Student suspended for suspicion...No proof, just suspicion.

Andy, why do you hate America?

Don't you know everything changed on 9/11?

I don't know what else there is to say about "Reefer Madness" 2004 version. This- many years after everyone knows that mar1juana is a reltively harmless was of getting high.

I guess the argument goes like this. If you smoke mar1juana and get high you might have fun and then forget to read your bible and then you might get sort of horny and then you might do you know what and the next thing you won't be voting Republican or obeying authorities or somethiing.

I can't figure it out.

 

I wonder how many people who perished on 9/11 were somehow responsible for their own deaths?

 

So, if you're walking to school and happen to walk by a group of kids who are smoking mar1juana, you should be suspended when you reach the school because you could smell like mar1juana?

And teens should be arrested if they attend a concert? Concerts were the first place I ever smelled mar1juana smoke, and sit there long enough, the smell transfers to your clothes.

If your backpack smells like mar1juana, it is not proof of anything other than the fact that it smells like mar1juana.

Plus, suspending the student doesn't get him any help even if he does need help for addiction. And smelling like mar1juana doesn't necessarily mean that there's a problem at all. Over-reacting to a problem can make matters worse. Taking a kid out of school can cause emotional problems at a potentially emotionally fragile time in a kid's life.

That's the sort of thing that could lead a kid into heavier drug or alcohol use in an effort to ease his pain.

 

The smell was in his locker. He could have lent a book to another student who needed it, and that student smoked up around it. Since the smell was in his locker only things in his locker needed to be around pot.

Whether or not students have the right to be around pot or not, is questionable. But even if they aren't, I don't believe that there is any rule in any school, district, or state that says if you are within 20ft. of others smoking pot you are subject to suspension.

I know their rights may not be the same, but that doesn't mean that they aren't entitled to justice.

 

I'll be a smart-a#$ - nineteen.

I would rather they concentrate on weapons and bullying rather than a sniff test for drugs. The sniff test on drugs is just politically easy to defend and easy to perform.

 

I'm guessing that there were more than 19 out of the 2800 or so who died who smoked mar1juana on a regular basis.

I know you were just being a smartass, though.

 

The War on Drugs......what a joke.

 

Not true. You simply trump up the old 'no one has ever overdosed on pot.' That is an overly narrow and self serving stance, but hardly encompasses all the harmful possibilities with pot. We can use the example from the article, which I'll also refer to below. This child says 'after all, it doesn't mean he was smoking it. He could have just been in a car where others were smoking.' Does that sound dangerous to life and limb to a child? No, it doesn't obviously. Does it to me, a parent? You bet your ass it does. And its illegal and could involve punishment within the legal system which is also not something I want my child involved in. There is more than enough justification for the system to ring alarm bells.

You're not, as a child, supposed to have any connection with drugs. The heavy smell of mar1juana, which is pretty unmistakeable, is enough proof that there is an undesirable connection. They didn't put him in jail, they suspended him. And I hope its a big wakeup call for him and his parents and other students.

Which is dangerous and undesirable, especially in a car.

 

Ridiculous example. Your backpack is not going to pick up a stench of pot like this.

No one was arrested. Try again. And no, children should not be in an arena filled with enough pot smoke to transfer a heavy smell to their clothes.

Uh, yeah. What's your point?

It certainly sends a strong signal home. It certainly sends a strong signal to other students. Around pot enough or in a concentrated space? You might just get sent home suspended and you can explain that. Sounds like a good thing to me. Your emotional distress argument is ridiculous. Just because you can make an claim doesn't mean there is a warrant for it.

C'mon FB.

Uh, no. Its not. They don't. It is ILLEGAL. And even if you buy into the 'victimless crimes' arguments but the legalization lobby, that does not apply to children. They do not have the same standing to disregard risk as adults do. And as the quote from the young girl proves, they cannot assess risk very well either.

You don't get a stench of pot from 20ft away or from letting some poor pothead borrow your book. You get it up close and personal. Either by physically being in a confinded space with pot smoking going on (whether or not he inhaled is irrelevant) or by actually having pot in the bag. Whichever it was, that was enough for the system to take action. You want to legalize? Go ahead. Even legalization won't allow students to possess or consume pot. As a society we still will want to keep drugs out of our children's environment.

 

I don't have to refute any of that. I'm not anti-legalization. We both agree kids should not be using so the rest of this is irrelevant. I can say both 'kids should not be using' and ' i support legalization to stop *insert here* bad thing.'

Again you are making arguments for adults. We are not talking about adults. Even within a legalized framework, there would be zero tolerance for children being around pot.

This is either a naive suggestion or one worded carefully to avoid the issue. No one ever contracted lung diseases from smoking? No one ever was in a fatal car accident while driving? You don't think its physically dangerous? If that's true then I wonder why you say you have concern for people driving and why you don't think children should be using.

No, I used the example given in the article.

The 'law' was not invoked. The kid was not arrested. And here you are really arguing scope of punishment, not the principle that action was warranted. That makes you materially different than some of the other posters in this thread, and means that you DO feel action was warranted. That is fundamentally different than your first post.

Maybe true.

Yep.

 

I disagree. I don't believe that it is illegal to be in a proximity to mar1juana. Possession is illegal. Possession with intent to distribute is also illegal, standing in proximity to mar1juana is not illegal. If you are in the car with it that counts as possession. If I'm walking with a friend, and that friend has a a joint in a backpack, and the police search it. They will probably search me too, if I have no mar1juana on me, I haven't committed a crime.


You don't get a stench of pot from 20ft away or from letting some poor pothead borrow your book. You get it up close and personal. Either by physically being in a confinded space with pot smoking going on (whether or not he inhaled is irrelevant) or by actually having pot in the bag. Whichever it was, that was enough for the system to take action. You want to legalize? Go ahead. Even legalization won't allow students to possess or consume pot. As a society we still will want to keep drugs out of our children's environment. [/B][/QUOTE]

If the book or backpack or whatever a student let the pothead borrow, it would be up close and personal to that person, and for a prolonged period of time. If you let somebody borrow a jacket or a sweater, that could easily become infused with mar1juana smell. Put that into somebody elses locker and that doesn't mean that the person was smoking anything. The next day if that book or backpack goes into the locker, the stench will be in the locker.

I'm not saying it's ok for this student or any student to smoke pot. That wasn't the point at all. The point is that this student may not have been smoking pot, and still got punished.

 

Its illegal to be in a car with mar1juana. I believe that's what I meant.

You need to stop lending your books to greasy stoners that rub their bodies all over your books.

 

The don't have to rub their bodies on the book, just smoke a lot around them, roll joints on them etc.

This isn't me lending anything to anybody. It is an explanation of how a smell could get in a locker without the student ever smoking pot. I think that smell is definitely reason enough to investigate further, and collect proof against the student, and then suspend him. But without proof it's wrong to to just suspend somebody who may not have done anything.

 

Personally, I just know how difficult it can be for a kid to rebound from a suspension or expulsion, especially if they don't feel like they did anything wrong. If the kid doesn't smoke pot and has the smell on him for some other reason, he's going to feel persecuted and that can lead to increased depression, emotion problems and even increased defiance, etc.

We've seen kids who were suspended or expelled over zero tolerance policies go into a spiral that ends in them being much worse off than they were before the suspension or expulsion, especially when those suspensions come over minor violations that are more misunderstandings that willful violations.

If the purpose is to make kids with a problem better, then set up a a treatment program for those who are suspected of drug use. Dig deeper into the issue and see if there actually is an issue before resorting to going the punishment route. A route that can cause more problems for the kids.

If the aim is to help kids, then help them. This is not helping them. That's all I'm saying.

 

I agree...This is ridiculous...

On a side note, I've been with many women, and have come home smelling like them or their scent, but I can't imagine being arrested...