Welcome to the Police State of Connecticut

[SimpleName]

Surely the wrong forum, but whatever. Point is, you are absolutely correct. Special interests have eliminated high schoolers' choice completely. I'm fairly sure 15-19 year olds can figure out themselves that soda/candy is bad for you. If not, the kid clearly was not raised correctly. And on the bigger scope of things, as this thread was about, not allowing children to even trade or sell their legally owned items anymore? This doesn't even make sense. Trading/Selling/Buying...simply sounds like reality to me. Don't you just love how other people can set standards for your children now? You don't even have to parent them anymore. The world will do it for you. So much for responsibility, huh? Great lesson to teach children.

I'll add in a little piece from the local school district up here in northeastern PA that is really disgusting me...and I mean REALLY disgusting me. Apparently children in elementary and primary school (K-5 up here) are no longer allowed to bring in caffeinated soda any longer. It 'irks' my nerves unbelievably. The students are bringing the drinks FROM HOME, most likely with their parents' permission, but yet are still not allowed to consume them. People just let the powerful gain more control in this world. It never ends.

 

[thetruthhurtsthefed]

It makes it a police state because people are prohibited from purchasing candy and exchanging money......is that hard to figure out? What a high crime, they should have jailed the kid and put him on death row.....maybe then that would convince you that it is a police state. The school wants to make the revenue. Hell it is legal to carry money for the vending machine but hey, don't you dare purchase anything else that we the school cannot sell for you and profit.

Done with with this

 

[DealzOnWheelz]

WOW


I guess I wont be moving to Connecticut

 

[p5yph3r]

It makes it a police state because people are prohibited from purchasing candy and exchanging money......is that hard to figure out? What a high crime, they should have jailed the kid and put him on death row.....maybe then that would convince you that it is a police state. The school wants to make the revenue. Hell it is legal to carry money for the vending machine but hey, don't you dare purchase anything else that we the school cannot sell for you and profit.

Done with with this

How do _you_ know what _that_ school wants to do? Maybe they don't want to get sued over some kid getting food poisoning or worse, from some candy that some other kid sold to him or her. The school doesn't reap tremendous revenue from the vending machines either; they sign a contract to have a snack company maintain a vending machine at the school. At least they know who to go after when the source of snacks is exclusive.

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

A school district imposing irrational rules within its jurisdictional boundaries is not a police state, so take a deep breath and call this what it is; elected school board officials executing their duties the best way they see fit. We're only human. Crying "POLICE STATE" every time a rule that not everyone likes gets enforced makes people in our movement sounds paranoid to people who haven't heard and understood the Freedom message.

Remember, No Skittles Left Behind could have been launched state-wide, or worse, at the Federal level.

 

[endwellmom4RON]

My children are in 3rd grade and they have to bring a snack from home everyday because the school does not give them lunch until 1:30. I sent them to school with marshmallows and my children's teachers would not let them have them because they were not on the approved snack list. I was informed that I am only allowed to send a healthy snack. I guess this might make some sense if the snack was for the entire class but these snacks are only for my children. Who the hell has decided that the school can tell me what I can provide for a snack for my own children?

The most ironic part of this story is that a week later the classes had a Valentine's Day party and the teachers provided ice cream sundae's. So, apparently the teachers can decide when it is appropriate for my children to have a snack that is not on the approved list but a parent cannot.

 

[G-Wohl]

WOW


I guess I wont be moving to Connecticut

Don't make this stop you. Connecticut is a great place, with some of the country's best and most sophisticated public services. I'm from Fairfield, CT and it's a great place to have a family, raise a child, etc.

Though I was in the public school system when the "wellness" laws went into effect (2003) and I found the results a bit fascist as well. NEVER, however, did anything like this happen. The public school system's workers are always on a huge power trip, because the students' parents pay for their wages, and that makes them think they can do whatever they want to the "clients" since it's their "job" to do so. Right...

But this is a state's rights issue, and technically they're allowed to enact this law. I just wonder how much the department of education has to do with the monstrosities of CT's current school situation.

 

[FreeTraveler]

I'm amazed at how many people here are telling stories about the schools, yet their children are still students there, and nobody's in jail.

I guarantee you the first time I heard one of these silly-ass demands, there would be hell raised, and if necessary my child would be homeschooled or placed in a private school.

Your children are your MOST important legacy. How can you stand by and let them learn that what's happening here is approved by you?

 

[Renegades]

How do _you_ know what _that_ school wants to do? Maybe they don't want to get sued over some kid getting food poisoning or worse, from some candy that some other kid sold to him or her. The school doesn't reap tremendous revenue from the vending machines either; they sign a contract to have a snack company maintain a vending machine at the school. At least they know who to go after when the source of snacks is exclusive.

Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state

A school district imposing irrational rules within its jurisdictional boundaries is not a police state, so take a deep breath and call this what it is; elected school board officials executing their duties the best way they see fit. We're only human. Crying "POLICE STATE" every time a rule that not everyone likes gets enforced makes people in our movement sounds paranoid to people who haven't heard and understood the Freedom message.

Remember, No Skittles Left Behind could have been launched state-wide, or worse, at the Federal level.

Exactly. I was in the school system, but left. No, the food wasn't the reason why. Geez people some schools allow junk food, others don't. Get over it.

 

[LibertyRevolution]

My freind is a mother of 2 children in CT. Her shool sent her home a letter telling her that she cannot send her children in with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches anymore. That its a health risk to children that are alergic to peanuts that they may share there lunch with.

 

[WilliamC]

Allow me to clarify my statement. I don't agree with what that district is doing; however, people are elected to the school board, giving them jurisdiction over school related matters in their district. If they say students can't sell candy in that district, they're exercising authority that others will freely cede to state or federal government in a heartbeat. As long as the Department of Education has such a heavy handed role in determining how we educate our kids, I'm afraid you guys that think I don't love liberty as much as you do are beating a dead horse. Liberty, free will and free market capitalism are not guidestones for how public schools are teaching our children right now. The OP clearly states that the policy said nothing about students sharing snacks when no money is exchanged, so to tacitly imply that the school district is telling people what they can and can't eat is going a little too far. I would much rather see a local school district make a stupid decision like this, that can be remedied in a number of ways: parents can move, people can run for the school board, or people can vote to replace people that set rules like the one in the OP.

While I agree that, if made only at a local level, these types of decisions are much less onerous than if mandated at a Federal Level, much of this "zero tolerance" type philosophy does indeed come from the Federal Level since, by providing mandates in other areas with which the local authorities need comply, it becomes much easier for said local authorities to simply adopt a zero tolerance attitude to those issues over which they exercise control.

Had they reprimanded the children involved verbally and notified their parents they were violating the school "candy rule" that should have been the end of it as obviously at least one of them was a rule-abiding student. However, for them to have meted out an immediate suspension and revocation of privileges based on a single non-threatening incident indicates that this school board has been inculcated with the very mindset that we supporters of Ron Paul are so ardently fighting against.

In other words, they are petty tyrants who should be exposed and eliminated from their positions of authority.

 

[WilliamC]

I'm amazed at how many people here are telling stories about the schools, yet their children are still students there, and nobody's in jail.

I guarantee you the first time I heard one of these silly-ass demands, there would be hell raised, and if necessary my child would be homeschooled or placed in a private school.

Your children are your MOST important legacy. How can you stand by and let them learn that what's happening here is approved by you?

Believe it or not there are still public school districts around the country where there is a modicum of sanity and sobriety left in the administration and school board.

That said at my last Republican Party meeting the idea was broached that we (Republicans) need to have more representation on the local school board. I have volunteered to look into running for a position but the district I am in will not have another election for two years.

But when they do I will try and get on it, assuming my lack of religious participation does not render me immediately unelectable. Perhaps the fact I have a Ph.D. in Genetics will prove to be a mitigating factor which will offset my distinct lack of belief in all things supernatural.

Perhaps.

 

[CountryboyRonPaul]

You see, you outlaw something, whether it be candy, prostitution, or drugs, and it creates an underground market.

It's painfully clear even in this grade school class that what is needed is NOT more laws, but more freedom.

 

[katjust]

I read some of this thread, not all of it.

This Connecticut school is ridiculous. The school really shouldn't be concerned with what kids are eating. That is the parents' responsibility. I know that only the sale of the candy was what is against the rules, but we all know (from prohibition of other things in society) that the target is to make kids eat what the school and government want them to eat. These people are power hungry and it sets a bad precedent to punish children for this free association.

Yes a rule is a rule, but sometimes rules are just plain stupid and need to be abolished.

 

[steph3n]

All thanks to Huckabee for CT wellness laws, Texas has them too, and Huckabee was the National Assn of Gov chairman that pushed this stuff!

 

[angelatc]

My freind is a mother of 2 children in CT. Her shool sent her home a letter telling her that she cannot send her children in with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches anymore. That its a health risk to children that are alergic to peanuts that they may share there lunch with.

Oh well. People who are sick should stay home, not demand that the rest of the world change to suit them.

 

[angelatc]

I'm amazed at how many people here are telling stories about the schools, yet their children are still students there, and nobody's in jail.

I guarantee you the first time I heard one of these silly-ass demands, there would be hell raised, and if necessary my child would be homeschooled or placed in a private school.

Your children are your MOST important legacy. How can you stand by and let them learn that what's happening here is approved by you?

I can't speak for everybody, but I am not organized enough to homeschool, and we can't afford private school.

 

[steph3n]

I can't speak for everybody, but I am not organized enough to homeschool, and we can't afford private school.

This is the case for many that do decide to homeschool(I say this being homescholed myself)

Parents do NOT HOMESCHOOL if you are not capable, organized, and able to handle your children, you will only be hurting your children!