Here We Go Again
Am I serious about these three options? Yes. And these three options should be legal without question and any lawsuits regarding their use should be summarily thrown out.
The "feisty" Nancy Grace played the video of the officer removing the girl from her chair/table over and over again on her TV show last night. She mentioned that the girl was "slammed against the floor." I didn't see the officer slamming her. I thought his actions were appropriate. If a person resists arrest the officer has the right to assume that the person might become violent. Bring her to the floor, knee in the back and handcuffs.
One of the greatest problems the black community faces in our nation is their lack of respect for authority and the fact that again and again we see blacks resisting arrest.
And take that case where the city councilman walked out of his residence dressed in a wife-beater and shorts and tried to engage the officers about why his friends/acquaintances were being detained. Officers should not be under any obligation to explain to people at the scene of an arrest why they are taking the actions they are taking. If the councilman is told to not interfere in "a police matter" he should remain quiet and leave the scene immediately if told to do so. He didn't and the officers tried to arrest him and he resisted. He got tasered. Right call!
If the police were expected to explain to friends, family members, etc., why they are taking certain actions to detain or arrest individuals they would be talking or days.
The slogan "Black Lives Matter" should be revised to: "Black Lives Matter. Don't Resist Arrest"
Now before someone accuses me of saying that resisting arrest is grounds for killing the black people let me point out that jumping to this conclusion is absurd. But resisting arrest has led to officers being in fear for their lives and tragedy has ensued.
Quote: GreasyjohnI thought his actions were appropriate. If a person resists arrest the officer has the right to assume that the person might become violent. Bring her to the floor, knee in the back and handcuffs.
Ya know, GJ, I have seen several pro-law enforcement type guests on several of the news channels also state that they officer did nothing wrong, in that he has the authority to take the 'perpetrator' into custody by whatever means.
The problem with that theory as well as your statement is that this was not someone that just committed a crime of robbery or assault or what have you. This was a 16 year old girl in a classroom who's 'crime' was talking on her cell phone. Let's not act like she committed a REAL crime. This was in no way even a matter for the police, even school police to be handling. School police are there for the protection of students not to handle disciplinary actions.
The appropriate action was not for a 240 lb weight-lifter ex-military sheriff's deputy to physically grab and throw a 16 year old, 120 lb female student to the ground and place her in handcuffs. The 'crime' that this child is accused of should have been punishable by after school detention or perhaps the old 'Bart Simpson punishment' of writing on the chalkboard 100 times "I will not talk on my cell phone during class".
So, GJ if you think the sheriff's actions were appropriate, we must live in different worlds. What next? Cops can shoot someone for jaywalking?
Quote: kewljYa know, GJ, I have seen several pro-law enforcement type guests on several of the news channels also state that they officer did nothing wrong, in that he has the authority to take the 'perpetrator' into custody by whatever means.
The problem with that theory as well as your statement is that this was not someone that just committed a crime of robbery or assault or what have you. This was a 16 year old girl in a classroom who's 'crime' was talking on her cell phone. Let's not act like she committed a REAL crime. This was in no way even a matter for the police, even school police to be handling. School police are there for the protection of students not to handle disciplinary actions.
The appropriate action was not for a 240 lb weight-lifter ex-military sheriff's deputy to physically grab and throw a 16 year old, 120 lb female student to the ground and place her in handcuffs. The 'crime' that this child is accused of should have been punishable by after school detention or perhaps the old 'Bart Simpson punishment' of writing on the chalkboard 100 times "I will not talk on my cell phone during class".
So, GJ if you think the sheriff's actions were appropriate, we must live in different worlds. What next? Cops can shoot someone for jaywalking?
The girl would not stop being disruptive. She would not leave the classroom. She was ordered to by an officer. She did not comply. She resisted arrest. The girl showed a lack of respect for authority while she was clearly in the wrong. Let's no leap to shooting jaywalkers just yet.
I think officers are taught a lot of different methods for subduing, restraining, and controlling people, and this officer had better options.
I don't know anything about the councilman.
Quote: Greasyjohn
One of the greatest problems the black community faces in our nation is their lack of respect for authority and the fact that again and again we see blacks resisting arrest.
Whether you realize it or not, this comment borders on racism, as you are categorizing a who race of people.
You might consider substituting black community with 'younger generation' as I see this attitude among "youts" (<my cousin vinny reference) of all races.
But if you want to stick with your original statement, I have two responses. First, Police have abused their authority time and time again. I don't know if it has become more prevalent over the last 20 year or we just see it more because of increases in video camera and now cell phones. Nearly every day on the news we some an officer somewhere abusing their authority. I am by no means saying all cops are bad. Like everything else, it is a few bad apples. But those actions of a few bad apples have caused some to not respect the profession as we should. Respect is something that is earned after all.
Secondly, While I am a fair-skinned Caucasian boy of European heritage, it is very clear to me that blacks have endured unfair treatment for decades. There is undeniable data on this. Black traffic stops and arrests are disproportionately higher by 10 fold, as compared to population percentage. THAT is racial profiling! I think if you or I were that race being profiled, you would not tend to not respect the authorities doing it as well.
It's all about proportional use of force. LOL at taser. What a sadist you are.
-Come with me.
No.
*zaps her, she falls to the ground in a trembling mass and shits herself*
What's the minimum age you would say using a taser in this situation is wrong? Would you use a taser on a 15 year old? A 10 year old? A five year old?
Quote: GreasyjohnThe girl would not stop being disruptive. She would not leave the classroom. She was ordered to by an officer. She did not comply. She resisted arrest. The girl showed a lack of respect for authority while she was clearly in the wrong. Let's no leap to shooting jaywalkers just yet.
The officer did not belong in the classroom or being involved in this type of situation. It is not his job. His job is to break up fights and protect the students against outside forces. Disciplinary matters are supposed to be handles the same way they have been for decades, by the school. If the teacher can't handle the student they call the principal, who may then call the parent.
We do not treat students talking on cell phones during class, even disrupting that class the same way we handle violent criminals.
Quote: kewljThe officer did not belong in the classroom or being involved in this type of situation. It is not his job. His job is to break up fights and protect the students against outside forces. Disciplinary matters are supposed to be handles the same way they have been for decades, by the school. If the teacher can't handle the student they call the principal, who may then call the parent.
We do not treat students talking on cell phones during class, even disrupting that class the same way we handle violent criminals.
I don't have all the facts. But if a student is talking on her phone and is asked by the teacher to stop and she doesn't I don't feel that calling the principal and if that doesn't work calling the parent should be the course of action. So this 16-year-old can disrupt the class for an hour until the teacher-principal-parent scenario is attempted? Coddle this kind of selfish self-indulgence? No.
Well those types of things have been gone from 'acceptable' disciplinary actions for decades now. Do you really think we are going to go backwards to where police officers slam a student to the ground, jump on top of them and hogtie them or handcuff them for simple school disciplinary issues like talking on a cell phone or passing a note in class.
GJ, I think you need to step back and differentiate between REAL crimes and REAL criminal behavior and student disciplinary actions. A police officer has no place even being involved in this equation.
Ya know GJ, this school girl may have had a SERIOUS issue. Perhaps her date to this weekend's Halloween dance just dumped her and her life was ruined. That's what life is to a 16 year old. We don't arrest them and put them in jail for that.
Quote: kewljI forget just how old you are GJ, but I believe you are of a different generation than I. So perhaps you remember the days when teachers could 'paddle' a student that misbehaved, or in Catholic school the nuns would take a ruler to one's knuckles.
Well those types of things have been gone from 'acceptable' disciplinary actions for decades now. Do you really think we are going to go backwards to where police officers slam a student to the ground, jump on top of them and hogtie them or handcuff them for simple school disciplinary issues like talking on a cell phone or passing a note in class.
GJ, I think you need to step back and differentiate between REAL crimes and REAL criminal behavior and student disciplinary actions. A police officer has no place even being involved in this equation.
I think corporal punishment in school should be bought back. Sorry if you think that's old-fashioned.
And the child wasn't physically bought out of her seat for "talking on a cell phone or passing a note" as you say. She ignored a command from an officer to comply--that's what lead to the handcuffing. (I've seen the video and I don't think excessive force was used. Perhaps there's a better video than the one I saw.)
I don't know who summoned the officer or if he just acted on his own prerogative. He should have left the matter for the school to handle unless he was asked to intervene. Do you have the answer to that?
Quote: GreasyjohnI think corporeal punishment in school should be bought back. Sorry if you think that's old-fashioned.
And the child wasn't physically bought out of her seat for "talking on a cell phone or passing a note" as you say. She ignored a command from an officer to comply--that's what lead to the handcuffing. (I've seen the video and I don't think excessive force was used. Perhaps there's a better video than the one I saw.)
I don't know who summoned the officer or if he just acted on his own prerogative. He should have left the matter for the school to handle unless he was asked to intervene. Do you have the answer to that?
Yes, I have an answer to that. The officer DIDN"T BELONG IN THAT SITUATION! That is not his job. That is not what he is there for. If asked, he should have said that is not part of my job and should not have gotten involved. Perhaps then he would still have his job.
And then it could have been avoided (again) if she had simply followed the instructions of the Sheriff's deputy, whether she liked those instructions or not ?
I'm not saying the use of excessive force was appropriate. I guess I am saying that the girl made multiple decisions that made this worse for everyone involved, including the Sheriff's deputy who lost his job over it.
But I'll end with this. Three 10 year olds are playing monopoly at the kitchen table. One is the banker and he cheats. His friend gets mad, goes out to the street and flags down a cop. The officer tells the boy who cheated to give back the monopoly money and play fair. The boy says no. He has now ignored a command from the officer and failed to comply, so the officer throws him to the ground, handcuffs him and arrests him.
You might think this a silly comparison, but it is 100% the same thing. The officer literally had no authority in either case. In the school case, the officer had absolutely no authority in that classroom unless a crime had been committed, which it had not. And that is why he is out of a job.
In this day and age, I would imagine that it is not legal for a teacher or even dean or principal to physically touch a student. It would appear that a school resource officer can.
Quote: JohnnyQIs it a fair point to say that this horrible situation could have been completely avoided if the young girl had done what she was told to do by the teacher and the principal in the first place ?
I don't know how old some of you people are. I suspect you have forgotten what happens in high school. I am 15 years removed from high school, but I can still remember that almost every single day, some student didn't do what the teacher and/or principal asked them to do. If that's the criteria, we are going to need to build one hell of a lot of jail space.
That is what we pay him for yes. If we want to pay someone 6 figures to go out and talk everyone into submission, then there wouldn't be nearly as many physical requirements. Should we just pay everyone to talk to each other?Quote: kewljYa know, GJ, I have seen several pro-law enforcement type guests on several of the news channels also state that they officer did nothing wrong, in that he has the authority to take the 'perpetrator' into custody by whatever means.
Yes she did, among other things she has stolen the time that the other students deserve to spend getting an education. We pay for the school, the teachers, transportation, meals, nurses and everything else. Why does a 16 year old need a cell phone, and especially in class disturbing the entire flow? Every other person including the cops suffer because the "child" has no respect or discipline. Expel her from school, and maybe let her come back if she can behave respectfully and without her phone turned on.Quote:The problem with that theory as well as your statement is that this was not someone that just committed a crime of robbery or assault or what have you. This was a 16 year old girl in a classroom who's 'crime' was talking on her cell phone. Let's not act like she committed a REAL crime.
I think America is about 30th in terms of education. Look at the country's that are ahead of us like Japan, or Korea or China. Do you think those kids sit in class disrupting everyone else's chances and time?
We really need to set an example so that the would be detractors understand there won't be a reward for unwanted behavior. I suggest jailing the parent an appropriate amount of time, with a martingale option for repeated waste of taxpayer moneys in school. Start punishing lousy parents. Including lousy step fathers.
The police may have a one size fits all program. I know the state patrol in Montana had a minimum 6 ft. Size matters. The girl should listen. I see the problem with no corporal punishment allowed is people have no respect. My folks spanked when we were young, and didn't have to very often. Pain is an effective deterrent, and society is paying for lack of parenting WITH DISCIPLINE. That is not condoning abuse, just sayin..Quote:The appropriate action was not for a 240 lb weight-lifter ex-military sheriff's deputy to physically grab and throw a 16 year old, 120 lb female student to the ground and place her in handcuffs.
You can talk that way here, but either in the ghetto or in prison you wouldn't even make eye contact with persons that may rip you to shreds. That is acknowledgement of the reality that when a superior force demands you do something, then you do it. If she would have complied, he wouldn't have tossed her, you think?Quote:So, GJ if you think the sheriff's actions were appropriate, we must live in different worlds. What next? Cops can shoot someone for jaywalking?
She will probably receive an outsized settlement which she probably won't use wisely, IMO.
Quote: JoemanAccording to the wikipedia article the officer was specifically called to the classroom to physically remove the student. Apparently that is one of his duties as a school resource officer.
His supervisor, the sheriff that fired him, stated that this was specifically NOT the duties of the school resource officer. I believe the City council say that as well. You might want to check something a little more official than Wikipedia. For all we know it was greasyjohn who made that Wikipedia entry. :)
Quote: petroglyph
Yes she did, among other things she has stolen the time that the other students deserve to spend getting an education. We pay for the school, the teachers, transportation, meals, nurses and everything else. Why does a 16 year old need a cell phone, and especially in class disturbing the entire flow?.
OMG! Again, some of you people must be 60 year removed from your high school years and have completely forgotten what happened. Hey I've seem American Graffiti. :/ Stolen time and preventing other students from getting an education......LOL.
I disagree. The reason an officer [240lb. weightlifter] is there at all, is as a deterrent, so that fights don't happen, same thing with radar traps along the hwy.Quote: kewljThe officer did not belong in the classroom or being involved in this type of situation. It is not his job. His job is to break up fights and protect the students against outside forces.
And how do you see that working out?Quote:Disciplinary matters are supposed to be handles the same way they have been for decades, by the school.
Swell, got an estimate of how much that cost everyone else including what the good students opportunity lost, cost this country? It cost us our position in the world.Quote:If the teacher can't handle the student they call the principal, who may then call the parent.
Quote: kewljYour corporal punishment comment speaks for itself. You might want to consider joining the 21st century.
But I'll end with this. Three 10 year olds are playing monopoly at the kitchen table. One is the banker and he cheats. His friend gets mad, goes out to the street and flags down a cop. The officer tells the boy who cheated to give back the monopoly money and play fair. The boy says no. He has now ignored a command from the officer and failed to comply, so the officer throws him to the ground, handcuffs him and arrests him.
You might think this a silly comparison, but it is 100% the same thing. The officer literally had no authority in either case. In the school case, the officer had absolutely no authority in that classroom unless a crime had been committed, which it had not. And that is why he is out of a job.
While I side with the child and not the officer, nearly everything you are saying is incorrect. Citizens are required to obey lawful orders from police officers. If in your story the 10 year old child resisted, then the police officer would be in his rights to use reasonable force to arrest him, if in fact a crime was committed. In your example, monopoly money has no value, therefore no crime has been committed, so the order would be unlawful, so the officer could be charged with false arrest and battery.
In this case, the officer had authority. CNN reports that there is a law called "disturbing schools" in LA which gives school officers authority to arrest when requested by administrators. Arresting the girl has nothing to do why he's out of a job. It's the disproportional use of force.
Quote: petroglyph
You can talk that way here, but either in the ghetto or in prison you wouldn't even make eye contact with persons that may rip you to shreds. That is acknowledgement of the reality that when a superior force demands you do something, then you do it. If she would have complied, he wouldn't have tossed her, you think?
Having grown up in the ghetto and knowing people who have spent time in prison, you definitely make eye contact with persons that may rip you to shreds. You have to let them think you may be ready for a scrap even if you know you are bluffing.
It's the ones who avoid eye contact who are usually victimized first.
Yeah, probably. It's an easy go-to, and usually pretty close to accurate. :)Quote: kewljHis supervisor, the sheriff that fired him, stated that this was specifically NOT the duties of the school resource officer. I believe the City council say that as well. You might want to check something a little more official than Wikipedia.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Sheriff is doing a little damage control here. Or maybe the officer did exceed his authority. I've read conflicting stories about this (not including Wikipedia!). I don't know all the facts, and I certainly am not knowledgeable about SC laws.
A police presence is not there to arrest someone that stole and extra milk at lunch, or has an overdue library book, or talking on a cell phone. These are school related disciplinary issues that are still handled by the school, not the judicial system.
The school resource officer getting involved in this type of thing is akin to an officer acting outside his jurisdiction. In this particular case it was wrong for this officer to get involved in this issue, even if he was asked. This is were he needed to respond by saying this is not my job, this is a school disciplinary issue. And again, THAT is why he is out of a job.
Point is, no matter what the circumstances, the media will blow the whole thing out of proportion. So why get caught in that whirlwind?
Quote: kewljHere is what some of you are failing to recognize and/or consider. A police type presence in schools is a response to two things, school shootings and drug activity, both serious criminal activity.
A police presence is not there to arrest someone that stole and extra milk at lunch, or has an overdue library book, or talking on a cell phone. These are school related disciplinary issues that are still handled by the school, not the judicial system.
The school resource officer getting involved in this type of thing is akin to an officer acting outside his jurisdiction. In this particular case it was wrong for this officer to get involved in this issue, even if he was asked. This is were he needed to respond by saying this is not my job, this is a school disciplinary issue. And again, THAT is why he is out of a job.
Twice now you have referred to this girl as getting arrested for "talking on her cell phone." If she would have complied with the teacher's request to hang up there would be no problem. The student ignored the teacher. The officer ask her to leave the class and she ignored him too. Then she failed to comply with an order to remove herself from the classroom as her actions were disruptive. It was for her failure to comply with the officer's commands that she was arrested. Are you being obtuse?
So you think I might want to "consider joining the 21st century" because I think corporal punishment in schools should be reinstituted. I don't agree that current mores and morality are the most enlightened.
Quote: kewljOMG! Again, some of you people must be 60 year removed from your high school years and have completely forgotten what happened. Hey I've seem American Graffiti. :/ Stolen time and preventing other students from getting an education......LOL.
My daughter has her kids in the same elementary school she went to, and a few of the teachers are still there. I was aghast when she told me that in that grade school, kids who don't misbehave are given a piece of candy every fifteen minutes.
Yeah, I'm getting older K. I graduated high school in '73, right at the end of the jungle conflict. I did some disrespectful things, smoked weed, mouthed off, didn't take advantage as well as I should have. I also always had a job or two.
A job provides a lot more than just a paycheck. Our folks worked us, we grew up and moved out. Loved them dearly. When my dad spanked me what few times he did, I now thank him for that love. I was a kid that needed some authority, and I don't begrudge him one bit for it.
My kids now thank me for loving them enough to intervene in some of their behavior physically.
I mouthed off a few times after a few beers to a cop, got away with it. But generally with a large cop in front of me telling me to hang up the phone, I would have. Back then though, cops could lean on you a bit and nothing ever came of it. Matter of fact, I got roughed up a little for walking down the street with a glass of beer, by the cops. No problem, I quit doing it. Mom was my best friend and pretty easy on me, but if dad said do this or don't, that is what happened. Same way raising my kids.
The universe needs order, chaos isn't working.
You got to cut me some slack here K, I never been this old before. I'm new at it.
Thankfully, I went to a school where most of the kids were well-behaved-enough. Still plenty of drugs and all sorts of other stuff. But the kids at least semi respected the teachers. If the teacher told the kid to leave, almost every time the kid left. Of all the times a teacher has attempted to kick a student out of the classroom, I think only once the student decided not to leave but to continue to be a nuisance to the class.
For the most part, I just kinda chilled in class, paid attention, and although it was probably the last place I wanted to be (in a class-room), I still enjoyed learning. Well, scratch History and English (two worthless subjects, IMO, but I still paid attention somewhat and wasn't disruptive to the class).
When others are being disruptive to the class....it's really annoying. I'm just thinking, "B****, just go outside. You clearly don't want to be here. And I'm sure you don't give a sh** about math, but I actually care about this....if we don't cover the material in class, we're still gonna get the same test everyone else gets."
Actually, the only time someone was asked to leave a classroom and the kid refused -- it took probably 10-15 minutes of arguing, but the kid finally left. No principal was called, parents were called, and no police were called. In fact, 2 of the other kids were talking sh** to the idiot who wouldn't leave.
KJ, if I'm at a restaurant and I'm being disruptive and am asked to leave but I refuse, do you think the restaurant-people (owner/manager/boss) should be in his right to call the police to have me leave? Do you think it would be within the policeman's job to show up to the restaurant and get me to leave? What if that all happens, but I tell him to F*** off, and I continue to be disruptive? Ultimately, it shouldn't come down to the policeman to have to show up to get me out of the restaurant -- it should have been UP TO ME to leave the restaurant. If I'm an idiot and refuse to leave....well, whatever happens next is on me.
I thought making eye contact or staring in someones face in the joint meant you planned on doing them harm or were going to have sex?Quote: darkozHaving grown up in the ghetto and knowing people who have spent time in prison, you definitely make eye contact with persons that may rip you to shreds. You have to let them think you may be ready for a scrap even if you know you are bluffing.
It's the ones who avoid eye contact who are usually victimized first.
When I was in California, I couldn't get anyone to make eye contact? At the time I looked a bit like Charles Manson with 19" biceps?
I don't know the prison code, just making that part up from watching it on the discovery channel. I know it is no place for me.
I wasn't raised in a ghetto but have lived in some and worked for short stints there. [Ghetto as much as can happen in Washington state or Oregon] Went to a trade school on Union ave. in Portland if anyone knows where that is. I got along very well, unless others were doing hard drugs.
I did not see that statement. I did see this statement from the Sheriff:Quote: kewljHis supervisor, the sheriff that fired him, stated that this was specifically NOT the duties of the school resource officer.
"Deputy Fields did not follow proper training, proper procedure when he threw the student across the room," Lott said.
School resource officers should use physical force only in the most extreme situations or when the student is a danger to the officer, Lott explained. Officers are trained to speak with students in an effort to get them to comply. If verbal commands fail, officers can use pain compliance, such as pressure points. "When he threw her across the room...that's not acceptable. Ben Fields should not have thrown the student. He was not trained to throw the student. We've done the right thing in our actions in terminating him," Lott said.
Source of Direct Quote of the Sheriff from a News Conf
Quote: kewljThe officer did not belong in the classroom or being involved in this type of situation. It is not his job. His job is to break up fights and protect the students against outside forces. Disciplinary matters are supposed to be handles the same way they have been for decades, by the school. If the teacher can't handle the student they call the principal, who may then call the parent.
We do not treat students talking on cell phones during class, even disrupting that class the same way we handle violent criminals.
That isn't the way things are run in many schools today. I went to a school that had some discipline issues--rednecks fighting hippies, racial fights. pot and other, drug use, smoking in the boys room, etc. The only time we saw the police was when the issue got out of hand (usually, for whatever reason, racial stuff boiled over one time a year pretty badly) and they needed to be called. They got on the scene and they were shown respect by all factions.
Fast forward to today and we now send kids who fight to see the Precinct Justice of the Peace in his courtroom. I know this only because fully half of the cases one day I was in traffic court for speeding were for fighting in school. These kids and their parents were in court on a school (and work!) day.
Everything up to a weapons issue was always handled by the school officials, now cops are involved way earlier.
The breakdown of respect--and you can blame officers with a complex for some of it, but not nearly all of it--is horrible. We're not talking about civil disobedience...we had a second grader crawl across the floor of his classroom to steal money out of the teacher's purse as a starter crime...we're talking about a whole group of people who have been taught to not respect authority. They are of all colors, so race isn't always the issue.
I don't have an answer. I think the force was excessive. I also think you get off the damned phone when you are told to. The first time.
Quote: GreasyjohnThe girl would not stop being disruptive. She would not leave the classroom. She was ordered to by an officer. She did not comply. She resisted arrest. The girl showed a lack of respect for authority while she was clearly in the wrong. Let's no leap to shooting jaywalkers just yet.
Good thing she was not chewing gum, or greasyjohn would think it was appropriate to shoot her. I mean what if she decided to spit the gum at that officer. Why wait for a crime to happen ? ? ?
He had a reputation amongst the students for using excessive force and there have been lawsuits against him previously. This is why so many of them whipped out their phones and started filming when he showed up - THANK GOD.
Everyone has a camera in their pocket now. More and more of these stories will pop up as time goes on because it's easy to catch them in the act. While "not all cops are bad cops," there are plenty of really crappy ones. Thankfully this one is no longer employed.
I do acknowledge that I would be outraged if my daughter was treated that way.Quote: ams288The force was excessive.
Police intervention in our society has reached the point of intrusiveness. Schools are increasingly using police to deal with discipline and taking actions that are too strong against students like suspensions and expulsions. Rather than immediately jumping to severe consequences, schools should have clearly established rules and consequences that students can grasp that allow the students to make choices knowing the consequences.
At the age of 16, teens are dealing with hormonal changes and brain development that profoundly affect behavior. The frontal lobe that regulates decision-making, planning and judgement isn't fully able to do so. Teens should be supported, rather than punished as they go through this change. There's a reason our jails are filled to capacity and only part of it is the behavior of those sent there.
The enforcer gets fired and faces assault, the kid get juvy for resisting arrest and CPD (Creating a Public Disturbance). Neither one did the right ting, and no good is EVER gonna come out of it.
Two losers.
Quote: bloodoilGood thing she was not chewing gum, or greasyjohn would think it was appropriate to shoot her. I mean what if she decided to spit the gum at that officer. Why wait for a crime to happen ? ? ?
Buzzard?
It gets creepy about 40+ minutes in. Kids that act out will be put on drugs, and it will be on their permanent record. They will be listed forever as "special needs" children. Even without the parents permission.
Quote: JohnnyQOfficers are trained to speak with students in an effort to get them to comply. If verbal commands fail, officers can use pain compliance, such as pressure points. "When he threw her across the room...that's not acceptable. Ben Fields should not have thrown the student. He was not trained to throw the student. We've done the right thing in our actions in terminating him," Lott said.
The girl was trying to save face in front of her classmates by not complying, and the cop responded with physical force because he is weak.
Had he used tactical conversation, the girl probably would have complied.
George Thompson was a martial artist who was a college professor with a PhD. in English.
He left teaching for Law Enforcement and used his experiences to develop 'Verbal Judo' which is the art of diffusing conflict through conversation.
His course is taught internationally to Law Enforcement, Corporations and Schools.
His videos are worth viewing because 'Verbal Judo' is not just for Law Enforcement.
Tactical Principles
Verbal Deflectors
ROFLMAOQuote: kewlj. You might want to check something a little more official than Wikipedia. For all we know it was greasyjohn who made that Wikipedia entry. :)
Teacher: "Get off the phone or its automatically an F".
Student: "B**ch I ain't care I already be failn." (Or is it "I be already failn?")
Teacher: "No, I mean FOR EVERYONE.
Students would have got her off the phone one way or another.
Just another sad, frustrated, obviously damaged little man on a power trip. He probably tortures animals in his spare time.
Quote: AxelWolfWhat we have here is a situation where the teacher couldn't handle the situation.
Teacher: "Get off the phone or its automatically an F".
Student: "B**ch I ain't care I already be failn." (Or is it "I be already failn?")
Teacher: "No, I mean FOR EVERYONE.
Students would have got her off the phone one way or another.
Yes, but then some alphabet group would come in and sue somebody for the violation of some right.
I think we almost need two sets of "schools"--one you can stay in if you want to learn, and one that is for people who refuse to learn. This country and the children we are raising need to be kept away from people who refuse to do what they are told to do by the person in authority and who refuse to learn. It hurts the poor kids more than the rich and upper middle class kids; rich/upper middle class kids can just go to a private school.
I'm not saying to give up on anybody; always leave hope for someone to change...
...but darn it...I don't care about your damned "pride"...and I do think the office used excessive force...but if you are told to get off the phone, get the hell off the phone. All we are turning out by letting people act like that is another group of folks who will either work at McDonald's or be in jail.
If this had happened in another setting and, the parties involved were reversed this incident wouldn't have even made the news. What really irks me is the hypocrisy of so many people.....especially Black people. To many African Americans avoid the real bottom line/problems within their ranks. IMO fatherless children is another big issue AA's refuse to address --- the gang culture within SOO many AA communities. Being disrespectful and defiant seems like a normal think in so many troubled black communities. It seems like each new generation/some AA's are getting more and more defiant with authority in general.
Quote: ajemeisterMore importantly, maybe we can create a discussion thread about why schools are deciding to end halloween celebrations/parades because of it not being culturally diverse...?
Didn't President Obama say he was going to transform America? Apparently his agenda is working at this point in time -- ? maybe I should've said the transformation process is working out just as he planned it. IMO if Hilary Clinton gets elected that will be another term for Obama -- leading to the inevitable destruction of this once great country. Hasn't the country had enough of the Clintons and Bush family to last a life time??
