Slashdot Mirror


School District Sued By ACLU Over Student's Free Speech Rights

An anonymous reader writes "The ACLU is suing Minnewaska Area Schools and Pope County, according to this article in the StarTribune. At issue: school administrators and a sheriff's deputy forced a girl to hand over login information to her Facebook and email accounts, after she posted on Facebook that she 'hated' a school hall monitor who had been 'mean' to her, and cursed in a separate Facebook comment because someone reported her. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and an order that would restrain school officials from attempts to regulate or discipline students based on speech made outside of school hours and off school property."

105 of 466 comments (clear)

  1. What about the parents? by Lord+Juan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I mean, what in the world are the school administrators thinking? That parents are not going to care if they force their daughter to give them their log in information to their personal accounts?

    1. Re:What about the parents? by EnempE · · Score: 3

      Maybe they were to busy getting a 9mm and some hollow points to perforate her notebook for sounding off on facebook again.

      Free speech aside, don't you USAns have a constitutional right to not incriminate yourself ?

    2. Re:What about the parents? by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, but this isn't even about that. A school isn't a court. If she'd refused to give them any information, what could they do - jail her for Contempt of Principal?

    3. Re:What about the parents? by stephanruby · · Score: 5, Funny

      Free speech aside, don't you USAns have a constitutional right to not incriminate yourself ?

      Yes, that twelve year old girl folded like a little girl. She's a wimp. That's mostly the parents fault of not training her properly. When I have kids, they'll be able to survive police intimidation and interrogation techniques by the time they're three years old. In fact, the first word they'll learn won't be "Mama" or "Papa", it will be "IwantMyLawyerImNotTalkingToYouPigs".

    4. Re:What about the parents? by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      dunno.. call the deputy? that's what they did anyways? and the deputy promptly went and gave access to the school "officials" to those accounts.

      the deputy should be fired and the school staff too. they fucked up.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:What about the parents? by lightknight · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ambassador Londo Mollari: My shoes are too tight and I have forgotten how to dance.

      I believe that quotes sums it up. The people involved have committed a great evil to someone less powerful than themselves, preying on the very being they were charged to protect; but it doesn't matter to them, because they've already forgotten what it was like to be a child.

      No doubt the kid will continue to be ridiculed and besmirched for some time, and the wounds will heal, leaving only scars. A few decade's time, she will want to become a teacher / administrator, so she can right the wrongs of her predecessors; and after many years of being pushed around by a system that frankly doesn't care about her now anymore than it did when she was a child, the light will go out in her soul at an inopportune time, during which she will commit a similar act to some young thing, and the cycle will begin anew. She will realize her mistake all too late to correct it, and spend the rest of her life trying to come to terms with an opportunity come and gone.

      I wish I had advice to dispense here, but I haven't found any that works in circumstances like these. I'd like to say that something will come from this, that there will be no scars, that good will triumph over evil, that everyone will learn some sort of valuable lesson, and that it will be the right one, but experience has taught me that good only triumphs over evil in fairy tales.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    6. Re:What about the parents? by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the deputy should be jailed

      EFA. I mean, after a fair and impartial trial, which is more than this girl got.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    7. Re:What about the parents? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 2

      They could suspend her, expel her, give her detention, etc.

    8. Re:What about the parents? by maitai · · Score: 5, Funny

      As a native (Yurok), wtf are you talking about?

    9. Re:What about the parents? by theNAM666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Spanish for persons from the US is 'Estadounidoestes." Thank you for playing, please try again.

    10. Re:What about the parents? by Scarletdown · · Score: 5, Informative

      They're idiots. In a national context the term is American for people that have citizenship in the US. Despite what bigots from other parts of the super continent might think, there's rarely if ever a legitimate reason for using American in a different context.

      Considering Mexicans are citizens of Los Estados Unidos de Mexico (aka United States of Mexico), and Canadians are citizens of a place called Canada (formerly the Dominion of Canada, it stands to reason that citizens of the United States of America would be referred to as Americans.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
    11. Re:What about the parents? by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, but this isn't even about that. A school isn't a court. If she'd refused to give them any information, what could they do - jail her for Contempt of Principal?

      Nothing, but it is a 12-year old girl. If they had invited one of her parents (in addition to the sheriff's deputy), the parent would certainly tell them to shove it. A 12-year old girl is easy to intimidate.
      I think every administrator involved should be re-purposed to janitorial duty as a more appropriate venue. I do hope ACLU includes that in their lawsuit demand.

    12. Re:What about the parents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      UMMM we are the only country called America. You know thats the name right? we are the United States of AMERICA. The of part is the key here.

    13. Re:What about the parents? by metrix007 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Americans is the accepted term. Using any other term like USian or USAn is idiotic and tries to solve a problem that does not exist.

      It is always clear from context that Americans refers to people from the USA, not lease because it is the only country that has the word America in it's title. Mexico doesn't count as we are talking about English here.

      In the rare times you need to refer to people from both north and south America it will be clear from the context, otherwise prefixing north or south to Americans makes it clear.

      There is really no problem to be solves except by pissy PC people who think the US somehow claimed a title it doesn't deserve.

      disclaimer: not american in any sense of the word.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    14. Re:What about the parents? by icebraining · · Score: 2
    15. Re:What about the parents? by silas_moeckel · · Score: 2

      I send my kid to private school, there school explicitly states that they will not let anyone police included speak with my child without first contacting me for my approval. This should be a basic rule, these guys should be canned and sued for such idiocy.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    16. Re:What about the parents? by firex726 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yea, they are so worried over a kid hurting themselves that they take away the monkey bars, or sand pit; but see no issues with forcing them to hand over login creds, or activating webcams in supplied laptops.

    17. Re:What about the parents? by Fjandr · · Score: 2

      Actually, the "of" is an implicit acknowledgement that the part preceding it is a subset of something greater.

      If you're going to be a pedant, at least get it right.

    18. Re:What about the parents? by Fjandr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And then they could be rightfully sued for any of those punishments as well. The issue in dispute here is whether a school administrator has the power to punish speech which is engaged in outside of a school-controlled environment.

      If they have the legitimate power to punish this then students have no other rights either, whether at school or not. Since speech and behavior codes in a school do not distinguish between staff, students, and visitors, it means they are claiming the authority to punish a student for any speech, in any context, at any time. No, they're not doing it explicitly, but it is certainly implied based on the logic they use to enforce rules in this manner.

    19. Re:What about the parents? by Fjandr · · Score: 4, Interesting

      At least in the USA police are typically not allowed to interview minors without at least notifying the parents, so it wouldn't surprise me if either department policy or state law was broken during these proceedings. However, it's hard-to-impossible to get abusive officers (or departments) disciplined for anything unless there is video and a willing district attorney (something of a rarity in itself), so it probably doesn't matter much if the former is the case.

    20. Re:What about the parents? by flyingfsck · · Score: 2

      Knucklehead, blockhead... ;)

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    21. Re:What about the parents? by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      >It's also the convention in every language I've ever heard. Why change something that works?

      Well in large parts of the world outside the USA (including South Africa) it's quite common to refer to all Americans as "yankees" - and those of us who didn't study advanced history (which included the US civil war, something that in school is glossed over as rather unimportant to our lives compared to our OWN histories) or watch old movies generally have no idea that in the USA "Yankees" only refer to people from the North (indeed - the first I learned it was when I watched Gone with the Wind at age 16).

      I totally agree with you. Why change something that works ? I mean what are the odds that somebody from Atlanta is going to hear my tell a joke about stupid redneck yankees in the pub tonight right ?

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    22. Re:What about the parents? by metrix007 · · Score: 2

      Then that is your fault for using a well accepted term in a different manner without explaining the difference.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    23. Re:What about the parents? by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "We" being pedants who have no interest in being clearly understood?

      --
      Brian Fundakowski Feldman
    24. Re:What about the parents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Legal dangers? Students have limited rights when it comes to the first amendment in the U.S.:
      * http://articles.cnn.com/2007-06-25/justice/free.speech_1_principal-deborah-morse-banner-case-school-policy/2?_s=PM:LAW
      * Some public schools feel they need to the decide what students wear, public uniforms. I know my school tried to enforce uniforms after a suicide threat by a kid who brought a knife into school and after seeing this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Epeo8Pfm1xM . They just made us tuck in our shirts when the district and the parents refused to pay for uniforms.
      * Webcam monitoring was already attempted: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-02-20/justice/laptop.suit_1_webcam-district-court-laptop?_s=PM:CRIME
      * And requesting social media passwords aren't unheard of considering other things: http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/06/10585353-govt-agencies-colleges-demand-applicants-facebook-passwords

      Requesting passwords seems to be well within the gray area where a non-timid district would be willing to make a power grab, and hope to gain such abilities. The gov is brushing up against warrantless cellphone searches (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/03/obama-admin-wants-warrantless-access-to-cell-phone-location-data.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss), so an organization tasked with keeping our children safe from even themselves could easily make the argument to sympathetic members of the public that they need this power.

      Actually, reading the article I see that last statement is a bit truer. They brought in law enforcement to force a hand over of information without a warrant. The Superintendent's response to the lawsuit: [quote]"We're taken aback by it," he said.[/quote]. Worrying about the legality didn't seem to even cross their minds it seems.

      The part that has me tweaked is they did this. She's twelve. Facebook, last I checked, requires you to be thirteen. They had a perfectly jerkwad path to take to get her off/limit her Facebook activities already if they could get the company to comply, and possibly a lawsuit they could win if Facebook didn't.

    25. Re:What about the parents? by silentcoder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well here is your counter story. When I was all over 9 years old I suffered from bad handwriting called by small-muscle coordination problems. I still haven't got great handwriting to this day.

      But with teachers lumping me under "doesn't bother to be a neat writer" there came a day when I had to erase something (at that stage we only wrote in pencil). The eraser I used had, unbeknownst to me gotten some pencil soot on it and left a big black mark in my book. Like a good little boy I went to my teacher to ask for advice. Instead of advice I was shouted at for making a mess in my book before I even finished my sentence... then sent to the teacher next door to be further ridiculed.
      A ridicule process that continued for some time all the way back to my own classroom where she then proceeded for the first time to ask my name. I told her my name ... and she said "I think 'varkie' would be a better name for you." (Varkie in my language literally means piglet - but without any of the 'cute' connotations... little swine is a better translation).

      The nickname stuck with me until I finally left for highschool - I got into fights all the time against kids calling me that, but nonetheless made it onto the student council in my final year of primary school and ended it as one of the top-scorers - but make no mistake that my social life was irreperably harmed and my ability to make friends suffered greatly.

      Like most kids in such a situation, I felt ashamed and didn't tell my family, big mistake, I told my dad some 4 years later (just before I would leave primary school) and then he was furious and told me if I had told him the story on the day he'd have had that teacher fired.

      That message changed my life... for the first time I understood that shit happens, but you don't have to be a victim - you can make bad people pay, you can hold people to account for their actions - even if they are authority figures. I went through high school a great deal happier, and made some real friends. I went to University where I was very successful and today I am 32 and I can say that I earn more money in a day than that teacher likely earns in month.

      There's a last little tail to the story. Just before I left primary school I bumped into that teacher one day, and she spoke to me, and talked of how "you don't like me because you're afraid of me" ... in retrospect, I hadn't fully understood why she chose to stop me and say that, nowadays I would outright have said to her "no, I don't like you because you horribly abused your position of authority and ruined my childhood you fucking bitch" and dared her to do anything about it.

      The thing is - your fairytale happened. I'm a happy and successful person. I remember these events, but they didn't define me - except to give me a perpetual soft spot for the underdog. The good guys won - even if the bad guy wasn't punished, it was the LAST teacher who did something wrong to me and didn't get in deep shit.
      There is a massive culture of power-abuse by teachers who think discipline is their job. I don't agree. Their job is to educate. Discipline is at best an evil they require to do their jobs and should be minimized not maximized. Their power, like that of any authority, should be the LEAST amount with which they can do their jobs, not the most.

      But don't think she's doomed. Her parents are doing exactly the right things. She may suffer a while but don't be surprized if she comes out stronger - and with a lifelong belief in being a champion for those who are stepped upon.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    26. Re:What about the parents? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Instead of suing the school. try suing the administrator specifically. True the school has more money. But if you really want to stop this. Sue the people that specifically did it for violating the policies of the school on a personal agenda. Every school administrator that thinks they may get sued instead of the school will follow the line quite well. Right now the administrator will think the school will take the brunt for their every action. I'm willing to bet there are many state and school policies that were violated. If the administrator has to take responsibility based on his actions he is going to think twice in the future. But as I said its less money.

    27. Re:What about the parents? by netsavior · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You joke, but I was expelled in 9th grade for something vaguely similar (admitting I had done something off campus that was neither illegal, nor against student code of conduct). My kids (age 7 and 5) have explicit instructions from me. If the principal, teacher, or a policeman want you to say something that you do not want to say or do something you do not want to do (other than normal school work) then you need to say:

      "I don't want to do that unless you call my parents"

      will it result in false positives? Maybe. Will I honor that phone call? ABSOLUTELY.

      Kids don't actually have many rights, especially during school hours. They are not protected by our laws because they can't vote. The only ones that can protect them from abuse of power is their parents, so whereas you are entitled to trial, counsel, not incriminating yourself, children are only really entitled to not being denied access to their parents. It is my job to extend my civil rights to my children in this situation, because they have none. So the earlier I am involved in an incident, the better.

    28. Re:What about the parents? by Fjandr · · Score: 2

      You're right. Unfortunately, I wasn't taking issue with the "only one country called America" part, making the rest of this irrelevant with respect to what I actually did write.

    29. Re:What about the parents? by morgauxo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      wow, talk about citations needed

    30. Re:What about the parents? by g0bshiTe · · Score: 2

      I sure as hell would be. They aren't the law, they have no right to enforce things outside their jurisdiction which in this case is school grounds, this happened off of school property, whether it was pertaining to the school or not. I think what's most troubling is the thought that the schools are following students social media pages. What need is there to do this? There were tons of people at school I hated and I made it well known I didn't like them.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    31. Re:What about the parents? by g0bshiTe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course not, it programs the child to think that it is ok to give up freedoms if authorities say so.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    32. Re:What about the parents? by g0bshiTe · · Score: 2

      We do but that is not saying anything in court to incriminate ourselves. I don't think it would pertain in this case like if I released a newsletter stating the same. At that point it has been made public knowledge. In this case thought it's more worrisome that the teachers forced the kid to hand over login details. Most likely threatening suspension or expulsion. If I found out the school or a teacher did this to my kid, they had better hope a lawsuit was the least I did.

      --
      I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
    33. Re:What about the parents? by jeepien · · Score: 3, Insightful

      WTF did the last fifty comments on what to call "Americans" have to do with passwords, law enforcement, or free speech?

    34. Re:What about the parents? by jeepien · · Score: 3, Informative

      Don't be silly. The speech and behavior rules in a school certainly DO distinguish between staff, students, and visitors. And the staff part usually differentiates further, between those who hold professional certification and those who don't (i.e., teachers and custodians).

      IANAL, but in case anyone cares, courts have already ruled on this quite a few times, and the most common test on whether the school can discipline students for out-of-school acts is: whether the act could be reasonably expected to cause a "substantial disruption" of the educational mission of the school.

      Having no other information to go on this case does not seem likely to rise to that level.

    35. Re:What about the parents? by camperdave · · Score: 3, Funny

      Calling a citizen or resident of USA a Columbian is like calling a Swiss a Helvetian, a Brit an Albion or an Irishman a Hibernian.

      They are alike in the fact that only 14 people on the planet would understand you.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    36. Re:What about the parents? by gv250 · · Score: 5, Funny

      To foreigners, a Yankee is an American.
      To Americans, a Yankee is a Northerner.
      To Northerners, a Yankee is from the East.
      To Easterners, a Yankee is from New England.
      To New Englanders, a Yankee is from Vermont.
      And in Vermont, a Yankee is somebody who eats pie for breakfast

    37. Re:What about the parents? by berzerke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...It boggles the mind that some would step so clearly out-of-bounds and risk something exactly like this...

      Not really. It's that corporate (or government) shield thing. The people directly responsible aren't paying to defend the lawsuit, and they won't pay a single penny of any damages that may be awarded. They certainly won't do a single day of jail time if they are found to have broken some law. At best, they may get some extra training and be reassigned.

      Since there is no real risk, they have no reason not to step out-of-bounds.

    38. Re:What about the parents? by TheRedSeven · · Score: 4, Informative
      They actually *do* have the ability to enforce things outside their school grounds. At least in my school district.

      (Reposting a comment I have also posted below...because it's relevant to your comment. Sorry for dupe-ing.)

      I'm a member of a Local School Council in a neighborhood elementary school in Chicago Public Schools. I heard of a kid (7th grade) that was punished in the school (suspension, possible expulsion) for bullying remarks made on Facebook--stuff he posted outside of school hours, off school grounds, and on his own computer. (He basically called some other kid 'gay' and threatened to beat him up, swore a bunch, etc. It was nasty stuff.) I wondered how the school was able to discipline a kid for something that was done completely outside the school's area of control.

      I decided to ask the assistant principal/disciplinarian at the school what the guidelines were. He pointed me to the "Student Code of Conduct" (SCC) (it's a .pdf):

      5.14 Use of any computer, including social networking websites, or use of any information technology device, or hacking into the CPS Network to threaten, stalk, harass, bully or otherwise intimidate others, to access student records or other unauthorized information, and/or to otherwise cause a security hazard. [emphasis mine]

      (On a side note, Group 5 offenses are considered those that "most seriously disrupt" school functioning, and include aggravated assault, inappropriate sexual conduct battery, criminal damage to property/vandalism over $500, and physical assault to a teacher. Does social network bullying really belong in that list? ...discussion for another time...)

      Still, I wondered how the school could enforce that regulation outside of school hours, off school property, on a privately-owned computer. The disciplinarian told me that they were allowed to, and again pointed to the preface of the SCC:

      The SCC applies to actions of students during school hours, before and after school, while on school property, while traveling on vehicles funded by the Board, at all school-sponsored events, and while using the CPS Network or any computer, Information Technology Device, or social networking website, when the actions affect the mission or operation of the Chicago Public Schools. Students may also be subject to discipline for Group 5 or 6 Inappropriate Behaviors that occur either off campus or during non-school hours, including actions that involve the use of any computer, Information Technology Device or social networking website, when the misconduct disrupts or may disrupt the orderly educational process in the Chicago Public Schools. [emphasis mine]

      Now, I don't know what kind of standard is required to be met to say that something "may disrupt the orderly educational process." I'd suppose that calling a kid a name on the playground could accomplish that, but there's no written proof of such events as there is on Facebook. Sure, the bullying kid should have gotten a tough talking to about appropriate behavior. Probably the school should have called the parents of the bully to deal with the situation. Maybe they did those things too, I don't know. But they definitely disciplined the kid in school because of something he did outside of school.

      It still kind of boggles my mind that we give teachers and administrators (who are largely untrained in such matters) the power to enforce school discipline outside the purview of their schools. But that's the system we have in the city I live in.

    39. Re:What about the parents? by Ihmhi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I had something similar happen to me in... 6th or 7th grade? Might have been 8th. (So we're talking late 90s, early 00s.)

      I was doing arts and crafts at some... library thing. Might have been boy scouts. The point is, it was also an out of school function. We were making our own bookmarks and then laminating them. I made one that said something like "Some people are nice..." on one side and "...and I'm not one of them!" on the back. Just something silly and teenage-y.

      I go to school the next day, and I find out that I had left my stupid little bookmark there. The person running the class (who also happened to be my school's art teacher) showed it to my teacher, and my teacher talked to me and stated how it was inappropriate. I replied with it was none of her business at it had taken place outside of school. I suppose she was power tripping or one of those "think of the children" people, but she was really fishing for me to apologize or admit guilt or something. She threatened to escalate it to the principal. I said "Go ahead," sat down, and went back to my schoolwork.

      Still have that bookmark somewhere...

      Long story short, make sure you teach your kids how to deal with authority figures who are asshats. Teach them to say no to the authority when they make an unreasonable request. Teach them to stand up for themselves like my parents did.

    40. Re:What about the parents? by AngryDeuce · · Score: 2

      It's funny, but my father (ex-hippy, anti-establishment guy that he is) taught me from about that age about my rights as concerns police and how to handle myself around them. Granted, when he was not much older than I was at that age he was getting his head cracked by baton-happy riot police in one protest or another, so that probably has a lot to do with it.

      It's important to teach our kids their rights, especially these days with all the bullshit surveillance, monitoring of online accounts, "enhanced security screening", and all the other Orwellian fuckery going on these days...and it's equally important to demonstrate your willingness to stand up for them to your kids as well. Imagine how much different our own lives would be if we'd grown up watching mommy and daddy just capitulate and do whatever the goon with a badge tells them to?

      There are good cops out there that genuinely want to help people, but there are a scary amount of cops that were just jock bully fuck-heads in school and want the freedom to be a state-sponsored bully in their adulthood. I suspect that the police officer involved in this case was the latter. I bet he feels pretty powerful bullying a 11 year old girl, though, that's for sure...

    41. Re:What about the parents? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      And not only that, but this was FaceBook. The school wouldn't have had any rights regardless. The worst part is, people this incredibly stupid are teaching your children!

      As to your "senile old lawyers", age != senility. If a lawyer becomes senile he's not going to be practicing for long.

    42. Re:What about the parents? by demachina · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just because a school board/administrator writes it in to their policies doesn't make it legal or right. Those policies grossly exceed their jurisdiction when the activities occur outside school hours, on a students personal computer, and not on school property. The student is only subject to local, state and Federal law at that point not the whims of the school board.

      People with some power often seek to acquire more power, and it regretably often falls on the shoulders of the people whose rights are being trampled to try to stop them.

      For example the U.S. President and Attorney General have recently bestowed upon themselves the power to assasinate American citizens without any judicial oversight. Just because they say they can doesn't change the fact that they are probably violating the Constitution and their oath of office to uphold the Constitution. The burden has now shifted on entities like the ACLU to engage in a multi year battle in the courts to try to prove them wrong.

      In a similar vein the Bush administration gave themselve the power to torture people which is also a violation of Federal laws and international treaties.

      A problem may arise when the politicians who are breaking the laws manage to stack the judicial process, especially the Supreme court, so the courts also fail to do the right thing, and let them get away with it.

      Another problem arises when you have a two party system and both parties have become equally complicit in dismantling the rule of law and trampling civil liberties.

      When those two things happen all the checks and balances the founding fathers built in to the Constitution are gone, and you are on the road to a totalitarian state unless the actual people up and say NO. That is a hard thing though, most people are too afraid.

      --
      @de_machina
    43. Re:What about the parents? by GmExtremacy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He can even use coercion, threats, and lies during the interrogation.

      Oh, I see. So for normal citizens, that kind of thing usually isn't allowed, but for cops, it's perfectly okay!

    44. Re:What about the parents? by bartosek · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This. A thousand times this.

      At my son's school they have a student code of conduct regarding technology which both the children and their parents are supposed to sign. One of the more egregious clauses gives the school permission to seize and search through students cell phones, laptops, MP3 players, etc, if they believe there is some incriminating evidence contained within. I struck that clause out and wrote a note saying if they had any problems with that to contact me, not a peep.

      If the school has any concerns or suspicions about what my son is doing they should contact me and have me search through his stuff. If we give the school that power it just desensitises our children against invasive privacy abuse.

    45. Re:What about the parents? by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a west coaster, Yankees mean is a hated baseball team. *shakes fist eastward toward yankee stadium*

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    46. Re:What about the parents? by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      I send my kid to private school, there school explicitly states that they will not let anyone police included speak with my child

      I see that you, yourself, went to a public school...

    47. Re:What about the parents? by demachina · · Score: 2

      Tank Man is a fascinating story. Very few know what happened to him. His fate ranges from the Chinese authorities denying they ever identified him so he was never punished to his being executed right after the famous incident.

      Peoples do still revolt, though it more typically occurs because of economic issues than purely civil rights issues. When people are starving, disenfranchised and have nothing left to lose they tend to be less afraid of the consequences of revolution. When people have a job, place to live and food to eat, they generally dont really care if their country is turning to a totalitarian state.

      Revolt is typically a horrible thing and it usually ends badly. Revolt is the ultimate collapse in the rule of law, so its paradoxical to resort to revolution to remedy the break down in the rule of law instituted by your government. But when your government no longer adheres to the rule of law what else do you do?

      I recently read I Was a Warehouse Wage Slave and discovered a new word, "workampers". They are people who live in RV's and drive from one warehouse to another getting minimum wage temp jobs. These are places like Amazon's warehouses where most of the work force is permenently temporary so they can keep wages to a minimum since there are no raises or seniority among temp workers, and there are no benefits. One wonders if the U.S. is edging towards the place where economic conditions are so bad for so many that one day they will in fact revolt on economic grounds even if they dont care about the loss of their basic civil liberties.

      --
      @de_machina
    48. Re:What about the parents? by demachina · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Schools may very well be an appropriate venue for handling most petty activities involving minors."

      I can see your point, since schools are substantially less about actually educating children, and more about indoctrinating them to their subservient roles in society and preparing them for a life working for corporations.

      Me I would rather we were raising our children to be highly educated, actively thinking, highly questioning rebels, who would give "honor courts" the "Animal House" treatment. Maybe if we had been raising kids like that for the last 40 years our presidential candidates wouldn't be a horror.

      I'm reminded of a quote from Kim Stanley Robinson's BlueMars , its more about corporations than schools but the two entities are remarkably similard, for a reason:

      "If democracy and self-rule are the fundementals, then why should people give up these rights when the enter their workplace? In politics we fight like tigers for freedom, for the right to elect our leaders, for freedom of movement, for choice of residence, choice of what work to pursue,-- control of our lives in short. And then we wake up in the morning and go to work, and all those rights disappear. We return to feudalism. That is what capitalism is,-- a version of feudalism in which capital replaces land, and business leaders replace kings. But the hierarchy remains. And so we still hand over our lives' labor, under duress, to feed rulers who do no real work."

      Robinson wrote this in 1996, he didn't know we would completely give up figthing for our political rights five years later or that twelve years later his portrait of capitalism as feudalism would be so vividly illustrated.

      --
      @de_machina
    49. Re:What about the parents? by tompaulco · · Score: 2

      Isn't it against the Terms of Use of Facebook to give your login credentials to someone else? They have just as much authority to raise a stink about this as the school district does, especially since she was also violating the ToS by being underage.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    50. Re:What about the parents? by demachina · · Score: 2

      I should add if state statute has overreached to the point of giving school boards authority over every moment of the lives of children, it doesn't make it any more right than school boards overreaching and giving themselves this authority.

      If parents choose to put their children in private schools and to surrender their children's rights to these corporations I suppose its their prerogative and part of the price of admission. Me personally, I would want the children themselves to be made aware of what they are signing up for and decide for themselves if they value the school enough to justify surrendering their rights to it.

      The problem with public education is there is substantial coercsion involved in that its nearly mandatory, so me personally I dont think attendance at public schools should be accompanied by the abandonment of children's rights in their totality to school boards and school principals, especially since local school boards are frequently packed with people with disurbing agendas you can get with the tyranny of a majority.

      I think I'm suddenly seeing why home schooling is appealing to many.

      --
      @de_machina
    51. Re:What about the parents? by onepoint · · Score: 2

      Sad, but I had to enforce this type of 'course of action' against a threat made to my daughter.

      the key for me to get the school involved was that the threat specifically stated it was going to happen on school grounds.
      ( if the threat was going to be outside of school grounds I would have taken another course )

      I was able to solve it rather quickly and in the course of the communications with the school, I discovered that they seemed to believe that they have the bounty hunters 'freedoms'. I quickly reminded them that I am only looking at this issue in the context of the schools grounds and that they not bother with it outside of the school. They had a fit when I reminded them that the law is still the law and that they can only reach so far. I also advised my daughter not to speak to anyone until the issue was resolved and the person removed from the school. and once that was resolved, to call me and I would advise her what she could say or not say ... ( ended up that she wold not disclose anything to anyone with my lawyer being by her side to protect her rights.

      what I learned after all this is that I needed to teach my daughter more about how to protect her rights and when in doubt, she can call her dad or a lawyer.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    52. Re:What about the parents? by arth1 · · Score: 2

      As far as we Eurasians are concerned, Eurasia is a single continent.

      Us Oceanians know we've always been at war with Eurasia.

    53. Re:What about the parents? by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      I hope to everything holy that you never have an issue, but if you do, you will see how badly the cards are stacked against you.

      They will first suspend your child. My boy was suspended for "intimidation" for drawing a "racist" cartoon that he saw on a BET comedy show (Dave Chapell). The four black guys that he was trying to get away from in the lunch room apparently were not "intimidating" anyone.

      You will get a chance to go before a board, comprised of the people that suspended your child, set for a month after the suspension. You are not allowed to challenge the merits of the case...only that the schoolboards procedures were followed. If you choose to challenge the verdict of the board, your child will be banned from school until the results of the hearing, schedule 6 weeks later, and faces the prospect of expulsion if the review board, composed of school administrators, decides against you. They offer an alternative school, which is mostly the discipline problems from throughout the school district and well known as a physically dangerous place to be.

      That's some damn tough decisions you'll be making. You won't sleep well for months, and you'll be bitter for many years afterwards. Unless you have tens of thousands for lawyers, no one will care. Lawyers will take your single digit thousands, but when push comes to shove, they will shrug their shoulders and say something along the lines of, "Oh well, that's how it is."

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    54. Re:What about the parents? by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      If they want to search anything your son has, they will completely ignore your note. Afterwards, they will completely ignore your protests. They may give you the feel good measure of letting you talk in front of a review board if they think it might shut you up, but you may as well talk to your wall at home. The ONLY way you will get ANY satisfaction is to have deep pockets, and the willingness to give it to lawyers.

      Trust someone who has been there. These people are practiced at screwing over parents. They have the purse of the state and the sentiments of the people (poor underpaid and overworked teachers) to back them.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    55. Re:What about the parents? by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >If you lived in the US, it would be a good thing that you didn't tell your dad until it was to late. He would have tried to have the teacher fired. She would keep her job, and you would have suffered the retaliation. It's not that he would have been fighting the teacher. He would be fighting the bureaucracy and the teacher's union.

      I am not entirely sure that's true. If I'd lived in the US I'm quite sure my dad's methods of doing so would have been rather different. If I lived in the US now and it happened to my kid I would approach it thusly:
        I'm absolutely certain that a lawsuit for slander and emotional abuse (I'm not sure about there but here emotional abuse of a minor is in fact a criminal offence - even though it's usually almost impossible to prove - this happened in front of 30 child witnesses and one adult witness) would have had at least a possibility of passing.
      Once suit is filed... I think right now I wouldn't even push very hard for a trial - I'd just get the school board on the back foot with some press reporting the event. Then I'd offer a nice low settlement figure, less than their expecting to pay in a court judgement - but contingent on the teacher being fired with cause and denied a refference.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  2. Fire them All by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone that thought it was a good idea to try and extract passwords from the girl should be fired and permanently banned from taking any tax payer money, for the rest of their lives. The people that hired them, should be fired and banned for 3 years. I bet, in a very short order, we could put an end to this foolishness.

  3. Oh, oh, me too! by neiras · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hate Anonymous Cowards. Also, the fucking mods are mean to me.

    Tee hee.

    1. Re:Oh, oh, me too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well we love you.

  4. ACLU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sometimes the ACLU's actions make me roll my eyes, but on this one, they're right. Seems to me the school's personnel took their petty authority way too far. Off school property, on a website not controlled by the school. GET 'EM, ACLU! Give 'em HELL!

    1. Re:ACLU by madhi19 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It the sheriff's deputy action that I found weird and mostly inexcusable of all peoples the cop should have been the voice of reason and told the Principal that he was treading in murky water to say the least.

    2. Re:ACLU by mosb1000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I take it you don't have much experience talking to the police?

    3. Re:ACLU by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Sometimes the ACLU's actions make me roll my eyes, but on this one, they're right.

      Why is it that so many posts praising the ACLU in any way contain this kind of ritual disclaimer? Can you give actual examples of some of the eye-roll-inspiring things the ACLU has done, or is it just "I've heard they're a liberal organization, and liberals are icky"?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:ACLU by Fjandr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In a perfect world, I'd agree with you. In the real world, it's fairly rare for an on-duty cop to be anything resembling "the voice of reason" when it comes to someone showing the slightest defiance to an authority figure. Whether that defiance is warranted or not is usually not ever something that would even cross the mind of most cops I've met.

    5. Re:ACLU by Jiro · · Score: 2

      How about the ACLU opposing the CAN-SPAM act on the grounds that this incredibly weak law was actually too restrictive? And the statements by an ACLU representative that people who are spammed should just press delete?

      Also see http://techliberation.com/2008/08/07/anti-spam-laws-and-the-first-amendment/ . Do a google search for "aclu" and "anti-spam".

    6. Re:ACLU by Ragica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The very blog article you have linked has an "update" at the bottom wherein the writer also says he thinks that CAN-SPAM might be too restrictive! His exact words are "too broad", but his description of the broadness is actually criticising the broadness of the restrictions. (ie. "criminalize the sending of “multiple” deceptive emails or the creation of more than five separate email accounts for sending commercial emails.").

      Anyhow, even if your description of the ACLU's position was true (which your reference does not seem to support), don't you think it more credible to give the ACLU the benefit of the doubt that they may have a point, given the vast amount of experience, expertise and examples of them standing up for freedoms?

    7. Re:ACLU by Hatta · · Score: 2

      What has CAN SPAM done to SPAM? Still exists right? So why should we tolerate that restriction on free speech? It's not doing anyone any good, and just sitting there waiting to be abused.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:ACLU by HopefulIntern · · Score: 2

      Where do you live where the cops are the voice of reason???
      Everywhere I have lived, you don't get reason until your lawyer arrives.

    9. Re:ACLU by jdev · · Score: 4, Informative

      Here's what the ACLU was actually saying in this particular case.

      "The law is overly broad, criminalizing not only commercial SPAM but also anonymous non-commercial bulk emails containing political and religious messages"

      http://www.acluva.org/docket/jaynes.html

      So the complaint here is Virginia's own anti-SPAM legislation was written to also penalize anonymous non-commercial free speech which is a violation of the first amendment. This is different from the federal CAN-SPAM law that specifically mentions that emails need to be commercial in nature to apply.

      I also find it very funny that you pick this particular case because the Virginia supreme court eventually sided with the ACLU that the Virgina law was overly broad. Like most people that criticize the ACLU, I feel like you don't understand the issue they were trying to address.

      http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/151014/court_overturns_virginia_spam_law_conviction.html

    10. Re:ACLU by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      You do realize that the courts have decided that the police in the US are not required to know anything about the law. Right?

      Makes me cry blood every time I think about it.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  5. Freest country in the world by gnasher719 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whenever I hear Americans make that claim, I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

    I had school teachers who thought it was their job to teach the kids how to stand up for themselves and how to stand up to authority. Including theirs.

    1. Re:Freest country in the world by sosume · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In this regard (free speech being regulated by schools, universities, employers, etc) the US is starting to look a lot like former Eastern Germany. I mean, like in this movie http://imdb.to/2fC1aE I find it really hard to understand how the US justifies this spying on each other's thoughts.

    2. Re:Freest country in the world by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a State that indoctrinates children to swear allegiance to it. That's really all that you need to know.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Freest country in the world by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Freest country in the world... Whenever I hear Americans make that claim, I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

      I fail to see your point. This was a shitty thing that someone did and they will be smacked down by ACLU. Your comment would be appropriate if this was an accepted behavior with no recourse.

    4. Re:Freest country in the world by Phrogman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Same up here in Canada. My High School (grades 8-12, ~250 students) was mostly farm kids. The teachers were mostly unqualified or should at the least never have been allowed to teach. The overwhelming pressure from the students was such that if you were too smart you would often find yourself being beaten up. Some sample moments from my school:
      * The math teacher teaching grade 12 math was living with one of his female students. She got straight A's of course.
      * The grade 9 English teacher I had, had to the best of my knowledge no teaching credentials. He had been hired before they were required. He taught English and the Agriculture courses (we had a barn attached to the school). He liked to separate his class into 2 halves - those he liked (farmer's kids) and those he didn't (anyone unusual, males with long hair (this was the 70's). The first group was referred to as the Wolves (or something like that) the second as the Rabbits (or something like that). Essays written by Rabbits got written up on the board so we could review them word by word in class.
      * Grade 10 English teacher. She was nice but was qualified to teach Phys Ed and Biology. They hired here but then had her teach English. I ended up teaching most of the grammar lessons because she didn't understand it at all.
      * Chem teacher 10-12. He was an alcoholic type, and we students periodically met him in the local bar after class. He delivered all his lectures via overhead projector and never looked at students most of the time.
      * Our guidance counselor was a bitter ex-nun. She hated the students I suspect. I know she told me that I was "too stupid to go to university, you should go learn welding or something".
      * We had a music teacher who lived near the school. He would regularly hold all-night parties featuring mostly free booze and weed. He invited a lot of the band students to these parties, particularly the young females.

      Nothing was ever done about these situations sadly.

      --
      "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
    5. Re:Freest country in the world by ZeroSumHappiness · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly. The US is not free because no one tries to curtail our freedoms. The US is free because when people try to curtail our freedoms we have strong recourse. Now, in recent times our recourse has been more and more restrained, but there are two boxes left that we haven't been using very much: jury and ammo. The US needs a larger, more concerted push at jury notification.

    6. Re:Freest country in the world by arth1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly. The US is not free because no one tries to curtail our freedoms. The US is free because when people try to curtail our freedoms we have strong recourse.

      You actually believe this?

      A strong recourse would be the school admin losing his job and the cop going to jail. Please post back to let us know when this happens.

    7. Re:Freest country in the world by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We have no recourse. If there were recourse in the US we'd have never have gone to Iraq, our jails would be stuffed with bankers, and we'd all be buying pot OTC. What we have instead is tyranny.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  6. What are the adults' priorities? by bughunter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is disturbing not necessarily because of the password coercion, but because of the entire premise. What are the school administrators, the parents, and the entire adult community *thinking* when they make such a big friggin deal about "I hate you" comments that are clearly just juvenile emoting? Why are they getting involved in such petty hall locker politics to begin with?

    Did they never mature past a high school emotional age?

    Were they itching to make an example of someone?

    Do they have some policy or quota that they need to demonstrate compliance with?

    In other words, it's just like when my wife flips out after I leave dirty socks on the floor. The socks aren't the real problem; something else is. She's been bottling it up, and the socks were just the trigger for some other pent up stress... it may or may not be something I did, but it certainly means there's something I need to fix. In the same sense, something else is going on in Minnewaska... something else that needs fixing. And it's not middle school drama.

    --
    I can see the fnords!
    1. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by Surt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are thinking that the columbine kids said they hated people too. And that the admins from that school have a terrible reputation for failing to pay attention to a serious problem.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    2. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Years and years of political pressure for "zero tolerance," a.k.a. "zero intelligence." The idea that most of the things kids get up to are individual incidents and should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis is anathema to this mentality. But it sells well to parents (until their kids get caught up in it, anyway), to legislators, and to voters in school board elections.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      The mind well and truly boggles as to why they didn't contact the parents. School punishment is pretty much limited to detention and even that has to be with parental consent. Beyond that, it really is impossible to imagine what got into those idiots heads. This is what happens when you have county rather than state managed schools. Lack of reasonable sensible management principles across the whole state. Tiny nothing local admin drunk on their own power over children.

      The ultimate punishment by a school is to require a meeting between the school principle, the parent and the child. So that issues can be resolved prior to suspension and detention.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by sociocapitalist · · Score: 2

      I don't like Mondays...

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    5. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by dargaud · · Score: 2

      Fine, then why not contact the parents, and/or have a teacher/administrator/psychologist with some tact speak to the student ?

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    6. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by Hatta · · Score: 2

      Ah yes. If only someone had forcibly corrected the writings of Harris and Klebold.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:What are the adults' priorities? by Shotgun · · Score: 2

      State or county, it doesn't matter. The school is run by a principal, and that person often believes they are king and ruler over all they behold. It is their school and they get to decide what goes on. The parent is a bother to them. I've had to deal with enough bastards to know. Unless you have deep pockets for lawyers, or the backing of the ACLU, they can basically jack around with your child's education however the damn well please, and they believe that give them total license over the child's life.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  7. Damned if they do damned if they don't by VinylRecords · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Welcome to the New American Nanny State.

    Right now, schools are under heavy pressure to reduce "bullying". The politicians and money groups have seized on an issue that is easy to win over the hearts of American voters and donors. That's why "bullying" is such a hot issue right now and gets tons of media coverage.

    Kids talking about sex, something mentioned in the article as being another reason why the police and school went after this student, is another always hot issue especially with American "conservatives". We must avoid talking to children or exposing them to sex at all costs.

    So we have a school where a kid is accused of bullying, and also talking about sex, on Facebook. The school knows if it does nothing they'll get blasted by moms, and the media, about how they failed to protect other children from bullies and perverts. They let a student make hate speech and promote sex talk amongst pre-teens or whatever. But if the school acts then they'll get blasted by people who think that the schools should mind their own business and let the parents handle things. And we know how well parents handle things in modern America.

    Instead of finding a middle ground, the school feels the pressure from all sides and.....calls the cops. Huge overreaction in hindsight of course but they must have felt at the time that it was warranted.

    But seriously? A kid can't say that they hate their teacher anymore? A kid can't talk about sex with another kid? When I was in school it didn't matter if a kid said he hated a hall monitor or a teacher. Most of the teachers had been around long enough to recognize which kids disliked them. And most of my teachers could tell which boys and girls had started puberty earlier than others because we behaved much differently around the opposite sex. Times have changed.

    The school should have just called the student's mother or father and said "some kid tattled on your kid, it's not a big deal, but you should monitor your kid's facebook and just check to see if they are doing anything that is inappropriate". No cops. No teachers. No detention even. Let the parents do their jobs.

    1. Re:Damned if they do damned if they don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      +1 for a think of the children post done right. People, this is what thinking of the children is all about. If you want to know what it's like when someone really thinks of the children, here it is.

  8. What can happen to a naughty little girl... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Someday we'll end up with this. Keep in mind shit like this has happened before:

    A few years after the WW-II a young teenage girl called Erika Riemann defaced the moustache on picture of Stalin at school in then soviet occupied Germany. She got ratted out and then they sent her to Sachsenhausen, a nazi concentration camp the soviets had reactivated. She spent 8 years there where she was continously brutally raped by the guards who knocked her front teeth out in one episode.

    1. Re:What can happen to a naughty little girl... by Qzukk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No idea who modded the parent down. Of course, maybe his problem was that he posted some long ago, far away scenario that could "never" happen in the US, right? Right?

      Unless you're in Texas. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Youth_Commission#Child_sexual_abuse_scandal

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  9. Kids - if this happens to you... by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I'd encourage using facebook's terms and conditions as the reason not to give out your password.

    "You will not share your password, (or in the case of developers, your secret key), let anyone else access your account, or do anything else that might jeopardize the security of your account."

    It's not ideal. The administration shouldn't ask in the first place, but it's a means you can employ to protect your privacy.

  10. Re:Anonymous by lightknight · · Score: 2

    *shrugs*

    Under the current thinking, a child can be charged as an adult if a crime is considered heinous enough, but denied its rights up until its 18th birthday. In short, if you're a kid, the State isn't really sure you have any rights. One might argue that it would have been particularly noble of an adult to have stepped in, and prevented this abuse, but nobility / honour is kind of out of fashion. Bowing to your leaders and their demands (thinking is hard), dogmatically agreeing with everything they say (spine of a jelly-fish), and fighting over their scraps is the current in-thing (if we are good, we might be able to ask for a small favor later on).

    For the record, we also send off kids to die before they're old enough to drink, have a permanent caste system, and we attack / infiltrate groups of people who have never spoken an ill word nor lifted a finger against us. We put the vile in evil.

     

    --
    I am John Hurt.
  11. more post columbine paranoia by epyT-R · · Score: 2

    Rational adults know that just because a kid says something bad about a teacher doesn't mean the student's out to do the teacher harm. So why do most school policies nowadays attribute any attitude short of sunshine and happy unicorns to be evidence of mental problems worthy of nuke-it-from-orbit 'solutions'? The most obvious conclusion is that it's the school trying to save face when the student gets too close to the truth for their comfort, so they play out the zomg-columbine excuse. The fact is, the teachers that get the majority of the jeers from students often deserve it, and since most often the student complaints get buried under piles of bureaucratic and jingoistic fallacy (arg from authority usually) whether they're legitimate or not, students resort to other means of expression. In many ways, this is the equivalent of employers using the law (and contracts) to dictate more and more of what employees may do outside of work..

    I swear, it's like every institution in this country is looking to get their hands on as much of everyone's freedom as possible, with the schools becoming the front lines for indoctrination. Too bad. I guess expression is only to be tolerated when authority has the mouthpiece most of the time and gets to set the politically correct boundaries for everyone else. It's truly a shame how hard and how fast liberty has fallen in this country. The stipulations for when and where we may exercise our rights have become more and more byzantine and the fine print is getting ever more fine as the power hungry chip away..

    1. Re:more post columbine paranoia by forkfail · · Score: 2

      It's all about the fear. Something has changed, and we as a society are suddenly willing to do anything to keep that fear away.

      Couple of kids go nuts with guns? Take all the kids rights away.

      Terrorists attack? Take all the rights away, period.

      What causes this willingness to give into fear is another matter. I think it's complex, but probably has its roots in the fact that even if we don't generally acknowledge it, there's a widespread awareness that Bad Things are probably going to happen given that they usually do when the number of people so outstrip the resources.

      --
      Check your premises.
  12. Thugs by shiftless · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You know, police officers used to be looked up to back in the day. Now they are just hired thugs to be feared. How big of a man do you have to be to intimidate and coerce a little girl? What a piece of shit

  13. My special snowflake by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Too many parents think that their child is a special snowflake. They must protect their snowflake from having any negative experiences, like having another kid dislike them. Their special snowflake is not supposed to grow up, and not excepted to actually be able to cope with such traumatic thins as having some other kid actually disliking them.

    Of course, it goes without saying that no one else's kid is as special a snowflake as your own - it's absolutely fine to traumatize other kids, in order to protect your own.

    The next generation of Americans will have a huge challenge to overcome their upbringing...

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  14. Not to mention the state prosecutor by The+Creator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Accessing computer systems with stolen passwords is a crime.

    --

    FRA: STFU GTFO
  15. More Information Please. by jklovanc · · Score: 2

    Nowhere in the article was there a complete quote; there was only single words. There have been a number of posts here that assume all she said was "I hate you". It is not clear from article that those were the word she used. maybe they were stronger like "I hate him because he was mean to me and he should have the crap beaten out of him". This is yet another article with enough detail to get the "free speech" brigade up in arms without giving enough information to make a logical conclusion about the issue.

    There are many schools that "regulate and monitor" speech off school property. Those kids who use bullying speech off school grounds are the same ones who use physical bullying on campus. A target can avoid bullying off campus but when they have to be in the same hallways, change rooms and classrooms as their bullies it becomes impossible. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to threaten or bully. Would you rather the school handle it or the youth court system? Perhaps if the school did it a bully will learn before he/she get a juvenile record. The juvenile court system is burdened enough as it is without having to deal with issues that could be handled in a much simpler way.

    To those who think that anti-bullying campaigns are "nanny brigade" I say you have never been bullied. Personally I got beat up by the entire soccer team I was on because a few bullies started it. Stand up for yourself does not work when it is five to one. You have never had to walk down a hall when you never know when you will be body checked into a locker, have your books slapped out of your hands, be elbowed in the head, etc. Bullies are smart they know where the teachers are and will not be seen.

    1. Re:More Information Please. by sociocapitalist · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have to disagree a bit here. I had similar issues and I was jumped by five boys after school one day. I fought back out of sheer terror and ended up putting two of them in the hospital.

      They nor anyone else in the school ever bothered me again.

      The only way to deal with bullies is to hurt them badly enough that they're too afraid to come back.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  16. Dangerous by SmarterThanMe · · Score: 2

    While I appreciate that this situation is outright silly (on the part of the school), ACLU's action here seems a little foolhardy. If schools can't discipline kids for what they say on social media, etc., then how are they meant to respond to cyber bullying such as that has led to however many teen suicides? What about defamation of teachers/students (I'm not talking about the usual Mr. So-and-so is a poopoohead, but what about calling him a pedo or something)? What about cyber-stalking or threats of physical violence against teachers/students?

    The alternative would be to deal with those issues through more judicial means, and that isn't necessarily better.

    1. Re:Dangerous by flimflammer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You'll want to take this up with the 1st and 4th amendment of the constitution.

      The school doesn't have the authority and it never will. The ACLU isn't being foolhardy. They're entirely right here. If the school suspected something dangerous, they should have alerted the authorities and the parents with the information they had and been done with it. They had no rights to threaten a little girl into handing over her login details for things she has done off school property.

      Every example you gave have procedures to deal with them. Defamation? That is a civil matter. Stalking, violence? That is a job for the police.

      Schools should never have the right to discipline a child for something said off school property. That's why this whole cyber-bullying thing is such a joke. Parents expect the schools to be able to do something, but they can't do anything. Nor should they be able to. If it doesn't happen on school property, there is no reason for the school to be involved.

    2. Re:Dangerous by SecurityGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      While I appreciate that this situation is outright silly (on the part of the school), ACLU's action here seems a little foolhardy. If schools can't discipline kids for what they say on social media, etc., then how are they meant to respond to cyber bullying such as that has led to however many teen suicides?

      The short answer is that they aren't, unless those things happen in a realm that falls under their authority. Schools are not the "child police". Their job is not to discipline children when they do things wrong. Their job is to educate children. Period. Now, if "cyber" bullying happens on school grounds, using school equipment, etc, then by all means they should discipline. If not, they have no standing to say word one about it, any more than if I, as John Q Public, call you a poopoohead, do you get to run off to my employer and tell on me.

      It really doesn't matter that you'd rather the schools handle it than the judicial system. The schools don't have the authority. The judicial does. Schools have gotten worse and worse at educating students due to the plethora of things which are not their job that they insist on doing instead.

  17. Re:Incredible by silas_moeckel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And the correct fix for this is to fire the involved parties with cause. To insure that that principle and cop never work in there respective fields again. They each knew what they were doing and exceeded there powers. Hell the principle should have been informing the kid that they did not need to talk to the officer without there parents and should not do so, they have a responsibility to act in the parents stead in there absence, that's where a lot of there powers come from in the first place.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  18. Re:Incredible by Sique · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They didn't just exceeded their powers. They were accessing a computer system with stolen or coerced passwords. This is a federal crime. They are just criminals.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  19. The school (and sherrif) have committed a felony by gurps_npc · · Score: 2
    It is illegal to obtain someone else's password without a warrant.

    It's a violation of the terms of services, and violation of federal law:

    18 USC Â 1030 - Fraud and related activity in connection with computers.ahref=http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030rel=url2html-19895http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1030>

    Cops need a warrant to obtain a password. Even if the person is a child. Schools are forbidden from doing so even with a warrant.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com