Will Republican perverts get enough Dems to support them on HR 5295?

[Padme Amidala]

Here is one of numerous action alerts that youth groups are fowarding out tonight. The Republicans are going to try to waive procedure to get through the bill to STRIP-SEARCH CHILDREN, HR 5295. If they do it this way, they'll need a super majority. Please tell your Congressperson not to fall for Republican bills. The alert I'm forwarding is from creativeyouth.net Also, keep this kicked so that enough people contact their Representative before the vote.


ALERTS TO PROTECT OUR RIGHTS
STOP HR5295

Important Action alert to stop strip-searching of America's youth to please some sickos in Congress. Are Geoff Davis (the bill's proponent) and co-sponsors, Charles Boustany, Michael Fitzpatrick, Jim Gerlach, Sue Kelly, Mark Kirk, John Kuhl, Ron Lewis, Jon Porter, Christopher Shays, and Curt Weldon perverts who like to see kids naked? DEMAND THAT YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR CONGRESSWOMAN OPPOSE HR 5295 Original alert:News Update from Citizens for Legitimate Government;19 September 2006; http://www.legitgov.org/;http://www.legitgov.org/index.html#breaking_news
"Congress Considering Strip Searching Students --Congress to vote on HR 5295 Tuesday or Wednesday 18 Sep 2006 (drugpolicy.org) The Student Teacher Safety Act of 2006 (HR 5295) is a sloppily written bill that would require any school receiving federal funding (essentially every public school) to adopt policies allowing teachers and school officials to conduct random, warrantless searches of every student, at any time, for essentially any reason they want. These searches could be pat-downs, bag searches, or strip searches depending on how far school administrators wanted to go."

[Kutjara]

1. Hmmm, are paedophile schoolteachers an important voter demographic...

...this November? I remember some teachers from my schooldays who would think all their Christmases had come at once if this piece of shit passes.

[papau]

2. ?-required school searches restricted only by state law - why is this bad?

I see nothing that authorizes strip searches in the bill. What am I missing?

The article is the wording of the Drug Policy Alliance - which says that it "envisions a just society in which the use and regulation of drugs are grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights, in which people are no longer punished for what they put into their own bodies but only for crimes committed against others, and in which the fears, prejudices and punitive prohibitions of today are no more. Our mission is to advance those policies and attitudes that best reduce the harms of both drug misuse and drug prohibition, and to promote the sovereignty of individuals over their minds and bodies."- all of which sounds good.

But their only real thought is that the bill "could make" police state tactics (meaning police in a large group locking down a school and then searching for drugs) more common. Indeed the Drug Policy Alliance fear disconnecting searches from individualized suspicion.

But needing "individualized suspicion" is an adult right in a criminal trial - students under the current law in every state do not have that right if not in a trial.

So where/how the hell did "strip searching perverts" become the theme of the article?