We're from the government and we're here to help....

Logic fail? I think not. They're feeling defensive, and they're trying to prop up their legitimacy.

I have never known Thomas to attempt to appease anyone. I consider him a friend and he's called me out of faulty logic several times over the years. I'm better because of it.

He's one of the few A2Kers who ever admits that he's changed his mind on a topic and that is a truly admirable trait on internet forums.

I think you must have missed his post on page 16 where he says after giving the topic more thought he now agrees with Dryden.

I was surprised when he started out by disagreeing. I'm glad he's changed his mind on this.

But even if he hadn't I'd still have high words for him.

Just like I still have high words for firefly.

That's some of the most convoluted bullshit you've ever proposed, and you've come up with some doozies.

Ticomaya wrote:

Normally, it's the possession of the controlled substance that's criminalized.

But how can you smoke pot if you don't possess it first? Logically, saying you smoked it has to imply that you possessed it.

I think the point is that saying you have smoked (and possessed) pot is insufficient evidence to convict you on. Case in point: A few months ago, I indulged a guilty pleasure by watching a series called Moonshiners on the Discovery Channel. In episode after episode, about 10 people didn't just say they were brewing moonshine; they were filmed doing it. None of them got arrested. That's because the police, in order to do that, can't just rely on what somebody says in the normal course of life. They have to catch the person with actual, non-taxed alcohol in their cars, or barns, or whatever. And that's why the students would not have incriminated themselves in that survey.

Do you understand English?

agreeing with drydens actions is not the same as showing understanding of what the bosses were up to.

All of which is not to say the teacher gave bad advice.

firefly wrote:

Quote:

Dryden previously admitted it was “dumb luck” he was able to review the questionnaires before passing them out, and that he would have consulted administrators if given more time

And no other teachers had this problem? Did any of them hand out similar legal advice to students? Or encourage their students to lie?

Apparently they didn't, and it's a damn shame.

Also, with respect, you rhetoric about "legal advice" is stale going on rancid.

Another Batavia High School teacher, Scott Bayer, said Dryden was not alone in thinking it was important to let students know they were not obligated to answer the questions if doing so involved admitting crimes. "Every teacher I talked to addressed students in the same way," he said.