It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Schools Extend Gun Free Zones Into Your Own Home!

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2020 @ 06:26 PM
link   
 


IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS
Posting work written by others
 




edit on Thu Aug 20 2020 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 20 2020 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Don't worry, pretty soon it will be commonplace. Monthly random "checks" by LE on American homes to make sure households have no "contraband."

After all, if you have nothing to hide, this is perfectly fine.

Comply.



posted on Aug, 20 2020 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Home school your kids.

Enough with the BS. There are so many options out there. It will be better for them and you'll actually be with your kids and know what they are learning.

Home. School. Your. Kids.

Edit:
Any time government is in your home they spy. It doesn't matter if it's the cops, the CIA, or a teacher. Something as innocuous as a BB gun is more than enough for government officials to ruin your life.

Get away from government. That means getting your children away from the grasp of Marxist teachers and their unions.
edit on 8 20 2020 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2020 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: StallionDuck

Okay. She said:


“I felt violated as a parent, for my child, who’s standing there with police officers in his room, just to see the fear on his face,” she added.


Why TF did you let them in? When they ask, 'May we search your sons room?", you say, "No".

I didn’t get that at all. I would’ve told them no, no warrant, no searchy. Some people do things against there will when under pressure.



posted on Aug, 20 2020 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Do you have a warrant? No? Have a nice day, and I'll be here if you get one.

That would be the extent of that interaction. Specifically because I would want them to get a warrant, come search the place and find a dang BB gun after I've been on the phone with my attorney. That would be a lawsuit against that school just waiting to pay out in a big way.



posted on Aug, 20 2020 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: StallionDuck

I don't know if you need to get all mental. You ask if they have a warrant and if they don't you tell them they can't come in and stay safe out there.

But she sounds like a Karen: Let's cops in house, outraged by cops in house.


I did not get that impression at all.

I thought she was more outraged at the school and understanding of the cops. Even the cops sounded unusually understanding - and that is coming from a Brit!



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 02:53 AM
link   
ok there is three issues as i see coming into this discussion and (as usual) getting mixed together...
so for the ideal of ATS deny ignorance let me separate them and discuss each of them.

one. the school intervening for welfare of a child

by all means they SHOULD be doing this...
but with REASONABLE LIMITS.

If during the zoom session they see something that IF THEY SAW on their own property or poses a clear and present danger... then that would be ok to involve the authorities.
in this case if a young child had A CLEARLY IDENTIFIED firearm in their POSSESSION at time of zoom, then by all means that poses a clear and present danger.

but a bb gun, paintball gun or something they cant clearly identify on a wall , in a case, whatever... NO the police should not be called just on that..

a call to the parents to clear it up.. by all means

but given that they are ON A COMPUTER and NOT ON SCHOOL PROPERTY, some of the same rules of having items, food, or hell even dress code (outside of naked) do not apply..

two....

should she have let the police in in this case.

first IMO anyone who has police say they are here because of concern from the school should follow up with what specifically they are here for...
the reason is one should know what they are up against so to determine a proper course of action

either following your right to legally not comply (will get more into that on point three) then get an atty or if you can clear up the issue without adding extra problems.

I am not gonna say what she did was wrong, but I (even working in Law enforcement) dont like giving anyone a "blank check".

three.

this general idea of not cooperating with law enforcement.
first alot of you tube videos give very bad legal advice..
either they give you WRONG or non applicable laws to your situation, or by following it make it worse.
you really need to ask yourself in any situation three basic questions

one... is what they are asking me to do or telling me to do a LEGAL ORDER.. not what i think is legal or ESPECIALLY NOT just because i dont agree with the law so i will not comply..
ignorance of the law is not a defense in court.

two.. if it is legal to refuse will it help me or hurt me in the long run..

this is MOST IMPORTANT question to be asking... yes in alot of cases it can be legal (ex) to refuse a search of your car...
but they CAN (not saying they will or will succeed ) then get a warrant if they can provide probable cause/ reasonable suspicion (depending on state law) .
that can take time (alot of it) and/or they may (key word may) pursue a minor illegal thing you didnt know you had because you caused them more trouble/to justify their actions.

to sum up this section...
taking all the available facts at that moment, it is worth more to you to just go along and be accommodating (not boot licking so to those gonna use that tired old line... DONT) to the police or to refuse and see if they are gonna take a different LEGAL approach (ex get a warrant) .

there is no right or wrong answer (unlike the you tube advice gives) but what is in YOUR BENIFIT.
sometimes just letting them check and go on your way is best option
the side of the road to be a know it all jerk you will NEVER WIN.

now specifically on this case

the school was right IF they saw something that concerned them to take action

the view that a virtual classroom has identical requirements as in person WAS WRONG.

the calling the cops first (unless they HONESTLY thought it was a real gun, only seeing the actual view can ANYONE HERE say if that is possible or not) was wrong action
a chat on the phone first would have been more appropriate.

the police asking to search was in and of itself not wrong...

the woman NOT ASKING (going on just what was given) FOR MORE DETAILS why they were there was IMO not the best thing to do.
letting them in without knowing why they specifically were there to search IMO was STUPID .
even if they said they were doing a welfare check on the child for the school would have at least given more information to decide what to do.

overall i am glad it worked out and the police were understanding.

the police professionalism was top notch and should be commended.

I bet the police thought it was BS too, but they dont get to choose to ignore the call.

in conclusion i will judge the mother or police harshly on this.

i am however greatly disturbed on how the school viewed and handled this.
along with the precedence it is setting.

scrounger



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 05:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: TwistedPsycho
I did not get that impression at all.

I thought she was more outraged at the school and understanding of the cops. Even the cops sounded unusually understanding - and that is coming from a Brit!


Yeah?


“I felt violated as a parent, for my child, who’s standing there with police officers in his room, just to see the fear on his face,” she added.


You wouldn't have felt violated if you didn't let the cops in.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 06:07 AM
link   
I wouldn't blame the schools; our society has become so litigious in the last few decades that schools simply don't know how to react to situations anymore. They have all adapted zero tolerance policies, to make sure they have covered their @ss, so its impossible for them to avoid situations like this one.

The fact that the parents are divorced probably didn't help matters. Had the young boy had a real and loaded gun in his room, some how wound up shooting himself, and the non custodial parent found out the school could see the gun in the video and did nothing he might seek to sue the school district for every penny they have.

If I'm the principle in that situation, the teacher in that situation, I'm calling the police too ... im not going to risk throwing my carrier away because you're kid might have a bb gun hanging on his wall. I'm going to do what the whole of society has forced me to do; call the police and have them worry about it.

Society needs to change in regards to this problem; but don't expect schools, principles, and teachers to be on the front lines of that change... their simply is no incentive for them to stick their neck out like that.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 06:42 AM
link   
Get em going

smile.amazon.com...=sr_1_2_sspa?dchild=1&keywords=prison+backdrop&qid=15980101 12&sr=8-2-spons&psc=1&spLa=ZW5jcnlwdGVkUXVhbGlmaWVyPUEzNVdLRU1RTEQzSldQJmVuY3J5cHRlZElkPUEwNDQ5NzQ2Mk1QM1E3QTdEODFVUyZlbmNyeXB0ZWRBZElkPUEwMzkxNDgwRlV ZNVRZVlk4QzRIJndpZGdldE5hbWU9c3BfYXRmJmFjdGlvbj1jbGlja1JlZGlyZWN0JmRvTm90TG9nQ2xpY2s9dHJ1ZQ==




posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: StallionDuck

First off, I would have throat-punched the cops, then gone to the teachers home and slashed their tires for even thinking of invading my privacy, then I'd. . . . then I'd. . . . . .

Then I'd do nothing.

. . . . .

I would have let the cops in.

I probably would have apologized to the school.

Most of us don't want trouble, out here in the real world. We live in communities where we are known. We don't want to rock the boat and maybe lose our jobs our homes.

It's all well and good to sound tough on the internet, but out in the real world?

Things are a bit different.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 07:29 AM
link   
it says " ‘concerned parent’ and subsequently two teachers saw his properly"
"concerned parent"
so they are leting ever one have a look in his home?
That is invasion of privacy! should get a lawyer!
and there must be some privacy laws to use.

people realy should make laws about this.
or soon ANY and all videos & photos, sounds
from your home will be use'd to Take your Freedom away.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 07:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Blaine91555

So much wrong with that statement that I might think you were a communist.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: buddha
it says " ‘concerned parent’ and subsequently two teachers saw his properly"
"concerned parent"
so they are leting ever one have a look in his home?
That is invasion of privacy! should get a lawyer!
and there must be some privacy laws to use.

people realy should make laws about this.
or soon ANY and all videos & photos, sounds
from your home will be use'd to Take your Freedom away.


When your on a video conference call you can see everyone else's video feed. All the kids in the class can see each other and into each others homes.

Most of these programs, Google, zoom, Skyp, have a way to turn off your own video and still remain on the call. Concerned parents can turn off their video during these online classes... they can even turn off their audio.

In fact the schools should be encouraging this behavior. One of the major problems, IMO, with these virtual classes is that half the time kids have to listen to background noise that is completely distracting. There's always that one house hold watching the TV supper loud or people arguing and ect.

And for good measure people ought to be physically covering the cameras on their computers. You don't want your school and classmates knowing what is going on in your house; than you certainly don't want spyware knowing.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 09:09 AM
link   
SCHOOLS THINK THAT THEY OWN YOUR CHILDREN.

A while back my Nephew wanted to go out for the school rifle team. He knew that I'd been on the team when I went to school and I had a rifle of the type that they used. During the summer I took him to the range and taught him how to shoot. When he went back to school he was assigned a "What Did You Do Over the Summer" paper. He wrote it about learning to shoot. A bit later CYS shows up at my Sister's door wanting to see how they stored their guns. My Sister said that they didn't have any guns. One CYS person pulled out a copy of my Nephew's paper and asked about the gun mentioned in it. She told them that it was mine. At the time I lived right down the street so they came to my door. When they asked to see how I kept my guns I said "Got a warrant?" They said "No" and I said "Have a nice day" and closed the door.

On a Saturday morning about a week later, they were back at my door with a State Police Officer. They had a Court order that prevented me from having contact with my Nieces or Nephews unless I let them in. I read the order and said to the cop "It says that I have to let you in, do I have to let them in?" He said "No." So I said come on in to the cop. I grabbed my coffee got him a cup and we went to my gun cabinet. I opened it up and he was looking at my pistols and we started talking guns. He was dry firing my Beretta and I was looking over his Sig. That lasted about 90 minutes and two cups of coffee. He went out the door and told the freezing CYS people that there was no problem here and left.

You have to tell your child that they don't sign anything with out their bringing it to you to read first. If the teacher or principal doesn't like it, tell your child to have them call you.

Schools are coming out with what they call a "Code of Conduct" that they make the kids sign. They hold the child accountable for the rules in the Code 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It doesn't matter if it is during school, after school on school property, at a school sponsored event or anyplace else.

The same Nephew got three days suspension his senior year for smoking. It was on a Saturday, in his yard and he was over 18 (legal age at the time), because a teacher going by saw him. My Sister fought it, but, the principal up held it until I said about suing him and the District for knowingly having a minor sign a "legal" contract. It got dumped.

A local school district suspended a bunch of students for drinking alcohol. They had a Church trip to Germany during the Summer. They were with their parents and were of legal age in Germany. The Church posted some photos of the trip on Facebook and someone from the District saw them. It went to Court. The suspensions were lifted, but, they were not allowed to participate in any extra-curricular activities. It cost at least one kid a football scholarship.

Has anybody seen the one about the parents being forced to sign a pledge to NOT monitor their kids online classes?



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

I saw that story today:

resistthemainstream.com...

There was a leftist teacher jackass on Twitter recently who was bemoaning having to deal with parents and that he wished he could teach children without "problematic conservative parents" interfering.

These people want our kids more than you and me. Killing us is the best answer they have. They say it all the time.

So long as they can get rid of you and me and have full access to our children they will have an agenda similar to what brought about the dystopian nightmare of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 10:09 AM
link   
What would I have done?

I honestly don't know. But I can guess, based on what I have done in the past when dealing with overly-aggressive "community leaders."

I would assume I would have questioned the police before allowing entry: "Why are you here? Who called you? What exactly are you looking for?" There's a good chance I might have let them in if the answers had been reasonable and sufficiently vague, along the lines of "We were tipped off there might be illegal items in your home." Of course, the truth would have come out during the search, and I would have withdrawn that invitation... and as long as the police have not discovered anything illegal, yes, one can withdraw that invitation if it was given under false pretenses.

Once I found out what the issue is, I would have confronted the Principal, likely by phone like Ms. Sperry did.

Sperry asked the principal why the issue couldn’t have been handled privately by phone rather than sending the police. “He said that was not their policy,” she said.

At that point, things would not have been peasant. Your silly little policy does not extend to me, and I would likely have driven to the school, forced my way in, and told him/her that to their face, daring anyone to do anything about it. Hopefully that situation would have ended as all my other "encounters" have... with the person I am confronting deciding the better part of valor is not ticking off the already ticked off redneck standing in front of them farther.

If so, I imagine I would have made my point and left. If not, well, I'd be posting this from the jail and someone would be reconsidering their life choices from a hospital bed. I can do a lot of damage before the police get there, call for backup, backup arrives, and they finally put me down.

But then I read on... this would not have ended well...

According to Sperry, the spy teacher took a screenshot of the boy’s bedroom, which is incredibly creepy and a violation of the family’s privacy. When the mother demanded to see the screenshot taken by the creeper-teacher, she was told she would not be allowed to view it because it wasn’t part of his official school record.

That is a direct invasion of my privacy and an attack on my child. I don't know this teacher, but I have already found out the hard way that they have no issue with calling the cops to me without cause. They have just performed covert operations to continue this activity against me and my child, have admitted they had no right to do so, and refused to stop. I cannot fathom any situation where there would not be bloodshed. At that point, my instinct would likely be to literally hunt this dog down and end them once and for all, probably in a very gruesome manner. The police would not be able to stop me; you mess with my kids and you have just declared war... that's just how it is. You can kill me, sure, but I get first strike.

I am not spouting bluster here, nor am I trying to be some "keyboard warrior." Several times in my life situations similar (but much less aggressive) have caused altercations between myself and teachers, principals, and even police. Not once have those issues ended with anything other than a confrontation, and not once have any of those confrontations ended with anything other than them backing away and apologizing... and that typically in front of others to make sure the embarrassment keeps the memory fresh. I am a peaceful man, but I am also a family man... and it would be my great honor to die protecting my children.

That's not a threat, but it is a warning... there is a line which is not crossed. Taking screenshots of my home and child for private use after trying to have my child taken from me for some political agenda (and make no mistake, that was the intent here) is way past that line. I would have no issue whatsoever utilizing deadly force in that situation.

Teachers have my utmost respect... but anyone can lose that respect if they attack me or mine. Some people need to understand that or things will someday end very badly for them when they cross the wrong guy. I'm a redneck; I mean what I say and I say what I mean. Treat me with a bit of respect and we'll get along just fine, but come after me and you better be ready for the war you just started. Cross that line too far and there will be no more conversation. I will finish what you started.

All excerpts from the original source.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

"According to Sperry, the spy teacher took a screenshot of the boy’s bedroom, which is incredibly creepy and a violation of the family’s privacy. When the mother demanded to see the screenshot taken by the creeper-teacher, she was told she would not be allowed to view it because it wasn’t part of his official school record."

The teacher is a school district employee, teaching the child, during school hours. If the screenshot is NOT part of the student's "official school record" then the teacher has no business having it. With some of the dumbass laws they have concerning stalking and pedophilia I'd be surprised if the teacher hasn't broken a law with that screenshot.



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

The teacher has broken a law... possibly several. There is a Constitutional right to privacy that is not over-ridden by anyone's personal opinion of what one may or may not have legally in their home. That is stalking of a child at the very least. This teacher should be charged with child stalking and, if convicted, declared a child sex offender and never allowed to be near children unsupervised again.

No one knows why she took that snapshot. By taking it and then keeping it private, in violation of every expectation of privacy, it is no stretch to believe he/she is using it for nefarious means. Why else keep it private and out of the official records?

I have consistently come down on the side of the citizen when police overstep their boundaries, and this applies even moreso to school officials. One cannot accept the responsibility to care for and instruct children without also accepting that their actions will be under closer scrutiny than otherwise.

One thing that has made this situation more prevalent and has led to the recent "Karen" phenomenon is the ability that people have to use the police as their own private harassment/revenge service. There is something seriously wrong with any society that will allow someone to anonymously make a quick phone call about someone they do not like and have the police/DHR/whoever harass them. I would love to see a Federal law that states that no one can make an official complaint against another under the guise of anonymity. Per the Constitution I have the right to confront my accuser in all legal encounters, and that applies whether they want it to or not. If there is any court action, the original accuser should be required to appear before me (or my lawyer) to answer questions regarding their motive and evidence making the complaint, under penalty of perjury and subject to the same laws that apply otherwise.

If such a law were passed, though, the downside would be we would need some new "Karen" prisons to hold the idiots who want to still be busybodies. I think the maximum sentence for making a false report should be the same as whatever their victim is charged with. If they try to take someone's child away, they should face a lifetime of never being able to be alone with another child (including their own).

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 21 2020 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I know what you mean. The other day I took my Sister to a Doctor's appointment. It was a nice day, comfortable, so I'm sitting in the car reading a book, when another car parks nearby. A woman gets out of the car, but, her son is doing something on his tablet and wants to stay there. She goes in to the office and about five minutes later another woman wants to know if I have a cell phone on me. I ask why and she tells me to call the police and report a child left alone in a car. I told her that he's not alone, I'm sitting right here, I work with his Mother and am keeping an eye on him (I don't and I'm not). She says Oh! and leaves. The Mother comes out gets in the car and leaves. Total time ten minutes. The kid was about eight years old, the car windows were down and it was a comfortable day. What's the problem?




top topics



 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join