hmmm well thats what the conduct book says...consumption. if there was alcohol on their breath and the bottle was closed, he could still bust them. I would still give the kids some kind of suspension but they'll learn their lesson drinking before a game. They could die drinking after a game but the most annoying thing to do is to punish them for everything that could've happened like Baker is wanting.

Ms. Baker, welcome to Life 101 in High School Athlethics!

Shalom

I can understand the writer's concern but I can't see how anyone can enforce rules that aren't on the books.

The kids were caught with unopened beers. There's really no way to know what they planned on doing with those beers, is there? Even if they drank the beers, who is to say they would drink and drive.

I drank many times under age and never even thought about driving while under the influence.

This might post a second time cause the n&R site was acting up but I don't want to rewrite it so......

I can understand the writer's concern but I can't see how anyone can enforce rules that aren't on the books.

The kids were caught with unopened beers. There's really no way to know what they planned on doing with those beers, is there? Even if they drank the beers, who is to say they would drink and drive.

I drank many times under age and never even thought about driving while under the influence.

I, with some hesitation, do agree with the letter writer. I think that what I'm suggesting is that I equate possession with consumption or at least placing possession as part of consumption. I make that association because, like all of you, I have had my own experiences and know some of the patterns of behavior of "under-agers".

Legally, what I have just written would be shot down very quickly in court and perhaps it is a weak argument but by looking only at consumption we may blind ourselves to behaviors that lead to consumption especially for young people. One has to possess before one consumes. These under-agers are possessing a controlled beverage of sorts simply because they are under-aged. In my experience, under-agers do not usually handle alcohol responsibly (broad stroke). I am afraid that if we are really hard nosed about interpreting and implementing this incompletely written policy, we may be giving implicit permission to use----"but just don't get caught". We can't control what they do but we can control what we say and imply.

I used to be a middle manager in a large organization and had to write policy and procedures. What started off as a five page policy memorandum ended up being thirty and counting because people kept looking for and finding loopholes. They then complained that I was too much a letter of the law person--which I am not. But I felt that my hand was forced.

Unless the school had a hidden agenda, I think that one could reasonably interpret the policy as placing together possession and consumption. In other non-school areas, Legally, people do get charged and convicted of possession of illegal substances. For the "under-agers" alcohol may be considered illegal.

Otherwise, athletic departments, be put on notice. Cross every t and dot every i and then think ahead to other t's and i's that could possibly be there and then add them and then repeat the total process.

In the meantime, I think that the school "committed and error".

Ms. Baker,
Why are you bringing this up? What's the matter, are you mad because someone else hasn't been bashing these kids to death for a whole week now? Did you ever stop to think that maybe this is none of your business? You think just because you "read" something in the paper, you know everything that happened!Haven't you ever heard the old saying, "don't beleive everything you read!" Or is it your just mad because your kid didn't get his picture in the paper!
All I have seen from all you "I'm better than you" people out there is bash, bash, bash.
You all have these kids guilty of buying the beer, drinking and driving and out there crashing and killing people!
YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THESE KIDS WERE DOING!Maybe your kid asked them to go pick that beer up for them!Let the parents of these kids discipline them. Keep your nasty comments out of the paper.
All you are doing is slandering these kids.

We may want to re-read yesterday's letter which addresses a concern that alcohol is killing our youth.

joejoe,

If we take your ideas strictly at value, then the police should search the refrigerators of the parents of every teenager.

If beer is in the home and teens have free access to it, then aren't they at least under pseudo-possession.

Legally, in my opinion, the school has no case based on what was stated in the lte.

I agree that the school may want to reexamine their policies.

I guess another implication is that the athlete is getting a free pass. If this was a non-athlete who possessed alcohol off-campus, the school would have nothing to do with this at all.

Nit, Thanks for your response; certainly not an easy issue. I interpreted the letter to mean that the student/athletes were in personal possession of the alcohol and were away from home. There may be double standards, as you imply, but athletics have a way of being center stage and athletes are put on pedastles and so forth. They formally and visibly represent far more than just themselves, namely: their family, their school, their team, standards of conduct and honor Their behavior, like it or not, can become a model of what is "revered and or rewarded". This is true in professional sports as well. I'm not trying to be dramatic. Sure, we would not probably hear about the non-athlete who possessed alcohol. I'm not sure that's desirable either. I hope there is something in the student handbook about non-athletes as well.

Parents have a right to have alcohol in their home. I hope they teach their children well; alcohol is a substance that can cause alot of hurt. I've worked in the field of mental health for 30 years and have seen and heard first hand.

I'm not trying to make athletics the "whipping post". If we really want values and standards, then let's have them---no favorites.

joejoe,

agreed.

I watched the BOE meeting last night as some lady from Page got up to defend $2 million for an upgrade of the sports facilities there.

They cannot afford to build a new JMS or other schools but they can afford to upgrade sports facilities?

Something is WAY off.

Slightly off topic here, however, I agree with nit in his last posting.

Check out the "wish list" for GCS anticipated school bond to be presented to the County Commissioners. I for one will NOT vote for any school bond as long as Grier is stupidintendent and the current BOE is sitting. The previous bonds were not used as allocated and I refuse to pour more money down this rat hole!

As for this LTTE, see my comments with an LTTE of the same topic matter on June 14.

Shalom

Darryl,

Can you cast my vote while you're there? Agree 100%.