Well, yes, but that is a thought that should have been in Officer McBeaty-Up’s excuse for a brain, also
3 Likes
They couldn’t even get her out of the seat, let alone to go to detention.
Is it any wonder these kinds of kids are expelled so often? If someone is this difficult to give a free education, how much extra effort is expected to be put into them and at whose expense?
Should a gun think “Man, I am the WRONG tool for cutting bread!”?
Since many police are former military, should a soldier think “Man, I am the WRONG tool for bringing peace.”
A: Lots. B: Everyone in society, in order to improve its general nature. I’d be OK with you paying extra though.
Yes.
5 Likes
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
Yes, because counselling a grief stricken young women is SUCH a burden on society compared to imprisoning her.
8 Likes
Remember when she refused to get off her cell phone during class, and punched a police officer? You know that makes you a certain kind of person, right? Because us normal folk (people who were raised right) put our phones away and wouldn’t DREAM of hitting a cop.
I mean I can link you the video but I’m assuming you’ve seen it so …
Not to be nit-picky but lets keep our terms straight - she’s a child, not a young woman. Young women are over 18.
Counseling her isn’t a cop’s job. There’s a social worker whose job is to counsel her. His job is to get her to comply. Big difference.
I’m not sure that the only two options are counseling or imprisoning but I agree she’s on a road to a bad place. But, at 17, that road is set and there’s little to be done about it now. In my opinion but, hey, I’m not a counselor. I just know that she can’t keep acting this way and stay an employed, useful, member of our society.
Wrong.
Hmm, I’m really smelling something funny in your perception of her as a certain kind of person… what is that smell in here?
7 Likes
I can’t decide if you’re a eugenicist or libertarian, or both…
1 Like
Facts can be proven wrong. I’ve provided an opinion, which isn’t a fact.
She’s a Certain Kind of Person - the kind who fights for no reason, or at least no good one. If she were fighting for a Just Cause she’d be worthy of a lot of respect. She’s just someone who is troubled. She needs something her family should be providing and either can’t, won’t, or are oblivious about.
What family? As I understand it, she’s an orphan.
Your lack of attention to specifics about this particular girl, and your willingness nevertheless to use her as a typical case of some sort of general category is . . . interesting, at best.
5 Likes
She is not an orphan.
1 Like
Okaaaay, so her exact status is murky at this point. So again, just what “Certain Kind of Person” is she? And how does that justify her being thrown across a room by a man who can bench press 600 pounds? And don’t give me that “she punched him in the face” shit. At that point, that was just reflexive self-defense in response to a ridiculously unwarranted abuse of physical force.
Again, what kind of person IS this one you’re describing below? Someone who fights for no good reason? (Except that she was being physically and unjustifiably attacked.) Someone who’s troubled? Someone who suffers from bad parenting?
I get where you’re coming from – “Everyone and everything here is at fault, except for the brutal Officer Friendly, who deserves nothing but respect and compliance!” – but it’s getting old. And weak. And it’s just not convincing me that we should blame the victim.
9 Likes
I was actually expelled from school, threatened with arrest, and wound up getting two degrees and starting a business. The argument that kids misbehaving in school means they’ll turn out rotten is, in my view, bogus.
What a lot of kids are doing when they misbehave is resisting, in their immature and often annoying ways, what they feel is an unjust, authoritarian structure that they don’t feel has their best interests at heart. There are other reasons, too, like being hurt like this young girl and possibly not having the space to sort it out and heal. We shouldn’t romanticize the kids, but the main point is that, from a certain worldview, a certain political framework, a lot of school environments are wrong for the kids, teaching the wrong lessons in the wrong ways.
I had teachers who were Zionists, advocated for taking away the right to vote from non-homeowners, had sex with children, embezzled, etc. And this was considered a “normal” environment. When you put people with these kinds of problems into positions that invest them with power, you wind up with serious, structural flaws and abuses that are inherent to the system, as your own above critique of police violence argues.
Maybe, given certain material conditions and experiences, you can see why one can fundamentally be at odds with authority as such–being a “troublemaker”–and not necessarily become the kind of horrible person that you are trying to depict as a natural and inevitable consequence of the events on display in this classroom.
What you are doing is character assassination of the victim, one who is established to be in foster care, and one has been subjected to an incredible ordeal that completely exceeds the scale of her own actions. I think that your comments here–that one should obey authority always, or else, that the only kinds of children who defy authority grow up to be a “drain” on the rest of us, that we in other words clearly have a moral imperative to submit to authority in spite of its horrendous mis-application–outline a political framework that, in no uncertain terms, is incapable of producing an analysis of this situation that is not already fraught with exactly the kind of prejudice that produces the weaknesses of such an analysis, namely that you are ignoring the possibility that one might have a total disregard for authority, for its frequently employed capacity to apply violence in order to impose its will, and still be a good person. We are talking, after all, about a context in which the officer has a history of behaving this way, and children know him as Officer Slam. Perhaps the girl was wrong, but it seems quite probable that children in the school have good reason for having little or no respect for the faculty’s or the police’s authority, since they are quite clearly abusing their power at the expense of the students.
None of which even begins to situate this event in the wider context and history of white supremacy and race relations in the US, which I am sure has considerable bearing.
13 Likes
You mean people would be reacting differently if he’d done that to a white girl? Or if she’d been white, and he’d been black?
Naaaaaaaawwwww… Say it ain’t so!
(And thanks for the rest of your comment. Spot on, A+)
5 Likes
She’s a CHILD. An authority figure abusing A CHILD is always unacceptable.
8 Likes
5 Likes
Because she’s a teenager. Sometimes they don’t do what you tell them to. The response should NEVER be “beat the shit out of them.”
Even if the appropriate response is to physically remove the child from her desk (I disagree, but that’s besides the point), this officer still failed at even doing that correctly. If he was not capable of doing it without severely physically injuring her (obvious, from the result), he should not have attempted it in the first place. The appropriate punishment for “refusing to get out of your desk” is not severe physical abuse. And the fact that you think it is really speaks volumes.
7 Likes
Somebody else said something kind of like that, upthread, let me see if I can find it…
Seems to be pretty black and white in someone else’s mind.
4 Likes
Because she’s a teenager. Oppositional defiance is a characteristic of the species. If you don’t think you did this when you were a teenager, you’re probably misremembering. It’s a normal part of growing up, unless you were the most abject type of spineless coward.
She did not create a situation that called for physical… anything. Any good teacher or parent has been in this situation and handled it better. Violence is the first resort of the stupid and incompetent; as Einstein said, it may be quick, but it’s not ever creative.
If you can’t maintain your authority in the presence of passive resistance, you are unfit to teach teenagers. It’s a requirement of the job to deal with immature behavior. If you can’t think of any middle road between asking nicely and initiating violence, you simply shouldn’t be anywhere near a teaching environment. Good teachers don’t ever need to start fights.
That is simply not true; nor does it apply to this situation, where there was no physical defiance - merely passive noncompliance - until the police officer chose to initiate violence in an extremely dangerous and incompetent fashion.
He put his weapons in reach of a person he was trying to get a chokehold on! That’s not ever a behavior you should be defending, regardless of how authoritarian or reactionary your philosophy is.
Well, at least you understand why it was done, I guess. The goal is to teach people to think exactly the way that you do - that authority must be allowed to trample anything it likes, regardless of the consequences or alternatives, merely to sustain itself, and that we must all condone this by our acquiescence. That lesson seems to be the focus of our school system in the USA now.
Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. – John Stuart Mill
11 Likes
You’re VERY wrong, and you need to VERY stop posting.
Nope, because that COMPLETELY didn’t happen. At all.
6 Likes
