13-Year Old Girl, Strip Searched ; For what ?

[thoraxe5000]

PILLS HERE!

That just made my day.

 

[mike1921]

Of course that person probably lied. However, try this. Imagine you are the principal at the school. There is a drug problem you have caught and could stop before these kids get older and try harder drugs. Not only did they do this for their job but because they care. The teachers aren't robots! They care what happens to their students and want to find the problem to help them. And anyway you can't automatically assume that someone is lying when they give someone up.

Hmm, if I had a drug problem in my school the last thing I'd ever do is trust one of the kids, enough to strip search someone.

No, you have no idea if they care, some do and some are dicks. Also, while you can't assume someone is lying, you can't take it as anymore than watch her for suspicious activity.

So if someone got sick or died by ibuprofen overdose because they sat and watched who do you think would get blamed? Certainly not a child

Read this:

Maybe they saw the pack, thought it could have been something like extacey, or some other pill based drug, asked if she had anything, but then to go as far as strip searching her, I mean they would have had to get the police involved to do that surely, not just a teacher, or even a school security guard. If nothing else the school should issue a public and unreserved apology over the situation, but to be honest that is just... sick.. messed up. I hope they sue.

...and I'm against sueing people, for just about anything, but that's rediculous.

Even if they had heard about or seen such pills on her person, then the reasonable thing to do is to bring her into an office. This puts her under supervised "custody", clearly if it is on her person she can't get rid of the pills under supervision. They then search her locker and backpack etc ;That is fairly acceptable. (Locker is school property, backpack meets reasonable search)

Now, if for whatever reason they deem it necessary to further search her person, i.e. her body. Then they have to at first notify authorities and her parental guardians in which case the guardian can deny the search requiring the authorities to obtain a warrant in order to do so. Which they obviously wouldn't do for a couple of ibuprofen pills. An immediate search isn't necessary because the pills on her person have no way of doing harm to herself or other persons. Get my drift? Common sense policy. Searching her immediately because she supposedly distributed the so-called pills to others does not rip a hole in the time/space continuum and remove the other pills from other people. Total nonsense.

Again, if the student is brought into an office under 'custody' and supervision, there is no need for a "search" because the pills go nowhere. The student is isolated from discarding the evidence or further distributing.

holy fucking ass crackers.

this sort of thing would cause a school shooting by me if they forced me to do it, i would just tell them to fuck off and that i didnt have any illegal drugs

the school should be sued and fined into oblivion and the staff involved should be thrown into a cell. sexual harrasment even if its bye women it could be considered molestation, infact if i was in her positon i would make shit up on them say they touched my "naughty" place, THEn i go school shooting and take care of the fucks who got away with it

Wimp, I wouldn't just say they touched my naughty place, I'd have a much more fucked up story than that.

America needs a new civil war to shake things up a bit .

yes yes we do and they way the supreme court, obama, and the congerse are acting i think we will have one pretty sone if things keep up. Itll be fun ;D

(there are more people causign it than i listed)

You really want a mass slaughter of our countrymen? You want to be fighting in a bloody battle to determine the fate of our nation?

I think not. We have a system and it may be flawed to some degree but its certainly better than most. I'd much rather not lose my life over some battle for "something better" when in reality it'll end up very similar under a different name.


Think about what you're saying.

I don't care if they're my own countrymen, also I'm pretty sure the person who started this was kidding.

This isn't even the weirdest time something like this has happened.A few years ago in Florida a principle "went so far as to lift the shirts of female students to insure the letters 'GP' or the words 'Gay Pride' were not written on their bodies"

Why he thought they would have a protest symbol underneath their cloths is not clear.

.......for one why the fuck did he even care and for two I hope that guy now gets gang-raped daily.

 

[dragonburner]

Of course that person probably lied. However, try this. Imagine you are the principal at the school. There is a drug problem you have caught and could stop before these kids get older and try harder drugs. Not only did they do this for their job but because they care. The teachers aren't robots! They care what happens to their students and want to find the problem to help them. And anyway you can't automatically assume that someone is lying when they give someone up.

Hmm, if I had a drug problem in my school the last thing I'd ever do is trust one of the kids, enough to strip search someone.

No, you have no idea if they care, some do and some are dicks. Also, while you can't assume someone is lying, you can't take it as anymore than watch her for suspicious activity.

So if someone got sick or died by ibuprofen overdose because they sat and watched who do you think would get blamed? Certainly not a child

Read this:

Maybe they saw the pack, thought it could have been something like extacey, or some other pill based drug, asked if she had anything, but then to go as far as strip searching her, I mean they would have had to get the police involved to do that surely, not just a teacher, or even a school security guard. If nothing else the school should issue a public and unreserved apology over the situation, but to be honest that is just... sick.. messed up. I hope they sue.

...and I'm against sueing people, for just about anything, but that's rediculous.

Even if they had heard about or seen such pills on her person, then the reasonable thing to do is to bring her into an office. This puts her under supervised "custody", clearly if it is on her person she can't get rid of the pills under supervision. They then search her locker and backpack etc ;That is fairly acceptable. (Locker is school property, backpack meets reasonable search)

Now, if for whatever reason they deem it necessary to further search her person, i.e. her body. Then they have to at first notify authorities and her parental guardians in which case the guardian can deny the search requiring the authorities to obtain a warrant in order to do so. Which they obviously wouldn't do for a couple of ibuprofen pills. An immediate search isn't necessary because the pills on her person have no way of doing harm to herself or other persons. Get my drift? Common sense policy. Searching her immediately because she supposedly distributed the so-called pills to others does not rip a hole in the time/space continuum and remove the other pills from other people. Total nonsense.

Again, if the student is brought into an office under 'custody' and supervision, there is no need for a "search" because the pills go nowhere. The student is isolated from discarding the evidence or further distributing.

If you watched the video they asked the girl if she had the pills. She denied and they assumed she lied. See that is procedure in investigations because she has a reason to lie. Now next would be a search. They searched her bag and found nothing. Now what is next. History tells us that we can hide things on our person. So they searched her. Why not the police you ask? Would she rather have the female school nurse check her or a large hairy policeman?

 

[mike1921]

If you watched the video they asked the girl if she had the pills. She denied and they assumed she lied. See that is procedure in investigations because she has a reason to lie. Now next would be a search. They searched her bag and found nothing. Now what is next. History tells us that we can hide things on our person. So they searched her. Why not the police you ask? Would she rather have the female school nurse check her or a large hairy policeman?

.........Apparently you didn't read the thing I quoted for you because this is pretty irrelevant.

Also, don't assume I'm a fucktard, I'm aware that's procedure in investigations.

Female police officers exist.

 

[Adfest]

Funny how people can underestimate kids. You don't think a 13 year old female is capable of hiding a weapon that could kill another child? Having worked with disturbed youth, I can assure you that they can have the will and the means. However, as to the strip search... Completely out of line. The school is not any sort of treatment center and they could have kept her isolated until a parent was contacted.

 

[dragonburner]

If you watched the video they asked the girl if she had the pills. She denied and they assumed she lied. See that is procedure in investigations because she has a reason to lie. Now next would be a search. They searched her bag and found nothing. Now what is next. History tells us that we can hide things on our person. So they searched her. Why not the police you ask? Would she rather have the female school nurse check her or a large hairy policeman?

.........Apparently you didn't read the thing I quoted for you because this is pretty irrelevant.

Also, don't assume I'm a fucktard, I'm aware that's procedure in investigations.

Female police officers exist.

I didn't assume you were a fucktard... until now. I know female police officers exist but I used my example to get a point across. What is the difference between a strip search by a nurse and a strip search by a police officer? And you mean your passage that you quoted so it came in my quote yeah I read it. Don't assume I am a fucktard.

 

[bindox]

*facepalm*

/QFT

 

[mike1921]

If you watched the video they asked the girl if she had the pills. She denied and they assumed she lied. See that is procedure in investigations because she has a reason to lie. Now next would be a search. They searched her bag and found nothing. Now what is next. History tells us that we can hide things on our person. So they searched her. Why not the police you ask? Would she rather have the female school nurse check her or a large hairy policeman?

.........Apparently you didn't read the thing I quoted for you because this is pretty irrelevant.

Also, don't assume I'm a fucktard, I'm aware that's procedure in investigations.

Female police officers exist.

I didn't assume you were a fucktard... until now. I know female police officers exist but I used my example to get a point across. What is the difference between a strip search by a nurse and a strip search by a police officer? And you mean your passage that you quoted so it came in my quote yeah I read it. Don't assume I am a fucktard.

If the parents consented to the strip search there'd be no difference.

Yea, my response to you was that quote, which was an idea that made a rushed strip search unnecessary. Your response to it was completely irrelevant.

 

[dragonburner]

If you watched the video they asked the girl if she had the pills. She denied and they assumed she lied. See that is procedure in investigations because she has a reason to lie. Now next would be a search. They searched her bag and found nothing. Now what is next. History tells us that we can hide things on our person. So they searched her. Why not the police you ask? Would she rather have the female school nurse check her or a large hairy policeman?

.........Apparently you didn't read the thing I quoted for you because this is pretty irrelevant.

Also, don't assume I'm a fucktard, I'm aware that's procedure in investigations.

Female police officers exist.

I didn't assume you were a fucktard... until now. I know female police officers exist but I used my example to get a point across. What is the difference between a strip search by a nurse and a strip search by a police officer? And you mean your passage that you quoted so it came in my quote yeah I read it. Don't assume I am a fucktard.

If the parents consented to the strip search there'd be no difference.

Yea, my response to you was that quote, which was an idea that made a rushed strip search unnecessary. Your response to it was completely irrelevant.

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

 

[mike1921]

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

tit for tat?


Yes, it's pretty easy to get rid of drugs while being watched, yet it'd be impossible to do it as soon as she got called down to the office?

Ok, you didn't read the quote, the guy said if they didn't they'd need a warrant to search.

Shoot first ask questions later is a mentality that should only be used when shooting stops danger and the danger is immediate. If they found out she was giving out pills while some kid was about to OD, would them finding out stop the overdose from happening?

 

[dragonburner]

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

tit for tat?


Yes, it's pretty easy to get rid of drugs while being watched, yet it'd be impossible to do it as soon as she got called down to the office?

Ok, you didn't read the quote, the guy said if they didn't they'd need a warrant to search.

Shoot first ask questions later is a mentality that should only be used when shooting stops danger and the danger is immediate. If they found out she was giving out pills while some kid was about to OD, would them finding out stop the overdose from happening?

If they had high enough security I guess.... But it is a school.

 

[mike1921]

If they had high enough security I guess.... But it is a school.

Leave her in a room with one person watching her. If you have employees you trust to strip search a 13 year old but not ones you trust to watch one something is fucked up.

 

[Drummerstixz]

Didn't this happen aboutfive years ago? HOnestly, youare a little late to the party.

It was five years ago but its going to trial AGAIN this year I believe.

 

[dragonburner]

If they had high enough security I guess.... But it is a school.

Leave her in a room with one person watching her. If you have employees you trust to strip search a 13 year old but not ones you trust to watch one something is fucked up.

Yeah that might work...

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

tit for tat?


Yes, it's pretty easy to get rid of drugs while being watched, yet it'd be impossible to do it as soon as she got called down to the office?

Ok, you didn't read the quote, the guy said if they didn't they'd need a warrant to search.

Shoot first ask questions later is a mentality that should only be used when shooting stops danger and the danger is immediate. If they found out she was giving out pills while some kid was about to OD, would them finding out stop the overdose from happening?

You can't OD on ibuprofen. The worst case scenario is a activated charcoal being shoved down your throat and you feeling like a dumb-ass.

 

[mike1921]

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

tit for tat?


Yes, it's pretty easy to get rid of drugs while being watched, yet it'd be impossible to do it as soon as she got called down to the office?

Ok, you didn't read the quote, the guy said if they didn't they'd need a warrant to search.

Shoot first ask questions later is a mentality that should only be used when shooting stops danger and the danger is immediate. If they found out she was giving out pills while some kid was about to OD, would them finding out stop the overdose from happening?

You can't OD on ibuprofen. The worst case scenario is a activated charcoal being shoved down your throat and you feeling like a dumb-ass.

In that case there should never be a strip search over it no matter who's doing it and who's informed.

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

tit for tat?


Yes, it's pretty easy to get rid of drugs while being watched, yet it'd be impossible to do it as soon as she got called down to the office?

Ok, you didn't read the quote, the guy said if they didn't they'd need a warrant to search.

Shoot first ask questions later is a mentality that should only be used when shooting stops danger and the danger is immediate. If they found out she was giving out pills while some kid was about to OD, would them finding out stop the overdose from happening?

You can't OD on ibuprofen. The worst case scenario is a activated charcoal being shoved down your throat and you feeling like a dumb-ass.

In that case there should never be a strip search over it no matter who's doing it and who's informed.

Well for regular people, ibuprofen is almost never a problem. If you are on medicine such as, isotretionoin.. Well you can have heart problems from just a 450mg dosage of it. I can attest to it.

 

[Knight Templar]

If you watched the video they asked the girl if she had the pills. She denied and they assumed she lied. See that is procedure in investigations because she has a reason to lie. Now next would be a search. They searched her bag and found nothing. Now what is next. History tells us that we can hide things on our person. So they searched her. Why not the police you ask? Would she rather have the female school nurse check her or a large hairy policeman?

.........Apparently you didn't read the thing I quoted for you because this is pretty irrelevant.

Also, don't assume I'm a fucktard, I'm aware that's procedure in investigations.

Female police officers exist.

I didn't assume you were a fucktard... until now. I know female police officers exist but I used my example to get a point across. What is the difference between a strip search by a nurse and a strip search by a police officer? And you mean your passage that you quoted so it came in my quote yeah I read it. Don't assume I am a fucktard.

If the parents consented to the strip search there'd be no difference.

Yea, my response to you was that quote, which was an idea that made a rushed strip search unnecessary. Your response to it was completely irrelevant.

My response would be irrelevant if it was about Pokemon. What I was responding to was the fact that their idea was nearly tit for tat what happened. Now another point. Kids are experts at hiding things from adults. In this case drugs. She could have easily disposed of the drugs if they waited. Also what would happen if they didn't consent? For all they knew another kid gets the idea drugs are ok. Hell the whole school gets that idea. Situations like this is where the phrase "Shoot first, ask questions later comes from." Also "there'd "isn't a word. As seen by spell check.

All they did was look in her bag and strip search her, that is not stoping any proplems and going too far. If you think they should be allowed to do it then this conversation will need to stop because I don't think eather of us are going to change our minds.

 

[Makke]

man seriously my aunt gave me ibuprofen 2 weeks ago for my otitis and i took like 6 in 3 days, you don't really notice a single chance to your mind. so why the fuck strip search a 13! year old girl by school employes. seriously thats wrong. surpreme court needs to serve justice.

 

[Captain Schpack]

Well, i could very well just be strip search. Or pedophile attempting to touch a small girl. On the other hand, she could be one of those sh*theads, who comes to school wearing the equivalent of a napkin's worth fo clothing and hangs around with the people who should almost certainly wear a prison uniform everyday to save the police the trouble of finding one for him when he goes to Rykers.