Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by rewinn, Mercer Island on May 17, 2009:

As for Kim's question "So the question is, what can we do about all of this?" I would suggest (to crib an idea from Matt Miller's delightful "The Tyranny of Dead Ideas") our American system of having 50,000 or so local school boards, often staffed by amateurs with little knowledge of education, often massively duplicating work (e.g. textbook evaluation) instead of actually solving schooling problems, may be a luxury we as a nation can no longer afford. Although it's a fine tradition, it's not a system used in many other advanced nations.

Certainly I agree that parents "need" to get more involved with schooling, but it's not gonna happen when so many parents are themselves struggling to get by in a difficult economy. All too often people exercise the inalienable Right to Bear Kids without even demonstrating the ability to handle them safely.

Posted by Ruki, Melbourne on May 18, 2009:

I'm actually a librarian in Australia. I recall reading an article which was either from the US or the UK some years ago (unfortunately I haven't time to check) which suggested that it was going to become the law to report activity which librarians may regard as suspicious. So, it might be that the librarian was actually just doing her job, no matter how much she hated doing what she was doing.

---

I can well imagine such a proposal was discussed, but I'm not aware of any such law in any state in the U.S., let alone federally. And indeed, as "Dex in CA" pointed out in his comment, the law in the state where this happened is that such information "shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed" unless legally subpoenaed by a court of law. She's going against professional ethics, she's going against the honor of her profession, and she's going against the law -- and her actions harmed an innocent person. That's not "doing her job." -rc

Posted by Steve, CT on May 18, 2009:

Though I am not aware of a librarian's responsibilities, I assume from all the responses she acted inappropriately. What, however, would the articles have all said had this student gone to school and opened fire. I'm quite certain the parents of the victims would have been a little upset had they learned this librarian suspected something and kept her mouth shut. Our fears are real people, Columbine was not a one time incident. Wake up.

---

I addressed this specifically in my essay -- please finish reading it. Your fears are NOT real, they're terribly overblown. You're letting your fear dictate that it's appropriate to consider all kids guilty until proven innocent. How sad for the youth of our country. -rc

Posted by Don, Illinois, U.S. on May 18, 2009:

As a pro-gun citizen, I agree that the librarian was in the wrong and should be fired. As a parent, I'm also concerned that the student was called into the principal's office, where police were waiting, without his parents being present. That, in and of itself, could have a chilling affect on his interest in, and good opinion of, the school and its principal. If I were that child's parent, I would be incensed that he/she was subjected to that without me there to help defend him/her. It seems that the student was capable enough to explain what they did and why. Some students are too shy and might not have been able to do as well. Two of mine are elementary students and don't yet have the verbal skills to do this in the face of such a serious concentration of intimidating authority. They've even (incorrectly) gotten in trouble when it's just the principal, because they didn't present all the relevant facts well enough to be completely understood. The schools shouldn't be engaging in this kind of investigative behavior without the parents present.

Posted by beth, washington on May 18, 2009:

This could almost be humorous if it wasn't so darn scary. Big brother is creeping into all facets of our lives and there is no sign of a slow-down, let alone a backtracking on how much people feel the obligation to monitor all actions of individuals.

The idea that a student can be called into the principals office and questioned with police there is truly frightening - a minor being questioned without representation by authorities. Wow, for the average kid, being called into the principals office is intimidating enough, but to have the police there is just over the top. Did this kid understand that he didn't have to say a word to anyone present? Did they tell him that 'they'd go easier' if he answered their questions right then without the opportunity to at least speak to his parents, let alone a legal representative?

Where was Miranda and what happened to her authority and protection? I hope the parents bring this up not only to the school board, but to the state department of education and a revue board at the police department. Even if this kid was plotting another Columbine, there was no proof other than the word of a busy-body librarian who demonstrated no ethics for her job. And on the off chance this kid was up to no good, it seems that following proper procedures (having parents present at the very least) while questioning the kid would have been much more effective to preventing another massacre. Stupid people who want to play at power hungry superheroes. This type of behavior and attitude was why the police & government had such a bad reputation for so many years. These throw-backs to the McCarthy era need to grow up and start demonstrating some uncommon common sense.

---

I indeed wonder why school kids don't seem to have Miranda rights; it's something I need to research when I have some time. But just to clarify, "Miranda" refers to Ernesto Miranda, whose landmark 1966 Supreme Court case confirmed not only that Americans have a right to refuse to speak to police to incriminate themselves, but also that they must be specifically warned that (as police shows usually put it) "anything they say can and will be used against [them] in a court of law." Many other countries have similar laws. -rc

Posted by rewinn, Mercer Island on May 18, 2009:

"Mr. Cassingham, our records indicate you are researching Miranda rights. What sort of crime are you planning?"

---

Exactly. Do we want a tyranny, or do we want freedom? -rc

Posted by Walter, North Conway, NH on May 18, 2009:

When I was in junior high quite a few years ago (late 60's), one of my art projects was to publish a "book" on any subject I wanted. It was to contain pictures and text. I did a book about different forms of torture: the guillotine, iron maiden, maces, the rack, etc. I do not remember the grade I received, but I was not hauled into the office or interviewed by the police. I do remember my teacher liked the book (it was different).

What would they have done to me today?

---

You're obviously a sadistic murderer, Walter. So, it would be for your own good (not to mention the good of society) to be locked up forever. Sorry that your productive, tax-paying life is over, but hey -- it's for the better good. -rc

Posted by Lee, UK on May 18, 2009:

A point that seems to have been missed is that the library is a PUBLIC library and therefore carries books for the general public to read.

If the librarian felt so strongly about the content of the reading material then it should have either been removed from the shelves or perhaps placed in a section for 'age appropriate reading'.

Posted by Tom, California, USA on May 19, 2009:

Personally I'm surprised at the number of people who have suggested that the librarian should have asked the kid questions about WHY he was reading what he was in order to satisfy her fears.

To me that behavior is almost as egregious as telling the school about the incident. It's none of the librarian's business WHY someone wants to research a particular topic. Only that they do.

Posted by Lea, Keyser WV on May 19, 2009:

I find this whole situation to be very disquieting. I was a very diverse reader as a child and I researched numerous subjects. A comment my brother made to me recently was that I had read almost every book in the school library. I expect that was pushing the truth a bit, but in general, I did read voraciously.

To this day I can pull up memories of numerous factoids. I researched anything that caught my fancy, including methods of creating weapons such as spears, and bows and traps. I also researched American history, the American Revolution, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, and the US Constitution.

I was not a popular kid and I am sure that if I were in school today, I would probably set off their concerns in their zero tolerance paranoia.
By the way, in high school, my mother worked in the school office and if I so much as made a sarcastic remark, my mother knew before the next period's bell rang. If anything it made me more quiet about my own thoughts. (Yeah, it's the quiet loners you have to worry about.) But, since I never utilized my knowledge in an antisocial manner, I am still among the free. And the only prejudice I will admit to is a prejudice against the stupid and intolerant. Such as the school officials that get concerned about a child researching gun laws and pulling that child in to question him because of what he was reading in the school library. I am so happy I was able to grow up without such foolishness as zero tolerance laws. I worry that the children of today will either be so scared about trying to think for themselves or be pushed into rebelling against any perceived authority.

I do hope the librarian is disciplined for betraying the ethics of her profession.

---

It was actually the public, not school, library -- but that doesn't alter your comments. -rc