|
Just want to say that Maxwell has always been a den of iniquity. Small town with a lot of nice farm/ranch people living nearby, but there are some real scumbags living there, too, and they feel they can carry on their activities because Maxwell is a dead looking little berg. The old beer dump it used to have there on the highway saw a lot of rockin' wild happenings. The police hardly ever looked their way. |
|
0
|
Posted by Hayseed9 - 10/7/2012 3:35:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
I can only imagine Adolf Hitler and all his minions are sitting up in their graves and smiling at all of these people following the government blindly. |
|
0
|
Posted by tess tickle - 9/29/2012 5:35:12 AM
|
|
|
The fishing is going to come to an end, there is a local attorney that is just waiting,and soon all this nonsense and wasted tax dollars will come to an end.
http://thelosangelescriminaldefenseblog.com/police-dogs-sniffing-for-drugs-are-surprisingly-unreliable/
http://www.wjhg.com/news/headlines/Are_Drug_Sniffing_Dogs_Reliable_144719475.html
http://www.lvrj.com/news/legal-challenge-questions-reliability-of-police-dogs-161759505.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-591477.html |
|
0
|
Posted by justmeagain - 9/28/2012 9:18:04 PM
|
|
|
http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/30/scotus-will-consider-dogs-reliability-as |
|
0
|
Posted by justmeagain - 9/28/2012 9:07:42 PM
|
|
|
Allow me to correct myself: except. There, now you don't have to. |
|
0
|
Posted by Mike - 9/28/2012 12:52:28 PM
|
|
Touché! You're not getting the point. Every one of these self proclaimed conservatives on this site say the Constitution of the United States and its Amendments are the law of the land.....expect when it fits certain circumstances. You can't have your cake and eat it too, some piddly little Nebraska school student handbook that is mandatory for all students to follow does not trump the Constitution, and therefore searching their cars is an illegal search and seizure. I'm an atheist, but I also think it is wrong to tell someone they can't wear a cross necklace to school. Wouldn't you agree that telling a student they can't wear a piece of jewelry because it might offend a student of a different religion is a violation of the 1st Amendment?
Searching lockers is another story. Lockers are school property, so the kids that got busted for having stuff there should have known better. |
|
0
|
Posted by Mike - 9/28/2012 12:51:21 PM
|
|
|
Its....or it's....kick in their front??? front what??...proofread your own reply mr. grammar police...these are kids who aren't old enough to vote, buy cigarettes or alcohol, some not old enough to drive but yet for some reason their rights were violated..no sir....and you do have the 'right' to send your kids to a different school, the 'right' not to watch cops. Also you have blown the situation completely out of proportion to try and make a point. Sticking with the facts will be beneficial. You stated...the debate is whether or not to keep drugs away from a learning environment...really?....thats debatable to you??? Finally when was the last time you were held at gunpoint and searched? |
|
0
|
Posted by shogunjobu - 9/28/2012 11:27:36 AM
|
|
*your
*privilege
Its funny because the debate is about keeping drugs away from a learning environment.
Even when you sign the student handbook it is bogus. They might as well hold you at gunpoint while they search your car. If you don't sign the handbook you are not allowed to attend classes. Its kind of a form of indoctrination, lets get the youth of our nation used to being searched on every street corner by making them sign BS contracts and put reruns of the show Cops on every other tv channel so that when the storm troopers and thought police kick in their front they won't struggle as much. |
|
0
|
Posted by Mike - 9/28/2012 9:08:33 AM
|
|
|
You are talking apples and oranges, this is you're personal vehicle, and there is a list of rules you have to abide by to keep your driving privalage. Driving isn't a right. Its a public school, no rights or liberties were violated. Fact. Check the north platte high school handbook, its available online. |
|
0
|
Posted by shogunjobu - 9/28/2012 8:05:49 AM
|
|
|
16 -18 years of age, doesnt matter to the arguement.
when we drive our vehicle on a public road we do not have to consent to being searched, just because the police want to, no matter how young or old you are. |
|
0
|
Posted by npborngirl - 9/28/2012 7:15:29 AM
|
|
|
This baffles me, 1st off people are confused on what your 'rights' really are. We have very few rights and are entitled to maybe even less. Think about that for a second. This is a public school, not a private school, not a private residence. What you do in your own home and what you do in public are two seperate worlds. An individuals rights do not supercede the communities 'rights' and or liberties. This sweep or whatever you call it should be of little concern. What if the dog found explosives, or a few handguns. Yes thats the world we live in and ask the parents of Columbine victims how they feel about 'random' searches. NPHS has a list of rules you have to follow, just like my job, just like the real world. I for one support these procedures and I have a child attending this school. Joe Doherty |
|
0
|
Posted by shogunjobu - 9/28/2012 6:13:48 AM
|
|
|
Bottom line is School shouldn't be looked at as "having to attend". There are very few(good)jobs you can get these days without a HS diploma. If a kid wants to do drugs-don't bring it to school!! Doesn't matter if you have an ounce or a pound there's NO place for it at school! Great job to the police and everyone involved for your part in keeping drugs (and those who use it) out of our schools! |
|
0
|
Posted by oneopinion - 9/27/2012 3:58:50 PM
|
|
|
From Ne statutes dated July 19th, 2012... 79-202. "(1) A person who has legal or actual charge or control of a child who is at least sixteen years of age but less than eighteen years of age may withdraw such child from school before graduation and be exempt from the mandatory attendance requirements of section 79-201 if an exit interview is conducted and the withdrawal form is signed as required by subsections "
|
|
0
|
Posted by oldie - 9/27/2012 3:37:22 PM
|
|
|
oldie...new Nebraska laws says school is manditory until 18. |
|
0
|
Posted by tiger4 - 9/27/2012 2:48:15 PM
|
|
|
I decry the use of all the things that now are necessary for anything illegal not just the war on drugs. However, it is necessary now. Until we change the culture of wanting to use drugs it is this that we are left to do. It begins at home but by no means ends at home as any parent will tell you. What I mean by that is the whole culture has to change as you can only keep your kids sheltered for so long. Media, entertainment, sports, politics basically all walks and cultures both local, generational and ethnic need to support a non drug culture. Supply and demand. No demand means very little in way of supply. And the USA also needs to take a real hard look at themselves when relief of pain, or certain (please do not think I mean serious mental issues) personality quirks need a pill or injection to solve. But it will not change by itself or with catchy radio or tv slogans. It has to start on the street with some real gritty work. |
|
0
|
Posted by FidesInfero - 9/27/2012 2:43:00 PM
|
|
|
I would think it would be fairly apparent what kids are showing up high to class. I'm also pretty confident that it's no secret at the school who's doing drugs and who's not. If you have a reason to suspect that someone has drugs on school property, search their stuff. But to do a sweeping search and check clean lockers and clean cars three cars away from the car or locker you're targeting just to have the grand a-ha moment is creepy to me. |
|
0
|
Posted by Northplatypus - 9/27/2012 2:21:39 PM
|
|
|
NP girl...you only have to attend until 16. Platypus...I'll bet you there was something going on to warrant this search, not just something they did because is was a slow day. If something happens that could have been prevented through a search like this, then you people will be screaming at the school and police about "why weren't you doing something to stop this..." How about a little support for these people trying to keep the schools safe and be what they're supposed to be, a learning place, not just a daycare for teens. |
|
0
|
Posted by oldie - 9/27/2012 1:41:37 PM
|
|
|
Hey ahhhhh.....The mentality of "I've got nothing to hide so go ahead and intrude on my privacy" is what made us turn a blind eye to the PATRIOT Act. If you're not carrying a bomb or a gun, then why should you be groped or be scanned by the naked body scanners? When you've got nothing to hide they've got nothing to search for, and with nothing to search for there is no need to search. Instead they assume you have something to hide (guilty until proven innocent) so they are going to look for reasons to bust you. |
|
0
|
Posted by Mike - 9/27/2012 12:37:46 PM
|
|
|
Is this what the "The War on Drugs" has become? Then who watches the watchers? "If I'm not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me." "Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition." "Because you might do something wrong with my information." My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect. |
|
0
|
Posted by tess tickle - 9/27/2012 11:25:52 AM
|
|
|
If this were someone over 18 and they were not with other people who were under 18 (13-18 years old) I would say of course do not search me it is a bother and might make me late for something. The reality is (for those of us who live in realville), that if someone at the next locker has drugs or is taking drugs that presents a problem of not only safety (think chemistry class, pe class, shop class) but one of influence. It has been studied and fairly well accepted that adolescents do not fully have enough "brain maturity" (my term) to evaluate risks and consequences fully and that is why teenagers sometimes do things that quite frankly are so illogical and stupid. But more practically, if a kid is taking drugs not only should his "rights" be violated to determine if he is endangering himself and others (think of the times you have been in that high school parking lot and have seen some of those kids racing around) but he or she needs help BECAUSE taking drugs is bad! Right? Darn his or her rights lets get these kids some help. As for those who do not take drugs or do anything remotely illegal, this is the price that has to be paid in order that your fellow students remain safe and sober and straight. |
|
0
|
Posted by FidesInfero - 9/27/2012 11:20:52 AM
|
|
|
I am glad they do this. If the kids want to do those ILLEGAL activities, then keep it at home and don't bring it to school. A wise man once said, "if you are not doing anything wrong, then why do you care?" My point is, parents, kids etc... shouldn't care the dogs got ran in NPHS unless those people have something to hide. |
|
0
|
Posted by ahhh - 9/27/2012 11:05:17 AM
|
|
|
I don't like this either. And just because i disagree doesn't mean I don't support our police force. I just don't understand rummaging through cars and lockers and running a police dog through our kids stuff without reason. What's next? |
|
0
|
Posted by Northplatypus - 9/27/2012 10:41:50 AM
|
|
|
call me crasy, but one of the things i like about the USA CONSTITUTION is the assumtion of innocence until PROVEN guilty.
just because a kid goes to school, which they are forced to attend until age 18, should not make them have to prove they are innocent of any crimes unless there is reasonable cause.
if "search" is a right of the school board, i believe they & the "police agencies/nazis" involved are once again wasting my tax dollars & trampling our rights!!! |
|
0
|
Posted by npborngirl - 9/27/2012 9:43:05 AM
|
|
|
Oops. A non logical argument was detected with last post. "no action until further testing" will have to be changed to "no participation until further testing", the urine test for drugs is an accepted form of testing for many governing bodies and unless there is widespread corruption, which can happen, it can be used to determine outcomes. |
|
0
|
Posted by FidesInfero - 9/27/2012 7:39:01 AM
|
|
|
It is sad that our kids resort to drugs for... what? Stimulation, feeling funny, peer pressure? I don't know the answer and obviously lots of other people do not know either. I am glad the police do this from time to time. I think we should take it one step further and I cannot possibly imagine a parent who cares about their kid disagreeing with this; random drug tests on kids but specifically athletes as a condition of participation. What could it hurt? Violation of privacy? Perhaps, but again if kid tests positive, then further testing before any action (at parents request only) and until kid tests negative on urine test sorry, no school, no athletics, stay away from other kids whom are not doing drugs. Really, what could it hurt? |
|
0
|
Posted by FidesInfero - 9/27/2012 7:36:22 AM
|
|
|
When you go to NPHS (or any public school) you give up your 4th amendment rights. All that paperwork in the student handbook you sign at the beginning of the year is a contract that says you give them permission to search through your bags and to let the popo break into your car and search it if you park on school grounds. Thats why you see so many students parking a block away on public streets. |
|
0
|
Posted by Mike - 9/27/2012 7:33:40 AM
|
|
|
Dogs cant smell prescription pills, and when i was there the drug dugs only went through the lockers, not what was on individuals. Good job picking up the dumb kids that stashed in there lockers or cars. Meanwhile theres 7 meth labs and a center full of homeless kids with crackhead parents. Much rather my tax dollars go to finding them a home and a new way of life than taking less than an ounce of marijuana from 3 kids who were in school. Should it be in school? No, it shouldnt, but instead of putting them through the cycle and making them have no trust for the system, they should be educated. Just my 2 cents. |
|
0
|
Posted by openmind - 9/27/2012 6:40:59 AM
|
|
|
Dogs must have had a cold. When I was there, I saw more than three dealing just outside the doors... their customers were more numerous than the football team! |
|
0
|
Posted by cliffne - 9/27/2012 5:31:11 AM
|
|
|
Thank you to all involved. I hope you checked the locker rooms, |
|
0
|
Posted by tiger4 - 9/27/2012 5:21:37 AM
|
|
|
Only three??? |
|
0
|
Posted by are you kidding? - 9/26/2012 9:57:43 PM
|
|
|
There is no right to privacy in common areas where the searches are conducted so no Fourth Amendment violations occurred. Also, the rules are different when it is on school grounds and the searches are done by or at the request of School officials. Way to go Law Enforcement there is no room in our schools for drugs and I hope that more things can be done to prevent drugs from entering the lives of our young people. The entire purpose of the search is to locate drugs and ensure that our children remain safe and in a good learning environment and rather than bitching that police are doing their job you should be praising them. WAY TO GO GOOD GUYS. |
|
0
|
Posted by iknowall?? - 9/26/2012 9:05:21 PM
|
|
|
jma,tried post and couldn't get on. |
|
0
|
Posted by witness - 9/26/2012 9:04:39 PM
|
|
|
Violate the Forth Amendment Rights of how many kids, for a bag of weed? Is the general consensus here that this is okay? Not in my Free World |
|
0
|
Posted by tess tickle - 9/26/2012 7:54:17 PM
|
|
|
You will see changes in the future of searches like this very soon.
http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/30/scotus-will-consider-dogs-reliability-as |
|
0
|
Posted by justmeagain - 9/26/2012 7:08:14 PM
|
|