Big Brother is Watching Your Children

[CanadianJudo]

@RTchoke

The student was in the privacy of his own home. She was the voyeur so to speak.

voyeur would imply she was watching without consent which is clearly not the case.

[PurpnGold]

@RTchoke

The student was in the privacy of his own home. She was the voyeur so to speak.

Not when his mom consented for them to be on camera for school.

[CanadianJudo]

@RTchoke

The student was in the privacy of his own home. She was the voyeur so to speak.

The Student was on a zoom call.

[zantax]

@PurpnGold

@RTchoke

The student was in the privacy of his own home. She was the voyeur so to speak.

Not when his mom consented for them to be on camera for school.

Was it optional?

[RTchoke]

@CanadianJudo

@RTchoke

The student was in the privacy of his own home. She was the voyeur so to speak.

The Student was on a zoom call.

I know how that works. I’ve been doing it since March with my students.

[WuWei]

@Sknyluv

It’s not clear from the article if the teacher recognized the weapon as a BB gun or if the article is providing that as information once it was identified by the police as being a BB gun.

I think it would be presented more matter of factly that the teacher knew it was a BB gun and reported it anyway. Do you think a cop would have gone to the house if it was known beforehand that it was a BB gun? It makes more sense that the instructor thought it was a real gun.

Yes it is.

[RTchoke]

@PurpnGold

@RTchoke

The student was in the privacy of his own home. She was the voyeur so to speak.

Not when his mom consented for them to be on camera for school.

Did she sign anything? Was it optional?

[PurpnGold]

@RTchoke

Did she sign anything? Was it optional?

Idk why does that matter?

[RTchoke]

@PurpnGold

@RTchoke

Did she sign anything? Was it optional?

Idk why does that matter?

You said she consented. How exactly did she do that?

[markdido]

@RTchoke

@PurpnGold

@RTchoke

Did she sign anything? Was it optional?

Idk why does that matter?

You said she consented. How exactly did she do that?

The mom probably consented to her son using video classroom.

Probably didn’t consent to a nosy teacher scrutinizing that students surroundings.

And she certainly didn’t consent to the teacher recording her child with a screenshot.

[PurpnGold]

@RTchoke

You said she consented. How exactly did she do that?

By turning the camera on

[RTchoke]

@PurpnGold

@RTchoke

You said she consented. How exactly did she do that?

By turning the camera on

Hmmmmmmmmm. I would think that a District so uptight about even seeing a firearm and coming unglued over it, would also have some sort of release/consent form.

[PurpnGold]

@markdido

And she certainly didn’t consent to the teacher recording her child with a screenshot.

This is the part that is questionable. I believe the teach would need to make the parent aware of a screenshot of their kid.

Not sure what the local laws are for that

[PurpnGold]

@RTchoke

Hmmmmmmmmm. I would think that a District so uptight about even seeing a firearm and coming unglued over it, would also have some sort of release/consent form.

Maybe for recording…

[RTchoke]

@PurpnGold

@markdido

And she certainly didn’t consent to the teacher recording her child with a screenshot.

This is the part that is questionable. I believe the teach would need to make the parent aware of a screenshot of their kid.

Not sure what the local laws are for that

We are not allowed to record the meetings etc. due to privacy concerns. Pretty sure the screen shot violates that.

[wiley8425]

Cops are called over silly ■■■■ all the time. There was a gal working at a restaurant dressed in a Stormtrooper costume as part of a campaign the restaurant was running who had the cops called on her because she was standing outside the restaurant with “a weapon.” Cops showed up and proceeded to arrest the gal even though the owner was out there telling them it was just a costume and a fake blaster the gal was carrying and that the gal was his employee. The employee was later released without charges, however the bogus call was never addressed. If the call hadn’t been made, police wouldn’t have responded in the first place. You’d think common sense would have kicked in at some point though.

Worker dressed as Star Wars stormtrooper held at gunpoint for blaster

[Mountain_Soldier]

@Sknyluv

@conan

What laws were broken?

None. The cops went and determined nothing was wrong.

I think the cops should be called on you and your home searched for no reason at all.

[Mountain_Soldier]

@CanadianJudo

@zantax

@Sknyluv

Ask the cops.

Like I said, the teacher needs to be held accountable as well. She used her position of authority and the access it granted to her to see into someone’s house to call the police over no crime and had no reasonable suspicion one had been. Don’t we call that Swatting? And isn’t it illegal?

this wasn’t swatting the teacher though something could be wrong in the household she was wrong but she didn’t call the police trigger a false raid.

The teacher is a ■■■■■■■ moron who shouldn’t be teaching.

[Mountain_Soldier]

@PurpnGold

@markdido

How do you figure interfering in a student’s life is “doing her job”

The we’re doing online class. With video, correct?

Let’s say the teacher saw a home that was unsuitable for a child. What should she do? Ignore it?

So firearms are unsuitable for liberals? Thank you for finally acknowledging it.

[FloridaYankee]

@zantax

@FloridaYankee

@zantax

@CanadianJudo

@conan

What laws were broken?

Nope, why no one was arrested.
you don’t need to break the law for the cops to be called.

The police however, do need at least the suspicion of a crime to get involved. It’s not illegal for a kid to have a gun on the wall. No crime, none of the police business.

In Maryland kids under sixteen cannot be unsupervised with any firearms. It was a stinking bb gun though, so yeah, it’s ridiculous. I would think the police could have determined that from the screenshot which they had to have seen.

Link to statute? Odds are, that statute reads as unsupervised in public, not inside a home.

No, it is exactly as I said with one exception, that being if the child has a certificate of firearm and hunter safety training.

2024 Maryland Statutes :: Criminal Law :: Title 4 - Weapon Crimes :: Subtitle...

(1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated.

(2) “Ammunition” means a cartridge, shell, or other device containing explosive or incendiary material designed and intended for use in a firearm.

(3) “Child” means an individual under the age of 16 years.

(4) (i) “Firearm” means a handgun, rifle, shotgun, short-barreled rifle, or short-barreled shotgun, as those terms are defined in § 4-201 of this title, or any other firearm.

(ii) “Firearm” does not include an antique firearm as defined in § 4-201 of this title.

(b) Exceptions. – This section does not apply if:

(1) the child’s access to a firearm is supervised by an individual at least 18 years old;

(2) the child’s access to a firearm was obtained as a result of an unlawful entry;

(3) the firearm is in the possession or control of a law enforcement officer while the officer is engaged in official duties; or

(4) the child has a certificate of firearm and hunter safety issued under § 10-301.1 of the Natural Resources Article.

(c) Prohibited. – A person may not store or leave a loaded firearm in a location where the person knew or should have known that an unsupervised child would gain access to the firearm.