Comments on: Sugarland Roundup http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/ A clean, well-lighted blog. Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:05:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2 by: SUMMERT http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-73 Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:00:08 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-73 no it's not the main reason, but the more moolah they bring ing, the more taser guns they can buy and the more criminals they cam elecrticute no it’s not the main reason, but the more moolah they bring ing, the more taser guns they can buy and the more criminals they cam elecrticute

]]> by: Jim http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-72 Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:47:50 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-72 I doubt that money is the reason those cops gave out all those tickets. More likely they just weren't interested in taking the trouble to figure out who was drinking and who wasn't. Why bother when it's easier to just write tickets for everybody? I doubt that money is the reason those cops gave out all those tickets. More likely they just weren’t interested in taking the trouble to figure out who was drinking and who wasn’t. Why bother when it’s easier to just write tickets for everybody?

]]> by: SUMMERT http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-71 Mon, 20 Jun 2005 22:34:19 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-71 Well, after it rains it turns ( or it's supposed to) the grass whatever the colour of the kool-aid was, but I don't know how well it works. Well, after it rains it turns ( or it’s supposed to) the grass whatever the colour of the kool-aid was, but I don’t know how well it works.

]]> by: Leigh Ann http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-70 Mon, 20 Jun 2005 03:09:12 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-70 Summer -- thank you for your post from a teenager's point-of-view. Your view doesn't differ much from mine, and I'm glad to see it! I would LOVE to hear your father's reaction to this post and to your reply! (What happens with the kool-aid before it rains???) Summer — thank you for your post from a teenager’s point-of-view. Your view doesn’t differ much from mine, and I’m glad to see it! I would LOVE to hear your father’s reaction to this post and to your reply! (What happens with the kool-aid before it rains???)

]]> by: SUMMERT http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-68 Sun, 19 Jun 2005 00:54:28 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-68 oh yeah, they only reason those cop dudes wouldn't give the chick the sobriety test is beacause they were money hungry brats who were just looking for reasons to hand out tickets so they could rob people of their money for somthing they didn't do. oh yeah, they only reason those cop dudes wouldn’t give the chick the sobriety test is beacause they were money hungry brats who were just looking for reasons to hand out tickets so they could rob people of their money for somthing they didn’t do.

]]> by: SUMMERT http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-67 Sun, 19 Jun 2005 00:52:26 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-67 okay, What happens outside of school should stay there. Once these kids have left the care of the teachers and principals, they shouldn't be able to punish them for what they've done out of school. That should be up to the parents. And instead of giving them ISS or D-Hall or whatever the school hands out, they need to just give it to the police to deal with,(if it's necessary) as if the kids wern't their students, or just flat-out strangers. Yeah, this is way over the rights that this lady has. Besides, they could have done A LOT worse that just wrapping ( or rolling) this dude's house. if they had poored KOOL-AID on the guys yard and driveway before a rainy night....oh boy... okay, What happens outside of school should stay there. Once these kids have left the care of the teachers and principals, they shouldn’t be able to punish them for what they’ve done out of school. That should be up to the parents. And instead of giving them ISS or D-Hall or whatever the school hands out, they need to just give it to the police to deal with,(if it’s necessary) as if the kids wern’t their students, or just flat-out strangers.

Yeah, this is way over the rights that this lady has. Besides, they could have done A LOT worse that just wrapping ( or rolling) this dude’s house. if they had poored KOOL-AID on the guys yard and driveway before a rainy night….oh boy…

]]> by: Leigh Ann http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-66 Sat, 18 Jun 2005 05:45:09 +0000 http://jimthompson.org/wp/2005/06/17/sugarland-roundup/#comment-66 I, too, would have fought the charges on lack of evidence. Guilt by association? I think not. What about the parent who requested a sobriety test for her daughter and was refused. Why? I am the first one to stand up for my kids when the are unjustly accused, but also the first to punish them when they are guilty. Schools these days are way over-stepping their rights. Recently, an incident happened in our community involving a group of boys and a teacher. The boys rolled the teacher's yard, and the teacher figured out the identity of one of the culprits. How? By a inadvertent calling card left at the scene. A painted sign was left in the yard, and the teacher recognized the handwriting of of the author. The teacher called the home of the boy and spoke with his mother. The boy admitted to doing the deed and apologized. Everything was worked out satisfactorily between the parties. So, what happened? The principal found out about the rolling incident and the identity of the boy. Through association and questioning, she also found out the identity of the accomplices. She didn't find any of this out from the victim of the rolling, but from a third-party. When asked, all boys admitted their guilt. These boys are very well-behaved, AB students who never cause 'real' trouble. What did the principal feel compelled to do? She placed the boys in ISS (in-house suspension) and denied them attendance to an out-of-town trip that had been pre-planned and pre-paid (to the tune of about 100.00). She tried to convince the teacher to press charges with the law ( which the teacher wouldn't do). Where does the principal have the authority to disciplin the boys in an incident that didn't happen on school property and didn't happen at a school-sponsored event? Is this right? Is this fair? Had my son or daughter been involved in this, I would have fought tooth and nail for their rights at citizens and then punished them at home. I feel the principal definitely overstepped her rights. Of course my son always asks my permission before he goes rolling, and guess what -- I give it to him! I, too, would have fought the charges on lack of evidence. Guilt by association? I think not. What about the parent who requested a sobriety test for her daughter and was refused. Why? I am the first one to stand up for my kids when the are unjustly accused, but also the first to punish them when they are guilty.

Schools these days are way over-stepping their rights. Recently, an incident happened in our community involving a group of boys and a teacher. The boys rolled the teacher’s yard, and the teacher figured out the identity of one of the culprits. How? By a inadvertent calling card left at the scene. A painted sign was left in the yard, and the teacher recognized the handwriting of of the author. The teacher called the home of the boy and spoke with his mother. The boy admitted to doing the deed and apologized. Everything was worked out satisfactorily between the parties.

So, what happened? The principal found out about the rolling incident and the identity of the boy. Through association and questioning, she also found out the identity of the accomplices. She didn’t find any of this out from the victim of the rolling, but from a third-party. When asked, all boys admitted their guilt. These boys are very well-behaved, AB students who never cause ‘real’ trouble.

What did the principal feel compelled to do? She placed the boys in ISS (in-house suspension) and denied them attendance to an out-of-town trip that had been pre-planned and pre-paid (to the tune of about 100.00). She tried to convince the teacher to press charges with the law ( which the teacher wouldn’t do). Where does the principal have the authority to disciplin the boys in an incident that didn’t happen on school property and didn’t happen at a school-sponsored event? Is this right? Is this fair?

Had my son or daughter been involved in this, I would have fought tooth and nail for their rights at citizens and then punished them at home. I feel the principal definitely overstepped her rights. Of course my son always asks my permission before he goes rolling, and guess what — I give it to him!

]]>