correction..."result in any suspect NOT having access"

justmy414...a tad farfetched. How do any of the proposed changes result in any suspect having access to an attorney before or during questioning? The conspiracy theorists are out in fashion on this topic.

Visions of zero tolerance laws gone awry.
.
Here's an aspirin for your head-ache...ooops...busted for drugs.
.
Fact...not fiction.

If these changes go through you will find the following scene taking place at your school. Susie and Tom are dating, Jill doesn't like this and decides to talk with Susie about stealing her boyfriend, during the discussion a few swear words are used with raised voices and Susie throws Jill's pencil to the floor breaking it, then Jill storms off. Now the school "must" call the police instead of having the girls discuss the incident. The police come and interview without notifying the parents and giving them the opportunity to get an attorney for the girls. The police and school pressure the girls to confess, and are allowed to lie to them about the evidence they have or the effects of the girls confessions. After telling the girls nothing will happen and they just want to find out what happened to discuss the issue the girls confess. The police then arrest and charge the girls for disorderly conduct, and Susie for criminal damage to property for breaking Jill's pencil. Since both the girls are over 17 they are automatically charged as adults and now have criminal records for the rest of their lives.

Schools are for educating and the criminal justice system is to punish. Automatically referring everything just turns schools into places where education ceases and punishment reigns.

Whenever you remove the discretion regarding the reporting of actions you end up catching the wrong people and not being able to do anything to help those who need it.

I would like to see open records on anyone 13 years and over State /County /and municipality/ by zip code like the sex offenders site .

After reading the updated info I think its a good idea. I honestly thought they already did all that. I think J.B is a great man with great possibilities.

Before you know it, we'll be owned by the King again.

updated story: Includes his recommendations to the state:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/W/W...

I have no problem with requiring schools to report criminal activity that occurs on school grounds to police, but I need more information on the other proposal. As SarahB says, I need more information on the current state and the proposed changes before I can make a decision.

I thought, that by law, schools and the employees had a duty to warn. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that include telling the police of something that occurred on school grounds?

Former A.G. worked to maintain the open-meeting law, this A.G. works to diminish our privacy.

I would need more detailed information on the present laws and the proposed changes before I could give a final opinion. However, with the little bit of information here, my gut tells me to say "no" to the changes.

Yes. It's important to teach the kids early that the police will be more and more a part of their everday lives. Good training for their reduced expectation of privacy they can look forward to under the Patriot Act.***I have no problem with the police becoming involved when there is eminent danger to themselves or others. But until then, let's not have the police building files on our kids.