Thread: School strip searches mandated by House With student molesta

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=52125
SEXTRA CREDIT
School strip searches mandated by House
With student molestations skyrocketing,
lawmakers demand weapon in drug fight
Posted: September 23, 2006
9:40 p.m. Eastern

By Joseph Farah
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – Even though student molestations seem to be reaching epidemic proportions in schools across America, the House of Representatives has approved a tough new anti-drug and anti-weapon law that would require local districts to develop search policies – including strip searches – with immunity against prosecution for teachers and staff.

Schools would have to develop policies for searching students, or face the loss of some federal funding, under the bill – HR 5295, approved by a voice vote Tuesday. It moves to the Senate, which does not have similar legislation pending at this time.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Federation of Teachers, the Drug Policy Alliance, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, the National Parent Teacher Association, the American Association of School Administrators and the National School Boards Association all opposed the bill saying it could invite unconstitutional searches. The National Education Association supports the legislation, according to the sponsor.

The bill was the brainchild of Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Kentucky, who said the idea was to "put a process in place so that the teachers don't have any fear of liability, but at the same time it protects the rights of the students from an unreasonable search."

The bill says only that search methods cannot be "excessively intrusive."

(Story continues below)

It drew opposition from the American Federation of Teachers, a smaller teachers union, and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The "Student Teacher Safety Act of 2006" passed on a voice vote, bypassing the committee process and with no way to hold individual members of the House accountable for their votes.

Particularly controversial is the requirement that each local school district have search policies in place, with the process defined like this:

"A search referred to in subsection (a) is a search by a full-time teacher or school official, acting on any reasonable suspicion based on professional experience and judgment, of any minor student on the grounds of any public school, if the search is conducted to ensure that classrooms, school buildings, school property and students remain free from the threat of all weapons, dangerous materials, or illegal narcotics. The measures used to conduct any search must be reasonably related to the search's objectives, without being excessively intrusive in light of the student's age, sex, and the nature of the offense."

The bill does not address whether body cavity searches are included, whether training will be provided to staffers performing them, whether background checks on staffers would be necessary, whether students who have been sexually abused in the past would be subject or whether parental notification would be required. Without those specifics, the judgment of local school administrators will be the litmus test.

Some fear the mandate for random, warrantless searches of every student, at any time, on any pretext – with immunity from prosecution – could create problems worse than drugs and weapons on campus.

Rep. George Miller of California, the senior Democrat on the House committee that oversees education issues, called the legislation an intrusion into local affairs.

"Schools and school districts already have policies in place regarding student searches," Miller said. "Those policies are the product of consultation with local administrators, teachers and parents. They take in the concerns of the community."

http://www.ed.gov/about/contacts/gen/index.html?src=gu]The Education Department[/url] has not taken a position on the legislation.

WND has documented the incidents of teacher-student sex throughout the country – particularly the new trend of female teachers molesting male students. WND news editor Joe Kovacs, who has spearheaded the research on this trend, is scheduled to appear Wednesday on "The O'Reilly Factor" on the Fox News Channel to discuss the issue.

If you would like to sound off on this issue, participate in today's WND Poll.

Related offers:

Will your child be the next to have sex with teacher?

Sex abuse, brainwashing exposed on campus!

On the 'sin' of sending kids to public school

Why homeschooling? New resource gives reasons parent education trumps all other options

NOTE: When shopping in WND's online store you have the option of paying with either a credit card or a check.

If you wish to order by phone, call our toll-free order line at 1-800-4WND-COM (1-800-496-3266).

Previous stories:

Grand jury fails to indict female teacher

'Sexy substitute' gets no jail

Another woman gets no jail time

Father of LaFave's boy toy: Debra should have got jail

Florida dismisses LaFave's charges

Judge to tell teachers: No sex with students

Sexy substitute teacher 'has relations with boy'

Woman pleads guilty to sex with student

Lesbian teacher rapist off hook – no jail time

Again! Homosexual teacher gets no jail for teen assault

Judge: No prison time for 'gay' rapist teacher

Teacher investigated for 'raping' boy quits

Again! Woman 'has sex with boy, 12'

U.S. teacher sexpidemic spreading across planet

Did 'rapist' teacher have sex with 3 other boys?

Again! Woman accused of intercourse with boy

Teacher-student sex OK, says prof

Police: Teacher had lesbian affair with girl, 15

'Pure nastiness': Teacher too sexy for God?

10-year-old forced to lick teacher's toes

Another teacher faces sex charge

Related column:

The slippery slope

Here's the text of the bill (dated 5/4/06):

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.5295.IH:

It's interesting how much has been disallowed but at the sametime what has been allowed. For example:

"Reasonable suspicion" was deemed impossible to define, but smelling marijuana on a kid does not constitute "reasonable suspicion".

Schools aren't allowed to have drug-sniffing dogs unless they can provide "reasonable suspicion" for every single kid but, they can do random drug testing.

Schools don't need warrants, but the police do.

The thing that really gets me is relying on teachers and school admin to use their "proffessional experience and judgement". The way things are these days, I don't see that schools are doing a great job teaching, how can people be expected to trust them to do that which a law enforcement officer has spent years learning? Especially when it comes to weapons?

How many times have we read stories about pedophiles in the schools and now they want to give them an open door policy to molest our kids! Oh I don't think so!

http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/092006search.cfm


House Approves Strip Search Bill

Wednesday, September 20, 2006



A bill approved by the U.S. House yesterday would require school districts around the country to establish policies making it easier for teachers and school officials to conduct wide scale searches of students. These searches could take the form of pat-downs, bag searches, or strip searches depending on how administrators interpret the law.

The Student Teacher Safety Act of 2006 (HR 5295) would require any school receiving federal funding--essentially every public school--to adopt policies allowing teachers and school officials to conduct random, warrantless searches of every student, at any time, on the flimsiest of pretexts. Saying they suspect that one student might have drugs could give officials the authority to search every student in the building.

DPA supporters and others who opposed this outrageous bill called their members of Congress this week to express their disapproval. However, House leaders circumvented the usual legislative procedure to bring the bill to a quick vote. It did not pass through the committee process, but went straight to the House floor. There, it was passed by a simple voice vote, so constituents cannot even find out how their Representative voted.

The bill moves next to the Senate, but it is unlikely to be considered there this session.

Bill Piper, DPA's director of national affairs, said, "It looks like this bill was rushed to the House floor to help out the sponsor, Rep. Geoff Davis (R-KY/4th), who is in a tight re-election race. This vote lets him say he's getting things done in Washington. But I would be surprised to see a similar push in the Senate."

HR 5295 is opposed in its current form by several groups, including the Drug Policy Alliance, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, the ACLU, the American Federation of Teachers, the National Parent Teacher Association, the American Association of School Administrators, and the National School Boards Association.

DPA will be watching the bill so that if and when it does come up again, this wide array of opponents can mobilize to stop it.

I say pull the kids out of public schools and network with a good home schooling organization.

Hubby and I plan on home schooling our kids ... when we have them that is. Our idea was to home school them until they got to highschool and then let them go to public school so they could participate in sports (if they wanted) and go to prom, things like that. This however, makes me want to reconsider letting them go at all.

I know I will be spreading the word about this new law. The press has not reported it so I will have to post it on places like myspace and other popular web sites. I would really like to know who was on the committee so they can be outed before the elections.