Bolding is mine, so…I ask again, what are you trying to say? In your opinion how is race relevant in this situation unless you are offering it as mitigation for the teachers actions? I ask because I’d like to know what you think.
You seem somehow reluctant to clearly state that the teachers actions were unjustified and you certainly haven’t condemned what they did.
The strongest thing you’ve said is that you “don’t agree” with the teacher’s response. And with one breath you (quite correctly) say that you’ve never justified his actions, with the other you play the race card. You could of course state unambiguously that you think the actions were unjustified and clear up any doubts but you seem unwilling to do that and I can’t help but be curious as to why that is.
In bald terms you refuse to condemn the actions of a teacher beating up a 14 year old kid who insulted him. You can take that position if you like but if you do it is because you see some justification. As it stands you seem to want to have it both ways.
To be honest, I’m also very confused by Novelty Bobble’s reading of your posts. I don’t see anything controversial that you’ve said, and you seem to be agreeing with the general gist of “teacher screwed up” which several posters in this thread actually disagreed with, somehow.
Irrespective of anything else, this was an old man being attacked by someone in the prime of his youth. Nothing excuses such reprehensible behavior.
I’m not going into bad/worse: I’d call the behavior unprofessional from the teacher and potentially criminal on both sides, but I’m not making a moral judgement with the ‘criminal’ tag: criminality is what is decided by the courts.
I think you forgot the sailor. But all jokes aside, you genuinely wonder why the same sort of adolescents and young adults that are willing to attack a teacher somehow end up getting shot by the police. Baltimore teacher just got punched in the face by a student. She wisely just took it.:rolleyes:
Not controversial, just weasel-worded, unclear and trying to play the race card while retaining plausible deniability that that is what they are doing.
I’m pushing Sparky to actually condemn what the teacher did. Not just say that they “don’t agree” with what they did or observe that “you can’t put your hands on a student”.
I think Sparky believes the insults used were in some way justification or mitigation for what the teacher did and they are very carefully avoiding admitting that. I believe that based on what they’ve written and also what they’ve carefully not written. I could be wrong about all of that but it is trivially easy to set me straight.
I express myself unclearly, we all do, and sometimes leave some room for ambiguity but If my poor sentence construction, phrasing or word choice accidentally gave people the wrong impression then I’d state my position very clearly to avoid any doubt. I’ve asked Sparky to clarify to their position in very clear words, they choose not to, I’ll draw my own conclusions from that.
Last time I checked, this is IMHO not GD or the Pit. I will not be “pushed” into agreeing with your line of thinking whether we agree or disagree. I do not have to explain or justify myself to you. You want me to condemn the man, I choose not to use your vocabulary.
For the others paying attention, I still do not condone or justify physical violence against any anyone, let alone a minor.
Already referred to it. At no point do you say the teacher was wrong to assault the student.
I know you don’t. I think that is because you still want to allow yourself wiggle room to have some sympathy for the teacher because of the racial abuse he suffered. Correct me if I’m wrong.
You still haven’t clearly said what, to you, is the relevance of the racial abuse in this case. You brought it up and haven’t explained it. It is either “relevant” in which case please explain. Or it is “irrelevant” in which case you agree with me that he had no justification for what he did.
It’s OK, you can say it out loud.
That sounds like what a politician would say when they don’t want to comment on a specific position. you can almost hear the unspoken “but…” on the end.
Still can’t bring yourself to say he was completely in the wrong can you?
Can’t you use language that refers to this specific case rather in the abstract?
OK, Novelty Bobble, drop it. You’ve made it clear that you think Sparky812’s statement is ambiguous. Sparky812 has expressed a lack of desire to do anything more to clarify that for you. Since this is not, in fact, Great Debates, let’s not tie this thread up in that conversation any further.
Draw whatever conclusion you feel comfortable drawing, but let it go and let the thread move on.
I think it is a mistake to limit it just to young black men. Most people who are shot by the police are “at fault” on some level.
Look at the various websites tracking police shootings here or here. Unsurprisingly
Cite. IMHO committing a violent crime is a common-sense definition of being “at fault” when someone gets shot.
I think octopus’ point is that people, especially young men, who grow up without the long term presence of a father in their lives tend to have greater problems dealing with authority. They get away with being defiant at home, they get away with being defiant at school, then they run into the police and find out they don’t get away with it as much.
I think it’s a mistake to link what happened at the school to police shootings at all, no matter how widely one wishes to cast the “victim-blaming” net.
It’s neat how you bring race into something where I never did so you could “insinuate” what exactly? :rolleyes:
Did I mention any characteristic such as race, gender, sexuality, or religion? Oh no. No I didn’t. Yet your post is making a very ugly accusation. “The same sort” refers to behavior. Behavior that is properly curbed before people have an ugly interaction with the police or someone else who might use force or lethal force.
If my post was as you insinuated do you honestly think I’d be taking the side of the teacher? :dubious:
Not once, in any thread, have I written in support of extrajudicial violence. Violence that many on this board have encouraged with regard to freedom of speech and assembly. Violence on prisoners. Even prisoners convicted of heinous crimes. I believe in due process and I don’t think the state should sanction even implicitly sadistic behavior.
However, throw a ball at someone, act very aggressively, and start lobbing racial slurs at someone and I feel that they have the right to defend themselves with reasonable force. I thought the teacher didn’t cross a line although maybe he did. But I wanted to make a bigger statement and that statement is that in the real world we have agents of the state that can and will shoot you for what that student did. And it doesn’t matter if the person is white black or striped. There was a video of a white man trying his best to follow police instructions in a hotel but he got shot.
Before my kids start driving, even though they are very well behaved, I’m going to show them some videos of police interactions gone wrong. Why? Because the consequences are so severe and unlike teachers or practically anyone else the police don’t have to take your nonsense and that’s a hard lesson to learn when the guns are drawn and the harshest discipline you had prior was a “time-out”.
Point is, don’t be so quick to jump to conclusions.
The law is clear that mere words/insults are not sufficient to provoke a battery. Likewise, even if legal in California, this is clearly excessive for corporal punishment.
But I agree with Shodan. This event escalated because the teacher did not show consistent authority once he told the student to leave class. He allowed the boy to stand there and lip off to him until the teacher was unable to control himself or the situation.
:dubious: When someone throws a basketball at you, what do you consider reasonable physical force after the throw has already happened? There are no more basketballs to be thrown, no further ball-based battery to be deterred/defended against. How is physical force at this point anything other than simple retaliation (as opposed to self-defense)?
When someone is lobbing racial slurs at you, what do you consider reasonable force? What does physical self-defense mean when the attack is entirely verbal?
If you thought the teacher didn’t cross the line with 30 blows to the head, then holy shit, where do you suppose the line is?
Well the kid stood there acting the fool and doing a monologue about how much he hated the teacher and loved all the attention he was getting and the teacher lost it.
If you have never worked in a public school, dont criticize.
Again, the problem is situational. IF the teacher knew the kid was going to be given a REAL punishment for bad behavior, he would not have lost it.
I’d bet this kid has done this numerous times and ALWAYS got away with it.
