Republicans Pass Mandatory Child Strip Search Bill

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#24
I hate how they say, "depending on how administrators interpret the law.."

FUCK THAT. The reason there is a law is so there's NO fucking if's and's or but's about what you can and cannot do.

FUCK THE GOV'T.
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#25
Mr Arson said:
I thought republicans where for smaller goverment?

They tell you that, they say big business, small gov't. But really, it's big business and undercover spying gov't.
 
Mar 12, 2005
8,118
17
0
36
#26
Sixxness said:
I hate how they say, "depending on how administrators interpret the law.."

FUCK THAT. The reason there is a law is so there's NO fucking if's and's or but's about what you can and cannot do.

FUCK THE GOV'T.
YUP!
 
Jun 15, 2005
4,591
14
0
#27
You cats thinking that the teachers are gonna strip search your kids are using the most extreme idea you could have interpreted from this bill. This is most likely a direct result of school shootings and such.

You would be singing a different tune if your child almost got shot at school, yet a teacher who suspected students of bringing guns to school couldn't search their backpacks/lockers because they had to wait for a law enforcement officer due to legalities.

This bill is only requiring that schools ADOPT policies on searches, it is not mandating that teachers strip search students. So at the very extreme, if you don't like the policies put forth by your child's school/district, then your option is clear...send them somewhere else.
 
Oct 28, 2005
2,980
25
0
40
www.myspace.com
#28
TROLL said:
i dunno but homeschooling my daughter seems to be a good idea at this point..



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/2/133711/534

i must be one of those wack job paranoid tinfoil hats huh? :dead:
And depending on how you interpret the law, you can be arrested for Jay-walking or speeding 2mph over the speed limit. What the fuck exactly is your point other than to be an asshole and scare people?

And did i forget to mention that there was no real "vote"...only a voice vote? Talk about blurring the lines and confusing people, just to advance an Anti-Republican agenda. Some of you so-called open-minded people sicken me.
 

short

Sicc OG
Feb 2, 2006
6,386
3,276
113
#30
Mr Arson said:
I thought republicans where for smaller goverment?

they just say that go get re-elected over and over again
the day we see smaller goverment is the day hell freezes over
 

TROLL

Sicc OG
Aug 8, 2003
5,360
22
0
42
#31
enserio said:
You cats thinking that the teachers are gonna strip search your kids are using the most extreme idea you could have interpreted from this bill. This is most likely a direct result of school shootings and such.
does it not mention strip search or have u really read it?its basically setting in place a loophole for any school to interpet a 'search'..
enserio said:
You would be singing a different tune if your child almost got shot at school, yet a teacher who suspected students of bringing guns to school couldn't search their backpacks/lockers because they had to wait for a law enforcement officer due to legalities.
The last couple of shootings were due to somebody not from the school and the others in the past were not like they did anything to HIDE they're guns as they're shooting them off at whoever but i would seriously rather have guards there other then having anybody the right to demand that of my child..
enserio said:
This bill is only requiring that schools ADOPT policies on searches, it is not mandating that teachers strip search students. So at the very extreme, if you don't like the policies put forth by your child's school/district, then your option is clear...send them somewhere else.
and i am using that extreme instance as an example and its very much a possibility still.. and sending my child elsewhere is exactly what i would do..

makes u wonder who comes up with this sick shit huh?? i mean the shock of a pedofile falsely confessing to jonbenet's murder has seemd to have worn off.. but it just goes to show how much YOU DONT know about somebody..
 
Oct 28, 2005
2,980
25
0
40
www.myspace.com
#33
Sixxness said:
FUCK THE GOV'T.
Question:

Why is it that every picture I've ever seen of you, you're wearing jewelry, head coverings, expensive t-shirts, have your hair styled, etc., and yet you act like you're some great messenger of truth? Why don't you wear white t-shirts, no jewelry, no watches, no hats, etc? Oh yeah....that'd make you...well...me. A Conservative that--get this!--actually conserves.

Don't think I'm on some Hatfield-McCoy shit right here either. But thats always gotten on my fucking nerves about you, and about Liberals in general. You all do nothing but complain about the Government and Corporations and such, and here you are, spending hundreds and thousands of dollars just on your "look" alone....nevermind all the goodies in your houses, your driveways and so on. It's like this is all some kind of funny game to you.

Talk about it...Be about it...whatever happened to that concept?
 
Oct 28, 2005
2,980
25
0
40
www.myspace.com
#34
TROLL said:
does it not mention strip search or have u really read it?its basically setting in place a loophole for any school to interpet a 'search'..
Dirty Shoez said:
And depending on how you interpret the law, you can be arrested for Jay-walking or speeding 2mph over the speed limit. What the fuck exactly is your point other than to be an asshole and scare people?
...
 

I AM

Some Random Asshole
Apr 25, 2002
21,002
86
48
#35
Dirty Shoez said:
Question:

Why is it that every picture I've ever seen of you, you're wearing jewelry, head coverings, expensive t-shirts, have your hair styled, etc., and yet you act like you're some great messenger of truth? Why don't you wear white t-shirts, no jewelry, no watches, no hats, etc? Oh yeah....that'd make you...well...me. A Conservative that--get this!--actually conserves.
I don't wear jewelry, period. I have one ring, that I don't wear. So shut the fuck up. Oh guess what Harold, I usually wear white t-shirts, with no jewelry, and the only hat I wear says 206 on it. You don't know me. You just assume, ALL THE TIME. You're still a half step Uncle Tom.

Don't think I'm on some Hatfield-McCoy shit right here either. But thats always gotten on my fucking nerves about you, and about Liberals in general. You all do nothing but complain about the Government and Corporations and such, and here you are, spending hundreds and thousands of dollars just on your "look" alone....nevermind all the goodies in your houses, your driveways and so on. It's like this is all some kind of funny game to you.
I'm not LIBERAL YOU COCK SMOKER. I'd rather have NO government. By the way, I haven't boughten myself clothing in over a year. That includes t-shirts, shoe laces, shoes, jeans, whatever. Maybe before you stereotype me becuase you dont' like me, you should FIND OUT THE TRUTH.

I speak the truth. Yours is just different cause you see the world differently. I could give a FUCK less.

Now go back to your LIBERAL HIPPY COLLEGE you stupid faggot.

Talk about it...Be about it...whatever happened to that concept?
That would be, ME. Stupid ass. You just dont' KNOW me. And you let your prejudgments blur the reality of things. You're a very sad individual.
 
Jun 15, 2005
4,591
14
0
#36
TROLL said:
does it not mention strip search or have u really read it?its basically setting in place a loophole for any school to interpet a 'search'..
I read what you posted, and then I read the ACTUAL bill itself (Link: HR5295). Here's an excerpt from the actual bill itself:

SEC. 3. SEARCHES BASED ON REASONABLE SUSPICION.

(a) In General- Each local educational agency shall have in effect throughout the jurisdiction of the agency policies that ensure that a search described in subsection (b) is deemed reasonable and permissible.

(b) Searches Covered- A search referred to in subsection (a) is a search by a full-time teacher or school official, acting on any reasonable suspicion based on professional experience and judgment, of any minor student on the grounds of any public school, if the search is conducted to ensure that classrooms, school buildings, school property and students remain free from the threat of all weapons, dangerous materials, or illegal narcotics. The measures used to conduct any search must be reasonably related to the search's objectives, without being excessively intrusive in light of the student's age, sex, and the nature of the offense.
So, AGAIN, each district will be required to adopt policies that are "reasonable and permissable...without being excessively intrusive..". I don't see where STRIP SEARCH will fit into that description.

At any rate, in order for policies to be adopted, School Board members must present and vote on them. Do you really think that policies covering strip searches wouldn't somehow be newsworthy or presented to the public before being voted on, let alone passed?

TROLL said:
The last couple of shootings were due to somebody not from the school and the others in the past were not like they did anything to HIDE they're guns as they're shooting them off at whoever
And this is your answer as to why you wouldn't want a teacher/administrator to search if they felt there was a safety issue? Here's another quote from the bill:

(1) The United States Department of Education's National Center for Education Statistics reported in the 2005 Indicators of School Crime and Safety that in 2003 seventeen percent of students in grades 9-12 reported they carried a weapon. Six percent reported having carried a weapon on school grounds.
(2) The same survey reported that 29 percent of all students in grades 9-12 reported that someone offered, sold, or gave them an illegal drug on school property within the last 12 months.
Oh, that;s right your answer would be...

but i would seriously rather have guards there other then having anybody the right to demand that of my child..
Would these guards be trained? Would they be like rent-a-cops? There are already plenty of adults on campus, and many times when weapons or drugs are found at school, it's because a student felt comfortable enough to tell a teacher that they trust. Will your guards be able to establish this kind of repore?

and i am using that extreme instance as an example and its very much a possibility still..
Yes, the example is extreme, and there are several people in the thread who are taking it just as extreme and seeing this bill more as taking rights away than being about safety. That's my point.
 

TROLL

Sicc OG
Aug 8, 2003
5,360
22
0
42
#37
Dirty Shoez said:
And depending on how you interpret the law, you can be arrested for Jay-walking or speeding 2mph over the speed limit. What the fuck exactly is your point other than to be an asshole and scare people?
my point is to bring about the possibility and make people aware of what some people higher up are planning to put into place at our schools.. i dont think that it should be left up to the schools to interpet the law as they see fit..
Dirty Shoez said:
And did i forget to mention that there was no real "vote"...only a voice vote? Talk about blurring the lines and confusing people, just to advance an Anti-Republican agenda. Some of you so-called open-minded people sicken me.
im not anti-republican im anti-facist and anti-police state.. so if the republicans would stop passing shit thats slowly turning us into those things i wouldnt have to expose it all.. not many knew about this so ive done my civil duty of passing along the information.. even conservatives are becoming "anti-republican".. but im not saying the democrats are anybetter.. theyre both the same agenda with a 2 diffrent masks..
 
May 27, 2002
2,804
0
0
www.google.com
#38
I wouldn't mind if one of those hot-sleeps-with-students-teacher asked me, but otherwise this is a stupid law. Searches of a locker or backpack would not bother me too much, but strip searches is going a step too far.
 
Mar 1, 2006
4,276
1,154
0
39
www.sendearnings.com
#40
Dirty Shoez said:
Question:

Why is it that every picture I've ever seen of you, you're wearing jewelry, head coverings, expensive t-shirts, have your hair styled, etc., and yet you act like you're some great messenger of truth? Why don't you wear white t-shirts, no jewelry, no watches, no hats, etc? Oh yeah....that'd make you...well...me. A Conservative that--get this!--actually conserves.

Don't think I'm on some Hatfield-McCoy shit right here either. But thats always gotten on my fucking nerves about you, and about Liberals in general. You all do nothing but complain about the Government and Corporations and such, and here you are, spending hundreds and thousands of dollars just on your "look" alone....nevermind all the goodies in your houses, your driveways and so on. It's like this is all some kind of funny game to you.

Talk about it...Be about it...whatever happened to that concept?