0
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Take Back Kentucky Legislative Action Alert

Oppose SB 228 and HB 316

Anti-Bullying Bills

3/14/2016

Call 1-800-372-7181

  • Both of these bills have passed their respective chambers, but now they must pass in the opposite chamber to become law. You have to wonder if anyone that voted for this bill read the language (which this is a short bill) or they just went for the feel good thing to do.

SB 228 is in the House Education Committee

HB 316 is in the Senate Education Committee

  • Tell the operator you have 2 messages:

The first message is for the House Education Committee Members, All House Leadership & Your Representative.

Message 1:Oppose SB 228. I am opposed to bullying, but the language of this bill is very vague and a slippery slope to limiting Freedom of Speech for our children.

The second message is for the Senate Education Committee Members, All Senate Leadership & Your Senator.

Message 2: “Oppose HB 316. I am opposed to bullying, but the language of this bill is very vague and a slippery slope to limiting Freedom of Speech for our children.

  • Suggested you email the legislators with the concerns with the bill below:

We have several questions about the language of this bill. “Bullying is any unwanted verbal, physical or social behavior that involves a real or perceived power imbalance and is repeated or has the potential to be repeated.

  • What kind of social behavior?
  • What is a power imbalance, and who determines it?
  • Who determines if something has the potential to be repeated?

It must occur “on school property, school sponsored transportation, a school sponsored event, OR that disrupts the education process. “

  • Apparently this can happen away from school property, transportation, or events?
    • How is this adjudicated?
  • What is a disruption of education process?
  • Who determines something is a disruption to the education process?

Here is where they try and clear things up but don’t quite hit the mark.
“The definition shall not be interpreted to prohibit civil exchange of opinions, or debate, or cultural practices protected under the state or federal Constitution where the opinion expressed does not materially or substantially disrupt the education process”

  • Who determines what a civil exchange is?
  • Is a constitutional right subject to limits such as materially or substantial disruption the education process?
    • We understand that materially or substantially was an attempt to raise the bar a little higher but to what level, because it has become a point of limiting constitutional rights. Current legal limits on Constitutional Rights are if you use them to cause harm. Are we now considering disruption to the educational process a harm?

We would never desire to see anyone bullied, but at the same time this bill is so vague with no definitions we don’t know how any of it could hold up in a court of law. This bill actually contains the potential to make bullies out of people who are not really bullies and thus making them the real victim. What is worse is they used a 7th grader to push this legislation through. We are tired of seeing children trotted out to pass legislation when they haven’t a clue what the consequences of the legislation they are being used to pass will have. This bill is fostering a culture amongst our children in which they cannot handle opposing viewpoints in society and that disagreement makes them a victim.

 

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Leave a Reply