even "right" way to go about things. The police should have been called first, definately. I wonder why they weren't and why the school saw fit to adminish their own punishments when (I believe) they had no right to do so.I'd say it all depends on whether or not the girls had the severity of the issue impressed upon them, and more importantly, upon their parents. If they eventually did suffer for it at the hands of their parents (which of course they might not have) then I'd say the school carried out the best course of action for everyone concerned, whether a valid legal route or not. This would make sense if it had happened on private land. But, this was a public school road, paid for with public taxes. Clearly, no place is more qualified for the juristiction of civil law. i think that might be debatable as to whether or not the issue fell under the judgement of those placed in authority of the school (I am only assuming of course the principal oversaw the issue) especially considering that they were not just let off and waved away (which would have been utterly irresponsible). I should also mention, that one this one peice of property, there are actually three schools. An elemtary, middle and high school. So, there was also the potential for them to run over some elemtary school kid, while drunk driving. I think I assumed this thing happened in the dead of the night (which doesn't make it any mroe "right" on the part of the girls by any means), was it elsewhen? If it happened in the day or evening I think I'd definately have to change my outlook. I wonder what would have happened if it had been one of the two black kids in the school? Just two eh? Well then, with stats like that, I wouldn't be surprised if the school took the quietest course of action possible to avoid any racially-fueled controversy. Or maybe not. Who can tell until it happens? Who, ironically enough, as foster kids from Brooklyn, are responsible for some of the 'gang' activity going around the school (as rumor has it). If, you can consider 14 yr olds vandalizing school property and getting into fight with other 'gangs' as real gang activity. Repeat offenders eh? Then I say flog 'um, then call the cops. Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 6, 2006 Author Share Posted October 6, 2006 I'm probably a little bit of an anarchist, but I don't feel the legal way is always the best &/or most practical, or even "right" way to go about things. Sadly, this is the truth. I'd say it all depends on whether or not the girls had the severity of the issue impressed upon them, and more importantly, upon their parents. If they eventually did suffer for it at the hands of their parents (which of course they might not have) then I'd say the school carried out the best course of action for everyone concerned, whether a valid legal route or not. I doubt it... in my OP, I said one girls parents decided to take advantage of the situation to get a headstart on their vacation to Disneyworld. i think that might be debatable as to whether or not the issue fell under the judgement of those placed in authority of the school (I am only assuming of course the principal oversaw the issue) especially considering that they were not just let off and waved away (which would have been utterly irresponsible). I think my question is, does the school have any legal authority to not enforce the law and take punishment into their own hands? I didn't think so before this. I think I assumed this thing happened in the dead of the night (which doesn't make it any mroe "right" on the part of the girls by any means), was it elsewhen? If it happened in the day or evening I think I'd definately have to change my outlook. I think, if they were caught by their principal, it definatly wasn't the dead of night, as the principal wouldn't be there. No anybody else to administer a breathlizer. Either it was in the morning or afternoon. (I believe) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 Sadly, this is the truth. What I think is sad is that it isn't practiced this way, or at least, that law is too inflexible to accomadate these simple facts, sometimes making it so that doing the legal thing might actually be the wrong thing to do. I doubt it... in my OP, I said one girls parents decided to take advantage of the situation to get a headstart on their vacation to Disneyworld. maybe they'll make her ride the Teacups over and over, it'd be a fitting punishment I think my question is, does the school have any legal authority to not enforce the law and take punishment into their own hands? I didn't think so before this. Again, i would have said that that didn't really matter as long long as they effectively handled it themselves (which, based on the day-lit, repeat-offender circumstances, they didn't). As for the possibility of the school actually blatantly committing a crime by handling it themselves, no school I know would stick their necks out that far to do "the right thing" (the "right thing" here being my first assumption about the circumstances rather than the illumnated version) so I would guess that they at least thought they were within their rights. Of course, maybe the east is just alot less shrewd than the west. I think, if they were caught by their principal, it definatly wasn't the dead of night, as the principal wouldn't be there. No anybody else to administer a breathlizer. Either it was in the morning or afternoon. (I believe) Aye, that changes everything. I was thinking more along the lines of them getting caught by night security and being "handed over" to some authority figure called in. Things like that have happened often enough around the schools hereabouts to make that a pretty common process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edtharan Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I would agree, except that it did occur on their property. I would say that gives them say as to whether or not they want to press actual charges or press the matter. And with the particular type of incident, I'd say the school's decisions and whatever punishments some of the parents might press would likely be adequate. Well they would have had to drive to the school in the first place (unless there is the on campus domatories thing). If they did this while druk (and could be proved) then they should be subject to legal prosecution as they have then violated the law. That might be a legal avenue for proper prosecution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 6, 2006 Author Share Posted October 6, 2006 Well they would have had to drive to the school in the first place (unless there is the on campus domatories thing). nope, just a public high school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzurePhoenix Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 Well they would have had to drive to the school in the first place (unless there is the on campus domatories thing). If they did this while druk (and could be proved) then they should be subject to legal prosecution as they have then violated the law. That might be a legal avenue for proper prosecution.or unless they were drinking at the school in the first place, another common trend hereabouts (we had a "drinking tree"), though it sounds as if it's a small school, so I guess that's unlikely. But you're definately right, my only thought was "the scene of the crime," for which I'll blame CSI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted October 6, 2006 Author Share Posted October 6, 2006 or unless they were drinking at the school in the first place, another common trend hereabouts (we had a "drinking tree"), though it sounds as if it's a small school, so I guess that's unlikely. But you're definately right, my only thought was "the scene of the crime," for which I'll blame CSI I'm not sure about the existance of a 'drinking tree' but I hear a lot of stories about people sneaking onto school property at night to drink... don't ask me why, I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 I'm not sure about the existance of a 'drinking tree' but I hear a lot of stories about people sneaking onto school property at night to drink... don't ask me why, I don't get it. Yeah, I always got as far away from school as I possibly could no matter what I was doing. Sometimes even when I was supposed to be in school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now