Zero Tolerance in Schools

If the vehicle has more than one owner, it very much is. It triggers an investigation, but there's a very good reason you don't respond to an illegal substance in a car by immediately imprisoning everyone who's ever driven it.

As for searches, there was a case in (where else >_>) North Carolina a while back where a kid got arrested for leaving his hunting rifle in his truck. When he found out it was there, he very responsibly locked it securely and was in the process of getting his parents to pick it up until rent-a-cops strongarmed their way in, arrested him, and he got expelled without appeal.

edited 9th Jan '14 3:48:32 PM by Pykrete

Not everyone who has ever driven it, no. The person who is currently driving it at the time of the infraction is the one on the hook, no matter how many other names are on the title or are listed on the insurance as legitimate drivers. And if there's booze in a car that's parked at a school because a student drove it there, it's the student who drove it there who's held responsible.

edited 9th Jan '14 3:49:42 PM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

They're a primary suspect, not an automatic culprit. Just because our prosecutorial system is systemically fucked beyond belief doesn't mean we just abandon the good parts at the drop of a hat.

edited 9th Jan '14 3:49:36 PM by Pykrete

Not the way it works, Pykrete. Anything in the car I'm driving is my responsibility, whether it's mine or not, and whether I knew it was there or not. That may not be the way it should work, but it is the way it does work. Someone else may be held to also be responsible, but that doesn't get me off the hook unless the officer or judge is feeling lenient.

edited 9th Jan '14 3:52:36 PM by Madrugada

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

So you're talking about limited liability? Because that's inconsistent across states. A lot of the less idiotic ones allow someone else to acknowledge ownership, and charges for that will only land if they willfully supplied it to the minor.

edited 9th Jan '14 4:09:47 PM by Pykrete

I can't find any reference to "host liability" in any of the legal dictionaries online. "Social host liability", yes, but that only concerns serving alcohol, not simply possessing it and woudn't apply to a bottle in a car parked at a school.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Right, I edited — social host is about serving, mainly parties. Minor in possession is inconsistent too though.

In any case, it's a moot point as far as the school is concerned. Even if the law is as backasswardsedly hamstrung as it can be regarding a border case, the school can make its own arbitration as to continued tuition.

Which brings me back to zero tolerance generally just being bad.

edited 9th Jan '14 4:26:37 PM by Pykrete

You know what? No. If they're too stupid and/or lazy to follow the basic gun safety rule of "Lock it up when you're not using it," then I want them arrested.^note Expulsion and/or jail time for a first offense is too harsh, but by the third time some teenager drives to school with his hunting rifle still on the rack on his truck, fuck the little shithead. A hunting rifle in the hands of someone proficient in its use is just as deadly from the school parking lot as it is from the other side of the cafeteria, and if it's sitting in someone's vehicle, it's now fairly easily accessible to anyone who can get into the parking lot^note which, from the high schools I'm used to seeing, means everyone including the random guy on the street who would not otherwise have access.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw

I don't think zero tolerance, if we're talking expulsion, should be used for alcohol and drugs. I think over half of California high schoolers smoke pot, no need to ruin the educations of so many for something so small.

doing so on campus is the qualifier here. How many are so bold as to do that?

About half of my sophomore biology class. Two of them tried to sell it to the teacher.

A fair portion of my chemistry class found it amusing to bring all manner of illicit substances in under the guise of For Science!! From what I've seen of the local high schools as well, there's almost never a day without someone hitting their bong in the parking lot before classes start in the mornings.

A student was suspended and faces expulsion for taking a razor away from a self-harming student

Epic Face Palm from me right now. I am not holding out hope that the administration will rule in her favor. Clearly the rules are more important than a teenager's life.

That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw

.... Wow. Both at the story, and at the needless arguments in comments to that turns into bible study.

Watch Symphogear

The only time i read internet comments is Bile Fascination. It's an exercise in Poe's Law to the hilt, you don't know who is trolling, who is shilling, and who is just taking advantage of the lack of moderation to vent their sincerely-held beliefs in a way that wouldn't pass muster in (not to sound elitist) a real internet community.

Didn't that article say she *initially* faced expulsion, but is now coming back to school?

…So it does. This is what I get for trying to read articles during class.

She's still facing expulsion. Or was at the hearing she had today. She was just in school until her fate was decided.

Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

Emphasis mine

And there was an update made this evening:

In the battle between the people who respect a good deed done to save a life, and the reactionaries panicking and going, "Child holding knife! CHILD HOLDING KNIFE!!! SHE'S GOING TO MURDER US ALL!!! LOCK DOWN THE SCHOOL!!! BRING OUT THE ARMED GUARDS!!! RED ALERT!!!", it's nice to see that reason won the day.

That's rare.

edited 21st Mar '14 8:26:05 AM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

I love you guys that this thread exists.

If you guys want something to be furious about, have at ye.

edited 30th Jun '14 5:36:24 PM by chi_mangetsu

"I'd like to be a tree." - Fluttershy

Yeah...that's messed up. I can basically guarantee that the kid had no idea what he was signing and that if anyone asked him what sexual misconduct was, he wouldn't know.

Also, what's wrong with the principal? Who makes kids sign complicated legalese documents for something like that anyway? More than anything, I think that principal needs a close looking at.

Not Three Laws compliant.

There's so much wrong with this I don't even...

Who would deem a document signed by an unsupervised five-year-old to be of any binding meaning? What's that all about?

Arizona has issues.

"I'd like to be a tree." - Fluttershy