Category Archives: Mental Health

WARNING: Students Who Force 3rd Grade Boys To Perform Oral Sex On Them Might Be Suspended for 10 Days!!!

homeschooler rights

So forcible oral rape of a 3rd grade boy in school isn’t a reason for criminal charges like forgetting and leaving your legally owned gun in the car after using it for target practice or exploding a pop bottle on school grounds when trying a science experiment.

Nope. Forcible oral rape of a minor in a public school gets you 10 days suspension… only a few days longer than the kid who accidentally ate his pop tart into the shape of a gun.

Meanwhile people who homeschool their children so that they don’t have to put up with all of the insanity are persecuted and considered terrorists by the government.

Makes total sense :/

Third Grade Boy Forced to Perform Oral Sex On Other Students

By Matt Liponoga | June 1, 2013 – 9:42 pm | News

abuse31n-4-web

 

We all know that school systems are becoming worse and worse. From the unwarranted suspensions we’ve all heard of, to the fact that our testing scores hasn’t improved in 40 years. So this story doesn’t come as much of a surprise but I would recommend looking into alternatives if you haven’t already.

The 8-year-old boy was waiting in the hall after lunch, ready to attend his next class. Without warning, a fifth-grader and two third-graders grabbed the boy and, as he screamed futilely for help, dragged him into a bathroom stall. Once there, they pinned his arms behind his back, forced him to his knees, pulled down their pants, and demanded that he perform oral sex on him.

After what happened, the little boy was left in the bathroom and then went to his teacher to report what had happened. The teacher notified the principal who called the mother of the young boy and said, ““I don’t know how to explain this to you, but your son was in the bathroom and was forced to perform oral sex on three boys.”

This was not the first time that the fifth-grader had sexually assaulted someone. During the 2009-2010 school year, he touched a third-grade girl under her skirt. Charyn Koppelson, who was principal then, did nothing to discipline the boy.

After this incident the fifth grader was suspended for 10 days and the two others involved were given a 5 day suspension. It probably sounds like a vacation to these kids after such a heinous act.

Since the incident happened, the mother has filed a $6 million lawsuit against the State of New York’s Education System. She says, “He would wake up in the middle of the night screaming and crying. My son was a very joyful, loving little boy, and the next few weeks after that he would just sit down and stare at the wall. He never stepped foot inside that school ever again.”

We wish the family the best of luck both in the lawsuit and the recovery of the young boy. This should have never happened, and it is time we stop turning our children over to the state and pretending like they will be taken care of.

http://freepatriot.org/2013/06/01/third-grade-boy-forced-to-perform-oral-sex-on-other-students/?fb_source=pubv1

Facebooktwitterrss

Drivers Don’t Have to Be Impaired To be Convicted of DUI in 12 States and Pay Hefty Fines

DUI CONVICTION DOESN'T REQUIRE IMPAIRMENT

DUI / DWI laws were passed to criminalize the behavior of driving while under the “influence” of certain substances. This terminology seems to imply that it is directed toward a driver of a vehicle being currently under the influence of a substance that might intoxicate or otherwise impair judgment.

I’m not a genius or anything, but I do think that a different, separate charge would be more appropriate for people who are not currently being mentally impaired or influenced by an intoxicating substance, but, instead, were influenced or impaired by an intoxicating substance illegally at some time in the past.

After all, if you are not mentally impaired and your judgment is not currently altered at the time when you are driving then how can you be charged with driving while under the influence?

Having imbibed an illegal substance at some point in the past isn’t the same thing as being currently mentally impaired by it while concurrently driving an automobile.

Arizona drivers are going to jail, paying big fines and losing their licenses even after blood tests prove they were not high.

EJ Montini  March 11, 2013

What if you could get a DUI for having had a few drinks two weeks ago?

Crazy, right?

Except it’s happening. Not with alcohol, but with marijuana.

Drivers from Arizona and at least nine other states, including Utah, Iowa, Indiana, Delaware and Rhode Island, are going to jail, paying big fines and losing their licenses after having gotten driving-under-the-influence citations when blood tests prove they were not high.

“It makes no sense,” says attorney Michael Alarid III, who is representing a man charged in Arizona. “But this is how prosecutors and the courts are interpreting the law. And the legislature doesn’t appear to want to change it. So we’re hoping we can get the issue before the state Supreme Court.”

How could a person who is not high get busted for DUI? It happens when science meets politics.

Blood tests can detect two important chemical compounds that come from marijuana. One of them, THC, makes a person high and lasts for hours. The other inactive chemical, created as your body neutralizes THC, can linger in a person’s system for up to a month.

In Arizona, state law says if you have either of these compounds in your blood, you are guilty of a DUI.

“As things stand,” Alarid says, “a person from Arizona could go on a snowboarding trip to Colorado or Washington state, where marijuana is legal for recreational use, and then a month later he could be driving in Arizona, get stopped and be convicted of DUI.”

Not long ago, the state Court of Appeals upheld Arizona’s law, which says if any “metabolite” of a drug like marijuana is found in a person’s blood he is guilty of DUI.

Alarid got a lower court to dismiss the original charges against his client after it was shown that the marijuana chemicals found in his client’s blood were inactive. The Court of Appeals overturned it. In its ruling in Arizona v. Shilgevorkyan,the court says, “We determined that the legislative ban extends to all substances, whether capable of causing impairment or not.”

Apparently, there is no statute in Arizona outlawing impaired logic. Not in Michigan or Illinois, either, where even the state Supreme Courts have upheld DUI convictions of people not under the influence of anything.

In Arizona, the case is being prosecuted by the Maricopa County Attorney’s office. I asked County Attorney Bill Montgomery whether he believed it was appropriate to convict people for DUI when the only marijuana metabolite in their blood did not cause impairment.

He responded, “The Court of Appeals decision is unremarkable in light of consistent case law on the issue of proscribing driving with a prohibited drug or its metabolite in a driver’s system.”

Because that didn’t answer my question I tried again, asking whether Montgomery would favor amending state law to differentiate between metabolites that cause impairment and those that do not.

He responded, “No. We do not want to create an incentive to ‘game’ how long it takes for any given metabolite to leave a driver’s system. Nice try, Ed.”

It isn’t a game. It’s chemistry.

Some states at least try to acknowledge the science. In Washington state, for example, a person is considered impaired if a blood test shows 5.0 nanograms of marijuana’s active ingredient. That level has been compared to a .08 limit for alcohol.

“An alcohol DUI in Arizona gets your license suspended for 90 days,” Alarid says. “After 30 days, you can drive to work and school. On the other hand, a drug-related DUI, like marijuana, gets you the same fines and jail time but revokes your license for a year. That means a person who wasn’t impaired could be punished more harshly than someone who was.”

Alarid is hoping the Arizona Supreme Court will take his case.

“In addition to the fairness issue, this doesn’t seem right in a state where citizens passed a medical marijuana law,” Alarid says. “It really puts an unfair burden on those patients.”

The risk of getting busted for a DUI charge when they are not impaired might cause some medical marijuana patients not to use the drug, no matter how much it helps them.

Of course, it’s probably just a coincidence that the politicians who could revise the DUI statute hate the medical marijuana law. As does the county attorney.

Coincidence. Yeah, that must be it.

EJ Montini is a columnist for The Arizona Republic. The column originally appeared in The Republic.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/03/11/dui-drivers-marijuana/1979905/

Facebooktwitterrss

The Top Five Special Interest Groups Getting Rich From Pot Arrests and Lobbying To Keep Marijuana Illegal

should marijuana be punished with jail time not according to the vast majority
POSTED AT 9:04 AM BY 
Last year, over 850,000 people in America were arrested for marijuana-related crimes. Despite public opinion, the medical community, and human rights experts all moving in favor of relaxing marijuana prohibition laws, little has changed in terms of policy.

There have been many great books and articles detailing the history of the drug war. Part of America’s fixation with keeping the leafy green plant illegal is rooted in cultural and political clashes from the past.

However, we at Republic Report think it’s worth showing that there are entrenched interest groups that are spending large sums of money to keep our broken drug laws on the books:

1.) Police Unions: Police departments across the country have become dependent on federal drug war grants to finance their budget. In March, we published a story revealing that a police union lobbyist in California coordinated the effort to defeat Prop 19, a ballot measure in 2010 to legalize marijuana, while helping his police department clients collect tens of millions in federal marijuana-eradication grants. And it’s not just in California. Federal lobbying disclosures show that other police union lobbyists have pushed for stiffer penalties for marijuana-related crimes nationwide.

2.) Private Prisons Corporations: Private prison corporations make millions by incarcerating people who have been imprisoned for drug crimes, including marijuana. As Republic Report’s Matt Stoller noted last year, Corrections Corporation of America, one of the largest for-profit prison companies, revealed in a regulatory filing that continuing the drug war is part in parcel to their business strategy. Prison companies have spent millions bankrolling pro-drug war politicians and have used secretive front groups, like the American Legislative Exchange Council, topass harsh sentencing requirements for drug crimes.

should marijuana be punished with jail time not according to the vast majority

3.) Alcohol and Beer Companies: Fearing competition for the dollars Americans spend on leisure, alcohol and tobacco interests have lobbied to keep marijuana out of reach. For instance, the California Beer & Beverage Distributors contributed campaign contributions to a committee set up to prevent marijuana from being legalized and taxed.

4.) Pharmaceutical Corporations: Like the sin industries listed above, pharmaceutical interests would like to keep marijuana illegal so American don’t have the option of cheap medical alternatives to their products. Howard Wooldridge, a retired police officer who now lobbies the government to relax marijuana prohibition laws, told Republic Report that next to police unions, the “second biggest opponent on Capitol Hill is big PhRMA” because marijuana can replace “everything from Advil to Vicodin and other expensive pills.”

5.) Prison Guard Unions: Prison guard unions have a vested interest in keeping people behind bars just like for-profit prison companies. In 2008, the California Correctional Peace Officers Association spent a whopping $1 million to defeat a measure that would have “reduced sentences and parole times for nonviolent drug offenders while emphasizing drug treatment over prison.”

RELATED: Why Can’t You Smoke Pot? Because Lobbyists Are Getting Rich Off of the War on Drugs

Facebooktwitterrss
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!