Michigan DA politicizing school shooting tragedy by charging parents

[Gelston]

Parents caught hiding in a basement.

They sure are looking guilty of something. There may be more to this. If they helped plan or knew about what was going on in anyway, I think negligent homicide is too weak of a charge.

[rolfard]

Your own link,
"In 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment applies to students in the public schools but concluded that the right is lessened in a school environment. Schools do not need a warrant or even “probable cause” before searching a student. Instead, the standard for student searches is “reasonable suspicion."

No warrant required

reasonable suspicion.” Reasonable suspicion exists if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the student has violated the law or school rules"

Reasonable suspicion doesn't even require breaking a law, only a school rule.

If the parents were called in, there was certainly an amount of suspicious behavior to warrant that call and then at that point enough to send the kid home for a psych eval.

[Gelston]

Your own link,
"In 1985, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment applies to students in the public schools but concluded that the right is lessened in a school environment. Schools do not need a warrant or even “probable cause” before searching a student. Instead, the standard for student searches is “reasonable suspicion."

No warrant required

reasonable suspicion.” Reasonable suspicion exists if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the student has violated the law or school rules"

Reasonable suspicion doesn't even require breaking a law, only a school rule.

If the parents were called in, there was certainly an amount of suspicious behavior to warrant that call and then at that point enough to send the kid home for a psych eval.

They used to search our bags all the time for drugs.

They'd line us up with our shoes off and our bags infront and run a dog by and search all the bags.

[Sighisoara]

This summarizes it pretty well.

https://massp.com/considerations-for...udent-searches

Pursuant to Michigan Code 380.1306, only locker searches are permitted as they are the property of the school district.

Tldr version, a search of a student's belongings is a violation of the fourth amendment right to privacy. Lockers belonging to the school are exempt as they own the facility. Only law enforcement has the right to conduct a warrantless search and only of reasonable suspicion exists.

TLDR? Damn, dude, you didn’t even make it to the second paragraph of your link. The remainder of it totally refutes everything else you’ve said.

[Seran]

Except, whoops here we go again with that pesky reasonable suspicion element again.

Student on Day 1 is looking up ammunition on his phone, school contacts parents and unbeknownst to them, was given a firearm by his parents and parent (mom) gives him hard lesson IN NOT GETTING CAUGHT.

Student on Day 2 is caught drawing some really questionable shit and again, school contacts parents, orders counseling and parents decline to take their child home. School, lacking grounds for discipline must let the student return to class. Except wait, again unbeknownst to the school the parents left the son's firearm in an unsecured place and parents didn't check to make sure the gun was still there.

So you might be asking yourself, "Seran has a totally good point here, just what grounds did the school have to search for a firearm they had no way of knowing the student had access to?" And you're be right to ask yourself this because the school had no way of knowing the student had access to a gun. Your thought process that the school being the ultimate arbiter of safety has the sole responsibility of knowing what goes on inside the homes of their students, what they may or may not own, and what is going on in their social media at all times is asinine.

Reasonable suspicion exists if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the student has violated the law or school rules.

Just where in the serious of events which are public knowledge does the school have reasonable grounds for suspecting the student violated the law or it's rules? We know they acted in good faith with district policy by immediately summoning the parents. But where, just where did this graduate from we have this troubled student whose drawing indicatea potential for self harm would in fact be shooting up the school? For the school it didn't, but you know those pesky parents who equipped their son with a deadly weapon ought to have had an inkling a shooting was possible.

Well done on the critical thinking, or lack thereof PC Citizens, I applaud your ability to abrogate all responsibility of the parents of parenting or keeping firearms from their disturbed child. By all means continue looking into your flawlessly clouded retroscopes, presume the school with it's gift of omniscience and perfect telepathy should have known everything in advance of occurrence and conveniently forget that none of this would have occurred if the the parents didn't give their kid a gun.

[Gelston]

Except, whoops here we go again with that pesky reasonable suspicion element again.

Student on Day 1 is looking up ammunition on his phone, school contacts parents and unbeknownst to them, was given a firearm by his parents and parent (mom) gives him hard lesson IN NOT GETTING CAUGHT.

Student on Day 2 is caught drawing some really questionable shit and again, school contacts parents, orders counseling and parents decline to take their child home. School, lacking grounds for discipline must let the student return to class. Except wait, again unbeknownst to the school the parents left the son's firearm in an unsecured place and parents didn't check to make sure the gun was still there.

So you might be asking yourself, "Seran has a totally good point here, just what grounds did the school have to search for a firearm they had no way of knowing the student had access to?" And you're be right to ask yourself this because the school had no way of knowing the student had access to a gun. Your thought process that the school being the ultimate arbiter of safety has the sole responsibility of knowing what goes on inside the homes of their students, what they may or may not own, and what is going on in their social media at all times is asinine.



Just where in the serious of events which are public knowledge does the school have reasonable grounds for suspecting the student violated the law or it's rules? We know they acted in good faith with district policy by immediately summoning the parents. But where, just where did this graduate from we have this troubled student whose drawing indicatea potential for self harm would in fact be shooting up the school? For the school it didn't, but you know those pesky parents who equipped their son with a deadly weapon ought to have had an inkling a shooting was possible.

Well done on the critical thinking, or lack thereof PC Citizens, I applaud your ability to abrogate all responsibility of the parents of parenting or keeping firearms from their disturbed child. By all means continue looking into your flawlessly clouded retroscopes, presume the school with it's gift of omniscience and perfect telepathy should have known everything in advance of occurrence and conveniently forget that none of this would have occurred if the the parents didn't give their kid a gun.

You're an idiot.

[Tgo01]

In Seran land a student Googling ammunition and drawing a gun and a threatening image isn’t enough reasonable suspicion.

Why can’t you just admit that maybe the school fucked up too?

[Arqueto]

Except, whoops here we go again with that pesky reasonable suspicion element again.

Student on Day 1 is looking up ammunition on his phone, school contacts parents and unbeknownst to them, was given a firearm by his parents and parent (mom) gives him hard lesson IN NOT GETTING CAUGHT.

Student on Day 2 is caught drawing some really questionable shit and again, school contacts parents, orders counseling and parents decline to take their child home. School, lacking grounds for discipline must let the student return to class. Except wait, again unbeknownst to the school the parents left the son's firearm in an unsecured place and parents didn't check to make sure the gun was still there.

So you might be asking yourself, "Seran has a totally good point here, just what grounds did the school have to search for a firearm they had no way of knowing the student had access to?" And you're be right to ask yourself this because the school had no way of knowing the student had access to a gun. Your thought process that the school being the ultimate arbiter of safety has the sole responsibility of knowing what goes on inside the homes of their students, what they may or may not own, and what is going on in their social media at all times is asinine.



Just where in the serious of events which are public knowledge does the school have reasonable grounds for suspecting the student violated the law or it's rules? We know they acted in good faith with district policy by immediately summoning the parents. But where, just where did this graduate from we have this troubled student whose drawing indicatea potential for self harm would in fact be shooting up the school? For the school it didn't, but you know those pesky parents who equipped their son with a deadly weapon ought to have had an inkling a shooting was possible.

Well done on the critical thinking, or lack thereof PC Citizens, I applaud your ability to abrogate all responsibility of the parents of parenting or keeping firearms from their disturbed child. By all means continue looking into your flawlessly clouded retroscopes, presume the school with it's gift of omniscience and perfect telepathy should have known everything in advance of occurrence and conveniently forget that none of this would have occurred if the the parents didn't give their kid a gun.

Would you just shut the fuck up for once if you can't be honest with yourself (or anyone else)?

[Seran]

In Seran land a student Googling ammunition and drawing a gun and a threatening image isn’t enough reasonable suspicion.

Why can’t you just admit that maybe the school fucked up too?

Because they didn't and I don't subscribe to the theory that responsible gun ownership is everyone else's problem but the owner or the user hurting innocents.

[Sighisoara]

Just where in the serious of events which are public knowledge does the school have reasonable grounds for suspecting the student violated the law or it's rules? We know they acted in good faith with district policy by immediately summoning the parents. But where, just where did this graduate from we have this troubled student whose drawing indicatea potential for self harm would in fact be shooting up the school? For the school it didn't, but you know those pesky parents who equipped their son with a deadly weapon ought to have had an inkling a shooting was possible.
he.[/B][/U]

Here, let me google that for you:

https://www.michigan.gov/documents/m...d_465406_7.pdf

Start on page 17 under the heading Violation Definitions. Next try looking at numbers 5, 13, and 29. Those are all student code violations he could have been reasonably assessed. Then, check page 23 under the heading School Community Responses to Violations. The third from the top of the page is “School service assignment.” This is exactly what should have been done, Mr. You Can’t Do That in Michigan.

Do you really need people to do everything for you?