Hanging By a Thread

Taking Responsibility {Who’s to Blame in Steubenville?}

Parents' Responsibilities

It is my opinion that each of us has control over our actions and how we conduct ourselves and the situations we put ourselves in and the people we associate with. As parents, it's our responsibility to teach this to our children, both boys and girls.

It is also my opinion that there will always be evil; there will always be someone ready to take advantage of whom and what he or she can. As parents, it's our responsibility to teach our children to be watchful for this evil, both boys and girls.

And it is my opinion that with proper attention, love, discipline, responsibility and instruction kids will not act in ruthless, savage and criminal ways. But we as parents must be giving this attention, love, discipline, responsibility and instruction to the kids of the world, both boys and girls.

"Steubenville Boys"

From what I can tell, a number of high school football players from Steubenville, OH, ran around doing exactly what they pleased at all times of day and night and not taking responsibility for any of their actions; in other words, they were hoodlums, hooligans, ne'er-do-wells, thugs, losers, except for perhaps on the football field.

One night their partying turned into a terrible crime against another person, a teen-aged girl. She was incapacitated by alcohol after drinking heavily at a party. Her friends knew she was quite drunk; so drunk she couldn't walk; in fact, she passed out. And her friends still let her leave the party with several of the teen aged boys.

These boys assaulted her, took demeaning photos and videos of her naked body while she was unconscious, posting these along with crude comments on social media sites. Clearly, they were unconcerned with whether what they were doing was wrong, much less criminal.

They were found guilty this past week. And there has been a flood of articles and opinions on this issue.

Placing Blame

So, who's to blame for this situation? Are the boys at blame? Absolutely! 100% yes! Are the girl's friends to blame? I think so. I've been in that situation in the long-ago past of my late teen and early 20s self. I did take the stance that it was my responsibility as a friend, as a female, to stop an overly drunk friend, or even mere acquaintance, from doing something that she would regret or would make her look like a fool. Was the girl to blame? Yes, in that she was drinking and kept drinking until she was incapacitated to the point that she couldn't walk or make responsible decisions regarding her health and safety.

I know there are many who will gasp at this, but let me be clear, there is nothing excusable about how these boys acted. In my opinion, they are getting off easy, because of their ages, spending only 4 to 5 years in a juvenile facility. Their superior, puffed-up attitudes thinking they could do anything they wanted and get away with it makes me raging mad. They are the worse kind of criminal; callous, uncaring, without any morals.

And yet, as a woman, I feel that this girl had a responsibility to herself to remain in control of her faculties and able to make decisions that kept her in a safe place among friends. Females are not always victims without any power over a situation. And in this situation, she could have had control of what was happening to here and where she went and with whom she left the party.

I also think that we, as a society, as parents, are also to blame. We have let down these out-of-control kids. It's our responsibility to mold and teach and reward and discipline them as they grow and mature.

The Scoop

These kids weren't born like this; they grew into these attitudes and failed to develop any morals, responsibility or conscience. Kids who aren't guided to the right path and supported along the way, taught by example and loved beyond measure won't magically grow into model citizens. Left to their own devices, many will rot at the stump and end up just like these kids.

It is my hope that this young girl can recover from the humiliation and mental anguish she has had to suffer throughout this ordeal. Clearly, she's no weakling having come forward and reported this crime to the police; having testified in court; and having endured the videos, texts and photos shared online and seen by friends, schoolmates and so many more now. My hope for her is that she will never again make the mistake to drink too much that she loses control of her faculties, that she finds new, more supportive friends to hang out with and that she can heal and move on from this experience.

In the end, we must each take responsibility for ourselves, take care of each other, whether friends or strangers, and teach our children well to be respectful, loving, honorable, decent, responsible beings. Over and out...

Anna

Random Tidbits: On a Rampage {Strong Opinions}

New Rules

I've been juggling a lot with work lately, which means that everything else suffers. So, I've decided to make some rules for myself, and I'm really trying to stick with it.

I'm setting weekly office hours. We're holding weekly family meetings with an agenda, a white board and an Angry Bird (that's a whole other post...stay tuned). I'm standing firm on what I can and cannot add to my overly stuffed schedule...and refusing to feel guilty about saying "No" when I need to.

Unfortunately, one of the things that has taken a backseat to being a priority lately has been writing. So, I'm trying this Random Bits style again...cuz you know I have things to say, but just not much time to get them said!

Bits and Pieces

1. Y'all know how I feel about using your phone and driving, right?! If you don't then read this: I Hit A Child with My Car and all the other Distracted Driving posts I've written. Well, my friend, Trina, a dedicated Phone Down, Eyes Up driver sent me this photo that her friend sent to her. I love it! And there's a lot of truth in this statement...believe it.
   
2. In DC, a Councilmember has introduced a bill to curb cheating. If passed, it would make facilitating cheating on standardized tests illegal. Now I'm certainly against cheating, but what troubles me is that there has to be such laws in place to prevent school personnel from tampering with tests.

   Shouldn't this be a given to teachers and administrators? Perhaps, the better answer is to take a look at why there is such a need to "fix" standardized tests in this district and examine the education resources and funding.

3. Apparently there is overcrowding at the Metro Louisville jail in Kentucky. The solution? Well, USA Today reports that "tech-savvy professionals will use technology and data to study the overcrowding," of course. The pros will be trying to find some possible solutions.

   News Flash! I've got a solution. Use that money to study how to get kids off the streets, keep them safe, educate them, and get them out of the cycle of committing crimes-jail-committing crimes-jail that many of their older siblings, parents, aunts and uncles and friends are in instead of employing "tech-savvy professionals." This is not an engineering/spatial problem; this is societal issue, a human interest story that could have happy ending.

4. Lastly, the total cost of the 2012 elections, from federal to state to local offices, was...hold on to your boots, friends... $7.3 BILLION (according to Politico.com)! WHAT A WASTE! Don't get me started on what that could have been spent on. This amount of money could have made a huge impact on many of the very causes and issues and institutions and families addressed by the candidates running for office. So many could have been greatly benefitted by even a fraction of this money being spent in a positive way. Here are more of my thoughts on the subject of political campaign spending.

The Scoop

Hmmm, it turns out I'm full of opinions this Monday morning. Well, there you have it. Over and out...

Anna

Sticky Messes: Good Guys v. Bad Guys {Biggest Gun Wins}

Cleaning up Messes

My kids are really good at making huge messes. They don't mean to; they're just busy playing, creating some playscape or making confetti or trying to help by pouring their own juice or milk.

The result is something sticky covering the floor, splattered on the counter and cabinets and inevitably on the boys themselves, bits of paper everywhere, pillows, blankets and stuffed animals scattered throughout the house, draping over this or that, pulling down lamps and picture frames.

I know I should make them clean up these disaster zones, but I know from experience generally their version of cleaning up a mess only results in bigger messes that make me a steaming, angry, stressed out mom; which is another type of mess altogether.

So, I banish them from the desecrated area, and I clean up the mess. They do have to clean up toys scattered about; it's just these sticky, dirty, destructive messes that I take over.

Yes, I know. You're shaking your head and thinking. "That's the way to spoil them and make them think they can get away with anything."

Perhaps, but it keeps me sane, and avoids the chance of a headline like this, "Mom loses mind, runs screaming from home, never to be heard from again after sons attempt to clean up spilled apple juice with down comforter, only to rip seam and allow all the feathers to float through house, adhering to all sticky surfaces covered in apple juice, including the boys and a giant dog."

Sometimes it's just better to step in and take control of a smaller, still fixable mess before it becomes a giant, sticky, slippery slope heading straight down the tubes.

Guns in Schools

A few days before Christmas I happened to see a newspaper headline, "NRA leader urges armed guards in every U.S. school." Surely not.

I read more. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," says NRA executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre. Hmmmm.

While I agree that gunmen on rampages who seem to all too often end up in schools of some level is a definite problem, I don't agree that throwing more guns into the mix is the answer.

The NRA's current plan is like standing to the side and watching my sons spill a gallon of apple juice all over the counter, the floor, the cabinets and themselves as they attempt to pour a small amount into a child-sized cup, then letting them clean it up with the socks on their feet and whatever else they can find to sop of the sticky liquid, leaving the residue behind to collect hair and dust and dirt, turning the whole thing into a filthy mess.

That doesn't solve or teach anything.

I realize that there are a number of schools in large cities that already have trained armed guards/off-duty police officers patrolling the halls, approximately one-third of public schools or 23,000 schools to be precise. I acknowledge this is necessary to keep the students in those schools safe, but I do not find this statistic to be an acceptable standard for schools.

Good Guys v. Bad Guys

This figure alone speaks volumes about the state of our country and the culture we live in. It saddens me to no end. But this proposed "solution" from the NRA enrages my faculties, breaks my heart and frightens me.

More guns, especially guns of the caliber and capacity that match those that the "bad guys" have access to do not belong in our schools. What lesson does this teach? The "bad guys" have big guns; well, the "good guys" will just get bigger guns.

Where does it end? Why stop at schools? How about movie theaters, churches, all government buildings, federal, state and city, malls, parks, the grocery store, libraries, parking garages, and every other public building? Perhaps it should be mandatory that every household owns an assault rifle. That ought to stop the "bad guys."

Of course, if we're all running around with guns all the time, that might make it difficult to tell the "bad guys" from the "good guys." Then what would the NRA propose?

Better Laws

I don't have all the answers, but I feel certain that adding more high powered weapons to our warped society is NOT the answer.

I am not advocating for all guns to be ripped from lawful gun owners' tight grasp. But I do support bans on assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition clips; weapons that belong only on a battlefield, if anywhere at all; weapons that can wipe out a great number of people in a few short seconds; weapons capable of ripping gaping holes in bodies and exploding through flesh and vital organs.

Weapons of this nature go far beyond hunting and "protecting" your home and family. If you oppose this type of ban, please explain to me the need for such devastating weapons.

Of course, bans are not the only aspects to be considered. Historically, horrible killing sprees that have taken place in schools, malls, churches, offices and theaters are carried out by people who have a mental illness of some sort. Therefore, mental illnesses, detection and treatment are also issues to be considered.

The Scoop

Call me naïve, but I don't want to live in a world where "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." And I just don't think we have to live in such a world...if we wake up and proactively start dealing with this issue.

The current gun laws are not adequate. We don't necessarily need more laws, but better laws. I challenge our lawmakers to disregard the powerful, $12-billion-dollar-a-year gun industry and its puppet, the NRA and find a way that protects our citizens' safety and rights. Over and out...

Anna

God is with Us {Always and Everywhere}

In the aftermath of this horrible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School I have seen various posts on Facebook and scattered through articles saying this massacre has nothing to do with stricter gun laws. Instead, these posts, remarks, quotes insist we need to "put God back in schools."

These statements sadden and confound me.

I am a Christian. I love my Lord. It matters not where I go, my God is with me always and everywhere.

To me, these statements imply that since our schools are secular, God abandoned these children and teachers in their hour of greatest need; as if God couldn't step through those shattered glass doors because our government adheres to the separation of church and state, respecting all religions.

Pardon me, but that's not the God I know. No, I know God was in that school on Friday, December 14, 2012 at 9:40 am.

God stood at those locked school doors, weeping as the gunman {whom I refuse to dignify by mentioning his name} made his way toward the school, resolute in his gruesome mission. God was there in the hall giving strength and courage to Principal Dawn Hochsprung and School Psychologist Mary Sherlach as they lunged for the gunman in an effort to protect every child and teacher and staff member in the building.

God was there in each classroom as the teachers realized what those popping sounds in the hall were. God was there guiding the teachers, holding their hands and steadying their voices. God was there wrapping his arms around the frightened children huddled in darkened closets, corners of rooms and cramped bathrooms.

Rest assured God stood with those teachers in those two classrooms where all those young lives were suddenly and tragically taken from this earth. I'm sure God wept as he held their tiny, broken bodies. God was there when barricaded classes quietly prayed at the suggestions of students.

God was there, as the police began to arrive and quickly and efficiently combed through that school. God was there helping to lead the frightened and shocked students and teachers from the building.

God was there waiting for the terrified families to arrive at the school searching for their children, spouses, parents, siblings and friends; looking for the familiar faces; hoping for a comforting word. God was there holding up the parents, siblings and friends when those 26 didn't appear.

God was present at every prayer vigil and service that has been held for these lives taken. God is with the family of the gunman helping them to cope with this terrible burden. God walked alongside those first responders who witnessed the tragic result of a mad man with an assault weapon.

God remains with those families who have been forever wounded and altered. God stands in judgment of the gunman's soul. And God silently waits with us as we, as a nation, ask what can be done to prevent this from happening again.

God is always with us everywhere. That is what I believe as a Christian, and that is what I teach my children.

Evil does lay in wait; looking for the opportune moment to strike and cause us horrible pain; hoping we will say that God has forsaken us; plotting to turn us against one another; pointing out our differences and preying on our weaknesses.

I refuse to give Satan that satisfaction. For Jesus tells us in John 16:33, "In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world."

God is with us...always and everywhere!

Anna

Eats, Shoots and Leaves or Eats Shoots and Leaves? {That’s the Debate}

Whose Right to Bear Arms?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

That is the 2^nd Amendment of the United States Constitution, as passed by Congress in late 1791.

It was a different time back then. I don't think anyone can argue with that. But that's about all we, as a country, can agree on when it comes to this 27 word sentence.

On Monday, there was another tragic shooting; this one in College Station, Texas. There were 2 people killed and several injured by a disgruntled home owner, as a city constable attempted to serve an eviction notice.

In our world of violence, it would be easy to pass this tragedy off and say, "well, it was only two people….this time." But to those two persons' friends and families, this is the worst news story they have ever heard.

Just a little over a week ago, a man went to a Sikh Temple during Sunday morning worship and opened fire, killing 6 people.

And less than a month ago, a man went into a dark movie theater and killed 12 people.

Of course, in each of these instances, there were people injured, as well.

When does this violence end?

The Governor's Rationale

After the College Station shooting, I read a long, rambling quote from Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, in which stated his argument for people's right to own and carry guns. Here is part of that quote,

"And Texas I will suggest to you by and large a majority of them, a large majority of them believe that law abiding men and women should be able to have their weapons and the criminals are never going to listen to the law, they're always gonna have weapons, whatever source they want, whether they're legal or illegal. And I think it's wise for the people of the state of Texas to be able to defend themselves when there is a law breaker that comes into their midst with a weapon."

I'll concede Perry two points: 1) He's probably right that most Texans feel this way; and 2) criminals are always going to find a way to get a weapon, and they don't care what the laws say.

But I think his reasoning is flawed.

Law Abiding Mass Murderers

If you think back over the years of all the terrible, senseless shootings in our country, you will find that most of these ruthless, selfish murderers had obtained their guns and ammunitions lawfully and were not breaking any laws by owning guns as they, themselves, were not lawbreakers until the very day they took multiple lives during their respective rampages.

The shootings are not committed by gang members, assassins, petty crooks or hardened criminals. Most often, these people are quite intelligent, but delusional or mentally unstable and fueled by hate for certain groups of people. Often these types of people are dismissed as quiet loners or quirky characters, but no one would ever have expected this person to do what he eventually does.

These types know how to go about obtaining guns and ammunitions legally; they plot and plan and wait and stock up. They are people who are protected by the 2^nd Amendment as it is interpreted today.

A Militia State?

Secondly, I'd like to point out that in none of these instances that I am aware of was the assailant shot by a regular Joe who just happened along upon a murderous scene and who happened to be packing heat, taking advantage of his 2^nd Amend. right, as the good governor from Texas would argue might happen if we are allowed to possess and carry guns.

Along that same line, I'm a bit confused by Perry's statement: "And I think it's wise for the people of the state of Texas to be able to defend themselves when there is a law breaker that comes into their midst with a weapon."

Is Perry suggesting that Texas is a militia state? A state where a body of citizens is armed and trained by the state that can take law enforcement into its own hands? Surely not.

Stand Your Ground

Of course things didn't quite work out this way for George Zimmerman of FL when he lawfully owned and carried a gun for protection in a neighborhood that had been repeatedly struck by thieves and home invasions. Zimmerman acted as Captain of the Neighborhood Watch and claims he acted in self defense under Florida's Stand Your Ground Law the night he shot and killed an unarmed young man. And yet, he is now standing trial for his actions.

Stand Your Ground laws do indeed protect those who "use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first." Under these laws, a person could even use deadly force without a duty to retreat, in some cases; and in those cases, these laws would be considered a defense or immunity against criminal charges or civil suits.

However, clearly sometimes a person might make a mistake about when he could legally use his gun and when he is breaking the law himself.

My point is that do we really want people carrying guns everywhere they go and making a split second decision whether what they think they are seeing is really what's going on? I think not, but I know this sentiment is not agreed upon across the board.

The Scoop

The problem is all in the way it was written and passed out to the states and eventually ratified by those states. It's only slightly different than the original version passed by Congress; but the difference is enough to make interpretation a bit dicey.

Here is the way the states' version is written and was subsequently ratified as:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Do you see the difference? It may appear subtle, but it makes a big difference. In fact, it's why there is such a debate over exactly what the right was intended to protect. If only there had been copying machines in 1791.

And lastly, when the 2^nd Amendment was written and passed, guns that could fire off hundreds of explosive rounds in a matter of minutes couldn't even be imagined, much less a machine that would make exact duplications of a piece of legislation. Over and out…

Anna

Poor Sense{r} of Judgment: Distracted by Self Preservation

Split Second Decisions

When faced with a decision to do the right thing or run, which would you do? Do you know?

It's easy to judge when you aren't in that situation. It's easy to say you'd never do that and how could she not know. But none of us were there; she alone was there.

And now a group of unbiased citizens have determined as best they could what happened that night and that her actions were criminal.

Lapse in Judgment

I'm talking about Amy Senser, the privileged wife of former Vikings star, Joe Senser.

What is undisputed is that late last summer she was driving her Mercedes-Benz SUV and in the dark of night struck and killed Anousone Phanthavong, a Thai Chef, on an exit ramp on I-94 in Minneapolis. Anousone was putting gas in his stalled car at the time. Senser's vehicle was heavily damaged from the impact, which is also undisputed.

Senser claims she didn't know she hit a person. She maintains she thought she had hit a large pothole or construction barrel or other construction debris in the area.

There are many sketchy details from the time surrounding the accident. She had been on the way to the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul to pick up her daughters and their friends from a concert, but she claims she became ill and called her husband and asked him to pick them up instead. She was apparently heading back home at the time of the accident.

Regardless of these facts, disputed or undisputed there remains two families forever altered. One family has lost a loved one forever; a life cut tragically short. The other family is left without a mother or wife at least for a while.

Everyone Loses

No matter how you look at this situation it's sad.

We can't know exactly what happened in those minutes leading to the death of Anousone. We don't know if Senser had been drinking; was heavily medicated due to a sinus infection and migraine; was looking at or using her phone; or simply negligent in operation of her vehicle and selfish in her decision to "save" herself by fleeing the scene.

Senser was found guilty of two counts of criminal vehicular homicide: failing to immediately call for help and leaving the scene of an accident. One of the questions the jury considered was whether a reasonable person would have pulled over to investigate what she had hit and check the damage of her vehicle. They decided that a reasonable person would have done that.

Why didn't Senser stop? Did she have something to hide? Was she intoxicated? We may never know the answers to these questions.

The Scoop

Once again, this case serves as a reminder that we can't be too careful while operating our heavy metal vehicles. It only takes a split second to destroy the lives of others and ourselves.

Senser will be sentenced in July; the convictions call for 4 years in prison. Had she made just a few different decisions on that evening Senser wouldn't have been on that exit ramp or had she simply pulled over and check out what she had hit and called authorities immediately, the outcome could have been very different for everyone.

Life happens in the blink of an eye. My thoughts and prayers are with all those affected by the events of that August evening. Over and out...

Anna

Crossing the Line: To Train Up a Child

A Different Point of View

Isn't it funny how time and age and experience change the way we see our favorite books and movies from our childhoods?

The other day some friends and I were discussing reading the Little House on the Prairie series to our own children. The series was a favorite of ours as children and aside from the nostalgia of reading these books there is a different perspective now; that of a parent.

We were musing over how well behaved the children were and how well they listened to their parents and followed directions; carrying out many difficult chores day in and day out; and all with just a few handmade toys and no DVDs. What made these children so hard-working and obedient?

Of course, times have changed...a lot. But for one thing, there was corporal punishment; and the kids knew this and expected it. There was a certain amount of fear mixed with respect when it came to their parents.

Today, as I discussed in yesterday's post, there are many different schools of thought about the best way to discipline and raise a fine, upstanding, well-behaved child. However, there is a point where so-called discipline crosses the line and becomes abuse; even murder. There is a book that has been the cause of concern for parents, social workers and prosecutors in the last several years.

Excuse to Abuse

This book advocates for using spankings on children as young as 6 months old to train them to submit to authority; to essentially break children in the same style that the Amish break their stubborn mules. Michael Pearl self-published his book, To Train Up a Child, and it has become popular in ultra-conservative homes, especially in Christian homeschooling households.

This book, which suggests using a switch for spanking a child in one example, describes how to use a quarter-inch flexible plumbing line for hitting the arms, legs or back and even advocates for periodic fasting for children, has now been linked to the deaths of several children. These children all died at the hands of their parents after being systematically beaten, most with the plumbing tubing mentioned by Pearl, having food withheld from them and subjected to other means of "discipline" supported by Pearl. Pearl's book was found in the homes of each of these children.

When Discipline Becomes Abuse

This is not to say that the book is to blame for these parents lashing out and killing their kids in an attempt to train them to submit to their authority. The parents are to blame. However, these parents had been led to believe that such behavior is acceptable. It is not.

Pearl has said it's not his fault if delusional, mentally ill parents took the wrong idea from his book. I think they understood his general principles and they just took it a step further, which resulted in the death of their children.

I would say it is never, not even once, acceptable to hit your child on the arms, back and legs with a switch, rubber tubing or any other instrument. This is abusive behavior that will only teach your child to fear and hate you.

The parents who followed Pearl's book, albeit extreme cases of following his teachings, were indicted for murder and are serving prison sentences now. Their discipline was most certainly actually physical and mental abuse. Their praying during or in between beatings does not make it alright either.

The Scoop

There is a wide expanse between parents who use spankings as a way to discipline their children and parents who withhold food and use various instruments to hit their children in the name of discipline. If you feel that you need clarification of where the line is drawn between discipline and abuse, see this link to the U.S. Administration for Children and Families.

Abuse in the name of discipline is still abuse. Abuse is a criminal offense. Abuse hurts everyone.

Teaching respect, trust and reason makes for a stronger, kinder, more confident child and adult. Over and out...

Anna

Restraining Facebook Comments: Two Courts & Two Outcomes

A Change of Status

About a month ago, my Dear Husband Will was closing one Facebook account and attempting to migrate all his friends, connections, information, traffic, etc. over to a different Facebook account. In so doing, before shutting down the one account he changed his relationship status from "married" to "single" as he added me as his wife on his other account.

One would not have thought this would cause such a stir, but it did. On his original account, Will immediately got messages and comments from concerned and well-meaning friends when his status showed up as "Single" in his friends' streams. Will wasn't sure why everyone was so concerned until he realized what he had done.

He quickly assured everyone we were indeed still {happily} married and quickly updated his relationship on his newer account. All of this was unbeknownst to me until I noticed that my Timeline had been updated to reflect that I had just married Will on that day in January 2012.

Again, well-meaning friends who knew better than to believe that update posted messages of congratulations under that relationship update. I had seen a notification to confirm I was married to Will and had done so, but didn't think much of it until he relayed this whole story to me.

Conversations Streams

We use Facebook to share lots of information whether good, bad, game changing, mundane, of interest to all, of interest to only a few. Some people are more laid back about their security levels and who they allow to see the information they post and how much of this information is available to people they haven't approved and granted "friend" status to yet.

People use their Facebook accounts for different reasons. Some use it as a networking tool for business. Others view it as an extension of hanging out with friends at a bar or coffee shop; friends sharing information and opinions. Some people are guarded about what type and how much information they share on this platform, even among friends. Others share just about every thought that crosses their minds; or so it seems.

Regardless of how each of us chooses to use his or her social media outlets, we are all tuned in and we listen to what our "friends" are saying. We react, respond and form opinions based on this information, as illustrated in the above example.

Harassment on Facebook

Courts are still trying to figure out how social media fits with the law. There were recently two cases involving Facebook posts; one from Minnesota and one from Ohio. These cases involve different circumstances and have different outcomes.

Olson v. LaBrie

In this case, Olson found that his uncle had posted old family photos and made mean and disrespectful comments regarding those photos. Olson emailed his uncle requesting the photos and comments be removed or altered to remove Olson; LaBrie refused to do so. Olson eventually filed an application for a Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) against LaBrie.

The district court found that LaBrie's actions did not constitute harassment and did not grant the HRO. Olson appealed and the appellate court agreed with the district court's ruling.

The Court of Appeals of Minnesota held that, "To constitute harassment, words must have a substantial adverse effect on the safety, security, or privacy of another. Minn. Stat. § 609.748, subd. 1(a)(1). Comments that are mean and disrespectful, coupled with innocuous family photos, do not affect a person's safety, security, or privacy—and certainly not substantially so."

So, in the end Facebook was not a component in this case. Regardless of where the photos and rude comments were, they simply didn't constitute harassment under the MN statute.

Byron v. Byron

In this Ohio dissolution case, the Facebook statement made by the husband against the wife who already had a temporary protection order in place due to an incident of domestic violence from June of 2011, was considered to be in violation of the TPO.

In November of 2011, Mr. Byron posted to his Facebook account the following statement: "If you are an evil, vindictive woman who wants to ruin your husband's life and take your son's father away from him completely -- all you need to do is say that you're scared of your husband or domestic partner and they'll take him away!"

Mrs. Byron became aware of this statement even though she is blocked from his account and filed a motion stating he was in violation of the TPO. The TPO restricted Mr. Byron "from causing plaintiff or the child of the parties to suffer physical and/or mental abuse, harassment, annoyance or bodily injury."

The magistrate ruled that Byron had violated the TPO and sentenced him to 60 days in jail and $500 fine or in lieu of this sentence he could pay back child support and post an apology on his Facebook page for 30 days beginning February 13, 2012. The magistrate wrote the apology into the order and required Byron keep his Facebook page active during that time.

Byron complained about free speech issues, but the magistrate reminded him that while we do have the right of free speech, there are limitations; we can't just say anything.

The Byron case is not over. This case will return to court on March 19^th. Once the case is concluded, Byron may choose to appeal the court's ruling on this and/or other grounds. This is certainly one to keep an eye on.

The Scoop

As I said, both of these involve statements made on Facebook. Both have very different outcomes. So, which one is right? Well, both could be. Each state can have different standards and different language regarding various areas of the law.

However, regardless of what the law says in your state, the rule of thumb when it comes to social media is kind of like the old adage, measure twice, cut once. That is to say, think twice before posting what's on your mind; asking yourself will this harm, offend, harass, frighten, disrespect anyone?; and then hit enter once.

We certainly do have the right to say many things and post those things on Facebook if we wish, but if it's harmful, offensive, disrespectful, etc. expect that some may block you, tell the person you are making remarks about, unfriend you on Facebook and maybe in real life too and perhaps even take the matter to court. This open forum does not give you an unfettered right to say ANYTHING that comes to mind. Over and out...

Anna

F is for Fear: Bad School Policies Affecting Good Kids {On a Soapbox....on a Tuesday}

School Contraband

I really hate the stories about the students, mostly boys, who once at school discover they have accidently brought a toy gun or small pocket knife in their backpack, book bag, lunch box or coat pocket; who report this to the teacher because the student knows this is contraband that shouldn't be at school; only to be tossed out of school and receive a record of bringing a "weapon" to school and a school suspension.

A boy from Georgia did just this a week or so ago. While in chess club, the 13 year old middle school student, discovered the 1.5 inch knife in the military style bag his aunt bought at a yard sale and gave him as a Christmas gift. The boy, upon discovering this knife, immediately alerted his teacher. His reward for this honest act? A 4-day, in-school suspension.

The Wrong Message

I can't tell you how angry this story and others like it make me. Disciplining an honest, well-meaning child in this way teaches two negative lessons: 1) don't tell the truth and 2) justice is a fraud.

We tell our children to tell the truth; honesty is the best policy. We tell our children that justice will prevail; the innocent will be free and the guilty punished.

And yet, our schools have responded to isolated incidents of evilness with fear. This fear has caused them to write harsh and unfair policies regarding ANY "weapons" brought to school, whether real or perceived, under ANY circumstances.

Lessons Learned

These school policies teach children to hide the truth {and the contraband} should they make such a discovery in their bags or pockets. These policies teach children that mens rea, or intent, doesn't matter, motives are unimportant, they are guilty by association and the school need not have any evidence to present against them to be found guilty of this "crime." These are lessons our students will learn at a young age and take with them all through school and into their adulthood.

We have thrown out the common sense response to the self-reporting of accidently {or unbeknownst to the student, as in this case} bringing a toy weapon or small knife to school. The response in such cases should be kind and appreciative. We should applaud and welcome those who come forward to admit the mistake and turn in the contraband; then remind all the students of the dangers of having any weapons, toy or otherwise, at school for a variety of reasons and tell them to carefully check their bags and remove any such items before coming to school.

The Scoop

Schools, in trying to protect the students, have instead hurt some of the "good" students. These policies are bad. These kinds of stories almost always make the news because they are unjust policies. Why must we punish the truthful, rule-following, upstanding students? The simple answer is Fear.

Fear controls much of how we run our lives. We must overcome fear and recognize the difference between students who are a threat and in need of intervention and students who are well-meaning, good kids, who sometimes make and honest mistake. Over and out...

Anna

Too Dangerous to Consume? Hazards of Doing the Dew & Having Some Wip at the Reddi

Considering Junk Food

At this time of year, the start of one year before us and the food-laden holidays and past year behind us, many of us take stock of our diet and exercise routines. We all know which foods we should be filling our diets with, but why is it that ALL seriously delicious, crave-worthy foods are terrible for us? It seems like a really cruel joke.

Although I think that on the whole I eat pretty well, I am often snared by the chocolate traps and can fall very far down in the ooey, gooey, rich chocolate pit {which I don't necessary think of as bad thing}. At least chocolate does have a number of redeeming qualities, which I have mentioned to you before.

However, there are other foods sitting on grocery store shelves looking very innocent, indeed; that are actually deadly {to a mouse} or could be used illegally. How could these corrosive, dangerous items be legal to sell? These junk foods are actually quite often consumed. It might surprise you when you find out what I'm talking about.

Last week, I happened upon two stories regarding food items and the law. Each story is completely different from the other, but both are interesting.

Whipped Topping No Laughing Matter

In the first instance, last week in St. Cloud, MN, a 23 year-old male was arrested driving while impaired from a hazardous substance after he crashed his car into a pole. What was this substance? Well, inside the vehicle were numerous cans of whipped topping.

My first reaction was "what, you can sniff whipped topping?" How crazy is that? Well, as it turns out whipped topping is included on the list of dangerous inhalants.

While the whipped topping contains mostly fat and sweeteners {and no cream}, it also contains nitrous oxide gas. You may be more familiar with its other name, "laughing gas." Yep, that's right; nitrous oxide is the same stuff your dentist might administer to you as an anesthetic. This gas aids in the dispensing of the whipped topping and whipping it at the same time.

There are actually a number of household items that are can be inhaled. Some you are quite aware of, but others may surprise you. They are categorized as gases (nitrous oxide, propane tank gas, chloroform, whipped topping, gases from a refrigerator, etc.) aerosols (contained in spray bottles, such as hair spray, vegetable oil sprays, spray paint, etc.), nitrites (often contained in cleaning products, leather cleaners and scented air fresheners; butyl, amyl and cyclohexyl) and volatile solvents (Often found at home, in schools and in the work place, including glues, paint thinner, degreasers, felt-tipped markers, etc).

Not many consumables on that list. Did you take a good look at other items in the same category as the whipped topping? I bet you'll think twice the next time you spray whipped topping on your pie? But seriously, would you really want to eat this product again?

Do the Dew or Maybe Not

The second story involves a lawsuit. A man alleges he found a mouse in his Mountain Dew. He says he sent the mouse remains he found in his Dew to the folks at PepsiCo for analysis and they destroyed the mouse. The lawyers for PepsiCo came back with an argument that isn't quite what you might expect.

They say that if a mouse had indeed ended up in a Mountain Dew container, the soda would have dissolved the mouse into a jelly-like substance before the consumer ever opened the container; approximately 15 months after bottling. Hmmm. Well, that makes me want to drink this pop.

Let's ponder that for a minute. I'm not talking about a cleaning substance or poison or toxic substance that could dissolve a mouse. I am talking about a consumable; a beverage. OK, so it looks like toxic waste and tastes a bit like what I would imagine Windex might taste like, but still many people do "Do the Dew" quite often.

So, here's the skinny: Mountain Dew contains citric acid that is corrosive enough to destroy teeth and bones in a matter of months {if soaked in the liquid}, as noted by several studies. While citrus fruit juices have more citric acid and the rate of decay of teeth and/or bones would be the same; at least there is vitamin C in the fruit juices. So, will Mountain Dew kill you? Well, it's not going to dissolve your teeth and bones; unless you soak in it for a couple of weeks; and it's not known to be corrosive on your "innards". For the record, I'm not taking any chances.

The Scoop

At the risk of sounding like a food snob, I don't consume these particular foods, and I have to admit I'm really glad I don't'. So, there you have it; a few interesting legal issues involving foods under inconsumable circumstances. Over and out...

Anna