Concealed weapons in college classrooms

[StrangeSox]

I thought the issue was that she was f***ing around on her phone, refused to hand it over to the teacher and then refused to leave the classroom when asked.

 

They also arrested the student who recorded the incident.

 

eta: even if she had hit the teacher, it's still pretty much "white cop beats black teen for no reason!" eta2: and he was fired for it

Edited October 28, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

I thought the issue was that she was f***ing around on her phone, refused to hand it over to the teacher and then refused to leave the classroom when asked.

 

They also arrested the student who recorded the incident.

 

eta: even if she had hit the teacher, it's still pretty much "white cop beats black teen for no reason!" eta2: and he was fired for it

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sherif...officer-n452481

 

It was a cop I guess, not a teacher.

 

edit: and yeah, he should be fired. I'm not arguing that.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

Yeah, she swung at the guy who was throwing her to the ground for no reason. Sounds like self defense to me. Too bad the teacher wasn't armed so she could have stopped this assault before it went any further.

[Jenksismyhero]

Yeah, she swung at the guy who was throwing her to the ground for no reason. Sounds like self defense to me. Too bad the teacher wasn't armed so she could have stopped this assault before it went any further.

 

So take out the throwing her to the ground part, you think he was wrong to put his hands on her to begin with? I'm pretty sure that's his job - if someone is being unruly (arguable, but that's what he's going on) and she's not leaving per his orders, he has to get physical at some point. So if he's doing that and she starts wailing on him (we don't know) then yeah, he still went overboard and became way too physical by throwing her around, but at the same time she also asked for a physical response from him.

 

I'm assuming the punch/punches came before he became physical, otherwise why are the news reports referring to a third video that shows something that is not in the first two? Maybe i'm missing something.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Jenksismybitch

[NorthSideSox72]

So take out the throwing her to the ground part, you think he was wrong to put his hands on her to begin with? I'm pretty sure that's his job - if someone is being unruly (arguable, but that's what he's going on) and she's not leaving per his orders, he has to get physical at some point. So if he's doing that and she starts wailing on him (we don't know) then yeah, he still went overboard and became way too physical by throwing her around, but at the same time she also asked for a physical response from him.

 

I'm assuming the punch/punches came before he became physical, otherwise why are the news reports referring to a third video that shows something that is not in the first two? Maybe i'm missing something.

School officers are supposed to get specific training on this sort of thing. You don't pick her up and throw her on the ground in any case. You try to talk to her, understanding she is a child - you can't just bark an order then use big force. If the talking - and I mean a real effort - doesn't work, then heck, drag the desk out of the room with her in it. Or hand cuff her and pick her up - carry her out. At worst.

 

[StrangeSox]

So take out the throwing her to the ground part, you think he was wrong to put his hands on her to begin with? I'm pretty sure that's his job - if someone is being unruly (arguable, but that's what he's going on) and she's not leaving per his orders, he has to get physical at some point. So if he's doing that and she starts wailing on him (we don't know) then yeah, he still went overboard and became way too physical by throwing her around, but at the same time she also asked for a physical response from him.

 

I'm assuming the punch/punches came before he became physical, otherwise why are the news reports referring to a third video that shows something that is not in the first two? Maybe i'm missing something.

 

Did you watch the video in your own NBC link? At the start of the video, she's sitting at her desk as he's walking up to her. Unless she swung at him, walked back to her seat, calmly sat down and then officer friendly approached slowly, then the alleged punches came in self defense as she was being assaulted by a violent thug. There's no good reason to assume that she just must have done something to provoke his violent action.

 

edit: go to about 55 seconds in this video clip, and you see where she swings somewhat blindly at her assailant as he begins throwing her to the ground.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sherif...officer-n452481

Edited October 28, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

Sure, and that's why he was fired, because he didn't do those things.

 

I was referring more to the comment about the teacher shooting him for committing an assault. I mean he's legally authorized to commit an assault if necessary. Just not to the degree this guy did.

[Jenksismyhero]

Did you watch the video in your own NBC link? At the start of the video, she's sitting at her desk as he's walking up to her. Unless she swung at him, walked back to her seat, calmly sat down and then officer friendly approached slowly, then the alleged punches came in self defense as she was being assaulted by a violent thug. There's no good reason to assume that she just must have done something to provoke his violent action.

 

edit: go to about 55 seconds in this video clip, and you see where she swings somewhat blindly at her assailant as he begins throwing her to the ground.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sherif...officer-n452481

 

The report makes it sound like there's a third video that hasn't been released yet. I don't really see any punches in the two videos on that page. It looks more like she was trying to grab his hands.

[StrangeSox]

I thought one of the most important aspects of the 2nd amendment was to protect us from a violent, oppressive state? Yes this comment is half-snark but why wouldn't self-defense or defense of another being attacked be justified here?

[StrangeSox]

The report makes it sound like there's a third video that hasn't been released yet. I don't really see any punches in the two videos on that page. It looks more like she was trying to grab his hands.

The sheriff mentioned a "third video" that would play a role in the investigation, the reports indicate it's not clear exactly what he's talking about, and the sheriff has since fired the deputy over this incident.

 

Why are you assuming that the teen probably did something worthy of provoking Officer Slam's rage? Is there anything in the videos available (and there have been three released already) that would even make it plausible that a punch was thrown before the first video was recorded? It shows her already sitting down calmly and the officer walking up to her.

Edited October 28, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

I thought one of the most important aspects of the 2nd amendment was to protect us from a violent, oppressive state? Yes this comment is half-snark but why wouldn't self-defense or defense of another being attacked be justified here?

 

I don't think a "reasonable person" would believe that a cop trying to effectuate an arrest is putting a person in danger of imminent death or great bodily injury. If that's the standard you want to go with, we'd have a lot of dead cops on our hands.

[StrangeSox]

I don't think a "reasonable person" would believe that a cop trying to effectuate an arrest is putting a person in danger of imminent death or great bodily injury. If that's the standard you want to go with, we'd have a lot of dead cops on our hands.

I think a reasonable person would believe that a cop slamming a student to the ground and dragging her across the floor for not immediately obeying his command is putting that student in danger of great bodily injury. What if she cracks her head open on the ground as he's throwing her around? Why would a reasonable person believe this man who just launched into an unprovoked violent assault of a teenage girl would stop once he's slammed her to the ground and dragged her around?

[Jenksismyhero]

The sheriff mentioned a "third video" that would play a role in the investigation, the reports indicate it's not clear exactly what he's talking about, the the sheriff has since fired the deputy over this incident.

 

Why are you assuming that the teen probably did something worthy of provoking Officer Slam's rage? Is there anything in the videos available (and there have been three released already) that would even make a plausible that a punch was thrown before the first video was recorded? It shows her already sitting down calmly and the officer walking up to her.

 

I'm not assuming anything. I'm reading that a third video exists that may or may not show her punching the guy. Doesn't make much since for the sheriff to claim there's another video out there that is important to the investigation if it doesn't show anything new/different.

 

I'm saying, as always, let's get all the info before we start accusing "Officer Slam" of being a racist white office that picks on poor little black kids (an obvious angle considering the media is clinging to accusations made in a civil complaint, which are just that, accusations).

 

The guy clearly went to far and deserved to be fired. He can't work at that school again after this. I have no problem with that. I have a problem with the "white cop/black victim" angle, as if that plays a part here. He's an asshole cop. Can't we leave it at that?

[StrangeSox]

I'm not assuming anything.

 

I'm assuming the punch/punches came before he became physical,

 

 

I'm reading that a third video exists that may or may not show her punching the guy. Doesn't make much since for the sheriff to claim there's another video out there that is important to the investigation if it doesn't show anything new/different.

 

The videos that have been made public show her swinging at his head as he's throwing her to the ground. There's been nothing about some other video that shows anything different than what we already know. No students, no one in the police department and no one within the school is saying that she swung at him first. You're trying to downplay what the video clearly shows based on one comment from the sheriff who has since fired the deputy. The investigation appears to be over.

 

I'm saying, as always, let's get all the info before we start accusing "Officer Slam" of being a racist white office that picks on poor little black kids (an obvious angle considering the media is clinging to accusations made in a civil complaint, which are just that, accusations).

 

We've got a violent, unprovoked assault on a black teen. What more info are you waiting for?

 

The guy clearly went to far and deserved to be fired. He can't work at that school again after this. I have no problem with that. I have a problem with the "white cop/black victim" angle, as if that plays a part here. He's an asshole cop. Can't we leave it at that?

Why should we keep ignoring signs of institutional racism? Why do you seem so sure that racism doesn't play a part in who asshole cops target or why they target them? eta there has been extensive research on the racial discipline disparity specifically in schools, why assume it plays no role here?

Edited October 28, 2015 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

I think a reasonable person would believe that a cop slamming a student to the ground and dragging her across the floor for not immediately obeying his command is putting that student in danger of great bodily injury. What if she cracks her head open on the ground as he's throwing her around? Why would a reasonable person believe this man who just launched into an unprovoked violent assault of a teenage girl would stop once he's slammed her to the ground and dragged her around?

 

Again, if that's your standard, and juries across the country agree with you, there will be a lot of dead cops out there. Any cop throwing an assailant on the ground will be seen as trying to cause death/great bodily harm.

[caulfield12]

But he's dating a black woman so he can't be all that evil or racist.

 

 

http://heavy.com/news/2015/10/ben-fields-r...deo-complaints/

 

You can't just intimate there is a video exonerating him and then fire the guy at the same time.

 

 

Johnson said, “When I asked (their teacher) Mr. Long if he felt bad for what happened to her … his reply was ‘she should have cooperated.'”

 

Great role model, that teacher...

Edited October 28, 2015 by caulfield12

[Jenksismyhero]

The videos that have been made public show her swinging at his head as he's throwing her to the ground. There's been nothing about some other video that shows anything different than what we already know. No students, no one in the police department and no one within the school is saying that she swung at him first. You're trying to downplay what the video clearly shows based on one comment from the sheriff who has since fired the deputy. The investigation appears to be over.

 

We've got a violent, unprovoked assault on a black teen. What more info are you waiting for?

 

Well right, fine, i'm assuming there's an importance to the sheriff saying she punched him. Again, why else say that at all?

 

And again i'm just commenting on this "other video." I don't know what it shows. You don't know what it shows. We have two cell phone videos of the incident that are short. And what do you mean "there's been nothing about some other video." Yes there has, that link i just sent quoting the sheriff as saying there's a third video showing her punching him. I have no idea how or when that happened, i'm just responding to that report.

 

Why should we keep ignoring signs of institutional racism? Why do you seem so sure that racism doesn't play a part in who asshole cops target or why they target them?

 

Other than the fact he's white and she's black, what evidence do you have that this was racially motivated?

 

edit: oh great, site a report showing how blacks are treated differently. Obviously that must mean that in every case, without exception, where a white officer does something to a black person, it must be because they're racist. It can't be that they're just bad at their jobs or bad people generally, it's because they don't like black people.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Jenksismybitch

[Jenksismyhero]

But he's dating a black woman so he can't be all that evil or racist.

 

 

http://heavy.com/news/2015/10/ben-fields-r...deo-complaints/

 

You can't just intimate there is a video exonerating him and then fire the guy at the same time.

 

 

Johnson said, “When I asked (their teacher) Mr. Long if he felt bad for what happened to her … his reply was ‘she should have cooperated.'”

 

Great role model, that teacher...

 

Maybe that's the third video there.

[StrangeSox]

Well right, fine, i'm assuming there's an importance to the sheriff saying she punched him. Again, why else say that at all?

 

And again i'm just commenting on this "other video." I don't know what it shows. You don't know what it shows. We have two cell phone videos of the incident that are short. And what do you mean "there's been nothing about some other video." Yes there has, that link i just sent quoting the sheriff as saying there's a third video showing her punching him. I have no idea how or when that happened, i'm just responding to that report.

 

As your link clearly states, it's not clear what the sheriff is referring to, and three videos have already been released publicly.

 

What I'm saying is that, other than the sheriff's one sentence, there's been nothing about some other video. There hasn't been any alternate series of events. Nobody has claimed that she hit him first. All you're going on is that the sheriff says there's a video that shows her punching him, and you can already see her punching his face as she's being thrown to the ground in the other videos. Since making the comment, the sheriff has also fired the deputy.

 

I'm also asking you to explain how her hypothetically throwing the first punch could even fit in with what we see on the available videos. Throwing your hands in the air and pointing to an unspecified video the sheriff mentioned isn't making much of an argument.

 

Other than the fact he's white and she's black, what evidence do you have that this was racially motivated?

 

Well, that's sort of how institutional racism works. Think of the effort to prove tobacco causes cancer--you can't point to one particular case of lung cancer and say "this was caused by smoking!" But you gather data in the aggregate that shows the racial disparities. Did "Office Slam" act this way towards other black students? Only or primarily black students? How does it fit in with the disciplinary picture at the school overall?

 

edit: oh great, site a report showing how blacks are treated differently. Obviously that must mean that in every case, without exception, where a white officer does something to a black person, it must be because they're racist. It can't be that they're just bad at their jobs or bad people generally, it's because they don't like black people.

 

That's not really how things like institutional racism work though. Plus, please stop your terrible argument style of jumping to ridiculous extremes nobody has come close to saying when you disagree with something. I'm disagreeing with your desire to dismiss the racial angle out of hand, not claiming that every case of a white cop doing something to a black person is an example of them individually being a racist. I'm not even claiming that every time a white cop does something to a black person it's an example of institutional racism, which is not the same thing as the officer "being a racist!"

 

It's highly probable that this guy is terrible at his job. It's pretty probably that he's also an authoritarian jerk. It's also possible that he disproportionately targets minorities in his job, and I don't see why we shouldn't even consider the role that plays.

Edited October 28, 2015 by StrangeSox

[caulfield12]

Trial is set for January in the case of an expelled student who claims Fields targeted black students and falsely accused him of being a gang member in 2013. In another case, a federal jury sided with Fields after a black couple accused him of excessive force and battery during a noise complaint arrest in 2005. A third lawsuit, dismissed in 2009, involved a woman who accused him of battery and violating her rights during a 2006 arrest.

 

 

He also attacked a veteran and his wife. Smoke, meet fire.

 

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/10/27/sh...oor/#more-28388

[StrangeSox]

Maybe that's the third video there.

Look at the "second angle" and tell me if your assumption that she provoked the violent assault still makes sense.

[Jenksismyhero]

As your link clearly states, it's not clear what the sheriff is referring to, and three videos have already been released publicly.

 

What I'm saying is that, other than the sheriff's one sentence, there's been nothing about some other video. There hasn't been any alternate series of events. Nobody has claimed that she hit him first. All you're going on is that the sheriff says there's a video that shows her punching him, and you can already see her punching his face as she's being thrown to the ground in the other videos. Since making the comment, the sheriff has also fired the deputy.

 

I'm also asking you to explain how her hypothetically throwing the first punch could even fit in with what we see on the available videos. Throwing your hands in the air and pointing to an unspecified video the sheriff mentioned isn't making much of an argument.

 

She could have punched him the first time he asked her to get up and then he walked away. Who knows. I think it's fair to assume if a high ranking person is making a statement about another video that needs to be looked at, that other video is going to show something different. If that's not the case, that's not the case.

 

Well, that's sort of how institutional racism works. Think of the effort to prove tobacco causes cancer--you can't point to one particular case of lung cancer and say "this was caused by smoking!" But you gather data in the aggregate that shows the racial disparities. Did "Office Slam" act this way towards other black students? Only or primarily black students? How does it fit in with the disciplinary picture at the school overall?

 

Citing to "institutional racism" studies alone isn't enough to peg one person as a racist or to show that one person acted a certain way because of having some racist beliefs/thoughts. By that logic we must conclude that we're all racist since there's institutional racism everywhere, right?

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

That's not really how things like institutional racism work though. Plus, please stop your terrible argument style of jumping to ridiculous extremes nobody has come close to saying when you disagree with something. I'm disagreeing with your desire to dismiss the racial angle out of hand, not claiming that every case of a white cop doing something to a black person is an example of them individually being a racist. I'm not even claiming that every time a white cop does something to a black person it's an example of institutional racism, which is not the same thing as the officer "being a racist!"

 

It's highly probable that this guy is terrible at his job. It's pretty probably that he's also an authoritarian jerk. It's also possible that he disproportionately targets minorities in his job, and I don't see why we shouldn't even consider the role that plays.

 

How is that an extreme? That's exactly how this story is being reported. It's white cop beats black teen and oh look he's been sued for it before! Why else bring that up unless you want to stir up that fire?

 

I'm tired of the every cop is racist and that's the only reason they do x, y and z story. Why can't we assume, firstly, that he's just an asshole and bad at his job? And then if the FACTS (not criminal accusations in a complaint) come out that he DOES target blacks, then you can come up with that angle. That's all i'm saying. You bringing up the "well studies show racism!" line means you're doing the exact same thing.

[StrangeSox]

She could have punched him the first time he asked her to get up and then he walked away. Who knows. I think it's fair to assume if a high ranking person is making a statement about another video that needs to be looked at, that other video is going to show something different. If that's not the case, that's not the case.

 

I really don't even know what you're clinging to at this point. Absolutely nobody is making the claim that she started the physical altercation. The sheriff mentioned a video that shows her punching him during the confrontation, and we see her hit his face as she's being thrown to the ground.

 

 

 

Citing to "institutional racism" studies alone isn't enough to peg one person as a racist or to show that one person acted a certain way because of having some racist beliefs/thoughts. By that logic we must conclude that we're all racist since there's institutional racism everywhere, right?

It's not about pegging anyone as "a racist," and it's not even really about discrete actions being driven by consciously racist thoughts. I would bet that there's an underlying racial element here, but really I'm more pressing you on why you think we should dismiss it out of hand.

 

We're probably pretty much all 'racist' to some extent, and that's regardless of our own racial background. There's been a lot of recent work on implicit bias.

[Jenksismyhero]

Look at the "second angle" and tell me if your assumption that she provoked the violent assault still makes sense.

 

She did provoke it with or without the punch. She resisted. Period. It wouldn't have been necessary if she had just gotten up like she was told before this cop ever arrived. Nothing excuses the degree to which he responded, which I said from the beginning.