|
Post by falgar25 on Feb 25, 2007 7:36:12 GMT -4
highalnder: I apologize for the registration comment. Individual liberties may not trump the greater good, but they win in a tie. Remember, our country was founded on the desire to protect individual liberties. Take a look at the court system: it is designed to let the possibly guilty go free rather than confining the not guilty. I'm not sure how far I (or you) would like to go with the concept that children are not entitled to the same liberties as adults. While I understand what you are saying and agree to a point, I worry that that concept could lead to abuse if taken to extremes. Guidance, of course, is important. Is your understanding of "guidance" the same as "leading by example?" To me, that is the key. Show the children that they have no rights and they'll rebel. Show them that they are respected and have responsibilities and they'll frequently try to live up to them. Show them that everyone will be penalized for the actions of a few, with no special punishment for the few, and you'll be chipping away at the idea of individual responsibility. Sure, there will be some whose parents have taught them differently, but they will be weighing what they are told at home against what they see in "the real world" of school and, apparently, mom and dad don't know what they're talking about. Guidance, teaching, or leading by example is everything so it's important to make sure we're sending the right message. I was going to agree with metal detectors based on them being non-intrusive. We all need to funnel through a limited number of doorways to get into the school. If those doorways were equipped with metal detectors today, no one would notice. However, I suspect metal detectors would be ineffective without physical searches of book bags and at that point it has become intrusive again. Quickly on the airports: For some reason I hate being forced to remove my shoes. Just me I guess. But I wonder if there aren't other places to hide stuff that aren't currently being searched. What about padded bras? Will women have to take those off and send them through the x-ray next? What about hiding substances inside the body? Are full body searches just around the corner? A solution, or at least a step in the right direction: How about a combination of more adult supervision and shoreman's testing of those who appear to be intoxicated? Have more adults walking the halls, interacting with the students, and watching for problems. Sure, this would require more staff, so let's get some concerned parents involved. We didn't have parents in my school but it was very common (perhaps it was required) for the teachers to be out in the hallways during class changes. If a program like this could be set up, I would volunteer for one or two days every month, and I don't have children. Then shoreman's idea. If a child is exhibiting signs of intoxication, pull the individual child aside for testing. That's the way it's done in the real world, isn't it? Hold the individuals responsible for their actions, don't penalize those who have done nothing wrong. This post was too long a while ago. It's time to stop
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Feb 25, 2007 10:00:10 GMT -4
Then shoreman's idea. If a child is exhibiting signs of intoxication, pull the individual child aside for testing. That's the way it's done in the real world, isn't it? Hold the individuals responsible for their actions, don't penalize those who have done nothing wrong. That wont work, You're asking our Teachers to actually pay attention and do their job. yeah, they should be doing that NOW. (jab NOT aimed at ALL teachers, just the lazy ones)
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Feb 25, 2007 12:16:42 GMT -4
You can't point the finger at teachers completely. Heck, if you want to lead by example, then why not pay teachers a livable wage? If I were a teacher, that 32K a year paycheck would be telling me that the community doesn't think to much of what I do in the first place. It also means that you aren't going to be getting all of the best potential candidates/teachers in the first place. Why would anyone sign up for the responsibility of raising countless kids, while taking a beating from parents that blame them for the part of education that the parents should be doing, and all of this for a paycheck that makes it so they can't afford to live in a desirable place. I thought about teaching when I was in my 20's, but poverty doesn't suit me well. It would make me bitter and that would make me a bad teacher.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Feb 25, 2007 12:28:33 GMT -4
I do my job, make them do theirs. There's plenty of teachers that shouldn't be.
All I meant was don't give them something else that they wont do. I must say it's already their job to report a student that looks to be under the influence of something.
I've had almost nothing but GREAT experiences with teachers at the KI schools, I have 2 in High school right now that have gone to KI Schools all the way.
Random testing isn't the answer, I dont have one except to make teachers do their job now. Random anything is a joke at most places.
Yes, they have random where I work, and I've been tested......
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Feb 25, 2007 14:44:57 GMT -4
Highlander, I also need security clearance for my job which so far has not included drug testing. If it did, I would choose to do it FOR MYSELF. I would not impose that choice on everyone else, adults or children.
I hope that anyone who supports random testing takes a look at real-life examples where it's been done in schools. Besides being intrusive, it causes a whirling vortex of bureaucracy and money and yields very few worthwhile results.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Feb 25, 2007 15:21:37 GMT -4
While we have it at my work, it stops just above me at mid-level management.
I'm not in favor of it where I'm at since it does not include EVERYONE. There are managers definatley that should be tested....
not in schools, no way
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Feb 25, 2007 23:32:10 GMT -4
Getting tested to do a specific job is far different than random testing. Imagine the reaction if the government wanted to drug test college students. Kids should not have to submit to drug tests to go to school.
|
|
|
Post by Deputy on Feb 26, 2007 0:55:22 GMT -4
I hate to be the grim reaper of bad news but what I'm about to say I'm sure will angry the writers on this forum but what the heck! The war on drugs are a joke and the police are not going to do squat diddle about it. We can't solve the problem cause the higher up's on the federal level don't want the problem to be solved. There is way to much money and jobs to be made by the government on the drug problem and if the government was serious about the drug problem there would be real results. The drug war has been going on since the days of President Regan which was in the 1980's and will be there 200 years from now. Drugs are in Queen Anne's County, Every county in the State of Maryland and every town in America. Drugs are here to stay and the police are going to do squat about it. There is nothing we can do on a local level. The police put on a dog and pony show for the citizens to give them a warm and fuzzy feeling so it looks like we are attacking the drug problem. It's all a bunch of smoke and mirrors and PR nonsense. I'm talking about all law enforcement in America not just Queen Anne's. The truth is the police can not solve this problem. The drug problem is a health issue and should be dealt as such. If drugs were legalized such as marijuana, heroin, cocaine the crime rate would fall to almost none. A heroin or cocaine addict would not have to break in your house and steal your property to then pawn them to buy there drugs. If the drug addict could get there fix from a doctor using clean needles and under a controlled environment they would not need to break into your house. If you could by a pack of marijuana cigarettes in 7-11 for $ 4.00 dollars then the drug dealer on the street is out of business. People are not on the corner in Grasonville selling cigarettes or alcohol are they. Of course not, cause there legal and you can go to most gas stations and buy them both there. The answer is so simple yet the government will never legalize those drugs therefore the drug problem will only increase. A person can buy a twelve pack of beer, drink all 12 within the hour, drive home 10 miles, beat there spouse and in society that is accepted as being ok. Yet a person can't go home, relax and smoke a joint without being arrested if caught or considered a drug user. Yet alcohol is a drug and the most addictive one at that. Tobacco is a drug that has no medical use in the United States, Highly addictive, cause damage to ones health yet it's OK for people to smoke. I must be missing something here. How many people fight after smoking a joint or drive. Never found one yet, other than happy and hungry people. I'm sure most of the readers are now outraged that a law enforcement officer has this view on drugs but I just bring the truth and this is how most of us cops feel about the drug issue. It's a big waste of time, effort and energy and a joke.
|
|
|
Post by highlander73 on Feb 26, 2007 1:15:43 GMT -4
I'm now 100% convinced this post-er is not a police officer. I'll play along though - you know any of this how exactly?
|
|
|
Post by Deputy on Feb 26, 2007 1:29:25 GMT -4
Highlander, Why now are you 100 % sure I'm not a cop! Whats the problem. Do you disagree! If so why do you disagree. How would you propose me to prove to you that I'm a police officer. So what is your great genius idea to rid the planet with the drug problem? Even Mr. Richter knows I'm right on this one! The drug problem is a losing battle which will not be won as long as they are illegal. Thats a fact! Waste of time. I'm now 100% convinced this post-er is not a police officer. I'll play along though - you know any of this how exactly?
|
|
|
Post by Deputy on Feb 26, 2007 1:40:44 GMT -4
Highlander,
I'll tell you how I know this to be true. Through my many years of training, experience and knowledge of being a cop and working the streets. Believe what you will for I do not care one way or the other but I sure am having fun on this site. God bless America. Why are you not with me on this point of view. What is your problem with it. I, in no way have a poor attitude toward the law or being a police officer. I love the job. I'm just being a realist and brings the reality of the issue to the table. It's not what you the citizen is used to hearing from the police cause the administrations are all about making you feel warm a fuzzy and not telling you the truth and how it really is. People like you are amazing. You would rather be lied to by the government and told what you want hear instead of being told the truth. I guess the truth hurts more than being lied too. Sorry, I won't fluff the facts to make you happy. I not the kind of person who would piss on your head and tell you it's raining. Of course I would not really piss on your head and that was only an analogy.
|
|
|
Post by DavidL on Feb 26, 2007 9:44:33 GMT -4
Deputy, with this logic aren't speeding tickets a joke too? If the government really wanted to stop speeders, cars would be sold with governors on them not allowing them to go over 65MPH, and inspected yearly. Obviously someone going 40MPH down the overpass on Main Street in Chester isn't going to hurt anyone, but the local police seem to feel that it's a big enough deal to sit at the bank at the bottom of the hill and ticket people rolling down the hill. To me it's obvious that doing that is only being a meter-maid for the county/state and not helping anyone in any way. Keeping drugs out of schools by taking dealers off the street seems infinitely more important and you are saying that it's no biggie? What's your opinion of the glorified meter maids on Main Street then?
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Feb 26, 2007 10:06:09 GMT -4
Everyone at my work is subject to random testing. Also pre-employment testing required to work in most goverment facilities. I get drug tested everytime I renew my CDL medical card. We are drug/alcohol tested if we are involved in a motor vehicle accident, everytime. But I chose to work in that environment.
We could use a good answer on how to protect our children. A few bad apples can ruin it for everyone. Maybe notifying the parents if a child appears intoxicated or stoned and have the parents take the child for testing before he/she can return to school. The school could supply a list of testing centers and the parent woould have a certain time period to have the child tested. The parents need to be more involved in this type of problem. My kids have gone through the school system relatively trouble free, and I've been very pleased with the education they have received. Two more years and my youngest is out of KIHS. FINALLY!
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Feb 26, 2007 10:30:33 GMT -4
If a child appears intoxicated at school, they should absolutely be dealt with. I would hope they couldn't get through the day with no one noticing...
Deputy's most recent statements don't sound deputy-ish. Either he is not a deputy or more than one guest is posting as deputy?
|
|
|
Post by highlander73 on Feb 26, 2007 13:49:37 GMT -4
We can't solve the problem cause the higher up's on the federal level don't want the problem to be solved. There is way to much money and jobs to be made by the government on the drug problem and if the government was serious about the drug problem there would be real results. I want you to explain this comment, as how a little county sheriff's deputy has such knowledge of high public policy. Do presidential orders come right to your inbox? Or just gubernatorial ones? My point is this is your OPINION and not fact so stop acting like you know anything more than you do just because someone (supposedly) taught you how to wear a badge and aim a radar gun. There is nothing we can do on a local level. With your attitude I can see why. The answer is so simple yet the government will never legalize those drugs therefore the drug problem will only increase. I must be missing something here. How many people fight after smoking a joint or drive. Never found one yet, other than happy and hungry people. Ah...there it is...this guy is a reafer addict. Anyone wanna lay odds with me that this joker is a pot-smoking, hippy-wanna-be-cause-he-missed-the-60's simpleton who thinks he's a police officer because he has a police scanner? Hey Cheech, I'm on to your act now buddy....
|
|
|
Post by Pete Richter on Feb 26, 2007 14:24:57 GMT -4
Highllander........One of the best under cover narcs in the country, highly decorated - time in the trenches - a good cop with inside information - on CNN news stated " We have lost the war on drugs". His point was this. You must decriminalize drugs to eliminate the corruption which exists from the top to the bottom. Not that everyone is corrupt. Prohibition profits corrupted the Cops, the Judicial System, and the Politicians.
|
|
|
Post by highlander73 on Feb 26, 2007 15:03:22 GMT -4
Highllander........One of the best under cover narcs in the country, highly decorated - time in the trenches - a good cop with inside information - on CNN news stated " We have lost the war on drugs". His point was this. You must decriminalize drugs to eliminate the corruption which exists from the top to the bottom. Not that everyone is corrupt. Prohibition profits corrupted the Cops, the Judicial System, and the Politicians. Forgive me if I don't take you as a creditable source for impartial opinions on crime prevention options, given your disdain for law enforcement in general...
|
|
|
Post by Pete Richter on Feb 26, 2007 15:33:02 GMT -4
Highlander 73......I am a decorated, retired due to a line of duty injury Balto. City Police Officer who personally arrested two men who shot and killed Police. I offered no opinion, I just reported what was on CNN news. I have no disdain for any Policeman doing the right thing. As a matter of fact just last week I bailed out of my car in the ghetto, and helped a Policeman who was having trouble making an arrest, and I'm 62 years old........My point on the thread was that people do offer solutions to the problems, no more - no less.
|
|
|
Post by ljp on Feb 26, 2007 16:24:14 GMT -4
I don't really know what the answer is either but what I do know is that I had to give my drivers license and other personal info at the CVS to buy cold medicine the other day. THAT tells me that there is a problem here. Do I think that RANDOM testing is a good thing? Yes I do.
BUT on the other hand, I see your points that this could open the doors to have the government knocking on my door someday for whatever the law of that day says they can search for. I have absolutely nothing to hide and would not object to having someone search me or my property. Once… BUT what happens when a person of my demographic commits a crime? Or if it is found that a high percentage of females between the ages of 20 and 40 are making Meth. (How true is the HBO show Weed?) Even though they say that there is no racial profiling we all know it exists. Then I would be subject to certain levels of scrutiny if the law says that to 'profile' me is ok? Much like saying that we should only drug test the ones who LOOK like potheads...
I have not yet had to deal with that but there is nothing saying that it won't happen. I used to travel a lot, and although I felt safer I am somewhat embarrassed to admit, it bothered me every time I saw TSA pull a young Arab female aside for extra security checks while every one in line stared at her while she was in tears from the embarrassment. It happens a lot and these people are innocent. I don't know the answer because when flying I would rather have them check than not, but it really is reminiscent of the days when we imprisoned all of the Japanese people and took all of their property during the war just because of their genetic heritage.
Then again, on the other hand…$260k every year would mean my middle class taxes would rise yet AGAIN because everyone also knows that is our tax bracket that pays for literally everything in this country. Even though I don’t have kids in the school system means it would be that much harder for us.
More and more as I age, I see George Orwells point of view. Who’s to say that in 25 years (or less) the health insurance companies won’t state that all Americans need to exercise for health reasons and if the government doesn’t force the issue than they will all go out of business? Will we have then have a Ministry of Exercise and be forced to have 2 way TVs in our living rooms with trainers forcing us to rise by a certain time and do our daily regiment or face daily beatings? You know…to help the American Economy? (you’ll have to read the book to get the reference). When considering to support a government forced invasion of privacy, think outside of the box. I wish that I had a solution…
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on Feb 26, 2007 16:46:12 GMT -4
About the exercise thing, ljp, a couple of years ago our county school system decided to send home health report cards. They do this in Massachusetts and it supposedly involves calculating body mass index. I found out about it by reading it in the paper the day after my kids were weighed and measured. They are not heavy but felt sorry for a heavy kid whose weight was yelled across the room by the gym teacher. I don't know what ever became of that brilliant idea. Personally, I'd rather they stick to reading, writing and math.
|
|
|
Post by Same Deputy on Feb 26, 2007 17:23:49 GMT -4
We can't solve the problem cause the higher up's on the federal level don't want the problem to be solved. There is way to much money and jobs to be made by the government on the drug problem and if the government was serious about the drug problem there would be real results. I want you to explain this comment, as how a little county sheriff's deputy has such knowledge of high public policy. Do presidential orders come right to your inbox? Or just gubernatorial ones? My point is this is your OPINION and not fact so stop acting like you know anything more than you do just because someone (supposedly) taught you how to wear a badge and aim a radar gun. With your attitude I can see why. The answer is so simple yet the government will never legalize those drugs therefore the drug problem will only increase. I must be missing something here. How many people fight after smoking a joint or drive. Never found one yet, other than happy and hungry people. Ah...there it is...this guy is a reafer addict. Anyone wanna lay odds with me that this joker is a pot-smoking, hippy-wanna-be-cause-he-missed-the-60's simpleton who thinks he's a police officer because he has a police scanner? Hey Cheech, I'm on to your act now buddy.... Highlander, Your a funny person and I like that! Sorry to disappoint you but I don't smoke reefer, ingest, inhale, inject any other illegal substances, nor smoke cigarettes, nor consume alcoholic beverages on a regular basis. On a rare occasion I may consume a few alcoholic beverages spread out during an entire year but not many. Those above things are not apart of my family values nor were they apart of my up bringing. If reefer were made legal tomorrow I would still not partake in the herb. If heroin or cocaine were made legal tomorrow I would not take them either. I'm over 18 and legally I can spoke cigarettes but I choose not to. I am over 21 and can legally consume alcohol till my liver goes into failure but I choose not to. The same people who smoke marijuana now illegally would be the same people who would smoke it if it were legal. Buy legalizing the drugs it cuts the drug dealer out. No more drug dealer, no more high price for drug would equal major reduction in crime. There would no longer be a need for drug dealers to stand on a corner and sell a dime bag for $ 10.00 to $ 15.00 dollars when you could by an entire pack of marijuana cigarettes at the convenient store for $ 4.00 dollars. Crime is gone. I may only be a local yokel county police officer but I have been in this law enforcement business long enough to know how the system works. It's plain as day to us cops and you don't need direct contact with the president to know what is the real deal. The war on drugs are a JOKE AND WILL NEVER BE WON. Let me ask you this question Mr. Highlander! Why would the government and police really want to reduce and stop all crimes? If that was the case then I would be out of a job. If crime goes down to where it is practically non existent then I'm unemployed and so are hundreds of thousands of other law enforcement officers. Its the joke of all jokes. Look at what happened since the 9-11 attacks. The government created an entire new public safety agency called Homeland Security which created thousands of jobs and tons of money for people. Hello, do you see where I'm going with this. Are your brain cells firing yet or are you still living in your fantasy land. Say hi to Bugs Bunny for me! The truth is the police officers make money and tons of overtime off of the criminals, drug users, speeders, etc. Because of drunk drivers law enforcement agencies across America get thousands of dollars from the federal government (tax payers) and pay officers overtime to lock up drunk drivers. If there were no one driving drunk then there would be no extra money to be made. Why the heck do police or the government want that. I love drunk drivers because I make tons of money off them. Thats crazy, sad but true. High crime equals job security and thats the way it is. This is the same deputy who has been writing on the other threads and not two different ones. Why am I not being deputy-ish? Crime, drugs, drunks will always be there because there is way to much money to be made by all who is in law enforcement on these parasites of society. I love criminals for not them I would be out of a job. Most police officers love people to go to court to fight there speeding ticket. Remember, your there on your on time, day off of work, loss of wages, etc. The officers are there getting paid OVERTIME if it is there day off. Bling Bling baby. If the officers are on day work then they are still getting paid there salary to sit in court and do nothing while you are found guilty for speeding anyway. It's a win, win for the police. It's the joke of all jokes. Just like drugs. IT'S A LOSING BATTLE! Police across America feed you the dog an pony show, smoke and mirrors and it's nothing more than being politically correct, PR garbage. I do the best job I can to protect the life and property but in the end drugs are here to stay and will only get worse. The best advise I can give to parents is to educate there children on drugs. I will also let you in on a little secret. The real drug thats killing America and the worse one of all is ALCOHOL! I have been to hundreds of domestic assaults and bar fights in my career and a large majority of people are drunk! If any drug should be illegal it should be alcohol. Let me break it down for you and I'm using this is just as an example. Mr. Richter has his own business selling security systems to the public and businesses. He makes a living off of selling a product to deter and stop a person from breaking into your house. If people no longer broke into homes and stores then there would be no need for security systems. Mr. Richter is now out of a business and job. The more homes get broken into the more money Mr. Richter makes selling his security systems. Now I ask you. Do you think the person who sells security systems wants no crime. I think not nor do I fault Mr. Richter. Mr. Richter knows I'm write on this topic. THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT WANT REAL CRIME REDUCTION any more than Ford wants to build a car to last 50 years without replacing it. Wake up people.
|
|
|
Post by ljp on Feb 26, 2007 17:32:48 GMT -4
omg I'm dizzy.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Richter on Feb 26, 2007 18:00:51 GMT -4
Same Deputy Guest..........Do not, and have never sold security systems to anyone. I provide hands on old fashion security, and property management.............Every Poll-Lease I know with balls agrees with your thread............Call me I'm looking for allies to fight the corruption in Centreville.
|
|
|
Post by Same Deputy on Feb 26, 2007 18:45:45 GMT -4
Mr. Richter, I do apologize for having my facts wrong about your security business. I was under the impression that you sold security systems but my mistake and I am sorry for that. I was just looking for an example to use and if someone did sell security systems then why would they not want people breaking into homes. They would sell more security systems. This is not deep people The irony of the whole thing is that the government wants crime because it makes money off of it and provides jobs for people like me. So I need criminals in order to provide for my family and have a job. The legislators and judges who were all once LAWYERS help write and pass the laws are the same people (lawyers) who get paid big money to defend the criminal and get him off from the law they passed. It's the joke of all jokes. There is too much money to be made in law enforcement for the government to be a major crime reduction. If people stopped getting arrested for drinking and driving then the lawyers could not make there money to defend them. If drugs were legal then how would a criminal defense lawyer make his living. He would be out of practice. Do you people see where I am going with this. The whole system is set up to fail and never to solve and rid the criminal element because from the governments point of view, it's too d**n profitable in having crime. I love being a cop and I still lock up the criminal and drug user because it is my job but I know that I'm not saving the world. I'm a person who is doing an honest job trying to support there family for a job that I enjoy. Nothing more! It's all a bunch of nonsense. We not going to solve the speeding problem. Why would the government want to have car manufactures make a car that could never travel over the posted speed limit. If that were the case how could the courts and police through out America make there billions of dollars on tickets each year throughout the country. They can't. They want the money. Why do you think the state police are ticket crazy. It makes money and generates revenue for the state. Hello people, wake up. I'm not being negative nor do i have a poor attitude toward my profession. I'm just a realest and calling it like it is. Thats the real deal.
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Feb 26, 2007 19:02:30 GMT -4
OMG Are they teaming up?
|
|