School principal refuses to give teen's phone back to dad

#251
#251
hndog609 said:
I don't like the precedent...at all...even a little bit.

I mentioned it earlier but I don't mind at all making the parent come pick it up themselves. I would hope having to do that would get pretty tiresome. Also, how is the only appropriate action the school can take something it shouldn't have any legal business doing in the first place?

And you're right, it isn't a big deal, have the school come up with something other than seizing private property for punishment.
Click to expand...
The school did try another route and it obviously didn't get the point across. This wasn't some arbitrary, surprise punishment. The parents anger is misdirected
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#252
#252
utvolpj said:
The school did try another route and it obviously didn't get the point across. This wasn't some arbitrary, surprise punishment. The parents anger is misdirected
Click to expand...

The parent should be furious as hell at the kid. I'm not cutting slack here for the kid either...suspend or expel for all I care...those are options available to a school. Having said that I'll say again schools have no business presuming they have control over property rights. Somebody paid for that phone and it's attendant costs and it belongs to them, not the school. It's literally impossible for me see how the latter depriving the former of possession amounts to anything other than illegal seizure of property.
 
#253
#253
hndog609 said:
The parent should be furious as hell at the kid. I'm not cutting slack here for the kid either...suspend or expel for all I care...those are options available to a school. Having said that I'll say again schools have no business presuming they have control over property rights. Somebody paid for that phone and it's attendant costs and it belongs to them, not the school. It's literally impossible for me see how the latter depriving the former of possession amounts to anything other than illegal seizure of property.
Click to expand...

Because it's very likely the parent was made aware it was possible. Is it illegal if they consent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#254
#254
utvolpj said:
Because it's very likely the parent was made aware it was possible. Is it illegal if they consent?
Click to expand...

There may be an interesting legal question in there. If a school asked me sign away rights to my own property I'd tell them to pound sand. If they said it was "required" then I'd sign it, wipe my arse with it and ignore it since I'm dubious such a "under duress" agreement would hold up. To the broader issue of if a school even has the legal authority to enforce such a contract, even if considered consensual at the time, I'm not sure.

I will say I profoundly disapprove of the idea. School "policy" has no business being confused with actual law and private property rights aren't something people should take lightly. It looks like this kid is a real piece of work and the parent may be as bad or worse...it's still a property rights issue in my eyes and not a case study of bad behavior/parenting. I think people should forget the players involved in this particular case and simply ask themselves if they feel a school has seizure rights of people's property. For myself I very much do not.
 
#255
#255
When I was in sales I called on customers at places where there was a no phone, zero tolerance rule in effect. They would absolutely confiscate any phone seen on their campus. Now, would that be legal for them to do? All I know is it was not something I ever wanted to challenge. It's not that difficult to put the phone down for a couple of hours
 
#257
#257
utvolpj said:
When I was in sales I called on customers at places where there was a no phone, zero tolerance rule in effect. They would absolutely confiscate any phone seen on their campus. Now, would that be legal for them to do? All I know is it was not something I ever wanted to challenge. It's not that difficult to put the phone down for a couple of hours
Click to expand...

It's not the confiscations that are at the heart of the debate here (although some want you to believe that) but rather how long that confiscation lasts for.
 
#258
#258
Grand Vol said:
It's not the confiscations that are at the heart of the debate here (although some want you to believe that) but rather how long that confiscation lasts for.
Click to expand...
Mine would have been gone completely. The policy evidently outlined when it would be returned. If you value your property then do what is necessary to protect it. Like I said, this is likely a good learning experience for the father and the child
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#259
#259
Rasputin_Vol said:
Since I was in school and up until now, I've never understood how schools are allowed to keep Sony Walkmans, Gameboys, beepers, and now iphones. They should only be allowed to take them from the students and give it to the parents IMMEDIATELY...
Click to expand...

It called eBay supplemental income
 
#262
#262
So would anyone who thinks this is fine be okay with a school confiscating your child's car for weeks at a time after repeat parking offenses? I'm not talking about having it towed where you pay at any time to get it back. I mean seizing it and not returning it for weeks.

Or what if the policy was that you never got the phone back? In a vacuum the temporary seizure isn't a huge deal, but as stated above it sets a dangerous precedent. What are the limits to what can be written into school policy that everyone is supposed to mindlessly agree with?

Personally I don't like the idea of any group outside of law enforcement having the power to arbitrarily decide why and for how long they can confiscate my property.
 
#263
#263
jjay2518 said:
So would anyone who thinks this is fine be okay with a school confiscating your child's car for weeks at a time after repeat parking offenses? I'm not talking about having it towed where you pay at any time to get it back. I mean seizing it and not returning it for weeks.

Or what if the policy was that you never got the phone back? In a vacuum the temporary seizure isn't a huge deal, but as stated above it sets a dangerous precedent. What are the limits to what can be written into school policy that everyone is supposed to mindlessly agree with?

Personally I don't like the idea of any group outside of law enforcement having the power to arbitrarily decide why and for how long they can confiscate my property.
Click to expand...

Because that scenario isn't feasible. I do know schools that tell kids they have lost the privilege to drive their car onto campus after several repeat violation....but to confiscate a car is not possible and doesn't compare to the phone situation.
 
#266
#266
volinSmyrna said:
Because that scenario isn't feasible. I do know schools that tell kids they have lost the privilege to drive their car onto campus after several repeat violation....but to confiscate a car is not possible and doesn't compare to the phone situation.
Click to expand...

Impounding a car has more history behind it and is most certainly possible.

Most people supporting this school policy with cellphones have no understanding of what a slippery slope is.
 
#267
#267
Rasputin_Vol said:
Impounding a car has more history behind it and is most certainly possible.

Most people supporting this school policy with cellphones have no understanding of what a slippery slope is.
Click to expand...

Yep, set a precedent and people will try and push the line further.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top