Umbridge the Thief (was Re: HP and the democratic equilibrium)

[Derek Hiemforth]

No: HPFGUIDX 87141

Kathryn Cawte wrote:
>As long as he/she was planning on giving it back at the end of term (or
>whenever the student went home) I wouldn't have a problem with it. If she
>wants to keep it from being confiscated for any reason she shouldn't have
>taken it to the school in the first place.

Derek:
So it would be okay for the administrator to walk up to a student and
say, "You know, I don't like the cut of your jib.  Therefore, I'm taking
all your money, your expensive wristwatch, your photo of your family...
in fact, I'm taking everything you have that isn't directly related to
schoolwork.  But don't worry... I'll give it all back to you at the end
of the term in six months, so that makes it all okay."

Do the students have *any* rights at all?  It seems like all the onus is
being put on the student.  (If the student didn't want his autographed
photo of Gilderoy Lockhart confiscated, he shouldn't have brought it.)
Doesn't it make just as much sense to place it on the school?  (If the
school didn't want the student to have an autographed photo of Gilderoy
Lockhart, they shouldn't have allowed the student to bring it.)

I guess I'm just having trouble buying the idea that the psychopathically
cruel and capricious Dolores Umbridge is somehow within her rights to
take a student's personal effects simply because she doesn't like the
student.  I consider this further evidence that she is evil and wrong,
therefore I don't accept that it's technically allowed.  :)

- Derek