It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by maestromason
It is very simple to understand...
Teachers are licensed public officials who hold the public's trust.
If you have "authority issues" well I can't help you with that...you need a psychologist not a systems engineer as I am.
People who usually have "authority issues" normally have a very hard time following rules, regulations, laws and have problems in life holding down steady employment and their lifestyles are not stable.
"Authority issues" often originate from the home. I never had any for I was taught a very early age about proper behavior at school and in general public. Public officials deserve the respect of the public like they hold the public's trust. Police are public officials too.
I never delved into the general human psyche, for this thread is clearly labeled and therefore it should be kept on its primary subject matter. Are there bad people in positions holding the public's trust?....YES! You only need to go to your nearest big city's hall to find an example.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely...I have known this axiom since the age of 4. We are on this thread talking about cowardice and its acceptance by the generation of today.
I am willing to bet that most on this thread(with the exception of the OP and myself) CANNOT refer back >40 years ago to a time when they were living and understood the times. I come from a time where neighbors were allowed to physically discipline you and then afterwards called your mother or father to make sure by the time you got home wave #2 and wave #3 were waiting for your rear-end. Morals and principles were integrated into our daily lives and the reminder that, "The lord hates a COWARD" embedded deeply within our conscious and sub-conscious.
Now-a-days most young people grow up either agnostic or atheist without beliefs, values or regards for higher authority of any kind what so ever.
COWARDICE does cut deeper than a bullet, and the scars that are left behind are akin the The Scarlet Letter left for everyone to see for public mockery and criticism.
That must be a hard way to "live" life knowing that you stand on two feet like a man/woman of the human species but yet wriggle in the dirt like a spineless worm in your day-to-day engagements.
smh
edit on 29-2-2012 by maestromason because: (no reason given)
easy for some adults but if your fat like i was
as a kid even though i could hit them the
words rang in my head not so easy for kids
to ignore everyday torment and some kids
just cant handle it
Yes, one child is too many. But plenty of more kids have probably died doing whippets then in school shootings.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
If you agree that one single child shooting is too many, then can we agree that it is a good idea to examine what the root causes of these shootings are? I have given my theory; I'm curious to hear yours.
To be honest you can't say that, as you have no idea whether it would have worked or not.
But I do find the 'concern for the child' part interesting. Is the concern for the child as important as the paddling? One can't work without the other? Thats the usual concensus anyway. So its interesting that
1. you are presuming that the kids involved had not been beaten by their family
2. that you are implying that concern for the child (ie we are talking about love / care / understanding here) was already given but didn't work.
Do you think that paddling is more important than the concern for the child bit?
Or do you think that the psychological aspects of behaviour can be remidied by brute force better than through communication?
Originally posted by maestromason
reply to post by freethinker123
Now, I see that you are remedial... so I am expressing the will not to have any further conversation with you.
Whatever I type is, "as is" and is not subject for further interpretation. I have direct interface with every aspect of my life and that includes speech. If you ever get here young man you will understand, for it takes A LOT OF WORK to get up to this vantage point.
Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by freethinker123
To be honest you can't say that, as you have no idea whether it would have worked or not.
Actually, I can (and do, by these posts) cite evidence, both in my own experience raising children and from watching the methods and results used on other children. That's a great deal more than the antagonists of corporal punishment can cite.
But I do find the 'concern for the child' part interesting. Is the concern for the child as important as the paddling? One can't work without the other? Thats the usual concensus anyway. So its interesting that
1. you are presuming that the kids involved had not been beaten by their family
2. that you are implying that concern for the child (ie we are talking about love / care / understanding here) was already given but didn't work.
Yes, I cannot help but admit I do make those presumptions. I make them based on the same evidence I mention above.
That means that, in this case, it is entirely possible (although I would argue improbable) that I am mistaken about the situations that led to the shooting in Ohio. But just because one exception occurs, it does not mean the entire theory is useless; human behavior is not as exact a science as mathematical analysis.
Do you think that paddling is more important than the concern for the child bit?
I believe that, when needed for disciplinary reasons, paddling is concern for the child. Do you believe your car is more important than your vehicle?
Or do you think that the psychological aspects of behaviour can be remidied by brute force better than through communication?
I believe that communication, while far preferable to physical action, is an exercise for those who are both capable and desirous of a non-violent resolution. I would be sorely disappointed in an adult who was not able to resolve at least most of his disputes via communication.
Children, however, must be made aware of the consequences of failure to communicate before they understand the purpose of communication. Have you ever tried telling a child not to do something they have their heart set on? You might as well be talking to a brick wall! But a stern "NO!", accompanied by a quick swat to the hindquarters for reinforcement, will quickly get their attention and cause them to realize there are consequences - painful consequences - for failing to use communication.
That is a handy lesson to learn early in life... rather than later in life as this shooter is about to experience. He is now guilty of three charges of first-degree murder, which will make him, upon conviction, a serial killer.
But at least he didn't get slapped on his butt.
TheRedneck