Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Mainstream
Excuse me, but are you just trying to be dumb? Why don't you call up the new guy and ask him if he would ever do anything like that?sure post it up, let's see what kind of force and where's the school authority?The policy is Excessive Use of Force, for which, if you do that as in this case, you can be fired. Pretty simple actually.Again, so where are the policies? What did he violate? I laugh at the lack of any formal procedures to detail what the cop did outside of no policy? Again as I stated many many times here, it was an ambush.
School Resource Officers
Posted a ways back --
"Yesterday’s incident was an outrageous exception to the culture, conduct and standards in which we so strongly believe in in this district. ... What happened yesterday – what we all watched on that shamefully shocking video – is reprehensible, unforgivable and inconsistent with everything that this district stands for, what we work for and what we aspire to be. ... The safety and the dignity of our students is our highest priority.” -- School Board Chairman James Manning
“In a situation like yesterday, you see the sheer painfulness of watching it, and as it went on, it’s really upsetting – incredibly upsetting. Maybe like you, it hit me in the gut. ... Our district and our school have zero tolerance for what occurred. I personally have zero tolerance as well. I think of our 2,000 students as my own.” -- Spring Valley Principal Jeff Temoney
“I am greatly concerned by these videos. The safety of our students is always our No. 1 priority. School districts contract with hundreds of dedicated school resource officers who work hard to protect our students across South Carolina. However, these videos and what they appear to show should concern all of us in public education. While it is vital that students have respect for law enforcement, it is equally important that law enforcement ensure they do not abuse the power and trust school districts instill in them.
“I am pleased that Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott has moved quickly to place the officer on unpaid leave and initiate a thorough investigation of the officer involved, by reaching out to both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice. Richland School District 2’s Superintendent Dr. Debbie Hamm has acted swiftly to ensure that pending the result of the investigation, the officer will not be working within any of the district’s schools. This matter must be investigated thoroughly and appropriate action taken.” --- Molly Spearman, SC State Superintendent of Education
“There is no justification whatsoever for treating a child like this. Regardless of the reason for the officer’s actions, such egregious use of force – against young people who are sitting in their classrooms – is outrageous. School should be a place to learn and grow, not a place to be brutalized. We must take action to address the criminalization of children in South Carolina, especially at school.” -- Victoria Middleton, SC ACLU
Doesn't appear the fascist bootlickers have a whole lotta support from those connected to the event.
And how was that NOT an Appeal to Authority?
VIDEO: Police Officer Beaten to a Pulp by UNARMED Man -If the next (or any) cop were a girl, chances are she'd find a way to think with something besides testosterone.
Nope. Would have encouraged resistance on the part of the punk.
There lies your problem right there. You and the rest of the authoritarian-worshiping sycophants: you view everything in terms of Force A overcoming Force B and imagine boiling down to a mathematical equation of "how much force is needed to overcome resistance of B".
These however are humans interacting with humans -- not hammers interacting with nails.
No, my "problem" is that I recognize that when a human is determined to cause trouble, you can't stop them. The punk had already told her friends to get their cell phones ready. She was planning of causing trouble.
A weaker Authority figure would only have been a plus for her plan.
You just confirmed everything I just said. Thanks for that.
Female cops do not solve problems better than male cops because of less testosterone. They get injured more, and have to resort to weapons more and hurt people more, because "humans" who are punks and thugs respect Authority only if it is backed up by force.
If the next (or any) cop were a girl, chances are she'd find a way to think with something besides testosterone.
Nope. Would have encouraged resistance on the part of the punk.
There lies your problem right there. You and the rest of the authoritarian-worshiping sycophants: you view everything in terms of Force A overcoming Force B and imagine boiling down to a mathematical equation of "how much force is needed to overcome resistance of B".
These however are humans interacting with humans -- not hammers interacting with nails.
No, my "problem" is that I recognize that when a human is determined to cause trouble, you can't stop them. The punk had already told her friends to get their cell phones ready. She was planning of causing trouble.
A weaker Authority figure would only have been a plus for her plan.
You just confirmed everything I just said. Thanks for that.
Female cops do not solve problems better than male cops because of less testosterone. They get injured more, and have to resort to weapons more and hurt people more, because "humans" who are punks and thugs respect Authority only if it is backed up by force.
3. Not a factor in Law Enforcement Procedure that I have ever heard. She hit him, boom justification.
Got your "she hit him" moment right here, you dishonest fucking cop-knob-gobbler hack. I found a still:
Why look at that, you're right -- she may be actually coming into contact there with his right upper arm. The one that's got her in a choke hold.
No, that's not a "lateral" trajectory at all. Why I bet he's got a broken humerus, probably a shoulder separation too.
Why that's WAY worse than a simple, I dunno, being flipped over backward in your own desk and thrown against a wall. Jeepers that's brutal.
Poor Officer Goon -- they may have to amputate.
Of course, there's the little inconvenience of linear time, under which he's already inconveniently attacking her BEFORE this viscous, devastating, arm-shattering blow.
Ooopsie.
Dishonest fucking HACK.
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
Seems you keep jumping around to find rationalizations for your anti-cop reflexive stance.
You're exactly right. Once the person assaults or tries to assault the cop...it's game on to use immediate and decisive force.
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...). But that's irrelevant here as I've just demonstrated that (a) there is no such threat, and (b) the ineffectual flailing you're trying so desperately to make into an "assault" -- happens AFTER Deputy Knuckldragger is already chokeholding her.
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
May be, but they are under obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them HASN'T EVEN OCCURRED YET -- if it in fact occurs at all. Sorry, "I felt threatened" doesn't make for a reality.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
Nope:This is why he's gonna win a shit load of money in court and be working for Lexington County next year.
Sorry libs. I hate destroying your arguments.
Mainstream
Excuse me, but are you just trying to be dumb? Why don't you call up the new guy and ask him if he would ever do anything like that?sure post it up, let's see what kind of force and where's the school authority?The policy is Excessive Use of Force, for which, if you do that as in this case, you can be fired. Pretty simple actually.
School Resource Officers
Posted a ways back --
"Yesterday’s incident was an outrageous exception to the culture, conduct and standards in which we so strongly believe in in this district. ... What happened yesterday – what we all watched on that shamefully shocking video – is reprehensible, unforgivable and inconsistent with everything that this district stands for, what we work for and what we aspire to be. ... The safety and the dignity of our students is our highest priority.” -- School Board Chairman James Manning
“In a situation like yesterday, you see the sheer painfulness of watching it, and as it went on, it’s really upsetting – incredibly upsetting. Maybe like you, it hit me in the gut. ... Our district and our school have zero tolerance for what occurred. I personally have zero tolerance as well. I think of our 2,000 students as my own.” -- Spring Valley Principal Jeff Temoney
“I am greatly concerned by these videos. The safety of our students is always our No. 1 priority. School districts contract with hundreds of dedicated school resource officers who work hard to protect our students across South Carolina. However, these videos and what they appear to show should concern all of us in public education. While it is vital that students have respect for law enforcement, it is equally important that law enforcement ensure they do not abuse the power and trust school districts instill in them.
“I am pleased that Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott has moved quickly to place the officer on unpaid leave and initiate a thorough investigation of the officer involved, by reaching out to both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice. Richland School District 2’s Superintendent Dr. Debbie Hamm has acted swiftly to ensure that pending the result of the investigation, the officer will not be working within any of the district’s schools. This matter must be investigated thoroughly and appropriate action taken.” --- Molly Spearman, SC State Superintendent of Education
“There is no justification whatsoever for treating a child like this. Regardless of the reason for the officer’s actions, such egregious use of force – against young people who are sitting in their classrooms – is outrageous. School should be a place to learn and grow, not a place to be brutalized. We must take action to address the criminalization of children in South Carolina, especially at school.” -- Victoria Middleton, SC ACLU
Doesn't appear the fascist bootlickers have a whole lotta support from those connected to the event.
And how was that NOT an Appeal to Authority?
In order to qualify as any fallacy -- it would have to be part of an argument of assertion.
These are quotes, and therefore facts. Facts are not arguments of assertion.
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
NOpe. Forcible removing someone from a room where they are not supposed to be does not require waiting until force has been used against them.
Nope. Would have encouraged resistance on the part of the punk.
There lies your problem right there. You and the rest of the authoritarian-worshiping sycophants: you view everything in terms of Force A overcoming Force B and imagine boiling down to a mathematical equation of "how much force is needed to overcome resistance of B".
These however are humans interacting with humans -- not hammers interacting with nails.
No, my "problem" is that I recognize that when a human is determined to cause trouble, you can't stop them. The punk had already told her friends to get their cell phones ready. She was planning of causing trouble.
A weaker Authority figure would only have been a plus for her plan.
You just confirmed everything I just said. Thanks for that.
Female cops do not solve problems better than male cops because of less testosterone. They get injured more, and have to resort to weapons more and hurt people more, because "humans" who are punks and thugs respect Authority only if it is backed up by force.
And once AGAIN you reaffirm your own knuckledragger hammer-and-nail description I already stated.
Thanks for the reaffirmation, but I'm already confident in it. It's not like I'm running it up the flagpole to see if anybody salutes.
This is just going in circles. You're boring.
Mainstream
Excuse me, but are you just trying to be dumb? Why don't you call up the new guy and ask him if he would ever do anything like that?sure post it up, let's see what kind of force and where's the school authority?
School Resource Officers
Posted a ways back --
"Yesterday’s incident was an outrageous exception to the culture, conduct and standards in which we so strongly believe in in this district. ... What happened yesterday – what we all watched on that shamefully shocking video – is reprehensible, unforgivable and inconsistent with everything that this district stands for, what we work for and what we aspire to be. ... The safety and the dignity of our students is our highest priority.” -- School Board Chairman James Manning
“In a situation like yesterday, you see the sheer painfulness of watching it, and as it went on, it’s really upsetting – incredibly upsetting. Maybe like you, it hit me in the gut. ... Our district and our school have zero tolerance for what occurred. I personally have zero tolerance as well. I think of our 2,000 students as my own.” -- Spring Valley Principal Jeff Temoney
“I am greatly concerned by these videos. The safety of our students is always our No. 1 priority. School districts contract with hundreds of dedicated school resource officers who work hard to protect our students across South Carolina. However, these videos and what they appear to show should concern all of us in public education. While it is vital that students have respect for law enforcement, it is equally important that law enforcement ensure they do not abuse the power and trust school districts instill in them.
“I am pleased that Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott has moved quickly to place the officer on unpaid leave and initiate a thorough investigation of the officer involved, by reaching out to both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice. Richland School District 2’s Superintendent Dr. Debbie Hamm has acted swiftly to ensure that pending the result of the investigation, the officer will not be working within any of the district’s schools. This matter must be investigated thoroughly and appropriate action taken.” --- Molly Spearman, SC State Superintendent of Education
“There is no justification whatsoever for treating a child like this. Regardless of the reason for the officer’s actions, such egregious use of force – against young people who are sitting in their classrooms – is outrageous. School should be a place to learn and grow, not a place to be brutalized. We must take action to address the criminalization of children in South Carolina, especially at school.” -- Victoria Middleton, SC ACLU
Doesn't appear the fascist bootlickers have a whole lotta support from those connected to the event.
And how was that NOT an Appeal to Authority?
In order to qualify as any fallacy -- it would have to be part of an argument of assertion.
These are quotes, and therefore facts. Facts are not arguments of assertion.
They're there for perspective --- views of those within the school, within the community, within the state. If you don't like how those far closer to the event see it, just because they don't agree with your authoritarian-bootlicker mentality --- tough titty. There ain't a thing you can do to change 'em.
They are Authorities you are citing to support or "assert" your position.
Quotes are not facts. They are the judgements and opinions of the people who say them.
It is not credible that you are having this much trouble understanding a simple definition.
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
NOpe. Forcible removing someone from a room where they are not supposed to be does not require waiting until force has been used against them.
Irrelevant. What's relevant here is -- what circumstances are required to justify assault and reckless endangerment? Not to mention false arrest?
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
NOpe. Forcible removing someone from a room where they are not supposed to be does not require waiting until force has been used against them.
Irrelevant. What's relevant here is -- what circumstances are required to justify assault and reckless endangerment? Not to mention false arrest?
The girl was disruptive of the class to the point the teacher summoned a police officer to remove her.
She refused to leave and the cop forcible removed her.
Your opinion that it was "assault" and "reckless endangerment" is just that. An opinion that you have done a very poor job of supporting with anything beyond your squeamishness and a large host of Logical Fallacies.
Mainstream
Excuse me, but are you just trying to be dumb? Why don't you call up the new guy and ask him if he would ever do anything like that?
School Resource Officers
Posted a ways back --
"Yesterday’s incident was an outrageous exception to the culture, conduct and standards in which we so strongly believe in in this district. ... What happened yesterday – what we all watched on that shamefully shocking video – is reprehensible, unforgivable and inconsistent with everything that this district stands for, what we work for and what we aspire to be. ... The safety and the dignity of our students is our highest priority.” -- School Board Chairman James Manning
“In a situation like yesterday, you see the sheer painfulness of watching it, and as it went on, it’s really upsetting – incredibly upsetting. Maybe like you, it hit me in the gut. ... Our district and our school have zero tolerance for what occurred. I personally have zero tolerance as well. I think of our 2,000 students as my own.” -- Spring Valley Principal Jeff Temoney
“I am greatly concerned by these videos. The safety of our students is always our No. 1 priority. School districts contract with hundreds of dedicated school resource officers who work hard to protect our students across South Carolina. However, these videos and what they appear to show should concern all of us in public education. While it is vital that students have respect for law enforcement, it is equally important that law enforcement ensure they do not abuse the power and trust school districts instill in them.
“I am pleased that Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott has moved quickly to place the officer on unpaid leave and initiate a thorough investigation of the officer involved, by reaching out to both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice. Richland School District 2’s Superintendent Dr. Debbie Hamm has acted swiftly to ensure that pending the result of the investigation, the officer will not be working within any of the district’s schools. This matter must be investigated thoroughly and appropriate action taken.” --- Molly Spearman, SC State Superintendent of Education
“There is no justification whatsoever for treating a child like this. Regardless of the reason for the officer’s actions, such egregious use of force – against young people who are sitting in their classrooms – is outrageous. School should be a place to learn and grow, not a place to be brutalized. We must take action to address the criminalization of children in South Carolina, especially at school.” -- Victoria Middleton, SC ACLU
Doesn't appear the fascist bootlickers have a whole lotta support from those connected to the event.
And how was that NOT an Appeal to Authority?
In order to qualify as any fallacy -- it would have to be part of an argument of assertion.
These are quotes, and therefore facts. Facts are not arguments of assertion.
They're there for perspective --- views of those within the school, within the community, within the state. If you don't like how those far closer to the event see it, just because they don't agree with your authoritarian-bootlicker mentality --- tough titty. There ain't a thing you can do to change 'em.
They are Authorities you are citing to support or "assert" your position.
Quotes are not facts. They are the judgements and opinions of the people who say them.
It is not credible that you are having this much trouble understanding a simple definition.
That these particular people made these particular quotes, is a FACT: Like it or lump it.
As I said these are the perspective of those within the school, within the community, within the state. Your finding them inconvenient is irrelevant. That IS what they said and there ain't a god damn thing in the world you can do about it.
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
NOpe. Forcible removing someone from a room where they are not supposed to be does not require waiting until force has been used against them.
Irrelevant. What's relevant here is -- what circumstances are required to justify assault and reckless endangerment? Not to mention false arrest?
The girl was disruptive of the class to the point the teacher summoned a police officer to remove her.
She refused to leave and the cop forcible removed her.
Your opinion that it was "assault" and "reckless endangerment" is just that. An opinion that you have done a very poor job of supporting with anything beyond your squeamishness and a large host of Logical Fallacies.
Didn't need those. We have the videos.
DAMN those videos, huh? Makes history revision so challenging.
That's why I take the side of truth over being a fucking liar. It's less work.
My understanding of police procedure, which you kept harping on, is that even the threat of assault justify force in response.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
Law enforcement is under no obligation to hold their force in check because the force used against them is not effective.
So, are you arguing procedure or not?
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
NOpe. Forcible removing someone from a room where they are not supposed to be does not require waiting until force has been used against them.
Irrelevant. What's relevant here is -- what circumstances are required to justify assault and reckless endangerment? Not to mention false arrest?
The girl was disruptive of the class to the point the teacher summoned a police officer to remove her.
She refused to leave and the cop forcible removed her.
Your opinion that it was "assault" and "reckless endangerment" is just that. An opinion that you have done a very poor job of supporting with anything beyond your squeamishness and a large host of Logical Fallacies.
Didn't need those. We have the videos.
DAMN those videos, huh? Makes history revision so challenging.
That's why I take the side of truth over being a fucking liar. It's less work.
As for "class disruption" --- diga me Tonto:
-- which "disrupts" a class more?
(a) Math class going on, one girl on the side is texting. No one pays any attention, class simply the fuck continues.
(b) Math class going on, Officer Goonsquad swaggers in, starts moving materials around, flips desk over backward, crashes into another desk nearly impaling a student in the eye, hurls 16-year-old girl at wall, arrests her and another girl who stands up to stop the violence, leaves entire class traumatized; class expected to go on with math lesson as if nothing just happened.
Choose your answer.... Now. Cue Jeopardy think music.
Mainstream
Posted a ways back --
"Yesterday’s incident was an outrageous exception to the culture, conduct and standards in which we so strongly believe in in this district. ... What happened yesterday – what we all watched on that shamefully shocking video – is reprehensible, unforgivable and inconsistent with everything that this district stands for, what we work for and what we aspire to be. ... The safety and the dignity of our students is our highest priority.” -- School Board Chairman James Manning
“In a situation like yesterday, you see the sheer painfulness of watching it, and as it went on, it’s really upsetting – incredibly upsetting. Maybe like you, it hit me in the gut. ... Our district and our school have zero tolerance for what occurred. I personally have zero tolerance as well. I think of our 2,000 students as my own.” -- Spring Valley Principal Jeff Temoney
“I am greatly concerned by these videos. The safety of our students is always our No. 1 priority. School districts contract with hundreds of dedicated school resource officers who work hard to protect our students across South Carolina. However, these videos and what they appear to show should concern all of us in public education. While it is vital that students have respect for law enforcement, it is equally important that law enforcement ensure they do not abuse the power and trust school districts instill in them.
“I am pleased that Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott has moved quickly to place the officer on unpaid leave and initiate a thorough investigation of the officer involved, by reaching out to both the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice. Richland School District 2’s Superintendent Dr. Debbie Hamm has acted swiftly to ensure that pending the result of the investigation, the officer will not be working within any of the district’s schools. This matter must be investigated thoroughly and appropriate action taken.” --- Molly Spearman, SC State Superintendent of Education
“There is no justification whatsoever for treating a child like this. Regardless of the reason for the officer’s actions, such egregious use of force – against young people who are sitting in their classrooms – is outrageous. School should be a place to learn and grow, not a place to be brutalized. We must take action to address the criminalization of children in South Carolina, especially at school.” -- Victoria Middleton, SC ACLU
Doesn't appear the fascist bootlickers have a whole lotta support from those connected to the event.
And how was that NOT an Appeal to Authority?
In order to qualify as any fallacy -- it would have to be part of an argument of assertion.
These are quotes, and therefore facts. Facts are not arguments of assertion.
They're there for perspective --- views of those within the school, within the community, within the state. If you don't like how those far closer to the event see it, just because they don't agree with your authoritarian-bootlicker mentality --- tough titty. There ain't a thing you can do to change 'em.
They are Authorities you are citing to support or "assert" your position.
Quotes are not facts. They are the judgements and opinions of the people who say them.
It is not credible that you are having this much trouble understanding a simple definition.
That these particular people made these particular quotes, is a FACT: Like it or lump it.
As I said these are the perspective of those within the school, within the community, within the state. Your finding them inconvenient is irrelevant. That IS what they said and there ain't a god damn thing in the world you can do about it.
We are on a internet debating forum. My lack of ability to directly "do" anything is nothing but a red herring.
The fact that the Authorities you are citing are close to the issue, increases the likely hood that they are NOT being objective or truthful, not decreases it.
Their squeamishness is no more relevant than your own.
Their opinions are no more relevant than anyone else's, UNLESS they support it with sound reasoning or facts.
Which I saw none of.
Mainstream
And how was that NOT an Appeal to Authority?
In order to qualify as any fallacy -- it would have to be part of an argument of assertion.
These are quotes, and therefore facts. Facts are not arguments of assertion.
They're there for perspective --- views of those within the school, within the community, within the state. If you don't like how those far closer to the event see it, just because they don't agree with your authoritarian-bootlicker mentality --- tough titty. There ain't a thing you can do to change 'em.
They are Authorities you are citing to support or "assert" your position.
Quotes are not facts. They are the judgements and opinions of the people who say them.
It is not credible that you are having this much trouble understanding a simple definition.
That these particular people made these particular quotes, is a FACT: Like it or lump it.
As I said these are the perspective of those within the school, within the community, within the state. Your finding them inconvenient is irrelevant. That IS what they said and there ain't a god damn thing in the world you can do about it.
We are on a internet debating forum. My lack of ability to directly "do" anything is nothing but a red herring.
The fact that the Authorities you are citing are close to the issue, increases the likely hood that they are NOT being objective or truthful, not decreases it.
Their squeamishness is no more relevant than your own.
Their opinions are no more relevant than anyone else's, UNLESS they support it with sound reasoning or facts.
Which I saw none of.
We actually have an emoticon here that expresses all of what you just posted. It goes
Again, the fact that you find the perspective of those close to the event inconvenient interests nobody. As I said, like it or lump it -- you choose the latter.
Whatever, there still ain't a damn thing you can do about it.
It may be, though exactly WHO determines whether said threat exists is problematic ("I felt threatened"...
To wit -- the still picture above immediately follows this --- the first move by either party:
See above. What part of linear time don't you grok?
NOpe. Forcible removing someone from a room where they are not supposed to be does not require waiting until force has been used against them.
Irrelevant. What's relevant here is -- what circumstances are required to justify assault and reckless endangerment? Not to mention false arrest?
The girl was disruptive of the class to the point the teacher summoned a police officer to remove her.
She refused to leave and the cop forcible removed her.
Your opinion that it was "assault" and "reckless endangerment" is just that. An opinion that you have done a very poor job of supporting with anything beyond your squeamishness and a large host of Logical Fallacies.
Didn't need those. We have the videos.
DAMN those videos, huh? Makes history revision so challenging.
That's why I take the side of truth over being a fucking liar. It's less work.
As for "class disruption" --- diga me Tonto:
-- which "disrupts" a class more?
(a) Math class going on, one girl on the side is texting. No one pays any attention, class simply the fuck continues.
(b) Math class going on, Officer Goonsquad swaggers in, starts moving materials around, flips desk over backward, crashes into another desk nearly impaling a student in the eye, hurls 16-year-old girl at wall, arrests her and another girl who stands up to stop the violence, leaves entire class traumatized; class expected to go on with math lesson as if nothing just happened.
Choose your answer.... Now. Cue Jeopardy think music.
Well, once you establish that the Teacher has zero Authority, the rest of the year, hell the rest of the school experience for everyone in the class if not the school is in the toilet.
So, A.
s0n.........s0n.... what variables are you referring to? The fact that the teacher asked the student to leave and she didn't and then officer Ben asked the student to leave and she didn't? Those variables?Overall I agree. Cops have militarized and I don't like it either.A debate at Fox’s Houston station went off the rails on Tuesday after a white Republican pundit told a black activist that “black culture” caused a cop to body slam a high school girl in South Carolina.
Angela Box argued that Deputy Ben Fields should not have been fired for violently throwing a 16-year-old school girl to the ground because he was “doing his job.”
“It’s time we start addressing the root cause of all this,” she said. “The disrespect of teachers, this Black Lives Matter movement, this perpetual chip on your shoulder against everybody that’s not like yourself. It’s got to stop. We’ve got to address the culture.”
Activist Quanell X then said: “Now for you to say that we need to deal with the culture of black kids in schools,” he noted, taking a deep breath. “Let’s deal with the culture of these crazy fanatic white boys who go in schools with guns and shoot and kill everybody.”
Ok, this is exactly what blacks on USMB do. Instead of staying on topic, they instead want to change the subject to dysfunctional white people. Why do blacks get so defensive when white people point out their bad behavior? Colombine shooters and Sandy Hook shooters have nothing to do with the topic of bad black behavior. And it seems blacks teach their kids this bad behavior very young. Then defend them when they get in trouble. Then cry racism.
Quanell X then replied. “Don’t tell me a damn thing about the black culture and kids in school when it’s white boys who go in school and murder all kinds of innocent people. Don’t tell me that! We need to study these fanatic white boys!”
I don't know why I got an alert on this but no I don't agree this is a racial incident. I see no such indication.
Is Ben Fields a racist? I don't know that and nothing in these videos suggests either way. What I do see is egregious brutality and endangerment against peaceful citizens, and that's what this is all about. What he's doing is obediently, even slavishly, following the Warrior Cop model that's been infiltrating police like a cancer.
I don't believe this Warrior Cop Culture is white supremacist. I think it's police-supremacist. It sees itself as a military class, superior to the rest of us the unwashed, who it views as an enemy to be vanquished. It's visited on blacks, Hispanics, whites and even women. And here, as in McKinney Texas, it's devolved to attacking teenage girls.
Its victims are not dependent on race but with its view of itself as a "superior" life form it has the same divisive class-mentality as racism does. And that's fucked up. The Warrior Cop is to the general public as the KKK was to black people.
But the way the girl acted reminds me of how when prisoners won't leave their cell so the guard bum rush the prisoner. It's not nice. So do what the officer says. But he was way too rough with the kids. I agree he shouldn't work in a school.
What if the next cops a girl and the next kid is a Mike Tyson. Let's roleplay. How would it go down?
If the next (or any) cop were a girl, chances are she'd find a way to think with something besides testosterone.
Nope. Would have encouraged resistance on the part of the punk.
There lies your problem right there. You and the rest of the authoritarian-worshiping sycophants: you view everything in terms of Force A overcoming Force B and imagine boiling down to a mathematical equation of "how much force is needed to overcome resistance of B".
These however are humans interacting with humans -- not hammers interacting with nails.
