Kid Attacked in School By Teacher Making $95,202 a year

Originally posted by WhisperingWinds

Originally posted by Strainz
reply to post by WhisperingWinds

 

I agree with you WhisperingWinds. Although I really don't want these two to hijack the thread with their barbaric and inaccurate assumptions.

Thats a great point, and I think they have scared off many who may be opposed to their view.

Thanks for interjecting your wisdom.. I know I have appreciated it so much..

Carry on, you're doing a great job explaining many things, and the arguments against you are just revealing how your sanity and position in this clearly wins !

edit on 3-7-2012 by WhisperingWinds because: (no reason given)

Last night, you said you weren't returning to the thread. I interected that you were welcome to but to please bring your own summation with you that would explain your position. You have returned after you said you wouldn't, but didn't bring that summation with you.

I'm very disappointed in the light this shines on you and await the summation that was agreed upon...

Originally posted by votan
From the video it looks like the man was going to escort the boy out.. when grabbed he probably mouthed off and the man did not begin to get violent with him until the boy swung is arm in an attempt to get loose. The mans job is the safety of other children so i really do not know what he was supposed to to do.

do his job or not. If he had not done his job and one kid like this one gets through and the result is some tragic event it would all be on him.

Children to today are mouthy little punks. They do not respect adults and it is very hard to deal with them.
Words lead to physical altercations and children are not taught to mind their tongue. I am pretty sure this boy was giving the usual mouthing off teens do which puts people on edge. Once grabbed to be escorted out his attempt to break loose pretty much caused the man to put force on him.

The force was not very bad. Except many people have a very weak stomach. This does not mean i am some kind of brute but usually things look worse than they are. I had to watch the video twice to attempt to see why the outrage. it looked clear case of kid does not do as told, gives attitude, has to be removed, attempts to fight back and security follows procedure.

what really bothers me is that the same people whining about this man stopping this boy he saw as a problem are the same people who called for him to have that position as security in the first place. people wanted more security at schools and now that they have it they get upset when security is upheld.

We would not need security if parents would teach their children to respect adults and their peers but nope that is too hard we need to take the shortcut we will just smack on some security.

Excellent points and you show that you were willing to look at it objectively even though they left the audio off!!

The man was doing his job with a threat to the safety of the school. Now the guilty party wants to cry foul.

Originally posted by WhisperingWinds
reply to post by EvilSadamClone

 

I am not exaggerating, I am being straightforward. It has been you people who have been twisting things as well as ignoring things.

That may be much more effective if you were to actually tell us what you viewed as you said you would last night after saying you wouldn't be back but the option to summarize it was given to you in a very polite, respectful way....which you have ignored and renigged on

....tends to greatly take away from your "argument"....

reply to post by PurpleChiten

That may be much more effective if you were to actually tell us what you viewed as you said you would last night after saying you wouldn't be back but the option to summarize it was given to you in a very polite, respectful way....which you have ignored and renigged on ....tends to greatly take away from your "argument"....

I declined in a polite respectful way,and stated my reasons. I did not ignore it, or renig, just merely said later I changed my mind, because I knew it would be a fruitless effort. Its pretty clear what is in the video, and people see what they see, or choose to interpret it how they wish.

What another member said about not letting the thread get too biased in one view is what me change my mind about adding further comments.

How disappointing that you feel unless I do the "summation" you expect me of me, that I am not entitled to further opinion, or changing my mind on particpating in a fruitless effort, when its there in the video. How that greatly takes away from my argument is beyond me.

You're not my teacher, and I won't allow you to pressure me to do any of your "assignments". (especially when they won't change the views of who sees what they see) Your summation certainly didn't change mine.

reply to post by PurpleChiten

The man was doing his job with a threat to the safety of the school. Now the guilty party wants to cry foul.

Because a child felt slighted for having his arm grabbed roughly and pulled it away, he now is threat to the school?

This is an example of how teachers and school officials, and other enforcers of law can carry their interpretations of danger too far , which result in overkill.

Originally posted by WhisperingWinds
reply to post by PurpleChiten

 

That may be much more effective if you were to actually tell us what you viewed as you said you would last night after saying you wouldn't be back but the option to summarize it was given to you in a very polite, respectful way....which you have ignored and renigged on ....tends to greatly take away from your "argument"....

I declined in a polite respectful way,and stated my reasons. I did not ignore it, or renig, just merely said later I changed my mind, because I knew it would be a fruitless effort. Its pretty clear what is in the video, and people see what they see, or choose to interpret it how they wish.

What another member said about not letting the thread get too biased in one view is what me change my mind about adding further comments.

How disappointing that you feel unless I do the "summation" you expect me of me, that I am not entitled to further opinion, or changing my mind on particpating in a fruitless effort, when its there in the video. How that greatly takes away from my argument is beyond me.

You're not my teacher, and I won't allow you to pressure me to do any of your "assignments".

(especially when they won't change the views of who sees what they see) Your summation certainly didn't change mine.

Then you have clearly proven MY point, that calm, rational and respectful do not work...

Which is EXACTLY why the DEAN of SECURITY had to result to physical means to subdue the extremely violent thug shown in the video!

Although yours isn't violent, it is clear refusal to accept a very respectful and calm request. In real-time situations, people often become physically opposing when that is done, just like the "thug" in the video did and quickly became a danger to the entire school simply because he KNEW what he was supposed to do, was asked politely and respectfully to do it, but chose to be defiant and became physically violent as a result.

Good job at proving my point!!!

.... you are now dismissed

reply to post by PurpleChiten

Which is EXACTLY why the DEAN of SECURITY had to result to physical means to subdue the extremely violent thug shown in the video!

Oh..now you've branded him a" thug".. all from one video..way to go teacher.. Extremely violent at that ?.. what a load of...

Although yours isn't violent, it is clear refusal to accept a very respectful and calm request.

Its a refusal based on the wisdom of not taking it to a level with those who only see what they want to see...and can come to conclusions that a kid is a "thug" because of a video that has no audio to it.

Good job at proving my point!!!

Great job at proving my point, which is the problem we have with some teachers and school authorities these days branding students as "thugs" and using excessive force in situations where it is not warranted.

.... you are now dismissed

Dismissed from what? Mind boggling 101? Or how to jump to conclusions and assumptions to justify irrational behavior 101?

Sorry didn't sign up for either, but it was sort of entertaining to watch from afar.

I suggest you watch the following in its entirety . The visuals are quite interesting. They do say "certain " teachers.

reply to post by WhisperingWinds


You have lost all credibility by your own actions. You have proven the case against you and now you are lashing out. Very typical.

The thug in the video was treated as he should have been treated by the Dean of Security.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by WhisperingWinds

 

You have lost all credibility by your own actions. You have proven the case against you and now you are lashing out. Very typical.

The thug in the video was treated as he should have been treated by the Dean of Security.

Chiten seriously, lost all credibility? You are the one making outrageous weightless assumptions, I can't stand idly by and watch as you use bull# to squirm your opinion into this thread. The problem with the video is the "EXCESSIVE" use of force not the force itself. I understand the US society is degrading and you require security within the schooling system, but that is no grounds for "EXCESSIVE" force.

If there is someone who as lost credibility, it would be you. Why? Your opinion is flooded with assumption, plain and clear. Your now attempting to destroy the credibility of someone else like I have stated you would do before. How? By using a ridiculous method of under table tactics and off topic attacks. You posted two murders from the UK in link to the use of "EXCESSIVE" (being the key word) force that is seen in the video.

Sure the kid pulled away someone breached his personal space, did that give the security dean permission to excessively slam his body into desk and table? No. He could have subdued him right there on the spot, using his highly trained ability (of course not seen) to detain without the use of table bashing.

Its simple to see your stance is falling apart with the assumption list growing.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
reply to post by WhisperingWinds

 

You have lost all credibility by your own actions. You have proven the case against you and now you are lashing out. Very typical.

The thug in the video was treated as he should have been treated by the Dean of Security.

..and you are losing credibility with each of your posts, with your underhanded psychological manipulation.

Its not upsetting me, I just find it sad, and at times amusing how you have manipulated this whole video scenario ,as well as manipulated how wrong I am about my views. So once again you dream up "proof" that I am 'lashing out". what next ? I'm a obviously a 'thug"

I have some friends who are teachers, so I will run this video by them when I get the chance. I'm curious as to their opinion of this whole thread.

Stainz .you are rock solid in your wisdom as well as articulating it. Your participation in this thread has been appreciated.

Actually, about 90% of the people who have commented have agreed that the Dean of Security was right in what he did. The two of you and perhaps one or two others are still trying to say he was abused and he wasn't.

You've continued to defeat your own argument time and again with your own actions.

You're on the losing end of this one, because you are wrong.

Deal with it.

Originally posted by article
I wasnt stating it as though it was something that came off the top of my head. Where did you learn to read? See what I did there?

I was stating where I stood on the issue, personaly. Not that it was a novel idea... Grow a lil and take posts for what they're for, dont pull your own spin out of it for your own kicks, buddy boy.

I guess my point was that on the planet I am on we have been trying that for quite some time now and it is not working well as it is. Adding to it can only help, right?

Originally posted by article
you're making no sense. none what so ever.

Killing an unborn child ... let me do this sloooooowly.

You could potentually be killing a child that could have grown into a leader, or someone great.

Get that? No? Reread till you do.

Or you could be killing the next Hitler. It is fun and easy when we just pretend, isn't it? There are lots of aborted babies that are aborted because they would be born into otherwise pretty ruff conditions. Each time I hear about a dead child found that was locked in a closet or a cage - yes EACH TIME - I wish to god those people had the sense to at least have an abortion if not give up their child to a government turnstile of abuse known as adoption.

You read slowly.

Instead of killing a child because you feel the parent isnt worthy... and who are you to judge, I might ask, adoption is the best alternative. Simply put.

Cool, you have an opinion as well. Good for you.

There was no other hidden secret meanings, no in between the lines... Just regular old "this is what I said and this is what I meant".



btw, i dont need to adopt. If I didnt have children, I would. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

There are still children going unadopted whether you selfishly decided to have your own children or not. How dare you suggest someone give up their child for adoption but when it comes to giving that child a home, you chose to have your own kids instead. What a selfish prick thing to do.

Personaly I see the biggest issue is with CHILDREN who have children. So, at 25 you think you have it figured out? Not even close. We learn till we die. I'm near my 50s and I still learn something new every day.

Now.. For a child to tell me how adoptions, abortions, whatever should be done... Sorry while I laugh till my side bursts and I bleed out all over in deathly humor.

Who are you calling a child?

Yes, experiance and age is still an important factor when making descisions.

(watch someone say something akin to ... but but but old people are dumb too...) once again... The basis for my posts... I dont speak secrets. I say what I say damn plainly.

edit on 2-7-2012 by article because: (no reason given)

I never said how old I was so...I dunno. Your anti-choice rant is noted. So is your body sans-utero.

reply to post by PurpleChiten


Not only do you struggle to make sense, this is isn't about winning or losing, its about forming an opinion biased or not, but within the evidence supplied, you on the other hand like to draw in as much off topic hogwash to form your opinion that is inaccurate at best.

Lets take a look, you have decided on what the boy has verbally projected towards the security dean which there is no evidence to provide, you have tied in the murder of an infant to further justify your stance on 'discipline' which is not seen in this video or is of any relevance.

To put it simply if the security dean were to subdue the child without the unnecessary force (this includes the desk and table, believe it or not but in some cases can cause fatal injury) there would be no case, this would not be seen as a public outrage. I am not a pacifist, I condone physical discipline for families who can't think of an alternative and is their limitation, although can work.

To be clear with you, your not making much sense, I have not committed any heinous actions that would depict me in any bad light or for a non existent battle of winning and losing you have conjured in your minds. Your propaganda tactics of saying we lost to herd blind sheep into your opinion is disgusting and this is why I feel you are a ##snip##. So, no.

people have watched the video and the vast majority see it for what it is. They agree that the Dean of Security acted in the proper way to keep a violent thug from threatening the school.

It really doesn't matter if that's your opinion or not, it's what the vast majority see as taking place even though the article it was posted from tried its best to slant it in the other direction.

ATS members have once again Denied Ignorance and not allowed the biased link and the opinions of a few biased members sway them from what is right and what is true.

Click here for more information.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by PurpleChiten
Nope, but discipline is the appropriate response to misbehavior when other methods don't work.
A good spanking isn't violence, it's discipline. It should be used much more often then it is.

Not sure what video you were watching. No one was being spanked.

It's the group of people who think that any form of discipline is equivalent to violence or abuse that are the problem. A spanking is not going to damage a child for life and will actually help them to learn that there are consequences for misbehavior.

No, but I can handle a 14 year old kid without having to try to completely beat him up. Can't you grown men do that? Do you think any and all violence is just discipline?

Children don't understand abstract ideas, which you would be aware of if you have studied human growth and development. They don't have the cerebral ability to comprehend that. They see immediate responses to immediate actions. The responses need to be very literal and feasible for them to grasp the meaning.

So this 14 year old is not a criminal mastermind that needs to be slammed into tables then?

A spanking shows them that something was wrong and there was a consequence for it. As they grow, they see that the action of being hurtful to others results in an action that is hurtful to them (not damaging, not scarring, it hurts when their butt is spanked, then they get over it).

Why the # are you talking about spanking?

It worked well for thousands and thousands of years, then someone came along and said "oh, not, that's abusive and violent, we can't do that", so now we have kids joining gangs at the age of 8, we have kids who kill people, we have kids that aren't able to function in society. That's the result of this insane concept and it will continue being the result.

Spank their backside, tell them why, move on. For those who want to appeal to Christianity.... spare the rod, spoil the child. Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

No one in that video was spanked.
I was responding to what you said about the video.

Why did you try changing the subject on me?