# This young boy died because boot camps are considered "tough love" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 13, 2006, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552 "2006-04-13T18:10:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2006, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/101 "2006-04-16T21:16:01Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > Furthermore, we cannot condemn the officers because they were functioning in a boot camp. The law allows it, right or wrong, and henceforth, making the young man participate means that these officers were acting under the color of law. I disagree strongly with that. An act can be immoral and condemnable even if it’s legal. Unless you ment “condemned” strictly from a legal standpoint. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2006, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/102 "2006-04-16T21:22:24Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > Part of fighting ignorance is getting all the facts. No one here has interviewed the witnesses, reviewed all the evidence, etc… > > My husband, who is tasked with reviewing use of force tapes as a part of his job, watched this tape. For the record, he and I don’t suppport “boot camps” because studies have shown their effectiveness to be marginal, at best. > > From this tape it would be very hard to determine a crime. What it appears to be is attempts by officers to move a subject who they believed was being passively resistant. Therein is the crux of the matter. Apparently, the child was in medical distress, BUT we don’t know what was being said. The young man could have been saying “fuck you, I aint going no where”. At that point, it would be easy to assume that the officers thought he was resisting. The slaps on the arm were likely attempts to turn the elbow, ie. force the joint into a submissive posture. The method used was not a good method. It is better to apply twisting force to move a joint, rather than a sharp blow. > > However, as my husband viewed the tape, he became very suspicious of a “passive resister”. Even if the officers thought he was resisting, the video seems to show enough to suggest the nurse should have been examining him earlier. Once he was controlled in a subdued position, he could have been checked and then maybe the vitals would have demonstrated a need for more medical attention. > > Nonetheless, Bricker is right. We cannot conclude that there are wrongful acts from the video alone. Furthermore, we cannot condemn the officers because they were functioning in a boot camp. The law allows it, right or wrong, and henceforth, making the young man participate means that these officers were acting under the color of law. > > If he died of suffocation, likely it was exacerbated by positional asphyxiation because alot of the tape does show force being placed on him with his face down on the ground or arms behind the back. > > This is a tragedy, nonetheless, that IMHO could have been averted by using a different form of punishment rather than a boot camp. **Thank you** for a **reasoned analysis** of the evidence at hand. A quick comment: **Bricker** does not deserve the calumny being heaped on him here. But he does deserve some. At absolute minimum, I cannot see how anyone with even my layman’s knowledge of the law who could view this and not see in it grounds for a “wrongful death” tort, given the evidence of the tape and the known outcome of the boy’s dying. No, it may not be grounds for a murder or even manslaughter conviction. It might be grounds for criminally negligent homicide, given the circumstances: if the boy is in their custody, they are **obliged** to know any relevant medical issues **before** administering whatever discipline they seem to feel is needed. By parallel, making a healthy 16 year old boy do a five-mile run may be legitimate practice on the part of a phys. ed. teacher. Making a healthy 16 year old _asthmatic_ boy do the same thing would be abuse, pure and simple, on grounds I don’t think I need to explain. **Bricker** focused on the people decrying “They oughta string those guys up for murder” – but in doing so, needlessly painted himself in a corner over reasonable legal consequences for an institution having custody over a youth, or employees of such institution authorized to use force over youths in custody. If he’s going to represent himself as an authority on the law on this board, it’s incumbent on him to take the **whole** law into account. And willy-nilly, that’s what he’s done: set himself up as an authority in a specialized field here. I’ll trust **Podkayne** on an issue of stellar evolution or **Johanna** on an issue of glottochronology, because they’re experts in those fields – but they better not be palming some fringe interpretation off as the consensus wisdom of experts in the field. Likewise, **Bricker** has the option of expressing an opinion as a layman, or of functioning as an authority on the law. But not at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2006, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/103 "2006-04-16T21:31:54Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > Furthermore, we cannot condemn the officers because they were functioning in a boot camp. The law allows it, right or wrong, and henceforth, making the young man participate means that these officers were acting under the color of law. As said above legal is not the same as moral. If the law demands a rape victim be executed for fornication, does that make it right ? Of course not. I’ll condemn any behavior I think is wrong, legal or not. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2006, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/104 "2006-04-16T21:45:32Z")
Did you miss this, **Poly**?: > [@Bricker](#): > > You’re exactly right: right now, with the evidence in front of me, I do NOT see this as horrible and wrong. If the kid died of complications from a genetic blood disorder, then blaming the camp for his death is absurd. Nothing I saw on that tape strikes me as over-the-top punishment for a teenager who stole a car. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2006, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/105 "2006-04-16T23:13:16Z")
Great. What I thought was a punch to the solar plexus may have been them grabbing him. Can’t tell from the video. I hope they have better eyewitnesses. ---
**Author:** ![Hostile\_Dialect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e495f1/32.png) [@Hostile\_Dialect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hostile_Dialect)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2006, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/106 "2006-04-16T23:57:56Z")
> [@Snowboarder Bo](#): > > Actually, you’re wrong…It is not something that is misleading or unknown to the masses in the US. Actually, you’re not even arguing against my point. I never claimed that the camp was called “Panama Whatever County Sheriff Torture Camp”; that was a snarky name I gave to it because I dislike its principles and its apparent disregard for the sanctity of life. Apparently I was unclear about that. My apologies. To Point 2: I don’t claim to be the most knowledgeable guy around, but I’ve never heard of these programs. Nor had I ever heard of the words “boot camp” used to describe anything other than Basic Military Training. Terrible sample size, I know, but this Doper was misled. > [@Snowboarder Bo](#): > > this isn’t where 14 year old kids go to learn how to be sheriffs, it is a correctional program for convicted youth offenders where the emphasis is (supposedly) on discipline and rigourous physical exertion, with military-like rules. Apparently you missed this part of my post: > [@fetus](#): > > If you ask me, the more basic, underlying tragedy is that 14 year olds are sent to **anything resembling** police/military/sheriff training–especially as **a punishment**. “Anything resembling” means that it’s _not_ police/military/sheriff training, it just has a strong resemblance to it, as you alluded to with the phrase “with military-like rules” in your same post which I quoted earlier. > [@Queuing](#): > > I hope you read the post from Snowboarder Bo , and know realize just how wrong you are. As much as some americans would like to think their military is sacred, that the boys can do no wrong, and all of its words and institutions are solely owned by the military, the truth is, sadly, not so. Boot camp can and does mean many things, such as in this instance. My point, which you seemed to have somehow missed is arguing about semantics is not the point of this thread. The point is a 14 year old boy died, in case you missed that too. Let’s take this point-by-point. 1. I don’t feel our military is sacred, or that the boys can do no wrong–quite the contrary, in fact. Why my political opinions, of which you’re rightfully ignorant, have been dragged into this I don’t know. 2. I don’t feel that any words or institutions are “owned” by the military. See 4. 3. I got the point quite well, thank you, and that’s not what I’m arguing about–although why 14 year olds need a county boot camp instead of, say, a prison school with a more modest physical education program, escapes me. I don’t agree with the methods used by the instructors, nor do I agree with the existence of the institution in question in the first place. 4. The words “boot camp” may be used by some people–hell, maybe a lot of people in 30 states–to refer to these institutions, but I’ve never heard anyone in California or Arizona, the states in which I’ve lived my adult life, talk about these. I didn’t know they existed. Shame on me for being ignorant, I guess, but my point is that the way I see it “boot camp” is more universally understood to mean “Basic Military Training”. I for one opened this thread expecting it to be about a 19-year-old soldier-in-training being maimed with a sack of dimes. > [@Queuing](#): > > My post is aimed only at the hijackers. The people who are trying to turn this thread into a pro/anti-military semantic arguement, rather then focus on (my percieved) point of the OP: A 14 year old boy has died in the hands of a pseudo-military institution. How anyone could find this less then outrageous is beyond me. I find it outrageous, but I certainly wasn’t participating in a pro/anti-military argument. I related my experiences in basic military training because I thought they were relevant to the discussion–I may have been wrong, but I wasn’t trying to make a pro- or anti-military point, although I guess if I had to pick one side it’d have to be anti-. My whole point is that to me “boot camp” means “basic military training” and I for one felt that I was misled. I can only conclude from the evidence presented to me that I was wrong in saying that “boot camp” exclusively means military training, but I still feel that that’s what it’s usually taken to mean. That said, I feel like I’m fighting an uphill battle that’s really not particularly important in the grand scheme of things, and that I’m not doing much here except distracting from the main point, which is–as you say–that a young child has died in a scenario that is massively wrong in every way. Thusly, I hereby withdraw and resolve to spend no more of my or anybody else’s time arguing about the phrase “boot camp”. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/107 "2006-04-17T01:44:06Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > A quick comment: **Bricker** does not deserve the calumny being heaped on him here. But he does deserve some. At absolute minimum, I cannot see how anyone with even my layman’s knowledge of the law who could view this and not see in it grounds for a “wrongful death” tort, given the evidence of the tape and the known outcome of the boy’s dying. No, it may not be grounds for a murder or even manslaughter conviction. It might be grounds for criminally negligent homicide, given the circumstances: if the boy is in their custody, they are **obliged** to know any relevant medical issues **before** administering whatever discipline they seem to feel is needed. By parallel, making a healthy 16 year old boy do a five-mile run may be legitimate practice on the part of a phys. ed. teacher. Making a healthy 16 year old _asthmatic_ boy do the same thing would be abuse, pure and simple, on grounds I don’t think I need to explain. How about making a previously healthy-seeming sixteen year old boy with a previously undiagnosed heart murmer do the five mile run? The standard is what you know, or reasonably should know. If the parents fill out a medical form and don’t indicate a medical history that raises alarms, a phys. ed. teacher does not have to run his own EKG on every kid he pushes to run the five miles. > [@](#): > > **Bricker** focused on the people decrying “They oughta string those guys up for murder” – but in doing so, needlessly painted himself in a corner over reasonable legal consequences for an institution having custody over a youth, or employees of such institution authorized to use force over youths in custody. If he’s going to represent himself as an authority on the law on this board, it’s incumbent on him to take the **whole** law into account. And willy-nilly, that’s what he’s done: set himself up as an authority in a specialized field here. I’ll trust **Podkayne** on an issue of stellar evolution or **Johanna** on an issue of glottochronology, because they’re experts in those fields – but they better not be palming some fringe interpretation off as the consensus wisdom of experts in the field. Likewise, **Bricker** has the option of expressing an opinion as a layman, or of functioning as an authority on the law. But not at the same time. Well, as I’ve said many times before, my expertise is in criminal law. I certainly have a law-school understanding of the world of civil liability, but I will equally well yield to someone with a stronger background on the relevant principles. I don’t think there’s anything here that’s subject to that debate. The dispute here seems to be on the facts, though, not the law. If you tell me that the camp knew of the kid’s medical condition and still acted as they did, that changes the equation considerably. Under those circumstances, they would almost certainly be civilly liable, and even manslaughter would not be a reach. (Murder is still a reach). But – so far as I know – we don’t have any evidence that would allow the inference that the camp knew. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/108 "2006-04-17T02:13:38Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > Great. What I thought was a punch to the solar plexus may have been them grabbing him. Can’t tell from the video. I hope they have better eyewitnesses. My point exactly. If we could add some testimony in from someone, anyone, who saw the thing and could add some context, some definitive statement about what was happening… then we can fairly reach inferences for which there is simply not any basis now. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/109 "2006-04-17T02:18:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > How about making a previously healthy-seeming sixteen year old boy with a previously undiagnosed heart murmer do the five mile run? > > The standard is what you know, or reasonably should know. If the parents fill out a medical form and don’t indicate a medical history that raises alarms, a phys. ed. teacher does not have to run his own EKG on every kid he pushes to run the five miles… Pushed, or forced? Show me the PE teacher who still has a job after treating a student the way this kid was treated. > [@Bricker](#): > > …If you tell me that the camp knew of the kid’s medical condition and still acted as they did, that changes the equation considerably. Under those circumstances, they would almost certainly be civilly liable, and even manslaughter would not be a reach. (Murder is still a reach). > > But – so far as I know – we don’t have any evidence that would allow the inference that the camp knew. Why wouldn’t the “eggshell skull rule” apply? CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/110 "2006-04-17T02:24:23Z")
> **[Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos](https://www.yahoo.com/)** > > Latest news coverage, email, free stock quotes, live scores and video are just the beginning. Discover more every day at Yahoo! > [@](#): > > Approximately **one in 12 black Americans has sickle cell trait**. > **[Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos](https://www.yahoo.com/)** > > Latest news coverage, email, free stock quotes, live scores and video are just the beginning. Discover more every day at Yahoo! > [@](#): > > If you or your child has sickle cell disease, **there are triggers that can cause your red blood cells to sickle.** These triggers include: > > Lack of oxygen because of: > Cigarette smoke. Both smoking and inhaling smoke from other people’s cigarettes (secondhand smoke) can damage the lungs and lower oxygen levels in the blood. Children and adults who have sickle cell disease should avoid cigarette smoke. > High altitude [locations higher than 5000 ft (1524 m)]. There is less oxygen in the air at high altitudes. > Air travel. Because there is less oxygen at high altitudes, flying in an unpressurized airplane can cause cells to sickle. Although large passenger airplanes are pressurized, a person with sickle cell disease may have a sickling problem even when flying in a pressurized airplane. Most people won’t have problems if they are flying only for a short time (less than 4 to 6 hours) and drink plenty of fluids during the flight. > Cold temperatures. Exposure to cold air and water may cause a painful event by triggering red blood cell sickling in exposed areas of the body. > \*\*Loss of fluid (dehydration). \*\* Dehydration may slow blood flow in the body, which increases the chance of having a painful event. > Infection. Painful events are commonly triggered by infection. > \*\*Stress. \*\* Increased stress may bring on painful events. > \*\*Strenuous exercise. \*\* Dehydration and reduced oxygen levels in a person’s blood resulting from strenuous exercise may cause red blood cells to sickle. Many people with sickle cell disease can tolerate moderate exercise if they rest when they feel tired and drink plenty of fluids. Sickle Cell Anemia affects 12% of the African American popultion. This is no secret. I am quite sure this boot camp has a fair number of African American “participants.” I am also quite sure that the activities with the highest probability for triggering a sickle cell event are practiced frequently in this boot camp. It is also no secret that extreme physical exercise can cause a sickle event. If the proprietors of this boot camp and their agents were not aware of the victim’s condition and the activities that trigger an episode, they certainly should have been. A civil cause of action certainly exists here, even if a criminal one does not. Negligence, possibly Gross Negligence could certainly be successfully argued. (emphasis added). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/111 "2006-04-17T02:40:19Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Pushed, or forced? > Show me the PE teacher who still has a job after treating a student the way this kid was treated. The PE analogy can’t be pushed too far. The boot camp was obviously much tougher than a high school PE class would be. > [@](#): > > Why wouldn’t the “eggshell skull rule” apply? The rule doesn’t create liability. You still have to show that they acted negligently. The classic eggshell skull examples presuppose a negligent incident that has far more dire consequences than the tortfeasor ever intended. When you start with a negligent act, the mere fact you didn’t know the victim was unusually vulnerable doesn’t save you. Here, we need to show that the actions of the camp guards were negligent in the first place, and what you know, or don’t know, is relevant to that question. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/112 "2006-04-17T02:47:13Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > Sickle Cell Anemia affects 12% of the African American popultion. This is no secret. From your own cite: > [@](#): > > People with sickle cell trait have one gene for the disease. They don’t develop the disease and usually have no signs and symptoms. Approximately one in 12 black Americans has sickle cell trait. 1 in 12 is 8.3%, not 12%. And that’s for sickle cell _TRAIT_, the broad category that doesn’t imply the presence of the actual disease. The percentage of people that actually suffer from sickle cell _ANEMIA_, in which they have TWO genes for the disease, are obviously far fewer. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/113 "2006-04-17T02:51:29Z")
> [@Der Trihs](#): > > As said above legal is not the same as moral. If the law demands a rape victim be executed for fornication, does that make it right ? Of course not. I’ll condemn any behavior I think is wrong, legal or not. Let me make my point more clear. If the law of Florida allows for boot camps, and it is an approved policy, in compliance with their administrative law, then the officers cannot be condemned as individuals if they were acting under the color of law. In this case, making the kids do push ups, yelling at them etc… As for the law itself, yes, of course I agree with you that we can disagree with it. But, there is a process for that change. The men and women following that law should be punished. Of course, there are circumstances, when the law is clearly immoral, but this is not such a case. Nonetheless, I don’t think this is a good form of punishment and it is certainly not rehabilitation. So, I was not trying to say you cannot condemn the act, just not the people following it. If this were true, every person that followed a law I did nto agree with could be “condemnable”. For example, if I did not agree with laws that say gays should not get married. Does that mean that the clerk working at the courthouse is “condemnable”? Of course not. Now, if the officers used excessive force and were abusive, that is another story. ---
**Author:** ![Metacom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecae2f/32.png) [@Metacom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Metacom)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/114 "2006-04-17T03:25:47Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > Let me make my point more clear. If the law of Florida allows for boot camps, and it is an approved policy, in compliance with their administrative law, then the officers cannot be condemned as individuals if they were acting under the color of law. I understood your point. I still disagree with it. Even though the officers were acting in a manner that may have been legal, I still feel they’re personally condemnable. To use an extreme example (and I hate to Godwinize this, and I’m not trying to insult you–you’re one of the more level-headed people here and I like your posts…), look at the Nazi extermination camp guards. They acted in accord with the laws of their country and the will of their government–would you still say they’re not personally condemnable? The officers in that camp were not coerced into taking that job. They could quit at will. But they didn’t, and instead chose to participate in a system which I consider immoral. I consider them personally accountable. Do I think they should be strung up or tried for murder? No, for a variety of reasons–not the least of which is that I don’t know much about the legal systems. But I do view them as acting immorally. In practice all this means is that an anonymous stranger on a board full of self-righteous wankers is spouting off his ultimately meaningless opinion. But I’ve never let that stop me in the past. 😛 > [@](#): > > Now, if the officers used excessive force and were abusive, that is another story. But then that would have been illegal… ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/115 "2006-04-17T03:30:17Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > 1 in 12 is 8.3%, not 12%. > > I Apologize for the error. > > > [@](#): > > > > And that’s for sickle cell _TRAIT_, the broad category that doesn’t imply the presence of the actual disease. The percentage of people that actually suffer from sickle cell _ANEMIA_, in which they have TWO genes for the disease, are obviously far fewer. What is lost in my error is that, regardless of numbers, sickle cell affects a disproportionately higher number of African Amercans. It should be obvious that higher trait=higer incidence of the disease. I don’t know, but I can certainly imagine that this camp inducts a comparitively high number of African Amercians. Also, it is reasonable to expect the camp to assess the health of every member it inducts given the nature of the camp. That the guards should have known of his condition and continued to deny him medical care that was immediately available, especially when the victim displayed clear signs of fatigue and physical exasperation, is grounds for tort action, at a minimum ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/116 "2006-04-17T03:37:31Z")
> [@Lissa](#): > > So, I was not trying to say you cannot condemn the act, just not the people following it. If this were true, every person that followed a law I did nto agree with could be “condemnable”. For example, if I did not agree with laws that say gays should not get married. Does that mean that the clerk working at the courthouse is “condemnable”? Of course not. I can and will condemn people who cooperate with a law I consider evil. If, say, America goes over-the-top fundie and new laws demand the execution of all homosexuals, Jews, Catholics and scientists, I will most certainly condemn anybody who cooperates with such a law. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/117 "2006-04-17T03:40:50Z")
> [@Mince](#): > > What is lost in my error is that, regardless of numbers, sickle cell affects a disproportionately higher number of African Amercans. While this is correct, it affects [[http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000527.htm](http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000527.htm)]one in five hundred African Americans: > [@](#): > > Sickle cell disease is much more common in certain ethnic groups, affecting approximately one out of every 500 African Americans. > … > Although sickle cell disease is present at birth, symptoms usually don’t occur until after 4 months of age. So if one out of 500 African Americans have it, and symptoms usually occur after 4 months of age, I’m not sure it’s appropriate to expect guards to know how to diagnose the disease in an adolescent who hasn’t previously shown symptoms. This is not to say the guards acted appropriately. I’ve not watched the tape, and I probably won’t. But I don’t see this as nearly as common as you’re suggesting. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/118 "2006-04-17T03:41:55Z")
Oy vey. [corrected link.](http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000527.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/119 "2006-04-17T05:07:37Z")
Well, I read the autopsy report, and the report says he died from complications of Sickle Cell Trait, not Sickle Cell disease. The findings were also consistent with him not being beaten to death; aside from some small cuts on his head and some mouth lacerations, his body was not touched. From [this](http://sickle.bwh.harvard.edu/sickle_trait.html) site: > [@](#): > > An important potential complication of sickle cell trait is unexpected exercise-related death (ERD). However, Florida is one of the 40 states that routinely tests newborns for Sickle Cell Anemia, so if he was born in Florida (or one of 39 other states, most of them southern), it might be possible to go back in the records and see if he was tested and if his guardians were negligent in informing the “Boot Camp” that he had Sickle Cell Trait. Is it reasonable to expect penal agents to test all inmates for Sickle Cell Anemia or Sickle Cell Trait, and then never allow anybody who tests positive to ever be in any kind of stressed situation or engage in exercise that might cause an attack? I would not want to be responsible for figuring out this policy. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2006, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552/120 "2006-04-17T10:19:27Z")
Well, at least I learned another lesson in the power of suggestion. I honestly can’t tell if he took a shot to the ribs or not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-young-boy-died-because-boot-camps-are-considered-tough-love/352552.md?page=7)