THIRD GRADER BUSTED FOR POSSESSION OF . . . . . CANDY!!!

[Fat Man]

OK, this is getting more and more ridicules.

The USA is becoming more and more like a dictatorship!

Check this out!!!

http://www.khou.com/news/Candy-Gets-Thi ... 33319.html

Jolly Rancher lands Brazos ISD third-grader
in detention for a week
by Gabe Gutierrez / 11 News
khou.com
Posted on May 6, 2010 at 10:04 PM
Updated Saturday, May 8 at 12:43 PM

ORCHARD, Texas â?? A third-grader at Brazos Elementary was given a weekâ??s detention for possessing a Jolly Rancher. School officials in Brazos County are defending the seemingly harsh sentence. The schoolâ??s principal and superintendent said they were simply complying with a state law that limits junk food in schools.

But the girlâ??s parents say itâ??s a huge overreaction. â??I think itâ??s stupid to give a kid a weekâ??s worth of detention for a piece of candy,â? said Amber Brazda, the girlâ??s mother. "The whole thing was just ridiculous to me." Leighann Adair, 10, was eating lunch Monday when a teacher confiscated the candy. Her parents said she was in tears when she arrived home later that afternoon and handed them the detention notice.

According to the disciplinary referral, she would be separated from other students during lunch and recess through Friday. Jack Ellis, the superintendent for Brazos Independent School District, declined an on-camera interview. But he said the school was abiding by a state guideline that banned â??minimal nutritionâ? foods. â??Whether or not I agree with the guidelines, we have to follow the rules,â? he said.

The state, however, gives each school discretion over how to enforce the policy. Ellis said school officials had decided a stricter punishment was necessary after lesser penalties failed to serve as a deterrent. Ellis said failing to adhere to the stateâ??s guidelines could put federal funding in jeopardy.

According to the Texas Department of Agricultureâ??s website, â??The Texas Public School Nutrition Policy (TPSNP) explicitly states that it does not restrict what foods or beverages parents may provide for their own children's consumption.â? Brazos Elementary Principal Jeanne Young, said the problem, in this instance, was that the candy was provided by another student â?? not the girlâ??s parents.

The girlâ??s mother said the incident has taught her daughter a lesson, but not the one her teachers intended. â??I told her, â??Leighann, unfortunately youâ??re learning very young that lifeâ??s not fair,'â? Brazda said.

Yeah, a little girl gets busted and a week's detention for having one little piece of candy!

Ellis said school officials had decided a stricter punishment was necessary after lesser penalties failed to serve as a deterrent.

How about the death penalty? Would that serve as a deterrent???

YEAH RIGHT!!!

Here's some more . . .

http://www.khou.com/home/State-responds ... 71189.html

State says school went too far in giving child
detention over Jolly Rancher
by Tiffany Craig / 11 News
khou.com
Posted on May 7, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Updated Saturday, May 8 at 11:09 AM

HOUSTON -- A week of detention for a 10-year-old caught with a Jolly Rancher at school ended on a sweet note Friday after the state said the school went too far. Leighann Adair has a sweet tooth but what happened a school this week, left a bad taste in her mouth. The Brazos Elementary third grader was about to eat a piece of candy, but it was taken away.

Jack Ellis, the superintendent for the Brazos Independent School District, said the school was abiding by a state guideline that banned â??minimal nutritionâ? foods. So that single Jolly Rancher led to detention, which separated her from other classmates at lunch and at recess.

Her parents called the punishment ridiculous. â??I donâ??t think they treated her fairly. I think the punishment was definitely exaggerated and they should have to apologize to her,â? says Amber Brazda, Leighannâ??s mother. School officials say they were following state law and were concerned about losing funding.

In a letter to the school system Friday, the Texas Department of Agriculture wrote, â??This particular incidence of candy possession as it has been reported by KHOU-TV would not be considered a violation of the state or federal nutrition program and therefore would not have jeopardized your districtâ??s food service funding.â? Leighannâ??s dad, Michael Brazda, is happy that someone sees his point of view. â??I was glad. I was actually happy that something was coming about it. I was starting to wonder if I would get anything accomplished,â? he said.

The detention is now over for the 10-year old and her mom says a valuable lesson was learned. â??If you feel that youâ??re in the right and theyâ??re wrong and in your heart you know youâ??re right, then you have to fight for what you believe in,â? Amber Brazda said.

The Agriculture Department also says that the nutrition policy is intended to improve the health of Texas youth, not prohibit sharing a little candy.

In our elementary AND high schools, kids are getting busted for a piece of candy!



I have to wonder . . . In the future, will kids wind up in jail for possession of candy???

Yet, in our high schools, athletic students are allowed and even encouraged to bully around the nonathletic students.

Like, what's wrong with this picture?

[HugeFanOfBadReligion]

That seems like a huge overreaction on the school's part. This whole junk food controversy and debate reminds me of my school's elections for grade x representative. Everyone's talking about some bill being that will likely be introduced next year that bans junk food from being sold in the cafeteria. Most candidates are saying they are against the bill because people will likely walk to fast food restaurants during their lunch instead of going to the cafeteria, and more students buying from the cafeteria produces an income for the school. Of course, another reason for them being against the bill is because kids simply like their junk food. There are a couple of candidates who are for the bill because of the health issues with junk food. I'm not sure what my view is on the whole thing. I think that it is important that the school has money (our school literally has 0$ in the music department, not a dollar. Of course we have the money for sports equipment and fancy decorations in our gym for sports games in our school), but I also think that junk food and unhealthiness are problems today. But anyway, this school in that article over reacted way too much over a candy. A week of detention over one piece of candy, that's just pathetic.

[Fat Man]

That seems like a huge overreaction on the school's part. This whole junk food controversy and debate reminds me of my school's elections for grade x representative. Everyone's talking about some bill being that will likely be introduced next year that bans junk food from being sold in the cafeteria. Most candidates are saying they are against the bill because people will likely walk to fast food restaurants during their lunch instead of going to the cafeteria, and more students buying from the cafeteria produces an income for the school. Of course, another reason for them being against the bill is because kids simply like their junk food. There are a couple of candidates who are for the bill because of the health issues with junk food. I'm not sure what my view is on the whole thing. I think that it is important that the school has money (our school literally has 0$ in the music department, not a dollar. Of course we have the money for sports equipment and fancy decorations in our gym for sports games in our school), but I also think that junk food and unhealthiness are problems today. But anyway, this school in that article over reacted way too much over a candy. A week of detention over one piece of candy, that's just pathetic.

Well, I don't eat a lot of junk foods myself.

I make sure to have vegetables and fresh fruit with every meal, but yes, I do like to put some whipped topping on my fresh strawberries and I like to keep some ice cream in my freezer. Like, big fucking deal!!!

When I went to school, sometimes I liked to take my own lunch box to school. My mother would pack a couple of cheese sandwiches and some celery sticks, some carrot sticks, and an apple and a banana. But she would also include a cup cake.

I learned to appreciate vegetables and fresh fruit when I was a kid, but I was also taught there was nothing wrong with an occasional treat.

But now, in some schools, kids have their lunch boxes inspected, and if there is any candy or a slice of cake, it is confiscated and the kid gets sent home after school with a note to the parents.

It's getting ridicules! Candy is now a crime, but assault and battery from the jocks in our schools is ignored or even encouraged!

I feel that I am slowly losing my mind and slowly going insane because of what is happening in the USA. I want to scream out into the night!

[Indurrago]

That seems like a huge overreaction on the school's part. This whole junk food controversy and debate reminds me of my school's elections for grade x representative. Everyone's talking about some bill being that will likely be introduced next year that bans junk food from being sold in the cafeteria. Most candidates are saying they are against the bill because people will likely walk to fast food restaurants during their lunch instead of going to the cafeteria, and more students buying from the cafeteria produces an income for the school. Of course, another reason for them being against the bill is because kids simply like their junk food. There are a couple of candidates who are for the bill because of the health issues with junk food. I'm not sure what my view is on the whole thing. I think that it is important that the school has money (our school literally has 0$ in the music department, not a dollar. Of course we have the money for sports equipment and fancy decorations in our gym for sports games in our school), but I also think that junk food and unhealthiness are problems today. But anyway, this school in that article over reacted way too much over a candy. A week of detention over one piece of candy, that's just pathetic.

Yep, its about the $$$. Question about the bill is it a state of national one? Either way I doubt its gonna pass, like you said their precious sports department might lose a football or basketball.

[HugeFanOfBadReligion]

Yep, its about the $$$. Question about the bill is it a state of national one? Either way I doubt its gonna pass, like you said their precious sports department might lose a football or basketball.

I'm unsure about if the bill is provincial or national (I'm from Canada, so it won't affect the US). I didn't even know about it until yesterday, I don't even eat at the cafeteria so I assume that's where everyone's talking about it. Personally, I don't really care what happens. Both outcomes have their pros and cons. I think they should just give healthier options and keep the junk food.

[Fat Man]

Yep, its about the $$$. Question about the bill is it a state of national one? Either way I doubt its gonna pass, like you said their precious sports department might lose a football or basketball.

I'm unsure about if the bill is provincial or national (I'm from Canada, so it won't affect the US). I didn't even know about it until yesterday, I don't even eat at the cafeteria so I assume that's where everyone's talking about it. Personally, I don't really care what happens. Both outcomes have their pros and cons. I think they should just give healthier options and keep the junk food.

Well, here in the USA, we are going insane!

OK, I admit that I have had my own issues with mental illness in the past, but I know the difference between right and wrong, and the difference between what is moral and what is immoral.

So, I may be nuts, but I'm not insane!

My country is going insane.

I remember, back in 2007 in another state, a high school student who was on the A honor-role got a three day suspension for buying a small bag of Skittles from another student, and he was not allowed to attend an Honor's Dinner for the A and B honor-role students.

Again, busted for candy!

And you all remember that topic I posted over a month ago titled HIGH SCHOOL-ISSUED LAPTOP WEBCAMS USED TO SPY ON STUDENTS! at: http://www.sportssuck.org/phpbb2/viewto ... f=7&t=4547

A kid got busted when the remotely activated webcam on his school issued laptop caught him "popping pills" which turned out to be only candy, Mike & Ikes.

He was in the privacy of his own bedroom, eating candy, but the ignorant buffoons on the school board had him busted because they thought he was popping pills! And the webcams even photographed some of the kids getting undressed to either go to bed or take a shower.

Eventually, in the future, kids are going to end up in jail for possession of CANDY!!!

Yeah! America is going insane!

The ACLU, American Civil Liberties Union use to defend the rights of the average citizen, but now, they have found it more profitable to defend NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association in their quest to have the age of consent laws lowered to a much lower age, and eventually repealed, so that rich old men who smell bad can get naked and have sex with babies!

And anybody who speaks out against pedophiles will be charged with "hate crimes" and kids will have no right to be protected from wealthy old pedo-pervs, and kids will go to jail for being in possession of candy, and end up getting beaten and raped in our jails!

Oh wait! Now I get it!!!

It's all part of fighting the great obesity epidemic!

Bust kids for having candy, repeal the age of consent laws, and put kids in jail to get beaten and raped!

Fighting off a would-be rapist who is much bigger and stronger is good exercise!!!

That ought to teach those fat little brats a lesson!!! Eh?

Yeah! Now I get it!

Why didn't I get it sooner?

It's because I'm a big fat retard!

But now, I get it!