The South Carolina incident & enabling

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

I wonder how many people will agree with this one.

The officer in the South Carolina incident, the one who grabbed the student and tossed her on the floor, clearly broke rules and has to pay the price. From the moment he touched her, he is responsible for everything he did. Period.

If I said otherwise, if I tried to spin or deflect for this guy, I would essentially be enabling his poor behavior. he would know that someone was covering for him in the future. I would be lying if I denied that.

Now, at the same time, the girl in the story had several opportunities to simply follow clear & reasonable instructions. If she had simply followed instructions at any of several points in this story, the officer would not have touched her.

If I said otherwise, if I tried to spin or deflect for this girl, I would essentially be enabling her poor behavior. she would know that someone was covering for her in the future. I would be lying if I denied that.

Do we agree? Does spinning and deflecting for poor behavior run a clear risk of enabling more in the future?
.

Spinning, deflecting and poor behavior has been around since humans rose out of the primordial soup. What is new are cell phones so deflecting and spinning isn't as effective as it used to be.

But if you want to learn more about THIS specific subject, I suggest you read about some first hand experiences of a civil trial attorney who sued school districts for these very things, back in the day before kids had cell phones:

 

[rightwinger]

It was an overreaction from a security officer who clearly lost his temper. The girl was not a threat to the officer or other classmates. Time was on the side of the officer

I agree with everything you have said with one exception, R.W.. She is a threat to the authority at that school because she refused to comply with school rules even when asked to put the phone away. The only recourse the principal has is to set an example and expel her. If there were any extenuating circumstances perhaps a very long suspension and permission to return to school with the agreement that she won't ever do it again.

Still...the punishment has to fit the crime

Refusing to put a phone away is not grounds for a body slam. She is no threat to anyone and there are multiple other means to punish her

 

[Anathema]

Now tell me who is at fault again?

The unruly little bitch.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

This is a lesson to the school authorities. You either use your authority or someone will take it and use it against you.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

It was an overreaction from a security officer who clearly lost his temper. The girl was not a threat to the officer or other classmates. Time was on the side of the officer

I agree with everything you have said with one exception, R.W.. She is a threat to the authority at that school because she refused to comply with school rules even when asked to put the phone away. The only recourse the principal has is to set an example and expel her. If there were any extenuating circumstances perhaps a very long suspension and permission to return to school with the agreement that she won't ever do it again.

Still...the punishment has to fit the crime

Refusing to put a phone away is not grounds for a body slam. She is no threat to anyone and there are multiple other means to punish her

Have you been reading my replies, R.W.? I am not disagreeing with you. I do not believe the officer was necessary to begin with! Call the parent / guardian and tell them their daughter has just been expelled. Come and pick her up. When the parent arrives? The Principal and teacher escort parent and child off of school property. Very simple. The rules are on the books already. This is not rocket science.

 

[defcon4]

Still...the punishment has to fit the crime

Refusing to put a phone away is not grounds for a body slam. She is no threat to anyone and there are multiple other means to punish her

.. but striking the officer is...

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

It was an overreaction from a security officer who clearly lost his temper. The girl was not a threat to the officer or other classmates. Time was on the side of the officer

I agree with everything you have said with one exception, R.W.. She is a threat to the authority at that school because she refused to comply with school rules even when asked to put the phone away. The only recourse the principal has is to set an example and expel her. If there were any extenuating circumstances perhaps a very long suspension and permission to return to school with the agreement that she won't ever do it again.

Still...the punishment has to fit the crime

Refusing to put a phone away is not grounds for a body slam. She is no threat to anyone and there are multiple other means to punish her

The only time the police arrived on my high school campus in the 70s, was when a riot broke out in the cafeteria. Literally boys in a pile on duking it out. Not because a 16-year-old girl refused to put away what every person in that entire building also had on their person.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Still...the punishment has to fit the crime

Refusing to put a phone away is not grounds for a body slam. She is no threat to anyone and there are multiple other means to punish her

.. but striking the officer is...

He put his hand on her neck first. I'd damn sure knee-jerk my fist out if someone grabbed me ANYWHERE, too.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

The luscious irony is that her cell phone did turn into a weapon, one which ended that goon's career.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Now tell me who is at fault again?

The unruly little bitch.

She is a 16 year old girl who needs to learn the meaning of the word "consequences" (before her life is wasted behind bars). A. School Rules were not made to be broken. B. Authority figures are to be obeyed immediately. There are consequences when A. and B. are ignored.

 

[defcon4]

He put his hand on her neck first. I'd damn sure knee-jerk my fist out if someone grabbed me ANYWHERE, too.

When the law (enforcer of the law) places the hand on you do not strike back, you have legal avenues to determine if the hand of law was lawfully applied or not.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Now tell me who is at fault again?

The unruly little bitch.

Bullshit. If she had been a blonde, blue-eyed cheerleader this would have never happened.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

He put his hand on her neck first. I'd damn sure knee-jerk my fist out if someone grabbed me ANYWHERE, too.

When the law (enforcer of the law) places the hand on you do not strike back, you have legal avenues to determine if the hand of law was lawfully applied or not.

SHE IS A MINOR, in case you forgot. And now her attorney has stated she has one arm and in a sling with head and neck injuries.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

I guess the righties on here think they can judge the situation better than the guy's boss, the Richland County sheriff.
My, my you idiots are fools for the media and yet you hate it, too.
Wait! Didn't Ted Cruz say something to this effect the other night? Bahahahahahaha

 

[Anathema]

Spinning, deflecting and poor behavior has been around since humans rose out of the primordial soup. What is new are cell phones so deflecting and spinning isn't as effective as it used to be.

Another reason why no kid needs a cell phone, iPod, or any ither electronic device in a classroom.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Now tell me who is at fault again?

The unruly little bitch.

Bullshit. If she had been a blonde, blue-eyed cheerleader this would have never happened.

Interesting comment. I don't know whether or not race factors into this story but had the matter been handled properly it would not have been given the opportunity to be exploited as such.

 

[Anathema]

Bullshit. If she had been a blonde, blue-eyed cheerleader this would have never happened.

It shoild have. Especially since girls shouldn't be in a high school to begin with.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Spinning, deflecting and poor behavior has been around since humans rose out of the primordial soup. What is new are cell phones so deflecting and spinning isn't as effective as it used to be.

Another reason why no kid needs a cell phone, iPod, or any ither electronic device in a classroom.

Absolutely. I agree. It would also give this girl the proper publicity she deserves. Make her behavior the reason that the schools are now opting to remove all cell phones, ipods, and electronic devices from school property. Once you are on school property? It is a cell phone free zone. Anyone found with a cell phone? Will be sent home with a one day suspension and they can increase it from there. Good idea, Anathema!

During boot camp if one soldier disobeys orders the entire group being trained with him suffer. It is known to work very well because the disobedient soldier is shunned by his own peers. If it works for the military it should certainly work for the school system. It could be that the school authorities wanted to allow this situation to escalate because they want cellphones removed due to teachers who have been exposed for wrong doing in the classroom. Still, the presence of eyewitnesses and their testimonies should be enough (in such cases) and removing the phones is a good idea.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Now tell me who is at fault again?

The unruly little bitch.

She is a 16 year old girl who needs to learn the meaning of the word "consequences" (before her life is wasted behind bars). A. School Rules were not made to be broken. B. Authority figures are to be obeyed immediately. There are consequences when A. and B. are ignored.

Yeah, I think we used to call it suspension, not assault and battery.

 

[rightwinger]

Still...the punishment has to fit the crime

Refusing to put a phone away is not grounds for a body slam. She is no threat to anyone and there are multiple other means to punish her

.. but striking the officer is...

I did not see him struck in the video