<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Outrageous Court Decision Of The Week</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/</link>
	<description>Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 18:49:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norm Nelson</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38658</link>
		<dc:creator>Norm Nelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 17:13:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38658</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It turns out the Advil was 400mg Ibuprofen that requires a persciption. Proof yet a gain that controling a substance only increases the curiosity value.

It turns out all the precedents were laid down so that suspicion, supporting evidence, and a broken rule are all that is required for a strip search. In this case there were lying snitches involved as well.

[url=www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A9F35200D27AB3418825735D005314A2/$file/0515759.pdf]This[/url] is the ruling.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It turns out the Advil was 400mg Ibuprofen that requires a persciption. Proof yet a gain that controling a substance only increases the curiosity value.</p>
<p>It turns out all the precedents were laid down so that suspicion, supporting evidence, and a broken rule are all that is required for a strip search. In this case there were lying snitches involved as well.</p>
<p>[url=www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A9F35200D27AB3418825735D005314A2/$file/0515759.pdf]This[/url] is the ruling.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norm Nelson</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38648</link>
		<dc:creator>Norm Nelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Sep 2007 09:31:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38648</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This article has a couple of problems.

1. Clifton was the disenting opinion in a 2-1 ruling. “I disagree, however, with the assertion that the search of (the girl’s) person was reasonable in scope,” Clifton wrote. “It was unreasonable to force (the girl), a 13-year-old girl, to expose her breasts and public area to schools officials.”

2. In the above quote it has public rather than pubic.

This smells like a snopes.com candidate.

Then I found this http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A9F35200D27AB3418825735D005314A2/$file/0515759.pdf]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This article has a couple of problems.</p>
<p>1. Clifton was the disenting opinion in a 2-1 ruling. “I disagree, however, with the assertion that the search of (the girl’s) person was reasonable in scope,” Clifton wrote. “It was unreasonable to force (the girl), a 13-year-old girl, to expose her breasts and public area to schools officials.”</p>
<p>2. In the above quote it has public rather than pubic.</p>
<p>This smells like a snopes.com candidate.</p>
<p>Then I found this <a href="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A9F35200D27AB3418825735D005314A2/$file/0515759.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A9F35200D27AB3418825735D005314A2/$file/0515759.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Quincy</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38635</link>
		<dc:creator>Quincy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 21:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just remember, according to the modern political school of thought, one&#039;s rights only begin when one is old enough to vote.  According to the vast majority of politicians, 13-year-olds have no rights.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just remember, according to the modern political school of thought, one&#8217;s rights only begin when one is old enough to vote.  According to the vast majority of politicians, 13-year-olds have no rights.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: T F Stern</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38630</link>
		<dc:creator>T F Stern</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:14:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for posting this one or it would have slipped between the cracks and been missed.

The ruling is unconscionable, that any public entity, much less a school attempting to enforce house rules, may invade and overturn basic rights of an individual without due process, without a warrant, without parental notification in this particular case sets a dangerous precedent.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for posting this one or it would have slipped between the cracks and been missed.</p>
<p>The ruling is unconscionable, that any public entity, much less a school attempting to enforce house rules, may invade and overturn basic rights of an individual without due process, without a warrant, without parental notification in this particular case sets a dangerous precedent.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: UCrawford</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38626</link>
		<dc:creator>UCrawford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:16:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38626</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Unbelieveable.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unbelieveable.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Isaac</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38621</link>
		<dc:creator>Isaac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 15:10:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38621</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are no words...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are no words&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: trumpetbob15</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38618</link>
		<dc:creator>trumpetbob15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2007 13:53:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/09/29/outrageous-court-decision-of-the-week/#comment-38618</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I wonder if the parents can now try and get the school officials charged for statuatory rape and/or child pornography.  Remember, if this student were to &quot;willingly&quot; do disrobe with a male student, he would end up going to jail for 10 years or more, having to always have the &quot;sex offender&quot; label.  Seems to me there might be some sex offenders lurking in the offices of the Safford Middle School Vice Principal and School Nurse.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder if the parents can now try and get the school officials charged for statuatory rape and/or child pornography.  Remember, if this student were to &#8220;willingly&#8221; do disrobe with a male student, he would end up going to jail for 10 years or more, having to always have the &#8220;sex offender&#8221; label.  Seems to me there might be some sex offenders lurking in the offices of the Safford Middle School Vice Principal and School Nurse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
