What a massive misunderstanding of the word “Right”!

[Ghost1958]

I ask because all through my school years and my kids school years the school had no authority to prevent my or their leaving whenever we pleased.

Oh they could huff and puff un3xcused absence but did not dare lift the first finger to physically stop me as they did not have that authority.

 

[eye95]

Who stated in the constitution students have no freedom to travel?

Uninformed question. Or condescending. If you meant to be condescending, please read this answer as having been written in a condescending tone. If you are indeed uninformed, then assume this was written pedantically.

Either way, if you’d like to have an adult conversation where we explore each other’s ideas in a more productive way, please ask adult questions. Thank you.

On topic:

You seem to be under the incorrect impression that the Constitution is the source of our Rights, the grantor of our Rights, the definer of our Rights, or maybe even the list of our Rights. It is none of these things.

The Constitution is a document that defines our national government and that attempted to put it in a box, describing the few things it was authorized to do and a few things that it was prohibited from doing.

The “who” part of your question is particularly silly, but let me answer it: No one.

Rights are a philosophical concept. They are only meaningful when thought of as a gift of God (God-given) or, if you prefer, inherent in our nature (natural). I dare you to find a philosopher upon whose thinking our concept of Rights was based who asserts that children have the same Rights as adults or that parents (and their agents) cannot exercise authority over their children in a way which, when done to adults, would be considered violating an adult’s Rights.

Children have no Right to travel in that their parents (and their agents) have the authority to restrict the travel of children.

 

[eye95]

I ask because all through my school years and my kids school years the school had no authority to prevent my or their leaving whenever we pleased.

Oh they could huff and puff un3xcused absence but did not dare lift the first finger to physically stop me as they did not have that authority.

You are conflating (again) the legal ability to physically prevent a behavior from happening at the time it is happening from the ability to prohibit the behavior and lawfully assess a consequence for the behavior after it has happened.

Schools have the moral and lawful ability to:

1. State a policy that denies a student’s “right” to travel, to leave the school at will.

2. Assess consequences for violating a stated policy.

3. Attempt to restrain a student from leaving the school at will, up to a reasonable point to avoid assaulting the student.

4. Call the police who have a higher level of restraint which they can lawfully apply.

Not only do they have this ability, they have this duty. They can be held liable in a court if they fail to maintain custody of a child and something untoward happens to him or her.

The conflation of which you are guilty (repeatedly) is an immature one that is essentially saying: “You aren’t the boss of me. You can’t make me.” In many cases, others are the boss of you. And while “making you” is not the route most people even want to take, they can assess consequences, and when the chips are down, they can call someone who legally can “make you”.

Rights are not a concept that allows you to do whatever you want, regardless of the impact on others. They are a concept that allows us to live together in a way that does not require us to make each other do anything. Rights are a way of cooperating in society that allow us to do what we wish without interfering with the ability of others to do as they wish. That is the essence of my Razor below.

Rights are not nearly as meaningful when we demand what we perceive to be ours from others as they are when we respect the Rights of others.

 

[eye95]

Case in point:

When I was a teacher, a student announced his intention to leave the school. I instructed him not to do so. He left the room and headed for the front doors. I beat him to them, and blocked his way, again explicitly informing him that he was not to leave the school, in fact that he was to go to the office. He pushed past me (essentially assaulting me) and left the building.

The school called the cops and the parents. He was brought back to the school building—against his will, in definite “violation of his ‘right’ to travel”. Had he merely left, he would have probably been suspended. Since he pushed past me to leave, he was expelled. We no longer cared when or where he traveled.

 

[Ghost1958]

Uninformed question. Or condescending. If you meant to be condescending, please read this answer as having been written in a condescending tone. If you are indeed uninformed, then assume this was written pedantically.

Either way, if you’d like to have an adult conversation where we explore each other’s ideas in a more productive way, please ask adult questions. Thank you.

On topic:

You seem to be under the incorrect impression that the Constitution is the source of our Rights, the grantor of our Rights, the definer of our Rights, or maybe even the list of our Rights. It is none of these things.

The Constitution is a document that defines our national government and that attempted to put it in a box, describing the few things it was authorized to do and a few things that it was prohibited from doing.

The “who” part of your question is particularly silly, but let me answer it: No one.

Rights are a philosophical concept. They are only meaningful when thought of as a gift of God (God-given) or, if you prefer, inherent in our nature (natural). I dare you to find a philosopher upon whose thinking our concept of Rights was based who asserts that children have the same Rights as adults or that parents (and their agents) cannot exercise authority over their children in a way which, when done to adults, would be considered violating an adult’s Rights.

Children have no Right to travel in that their parents (and their agents) have the authority to restrict the travel of children.

Qy
Quick cus I don't have much time.
Your right in the COTUS does not grant the rights it protects.

It does list God given rights in the BOR, though not all.

It grants limited power to gov and it's agencies.

Public school is a gov agency, not "parents agents".

You didn't answer my question at all.

Again. Public Schools are gov agencies one may or may not send their children too.

Where is a public school granted power in the COTUS to interfere with a child's free travel right?

Please no more parents agents wandering around.

I left school whenever I pleased when my parents said I could. The school had no authority to stop me, or my kids when I told them they could leave.

Same question stands because you didn't answer it the first time.

 

[solus]

Ah, the grand stories of school lore where children are told their parents walked in snow/rain/whatnot up hills both ways.

Or how the children were disciplined to assure they learnt their three “Rs”.

Or how the nuns...no shan’t raise that specter in the current climate

 

[OC for ME]

Once the kid reaches 18, if in school, all bets are off. I would go as low as 17, but this is just me. If a school refers a 18 y/o to truancy officers/juvie court, the state (and its employees) has exceeded its authority and should be held to account for a rights violation and criminal charges for any physical restraint of a adult as would be a cop for unlawful arrest or "detainment."

 

[Ghost1958]

Once the kid reaches 18, if in school, all bets are off. I would go as low as 17, but this is just me. If a school refers a 18 y/o to truancy officers/juvie court, the state (and its employees) has exceeded its authority and should be held to account for a rights violation and criminal charges for any physical restraint of a adult as would be a cop for unlawful arrest or "detainment."

Unless it has changed in my state one could quit school at 16.

 

[eye95]

Which level on the pyramid was picking a single point, a single nit, to try to refute a complex idea?

I’ll just take that as a failure to refute. When something new comes up, I’ll rejoin.

 

[solus]

Which level on the pyramid was picking a single point, a single nit, to try to refute a complex idea?

I’ll just take that as a failure to refute. When something new comes up, I’ll rejoin.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose [Karr] eh eye95...

 

[OC for ME]

It is not a complex idea...until the state gets involved.

 

[Ghost1958]

It's only a complex issue to those who must make the simplest if subjects into a college thesis .

 

[eye95]

I won’t respond to the bottom-three-style posts. Maybe I’ll respond to “Contradiction”. I prefer to respond to the top three.

Replies from the bottom three levels to a post of substance are an admission of rhetorical bankruptcy.

 

[Ghost1958]

 

[OC for ME]

Do Local Governments have Federal Constitutional Rights?

https://canons.sog.unc.edu/do-local-governments-have-federal-constitutional-rights/

Interesting read. The linked monograph by David Lawrence is quite singular.

I knew this in a general sense, as in "well yeah...duh!" It is enlightening to read case law on the OP's topic from fellas who have the time to do my research for me. Chalk up the misuse of the term, as eye95 wisely observes, to nitwit media types exposing their nitwittery...with nitwit consumers accepting their nitwittery.

Full disclosure: I too have uttered to a government drone, one or twice, "You have no right..." back then little did I know that my ignorance was not so ignorant...especially now...that I am less ignorant.

...my DW's opinion of my level of ignorance notwithstanding.

 

[eye95]

In a statement, a spokesman for the school district said the school had a right to test the child...

They may have the authority. The don’t have the “right”.

If it were my child, they wouldn’t even have the authority. There would be a letter on file stating that, if they had “reasonable suspicion”, they are to contact me, and share that reasonable suspicion. If I agreed with their suspicion, I would obtain the test. If I didn’t agree, I’d tell them to get bent.

If they did not like that, that’s what courts are for.

Folks, we need to stop just blindly turning over authority to government entities, thinking that it makes our lives easier. It may—until the government decides to target us or ours.

Governments don’t have rights relative to the People. They have authorities that have been granted (preferably explicitly, sometimes implicitly due to indifference) by the People.

Colorado mom upset when daughter given drug test without her knowledge

The mother of a 12-year-old Colorado middle school student received an apology from district officia

www.whio.com

 

[solus]

Snippp...

Colorado mom upset when daughter given drug test without her knowledge

The mother of a 12-year-old Colorado middle school student received an apology from district officia

www.whio.com

Do you kind folks know if you type in the following statement in your browser(s):

“Thornton co child given drug test”

You will only receive one ping from the DAYTON DAILY NEWS about the subject...thats it for three pages...

If you type “denver post thornton child drug tested” nada, also three pages

If you enter the Post’s site and type “thornton child drug tested” no article or blurb pops up

Soooo eye95 your point of posting another jaded newspeek nonsensical & apparent false from your beloved WHIO?

Oh BTW eye95, this on since9’s big olde gaily colored triangle, is REFUTATION ~ finds the mistake and explains, yet again, why its mistaken, using quotes!

 

[eye95]

Took about 15 seconds of my time:

Adams County parent upset after 6th-grader drug tested without notification

THORNTON, Colo. — Adams 12 Five Star Schools is apologizing to a Brighton mother after her 6th-grade daughter was drug tested at school without the mother’s knowledge. Twelve-year-old A…

kdvr.com

 

[solus]

Took about 15 seconds of my time:

Adams County parent upset after 6th-grader drug tested without notification

THORNTON, Colo. — Adams 12 Five Star Schools is apologizing to a Brighton mother after her 6th-grade daughter was drug tested at school without the mother’s knowledge. Twelve-year-old A…

kdvr.com

Course it did when you ping the cite in the whio who’s story doesnt read like KDVRs...

Following instructions isn’t a forte is it, please re-read my post.

 

[eye95]

Do we have any on-topic replies?