Police raid high school; place kids on floor at gunpoint.


PDA






jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 01:23 PM
I am LIVID at this! If I lived in this town, and they did this to my kids, I'd be organizing to march on the police department -- ARMED. I'd arrest the bunch of them, and the school principal, and turn their sorry a$$e$ over to the FBI for charges. :fire:


http://www.charleston.net/stories/110703/loc_07bust.shtml

Police fail to find drugs in Stratford High raid

BY SEANNA ADCOX
Of The Post and Courier Staff

GOOSE CREEK--Reports of drug deals at Stratford High School led to an early-morning police raid this week in which about 15 officers cordoned off the main hallway to search for marijuana. Several drew their guns but did not use force, police said.

Officers did not arrest anyone during the lockdown at 6:40 a.m. Wednesday.

A police dog sniffed residue on 12 book bags but found no drugs, said Lt. Dave Aarons of the Goose Creek Police Department.

"Several officers did unholster their weapons in a tactical law enforcement approach," he said. "There was no force whatsoever. Everyone was very compliant."

Officers charged a ninth-grader Wednesday afternoon with filing a false police report.

The juvenile said an officer shoved her to the ground during the search, Aarons said. Principal George McCrackin said he, other school officials and the girl's parent reviewed video surveillance tapes and determined she wasn't even in that hall at the time.

McCrackin went to Aarons on Monday with suspicions about marijuana exchanges at the school, based on camera recordings and reports from students and teachers.

"Within the last three weeks, there's been an influx of drug activity. I've been in this business for 34 years, and I've never seen the amount of activity we've experienced recently," said McCrackin, who has been principal at the school since it opened in 1983.

Several weeks ago, a student was arrested trying to pass out between 200 and 300 prescription pills, he said. After school ended Friday, one student threatened another and claimed to have a weapon.

"We're not going to tolerate it," McCrackin said. "We have to ensure the health and safety of our students and staff."Aarons said he watched school surveillance tapes from four days that showed students congregating under cameras, periodically walking into a bathroom with different students and coming out moments later.

The suspected group of about 10 students comes to school in early buses. Tapes show a network of lookouts, Aarons and McCrackin said.

"They're pretty knowledgeable in terms of where to stand. They know where the cameras are. If they stand directly under them, the cameras don't look directly down," Aarons said. "Faculty can view the students from other cameras, but from quite a distance away. They see silhouettes."

Fourteen officers and a police dog sealed off the main hallway Wednesday as about 20 administrators and teachers helped steer other students away, Aarons said. There were 107 students who happened to be in the hallway at the time, he added.

Police told the students to sit on the floor and put their hands out, McCrackin said.

Officers searched only book bags that the police dog responded to, not students, he said.

McCrackin said he believes a lookout alerted the group Wednesday morning by cell phone after seeing police arrive.

Later in the day, two other students who fought in the cafeteria during lunch were charged with disturbing school.

One of those received a five-day suspension, while the other received a 10-day suspension and is recommended for expulsion, he said.

About 2,760 students attend Stratford High, the largest school in Berkeley County and among the largest statewide.

Two officers work in the school full-time. The high school in the county's growing southern end has an academic reputation as one of the Lowcountry's best. It received a score of excellent on state report cards released Wednesday.

McCrackin, who has two children at the school, said the problem mostly stems from students who transferred into the school this year from out of state.

"No school is immune, whether it's one of the best or one of the worst. It's anywhere and everywhere," said Harriett Dangerfield, chairwoman of the Berkeley County School Board. "I'm proud we don't deny those things occur. I'm delighted we're being proactive and not reactive, because it is out there."
:banghead:

If you enjoyed reading about "Police raid high school; place kids on floor at gunpoint." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 01:28 PM
Sounds like that school has a serious drug problem.

Jim, now as to the inflamitory title, where in the aricle does it support your title "POLICE RAID HIGH SCHOOL, PLACE KIDS ON FLOOR AT GUN POINT"?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 01:29 PM
Several drew their guns but did not use force, police said.
"Several officers did unholster their weapons in a tactical law enforcement approach," he said. "There was no force whatsoever. Drawing a firearm on unarmed persons is the ultimate in the threat of force. Drawing a weapon IS force.A police dog sniffed residue on 12 book bags but found no drugs, ...So the entire thing was a great big snafu."Aarons said he watched school surveillance tapes from four days that showed students congregating under cameras, periodically walking into a bathroom with different students and coming out moments later.What if they are merely members of the school LGBT club?I'm delighted we're being proactive and not reactive,If this is not reactive I apparently don't know the meaning of the word.

TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 01:31 PM
jimpeel: "So the entire thing was a great big snafu."

15 officers cordoned off the main hallway to search for marijuana

A police dog sniffed residue on 12 book bags




Well, they didn't search the kids or have the dog sniff the kids, so the drugs could have been on them.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 01:32 PM
So having the firearm unholstered, at low ready, is NOT gunpoint?

I can't believe you are defending this action!

TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 01:35 PM
jimpeel: "So having the firearm unholstered, at low ready, is NOT gunpoint"?

from the article: Officers searched only book bags

Fourteen officers and a police dog sealed off the main hallway Wednesday as about 20 administrators and teachers helped steer other students away

No Jim, it's not. Pointing a firearm at or in the direction of someone is at gun point. By your defenition everytime you're on the firing range or hunting you are holding everyone at gun point...

I'm not defending anything, just clearing up inaccurate statements.

TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 01:40 PM
"Within the last three weeks, there's been an influx of drug activity. I've been in this business for 34 years, and I've never seen the amount of activity we've experienced recently," said McCrackin, who has been principal at the school since it opened in 1983.

Several weeks ago, a student was arrested trying to pass out between 200 and 300 prescription pills, he said. After school ended Friday, one student threatened another and claimed to have a weapon.

school surveillance tapes from four days that showed students congregating under cameras, periodically walking into a bathroom with different students and coming out moments later.

The suspected group of about 10 students comes to school in early buses. Tapes show a network of lookouts

"They're pretty knowledgeable in terms of where to stand. They know where the cameras are. If they stand directly under them, the cameras don't look directly down,"

a lookout alerted the group Wednesday morning by cell phone after seeing police arrive.

Officers charged a ninth-grader Wednesday afternoon with filing a false police report.

The juvenile said an officer shoved her to the ground during the search, Aarons said. Principal George McCrackin said he, other school officials and the girl's parent reviewed video surveillance tapes and determined she wasn't even in that hall at the time.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 02:07 PM
The police and the school admins. did the right thing.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 02:09 PM
Indicators of a SERIOUS drug problem in that school Serious enough to place every kid in the hall under gunpoint -- and YES I do consider that gunpoint!

Your retort is specious.

When I am at the range, my firearm is directed to an area where no person is, or is allowed to be. I am not walking up and down the firing line with my drawn loaded firearm. I am not walking around in a crowd situation with a drawn loaded firearm.

Know the difference.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 02:13 PM
The police and the school admins. did the right thing.Then we are lost. If that is acceptable behavior in a school setting, then the sound of rifle butts banging at the door cannot be far in the future.

What are you hiding in your attic?

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 02:15 PM
I believe a severe problem requires an equal response.

winstonsmith
November 7, 2003, 02:25 PM
There's a drug problem at my school, we're infamous for it. I personally have never imbibed, and my friends haven't either. I can't beleive that some of you would feel it appropriate for armed policeman to brandish their guns and forcibly search. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?:banghead:

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 02:30 PM
Sounds like they knew were they were going...

Thugs get there at 6:40
They were in certain areas
Hiding from camera views

Looks like the officers hit the school at the right time and location. Unfortunately the thugs might have been "tipped off."

Note: This was not a massive school searh/ lockdown.

Augustwest
November 7, 2003, 02:31 PM
"..there's been an influx of drug activity. I've been in this business for 34 years, and I've never seen the amount of activity we've experienced recently..."

From this, it sounds more like the principal's POed that the little buggers are cutting into his action. :D

I'll readily admit that I have a bit of an "authority problem," but cops with unholstered weapons, no matter where they're pointed, is a response way out of balance with trying to take doobies away from a few high school kids.

This is a use of force. A heavy-handed one. And unless there's more information that we're not aware of yet, new cops and a new principal are in order.

JMO

kbr80
November 7, 2003, 02:31 PM
Pulling your weapon, pointed at someone or not, is FORCE.

TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 02:33 PM
Sportcat: "Note: This was not a massive school searh/ lockdown."
Correct, it was one specific hallway (where the problem was observed occuring).

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 02:34 PM
And what would the response have been if one of the kids had pulled out their cell phone, terified, to call their parents?

Teen shot when cop mistaked Three Musketeers bar for firearm (http://ny.yahoo.com/external/wcbs_radio/stories/8790267421.html)

The result?

No charges in candy bar shooting (http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98.n164.a11.html)

Harold Mayo
November 7, 2003, 02:36 PM
I saw some video of this. I have to say that I'm with jimpeel on this. The officers may not have beaten the students, but their aggressive stances and attitudes as well as the unholstered firearms went beyond what really should have been done in this particular situation. I am not so sure, either, that they didn't hold some students at gunpoint or, at least, passed their muzzles over the high school students.

If I were a parent and saw the video that I saw, I would be VERY upset and would take my opinions to the school administration, the police, the mayor, etc. and, ultimately, if I didn't get satisfaction, I'd explore legal action based on whatever taped evidence and personal statements that I could find. It might be totally ineffective in the long run, but it would make things uncomfortable for those who were involved.

I WOULD NOT appreciate the treatment that was given if I were on the receiving end of it.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 02:38 PM
The video was on MSNBC and FOXNews this morning. It will likely be repeated this afternoon.

Those of you at work should call the spouse and have them set the VCR to tape several hours of either so yoiu might catch it and see for yourself what went on.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 02:39 PM
Is this not any different than raiding a drug house? Does not everyone in the drug house have to get down and searched?

Drugs in house
Drugs in the school hallway

Weapons suspected in house
Weapons suspected in hallway

Information/ history says drugs/ possibly weapons in house
Information/ history says drugs/ possibly weaponsin hallway

Tactics used in both cases

Ian
November 7, 2003, 02:40 PM
Indicators of a SERIOUS drug problem in that school
Well, what do you expect when you cram youths into little concrete rooms to do pointless and inane busy work, running from room to room every 50 minutes to the sound of a bell 7 hours a day for 12 years straight?


<sarcasm>

Winstonsmith - This is DRUGS we're talking about! They're such a huge problem that we can't afford niceties like 'innocent until proven guilty.' Besides, it wasn't your school, so why are you complaining? What is it that you're trying to hide, anyway? :scrutiny:

</sarcasm>

TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 02:43 PM
A question Sir. Do you object to the search for drugs period, or just the conduct of the Officers doing the search?

Ian
November 7, 2003, 02:43 PM
Sportcat - Only if they're lucky. Sometimes they're just shot right off the bat. Can't be too careful, you know...and it's not like those druggies are real people with rights to life and liberty or anything. :barf:

cordex
November 7, 2003, 02:46 PM
"Gunpoint" or not, the officers threatened (dare I say, menaced?) the kids with their firearms. Didn't read anything suggesting the kids acted in a manner requiring threat of deadly force.

I know I would get in some serious trouble for drawing my gun in public without a good reason.
Indicators of a SERIOUS drug problem in that school
Oh?
One dealer busted and one threat of force with weapon is a sign of a serious drug problem in a school? *snicker* Someone hasn't seen a public school in about twenty years.

The high school I went to had dogs go through it from time to time (they even found stuff now and again), but the officers stopped short of drawing down on students who happened to be in a given hallway.

A few of the kids there might have been scum of the earth drug dealers. I don't think that excuses the action of the police. Since I disagree with the actions, how about I offer a solution?
Late one night, put up a few new cameras. You know where the activity is supposed to be taking place, so hide them in such a manner that they cover that area. No problem.

It is not conducive to respect of authority (especially the police) when the authorities draw their guns on you just because you're walking in a school hallway.

TheeBadOne
November 7, 2003, 02:55 PM
Not having the benefit of training or experiance Sir, you have missed some glaring waring signs in the article.

cordex
November 7, 2003, 03:06 PM
Not having the benefit of training or experiance Sir, you have missed some glaring waring signs in the article.
*shrug* Perhaps. Wouldn't be the first time.
In that case, I guess my school must have had a "serious drug problem" too.

Thankfully, the local police didn't resort to the same methods these have.

HankB
November 7, 2003, 03:13 PM
jimpeel: "So having the firearm unholstered, at low ready, is NOT gunpoint"? No Jim, it's not. Hmmm . . . I'm licensed to carry a concealed firearm. If I'm in contact with someone who annoys me and I draw my sidearm, I'm in deep trouble, REGARDLESS of whether or not I point it at the annoying party. "Brandishing" is probably the least of the charges I'd face.

Mike Irwin
November 7, 2003, 03:18 PM
Massive levels of violence surround the drug trade in this nation, and MUCH of it is perpetrated by people under 20 years old.

In the past year in Washington, DC, there have been, IIRC, over a dozen drug-related shootings in which the shooters have been under the age of 18.

This ain't Mayberry anymore.

Oleg Volk
November 7, 2003, 03:23 PM
Home schooling sounds better and better. Pity that the mere mention of drugs makes some people side with the government, right or wrong. The term "drug dealer" makes some people want to kill them, a PR success which the USSR would have envied...even their citizens weren't eager to kill people who provided desired goods through the "black" free market. Drug dealers who commit other crimes (such as murder) are obviously no good, but I would think violence would be as bad for that business as for any other, so I doubt that real drug dealers act as the TV variety does. TV jut doesn't have a good record when it comes to accuracy.

Master Blaster
November 7, 2003, 03:24 PM
The suspected group of about 10 students comes to school in early buses. Tapes show a network of lookouts, Aarons and McCrackin said.

Arrive early say 10 minutes before the bus arrives, or have the police board the bus before it gets to the school, hard for a lookout to be effective if this is done right.
Haul the 10 suspects into the office as soon as they arrive and search their bookbags lockers and persons. Have a police officer present.

You dont conduct a swat raid on a school, and point loaded guns willy nilly, over a couple of suspected doobers.

If this happened at my children's school I would be requesting that the pricipal be retired at the next schoolboard meeting.

Drugs should not be tollerated at school, but neither should Gestapo tactics.

Since its obvious who the providers are only they should be subjected to a search and appropriate action.

I guess that there are some on this board who would drop a mortar round on the school and then have an army repell out of helicopters onto the roof.
over suspected weed sales.
:barf: :scrutiny:

Mike Irwin
November 7, 2003, 03:25 PM
That's just it, Master, there's NO indication of guns being pointed "willy nilly..."

ballistic gelatin
November 7, 2003, 03:35 PM
When I was in school....if a group of cops with guns drawn came erupting into both ends of said hallway. I would hi-tail-it outta' there through a window or any other exit. Remove myself from the threat. That's how I feel when I read the article, threatened that is.

Augustwest
November 7, 2003, 03:40 PM
Massive levels of violence surround the drug trade in this nation...

Little bit OT, but I hope folks realize that the reason the drug trade is violent is because it's illegal.

Just like the booze trade under Capone and his ilk was violent.

Generalizing a little bit, but it isn't drugs that create violence, it's bad people and bad laws.

And the likelihood of a high school kid shooting a cop so that he doesn't get nailed for a dime bag, or whatever they're selling these days? Nilish, I bet.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 03:45 PM
Drugs in house
Drugs in the school hallway

Weapons suspected in house
Weapons suspected in hallway

Information/ history says drugs/ possibly weapons in house
Information/ history says drugs/ possibly weaponsin hallway
Most of the below also met your criteria.

The militarization of the police?
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54886

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=36699

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25454

Cops raid wrong home
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29414

The problem with no-knocks and "informants"
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25771

Grandfather of 14 shot to death
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=34617

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23817

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32492

What if I shoot an agent or cop.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23807

Denver Officer Loses Wages for Raid
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=53707

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=33489

Innocent Man Dies in Police Blunder
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39714

The Donald Scott murder
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=34071

Is Government Declaring War on Citizens?
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79831

Trooper's gun accidentally fires during drug search
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=97220

(OH) Police Raid Wrong Address Looking For Robbery Suspect
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=77571

(CA) SWAT team kills 11-yr old boy
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39202

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28955

Cobb cops cuff wrong man; gun fired by mistake
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79471

Police officer accidentally shot to death by SWAT team during raid
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=77304

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=76196

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=74971

BATF RAID: ANOTHER DEATH
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54488

SWAT accidental discharge
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49773

(MN) Grand Rapids teacher files suit claiming attack by SWAT team
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38728

Orlando hostage shot by police sniper
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28139

Do you still want cops with drawn firearms running through your child's school?

Mike Irwin
November 7, 2003, 03:46 PM
"And the likelihood of a high school kid shooting a cop so that he doesn't get nailed for a dime bag, or whatever they're selling these days?"

Two or three years ago in DC that exact thing happened.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 03:49 PM
Where's does it say the cops went "running through the school?"

Also, it is not like the cops were there for their health - they were asked to come in and take of a drug and violence issue.

submin
November 7, 2003, 03:54 PM
How much more freedom are we going to surrender to this stupid ‘war on drugs?’ I find it hard to believe that this is anything more than a show of force and mental-conditioning on the part of the police. The type of violence that the police expected/feared(?), in this case, is a result of drug laws, not drugs themselves. Land of the free, home of the brave my a$$.

What ever happened to good police work? Could not these 10 young citizens have been arrested as they got off the bus or at the bus stop?

No. This was a show of force. To get them off school property wouldn’t achieve the desired effect, which I believe, was to terrify the student body and justify higher departmental funding.

How much is enough for the war on drugs? Another $100 billion (much of which going in the pockets of dealers/financiers of the trade)? The RKBA? Personal property rights? In my opinion, which, admittedly doesn’t carry much weight, we reached the point of diminishing returns on day one.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 03:54 PM
A question Sir. Do you object to the search for drugs period, or just the conduct of the Officers doing the search?Both. Warrantless searches are not a component of the age of the suspect. The Fourth Amendment covers all Americans from birth.

The actions of the officers were inappropriate at best; and terroristic at the worst.

Jonesy9
November 7, 2003, 03:55 PM
marijuana? that's nuts. glad no one got accidently shot.

Augustwest
November 7, 2003, 03:57 PM
Two or three years ago in DC that exact thing happened.

In a roomfull of witnesses, with other cops around to avenge their fallen comrade?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 03:59 PM
Prohibition of the twenties gave us the violence we enjoy today. The Mafia, mob, gangs -- take your choice of vernacular -- were born of prohibition and they live with us today.

Prohibition was a failure then and it is a failure now. The only difference is that people then were sensible enough to admit they were wrong.

Prohibition breeds violence -- PERIOD!

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 03:59 PM
Warrantless search??? Did you not read about the problems they were having at the school?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:01 PM
Warrantless search??? Did you not read about the problems they were having at the school?Oops! I forgot. No warrant needed if the kids are on government property where all civil and Constitutional rights are suspended.

My bad.

winstonsmith
November 7, 2003, 04:02 PM
If you can't blame guns for killing, then you can't blame violence on drugs. Or rap music, or tv, or video games, or anything.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 04:03 PM
Do you mean warrantless... not having a warrant, or

warrantless... nothing "warranted" a search

ballistic gelatin
November 7, 2003, 04:05 PM
Heck, I bet the newspaper even had a pic of the Chief of Police standing in the hall next to one of the K-9 units. Headline could read, "POLICE DRUG RAID YIELDS POSITIVE RESULTS"

Baba Louie
November 7, 2003, 04:05 PM
Force Continuum?

Why "unholster" anything for a group of (reading between the lines here) compliant teenagers unless it was to emphasize immeditate potential for use of handguns by Police, thus immediate compliance?

Drugs are a problem in schools.

A Police State is a problem anywhere.

But if you're going to prohibit something you gotta get the necessary enforcement tools and use em.

Too bad they didn't find anything.

Makes me wonder if any other crimes were committed in the town during the same time frame that might have been a better use of Police Agency.

But I'm sure that those kids learned a lesson or three that day.
1. Something about trusting Law enforcement officers.
2. There's ways to beat any system
3. Big brother is definitely a part of your life from this point on.

Adios

Mike Irwin
November 7, 2003, 04:05 PM
"In a roomfull of witnesses, with other cops around to avenge their fallen comrade?"

And that sort of situation has stopped OTHER drug dealers/users from opening fire in similar situations how?

Oh, wait, it hasn't.


Face it, folks.

The Ritchie Cunningham days of cute, freshfaced students taking apples to the teacher are OVER.

Some of these little ????s are far more violent than their older cohorts.


As for warrantless searches, I'm not sure, but I seem to recall a Supreme Court ruling some years ago that allows locker searches sans warrants as long as a school administrator gives permission (guardian ad litem, or something like that), and also gives police and school administrators BROAD discretionary & search powers while the students are on school property.

submin
November 7, 2003, 04:07 PM
Prohibition was a failure then and it is a failure now. The only difference is that people then were sensible enough to admit they were wrong.

Prohibition breeds violence

Thumbs up to you, sir.

TheEgg
November 7, 2003, 04:09 PM
Jack Booted thugs on a mission. :barf:

Mike Irwin
November 7, 2003, 04:11 PM
Good overview page...

http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/sa2lk13.htm


Interesting page...

http://www.landmarkcases.org/newjersey/compare.html

Oleg Volk
November 7, 2003, 04:13 PM
As for warrantless searches, I'm not sure, but I seem to recall a Supreme Court ruling some years ago that allows locker searches sans warrants as long as a school administrator gives permission (guardian ad litem, or something like that), and also gives police and school administrators BROAD discretionary & search powers while the students are on school property.

May be legal but still wrong. Another argument for home schooling.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:14 PM
http://civilliberty.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.newwestpolice.org/peel.html

SIR ROBERT PEEL'S NINE PRINCIPLES

The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.The courts have absolved the police of this function and the police have willing acceded to it.

The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.

More and more the public is becoming more disapproving of the actions of the police as the laws creep further and further into everyone's lives.

Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observance of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.

The problem is that there are more and more prior restraint laws that make nearly everyone a criminal and take to task those who are in no way in favor of the violation of the law.

The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.


Note this principal especially as it regards this thread.

Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.

The problem is that the police are now driven by public opinion to the extent that they are unable to effectively enforce the laws.

Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient.

Hah!

Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

The problem here is that the police, through militarization of the forces, have forgotten their roots.

Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.

The police these days act in a manner that jumps to a conclusion of guilt of the accused rather than acting in the interest of justice. The attitude of "everyone is guilty of something" is becoming pervasive.

The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.

This is the exact opposite of the showboating that goes on today; Waco being the best example.

Augustwest
November 7, 2003, 04:18 PM
And that sort of situation has stopped OTHER drug dealers/users from opening fire in similar situations how?

Dunno, I'm kinda sheltered, but I've never heard of a case of a pothead shooting a cop in a room full of people with other cops around. I'm willing to be corrected about that, but I've never heard of it.

but I seem to recall a Supreme Court ruling some years ago that allows locker searches sans warrants as long as a school administrator gives permission (guardian ad litem, or something like that), and also gives police and school administrators BROAD discretionary & search powers while the students are on school property.

The state compells kids to show up to get indoctr...er...educated, and when they comply, the courts have decided that they forfeit their rights for having done so. Makes as much sense to me as, say, Miller or Dred Scott.

People's hysterical fears of guns, drugs, or different looking people don't justify usurpation of their rights, whether a few political appointees in robes think so or not.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:20 PM
Where's does it say the cops went "running through the school?"Nowhere. I was not quoting the story. I was posing a question.

Perhaps one of the below would suffice:

Do you still want cops with drawn firearms wandering through your child's school?

Do you still want cops with drawn firearms walking through your child's school?

Do you still want cops with drawn firearms meandering through your child's school?

Do you still want cops with drawn firearms roaming through your child's school?

Do you still want cops with drawn firearms ambulating through your child's school?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:23 PM
If you can't blame guns for killing, then you can't blame violence on drugs. Or rap music, or tv, or video games, or anything.I am not blaming drugs for violence. I am blaming the drug trade for the violence that is born of prohibition.

Carlos
November 7, 2003, 04:23 PM
I just saw the video and my take is that cops' conduct was outrageous.

In a facility, locked down, no escape, and running around with weapons drawn like they're raiding the crack house down the street.

I'm with you on this one, Jimpeel, all the way. Morons.

Heads need to roll.

Pilgrim
November 7, 2003, 04:24 PM
I watched the video. There was an officer with a "High-and-Tight" haircut who continually walked about with his weapon aimed at students.

I think the episode was a bit heavy handed and designed to intimidate.

It will be interesting to see if the principal keeps his job for being so supportive of the evolution.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 04:24 PM
Jim,

The cops were in a specific hallway, with a specific mission, and some had guns drawn.

As I stated earlier, this was not a campus-wide "assualt.":rolleyes:

I can almost 100% guarantee that no guns were drawn until they reached the hall.

cordex
November 7, 2003, 04:25 PM
Jim,
More to the point:
"Do you want police drawing their firearms in school around children without cause at all?"

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 04:25 PM
Video link somewhere?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:30 PM
Do you mean warrantless... not having a warrant, or

warrantless... nothing "warranted" a searchThe cops had no lawfully issued warrant to search these kid's belongings; but the courts have held that none is needed on school property so the kids surrender their rights at the schoolhouse door -- ALL OF THEIR RIGHTS.

To take a group of people into custody on the off chance there might be a perpetrator among them is antithetical to the Constitution as written. The problem is too many people ignore the Constitution as written and simply use their own interpretation.

Is this any different than the Nazis herding people on the street aside in search of anyone who might possibly be a Jew?

Remember this: Hitler never did anything that was against the law.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:35 PM
I can almost 100% guarantee that no guns were drawn until they reached the hall.And that is significant ... how? Read the posts of those who have seen the video.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 04:36 PM
And at Columbine a few years ago... none of those innocent kids should have been forced to leave the building with their hands-up and searched?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:38 PM
Jim,
More to the point:
"Do you want police drawing their firearms in school around children without cause at all?"Ambiguous question. Please post something more specfic.

This sounds like you think I want the cops walking into any school they happen to enter with their firearms at low ready even if it is to deliver their child's absence note.

I know you mean otherwise but don't know what otherwise you mean.

J

Augustwest
November 7, 2003, 04:41 PM
And at Columbine a few years ago... none of those innocent kids should have been forced to leave the building with their hands-up and searched?

Since when do we equate kids selling pot with mass murder?

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:42 PM
And at Columbine a few years ago... none of those innocent kids should have been forced to leave the building with their hands-up and searched?Specious post.

Columbine was so very different I don't know where to begin.

At Columbine, there were bullets in the air.

The cops didn't know who was doing the shooting nor who their cohorts were.

The cops quite possibly shot Daniel Rohrbaugh to death by accident thinking he was one of the shooters. That case is still pending.

cordex
November 7, 2003, 04:42 PM
sportcat,
You don't see a difference between active shooters and some people who might have some illegal plant matter in their backpack?

FYI,
http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2003/11/07/image582497x.jpg
Video can be found here, I think:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/07/national/main582492.shtml

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:47 PM
The officer at the left of the above picture has his firearm pointed at one of the students. The two at center rear and center near have theirs at low ready.

So when I say "gunpoint" I mean "GUNPOINT". Thank you officer left.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 04:48 PM
I have tried to do my duty to monitor and respond to a thread I started. I have to go for several hours to do work around here but I will be back to counter jibes and answer questions later. Not ducking the issue.

J

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 04:52 PM
Jim,

Sir, you are correct - Officer Left has a drawn weapon pointed at a student. Perhaps Officer Left should be reprimanded? Let's not bash all cops and law enforcement for this incident.

Also, could possibly some of the student's actions warrant an officer to suspect something, and cause them to draw their weapons. Could be.

Mike Irwin
November 7, 2003, 04:53 PM
"but the courts have held that none is needed on school property so the kids surrender their rights at the schoolhouse door -- ALL OF THEIR RIGHTS."


WRONG.

There are limitations on the exercise of rights, but students are not fully stripped of their rights. You know that.


Since you're so agrieved by all of this, what have you done today to CHANGE what you perceive to be the wrongs committed?

cordex
November 7, 2003, 05:00 PM
Since you're so agrieved by all of this, what have you done today to CHANGE what you perceive to be the wrongs committed?
For one, he's tried to convince a few pseudo-statists on an online forum.
:)

Oleg Volk
November 7, 2003, 05:03 PM
Someday (I can only hope), the images like the one above would be viewed the same way that pictures of OGPU or NKVD actions are now viewed in Russia. I can only wonder what would be reaction of a parent who'd walk in on this scene and find someone holding his kid at gunpoint. I know my first reaction would be to try to hit the "off switch" inside the perpetrator's head.

KMKeller
November 7, 2003, 05:13 PM
I watched the video. I saw a kid being spun and thrown to the ground at gunpoint. Virtually every officer save those in the middle of the hall, had his weapon trained on the kids. This is wrong. VERY wrong.

cordex
November 7, 2003, 05:16 PM
Seems like not too many people who actually watch the video choose to defend the actions of the police ...

2dogs
November 7, 2003, 05:18 PM
Someday (I can only hope), the images like the one above would be viewed the same way that pictures of OGPU or NKVD actions are now viewed in Russia

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe :uhoh:

Sergeant Bob
November 7, 2003, 05:21 PM
What if some of you were at work at the office and a bunch of cops came in, put you all on the floor with weapons drawn "at ready", pointed them at a couple of you, and searched through everyone's personal belongings looking for drugs (finding none, by the way)? OK with that?

Saw the video, followed by a police spokesman who said (loosely) "The officers had their weapons drawn at "low ready" in case any of the students made an "unfornate decision" to attack the officers, or attempt to escape".

Bill Hook
November 7, 2003, 05:23 PM
The Barney Fifes of the world are moving up from dogs to kids. :rolleyes:


"The officers had their weapons drawn at "low ready" in case any of the students made an "unfornate decision" to attack the officers, or attempt to escape".

"Sorry, Mrs. Smith, but Billy was shot trying to escape from school today." :D

:rolleyes: :barf:

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 05:24 PM
Not only were the officers looking for drugs, but the school recently had reports of WEAPONS!!!

Gee, wouldn't you want your weapon handy if you were searching someone who might have a weapon on them?

Oleg Volk
November 7, 2003, 05:25 PM
I just keep wondering how many people who viewed this video would choose to carry a backup chambered for 7.62x25 Tokarev from now on. Good people (including many LEOs on this forum) are likely to end up taking flak for the bad hominids shown in this view.

As for "weapons"., I've taught at colleges where students brought in swords, crossbows and (probably) firearms...didn't bother anyone, students or instructors. And if a specific person was a real threat, then why not go after that individual instead of victimizing everyone.

Bill Hook
November 7, 2003, 05:25 PM
WEAPONS!!!

Boxcutters and fingernail clippers??? Those are considered "weapons" now.

:rolleyes:

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 05:27 PM
Several weeks ago, a student was arrested trying to pass out between 200 and 300 prescription pills, he said. After school ended Friday, one student threatened another and claimed to have a weapon

Yes, weapons.

Bill Hook
November 7, 2003, 05:28 PM
I just keep wondering how many people who viewed this video would choose to carry a backup chambered for 7.62x25 Tokarev from now on.

I'm getting another CZ-52 now, so I can beat up my current one w/ hot Czech SMG loads for criminals, legal or extra-legal.

saddenedcitizen
November 7, 2003, 05:29 PM
After watching the clip -

Sorry but those officers are ready to fire and YES they
they did muzzle sweep several students.

You try that same tactic ANYWHERE with CCW and say
you were simply 'unsure' of the situation you were in
and see where you wind up
(hint - broke and behind bars).

But I forgot - these are highly trained professionals who
never have AD's (yeah, right)

Many of them are elitists and bullies and now they can
bully LEGALLY. Above the law and can tell YOU to do
whatever they want.

Too much 'enthusiasm' and 'military' leaning/training.

And no guns on school property - well that little 'inconvenience'
doesn't apply to them (along with a host of other 'inconveniences')

As to another poster - yes, they can search lockers (they are
usually part of the building but if I can prevent &/or intervene
in it, I'll be da**ed if I'll let them search my kids PERSONAL
property (clothing/backpack etc) without a warrant and a fight.
(one of the reasons I've stopped flying commercial - assumed
guilty and subject to INTRUSIVE searches at the whim of some
lifetime termination/suit/ proof federal employee - try resoning
with one sometime)

It appears that this is part of conditioning - get the next
used to/comfortable with being watched/searched/scanned
followed/tracked CONTINUOUSLY with no recourse
and no escape.

4th Ammendment ?? What's that ??

&DIETY help us !!!

Bill Hook
November 7, 2003, 05:29 PM
a weapon

What kind? Revlon or Trim. :neener:

geekWithA.45
November 7, 2003, 05:30 PM
After Having viewed the video, all I've got to say is:

This is unnacceptable.

Displaying this level of force for a couple of high school pot dealers is entirely over the top.

I'm not really willing to contemplate as valid the "officer's safety" argument, because that can be used to justify any level of force, in any situation.

Absent any direct opposition, when this much force is thrown around by the state, it has only one purpose:

To cow the populace into compliance.

We cannot accept this.

This is SO WRONG I CAN'T EVEN BEGIN TO TALK ABOUT IT.

What have they achieved with this raid?

Well, they didn't catch any pot dealers, and even if they did, that end would not be justified by the means.

What they did succeed at is scaring the crap out of a lot of kids, and taught them that the power the state holds over them is limitless.


Shame on everyone involved for their bad judgement.

pdog
November 7, 2003, 05:36 PM
but we don't live in a police state.... yet?

gun-fucious
November 7, 2003, 05:40 PM
i wonder what the result would be from citizens
"raiding" a police social party with drug sniffing dogs

i would bet more than some residue alerts

hops
November 7, 2003, 05:48 PM
Wow!

ojibweindian
November 7, 2003, 05:51 PM
Hey Sportscat

Got any kids? Would you like them to have been there during that raid?

Tell you what, next time someone sweeps you with their muzzle at the range, don't get bent out of shape, just tell yourself the weapon was at "low ready".

Oh, btw, welcome to our brave, new world...

Balog
November 7, 2003, 05:51 PM
Not only were the officers looking for drugs, but the school recently had reports of WEAPONS!!!


If you get pulled over for speeding in a neighborhood where it had been reported that someone might have a weapon, would you want the cop to approach your window with his gun pointed at your head?
Let's face it, anytime a cop does anything there is a chance weapons will be present.

Splat Shot
November 7, 2003, 05:55 PM
This whole thing could have gone totally out of control by one "furtive movement" of a student reaching in his pocket or picking up a cell phone. I can see it now, student goes into a pocket, cop shoots him, other cops panic (yes, cops do panic), swing around and start firing, people screaming and running.

Also reminds me of a poll taken a while back, I think with cops and/or the military on what they would do if ordered to do something they thought morally wrong. Some or many said they would disobey orders and refuse to do such a thing. Yeah right - wonder how many refused to go on this little raid?

Edited to note that I am not anti cop. I have very close relatives that are on the force but this went way over the line.

rock jock
November 7, 2003, 05:55 PM
Raid? Yes. Drawn weapons? Not unless a reasonable person would perceive a threat.

gun-fucious
November 7, 2003, 05:55 PM
nice
http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=590810

at least 2 guns are on the kid

the guy on the left is advancing fast while targeting

in 1 second he moves 10 feet

Carlos
November 7, 2003, 05:57 PM
The Barney Fifes of the world are moving up from dogs to kids.

Ain't that the truth. The more I think about it, the more it really pisses me off.
:fire:

Balog
November 7, 2003, 05:59 PM
Yeah right - wonder how many refused to go on this little raid?

I wonder how many had a problem with it? M*****F******* brownshirt wannabe's. I'd hope they got punished, but our friend Lon Horiuchi kinda ruined my hopes in that area :barf:

Bill Hook
November 7, 2003, 05:59 PM
Where have all the JBT apologists gone? :neener:

Balog
November 7, 2003, 06:05 PM
Must have watched the video.

Thufer
November 7, 2003, 06:08 PM
If you upholster your weapon you intend to use it. Those 15 police officers were intending to use their weapons on those students over the possible possession and sale of small amounts of marijuana. Why is our Government so afraid of its citizens that they train the police force to draw their weapons on anyone including children, innocent or not?

Perhaps the Government is conditioning the police not to trust the people they are suppose to be protecting and at the same time conditioning the future generations of America to believe that the Government has all the power and having a police officer pointing a gun at you is perfectly normal.

DO NOT TRUST THE GOVERNMENT OR LAW ENFORCMENT OFFICERS, FOR THEY DO NOT TRUST YOU!

Cal4D4
November 7, 2003, 06:19 PM
107 kids held at gun point, maybe one or two arrested (which is not the same as charged, prosecuted or convicted). I want a refund. Another generation fearing the police and learning how to work around them. Job well done. When the cases against those kids arrested falls apart, what have you created?

Ed Brunner
November 7, 2003, 06:30 PM
Police work is tough. A police person cannot respect all of the rights of all of the people all of the time. If he/she were required to respect all rights, it would be dangerous to be a police person and nobody would want to do it and then where would we be?
We would be up to our eyeballs in crime.

Parker Dean
November 7, 2003, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by Ed Brunner
Police work is tough. A police person cannot respect all of the rights of all of the people all of the time. If he/she were required to respect all rights, it would be dangerous to be a police person and nobody would want to do it and then where would we be?


OH! Well that makes it OK then. Sorry to have troubled anyone. Carry on!

moa
November 7, 2003, 06:45 PM
We would not be up to our eyeballs in crime for long. Because, soon I bet, we would be up to our eyeballs with dead criminals.

I would rather deal with common criminals than heavily armed goons or idiots with police powers directed by the State. The world has been there and done that repeatedly, and it is not a pretty sight.

kbr80
November 7, 2003, 06:55 PM
How do we go about putting a stop to these "powers that be" abusing their authority.

And dont say, write your congress critters, newspapers and such. That has been done to death, with no results. What is a real answer to stopping this nation from becoming a Police State. Because, more than a few stones have already paved the road towards that destination.

Ed Brunner
November 7, 2003, 07:05 PM
How do we go about putting a stop to these "powers that be" abusing their authority

History shows that when we collectively hire someone to to work for us, we often end up working for them. A number of examples come readily to mind such as government, schools and law enforcement.

What is the answer? Don't say we have to move to a cave. That is where it all started. The only answer is to insist that everyone that we hire remembers who is working for whom.

kbr80
November 7, 2003, 07:40 PM
The only answer is to insist that everyone that we hire remembers who is working for whom.

Sounds good in theory, but it wont work. Government, and all levels, has evolved into its own animal. NO longer are the people in charge. We see that everyday. We The People no longer means what our founding fathers intended. This incident at this school is just one example out of many that proves that. Damned if I know how to make a change. All I do know about this it writing congress critters, mayors, police depts, and such, even marching on capitols, police depts and such, wont do a damn thing. We need some innovative, take the bull by the horns ideas.

pdog
November 7, 2003, 07:45 PM
Well I am not a utopian, but I have real hope for the free state project.
Maybe libertarian ideas can work?
Might turn the corner for the rest of the country.
High hopes
pdog

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 07:48 PM
WRONG.

There are limitations on the exercise of rights, but students are not fully stripped of their rights. You know that.
Okay, let's just go through their "rights" and see. What I say here is generalized commentary not this school specifically. Remember, you are the one who posted the links to http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/envrnmnt/drugfree/sa2lk13.htm and http://www.landmarkcases.org/newjersey/compare.html both of which go to show that I am correct.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The kids were disallowed a Christian Club at school and had to take their meeting to the flagpole in the mornings. When the courts ruled that the club could be in the school as long as the school was not an active participant, the school said there could be no clubs after school at all.

The courts have ruled that the school newspaper, operated by students, can be censored by the school administration.

Kids at school are limited to the number who can congregate in one place.

Student petitions to school administrations are regularly ignored.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Need I say anything on this one?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Does not apply; unless you want to count the two uniformed police officers stationed at the school during school hours.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Kids, their lockers, their bookbags, and their vehicles are regularly searched at school by serruptisious means such as dogs. Refusal to allow a physical search after a dog "hit" is cause for suspension.

Kids have been stripped and inspected for sexual abuse at five-years-old by school authorities.

Female students have been given exams for sexual abuse without their, or their parents', permission.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Refusal to allow a physical search after a dog "hit" is cause for suspension.

Schools are immune to due process regularly throwing kids out of school for the slightest infraction under "zero-tolerance".

Schools can confiscate any property from students they feel is in violation of school guidelines without compensation.

Zero-tolerance removes any modicum of fairness, due process or the brains to employ either..


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Kids get no trial, no hearing. They just get thrown out.

They have no right to face their accusers in any action or have witnesses in their favor.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

The school administration is the judge, jury, and executioner.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Does not apply


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

What good is this one to the kids when the rest have already been removed?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Does not apply

submin
November 7, 2003, 07:48 PM
How do we go about putting a stop to these "powers that be" abusing their authority.

State-funded thugs to control a state mandated indoctrination camp. This world has gone to he77 in a handbag.

One thing is for sure. The Federal, State, and local governments will be pouring over before/during/after stats to find a better way to get even more shock value out of future events. I see nothing to indicate a government more responsive to the wishes of the people. Only the preservation of power to the elite is of concern.

21st century slaves.

The third world has more freedom than we do.

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 07:55 PM
Since you're so agrieved by all of this, what have you done today to CHANGE what you perceive to be the wrongs committed?I shouted this story from The High Road treetops; and was met with opposition from folks like you who, once they viewed the video, came to my side of the ledger. You are fast becoming a one man minority.

I will be calling the police department there and the school and expressing my displeasure. There's not much else I can do short of getting some legislator to pass a law against this sort of abuse.

toro
November 7, 2003, 08:03 PM
Well, I saw the tape and the police officers were pointing the guns at the students. They handcuffed some innocent students, and treated them as if they were criminals. I can tell you, I would not put up with a police force who went into the schools and did this kind of insane stunt.

You know this additude of the police officer going home at night at the expense of one of your children's lives is just as far out as anything I have ever heard. How about all the Negligent discharges I have heard about over the years. Sounds to me like this police force is going to get a very large lawsuit, because the principal is already saying he had no idea the police would draw their guns.


Mrs. Toro



_________________________________________
2 Chronicles 7:3
And when all the children of Israel saw the fire came down, and the glory of the Lord upon the house, (that Solomon had built) they bowed themselves with their faces to the gound upon the pavement, and worshipped, and praised the Lord, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth forever.

Detachment Charlie
November 7, 2003, 08:04 PM
I saw the video this morning.
The scenes have shaken me all day. Ladies and gentlemen, this outraged me.
The actions of the police are absolutely indefensable.
Reading this thread from the start has left me shocked as well. I can not understand how any American can even attempt to justify what the police did at that school. By their actions the police have demeaned not only themselves, but the law and our society as well.
Sadly, there are those among us without honor.

Baba Louie
November 7, 2003, 08:12 PM
Maybe several good attorneys are already at work on this... not in the hopes to break the bank... but in hopes to recapture what little "Liberty" and civil rights (I really don't like those words), Human Rights our society wants, needs and should be clamoring for... Specific Performance...

Who's at fault?

School administrators for calling the show?
School Board for their Zero Tolerance?
Police Officers for responding with enthusiasm and maybe a bit of "Tough Love" or "Scared Straight" attitude? (and drawn handguns)
Police Admin for allowing this from their "professional" staff.
City or County fathers?
Kids for dealing drugs? (There's a new one)

And what about that small fact that NOTHING WAS FOUND???

"Woops... Sorry... Go to class kids, learn something useful in school today. We'll be back at some point in the future, you can bet on it. You're all guilty of something."

Gonna be a bunch of P.O.'d parents talking long and loud to their attorneys, you can bet.

sigh

Home Schooling anyone?

Adios

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 08:13 PM
Gee, wouldn't you want your weapon handy if you were searching someone who might have a weapon on them?School administrators see a weapon in every hand. They make up more weapons than exist in real life.

Would the following "weapon" in school require the use of a defensive Glock?

Girl Suspended for Tweety Chain

AUSTELL, Ga. (AP) -- A sixth-grader has been suspended for 10 days because the 10-inch chain on her Tweety bird wallet violates the school district's zero-tolerance weapons policy.

Ashley Smith, an 11-year-old student at Garrett Middle School in suburban Atlanta, received the maximum punishment Tuesday. The chain connects her wallet to her key rings.

''It's only a little chain, and I don't think it can really hurt anyone,'' said Ashley, who maintains her own Tweety Web site.

Because her suspension is ''short-term,'' Ashley cannot appeal, assistant superintendent Tony Arasi said. School officials said Ashley and her parents, Raymond and Carmen Smith, knew chains were banned.
Smith said the suspension ''lacks common sense.''

''A little piece of chain is not a deadly weapon,'' he said.

At the beginning of the school year, students were shown samples of items they could not bring to school. Ashley said she saw a chain about 2 feet long and much thicker than the chain on her wallet.

''They shouldn't have jumped to immediately suspend her,'' said Gerry Weber, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Georgia chapter. He called the suspension ''zero-tolerance gone awry.''

The ACLU successfully represented Atlanta student Rose Marie Spearman in 1994 after she was charged with criminal weapons possession for bringing African tribal knives to school for extra credit.

LINK IS NOW DEAD

_AP-NY-09-28-00 1344EDT&lt; _
09/28/2000 http://www.newsday.com/ap/text/national/ap705.htm

GOOD LINK (http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/09/28/wallet.suspension.02/index.html)

http://www.wxia.com/art/tempart/news/2000/10/ashley_chain_140.jpg http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/09/28/wallet.suspension.02/story.mother.tweety.jpg

jimpeel
November 7, 2003, 08:21 PM
http://www.jpfo.org/athens.htm

Baba Louie
November 7, 2003, 08:25 PM
I pray to the heavens above that every Police Agency and School District in this country has seen this video repeatedly and discussed what to do and what not to do should they ever get a similar call.

It might be worth visiting or writing to your local dept to discuss this with the local Precinct Capt or Area Commander.

It might also be a good idea for those who still have kids in Public Schools to set up an appointment with your local HS Dean, Principal or Vice Principal for the same discussion. Bring a copy of the link with you for their edification in case they're unaware of its existance.

It's definitely worth a conversation with your school aged kids.... just a print out of all the posts here should give them something to mull over and another chance for you to review their understanding of our Constitutional duties.

Adios

Pilgrim
November 7, 2003, 08:39 PM
This whole thing could have gone totally out of control by one "furtive movement" of a student reaching in his pocket or picking up a cell phone. I can see it now, student goes into a pocket, cop shoots him, other cops panic (yes, cops do panic), swing around and start firing, people screaming and running.

Ahhh, don't tell me. Let me guess. "Wounded Knee?"

Pilgrim

Intune
November 7, 2003, 09:10 PM
Some of you people responding to this thread scare me. You scare me because the Thin Blue Line has become a Thick Blue blindfold. You scare me because I can’t recognize you in public and know you for the danger you are. White, Black, Longhair, Tight Whitewalls? Your appearance can vary but your totalitarian message remains the same. Too bad the uniform doesn’t have the power to shame you. Yeah, you’d let this happen to YOUR kid. Disingenuous is the kindest way I can put it. Like you wouldn’t be talking to Officer Fife to let your angel go on that dime bag. Brotherhood. Yeah, right. The drugs are so prevalent in that school that they found um, they found, oh, they found… ZILCH, NADA, NOTHING! The dogs pinged on the residue… Ouch, S T R E T C H! They remind me of early man in the scene from 2001, A Space Oddessy. One gets going and they all begin grunting and pounding their chests. Sad. Maybe kids is all they can handle. Cats, each and every one of them. Read into the word cats what you will, that’s prob how I meant it. Shameful.

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 09:41 PM
I bet if your kid attended this school, but was not in the hall, you'd be happy the cops showed up.

Carlos
November 7, 2003, 09:48 PM
Nonsense.

I'd still be pissed. Getting to watch this video for the second time, after the commercial. :(

:cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss: :cuss:

George McCracken should be looking for a new job, out of the public arena. He sounds like a real dummy.

I'd like to get a complete copy of that video, either on tape or hard disk.

Nightfall
November 7, 2003, 09:57 PM
I feel a great sadness for this nation that we have reached a point where some consider it acceptable for cops to point guns at children over the mere suspicion of possessing a plant. :(

pdog
November 7, 2003, 10:09 PM
But like the kitty said its all for your children. Got to keep them safe from those nasty plants.

O.F.Fascist
November 7, 2003, 10:26 PM
Yep there is a definate drug problem at that school. I think the Principle must be on crack, or actually what drugs are the ones that cause paranoid delusions?

That was a complete misuse of manpower and definately a case of unfair search.

If you suspect there are a few guys dealing drugs, then you go search them. If you dont know who they are then you do some ????ing police work and find it out first, you dont line everyone up and search them one at a time.

Thats ????ing rediculous.

All this bull???? because the principle suspected that some kid had some marijuana.

Waitone
November 7, 2003, 10:38 PM
A few random thoughts in no particular order

--The principal saw an influx of badguys dating back 3 weeks so his solution to a growing problem is a raid.

--Was any warrant presented?

--What was the source of info of guns the possession of students. One could only justify pulling a sidearm only if there was a presumption of armed resistance. If there was the presumption of armed resistance why did they not bring in the heavy SWAT unit and really put on a show.

--Looks to me like the raid was to intimidate the bad students. Which begs the question, "Why not simply expel the bad apples?" or is that too logical.

What I saw on the videowas a bad thing which will be address by the various power structures in SC.

How do I say that? Really simple. Goose Creek is part of the Charleston, SC metro area. Charleston's nick name is "The Holy City." The vatican of the SC power structure resides in or hails from Charleston. More than half the SC state legislature graduate from a Charleston university....the Citadel. The raid made LE look bad. It made SC look bad. Worst of all, it made Charleston look bad. Charleston to this day is a throwback to mid-nineteenth century and the mores still hold.

This unfortunate event took place in the heart of the power class in SC. I suspect LE in general and the brass in particular will be soiling their drawers over the next few weeks. I also suspect the principal has just done a bad thing to his messkit. What will ice the cake will be to get a reading on which families have kid in that school. Goose Creek is the elite suburb of Charleston. God help the poor slobs who did this if the school was in the old city. What they did is bad enough.

I think I'll go down to Goose Creek and erect bleachers then apply for the concessions permits. This one will be entertaining to watch.

spartacus2002
November 7, 2003, 10:41 PM
The most disturbing part was Lt. Buzzcut talking in his robot voice about "Ze Taktiks Ve Chooz to Yooz"

I sure F***ing hope this makes some people wake up and understand that Prohibition II (AKA The War on Drugs) is a bunch of crap. The only things the War on Drugs has accomplished is to raise the price of drugs, justify bureaucrats' budget requests, make drug dealers rich, and destroy our rights.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: In law school, every case that in my Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure classes that dealt with the Supreme Court chipping away at the 4th Amendment was a drug case. THAT should tell you something.

ojibweindian
November 7, 2003, 11:07 PM
I bet if your kid attended this school, but was not in the hall, you'd be happy the cops showed up.

Lemme guess, Sporty, you have no kids.

Do unto others until you get screwed the same way, eh?

Intune
November 7, 2003, 11:21 PM
And let me guess, Reefer Madness made perfect sense to you Sporty. Let me tell you now, I am your enemy. I stand for everything you would trample on. Use your radio and use it often. Bah, cats. Each & every one. How do you feel about people using drugs in the privacy of their own home Sport? Morality police make me want to puke. What's your say?

Pilgrim
November 7, 2003, 11:22 PM
E-mail address for Chief H. Becker, hbecker@cityofgoosecreek.com

E-mail address for Berkeley County School District Public Relations Officer, Pam Bailey, pambailey@berkeley.k12.sc.us

Pilgrim

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 11:33 PM
And let me guess, Reefer Madness made perfect sense to you Sporty. Let me tell you now, I am your enemy. I stand for everything you would trample on. Use your radio and use it often. Bah, cats. Each & every one. How do you feel about people using drugs in the privacy of their own home Sport? Morality police make me want to puke. What's your say?

Perhaps someone needs to smoke some more pot and calm down.

I'm not the morality police and do not portray myself as. I see what happened today as a case of a school administration fed up with thugs, weapons, drugs, and violence in his school. He called in the police to try and rid his school of this scum. Unfortunately things didn't go as planned.

As far as drugs go, do what you want in your own home. But if your drug use affects my life, or the ones I love, then we have a problem.[

Sportcat
November 7, 2003, 11:35 PM
Intune,

I guess you trample on the 2nd Amend too. Because that is something i whole-heartedly believe in.

ojibweindian
November 7, 2003, 11:39 PM
Perhaps someone needs to smoke some more pot and calm down.

Like, perhaps, the cops on the raid?

O.F.Fascist
November 7, 2003, 11:52 PM
Originally posted by Sportcat
I see what happened today as a case of a school administration fed up with thugs, weapons, drugs, and violence in his school. He called in the police to try and rid his school of this scum. Unfortunately things didn't go as planned.

It seems more like a case of inept school administers who dont know how to do thier job.

If he knew who these "thugs" were then why didnt he just get a police officer or two to accomply them to thier classrooms and pick them up.

Apparently he has no clue as to what is going on in his school, yet he has his suspicions. So instead of finding out who is doing what and taking appropriate action he assumes everyone is a suspect and lets the police have thier way with his students.

When nothing was found his response is "oh they must have gotten away." Yeah that is a likely story. :rolleyes:

goon
November 8, 2003, 12:24 AM
This does seem to be a little extreme.
I think that at even the very best, this was a poorly thought-out plan.
My reasoning is as follows:
You should never pull a gun unless you are completely ready to use it, and you know that you will have need of it.
We all know this.
All it would have taken would have been for one cop to trip, stumble, or just have something startle him and someone could have gotten killed.
At best it was completely irresponsible.

scottgun
November 8, 2003, 12:30 AM
Back in my days of HS in late 80's, if students were suspected of having pot the principle or whoever would search the locker, confront the student and call the cops (maybe). Reasonable suspicion and confronting the student is the direct way of taking care of the problem without treating everyone as guilty. This is totally overboard. Comparing this to Columbine is ridiculous. At Columbine the police refused to go into the school. Comparing the school to a crack house is also ridiculous. Nobody is forced to go to a crack house for 12 years as a child.

Does anybody who agrees with tactics used by this school feel comfortable if they employed the same tactics in your neighborhood (going door to door with guns drawn because there is a suspected drug dealer on your street)?

dustind
November 8, 2003, 12:30 AM
I see what happened today as a case of a school administration fed up with thugs,The irony is incredible, there is a supposed thug problem, which is to be solved by trapping kids in a hallway, throwing them around, and pointing guns at them.weapons,Out of the close to a hundred students how many where found?? drugs, Out of the close to a hundred students how many where found?? and violence in his school. Yea throwing kids around at gun point, to prevent violence.

I feel so much better knowing the police are willing to trap kids against walls and beat them. Even if the allegations were true this raid was as wrong as it could be. Police abuse is a bigger threat to children then drugs will ever be.

Intune
November 8, 2003, 01:27 AM
I see what happened today as a case of a school administration fed up with thugs, weapons, drugs, and violence in his school. He called in the police to try and rid his school of this scum. Unfortunately things didn't go as planned.
As far as drugs go, do what you want in your own home. But if your drug use affects my life, or the ones I love, then we have a problem.
Is that how you see it? No overzealousness on the part of the popo? The end justifies the means? You sure do read a lot into a drug raid Mr. Man. Thugs, weapons, scum, violence? You've conjured up a few warrents in your lifetime, eh? Creative cat! I’m with you on drugs in school. Are you for decrimiminalzation? Is it ok for me to do heroin in my house? State your true stance now.
I guess you trample on the 2nd Amend too. Because that is something i whole-heartedly believe in.
Because I call your endorsement of Gestapo tactics as B.S? Please. Your stance weakens with every post. What DO you want?


Perhaps someone needs to smoke some more pot and calm down.
And you can take some doctor prescribed zanex and all is klas Herr Kommisar? I don’t think so. But try again. Your steam is billowing, much to my and other's amusement.

Balog
November 8, 2003, 01:33 AM
Violence isn't a problem if the victims are kids and the criminals are pigs.

So Sportster, you refuse to answer a very fundamental question. If your place of employment were raided with no warrant (the boss thought something might be going on that was illegal), you or a coworker were thrown to the ground or jacked up against a wall, and repeatedly had a loaded gun pointed at your head as Officer Brownshirt screams threats at you. Once everyone is cowed, they conduct a search and find nothing.

You still be ok with that?


The problem, as I see it, is that you hate kids. You think they're a bunch of eeeeeeevvvviiiiilllll little hooligans who deserve everything they get. They have no rights. Basically, you feel about kids as Sarah Brady, Hitlery, Chuckie Schumer et al feel about gunowners. They're sub-humans who need to be ruled by their betters ie you.

Intune
November 8, 2003, 01:44 AM
. Mod's, please don't say "more heat than light" on this one. If a cop jacks me against the car & slams my face into the hood for a minor traffic infraction I should take it? He's goin' down. Better get on the radio, call your buddy's And that's far less than gun point. At the juncture of gunpoint, I figure you're considering killing me. Ain't gonna fly. These kids did no wrong.

jimpeel
November 8, 2003, 01:58 AM
Basically it comes down to there being only two posters who see this as a legitimate raid -- and one of those has even conceded that firearms were, indeed, pointed at the kids. Yet they unflaggingly continue to defend this action. I have no idea why this is so but, to each his own.

Below is something I wrote several years ago on zero-tolerance. It was published as a guest editorial commentary piece in the Attleboro, MA Sun-Chronicle. Note the part near the bottom where I said "When we treat everyone as a criminal, a ne’er-do-well, a druggie, a purveyor; we also create hostile, disrespectful, angry human beings that will at some point live up to those expectations."

Let's hope that these kids fail that test.

The Death Of Goodness In America

by Jim Peel

I was exiting a local warehouse club recently and was greeted at the door by the obligatory person who checks your receipt against the goods in your cart. I thought “Treat everyone as though they are a thief and no one can complain.” I later heard the President say on television that we have reached a level of zero-tolerance in America. I thought “Treat everyone as though they are a criminal and no one can complain.” The two were inexorably linked in my mind.

Most Americans can tell you that the death of common sense occurred years ago. What most fail to realize is that the death of goodness accompanied it.

Mandatory sentencing, due to the unwillingness or inability of judges to act against criminals, is one aspect of the equality in justice that has removed all semblance of cognizant thought from the process. Judges have their hands tied when it comes to sentencing; unable to differentiate between persons who broke the law with malice or those who simply fell astray. Any consideration of the motive of the accused is removed and everyone is treated as though they had heinous intent. Everyone is lumped together as a single evil entity.

Not even the President of the United States is exempt from this madness. Under the laws, as written, he has no choice but to impose sanctions on any nation that errs on any side but our own. The result is that the United States now has sanctions on many countries including some of our closest allies. Regardless of their true intent, all who err are treated as though they have the basest of intentions.

In the drunken logic of the modern bureaucrat the equality of treatment for all far outweighs the quality or fairness of that treatment. All things must be treated on an equal basis regardless of right or wrong. The problem is that when you treat all things equally you must always err on the side of evil over goodness. All things are viewed in their worst light. Of course this allows the bureaucrat of the moment to shirk any duty to fairness and relieves them of any, and all, responsibility for any, and all, decisions at any, and all, levels; i.e. the law is the law and it is out of my hands. Neat, concise, to the point.

Zero-tolerance is the primary example of this wrongheaded thinking. Everything is treated as equally bad and everyone is treated as equally evil. Under the guiding principles of zero-tolerance everything is at its worst. Every knife is a weapon. Every drug is a restricted drug. Every action contrary to the wishes of the authorities is evil.

When a girl picked up her mother’s lunch in error one day in Longmont, Colorado she didn’t realize there was a paring knife in the bag. Upon discovery of same, she brought it to the attention of her teacher, and was immediately expelled from school under zero-tolerance.

When a Providence, Rhode Island teenager used the screwdriver on his Swiss Army knife to tighten the screw on a computer case at school he was immediately suspended under zero-tolerance.

When a Denver, CO student handed out lemon drop candies to a few of his fellow students he was met with a barrage of criticism after the school panicked and called out the police, fire department, and paramedics. He was suspended under zero-tolerance.

When a girl in another city gave a girl at school an aspirin for “ladies cramps” she was immediately suspended under zero-tolerance.

What all of these kids have in common is that they were deemed to be the worst of persons with the worst of intentions; even though they were good kids and their intentions were good. They also share the common thread that it will be long and hard to bring them back to whatever respect they previously had for the system that wronged them..

What is the underlying cause for this anomaly in our nation? What has caused us to become so suspicious, so paranoid, so distrusting? In a word; litigation. Our litigious society has driven us over the brink and into the abyss from which we may never return. We now are so paranoid that if we treat one person in one manner, and another in another, we will be sued for the inequality of our actions. One, or the other, will sue us because of their real or perceived injury at our hands and we will do anything to prevent it; even the destruction of an entire generation of our children and their respect for the laws of the nation.

When we treat everyone as a criminal, a ne’er-do-well, a druggie, a purveyor; we also create hostile, disrespectful, angry human beings that will at some point live up to those expectations. We instill in the young that there is no goodness.

The time has come for the people of this nation to realize that zero-tolerance, and like laws, are destructive to our nation and our system of laws and government. The people of this nation must realize that it is time to do away with these destructive laws and return to the common sense approach to the laws that built this nation. Only through the destruction of these laws can we as a nation return to a system that seeks out and reveres goodness.

Intune
November 8, 2003, 02:10 AM
Well said Jim.

Lennyjoe
November 8, 2003, 02:16 AM
Looks like a couple of THRers need to go to PM to settle their differences.

Bill Hook
November 8, 2003, 02:23 AM
Looks like a couple of THRers need to go to PM to settle their differences.

Or pistols at 20 paces. ;)

Balog
November 8, 2003, 02:28 AM
I'd prefer epees. More gentlemanly to stab ones opponent, don't you know :rolleyes:

tyme
November 8, 2003, 02:38 AM
Downloadable video (cbs version) - realmedia (http://www.sockpuppet.org/~tyme/video582537.rm)

Intune
November 8, 2003, 03:02 AM
Sardines at dawn. Breath of a thousand camels. Don't ask me how I know. This is no joking matter. Although I joke, figure that out. You treat my kid like that... I am the alpha male of my family, you better have a damn good reason to mistreat my offspring. Everyone would like to think we're sooo civilized. We're not.

The principle:
I'll use whatever force I deem necessary to keep this campus safe and clean. Peasants, eh? Screw you Mr. Principle and your local Gestapo. See how the school board feels about paying for your arrogance. It pisses cops (excuse me, some cops) off and principles off but too bad, stay within your jurisdiction. What a concept. Bah! It gets better and better. Fools.

LiquidTension
November 8, 2003, 03:51 AM
It's times like these that I'm proud to be a SC resident :rolleyes: :banghead:

I watched the video. Overkill, no doubt about it. There were definitely much better ways to handle this situation, several of which have been addressed in this thread. I wonder how much of my stolen tax money was used in this raid? :fire:

I'm not a big fan of drugs in school, but I'm an even smaller fan of cops pointing guns at innocent students over some SUSPECTED doobie dealings. Yeah, some of the students MAY have been guilty, but definitely not all of the ones that were there. It is outrageous that the other students were treated this way when the cops KNEW WHO THE SUSPECTS WERE.

Mike Irwin
November 8, 2003, 04:50 AM
Well, I've watched this video three times now that I've found a link that works, and I've yet to see anything to get upset about.

But the students had guns pointed at them!

Boo hoo.

Think of it as a schoo sponsored "Scared Straight" program.

tyme
November 8, 2003, 06:07 AM
I'm okay with a "scared straight" program, but not when the scaring is done with threat of lethal force and when the "crookedness" is most likely sale of marijuana.

Mike, so can I go walk around a place where juveniles are known to deal drugs and attempt to scare them straight by pointing a gun at them and searching them? Even if I wouldn't get shot in the process, I can't even imagine doing that.

gunsmith
November 8, 2003, 06:34 AM
And it looks to me like this school has a police problem not a drug problem
kids going in and out of restrooms? big flipping deal!

When I was in highschool cops just took half of your dope and sent you on your way!
What ever happend to the good old days?

greyhound
November 8, 2003, 10:38 AM
"Officers charged a ninth-grader Wednesday afternoon with filing a false police report.

The juvenile said an officer shoved her to the ground during the search, Aarons said. Principal George McCrackin said he, other school officials and the girl's parent reviewed video surveillance tapes and determined she wasn't even in that hall at the time."

So on a slightly different topic, here we have one "shining light of our future" who is accused of lying about police mistreatment in this raid:

1. Maybe these kids ALREADY hate the police and want to cause as much trouble for them as possible.
2. or maybe she just "gots ta get paid".

In any case, I just saw the video this morning and if you changed the scenery a little you'd swear it was soldiers clearing a house in Iraq. And I also saw "Lt. High and Tight" interviewed. Not a good spokesman for the police....

Sportcat
November 8, 2003, 11:02 AM
It's obvious this thread has gone OT... members are now accusing me of ending all civil liberties, and also that I hate kids (if they only knew what I've done for the past five years to help kids and their parents).

I'm taking the high road and leaving this thread.

Intune
November 8, 2003, 11:11 AM
Not all civil libs, just some. But that's ok, right? You leave still believing this was a good thing. So does Mr. popo spokesman. This was wrong and lame & they're gonna pay for their stupidity. Well, taxpayers will pay. These idiots will continue on the public dole.

outfieldjack
November 8, 2003, 11:32 AM
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions... This is a forum where we can debate those. HOWEVER, when debate turns to personal insults, thats when the High Road is no longer the "High Road". SportCat has worked with childern in SC for many years. And for some of you to say that he "MUST HATE CHILDERN" is asinine!!! :barf: :barf: :barf: How DARE you make a statement like that?!?!?! Where do you, as a "member" of the HighRoad, come off saying that a fellow member HATES CHILDERN?!?!?!

Makes me ashamed to be a member of this FINE board when members start INSULTING other members like that. :fire: :fire: :fire:

jimpeel
November 8, 2003, 11:42 AM
Well, now that Sportscat has left you are, as I stated, the one-man minority in this debate.

Think of it as a schoo (sic) sponsored "Scared Straight" program.
Taken from your absurdity to the next level of absurdity: If the police, during a traffic stop, put a firearm to a teen driver's head, and threw them to the ground in a felony prone position, it would be more effective in the furtherance of the obedience of the traffic laws than the issuance a mere citation?

Concerning the video:

You have no problem with the two cops who, at the beginning of the video, pounce on the kid in the forground in the red jacket and reel him around and throw him to the ground?

You have no problem with the third cop, entering from the right, who puts his firearm on the kid and then sweeps the line of kids against the left wall?

cordex
November 8, 2003, 12:05 PM
But the students had guns pointed at them!

Boo hoo.

Think of it as a schoo sponsored "Scared Straight" program.
Let me get this straight ...
You encourage police to violate Rule #2 of firearms safety for the nebulous benefit of scaring some kids "straight"?
You advocate the use of deadly force to intimidate children - some of which may be criminals, but none of which have been charged or convicted of a crime?

*chuckle*
Okay, Mike. I respect your knowledge on a lot of things, but your opinions on this are simply too silly.

Tim Burke
November 8, 2003, 12:38 PM
But the students had guns pointed at them!

Boo hoo.Pointing guns at people that you don't have justification to shoot is a felony. I wasn't aware that we have a segment of society that is above the law. It isn't unheard of for the police to have a ND in these circumstances, with lethal results. Boo hoo? If you make a habit of pointing guns at things you don't intend to shoot, sooner or later you will shoot something you don't intend to shoot.

Initially, the defenders of the police action took the position that holding someone at low ready wasn't holding them at gunpoint. I found this semantic argument disingenuous, but it didn't last long, as evidence was soon posted that the police had, in fact, pointed their weapons at the students.

Then we have the Lieutenant explaining how it was a reasonable tactic to point guns at children for everyone's safety. I get rather tired of the leftist exclaiming it's "for the children," but I've never heard one claim that was why they pointed a gun at them.

I'm not buying into any of this.

If I were in a similar scenario, when the guns came out, I'd assume that there was about to be a gunfight, and would make every effort to leave, ASAP. Then you could hear the LT explain how it was necessary to shoot me for my safety.

HarryB
November 8, 2003, 01:12 PM
As a junior high teacher and a parent of a junior student, this video is outrageous!

What if your boss suspected that someone at your work was doing something illegal and had the cops do this do you and your coworkers. How would you feel being covered by a weapon for now reason!

What if your wife/significant other came home and told you this happened to her at her work?

Lawsuits, firings, and the principal going on sabattical to find a clue are all in order.

I had spent 5 years teaching 8th grade in gang influenced neighborhoods. Each year I was tipped off several times about students possessing. A discreet message to the school resource officer was sent out (classroom e-mail is a wonderful thing). Soon afterword he would come to the class and remove the student without incident. The teachers always kept the students who tipped us off out the the picture so there was no fear of retribution.

:barf:

P12
November 8, 2003, 01:53 PM
Goose Creek parents question drug raid at high school


(Goose Creek) Nov. 7, 2003 - Students in Goose Creek say they were minding their own business early Wednesday when 14 police officers burst into Stratford High School with guns drawn.

Police dogs indicated the presence of drugs in 12 bookbags. One student was handcuffed as a result, while his backpack was searched.

No drugs were found and no arrests were made.

Goose Creek Police Department Lt. Dave Aarons says proper procedure was followed, "Some of the officers had their gun drawn in the low ready position, which is not pointing at the faces or heads of the students. It was down in a position where had somebody who had drugs on them and in fear of being caught makes a poor decision and decides to use a weapon as means of escape, we would be able to address that."

(so like what the heck show was he wathcing?)

The incident infuriated many parents, like LeTonia Simmons, who say the children were treated like criminals, "I was just upset knowing they had guns put to their head and a K9 was barking at them and about to bite somebody. It was awful." She wants to know why the ordeal was neccessary, "Why did they have to take all that force? They were innocent kids, minding their own business, getting ready for class."

(go sick 'em)

Graham Boyd of the American Civil Liberties Union says police officers should never have come into the school with guns drawn. Instead, the students suspected of having drugs should have been brought to the principal's office to have their bags checked.

(something from the ACLU that I can agree with)

The school's principal says the raid sends a clear message to the students that those who bring drugs to school could wind up in jail. Principal George McCrackin stands behind the decision, "The high school has always had a reputation for being a safe, clean school. And I'll utilize whatever forces I deem necessary to keep this campus safe and clean."

McCrackin says several students were cuffed when they refused to get on the floor, "I don't think it was an overreaction on our part. I'm sure it was an inconvenience to those individuals who were in the hallway, but there is a valuable experience there."

School officials say there have been at least four cases of students bringing drugs to school. Officers also say they're sure drugs and a large amount of cash was floating around the school. Police say the school alerted them to suspicious behavior observed on surveillance cameras. Officers looked at tapes and watched live surveillance before they decided there was enough cause to enter the campus.

They are now trying to figure out if the dealers were tipped off by students using cell phones.

The Berkeley County Sheriff's Department and the solicitor for the area called in the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) to investigate the raid. They want to know if the display of force was necessary.


Updated 11:02pm by BrettWitt with AP
MOVE ALONG PEOPLE!! MOVE ALONG!!

:cuss: :fire:

The story (http://www.wistv.com/global/story.asp?s=1515796&ClientType=Printable)

dustind
November 8, 2003, 01:55 PM
I honestly can not believe that people think it is ok for police to throw people around and point guns at them for no reason. I got mad once when the police stopped to talk to me for what I thought was a dumb reason. They were very polite and professional so I got over it. I also later learned that kids were causing trouble, and spray painting in the area(less than 50 yards away) so there is no hard feelings.

I some countries police and/or military burst into houses in the middle of the night demanding to see papers. I have known people (although not to well) that have had that happen to them. I guess people have different standards of what is acceptable.

Drjones
November 8, 2003, 02:48 PM
Situations like this are exactly why only the government should have guns.

Drjones
November 8, 2003, 02:52 PM
I also wish the benevolent government with their guns-for-me-not-for-thee had shot some of these evil, drug-dealing and using kids.

I mean, they were using drugs for crying out loud!

Now we should increase spending for the WOD even MORE to get all those dangerous pot-smoking high schoolers off of our streets.

jimpeel
November 8, 2003, 03:45 PM
The school's principal says the raid sends a clear message to the students that those who bring drugs to school could wind up in jail. Principal George McCrackin stands behind the decision, "The high school has always had a reputation for being a safe, clean school. And I'll utilize whatever forces I deem necessary to keep this campus safe and clean."
No Principal McCrack-head, the raid sends a clear message to the students that those who bring drugs to school could wind up wealthy with the taxpayer's money from lawsuits brought for specious raids on schools.

We have now seen the type of force you deem necessary. I'm sure all of those kids have a newfound respect for you -- sort of like Hitler or Pol Pot -- respect me or I'll hurt you.

Respect is COMmanded not DEmanded.

Cal4D4
November 8, 2003, 03:49 PM
Spot on, jimpeel.

corncob
November 8, 2003, 04:11 PM
Why can't SC ever get any good press?:rolleyes:

care-less
November 8, 2003, 04:27 PM
I am rather suprised that everyone seems suprised at this type of behavior by police officers. Hell, they dress like SS, or Rambo's, etc. Why are you suprised that they act that way? Been going on for years, where have you all been? When you start to train your Police Officers like they were a military force, arm them like they were a military force, dress them like they were a military force; people are somehow suprised that they act the part! Even in Nazi Germany, when the Gestapo came for you; they didn't kick your door down with guns drawn. They came dressed in suit and tie, and knocked on your door. Sure, they took you away and killed you, tortured you, or imprisoned you; but they knocked on the door like gentlemen first. We used to have "Peace Officers" in this country. Now we have "Police Officers" and "Police Forces". There is one hell of a difference. jimpeel, I totally agree.

kbr80
November 8, 2003, 04:36 PM
I hope it never happens, but I secretly wait for the day we here news of these "Gestapo like police forces" kicking in a door in the middle of the night and the home owner unleashes hell on them.

Don Galt
November 8, 2003, 09:00 PM
What's the big deal? This is standard operating procedure-- cops do this all the time.

The only difference is this time it was kids they were pulling guns on.

When they do it adults the JBTs in this forum are absolutely certain the adults in question MUST be criminals, or they never would have thrown them to the ground and pulled guns on them.

But now it happens to kids and suddenly people think there's a problem?

You get any large population of people selected by a criteria-- jews, baptists, John Deere Tractor owners, and some percentage of them are going to be dishonest, or do wrong things.

But when that population is police-- doing wrong is REWARDED, and even when the country is outraged, they are never punished.

Thus, while you may have had a population that had the typical (Small) percentage of wrongdoers, over time, those who WANT to do wrong, or get kicks from it, will gravitate to them.

And now with the "War on DRugs" and the "War on Terrorism" we're training them to be force-initiating wrongdoers.

IT doesn't matter whether the victim is a kid or an adult-- when you initiate force, you violating morality. Cops who do so belong in jail.

But of course, the government never makes mistakes, that dog had it coming, the kids in Seattle had it coming, these kids in school had it coming-- "To insure everyone's safety" :barf:

When a percentage of cops act like this and get away-- reasonable people recognize that they cannot trust ANY cops. Especially when the cops they hear from cheer on this kind of initiation of force.

Baba Louie
November 8, 2003, 10:37 PM
What kills me is that they didn't find A THING. NOT ONE HIT by the dogs.

Good trigger control tho, what with fearing for their lives whilst slamming a few slow to react ner-do-well teens around.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Principal of the school ended up with a bunch of green leafy substance scattered within his car, office or teachers lounge and some anonymous but well meaning person calling for the local boys in blue and their little dogs too, ala Revenge of the Nerds.

Bet they're all on double secret probation from here on out now.

Adios

longeyes
November 8, 2003, 10:41 PM
Another ordinary day in AmSoc.

mountainclmbr
November 8, 2003, 10:54 PM
If citizens, WHO PAY the salaries of LEO!!!!! can draw down on LEO for robbery in speed zone arbitrary reduction robbery zones, then I would also support school searches. LEOs should obey the golden rule! This country has to change if it is to survive!

mountainclmbr
November 8, 2003, 10:59 PM
I do not trust anyoe who thinks they can run my life!!!!

TrapperReady
November 8, 2003, 11:45 PM
ose Creek Police Department Lt. Dave Aarons says proper procedure was followed, "Some of the officers had their gun drawn in the low ready position, which is not pointing at the faces or heads of the students. It was down in a position where had somebody who had drugs on them and in fear of being caught makes a poor decision and decides to use a weapon as means of escape, we would be able to address that."

So, using this guy's definition, "low ready = COM"?

Yeah, go ahead and try that without a badge.

Drjones
November 9, 2003, 02:02 AM
I hope it never happens, but I secretly wait for the day we here news of these "Gestapo like police forces" kicking in a door in the middle of the night and the home owner unleashes hell on them.

My initial reaction was, "yeah, that might send a message to the govt."

Then it occurred to me what the message to the govt AND public would be; ordinary citizens shouldn't have guns because they will kill benevolent JBT's who were ONLY kicking in his door. They were just following orders...just doing their job...

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Drjones
November 9, 2003, 02:09 AM
The only difference is this time it was kids they were pulling guns on.

When they do it adults the JBTs in this forum are absolutely certain the adults in question MUST be criminals, or they never would have thrown them to the ground and pulled guns on them.

But now it happens to kids and suddenly people think there's a problem?


Good point.

dustind
November 9, 2003, 02:14 AM
I think this is a different article on the subject, sorry if it was already posted.
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/US/South/11/07/school.raid/

Gotta love these parts.

"They would go put a gun up to them, push them against the wall, take their book bags and search them," Aaron Sims, 14, told CNN affiliate WCSC. "They just came up and got my friend, not even saying anything or what was going to happen. ... I was scared."

"The school had no knowledge that weapons would be drawn," Barrow said. "We understand students' and parents' and the community's concerns about this particular search. We will work internally and with local law enforcement to be sure these issues are addressed."

Still, he said, the school was concerned about possible drug sales on campus, and believed action was necessary.

Dustin's comments: When did SC repeal the 4th amendment. I doubt they had warrants for everyone's back packs. Reasonable suspicion is not probable cause. I can not understand how these scum think throwing kids around that they think may have drugs is alright. Even if they did that would be plain wrong, arrest them, but do not put guns to 14 year olds heads. Many third world countries are not this bad. I can not imagine what would happen if this was done in Minnesota.

Drjones
November 9, 2003, 02:18 AM
If some JBT did a random, without cause search of my child with a gun pointed at him, I'd "address some issues" allright.

:fire: :fire: :fire:

semf
November 9, 2003, 02:52 AM
But the students had guns pointed at them!

Boo hoo.


But a bunch of students were manhandled and threatened with death or or grievious bodily injury for the crime of going to school with SUSPECTED drug dealers whom somebody CLAIMED had weapons Boo Hoo

Yes commrad I see your point

toro
November 9, 2003, 09:35 AM
Well, I just heard on the the Fox News that the State Government is going to check into the police department at Goose Creek S.C. They are comming in to check their records, their training and want to know why they pulled guns on children. I wonder if they will order them to get rid of their military type hairstyles? I wonder if they will have to get rid of those leather gloves they like to make them look mean? I wonder if there will be any police left on the force? I wonder if Goose Creek will have the money to pay the police officers, after the law suits. Let's see it could be a class action suit with 107 innocent children. I think they made a BIG mistake.

Mrs. Toro


________________________________________________
Acts 17:11
These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Boats
November 9, 2003, 12:16 PM
Goose Step, er Goose Creek, South Carolina has less than 30,000 and their Police Webpage (http://www.cityofgoosecreek.com/cities/GooseCreekSC/docs/UploadedPages/police.htm) will show that there are only some thirty or so patrol officers on the entire force. Of course, the PD also has a "Special Response Team," as a thread of mine in the past pointed out, just about everywhere there are more than three cops on the same shift there is a SWAT team these days, because no matter how poor the training, being a paramilitary is a rush!

So a significant fraction of the local high and tights were there Goose Stepping that day. One will also note on that website that their complaint page has been taken offline.

Were my son swept up in the "round-up" I think Goose Step would at least be facing a Sec. 1983 Civil Rights suit and false imprisonment lawsuit.

WYO
November 9, 2003, 05:00 PM
I watched the video, and it looked out of bounds to me without a REALLY good explanation that probably isn’t there.

Moparmike
November 9, 2003, 05:55 PM
What pi$$es me off about the whole situation isnt the complete overstepping of boundaries and miss-appropriation of force, but how un-apologetic and celabratory the HS principal and Goose Creek police force as a whole is. If my HS would have done that, I would have given them a HUGE peice of my mind, laced with "colorful metaphors" and gone to another school. I would be finding everyone I could to make these people's lives a LIVING HELL.:fire: :cuss:

Owen
November 9, 2003, 10:44 PM
I have a freind in Goose Creek, who has told me several horror stories. In his case, he drove of the road on a rainy night. (There were no shoulders, or white line on the side of the road). When the brownshirts showed up, they booked him for drunk driving and threw him in a cell, even tho he was asking for medical attention. The cops told him he was lying and stop being a cry baby. He ended up having a few crushed disks.
I've heard quite a few other stories about this dept. Maybe they will finally get their comeuppance.

owen

Don Galt
November 9, 2003, 11:01 PM
And of course, the alleged crime is CAPITALISM.

There are two main branches of socialism. In the communist society, the state owns the means of production. In a fascist society, the means of production are private, but they are controlled, to an absolute degree, by the state.

Therefore, in this example of drug "enforcement", we literally have an example of fascism.

You cannot legally grow or deal in marijuana for even scientific purposes without the permission of the federal government.

Thus, to call this incident fascist is not to engage in hyperbole!

Oh, and any school where such a search finds NO drugs, is a school that is unusually clean. A normal highschool with well adjusted, healthy, kids should have at least some weed in it.

That none was found, tells me that the excuse for the raid is false-- this was just a chance to play soldier with live ammunition.

Any word on repercussions? Is the local DA on the case? Or is this just going to be ignored like virtually every crime committed by police in this country?

Moparmike
November 9, 2003, 11:27 PM
WRONG.

There are limitations on the exercise of rights, but students are not fully stripped of their rights. You know that. Mr. Irwin, it may have been like that before. But NOW, it is not. Having graduated high school in May of 2001, even a small school of less than 1000 in K-12, I KNOW now and found out through high school that my rights ended at that door.

What you have left is "pseudo-rights", that are only there because the admnistration does not want to get sued. No one is strip-searched, no one is...err...was:scrutiny: held at gunpoint for any reason. They could search your locker because you rented it from them. It was their property. Ok, I will buy that. However, them going through my backpack was something else entirely.

Sure we had drug dogs twice a year. We left our stuff on the floor, and walked out of the building. We came back 5 minutes later, some of our stuff kind of disturbed. We had dogs sniffing cars. If the dog did something, it got searched. No car got searched otherwise.

Things have changed in schools. No one is trusted, and no one has rights while on the property. Welcome to government schools since 1995. Aint that right Winston?

hillbilly
November 10, 2003, 09:14 AM
I have just seen the video of the glorious defenders of the Reich.......oops, I mean police officers in the high school.

Und I vant to know vhere are der JACK BOOTS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

How can you conduct a proper raid of that sort vithout der JACK BOOTS!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?

Sig Heil!

hillbilly

ScottsGT
November 10, 2003, 09:50 AM
I've got to chime in on this one. I grew up in Summerville, one of the main rivals of Goose Creek in HS Football. ( Goose Creek was split to form Stratford HS years back) It got so bad, we quit playing them for several years. But Goose Creek PD and Berkeley County has ALWAYS had a reputation for being a little heavy handed in its tactics. This does not suprise me in ANY way. I think things could have been handled a little better. But I'm not searching for drug dealers for a living. I guess we can all be arm chair quarterbacks, but until we get involved in a few plays and take a few bruises, we really don't understand the game. Besides, South Carolina has had a REAL rise in Gangs in recient years. These gangs carry real guns with real bullets into schools. Think about it.

Intune
November 10, 2003, 10:09 AM
No excuse. We have gangs here too, guess I should expect a faceful of Glock on my next stop for expired tags. I'm not a doctor either so I can't question my doc leaving the sponge in my body during surgery, eh? Sheesh!

If one has difficulty interacting with fellow humans a job doing so with a high potential for violence probably shouldn't be ones first career choice.

I don't understand how this action could be defended by anyone, but I've seen it here. I don't care if the hallways looked like a rainbow with so many gang colors and there was so much reefer smoke it looked like fog. Bust the hell outta them but do it safely and legally. Is that too much to ask from the POLICE? Safe and legal, novel concept? Hmm...

JohnBT
November 10, 2003, 11:08 AM
Armed intervention might, maybe, somehow, save Richmond City Public Schools.

But they'd better be careful because they'd be outnumbered and outgunned.

John

P.S. - I didn't think kids had any rights at school. That's what they always told us.

Balog
November 10, 2003, 11:27 AM
outfieldjack:
Let's review, shall we? Sportcat: loves kids, wants to help kids, thinks kids in school don't have the same rights as he does, and has no problem with cops abusing and pointing guns at kids. Which of these statements don't belong? Which of these statements has he made in the thread? I stand by my post. Calling someone an elitest when they have no problem with the JBT's violating someone else's rights isn't an insult, it's accurate. I'm so sorry he got his feelings hurt before he got a chance to answer my question: if it happened to him, would he still be ok with it?

outfieldjack
November 10, 2003, 01:27 PM
I guess I like to debate and make my points without having to "name call" and insulting other members without really knowing them. I'm not going to get in an arguement with you about what he said... All I said was saying "He HATES kids" was wrong. I believe that that the "intent" of the police and the school administration was correct, but the follow-thru was wrong. I believe that Sportcat feels the same way.

Jack

Balog
November 10, 2003, 01:46 PM
Ok jack, I'll rephrase. He doesn't hate kids, he just thinks they have less rights than he does and has no problem with their lives being endangered. Happy now?

I wasn't trying to insult or name call anyone. I was simply pointing out that his views, as expressed in this thread, are exactly the same as the views expressed by Schumer et al toward gun owners. I could see how this might be insulting, but it is also accurate. No, I don't know him. But I wasn't aware that I had to meet someone before I could debate them.

outfieldjack
November 10, 2003, 01:57 PM
You don't need to meet them to debate them, but insults are a different thing. I don't think any of us are here to make each other mad... Anyway, I think we are all on the same page here... even if our positions were not as clear as they could have been made. I'm signing off from this thread.

DaveB
November 10, 2003, 02:15 PM
The mistake is not that they pointed guns at children.

The mistake is that the video was made public.

It looks to me like the school board has a few weeks to sack the school principal - or face a recall. As upset as many of you will get, the ACLU should be all over this one.

If it were my own kids shown on the video, they would now be in private school, or in homeschooling.

Zero Tolerance for me.

db

hops
November 10, 2003, 02:47 PM
Can't figure out if these are GESTAPO tactics or NKVD tactics.

Oleg Volk
November 10, 2003, 02:50 PM
Maybe it is a time for a new thread, then...

;)

If you enjoyed reading about "Police raid high school; place kids on floor at gunpoint." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!