School bans CCTV film check to protect iPod thief’s rights. Can they get any dumber?
on 03/10/2009 at 06:12 AM
So Typical of the Fiberal Nanny Statism - reminds me of the horrible High School the kids were in when we were in TX - one day (I was there, so I got to witness it) the cops come to arrest a girl (sad, I happen to know her as she was my youngest’s friend) and the Counslor (one of the Vice Principals) stood there and said - we can’t put our hands on her as she basically ran out a back door of the school - but the cops were slicker than the Fiberal Nanny State idiots and had a cop at the back door too.
One of the teachers actually got up from his desk and closed the door to his room to ‘avoid’ hearing the beating of one student by another.
My only mistake was not pulling the kids out of that school immediately - they went from a school with a terrible graduation rate and about a 90% rate of kids who don’t go onto college to a school with a 97% graduation rate and a 70% college attendance rate (so unlike what the Fiberals also are pushing now) my kids proved that you can recover from a failure/failing school.
Hmmm.... so average citizens can’t spy on one another, even when investigating a crime, using something specifically put there FOR investigating a crime....
...but school administration can spy on people, that’s all right.
To answer the question posed in your headline...yeah, they can get dumber.
And probably will.
Posted by CKO86
03/10/2009 at 01:16 PM
"rights of the thief”? What? They’ve got the...individual (had to stop for a second there so as not to be profane)And they won’t bust him because he has a “right” to BE a thief?
And GOF, what about the shower room cam eh? Nudge, nudge, wink, wink, eh, eh.Hey guys, there’s an even better bit here. Notice how they try to blame him for having an iPod?
“As a rule it is locked but every child knows that if they have anything valuable in their bag they have to give it to the teacher for them to lock up.
The spokesman added that it was the choice of pupils as to whether they brought an iPod into school.
Pupils had responsibility for their iPods and they were not allowed to use them in lessons unless directed to by the teachers.
Now I seem to have noticed that the thief took the whole bag and sorted the items out at leisure. What did the thief want? He grabbed the whole bag, including school books. Had he only taken the iPod, he could have easily slipped it into his pocket. In other words, the thief was on a fishing expedition, probably didn’t even know the iPod was in the bag and was just looking for something to steal, like house keys or cash. You find much better pickings in a home than you do in a bag. Does that mean it’s the kid’s fault for having house keys?
The schoolboy’s bag, containing his house keys and books, as well as the iPod, was taken during a PE lesson, forcing his mother, Lesley Wheen, to change the locks on their home.
Oh yeah, since there seems to be a hint that nothing incriminating was seen on the tape (like the thief walking out with the bag in his hand) by the cops and school people, does that mean the thief didn’t walk out with the bag right then? Anyone think he might have stashed it and removed it later? How about stashed it, pocketed the iPod and whatever else he fancied, walked out looking clean and left the bag to be found weeks later. It might be interesting to review a lot more of the video tape. Gee, what a concept, don’t go for the loot until the heat dies down or at least don’t get seen with the incriminating stuff.
SUMMARY: It’s the kid’s fault for owning an iPod and the cops not only couldn’t find a pig in a bathtub but they wouldn’t accept any help in finding said pig.
