PeterDavid.net

Let the student school the school for some big amount of money. Or write another essay and what freedom is supposed to mean. It's very scary how some people can react with censorship in the face of fear (as in saying he should have wrote something non-offensive). Of course, without seeing the actual paper, it's hard to concretely say what might be going on behind the scenes. What we have here is a scary surface story, let's hope the meat behind it, isn't as scary as it appears.

In the mid-1970s, I remember dating a quiet, reserved co-worker when I found out she was an artist like me. Now, in those days, my art leaned towards horror and violence because I was a big fan of EC, Warren horror stuff, and underground comix like Captain Guts. And I was actually worried that she would think I was one strange dude, based on my comics work.

That evening, after a movie, we were sitting on her front steps talking when I asked to see some of her work. She went in the house, and a few minutes later came out with a number of paintings. They were so bizarre... so grotesque... so morbid... and so haunting... they scared ME! We chatted some more, and then I excused myself and left. Although we continued to occasionally talk to each other at work, we never dated again, and I have no idea what happened to her after I left that job.

Quality-wise, she was actually a pretty good painter. But was she crazy? Who knows!

People will inevitably draw the "shouting FIRE in a crowded theater" analogy when defending the overreactions to stuff like this, but there's a difference between shouting it in a crowded theater and shouting it in an empty one....

This article is so disturbing to me and scares me so much I think the newspaper publisher should be arrested.

The actions of the teacher and police also represent a threat to my freedoms and they should also be arrested. In fact, anyone who thinks anything but happy thoughts should be executed.

I hope there is a BIG lawsuit over this crap.

Let the goose-stepping begin.

The Nanny-States of America is upon us.

Problem is, is there anywhere else in the world any better?

R. Maheras, perhaps her paintings were her way of cleansing her mind of bizarre dreams/nightmares and she wasn't actually crazy at all.

The kid needs to release the story to the public himself. He worte it, it's his to release to the public. Maybe next time the other students will think twice before obeying a teacher's instructions. Oh yeah, I see NOTHING BAD that can result from this sort of over-reaction.

And the police department needs some kind of suit filed against them for violation of the kid's (well, not really a kid at 18) First Amendment RIGHTS.

The thought police are already here and they're setting up shop.

Better stop wrinting them stories full of violence and combat PAD, or you'll be arrested next...

Pathetic little world we live in.... is this the 21st Century or the return to the Dark Ages?

They arrested him for disorderly conduct!!??!!??!!

Lets see...

"Told to express emotion for a creative-writing..."

"Lee, 18, a straight-A student..."

"...police described as violently disturbing but not directed toward any specific person or location."

"School officials declined to say whether Lee had any previous disciplinary problems, but said he was an excellent student. Authorities said Lee had never been in trouble with the police."

"Cary Police Chief Ron Delelio said the charge against Lee was appropriate even though the essay was not published or posted for public viewing." ... "But it can also apply when someone's writings disturb an individual, Delelio said."

Ok, a student is asked to write something for creative writing, does and gets arrested for it? And no one can really articulate a good reason for the arrest other then he should have been arrested because his writings "disturbed" his teacher.

Yeah, right. Just what we all need. Creative writing with a touch too much testosterone becomes the new pornography. They can't really tell you what it is and they can't really tell you where the line will always be, but they can nail your butt to the wall and screw with you when they see it.

Thank you God that this crap wasn't this prevalent or this stupidly over the top when I was in middle school and high school. I'd have been jailed for life.

This "teacher" sounds like an embarassment to the profession.

There is no way this can stand.

OH MY GOD!!!!

Sure, take a look at the guy, maybe psychoanalyze him to determine if he's a threat to himself or others, but slapping handcuffs on him and putting him in jail for thirty days?! What the hell is that supposed to accomplish?

There was one time I wrote something that concerned a teacher and she later asked me in private where it came from. She was kind enough to listen to me as I vented about the kinds of problems I was having that inspired it, and to give me advice. In other words, she saw me as a person instead of as a time bomb that couldn't be reasoned with.

That's what should've been done here, assuming that the kid in question even had any revenge fantasies and wasn't simply trying to be the next Stephen King or Thomas Harris.

For a great look at censorship in the media, go rent (if anyone has a copy for rental, I bought mine) This Film Is Not Yet Rated. A disturbing look at what goes on behind closed doors of the MPAA. Talk about the dark ages... And think about this, for this being the land of freedom, how many would look at you crossways if you believed in a religion that wasn't Christian/Catholic based....

In the "Imus in the Mourning" thread, at least one other poster tried to dismiss the idea that Imus's firing was the first step down a "slippery slope." I've heard people as prominent as Gwen Ifill assert the same thing: that it's easy to know where to draw the line, and that Imus's remarks are where the line is drawn.

That's bull. Just complete bull. And this story about a kid being arrested for a violent essay that threatened no one in particular proves it. One obviously unbalanced kid snaps and commits mass murder, and suddenly we're examining everything with a microscope to see if we can find the next Cho Seung-Hui. Never mind the fact that the Cho Seung-Hui's of this world are rarer than rare. Never mind the fact that what drove him over the edge was probably uniquely, idiosyncratically him, an amalgam of his individual experiences filtered through his individual personality and perceptions. Nope, never mind any of that. We're going to make this world SAFE, damn it! And if we have to lobotomize the planet to do it, then so be it.

No, humans don't go overboard. Talk of a slippery slope is academic.

Bullshit. Pure bullshit.

THIS is why I agree with Peter's views on free speech: our commitment to the principle must be total, because if we allow incursions they won't stop. Give censors an inch, they'll take EVERYTHING eventually.

Of course, they won't call it censorship, it's all about "Public Safety" and protecting "Society" and "The Children" from the mentally unbalanced and disturbed "Terrorists".

What's the Vegas Line on how long before they refer to him as a "terrorist"?

I read this story and had to go to the bathroom, although it ended up only dry-heaves and not quite actual vomitting... but it was real close.

"Of course, they won't call it censorship, it's all about "Public Safety" and protecting "Society" and "The Children" from the mentally unbalanced and disturbed "Terrorists"."

Sure they will. Because God knows that a piece of paper represents such a great threat that the author has to be arrested for the safety of others.

Oh, no, wait, that's actually censorship when that happens.

Disorderly conduct...so, apparantly, doing your homework is the equivilent of running into Borders and yelling your head off.

I wonder how many of this guy's students will plead the fifth the next time he gives an assignment.

I remember when there used to be free speech in this country...

I wonder if my kids will.

This story just pisses me off. Like really really pisses me off.

I work in the mental health field, not only is it a slap in the face to our Freedom of Speech, but it is a kick in the groin to the work that I do.

That poor kid. Regardless of the content of the work, that's clearly a case of the teach and the police freaking out and abusing their power.

"I wonder how many of this guy's students will plead the fifth the next time he gives an assignment."

No kidding. I hope the student's fellow students give the teacher a hell of a time after this. I'm normally pretty sympathetic towards teachers, but this is way out of line and probably deserving of job loss.

This "teacher" sounds like an embarassment to the profession.

There is no way this can stand.

Actually, it looks like the teacher took the right action. In most schools, teachers are obligated to report this sort of thing to the student's advisors and the administrators. Usually, nothing becomes of it officially (and obviously, this time the administration made a very wrong call).

These things have to be recorded just in case there is a pattern of abuse, violence, suicidal tendencies, etc. It makes it easier to remove a student from a bad environment or get the student the help he or she needs, if the need comes up in the future.

And trust me, even if the teacher pulled you aside to talk to you about a concern, there's a good chance she reported you, too, along with the discussion you had. That's just part of a teacher's job.

Sometimes I think half the people I hung out with in high school would have been shipped off to jail for their behavior there. Instead of, you know, the one who WAS shipped off to jail for breaking into the chem lab and turning all the gas jets on. ;) But the guys with swords in their lockers, half the stuff I got submitted to the literary magazine when I was editing it...sheesh. My friend who got in trouble for organizing a student protest probably would have been jailed rather than just fired from his job (he'd photocopied a protest newsletter without permission on company machines).

Heil, Brave New World.
I cannot tell you my terror reading that. I have been down that road with a family member, to the land of psycho false accusations by Those That Know Not What They Do. It cost $40,000 in lawyer fees and 15 months in living hell before being settled in our favor, without so much as an apology in return. We had not the energy or finances to sue in return, but rested on the fact it was over and we won. My heart goes out to that kid, and I hope he and his family will someday be able to rebuild their lives.

This kid better get an "A" on the assignment. He obviously passed with flying colors, writing something emotional that generated an emotional response in his reader.

And a clean criminal record.

A kid that is obviously not at all like Cho is being treated far worse.

What I find particularly disturbing is this takes place in the NW burbs of Chicago and it's Seattle(!) that reports it!

Anyway, this young man just got his college paid for by the Cary School District. To call this an "over reaction" is an extreme understatement. Best part of the article was this though: A civil-rights advocate said the teacher's reaction to an essay shouldn't make it a crime. "One of the elements is that some sort of disorder or disruption is created," said Ed Yohnka, a spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois. "When something is done in private — when a paper is handed in to a teacher — there isn't a disruption.

Did you hear about the really silly overreaction at Yale? The Dean of Student Affairs banned any realistic looking weaponry from campus theater productions (and unless things have changed from when I was there, Yale has 2-3 different and new student productions just about every week). One play had to substitute fake looking wooden swords for metal ones...and that was after managing to talk Dean Trachtenberg down from her initial desire to just ban weaponry from the stage all together.

After a couple of days, the ban was rescinded (I'm guessing a higher up realized just how stupid this looked). But still, that it was done at all is just silly.

I'm reminded of the movie "Minority Report" where you're arrested not for a crime you have commited, but for a crime you can eventually commit in a potential future.

This is just so stupid, so crazy... I think it is justified to make it so students with eccentric behaviour and violent writings are examined by a psychologist, but ARREST him for the paper? This is crazy.

R. Maheras, perhaps her paintings were her way of cleansing her mind of bizarre dreams/nightmares and she wasn't actually crazy at all.

You know, that's kind of along the lines of something I said in my journal when I posted my reaction to all this insanity.

Have a look. Might as well throw in my two cents.

There needs to be major lawsuits. But I also would hope that there is now a bidding war for this story.

What I find particularly disturbing is this takes place in the NW burbs of Chicago and it's Seattle(!) that reports it!

Check the byline; it's a Chicago Tribune story just being reprinted in the Seattle paper.

The Dean of Student Affairs banned any realistic looking weaponry from campus theater productions

"Is this a dagger I see before me?"
"No, that's a banana."

It seems to me that the teacher got it all backwards. The first concern should be the student. If she was really concerned about his psychological state of mind, then you talk to him, to his parents, to the guidance counselor, not call the police. It seems as if the main concern was how the story the student wrote affected the teacher. Perhaps she needs to see a psychologist too?

Typical.

This country is so pussywhipped these days, it's a wonder we can get out bed in the morning without being arrested for offending people who think we should lay in bed all day.

The charge against Lee comes as schools across the country wrestle with how to react in the wake of the massacre that claimed 33 lives at Virginia Tech.

First, I think it's terrible that the school should wrestle. Such violence on the part of a school sets a bad example for the children.

Second, is this really that difficult to figure out? At least the part that reacting to a creative writing assignment by a straight-A student by arresting them is not the way to go.

Third, does nobody in that town have any common sense? Let's see. For this to happen: The teacher has to report it. The school administration has to call the cops. The DA has to decide to file charges. So there's at least three "responsible" adults and quite probably more (if the principal or DA discussed it with anyone else in their offices before deciding on a course of action). The Chief of Police also gets in there defending the charge is appropriate.

It's like one person has a over reaction and nobody dares say the emperor's is showing a bit too much ankle.

And trust me, even if the teacher pulled you aside to talk to you about a concern, there's a good chance she reported you, too, along with the discussion you had. That's just part of a teacher's job.

Be that as it may, Valerie, at least my teacher cared enough to listen to how I felt, instead of saying "oh my God, I'm not taking any chances, I want this freak locked up somewhere far away this school and far away from me!" That appears to be what the teacher in this story did.

This teacher didn't sit down with the kid, didn't offer a sympathetic ear, didn't even give two shits about anything but his or her own safety. "Fuck my student, fuck his well-being; only MY well-being matters," this teacher said. "This guy might not want to shoot me at all, but I can't afford to risk it, so I'm gonna get him put in jail. Guilty until proven otherwise, a threat until proven otherwise."

This teacher didn't bother to ask why the student wrote what he wrote. This teacher didn't wonder whether it was indicative of mental problems or pure fiction not the least bit reflective of the student's psychological state. This teacher was too busy dropping a load in her or his pants to do anything but assume the worst and take the most extreme action.

This just shows how little we have learned since 2002. Back then most people were in favor of striking at Iraq before Iraq wiped out the free world with a barrage of nukes. It didn't matter that there was no evidence of the threat, people just didn't want to take the chance. Today, people at this school are in favor of throwing a kid in jail because he reminds them in some way of Cho and they're scared he might go on a killing spree. It doesn't matter that there's no evidence of a threat here either. People, just like in 2002, just don't want to take the chance.

Screw that. If you refuse to give anybody the benefit of the doubt and decide to take preemptive action without proof of a threat, then YOU should be the one behind bars.

"Fuck my student, fuck his well-being; only MY well-being matters," this teacher said. "This guy might not want to shoot me at all, but I can't afford to risk it, so I'm gonna get him put in jail. Guilty until proven otherwise, a threat until proven otherwise."

You know this for a fact? You can read the teacher's mind? I sure didn't get that from this story.

I'm certainly not happy that police were called in, and I lean towards believing that it was a gross overreaction, but you DON'T know what was in the story, and you DON'T know what was going through the teacher's mind. Neither do I.

The shrill hyperbole does nothing to address the real concerns here.

All those who wrote stuff in high school and/or college that might getcha arrested right now, step forward.

To quote Rowan Atkinson as Beelzebub, Dear GOD, there are a lot of you.

"But it can also apply when someone's writings disturb an individual, Delelio said."
Yeah, okay. In that case, I want Arthur Miller, Charles Pelegrino, Jay Anson, and William Peter Blatty arrested.

Tom, the ban on realistic weaponry in college theater isn't that new. We did a production of A Knight Of British Comedy and the moron who ran the theater department said Arthur and his Knights couldn't go out with (sheathed) weapons. Wouldn't have been a problem except for the Killer Shark-Standing-In-For-The-Rabbit scene. (Incidentally, that's not why I call him a moron. I do that because when he would direct a show, he'd change his mind four times in five minutes and then NOT TELL anyone of the new stuff and get pissy when we couldn't read his mind.)

I can't help but think of the writings that I did in those days. Combat, murder, psychological attacks, rape, terrorism, and bad jokes. My teachers' reaction?

They wanted to know what happened next and when I was going to submit these things for publication. Judging by some of the other posts, I don't think that this isn't a shared experience around here.

WOW. That is unbelievable. I do not see how whatever the student wrote could possibly be as disturbing as the news article itself. The fact that there was no specific threat and he still got arrested is scary as hell. I really believe that no matter which side of the conservative / liberal fence we normally land on that hopefully we can all agree that this is just ludicrous. With this and all of the Imus political correctness going on, and the new call for censorship of rap artists, it is probably a matter of time until Alice Cooper (OK I admit that I am an OLD rocker) and Rob Zombie are arrested for their music due to violent content. I know that this sounds like a defeatist attitude but what can we do? The people who whine the most get the best press.

Forgot to post my real name. James. Although it may be harder to find and arrest shadowquest should I ever scare someone with my post. I can always blame it on someone else using my computer.

I'm certainly not happy that police were called in, and I lean towards believing that it was a gross overreaction, but you DON'T know what was in the story, and you DON'T know what was going through the teacher's mind. Neither do I.

It really doesn't matter what was in the story. Even the most hideously grotesque story in the whole world does not deserve jail time. Psychological counseling, sure. Jail? Never. You can't be hurt by a story, particularly when they say there was no direct threat in the story.

"... but you DON'T know what was in the story, and you DON'T know what was going through the teacher's mind. Neither do I."

Well, we don't really need to know. The story quotes the police as saying that nothing in the story was in any way making a threat to anyone or anything. The story contained no threats.

Once this fact is established, I don't really care about what was going through the teacher's mind. I also don't care what was in the story. The student could very well have written a story that was one part Battle Royal, one part Zombi 2 and one part Debbie Does Dallas with absolutely no redeeming social qualities whatsoever and it would make absolutely zero difference.

By the accounts we're going on, all he did was write a really freaky story that "disturbed" his teacher.

So

freaking

what.

There are no threats. This is massive overreaction by a teacher who will hopefully get disciplined heavily for this. I'm ticked at the Chief as well. They may have had to act on this once it was started by the teacher, but they're adding credibility to this with any statement other then a terse no comment. By saying that the charge against Lee was appropriate and explaining why it is so, he's coming across, whether he wants to or not, as saying that this is a good or right thing.

He's either very bad at dealing with the press or he agrees that it's the right thing to do. And with the information on hand, it certainly doesn't appear to be the right thing to do.

Say, what ever finally happened with the kid who got jammed up for the Zombie story a year or so back? News on that just kinda dried up and I never did find out. Anybody else know?

These have a bit more in them and some new news.

www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-070425essay,0,5733419.story

www.nwherald.com/articles/2007/04/25/news/local/doc462f202c94fa2608338443.txt

...you DON'T know what was going through the teacher's mind. Neither do I...The shrill hyperbole does nothing to address the real concerns here.

I'm sorry, Eric, as you can see I'm among the people who are upset by this. I'll try to calm down.

It seems pretty clear to me that when you press charges against somebody or report them to authorities, you have to be pretty ignorant if you think they're only going to get a stern talking to. Somebody here really overreacted and this kid is suffering because of it. They should be ashamed of themselves.

As for my final statement, I don't think it's as over the top as you do. I think it'd be karma; if you're the kind of person who's willing to get people arrested for the most trivial of things, then IMHO you deserve to experience the same kind of suffering you put those others through.

I'm pretty sure that if a student demonstrates a strong suicidal urge, the school is obliged to inform tha police. Disorderly conduct is one of the broadest of statutes, and for all anyone knows may be cited to justify bringing someone in to be evaluated.

Heh, it gets even better close to home. I was talking to one of my co-workers about this tonight and he threw out something equally stupid.

His daughter just got suspended from elementary school. One of her fellow second graders was teasing her, so she drew a picture of this kid standing in lava. The kid went to the teacher and my friend's daughter got suspended for a week for "violent tendencies."

For a silly drawing of another kid standing in lava, she gets booted from school for a week under the pretext of showing violent tendencies. What the hell is wrong with the schools right now?

The idea of home schooling just keeps looking better and better.

" Jerry Chandler at April 27, 2007 01:31 AM "

Was the other child punished for the bullying behaviour as well, (which is what "teasing" is), or did the bully get away with it?

Disorderly conduct is one of the broadest of statutes, and for all anyone knows may be cited to justify bringing someone in to be evaluated.

I have no problem with people being evaluated, but what really freaks me out is the mention about a 30 day prison sentence being an option. That's completely the wrong way to deal with this. Maybe it won't happen to Lee, but just the possibility that it might creates a strong reaction in me, as you can see.

I very much doubt that spending time in jail or prison has ever made anybody saner, by the way.

For a silly drawing of another kid standing in lava, she gets booted from school for a week under the pretext of showing violent tendencies. What the hell is wrong with the schools right now?

Aw man Jerry, that's awful. I agree with Megan that if the school insists on suspending your friend's daughter, they should take action against the kid who was harassing her as well. He (if it was a boy) wasn't hurt at all by what she drew, but she was hurt emotionally by his behaviour. So who did the most harm here?

It surprises me that a teacher could hand out an assigment like this to a room full of teenagers and get only one disturbing paper, and even more that he/she would be surprised that it happened.

At the very least, this has to be the most blatant example of moving the fucking goalposts I've seen in a long time. If the teacher didn't want to read anything but flowers and puppies and happiness, especially so soon after the VT shootings, that should have been the assignment.

I truly fear for the state of public education when my daughter is old enough to go to school...

-Rex Hondo-

He should have just written about people smiling, dogs running, rainbows. They don't have meetings about rainbows.

Re: she drew a picture of this kid standing in lava. The kid went to the teacher and my friend's daughter got suspended for a week for "violent tendencies."

She got off easy. In our New-Age police state, the other month police TASERED a FIVE year old, who got upset and was throwing chairs.
Now, I've worked with psycho children for more than 20 years - the kind that can't live at home, and literally rip off their and your body parts when they get 'upset'. Believe me, there is NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING a normal five-year old mainstreamed child can do, short of wielding a flame thrower, that would require the use of a taser. When can we click our heels, open our eyes, and hear the words "Wake up, Dorothy..."? It's time to move to Montana.

As for my final statement, I don't think it's as over the top as you do. I think it'd be karma; if you're the kind of person who's willing to get people arrested for the most trivial of things, then IMHO you deserve to experience the same kind of suffering you put those others through.

I didn't say the reaction was over the top. I believe it was as well. But attributing it to the teacher may well be a mistake. He or she may have simply reported the story to the office (as is mandated by law), and the office over-reacted. Once the administration has it in their hands, the teacher generally has little to no say in how it's handled.

I've had to report disturbing things my students have put in their notebooks before because to not do so a)would haunt me if something did happen to the kid or his classmates, and b) I could lose my job if I didn't. Fortunately, in all cases I've been involved with, the principals pulled the kids aside nondescriptly and got the details without embarrassing the kids or downplaying their creativity. In one case in my school that I know of, however, the result was that the student needed some help, and the school was able to set it up for him precisely because warning signs were heeded.

Calling the cops in, however, is ridiculous.

The last time I tried to post this, last night, it got caught in the filters. Not sure why. Since it has not yet appeared, I'll try again now. Apologies if it ends up posting twice.

Bill Mulligan asked, "PAD, is it possible that we are beginning to see a kind of parallel to the infamous "I'll wait for the trades", only now for TV?"

Wouldn't surprise me, Bill. I wrote a column earlier this year entitled "Are DVDs Changing the Way We Watch TV?", in which I noted changes in viewing habits, especially my own.

One of the people I interviewed was a university marketing professor who said living patterns have changed, and one pattern that's become the norm is that of people preferring to watch DVDs over first run shows.

I also interviewed a co-worker who doesn't watch much TV (mainly because he has young kids), but when he does, more often than not, it's on DVD. His theory: With the hectic pace of many people's lives, sitting down at a specific hour to watch a specific show is no longer an option.

In recent years, I also tended to watch more DVDs than first-run shows. In the 2003-2004 TV season, I only watched three first-run shows, but still spent a lot of time in front of my TV. Most of that time I watched DVDs from my home library.

Most of the DVDs I own are of shows I originally watched first-run, like Buffy, Angel and Babylon 5, but not all. I never saw a single frame of Firefly on TV. I bought the DVD set of that series based mostly on the fact that I'd liked Buffy and Angel. Once I saw Serenity, that pretty much clinched the deal, but even before that, I knew I'd buy the Firefly DVD set one day.

Likewise, I bought Neverwhere without having seen an episode. Since I don't have cable, I never had an opportunity to do so (assuming it was ever on a cable channel in my area). I bought it on the strength of Neil Gaiman's reputation as a writer.

I'm probably not alone in that respect, either. I'm sure people have bought DVD sets based on either the premise or involvement of particular people (whether behind or in front of the camera), or some other factor(s).

Is this a "wait for the trades" mentality? Obviously not with regard to shows I'd previously watched first-run, but with some current shows, I may be leaning in that direction. I've seen perhaps five episodes of 24 this year. Maybe seven. I'm more interested in Heroes, and I know 24 will be out on DVD by what, September? I can rent the series then, and watch several in a row, if I've a mind to do so.

True, I could, in theory, tape it and watch it later; but my VCR's no longer very reliable when it comes to tuning in stations. I found that out awhile back when I tried taping Smallville and Supernatural because I had to be some place that particular Thursday.

On the other hand, I have no urgent need to go out and buy the current season of 24 on DVD. Renting is fine. So, if I'm waiting for the trade with regard to 24, I'm waiting for it to come to the library, not my local comics shop.

I concluded my column with this statement: "The question remains, will it become commonplace for people to buy a DVD set of a season (or entire series) of a show they never saw, based just on the description and/or word of mouth?

Time will tell."

And so it will. It'll be interesting to see what people's viewing habits are like a decade from now. Will there be more direct-to-DVD TV shows? We already have direct-to-DVD movies? Granted, some are probably very bad and never had a prayer of making it to theaters; but others, like the new Babylon 5 project, The Lost Tales, are marketed for direct DVD release from the get-go. Perhaps a decade from now a show like Drive will go direct to DVD.

If so, expect to see a lot more product placement, if not actual advertisements, included with the series.

Rick

P.S. I never saw a frame of Firefly when it was on the air because I deliberately didn't watch it. Not because I was waiting for the DVD (I didn't yet own a DVD player, and didn't have any thoughts along those lines.) I didn't watch it because I felt sure I'd like it, and I wanted to cut back on my TV viewing. Which was easier when I didn't have a DVD library.

I also didn't watch Drive. The premise didn't interest me (and doesn't), but I agree with PAD that FOX seems to cancel shows too quickly. I might still have never watched it, but "TheJohnWilson" has a point. A show about a race is obviously structured to have an end. The network should have agreed to approve the series as a whole, with the caveat that whether it's a six, 13 or 22-episode series would depend on how well it did in the ratings. If it does well, it goes a whole season. If it does poorly, it becomes a mini-series.

Of course the writers would have had to structure the show in such a way that it could both logically wrap up in six episodes and logically continue for 13 or 22. But I'm sure they could've done that.

P.P.S. Amy Acker was in Drive? If I'd known, I might've tuned in at least once.

Dammit Jerry, you beat me to the homeschooling comment...

Look for public scholl enrollment to drop in the new year or two if this story really "gets out".

(I say that because I haven't heard about it on local news radio, talk radio, or the nightly news, only here and in the links listed)

Disorderly conduct is one of the broadest of statutes, and for all anyone knows may be cited to justify bringing someone in to be evaluated.

I have no problem with people being evaluated, but what really freaks me out is the mention about a 30 day prison sentence being an option. That's completely the wrong way to deal with this. Maybe it won't happen to Lee, but just the possibility that it might creates a strong reaction in me, as you can see.

I very much doubt that spending time in jail or prison has ever made anybody saner, by the way.

As far as they are using a law on the books that has an upper limit of 30 days incarceration, reporting that is simply a fact of the story.

My understanding is that all states have the right to institutionalize anyone they deem unfit for independence. They don't issue tickets -- they send the cops to pick you up.

They don't go to judges to sign warrants on this -- because judges aren't mental health professionals. The teachers are also unqualified to evaluate students, and as far as police aren't mental health workers, the only justification for establishing a record to evaluate a kid seems to be arresting him for disorderly conduct. What are they going to do, give the kid a wide berth to climb to a high ledge?

In our New-Age police state, the other month police TASERED a FIVE year old, who got upset and was throwing chairs.

Oh. My. God. Now that is just insane. You mean there was no other way a group of adults could restrain a five year old? WTF is wrong with these people?

Maybe somebody can explain the justification for the specific charge: How does writing an essay qualify as "disorderly coduct"? How words on a piece of paper cause disorder?

In our New-Age police state, the other month police TASERED a FIVE year old, who got upset and was throwing chairs.

Oh. My. God. Now that is just insane. You mean there was no other way a group of adults could restrain a five year old? WTF is wrong with these people?

Well, how do a group of new-age police-state adults apprehend a 5 year old so that the parents won't sue? Pepper spray? That bottle of chloroform cops like to keep handy? Grabbing her like that uncle who forces her to keep secrets from Mommy and Daddy?

There was a news story within the last few years where the police demonstrated a taser in a primary school on a student-volunteer. If the state of mind of the police is such that tasering poses the least risk of harm, that's something they can take to a judge if the parents sue.

Maybe somebody can explain the justification for the specific charge: How does writing an essay qualify as "disorderly coduct"? How words on a piece of paper cause disorder?

This case seems to be counter to the spirit of the conventional understanding of disorderly conduct. As a (perhaps the only) means for the state to bring a kid to a psych eval, the false arrest will probably be overlooked.

And let 'Thou Shalt Not Offend Thy Neighbor, Nor Disturb Them by Thy Speech, Nor by Thy Countenance' be the new law. :(

PAD, I'll go so far as to predict the next step -- the removal of already published writings from school libraries, on the presumption that the ideas expressed might feed and foster any latent hostilities buried in the personalities of the students.

Well, how do a group of new-age police-state adults apprehend a 5 year old so that the parents won't sue? Pepper spray? That bottle of chloroform cops like to keep handy?

There are legal ways to restrain a student that don't involve any of the above. At my school principals are trained in those procedures.

Grabbing her like that uncle who forces her to keep secrets from Mommy and Daddy?

If you think the only possible way to touch a child, you need help.

The authorities reaction to the student were asinine. But to add a note of optimism, the general reaction to this, like the reaction to the Art Teacher who was fired last year for taking her students to a museum with nude sculptures, is one of overwhelming disbelief. I think the public at large does not endorse this sort of censorship. And the authorities behind it usually end up embarrassed.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't be ever vigilant and not fight those who think this is acceptable. I'm just saying the slope isnt slipping yet.

I truly appreciate my public school education. I had, for the most part, teachers that cared, that tried, and that I was able to learn from. Not just the lesson from the book, but learn from their examples, their stories, the way they interacted with other students, me, other teachers. People I could respect.

Teachers today are far too hampered by rules and regulations to be people to our kids. All they are allowed to be, in many cases, are conduits for approvide curriculum. Which may or may not actually be of any use aside from progressing far on Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader?

Before we decided to have kids, my wife and I first decided that we were going to homeschool them. Because, quite frankly, we can't do any worse than what's allowed to be "taught" in schools today, and we can probably do a helluva lot better job unfettered by such a restrictive, oppressive atmosphere as our schools are today.

"Was the other child punished for the bullying behaviour as well, (which is what "teasing" is), or did the bully get away with it?"

Since when do kids get in trouble for being bullys or verbal abuse of their peers? I remember crap like that happening all the time when I was a kid. The playground was nothing but a spot for kids to yell insults at each other. Nobody gets in trouble for that, but fighting back gets you in detention or worse.

By the way, I think a kid drawing another kid in a lake of lava is hillarious. :)

Since when do kids get in trouble for being bullys or verbal abuse of their peers? I remember crap like that happening all the time when I was a kid. The playground was nothing but a spot for kids to yell insults at each other. Nobody gets in trouble for that, but fighting back gets you in detention or worse.

They do at my school, especially if I'm a witness. They also get charged with assault if they take it to the next level. There are more than a few teachers who probably got into teaching at least in part to seek vicarious revenge on the bullies they knew in high school.

I remember kids getting away with everything but murder when I was in school so in that way at least this zero tolerance mentality has brought about some welcome change. Though, as always, idiots take it too far.

Update;
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/360827,CST-NWS-essay27.article

Essay arrest baffles experts

Police Thursday released portions of an essay used to charge a Cary-Grove High School student with disorderly conduct, leaving several experts puzzled at an arrest based on such schoolwork.

Asked to write about whatever he wanted in a creative writing class, would-be Marine and honors student Allen Lee, 18, described a violent dream in which he shot people and then "had sex with the dead bodies.''

But then he immediately dismissed the idea as a mere joke, writing, "not really, but it would be funny if I did.''
A second disorderly count accuses Lee of alarming first-year teacher Nora Capron by writing that "as a teacher, don't be surprised on [sic] inspiring the first CG shooting,'' an apparent reference to Cary-Grove High.

Lee said Thursday he was "completely shocked'' to be arrested Tuesday for his essay, especially because written instructions told kids not to "censor'' what they wrote.

"In creative writing, you're told to exaggerate,'' said Lee. "It was supposed to be just junk. . . .

"There definitely is violent content, but they're taking it out of context and making it something it isn't.''

"I have no intention of harming anyone,'' said Lee, who has been transferred to an alternative school setting. "I miss school.''

Lee's father, Albert Lee, who emigrated from China 32 years ago, said his son has a clean academic and police record. He, too, insisted his son's essay was not threatening but authorities "drew a conclusion before the investigation. They didn't want to do the investigation.''

However, the father would not comment on whether he believed authorities acted quickly because his son is of Asian heritage, as was the Virginia Tech campus shooter.

Family therapist Michael Gurian, author of The Minds of Boys, said Allen Lee needs at least good counseling, but "If he was arrested solely based on those words, I don't see that as the most helpful course.''

Bernardine Dohrn, director of Northwestern University's Children and Family Justice Center, laughed when she heard the charge.

"You might want to talk to him, talk to his parents, but the criminal justice system seems to be the last thing you'd want,'' said Dohrn, a former Weatherman leader who lived for years as a fugitive.

Mike McInerney, former head of the Cook County Public Defender's Juvenile Court office, said he "wouldn't be happy'' if his son wrote such words but "I wouldn't criminalize free expression. . . . I don't think it's going to hold up criminally.''

I'll take back what I said about the teacher--she probably should have reported it, though I'm assuming she did not think the kid would be arrested (and I still say that's a grotesque over-reaction). Had this kid ever done something to himself or others and it came out that he was making necrophilia references in class and they were ignored...

Still, when you tell kids not to censor themselves, in my opinion, you pretty much have to take what you get. You set the rules, you gotta live with them.

I gota say, if I were that kid or his parents, I would sure be hoping for better references than former members of the Weather Underground.

Here's the next shoe to drop (at least it's a caterpillar -- there's plenty more shoes where that came from):

My congresscritter, Mark Kirk (IL 10th), is supporting legislation to permit teacher to search students bags and lockers, if, *in their professional opinion* (cough) they suspect a weapon may be present.

So much for protection from search and seizure, miranda warnings, etc.

The last couple of places I've worked had signs up that warned you that, upon entering, you and your belongings could be subject to search. I see no reason why schools should be any different -- inside the school buildings, of course.

Megan,

I'm really not sure if the other kid got in trouble. The idea of what happened to his daughter was so stupid that I never bothered to ask about the other kid.

"In our New-Age police state, the other month police TASERED a FIVE year old, who got upset and was throwing chairs."

Ok, that's over the top. There was a incident with a five year old getting hit with a Taser a little while ago that was justified, but that involved a mentally disturbed five year old trashing a room and then threatening to harm himself with a shard of broken glass. There was no safe way to approach the kid, so the Taser became the safest way to disarm the kid. But just because the kid is throwing chairs? I'm sorry, but there's no five year old that can throw a chair hard enough or far enough to scare me enough to use anything but my hands to swat the chair away.

"My understanding is that all states have the right to institutionalize anyone they deem unfit for independence. They don't issue tickets -- they send the cops to pick you up."

"This case seems to be counter to the spirit of the conventional understanding of disorderly conduct. As a (perhaps the only) means for the state to bring a kid to a psych eval, the false arrest will probably be overlooked."

The problem here is that most, if not all, states have some version of a TDO (Temporary Detention Order) to deal with mentally unstable individuals. I don't know how Illinois does it, but I can get Crisis to come and pick up any mentally disturbed subject on the street that is a danger to themselves or to others without issuing any charges. If this was an attempt to institutionalize a mentally or emotionally disturbed subject (again, pointing out that I'm not up on my Illinois law) they shouldn't need to bring about criminal charges like these.

Anybody from that area or with knowledgeable friends from that area that can point out exactly how they handle it there?

"PAD, I'll go so far as to predict the next step -- the removal of already published writings from school libraries, on the presumption that the ideas expressed might feed and foster any latent hostilities buried in the personalities of the students."

Damn R.J., where have you been? That's been quietly and occasionally not so quietly going on for some time over reason including violence, racism, and whatever the flavor of the month is for the local PC Police.

"At my school principals are trained in those procedures."

What do they train you to do? Just professional curiosity. We get very little training that is small child specific outside of CPR for toddlers. With the large number of schools that will be sending classes to flood Downtown Richmond this year, it might be something that our department should look in to if it's not just duplicating some of our standard stuff.

"If you think the only possible way to touch a child, you need help."

I would now like to issue a terse no comment at this point.

"However, the father would not comment on whether he believed authorities acted quickly because his son is of Asian heritage, as was the Virginia Tech campus shooter."

Huh, call me dense as a rock, but I didn't even connect the the name "Lee" to "Asian" last night. That's an interesting twist to add in.

"A second disorderly count accuses Lee of alarming first-year teacher Nora Capron by writing that "as a teacher, don't be surprised on [sic] inspiring the first CG shooting,'' an apparent reference to Cary-Grove High."

I would like to see this entire paragraph from Lee's writings. As a partial quote, it would seem to actually conflict with the police's initial statement of containing no threatening statements referencing real persons or places. The complete quote in context would be better to make a judgment from.

"Still, when you tell kids not to censor themselves, in my opinion, you pretty much have to take what you get."

Yeah, my 10th grade English teacher learned real fast to give that particular class specific guidelines when issuing such assignments to the class. The first time that she gave us a creative writing assignment without them... Lets just say that Carpenter, Romero, King and Lovecraft would have been proud. She was of course mortified and deeply "disturbed" by our work.

That class was probably the best grouping of students in one class that I ever had in school. I think we retired that poor teacher though.

Devil's Advocate

With him being 18, and knowing what was just in the news (assuming, of course), then my guess is he probably knew that it was inappropriate right now. Does he have the right to write it? Yes, but I think a little rebel in him was his guardian angel for the production. Thank you for the more in depth coverage of the situation, Bill. Should he have been arrested? Probably not, but with the contents revealed, I think he knew he was looking for some trouble

"My congresscritter, Mark Kirk (IL 10th), is supporting legislation to permit teacher to search students bags and lockers, if, *in their professional opinion* (cough) they suspect a weapon may be present."

Lockers don't fall under "search and seizure, miranda warnings, etc." protections as you, and your critter, seem to believe. The lockers belong to the school and are therefore the schools to do with as they please. That's been established to the Federal level already.

"Student bags" may or may not be covered. The schools I went to had a waver that parents signed that basically said that students' backpacks, bags and purses could be checked on site by school officials if the student had done or was suspecting of doing something that violated school policies (theft, weapons, drugs, prohibited items, etc.) and I'm not sure how widespread that is or if that has ever gone to the State or Federal Courts before.

Any of the active teachers (Thanks R.J.) wanna enlighten me as to their district's policies?

Seeing the assignment, it's like entrapment...be creative, write freely what comes to mind DON'T CENSOR YOURSELF.

Because we want to arrest you for the thoughts we encouraged you to write down.

In need of good counseling? Sure, counsel him to not listen to what he's told is the assignment.

Over-reaction is the least of the words that comes to mind. One comment on the Trib's site says something like "and if this kid had just shot up a school, we'd all be asking why something wasn't done earlier." Which is of course the knee-JERK reaction. Point being, yeah, maybe the teacher talks to the parents about the writings, certainly talks to the student, maybe brings in the school counselor to determine if there's more than just this one creative writing assignment indicating there might be a problem. And find out there isn't, and have that be the end of it.

Instead, he gets arrested for essentially writing out his thoughts. Literally, thought police in action.

Bobb Alfred said: Seeing the assignment, it's like entrapment...be creative, write freely what comes to mind DON'T CENSOR YOURSELF.

Because we want to arrest you for the thoughts we encouraged you to write down.

It was mentioned that this is a first year teacher, so in all likelihood she didn't consider what she was unleashing. She screwed up, but once she had, she was obligated to report what she read. It NEVER should have reached the point where the police were called, though, unless there were specific threats to do harm to others or himself.

Mike: Well, how do a group of new-age police-state adults apprehend a 5 year old so that the parents won't sue? Pepper spray? That bottle of chloroform cops like to keep handy? Grabbing her like that uncle who forces her to keep secrets from Mommy and Daddy?

There was a news story within the last few years where the police demonstrated a taser in a primary school on a student-volunteer. If the state of mind of the police is such that tasering poses the least risk of harm, that's something they can take to a judge if the parents sue.

If the state of mind of the police is priority 1 is not getting sued, then priorities are way out of whack. Too much deference is being given to stupid lawsuits, or the risk of suits. When a cop moves in to restrain an out of control 5-year-old by, say, grabbing their arm and holding them tight and the parents then sue for police brutality, the courts should seriously tend to side with the cop and laugh the parents who have failed to raise their kid well out of court. This isn't to say that police should be given free rein and if they overstep the bounds of using only the reasonable amount of force (and tasers on a child are not reasonable) they should be smacked for it.

But when I can be sued by the burglar who slipped on the ice in my yard as they were tying to jimmy my window, when independent farmer can get sued for patent infringement by Monsanto because Monsanto's genetically-modified grains blew into his fields. Something is seriously wrong about the validity that is being given to things that really should be dismissed out of hand.

Are any of you surprised? I'm not.

We better take care what we say here, we can be arrested for being... noisy. (sarcasm in case someone gets this the wrong way and decides to file a complaint against me.)

From
one news story on this:

The youth's father said his son was not suspended or expelled but was forced to attend classes elsewhere for now.

So he's too dangerous to have at our school, but it's okay for him to be at yours?

Imagine what would have happened if young Stephen King wrote and published "Rage" right after The Kent State Massacre or Columbine or...Virginia Tech?

Let's not confuse what's all right at school with what's all right to do elsewhere (own time). When I was in fifth grade (many years ago), I knew it was wrong to include the word "whore" in my story, but I did it anyways and got in trouble. I never remember thinking it was okay to do anything sexually explicit for any school project. The kid had to have known he would get some sort of backlash...and I'm not saying the authorities needed to be involved

I just read another article about this, that aside of a few quotes from the essay, included some comments from the kid himself.

Was he stupid to write this? Definitely, he even admits this.

Was the writing disturbing, hell yes, he'll admit that too, see previously mentioned stupidity.

Should he have been arrested for it?

No!

What should have happened was for the principal and possibly a guidance counseller, to talk to his parents, to discuss with him why his writings were so disturbing and so on.

But to arrest him like this won't help the kid, it won't help his fellow students and it won't help the school.

From the looks of it, a few friends of him seem to have gotten away with previous disturbing responses to assignments, and I guess he probably thought nothing would come out of it.

(apparantly part of the assignment said that the teacher probably wouldn't even read the essays.)

http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2007/04/26/news/local/doc4630304f12dd7798473383.txt

New stuff from what he wrote.

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18353425/>1=9246

I'm not sure if anyone has put up a link to the actual essay, yet. apologies if they have.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070426student-essay,1,6366371.story??track=sto-relcon&coll=chi-news-hed&ctrack=2&cset=true

Not that it should matter what was written. People overreacted. period. But after reading it, i can't even understand why they did. The subject isn't exactly sunshine and flowers. Okay frankly its a little strange and definitely gross in places. But i don't find it that alarming. Maybe that means i should be locked up too?

> What we have here is a scary surface story, let's hope the meat behind it, isn't as scary as it appears.

What's really scary is that we're not being shown the 'evidence'. We're expected to meekly take their word for it.

Say what?!

This isn't like some terrorist investigation where someone is arrested but the evidence is concealed because it draws on other, ongoing investigations.

(OK, reading further shows they've finally released SOME of it. But why not ALL of it???)

>"In our New-Age police state, the other month police TASERED a FIVE year old, who got upset and was throwing chairs."

Surprised? I'm [sadly] not. I dated a teacher for a couple of years and she was on the verge of quitting the profession in frustration with the STUPID rules she was saddled with. As examples ... At the time she was teaching grade school kids, often grades 1-3 and she'd run into a child who, for one reason or another, was very sad/depressed and clearly needed comforting. But, though her every instinct was to give the kid a friendly, comforting hug, she had to remain at arm's length because the school feared sex abuse lawsuits. Or, some kid would throw up and she couldn't do anything about it until another teacher was brought in to witness that she wasn't doing anything inappropriate with the kid while cleaning him (or her) up.

How sick is that?

No wonder schools prefer to have the cops handle the problem.

Starwolf: What's really scary is that we're not being shown the 'evidence'. We're expected to meekly take their word for it.

With all due respect, unless this goes to trial and "we" are on the jury, it doesn't matter a fig what "we" think. God help us if we start determining due process like the home audience for American Idol.

Bill Mulligan wrote

They do when the rainbow is on a teletubby. That seems to bring out a big hullabaloo.

Has anyone even mentioned whether or not the student is Korean? His last name is Lee, so there's a very good chance that he was Korean and that the police were racial profiling.

Agh. the attribute did not paste
That should have read:

Bill Mulligan wrote:

He should have just written about people smiling, dogs running, rainbows. They don't have meetings about rainbows.

And I said:

They do when the rainbow is on a teletubby. That seems to bring out a big hullabaloo.

Korea,

One news story points out that his father came over from China 30 some years ago.

The student could very well have written a story that was one part Battle Royal, one part Zombi 2 and one part Debbie Does Dallas with absolutely no redeeming social qualities whatsoever and it would make absolutely zero difference.

You know, that could be the premise for the greatest movie ever made!

My congresscritter, Mark Kirk (IL 10th), is supporting legislation to permit teacher to search students bags and lockers, if, *in their professional opinion* (cough) they suspect a weapon may be present.

So much for protection from search and seizure, miranda warnings, etc.

I think the schools can already search lockers any time they wish--they are school property. Students are only using them, at the school's discretion.

With bookbaghs it's trickier. As an aside, today's bookbags are of a size that would easily allow a mid sized thermonuclear device to be hidden. If Saddam really DID have WMD I'm pretty sure they were taken out of the country in bookbags. Anyway, we have to have a valid reason to search one. I see a kid slip a gun into his bookbag I yell out "Hey, buttmunch! Hand over that gun right now and no backtalk!" Ha ha, no, actually I don't do anything of the sort, since my next line would be something like "Hey, mofo, that hurt!" I would call up the resource officer and use pig latin to el-tay im-hey about the un-gay.

If we don't see it we are SOL. We can bring in Sniffy, the drug sniffing Dog and if he reacts that is considered valid reason.Otherwise we need a witness.

The dream police/They live inside of my head/The dream police/They come to me in my bed/The dream police/They're coming to arrest me, oh no... --Cheap Trick, "Dream Police."

I have a horrible feeling that one day, when I'm in my sixties (43 now), I'm going to be talking to someone born right about now and wistfully saying how much I miss America.

Oh, and just because I've been thinking it a lot lately: Whenever there's a Columbine or VA Tech or other situation where a teenager goes batshit crazy and kills a bunch of people, we inevitably hear about how abused he was, and what an outcast he was. I have yet to read about any of them having had to endure one-tenth of the peer abuse I lived with from September to June from second grade through the end of high school. I'm not going to go into detail, but it was pretty goddamn bad and the administration was no help at all. My thoughts of revenge were limited to thinking, "Gee, I'd really like it if I could hurt that guy without getting my ass kicked." And then I graduated, and went out into the real world, and never had to deal with daily abuse again. Imagine that.

:: There was a incident with a five year old getting hit with a Taser a little while ago that was justified, but that involved a mentally disturbed five year old trashing a room and then threatening to harm himself with a shard of broken glass. There was no safe way to approach the kid, so the Taser became the safest way to disarm the kid.

Nope. Sorry. It's called Physical Management Training, and the police have had it. No excuses. If anyone in the mental health field did that, it would be blasted as abuse from every headline. We have to go to court to put a padded glove on a kid who's tearing out chunks of hand with his teeth, because it's a restraint and any restraint is abusive. I've taken down 6-foot teens with weapons, and autistics bent on suicide. On a five year old, you either get them in a basket hold (the safest way), or two people approach from the sides and grab above the wrist and elbow. It's safe, harmless, and legal in emergencies. Never, ever, ever a taser. They're lucky the kid didn't die. I've yet to see a video where a taser was justified vs. the risk of cardiac shock.

When I was in high school, one of my teachers told a story about an incident that took place back in the 1960s or 1970s:

As the story goes, he was teaching a speech class; and on a particular day when the class was to give their assigned speeches, one student showed up with a gun, pointed it at the teacher and ranted and raved about one thing or another. And then, just when it seemed certain he'd pull the trigger....

he set aside the gun and went into his speech.

I don't recall what the teacher said the speech was about, but since the "confrontation" had been arranged between the two of them, it must have had some connection with the topic. Maybe it concerned the ease with which people could get guns. Anyway, I trust the principal was in on the act, too; And, so far as I know, there was no fallout from that bit of mutual acting. But can you imagine what would happen if they did that today? It's a private, independent school, so there's neither a school board nor a diocese to lower the boom; but you could count on a police investigation; threats of lawsuits (if not actual filings of same); the involvement of various camera-loving special interest groups; and, of course, negative publicity blowing the matter well out of proportion.

Like I said, the incident took place before my time, but I imagine that once the kid began the actual speech, the rest of the class realized it had all been an act (and one hell of an introduction); and that when they told their parents what happened in school that day, the parents also understood it had just been a bit of theatricality.

Today? Don't count on it.

Rick

Another site at which the essay can be read:
http://nwherald.com/articles/2007/04/27/news/local/doc46323cf53fd2a594795423.txt
and it's interesting to actually see what this "straight-A student" wrote.

"Umm, yeah, what to wright [sic] about...... "
"...so whoever gets there [sic] name on the Ballet [sic]... "

It does make me wonder how the C students do at this school.

Also:
"My current English teacher is a control freak intent on setting a gap between herself and her students like a 63 year old white male fortune 500 company CEO, and a illegal immigrant ... wtf is her problem. ... as a teacher, don’t be surprised on inspiring the first cg shooting."

The news reports quoted police as saying the essay caontained no specific threats. Seems to me that the English teacher would have some reason to be concerned.

Rick Keating: As the story goes, he was teaching a speech class; and on a particular day when the class was to give their assigned speeches, one student showed up with a gun, pointed it at the teacher and ranted and raved about one thing or another. And then, just when it seemed certain he'd pull the trigger....

he set aside the gun and went into his speech.

I don't recall what the teacher said the speech was about, but since the "confrontation" had been arranged between the two of them, it must have had some connection with the topic.

Waaay back in 6th grade (1973) we regularly had to do debates about some current topic. Should we adopt the metric system? Should the Concorde be allowed to fly? Should there be more restrictions on handguns?

I got assigned the "Yes" side of that last one. Handguns are easily concealed was one of my points and, to emphasize it, I brought a cap gun to school in my pants pocket. It was small, black, and looked just like a real gun. In the morning I told the teacher I'd like to have my debate in the afternoon session so I could carry this gun for a larger part of the day and, without batting an eye at all, he agreed.

God, could you imagine the hell to pay if any kid tried such a stunt today?

"Nope. Sorry. It's called Physical Management Training, and the police have had it. No excuses."

If you can't get near a subject, even a child, without that subject threatening to to slash open something vital a Taser is a perfectly acceptable option. The subject drops the item and you can rush the subject fast enough to keep them from hitting the ground.

"They're lucky the kid didn't die. I've yet to see a video where a taser was justified vs. the risk of cardiac shock.

Oh knock it off. Tasers have been tested so many times that it's not even an issue. Every police officer who carries a Taser has been hit by one. Every officer who instructs other officers has been hit multiple times with full five second bursts. I was hit six or seven times at various training courses in a two year period by both of the most recent generations of Taser. We're all still fine and dandy as are all the people, including people with pace-makers, who have been used to test the things.

Have there been Taser "related" deaths? Yes and no. the press loves to play up a "taser death" when one happens, but they always fail to come back and report that the findings of the investigations into those deaths have all shown that other factors (like, drug overdoses) caused the deaths.

If you put me in a position where you won't let me get closer then ten feet from you and I have to decide whether to risk letting you slash your wrist or your neck by charging you VS tagging you with a Taser when you give me the opening... You're lighting up there, Sparky.

Posted by: campchaos at April 27, 2007 07:44 PM

Nope. Sorry. It's called Physical Management Training, and the police have had it. No excuses.

You're not a police officer. Jerry Chandler is. Therefore, his word carries infinitely more weight.

Posted by: campchaos at April 27, 2007 07:44 PM

If anyone in the mental health field did that, it would be blasted as abuse from every headline.

Then it's a good thing we don't hold cops to the same rules as people in the mental health field.

Posted by: campchaos at April 27, 2007 07:44 PM

We have to go to court to put a padded glove on a kid who's tearing out chunks of hand with his teeth, because it's a restraint and any restraint is abusive. I've taken down 6-foot teens with weapons, and autistics bent on suicide.

Well, what were the circumstances? Were you faced with someone ten feet waving a weapon at you, or themselves? If so, how, praytell, did you get to them fast enough to prevent them from doing damage to you or themselves? Because frankly, if someone has a sharp object pointed at their wrist and is determined to use it to inflict self-harm, I don't know anyone -- ANYONE -- who is fast enough to get there before they can do it.

Posted by: campchaos at April 27, 2007 07:44 PM

On a five year old, you either get them in a basket hold (the safest way), or two people approach from the sides and grab above the wrist and elbow. It's safe, harmless, and legal in emergencies.

Yeah, if the kid is kind enough to make sure there's someone behind him who can sneak up before he can slit his writsts. If everyone is in front of him ten feet or more away, THEN what do you do? Lunge at him, watch him slit his wrists, and then put him in a basket hold while he bleeds to death?

My girlfriend works at a children's detention facility and did an educational field placement at a psychiatric center. She knows all about restraint moves -- she even had to put someone in a hold herself the other day. They're not magic. People at the detention center get injured all the time performing them, and sometimes the detainees are injured as well.

Posted by: campchaos at April 27, 2007 07:44 PM

Never, ever, ever a taser.

Well, not for YOU, no. But you're not a trained law enforcement official.

Well, how do a group of new-age police-state adults apprehend a 5 year old so that the parents won't sue? Pepper spray? That bottle of chloroform cops like to keep handy? Grabbing her like that uncle who forces her to keep secrets from Mommy and Daddy?

If you think the only possible way to touch a child, you need help.

If you don't understand the value of sheltering a child's ability to establish a boundary -- to say "no" -- you should minimize your time with children.

If you don't understand the value of sheltering a child's ability to establish a boundary -- to say "no" -- you should minimize your time with children.

A pedophile would say that.

Look campchaos, I don't want to turn this into a me VS you thing. Virginia is kinda strange laws and regs for this kind of thing. When it come to a mental subjuct, there are things I can't do that Crisis can and vice-versa. Hell, there are things the neither we nor Crisis can do that they can do at lock-up.

We train differently. One thing that my training has shown me is that you can't take a subject with a bladed weapon or the like from farther away then arms length without getting sliced yourself. You also can't move fast enough to stop a subject from slicing themselves open. We've done both set ups with training blades and it ends the same way 99 times out of 100.

I also know the Taser very well. I'm looking in to being a trainer myself and I've been doing a whole lot of study into the things history and use. I'm pretty sure that I can say that I know a whole lot more about it then you.

It's not the health risk that a lot of less informed people believe it to be. It's actually safer then most of the other less then leathal tools we have.

OC Spray? I've seen more bad reactions to that then I've seen to Tasers. Pepper spray in the face does not wear off anywhere as easily or as well as a Taser burst.

ASP? Yeah, let me hit you with a steel pipe a few times and see what you think about it?

Hand to hand? Yeah, I really want to hurt some one or have them hurt me. I really want to drop some one onto the hard concrete. I really want to roll around with a guy who might have TB, AIDS or some other thing or a crazy homeless guy who has spent the last few days peeing on himself and messing his pants.

The Taser when deployed, when rarely deployed, does no harm to others and it keeps us from getting hurt as well. I see that as a good thing.

Now, it does hurt like hell when it's hitting you, but that's actually a good thing as well. I've seen guys who wanted to fight drop to the ground and spread their arms out at the first sight of a Taser. It hurt so bad that they didn't want to go through that again. I'm sure that caused a hell of a lot less damage then just about anything else you could think of.

Tasers also work good when you've got a subject on drugs. I've been in a fight with a guy that was high as hell and it was like fighting four guys who felt no pain. I've seen six or seven officers struggle with one guy who's drugged up and in a rage before. ASPs, OC Spray and hand to hand are a joke. Tasers still work. it's a better option then that other thing that always works. Well, mostly always.

I know the Taser. I know what I'm talking about. I'm not going to do a Tom Cruise and slag on mental health professionals because, like Tom, I really don't have the background, training or years of study to talk in an expert way on it. I'm just asking that you not Tom Cruise us or our tools either.

Eric, have fun.

I'm not touching this one with a 100 foot pole, but it should be a blast to watch.

Just in case everybody hasn't seen this by now, the Marines have stopped this guy from joining up because of this essay and the pending criminal charges.

http://www.comcast.net/news/national/index.jsp?cat=DOMESTIC&fn=/2007/04/27/648731.html

This kid's future plans are now trashed over a no boundaries writing assignment. I know people that got into the Marines after putting ski poles through peoples' ears during a fight, but they won't take this kid, in essence, because of class work.

I also have to say that I find it funny that the AP would let a story go out about the Marine Crops. When do you plant those? And under what phase of the moon?

No less then twenty five feet off sure in no less then ten feet of water and under a Hunter's Moon only.

You don't wanna know about what grows if you leave out that last part. I can't say much, but I will say that the last outbreak of "shark" attacks wan't everything the press led you to believe it was.

Would you arrest me for growing it, though, Jerry? And no wonder you had that sword under the tree!

I saw nothing, I know nothing and... who are you again?

If you think the only possible way to touch a child, you need help.

If you don't understand the value of sheltering a child's ability to establish a boundary -- to say "no" -- you should minimize your time with children.

A pedophile would say that.

A pedophile would say lots of things -- like what a pedophile would say.

Oprah says to give in to the child if the child doesn't feel like hugging grampa -- to nurture the child's ability to establish a boundary.

As far as your statement characterizes Oprah as a pedophile, I take no shame or embarrassment in your arbitrary attempt to -- I don't even know what you're trying to do -- hate on a guy who takes the word of the molestation victim who became the most successful broadcaster in the world.

Hey, don't pull innocent Oprah into this to justify your perversions. You are the one who some managed to go from restraining a child to fondling him. No one else brought it up.

While you may be a sick rat bastard pedophile, I do feel sorry for you. You were obviously molested as a child. It doesn't mean you shouldn't be castrated for what you want do to children now, but it does explain your repulsive desires. I recommend you get help soon.

but as a teacher, don’t be surprised on inspiring the first cg shooting.

Having read that in full context, I don't think it falls into the realm of "threat."

If you keep poking that dog with a stick, it's going to bite you.

If you keep playing with the fire, it's going to burn you.

If you keep ticking off your employees, their going to walk out of this place and leave you hanging high and dry.

If you keep doing ______, then one day _______ will one day happen.

Not very nice, more then a little crass and not something that I would ever have gotten away with saying to a teacher (dad woulda killed me) in my day, but not really a threat.

He wasn't saying that he would go on a rampage, he was saying that her... "style" of teaching was ticking students off. Not a great comment on his part, but not a threat.

The rest of it was just junk. Movies, songs and events in the news blended together with slagging on the teacher and his plans to be out of that place. It was pure SoC writng and nothing more then that.

I'd still like to have known more on his background, but based on this I'd say that all of this is a way over the top ado about nothing much at all.

they're going to walk out of this place...

Well, how do a group of new-age police-state adults apprehend a 5 year old so that the parents won't sue? Pepper spray? That bottle of chloroform cops like to keep handy? Grabbing her like that uncle who forces her to keep secrets from Mommy and Daddy?...

Oprah says to give in to the child if the child doesn't feel like hugging grampa -- to nurture the child's ability to establish a boundary.

Hey, don't pull innocent Oprah into this to justify your perversions. You are the one who some managed to go from restraining a child to fondling him. No one else brought it up.

Anyone with a basic understanding of PTSD knows that triggers of PTSD do not have to be intentional.

I used to play throwing-dummy for a Midwestern grandmother and judo black-belt who held self-defense classes at the YWCA. She started new classes by instructing each student to walk past her as she walked forward. Then she told the class to always look at people when you walk by them, because predators will choose the girls who don't look at them.

After the first class I saw her do that, she told me, "Those 3 girls who didn't look at me were molestation victims." I didn't notice any of the girls not looking at her -- and it didn't occur to me to accuse her of being a pedophile or molestation victim for noticing a vulnerability in someone I hadn't noticed.

While you may be a sick rat bastard pedophile, I do feel sorry for you. You were obviously molested as a child. It doesn't mean you shouldn't be castrated for what you want do to children now, but it does explain your repulsive desires. I recommend you get help soon.

My perversions do not depend on trampling the principle of consent, as you seem to enjoy doing.

Somewhere I've still got my old notebooks where I drew comic strips of myself and a buddy at the time going on very graphic revenge sprees against our arch-enemies at the school.

What happened when a teacher saw it? She said if I'd start drawing stuff that related to the subject she'd give me extra credit.

The end result?

I was a commercial sell-out in middle school.

These days I'd be locked away for life.

- Chris

ArcLight,

Yeah, and we used to sing songs about shooting the teacher to the tune of On Top of Old Smokey.

Between the stuff we did as parody towards other students and the stuff we directed towards teachers we disliked... I'd be in jail for life these days.

>With all due respect, unless this goes to trial and "we" are on the jury, it doesn't matter a fig what "we" think.

Irrelevant. In a Democracy, it is essential that justice not only be carried out, but be SEEN to be carried out. And how can one 'see' that when one has no way of knowing if the accusations are well-grounded, or just the product of some authority types who got up on the wrong side of the bed that morning? To be able to do that critical differentiation, you need to be in posession of all the facts. Which, until you can read the offending document for yourself, you aren't.

campchaos, ditto what Jerry said about not wanting to turn this discussion into personal combat.

It's just that knowing both a police officer and someone who did a field placement at a facility for the mentally ill, I know that you can't judge one by the other's standards. And restraint holds aren't foolproof. My girlfriend can cite multiple instances where an attempt to restrain a juvenile detainee resulted in injury to staff and/or the detainee.

This is a long one, since i went through the hundred or so posts already up and found several that stimulate me to reply:

Posted by Bladestar

Of course, they won't call it censorship, it's all about "Public Safety" and protecting "Society" and "The Children" from the mentally unbalanced and disturbed "Terrorists".

Kris Kristofferson said:

so thank your lucky stars you've got protection walk the line, and never mind the cost and dont wonder who them lawmen was protecting when they nailed the savior to the cross.

'cause the law is for protection of the people
rules are rules and any fool can see
we dont need no riddle speaking prophets
scarin' decent folks like you and me

Posted by Valerie

Actually, it looks like the teacher took the right action. In most schools, teachers are obligated to report this sort of thing to the student's advisors and the administrators. Usually, nothing becomes of it officially (and obviously, this time the administration made a very wrong call).

The teacher assigned a Creative Writing class an essay expressing strong emotion. To a class of 18-year-olds.

She's lucky she only got one that "disturbed" her.

Posted by Nat Gertler at April 26, 2007 07:15 PM

The Dean of Student Affairs banned any realistic looking weaponry from campus theater productions

"Is this a dagger I see before me?"

"No, it's a bunch."

"No, it's a pointed stick..."

Posted by Rene

I'm certainly not happy that police were called in, and I lean towards believing that it was a gross overreaction, but you DON'T know what was in the story, and you DON'T know what was going through the teacher's mind. Neither do I.

It really doesn't matter what was in the story. Even the most hideously grotesque story in the whole world does not deserve jail time. Psychological counseling, sure. Jail? Never. You can't be hurt by a story, particularly when they say there was no direct threat in the story.

Mike Diana.

Who was not only forbidden by the court to ever publish a comic book again - he was actually ordered to never draw anything again.

Wouldn't surprise me if he had been banned from ever being in the same room as a pencil or piece of paper...

(Understand, if i could ever condone burning books, Diana's "Boiled Angel" would be up there on the list...)

Posted by Jerry Chandler

There are no threats. This is massive overreaction by a teacher who will hopefully get disciplined heavily for this.

And leave us not ferget that the teacher had assigned the student to write something that expressed strong emotion.

And had apparently said profanity was okay.

I'm visualising a student turning in out-and-out pornography after an assignment like that.

Wonder if that would "disturb" the teacher.

Posted by Rex Hondo

It surprises me that a teacher could hand out an assigment like this to a room full of teenagers and get only one disturbing paper, and even more that he/she would be surprised that it happened.

I've been thinking the same thing.

Posted by Den

In our New-Age police state, the other month police TASERED a FIVE year old, who got upset and was throwing chairs.

Oh. My. God. Now that is just insane. You mean there was no other way a group of adults could restrain a five year old? WTF is wrong with these people?

No taser, but remember the five-year-old in Florida a few years ago who was handcuffed and hauled off by the cops because she refused to do something in class?

Doug Marlette did a cartoon inspired by this incident and the Florida "stand your ground" law that was in the process of being passed at about the same time, showing a teacher with a smoking gun and a little girl on the floor. Caption: "She made me nervous."

At the time i just thought of it as an amusingly snarky reductio ad absurdum of two different stupid Florida news items.

Posted by Rich Lane

It was mentioned that this is a first year teacher, so in all likelihood she didn't consider what she was unleashing.

There's a line in the book Up the Down Staircase (i have no idea if it's in the film, having never seen it), in which the p[rotagonist, writing to her college best friend/roommate says something like "..Dr. Romano's course on 'Psychology of the Adolescent'. I have met the adolescent in his natural habitat. I'm beginning to suspect Dr Romano had not."

Quoting the comment in the Northweat Herald {http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2007/04/25/news/local/doc462f202c94fa2608338443.txt}referred to (i think it's the one) above:

Swoosh wrote on April 25, 2007 11:12 AM:

"I am a student at CG and know both the teacher and student involved. First let me say that I have not read the essay so cannot comment on the specifics, but Allen is a good kid. I have been in many classes with him and he is a smart and creative kid and it doesn't surprise me that he would write this. However, I do not believe that it was a prank as his father said. As I said i dont' know the content of the paper, but if there was no direct threats I don't see what grounds this was on. As far as I know they did not talk to the student before calling the police which just blows my mind. But I will say this, knowing the teacher if there is anyone who would overreact it WOULD be her. Ultimatly this was terribly managed from the teacher and the police. I have to pose this question though Would this have been handled the same if the student was not asian? 2 weeks ago this wouldn't have gone any further than a talk from the teacher, but now after VT he is now a criminal? 2 asian kids who both wrote violent essays doesn't mean both of them are going to go shooting places up. I can only hope that this does not ruin Allen's bright future: he was planning on joining the Marines next year"

His Marine recruiter has already informed him he won't be joining the Marines (he apparently already had a contract that has now been cancelled by the Corps.)

I like this line: But I will say this, knowing the teacher if there is anyone who would overreact it WOULD be her.

And she was the one who made the assignment.

Posted by David S.

Imagine what would have happened if young Stephen King wrote and published "Rage" right after The Kent State Massacre or Columbine or...Virginia Tech?

Ever seen Targets, Peter Bogdanovich's first film? Directly inspired by Charles Whitman's Texas Tower spree. These days, it might have blighted Bogdanovich's career before it began.

And then there's Kinky Friedman's Ballad of Charles Whitman a cheerfully morbid Texas two-step-style account that includes the lines "..sittin' up there with his .36 magnum/Laughin' wildy as he bagged 'em..."

Posted by Moon Man

Let's not confuse what's all right at school with what's all right to do elsewhere (own time). When I was in fifth grade (many years ago), I knew it was wrong to include the word "whore" in my story, but I did it anyways and got in trouble. I never remember thinking it was okay to do anything sexually explicit for any school project. The kid had to have known he would get some sort of backlash...and I'm not saying the authorities needed to be involved

A couple of accounts indicate the teacher had said it was okay to use profanity. And it wasn't (by itself) the language that was the problem, but rather the content.

Posted by Paul1963

The dream police/They live inside of my head/The dream police/They come to me in my bed/The dream police/They're coming to arrest me, oh no... --Cheap Trick, "Dream Police."

"Who are the Brain police?" Zappa, 1966.

Also you might want to see if you can find Zappa's essay "The Chrome Plated Megaphone of Destiny" from We're Only in it for the Money (1967), which is also the album where Frank caught flak from Rolling Stone's reviewer for being "over the top" in the song Mom & Dad, that says

Someone said they made some noise
The cops have shot some girls and boys
You'll sit home and drink all night
They looked too wierd, it served them right,

which then ends:

Your kid was killed in the park today
Shot by the cops as she quietly lay
By the side of the creep she knew
They killed her too...

Of course, in 1967, Kent State was just a college in Ohio.

Posted by Jerry Chandler

but as a teacher, don’t be surprised on inspiring the first cg shooting.

Having read that in full context, I don't think it falls into the realm of "threat."

{snip}

Not very nice, more then a little crass and not something that I would ever have gotten away with saying to a teacher (dad woulda killed me) in my day, but not really a threat.

I once casually made a similar remark at work (in 1991) to a fellow-worker (others standing around laughd at it in context), and found myself in the HR office talking to a cop (off-duty cop who moonlighted [in uniform] as extra security at the plant) and apparently quite seriously told that Sgt Smith had considered arresting me for "terroristic threats".

{For some reason, unrelated to Peter's post or the comments thereon, i am reminded of a lovely little snarky line in one of Eisner's later "Spirit" stories "...the school psychologist, Doctor Wolfgang Worry, conducting his regular weekly book-burning..." - mainly of comics, apparently.)

Eric Butler, you began your discourse in this thread by accusing us of being "shrill." It is therefore ironic that you are now involved in a sniping match with Mike, our resident troll.

Mike is a complete idiot and a total jerk. That nevertheless doesn't justify accusing him of pedophilia. You have no grounds for making that accusation, and in by leveling unfounded accusations at Mike you are acting no better than he.

Were I you, Eric, I'd knock it off.

This sort of thing happened after Columbine, too.

" Alex B. at April 27, 2007 09:57 AM "

It's the policy at both the Primary and High Schools that my children did/are attending.

My perversions do not depend on trampling the principle of consent, as you seem to enjoy doing.

I think that's the motto for NAMBLA, isn't it?

Hey, take it out on me all you want. Every minute you're typing is one that you aren't out at the playground asking kids to help you find your lost puppy.

Eric Butler, Bill Myers is right. We all know that Mike is a troll, officially and idiot, and possibly even not in command of all his mental faculties. But accusations of pedophilia should not be leveled lightly or jokingly. Conversation with Mike is not only frustrating, but completely futile (if you expect serious conversation). And they never end. But you should refrain from venting your frustration by such accusations. It is cras.

No, I'm not a policeofficer, and don't pretend to be one. That's a job I could never do, and Kudos to those who can. No one knows all the details in the case, so no one can claim victory in post-analyzing it.
The kids I work/worked with never had the courtesy of a detention center or a mainstream school. Some were drugged and locked up from the age of two, but they could be managed. I stand by my original statement: short of a flamethrower, or perhaps a loaded gun or a WMD, there is no need to taser a preschooler.

My perversions do not depend on trampling the principle of consent, as you seem to enjoy doing.

I think that's the motto for NAMBLA, isn't it?

Hey, take it out on me all you want. Every minute you're typing is one that you aren't out at the playground asking kids to help you find your lost puppy.

As children cannot consent to sex, NAMBLA tramples on the principle of consent -- which makes them more like you than like me.

Eric, it looks as though you aren't going to listen to good advice, but here goes: don't get into a "who's the bigger pedophile" argument with Mike. Mike is a jerk, nutty as a pet raccoon and The Official Idiot of Paterdavid.net. Engaging in this kind of fight with him will only do what has heretofore been almost impossible--you'll actually end up making some of us have to stick up for him (and we'll undoubtedly do a better job of it than he can, poor sap).

Flame wars can be ugly but there ought to be a line not to be crossed and pedophilia seems a better place than most to put that line. Mike's post was creepy but in no way evidence of anything so horrible as that. His replies are equally wrong but, in his defense, A-you started it and B-he can't help it.

If you really want to make Mike look bad, just hang around for a while and make some perfectly reasonable observations--compliment Kurt Vonnegut for example or, I don't know, claim the sky is often blue, it won't take much.

But this is making you at least as bad as him, if not worse.

Calling someone a pedophile without cause is at the very least flirting with libel or slander. But, as Wolverine-as-penned-by-Chris-Claremont used to say... your choice, your consequence.

"your choice, your consequence."

That's not much of a deterrent, since the consequences would be the same had he made a perfectly sensible point. But it's still wrong.

A a general rule people should refrain from calling each other pedophiles and Nazis, and should be very cautious about calling them racists or traitors.

----------------

"claim the sky is often blue."

That's a straw man, he never claimed that the sky is blue. Jerry Chandler did (see link to a picture Jerry drew in kindergardnen in which he clearly used the purple crayon, and a link to a dictionary defining the word 'often') ;)

Hell Eric, just tell Mike that you agree to disagree. It's amazing the mileage that you can get out of that.

But if Eric doesn't take anyone's advice here:

I've got May 3rd in the betting pool on when the Poisonous Pedophilia Polemic Problems invite an intervention by the management and kill an otherwise interesting thread.

Ok campchaos. I guess we're agreeing to disagree at this point.

"My perversions do not depend on trampling the principle of consent, as you seem to enjoy doing.

I think that's the motto for NAMBLA, isn't it?

Hey, take it out on me all you want. Every minute you're typing is one that you aren't out at the playground asking kids to help you find your lost puppy."

Yeah, okay, Eric, you need to knock this shit off now. What you're posting right here? The pedophilia thing? It's libel. End it now.

PAD

Posted by: Micha at April 28, 2007 10:40 AM

That's not much of a deterrent, since the consequences would be the same had he made a perfectly sensible point.

Uh... no. Libel can have legal consequences.

Now that we know what the kid actually wrote, I feel less sorry for him and it actually seems like he made some sort of indirect threat to the teacher. That thing about saying she would inspire a shooting?

But (and granted that I'm saying this from a distance), this kid doesn't look like the next Cho to me. He doesn't look crazy. He rather looks like a garden-variety immature jerk that thought it would be so cool to see how much he could freak out the new teacher. Looks more like a bad taste prank to me.

Even with that line about the teacher in the paper, this could have been dealt with without calling the cops, in my oppinion. But it's America, so everything must become a lawsuit.

How can you libel a anoymous poster?

"How can you libel a (sic) anoymous (sic) poster?"

In the real world legal system, you can't. But here: I am the law. Random insults are one thing. The line I draw is where the real world would draw the line. Case closed...as this thread will be if Eric's line of commentary continues.

PAD

Posted by: campchaos at April 28, 2007 08:11 AM

No, I'm not a policeofficer, and don't pretend to be one.

I never said you "pretended" to be a cop. But you are second-guessing a police officer. In a nation where the police are part of a government that is, at least in theory, "of the people, by the people, and for the people," asking questions about whether a police officer acted properly is legitimate. But you're doing more than asking questions -- you're drawing conclusions based on scant evidence and declaring, "I've heard all I needs to know, I don't needs to know no more."

Posted by: campchaos at April 28, 2007 08:11 AM

That's a job I could never do, and Kudos to those who can. No one knows all the details in the case, so no one can claim victory in post-analyzing it.

Uhm, okay... on the one hand you're saying we can't analyze this without all the details and yet on the other hand you're doing just that. Well, which is it, then? Can we analyze it without all the details, or can we?

Posted by: campchaos at April 28, 2007 08:11 AM

The kids I work/worked with never had the courtesy of a detention center or a mainstream school. Some were drugged and locked up from the age of two, but they could be managed.

Wow. Either the children's detention facilities in your area are a lot nicer than the one where my girlfriend works... or you're drawing conclusions based on pre-conceived notions.

One of the kids brought to the facility at which my girlfriend is employed was a mentally disturbed ten-year-old who didn't want to go to the hospital. To protest, he began screaming at the top of his lungs, dropped a load of feces in his shorts, and began smearing said feces all over the walls of his room.

And that's but one example. Many of the kids who end up in this detention facility have suffered extreme abuse and neglect. Many of them have mental illnesses that go untreated until they lash out badly enough to end up in detention. Oh, and some of them... some of them are rapists and murderers.

So when you refer to the "courtesy" of a detention facility, you know not whereof you speak. You really don't.

Moreover, as I said, my girlfriend just wrapped up a field placement at the local psychiatric center as part of her MSW program. She's told me some harrowing stories.

Based on her input, I can say with confidence that the holds used to restrain people without injuring them are not foolproof. I don't care what your individual experiences have been, as the tales my girlfriend has related to me comprise the aggregate experiences of many people at her place of work over a number of years. People can and DO get injured performing restraints -- both the restrainers and the restrainees.

Posted by: campchaos at April 28, 2007 08:11 AM

I stand by my original statement: short of a flamethrower, or perhaps a loaded gun or a WMD, there is no need to taser a preschooler.

You can stand by it to your heart's content. Personally, I prefer to recognize that all knowledge begins with the statement, "I don't know." And without more details about the incident in question, I cannot tell you whether there was a need to taser the preschooler or not.

I suppose this won't help sway you, but I've gotten to know Jerry pretty well. We've talked on the phone a few times and I can tell you he's extremely level-headed, intelligent, and compassionate. He'd HAVE to be in order to have engaged in coversations with me and not concluded them by swearing at me and hanging up. If he says there are situations where tasering a preschooler may be the only option to preserve said preschooler's life... well, knowing Jerry as I do that carries a lot of weight.

Couldn't you just inflict punishment in the form of a month long Disemvowelling of him instead? This thread's actually pretty interesting and running along, certain parties excluded, pretty civilly.

Thanks Bill.

"Posted by: Bill Myers at April 28, 2007 12:07 PM :
Posted by: Micha at April 28, 2007 10:40 AM

That's not much of a deterrent, since the consequences would be the same had he made a perfectly sensible point.

Uh... no. Libel can have legal consequences."

I didn't consider legal consequences to be a realistic event in these circumstances. So, until PAD stepped in, the only likely consequences seemed to me to be the continuation of the argument.

In general I prefer people refrain from doing things because they are wrong and not for fear of consequences. Obviously, that's not always possible.