my school had a walk out

[tripsis]

venomai - At this point there is not "right or wrong" answer. It just comes down to your opinion vs. mine, which isn't something to argue over in my opinion.

 

 

 

There is a huge difference between informing parents that their child is drinking coffee and alcohol. It is not illegal for someone to drink coffee, but it is illegal (in the US) for anyone under 21 to drink. Unless there's something I don't know about, coffee won't impair your judgement or cause you to do idiotic things, but alcohol will. I think that parents have every right to know what their kids are doing in their "private lives" if it's something illegal. I mean they are their parents. They're looking after and raising their children, so I certainly think it's their business. I think a better question is why they don't deserve to know.

[venomai]

erkid"]What a [bleep] mom... Who would risk their kids popularity because you found pictures of kids drinking. It's nothing new and it's nothing you can stop.

 

 

 

Quite frankly, I wouldn't want to be friends with anyone who blamed me for something my Mom did anyway.

 

I wouldn't either, but most friends wouldn't blame you -- they would blame your mom. But that's the thing -- it's YOUR mom -- you would end up taking most of the damage (not just from your friends).

 

 

 

If it was public as to who's mom it was, then there's a good chance that the student would get bullied, beat up, teased and ostracized. There's a good chance that people wouldn't invite her to large parties out of fear of another issue arising. Hell, I would go as far as saying that single event could traumatize her entire high school life, depending on the person and school.

 

 

 

Sure, her small group of friends would support her, but what does that matter when the rest of your school avoids you and bullies you?

 

 

 

If you still want to call somebody stupid, call the mother stupid for making such a poor decision. She shouldn't have been on her daughter's private profile in the first place, and even if she did see those pictures it is not her duty to notify every parent in the school about a few beers or joints.

 

 

 

They shouldn't have been posting pictures of themselves drinking on public message boards. Their fault.

 

Will people stop blaming the students for "posting pictures of themselves" when clearly it is not their own fault if hundreds of others post pictures of them without consent. And what is this general assumption that anything posted to Facebook gets immediately uploaded to parents and teachers? I've rarely ever heard of this happening, and there are a lot of Facebook users in my area. That isn't to say it doesn't happen, of course, but you and others seem to be exaggerating the truth when you say that "everyone" can see these "public" pictures.

 

 

 

First off, what if a kid decides to go to school drunk? and maybe hits another kid on the way, or just acts like a jack [wagon] there.

 

What does driving to school drunk have to do with a picture of somebody drinking at a party?

 

If a person is driving drunk on a school day then they have some serious issues.

 

 

 

Also, if someone got a hold of alcohols at such a young age, what else can he get a hold of?

 

Marijuana. Tobacco. Shrooms. Any soft and/or legal drug. Hard drugs are very difficult, most responsible kids wouldn't want to do them anyways.

 

Most would agree that it's a lot easier to get marijuana at a young age than alcohol or tobacco.

 

 

 

Thirdly, if a person can so easily break one law, how many more laws can he break without his own concern?

 

Quite a few. No doubt, the ridiculously strict drinking and smoking laws in the U.S., which rarely ever prevents teen drinking/smoking, only end up showing youth that the law is perhaps not exactly something to take very seriously.

[anarchyxarmy]

Oh my god :shock: , I know where you live, I personally go to CMS but will be going to the high school next year! Some kid at our school got caught smoking weed at our school but that happens at the high school all the time :|

 

 

 

I think that since the only kids that got suspended were athletes, because when you go into the sport you sign a waiver that says that you won't do that sorta stuff so since they did the school had every right to do it but since the kids that didn't get suspended weren't in any sort of extra-curricular program they didn't get consequences the school was being extremely fair and just. :

 

 

 

Also: They were drinking underage, if they were stupid enough to put it on the internet it's there own fault...

[Riku3220]

i honestly couldn't care if anyone drank alchohol as long as they arent around me, its their liver at stake :?

 

 

 

but i still think they're stupid even if you didnt get consent to post a picture of you drinking, hey guess what? your STILL drinking and your parents DO have a right to know that. if i caught my child smoking, drinking, or taking any drug he'd be in his room studying until he was in college.

 

 

 

as for the not drinking on school campus... WHO CARES im not going to have a bunch of drugged up kids in my school popularity is a small price to pay compared to all the damage you could to to your body

[venomai]

venomai - At this point there is not "right or wrong" answer. It just comes down to your opinion vs. mine, which isn't something to argue over in my opinion.

 

True.

 

 

 

It is not illegal for someone to drink coffee, but it is illegal (in the US) for anyone under 21 to drink.

 

Parents should encourage their children to abide by the law, yes, but in most cases it would be futile to try and stop them from drinking at all before the (ridiculously high) drinking age. Do you have any idea how many students have gotten drunk by the time they turn 21, even with the strict laws and no-tolerance rules that so many parents live by?

 

 

 

Unless there's something I don't know about, coffee won't impair your judgement or cause you to do idiotic things, but alcohol will.

 

There's something you don't know about, then. If you think responsible drinking of alcohol makes you do idiotic things, you are mistaken.

 

 

 

When the person begins to drink so heavily that it becomes detrimental to their health or well-being, then there is reason to be concerned, but light to moderate drinking does not make you act idiotic and is relatively low in harm. What I don't understand is why so many parents strictly enforce "no drinking" right up until the age of 21, and then the day their kid turns of age they stop caring and claim "it's their choice now". This ends up being extremely detrimental, as the kids haven't become accustomed to responsible alcohol use and often drink to the point of it being dangerous to themselves/others.

 

 

 

However, if by idiotic things you are referring to impaired driving, then yes -- that is pure stupidity (and doesn't have much to do with the drug). Somebody who is irresponsible enough to drive impaired does not need alcohol to make them do stupid things.

 

 

 

As for coffee, it's shown to be extremely addicting and high doses can get you impaired. It has a lot of withdrawal symptoms and it's known to cause psychological issues such as substance-induced psychosis. It would be silly to say that we should turn a blind eye to caffeine use simply because it is a legal commodity. If drug laws were actually based on harm, addiction and "doing idiotic things" then alcohol would be one of the top contender's for illegal drugs.

 

http://caffeineweb.com/

 

 

 

I think that parents have every right to know what their kids are doing in their "private lives" if it's something illegal. I mean they are their parents. They're looking after and raising their children, so I certainly think it's their business. I think a better question is why they don't deserve to know.

 

In answering your question: because it's private and because it does not severely harm yourself/others. As I've said -- if you are doing something wreckless that endangers yourself or others then the parent should definitely be interrupting.

 

 

 

But if I'm having a few beers or smoking a joint I see no reason that a parent needs to know. Likewise, if I choose to enter an altered state of mind through responsible use of caffeine, meditation, IDoser, etc. then there is no need to alert my parents. What I do with my own life, granted it is not very harmful to myself or others, is none of my parents' business.

 

 

 

Thankfully, my parents give me the space I need -- that is one of the reasons why I tend to be so much more responsible in using drugs when compared to many of my friends. I feel no need to rebel against my parents as they treat me fairly and with respect. When parents try too hard to force their children to stop drinking, it often results in issues. A lot of teens use alcohol and drugs to get away from the strict rule they must live in under their parents' house.

 

 

 

As for it being illegal, that is a perfectly valid argument. I wouldn't want my kids getting caught using drugs/alcohol because of the legal impact. But if I try to force them to stop drinking through strict rules and private investigations then it will only end up making matters worse, and it's likely that the child will drink/smoke more to rebel.

 

 

 

If my child is doing something heavily illegal -- such as trafficking, growing or fraud -- then I would surely like to know. But those infractions are vastly different from having a few beers at a party or smoking a marijuana joint.

 

 

 

(Note: I do not drink with the goal of getting "plastered" as many of my peers do. I spent two months in Europe and I've acquired a fine taste for dark beers -- plus I enjoy the buzz it gives)

 

 

 

if i caught my child smoking, drinking, or taking any drug he'd be in his room studying until he was in college.

 

I'd love to see you enforce that on your kids. :lol: And what exactly do you mean by "any drug"? What about medical drugs (think Advil) or legal drugs like caffeine?

 

Or maybe you only mean illicit drugs? In that case, what about other drugs like salvia d, mescaline, DXM, etc? These are hallucinogens that can be found in legal commodities (such as cough syrup or in herbal remedy stores). If my kid really had to do drugs, I would much rather him do well-studied drugs (such as LSD or cannabis) that have proven to be much safer and less addicting than many "mysterious" and potentially dangerous alternatives.

[Foooman]

I don't believe the school had any right to suspend or punish their students for partying somewhere else, not during school hours. However, people should know pictures of themselves doing illegal things on the internet.

[anarchyxarmy]

I don't believe the school had any right to suspend or punish their students for partying somewhere else, not during school hours. However, people should know pictures of themselves doing illegal things on the internet.

They signed a form saying they wouldn't drink while on the team...

[Father_Time89]

I think it's downright stupid and an abuse of power to suspended people for something they did outside of school. I fI wa sone of the kids suspended I would hire a lawyer and sue.

[raven_gaurd0]

You can get suspended for things you did out of school easily.

 

 

 

For example, if there were...compromisingly sexual pictures of a girl at a high school taken by a guy at the same high school, both of them can be suspended even though they were both at a party, over the weekend in another friggin' city. The arm of the school system stretches very far...It has a lot of power.

 

 

 

Besides, underage drinking is illegal anyway.

[Father_Time89]

You can get suspended for things you did out of school easily.

 

 

 

For example, if there were...compromisingly sexual pictures of a girl at a high school taken by a guy at the same high school, both of them can be suspended even though they were both at a party, over the weekend in another friggin' city. The arm of the school system stretches very far...It has a lot of power.

 

 

 

Besides, underage drinking is illegal anyway.

 

 

 

So what? It's still a disgusting abuse of power and like I said earleir if the school tried that on me I would threaten to sue (which has worked on some stupid punishment that happened to me over something entirely on campus).

 

 

 

Oh and 0-tolerance policies for the epic Loss.

[SanFranciscoGiants]

First off, what if a kid decides to go to school drunk? and maybe hits another kid on the way, or just acts like a jack [wagon] there. Unlikely but possible.

 

 

 

Also, if someone got a hold of alcohols at such a young age, what else can he get a hold of?

 

 

 

Thirdly, if a person can so easily break one law, how many more laws can he break without his own concern?

 

 

 

It's a very small chance that a kid would drive to school drunk, mabye high, but not drunk. Unless you're a big alcoholic, you don't usually start drinking in the morning, espically when you're going to school.

 

 

 

I doubt a kid under the age of 18 would want to do anything above LSD, marijuana, or alcohol; it's not like he's/she's going out and buy a "hard" drug like meth at this young age due to its strength and cost.

 

 

 

It really isn't that hard to get a hold of marijuana or alcohol, so most likely he's/she's not going to do anything very bad because it's not it most cases fun to break the law, like it might be to get drunk or high.

[knives669]

Why is it any of the school's business what the kids were doing as long as it wasn't at school?

[SanFranciscoGiants]

Why is it any of the school's business what the kids were doing as long as it wasn't at school?

 

 

 

I guess the school thought that if the kids went there, it was their responsibility to deal with the problem :? .

[Kashi]

They were all going to walk out, but then the teachers and guards came out and most of them dissolved.

 

 

 

Revolution only works when you have dedication.

 

 

 

So yes, in this case it was dumb. Next time someone hands you a

 

copy of the Bill of Rights just blow your nose with it or something.

[raylifes]

Why is it any of the school's business what the kids were doing as long as it wasn't at school?

 

 

 

I agreed with this, untill I read the article... Here's a quote from the article at startribune:

 

 

 

The Minnesota State High School League requires student athletes to sign a pledge that they will not drink alcoholic beverages.

 

 

 

And here another important part:

 

 

 

Eden Prairie High School administrators have reprimanded more than 100 students and suspended some from sports and other extracurricular activities after obtaining Facebook photos of students partying, several students said Tuesday.

 

 

 

I don't know about the "other extracurricular activities", but I feel they were right to suspend the athletes who had been drinking, it's their own fault.

[Kiriyama]

If they were drinking on school property I would understand that, but the school should not have any control over what people do in their free time, whether it be illegal or not, that is the parent's job(And possibly the police depending on what happened).

 

 

 

Truth is its very rare that a person doesn't drink at least once before he/she is legal, its so rare that back when I was in school the students were fairly open about it and the teachers didn't mind at all, I wouldn't be suprised if they did it when they were kids as well.

 

 

 

Now is a very different time.

 

 

 

The school has no control what you do outside school grounds, I speak from experience here (shortly after school, not far from it, part of a tooth punched out).

 

 

 

I've heard people admit to drinking, heck some people have discussed parties where they've drunk during, and the teacher didn't care. That was the pupils admitting to it basically, when the teacher could hear.

 

 

 

I have to admit I've tried drinking sometimes. (Vodka +Irn Bru (just like a small mouthful), Blue WKD (I hate the stuff)) I don't like the smell of any beer, and anything mixed with Vodka leaves an aftertaste. Every parent lets their child drink at some point, in moderation, it helps more that way than the kids doing it behind the parents back.

 

 

 

Heck I have a mate and his mother would let him drink in his room if he wanted (He's 17), just not smoke (even when it was perfectly legal for him to smoke). Smoking is worse than Drinking, I bet theres more people addicted to smoking (regular cigarettes) than there is addicted to Alcohol.

[War_Junky_91]

The school did not have any right to do that, those were just pictures, you can not prove what was in those bottles,

 

 

 

This happened at my school also, but it was actually after the principal himself found the pictures on myspace

 

 

 

And again this is utter nonsense, yes they were drinking, but they were most likely not involved in anyway with school activites at the time and defenietly werent on school ground, the school had no legal right to suspend those kids

 

 

 

And also according to United States Law it is only illegal to have alcohol in your system if your under the age of 21, if you were drunk 2 days ago and you have a video tape of it the police can not do a thing if you do not have any alcohol in your system at the time they confront you

 

 

 

School's really need to whipped back into shape, they are realling stepping all over our rights, especially with things such as free speech (clothing styles, piercings, hair color and even what your shirt says),

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

Schools are over stepping on our rights and somebody need to take a hammer to that foot.

[Kiriyama]

War_Junky, I suggest you read up what freedom of speech entails.

 

 

 

It does not mean absolute freedom, and I can't be bothered quoting the restrictions and such again.

[War_Junky_91]

War_Junky, I suggest you read up what freedom of speech entails.

 

 

 

It does not mean absolute freedom, and I can't be bothered quoting the restrictions and such again.

 

yes i know there are some restrictions, but if i wore a shirt with a cross to school nobody would give it a second look, but if i wore one with a Nazi symbol (and was an actual follower of that, and was not a supremesist but just being proud of my race) i would be surrouned by teachers in like 15 seconds,

 

its a totally biased system

[BlueTear]

What I don't understand is why so many parents strictly enforce "no drinking" right up until the age of 21, and then the day their kid turns of age they stop caring and claim "it's their choice now". This ends up being extremely detrimental, as the kids haven't become accustomed to responsible alcohol use and often drink to the point of it being dangerous to themselves/others.

Last time I was involuntarily thrown into a lecture on drugs the speaker claimed that there's a coorelation between how early you start drinking, and how likely you are to develop alcohol related problems in the future.

 

 

 

Basically, he cited statistics saying that the earlier you start, the more likely you are to develop alcohol dependence. You disagree?

In answering your question: because it's private and because it does not severely harm yourself/others. As I've said -- if you are doing something wreckless that endangers yourself or others then the parent should definitely be interrupting.

Interrupting, and knowing, is not the same thing. If I had a kid, I would want to know. I'm fairly certain that most other parents would as well, and if they wouldn't; Tough [cabbage], willfull ignorance does not make one a good parent, and I'd tell you anyway.

 

 

 

What, if anything, said parents choose to do or not do about it, is open for debate. A quick talk regarding risks that should be observed, or a six months de facto house arrest. Either way, that's the choice of the parent in how they intend to raise their offspring to legal majority. Making that choice for them by withholding information regarding illegal or potentially harmful activities on the basis that you yourself manage responsible drug use... Meh, I don't buy it. I may not agree with how all parents given such information will deal with it, but I think they have a right to that information.

 

 

 

 

 

Moving on the other things;

 

 

 

On the subject of who's fault it is; If whatever you're doing gets you in trouble if it's caught on camera, you should really be paying attention to what you're doing, the cameras, or both. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. And if you leave evidence and witnesses behind, yes, that is actually your fault. You can't play helpless victim because "someone else" took photographic evidence of what you were doing at the time.

 

 

 

On the subject of any damages related to the parent who made the disc's child; The day parents allow themselves to be scared into refraining from doing what they believe to be morally right because the repercussions might involve people being mean to her at school, that's the day when the inmates truly start running the asylum.

[War_Junky_91]

What I don't understand is why so many parents strictly enforce "no drinking" right up until the age of 21, and then the day their kid turns of age they stop caring and claim "it's their choice now". This ends up being extremely detrimental, as the kids haven't become accustomed to responsible alcohol use and often drink to the point of it being dangerous to themselves/others.

Last time I was involuntarily thrown into a lecture on drugs the speaker claimed that there's a coorelation between how early you start drinking, and how likely you are to develop alcohol related problems in the future.

 

 

 

Basically, he cited statistics saying that the earlier you start, the more likely you are to develop alcohol dependence. You disagree?

In answering your question: because it's private and because it does not severely harm yourself/others. As I've said -- if you are doing something wreckless that endangers yourself or others then the parent should definitely be interrupting.

Interrupting, and knowing, is not the same thing. If I had a kid, I would want to know. I'm fairly certain that most other parents would as well, and if they wouldn't; Tough [cabbage], willfull ignorance does not make one a good parent, and I'd tell you anyway.

 

 

 

What, if anything, said parents choose to do or not do about it, is open for debate. A quick talk regarding risks that should be observed, or a six months de facto house arrest. Either way, that's the choice of the parent in how they intend to raise their offspring to legal majority. Making that choice for them by withholding information regarding illegal or potentially harmful activities on the basis that you yourself manage responsible drug use... Meh, I don't buy it. I may not agree with how all parents given such information will deal with it, but I think they have a right to that information.

 

 

 

 

 

Moving on the other things;

 

 

 

On the subject of who's fault it is; If whatever you're doing gets you in trouble if it's caught on camera, you should really be paying attention to what you're doing, the cameras, or both. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. And if you leave evidence and witnesses behind, yes, that is actually your fault. You can't play helpless victim because "someone else" took photographic evidence of what you were doing at the time.

 

 

 

On the subject of any damages related to the parent who made the disc's child; The day parents allow themselves to be scared into refraining from doing what they believe to be morally right because the repercussions might involve people being mean to her at school, that's the day when the inmates truly start running the asylum.

 

The law states if they have no alcohol in their system its not against the law, thats why people post pictures of them with giants bags of weed and dope and stuff on the net, once they get rid of it by using it or something else they are perfectly green and nobody can do a thing,

 

 

 

the kids were not in violation of any rules and laws when the pictures were given to the school, thats what the uproar is about

[Allu]

Wow that's a awsome mom, hope someone burns her house down, and yes I really mean it.

[Skully]

tbh it had nothing to do with the school, it wasn't their problem, so they shouldn't have got involved.

[deloriagod]

tbh it had nothing to do with the school, it wasn't their problem, so they shouldn't have got involved.

 

 

 

I agree 100%. I'm 17 and I drink (hell, there are alcohol cans sitting on my desk right now). My school can't do anything about it. They can tell me not to do it, how much it's hurting my body, and how I could kill someone if I drive. But they can't suspend me unless I walk onto their property while I'm intoxicated. They had no right to suspend those kids for drinking. I will say, it was stupid of them to post pics of themselves drinking. But the only people who could really punish them is their parents.

 

 

 

On the subject of parents checking things like Facebook and MySpace. Honestly, they need to stay out. Do you trust your kids so little that you need to check on everything they write to their friends? If that's the case, you probably shouldn't let them leave the house. Parents want respect, right? Well they're not going to get it if they're going through their kids stuff. I lost a lot of respect for my dad when he went through my Facebook when I forgot to close it one day. It's not like he walked past my computer and noticed it was up. He went upstairs, into my room, open my laptop, closed the game that was up, and saw that Facebook was open. He was mad about something he saw so he brought it to my attention and we had a hell of an arguement that night..

[mchainmail]

I'm actually kind of surprised. If the pictures weren't of people drinking on campus, I didn't know the school could do anything about it. At least in all the high schools I've heard of (including my own), the school is only allowed to take action if the student is found to be drinking/doing drugs on campus. That policy makes a lot more sense in my opinion (than being allowed to suspend a student who got drunk, but not on campus).

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that's how it works in all of the country. As long as it didn't happen on school property, a trip, or similar, a school has no jurisdiction. However, I think the school may still attempt to "help" people with counseling, etc.