Saw this on Scipio's facebook page, sadly, this sort of imbecility isn't limited to Canada.
http://www.davidmcelroy.org/?p=18283
Quote
Student scolded for saving a life; School doesn't 'condone heroics'
by David McElroy
Briar MacLean and mom
When 13-year-old Briar MacLean saw a bully put another student into a headlock in class last Tuesday, that wasn't the worst of it.
"I heard the flick, and I heard them say there was a knife," the Calgary, Alberta, teen told Canada's National Post.
He quickly stepped up and pushed the bully out of the way. The teacher came from the other side of the room and the principal was called. Briar was obviously a hero for saving the other boy from the bully's knife.
It wasn't until later in the day that it became clear that the school didn't see it that way. Leah O'Donnell, Briar's mother, said a vice principal called from the school to say that her son had been involved in an "incident" and that he had decided to "play hero." She was told that Briar's action had been wrong.
"I asked: 'In the time it would have taken him to go get a teacher, could that kid's throat have been slit?'" O'Donnell told the National Post. "[The vice principal] said yes, but that's beside the point. That we 'don't condone heroics in this school.'"
According to the rules of the Calgary Board of Education, Briar should have left the victim to his fate while he went off to get the attention of an adult to come intervene. Instead, he did the right thing by potentially saving another child's life — only to be investigated, lectured and have his locker searched, as though he were a criminal.
O'Donnell said she teaches her children to stand up to bullies and that this isn't the first time her son has gotten into a trouble for the same thing.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather live in a society full of people like Briar MacLean and Leah O'Donnell than with the myopic people who run the Calgary Board of Education. Yes, it's a good thing to teach kids to avoid fights, but the "one size fits all" nature of the school system's robotic application of the rules is wrong-headed.
We need more heroes. Sometimes those who try to help can be hurt. There's always that chance. But those who choose to help others should be lauded and emulated, not treated as though they simply need to watch helplessly while others are hurt or killed.
When this story made the rounds on facebook a few days ago, there was a bit about the parents of the bullied child taking Brian on a trip to Disneyland.
If the tackled bully had been hurt the school would have been sued. It's lawyers and parents fault. In that order.
Time for homeschooling. :)
A kid who pulls a knife is a "bully?" :huh:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 04, 2013, 05:45:56 PM
A kid who pulls a knife is a "bully?" :huh:
You think he's the victim here?
I guess if you go through life with a name like Briar, you're going to be ready to come correct at 13.
Quote from: Jacob on June 04, 2013, 05:53:54 PM
You think he's the victim here?
I think he's a felon.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 04, 2013, 06:03:13 PMI think he's a felon.
Highly unlikely. I'm pretty sure we don't have felonies in Canada.
Quote from: Jacob on June 04, 2013, 05:53:54 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 04, 2013, 05:45:56 PM
A kid who pulls a knife is a "bully?" :huh:
You think he's the victim here?
I guess I do not consider attempting to murder somebody 'bullying' unless we want to just make everything bad that anybody ever does bullying.
Who cares what David McElroy has to say?
In the context of an insanely litigious culture, I'd say the school's response makes a lot of sense.
Yeah. It happens. Even if the kid being bullied himself is the one to get the bully he gets in trouble.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 04, 2013, 06:35:04 PM
In the context of an insanely litigious culture, I'd say the school's response makes a lot of sense.
Sadly true.
One thing that really bugs me about modern human civilization is that we've gone full retard on avoiding risk. Risk-taking is what got us out of the caves, and it should be encouraged to some extent still.
QuoteIn the time it would have taken him to go get a teacher, could that kid's throat have been slit?'
:rolleyes:
Possible. But highly improbable. I think it is also hyperbole to suggest that he saved the kids life. This sounds a lot like helicopter parents to the rescue.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 05, 2013, 11:45:47 AM
QuoteIn the time it would have taken him to go get a teacher, could that kid's throat have been slit?'
:rolleyes:
Possible. But highly improbable. I think it is also hyperbole to suggest that he saved the kids life. This sounds a lot like helicopter parents to the rescue.
Yeah I gotta say that they definitely overplayed that bit.
Why? Do you think a knife is not deadly or do you think the asshole would have not stabbed the kid?
If it is the first, you are very wrong, if the second, you definitively have no way to predict the what the guy with the knife was going to do.
Quote from: Siege on June 05, 2013, 11:56:35 AM
Why? Do you think a knife is not deadly or do you think the asshole would have not stabbed the kid?
If it is the first, you are very wrong, if the second, you definitively have no way to predict the what the guy with the knife was going to do.
Really. According to the parents the victim was in a headlock with a knife going for his throat. If you buy that then some other kid bumping into the two of them is probably going to make it even more likely the knife finds its target.
It sounds a lot like an after the fact justification. But I can see how the story would appeal to the red necks - which is essentially the target audience of this particular newspaper. ie the way the story was written says more about the newspaper's attempt to stay relevant with its subscribers than anything else.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 05, 2013, 12:13:59 PM
Quote from: Siege on June 05, 2013, 11:56:35 AM
Why? Do you think a knife is not deadly or do you think the asshole would have not stabbed the kid?
If it is the first, you are very wrong, if the second, you definitively have no way to predict the what the guy with the knife was going to do.
Really. According to the parents the victim was in a headlock with a knife going for his throat. If you buy that then some other kid bumping into the two of them is probably going to make it even more likely the knife finds its target.
Really? If I have you in a headlock with a knife going for your throat your ONLY chance is that someone stops me. Your last worry should be somebody bumping into us. Actually, somebody bumping into us might make me miss my mark. But then, I would never go for the throat. That's for amateurs and movies. You got for the heart if you can, center mass if you can't. And never try to cut, you want to use your knife as a thrusting weapon, not slashing or cutting. Cutting the throat would not kill anybody. The part that is lethal on the neck, is 2 inches long from to top to bottom, and 2 inches wide from side to side. You are better off thrusting your knife into your enemy's chest, wheather you get a vital organ or not, than to try to go for such an small target in the side of the neck. Your adrenaline release will fuck up your accuracy anyway. Go center-mass, where the big organs are.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 04, 2013, 06:35:04 PM
In the context of an insanely litigious culture, I'd say the school's response makes a lot of sense.
Canada is an insanely litigious culture?
Is everyone channeling Neil today?
Is there any concrete basis to conclude that the school's rule has anything to do with litigation?
Quote from: Siege on June 05, 2013, 12:29:27 PM
Really? If I have you in a headlock with a knife going for your throat your ONLY chance is that someone stops me.
You should write for the National Post. You are pretty good at hyperbole.
My understanding is that it is reasonably commonplace, if there has been a fight of any sort, for the school authorities to impose discipline on everyone involved - even if the "fight" is some bullies beating up on a kid. It is simply easier for the authorities, who don't have to exercise any judgment that way, or sort out the conflicting accounts of WTF happened. That definitely would inspire a degree of "helecoptering" on a parent's part - writing letters, documenting stuff, etc. in order to convince the authorities to do some justified discrimination.
In this case, assuming the facts as stated are true, seems like the cops would be involved, not just the school authorities.
Quote from: Malthus on June 05, 2013, 01:01:45 PM
In this case, assuming the facts as stated are true, seems like the cops would be involved, not just the school authorities.
Yeah, which is one of the main reason I think this story is slanted to say the least. If this kid really was a "hero" one would expect the story to be that the police took the "bully" into custody and charged him with attempted murder.
Quote from: Jacob on June 04, 2013, 05:53:54 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 04, 2013, 05:45:56 PM
A kid who pulls a knife is a "bully?" :huh:
You think he's the victim here?
he's at an immediate disadvantage though :p
...takes deep drag on fag.......
...and THAT is how he won the respect of the PTA.
:cheers:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 05, 2013, 12:48:31 PM
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 04, 2013, 06:35:04 PM
In the context of an insanely litigious culture, I'd say the school's response makes a lot of sense.
Canada is an insanely litigious culture?
Is everyone channeling Neil today?
Is there any concrete basis to conclude that the school's rule has anything to do with litigation?
Are you seriously wondering whether the school's policies and responses involving safety and incidents, particularly violent ones, are not informed in large part by a fear of law suits?
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 05, 2013, 09:22:50 PM
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 05, 2013, 12:48:31 PM
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 04, 2013, 06:35:04 PM
In the context of an insanely litigious culture, I'd say the school's response makes a lot of sense.
Canada is an insanely litigious culture?
Is everyone channeling Neil today?
Is there any concrete basis to conclude that the school's rule has anything to do with litigation?
Are you seriously wondering whether the school's policies and responses involving safety and incidents, particularly violent ones, are not informed in large part by a fear of law suits?
I will let Minsky speak for himself. But any suggestion that Canadian culture is "insanely litigious" is itself quite insane ;)
Responses to incidents regarding violence are largely informed by a desire to ensure there are no acts of violence between or among students. Seems to me that is an objective good independant of any influence an unlikely law suit might have.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 05, 2013, 09:22:50 PM
Are you seriously wondering whether the school's policies and responses involving safety and incidents, particularly violent ones, are not informed in large part by a fear of law suits?
Yes. If Canadian schools were immunized from law suits, I would expect the policy to be quite similar to what is. For exactly the reasons CC says above, because the school has an independent interest in suppressing escalation of fights and protecting student safety.
I have yet to see any facts supporting the claim that this particular policy and response was litigation-driven.
Obviously one objective of non-violence policies is to discourage violence. But if you don't believe school policies regarding violence, supervision, etc. are shaped significantly by a desire not to be sued (and having worked in schools I can assure you from personal experience that they most definitely are), then that's your prerogative, albeit one I consider rather naive.
Quote from: Pitiful Pathos on June 06, 2013, 10:01:59 PM
Obviously one objective of non-violence policies is to discourage violence.
Isnt that the obvious one? The fact that there is some chance that a law suit might result from a school not implementing an obvious objective does not mean that the obvious objective was created because of the risk of the law suit.
Think about your theory in another context. People dont avoid care accidents because they might be sued. People avoid having car accidents because it makes good sense to do so.
Quote from: Siege on June 05, 2013, 11:56:35 AM
Why? Do you think a knife is not deadly or do you think the asshole would have not stabbed the kid?
This is the crux of it, from my perspective.
Anytime a weapon is shown, there's a danger to someone. The kid did the brave thing of getting that weapon out of the hand of the assailant. Whether the bully was going to use it or not is irrelevant. A knife in hand is a danger to
someone.
If the kid broke school policy by acting as he did, then the school policy is broken. It's one thing to encourage kids to get someone to help when there's an incident, and another thing all together to punish someone for choosing to act instead. That's where I feel like the break-down occurred. Were I the parent of the kid who knocked the knife away, I would tell the administration that they're wrong, and take my kid out to celebrate his "vacation" away from school. Probably to an amusement park to let him know that I'm proud of his decision to help someone instead of just running away.
If that's being a "helicopter parent", then I guess I misunderstand the word.
Even in the story, which is full of hyperbole, there is no mention of:
1) a knife being "shown" - the boy simple said "I heard them say there was a knife"
2) the boy "getting that weapon out of the assailant's hand" - the story just says he bumped the assailant aside. The only person who says he should be a hero is the parent who makes all kinds of unfounded assumptions in the course of coming to the conclusion that her child was a "hero".
If you dont recognize this story as a helicopter parent coming to her child's rescue by creating a dubious version of events to justify her childs actions then I suppose that is a good indication of how ingrained such parenting has become in our society.
Actually I found an article on HuffPo that says the police confirmed there was a knife involved.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 10:30:34 AM
The only person who says he should be a hero is the parent who makes all kinds of unfounded assumptions in the course of coming to the conclusion that her child was a "hero".
Um please point out in the article where it says she came to that conclusion? Talk about unfounded assumptions. Nowhere was she even quoted saying that she was just giving her version of the what school said, it was the dude who wrote the article who said he was a hero. Which makes your assumption that the 'only person who says he should be a hero' was her pretty bizarre.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on June 04, 2013, 05:20:50 PM
When 13-year-old Briar MacLean saw a bully put another student into a headlock in class last Tuesday, that wasn't the worst of it.
"I heard the flick, and I heard them say there was a knife," the Calgary, Alberta, teen told Canada's National Post.
He quickly stepped up and pushed the bully out of the way. The teacher came from the other side of the room and the principal was called. Briar was obviously a hero for saving the other boy from the bully's knife.
The kid heard a flick, someone said there was a knife, and the kid acted to protect the one in the headlock. The rest is immaterial to me. Whatever else was said or done doesn't matter one bit.
Were that my kid, I'd think he'd done what he should have regardless of the danger to himself, and I would reward that. What the school thinks about it is immaterial to how I would respond. If the school decided to punish my kid, then I would think that policy foolish, and would say so to both the school and my child. In fact, I'd say it whether the kid is mine or not, and am now on record as having done so.
I understand a helicopter parent as one who "cossets" their kid, not praises them for putting themselves in dangerous situations. Given my understanding of the term, I doubt you could claim that my take on this situation is one of "helicoptering". Having an opinion that a school policy is a bad one isn't the same thing as "helicoptering", regardless of how much some like to throw that word around.
Of course, anyone is welcome to teach their children to run away and tell Teacher whenever anyone does something bad. I'd rather my kids did something about it.
Quote from: garbon on June 07, 2013, 10:34:31 AM
Actually I found an article on HuffPo that says the police confirmed there was a knife involved.
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant on how other people parent poorly.
Quote from: Valmy on June 07, 2013, 10:35:46 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 10:30:34 AM
The only person who says he should be a hero is the parent who makes all kinds of unfounded assumptions in the course of coming to the conclusion that her child was a "hero".
Um please point out in the article where it says she came to that conclusion? Talk about unfounded assumptions. Nowhere was she even quoted saying that she was just giving her version of the what school said, it was the dude who wrote the article who said he was a hero. Which makes your assumption that the 'only person who says he should be a hero' was her pretty bizarre.
the article is all about her child being a hero and the school being stupid. The conclusion is based on the mother's view of events.
Quote"I asked: 'In the time it would have taken him to go get a teacher, could that kid's throat have been slit?
The Wild West runs strong in you people.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 10:41:53 AM
Quote from: garbon on June 07, 2013, 10:34:31 AM
Actually I found an article on HuffPo that says the police confirmed there was a knife involved.
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant on how other people parent poorly.
Perhaps you could quote where the story says the boy did more then simply bump the assailant... you know the basis upon which you say he saw a knife and disarmed the boy.
Its clear you guys are all about people taking matters into their own hand regardless of the risks. Another one of those things that makes me glad you dont vote here. :hug:
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 10:45:59 AM
Perhaps you could quote where the story says the boy did more then simply bump the assailant... you know the basis upon which you say he saw a knife and disarmed the boy.
Let me reiterate.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 10:41:11 AM
The kid heard a flick, someone said there was a knife, and the kid acted to protect the one in the headlock. The rest is immaterial to me. Whatever else was said or done doesn't matter one bit.
QuoteIts clear you guys are all about people taking matters into their own hand regardless of the risks. Another one of those things that makes me glad you dont vote here.
Yes, I am. Had more people been like that, maybe 9/11 wouldn't have killed thousands and scarred a nation. After all, the one plane where people acted instead of sitting like sheep resulted in only their deaths, and not the deaths of who knows how many more.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 10:43:00 AM
the article is all about her child being a hero and the school being stupid. The conclusion is based on the mother's view of events.
The conclusion might just as easily be about the author's particular axe to grind.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 10:52:00 AM
Yes, I am. Had more people been like that, maybe 9/11 wouldn't have killed thousands and scarred a nation. After all, the one plane where people acted instead of sitting like sheep resulted in only their deaths, and not the deaths of who knows how many more.
This is exactly why I have not said much specifically about who is in the right here. For years it sort of bugged me the message the government kept giving us about hijacking was just to let the hijackers do what they want and let the authorities handle it even if we could easily subdue them...you know for safety and stuff. Because hijackers would never do anything that would endanger us all don't you know? Yeah that public service announcement worked out great. And I also remember the message was specifically 'do not try to be a hero'.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 10:52:00 AMYes, I am. Had more people been like that, maybe 9/11 wouldn't have killed thousands and scarred a nation. After all, the one plane where people acted instead of sitting like sheep resulted in only their deaths, and not the deaths of who knows how many more.
"Sitting like sheep"? Really?
Quote from: Valmy on June 07, 2013, 11:02:55 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 10:43:00 AM
the article is all about her child being a hero and the school being stupid. The conclusion is based on the mother's view of events.
The conclusion might just as easily be about the author's particular axe to grind.
Yes, that is a possibility.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 10:52:00 AM
Yes, I am. Had more people been like that, maybe 9/11 wouldn't have killed thousands and scarred a nation. After all, the one plane where people acted instead of sitting like sheep resulted in only their deaths, and not the deaths of who knows how many more.
You are equating schoolyard violence to a highjacking. Wow.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 11:42:30 AM
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 10:52:00 AMYes, I am. Had more people been like that, maybe 9/11 wouldn't have killed thousands and scarred a nation. After all, the one plane where people acted instead of sitting like sheep resulted in only their deaths, and not the deaths of who knows how many more.
"Sitting like sheep"? Really?
Yes. :mellow:
I don't blame them, but I don't applaud them, either. They did what they felt was appropriate for the circumstances - and like Valmy says, what we'd been taught to do. However, had they chosen to act instead of not acting, things would likely have turned out very differently.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 11:47:15 AM
You are equating schoolyard violence to a highjacking. Wow.
Well the message to handle both is/was 'do not be a hero'....you know until somebody gets killed. So yeah.
Quote from: Valmy on June 07, 2013, 11:49:26 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 11:47:15 AM
You are equating schoolyard violence to a highjacking. Wow.
Well the message to handle both is/was 'do not be a hero'....you know until somebody gets killed. So yeah.
Exactly.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 11:49:26 AMYes. :mellow:
I don't blame them, but I don't applaud them, either. They did what they felt was appropriate for the circumstances - and like Valmy says, what we'd been taught to do. However, had they chosen to act instead of not acting, things would likely have turned out very differently.
If only you and Marty had been on one of those planes, you could have tackled the highjackers.
Just one minor detail, of course - the people on the planes that were flown into the WTC had no idea that was being planned. Prior to that pretty much all plan highjackings resulted in a landed plane and demands being made.
The passengers on UA 93 KNEW that someone had just flown two highjacked planes into the WTC. That's a rather different context.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:07:36 PM
Just one minor detail, of course - the people on the planes that were flown into the WTC had no idea that was being planned. Prior to that pretty much all plan highjackings resulted in a landed plane and demands being made.
That is a pretty significant detail. That is precisely what we were getting at. We were told to always assume that hijackings were always made without any intentions to harm anybody so even if they could be thwarted not to.
FFS Jacob.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:07:36 PM
Just one minor detail, of course - the people on the planes that were flown into the WTC had no idea that was being planned. Prior to that pretty much all plan highjackings resulted in a landed plane and demands being made.
This is true; before that day, you just figured you were flying to Cuba or Algeria and wait for demands.
QuoteThe passengers on UA 93 KNEW that someone had just flown two highjacked planes into the WTC. That's a rather different context.
Which is also why 9/11-style hijacking would never, ever happen again. Hell, you see passengers jumping somebody who's confused the cockpit door for the bathroom door. The paradigm has changed.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:07:36 PM
If only you and Marty had been on one of those planes, you could have tackled the highjackers.
Just one minor detail, of course - the people on the planes that were flown into the WTC had no idea that was being planned. Prior to that pretty much all plan highjackings resulted in a landed plane and demands being made.
The passengers on UA 93 KNEW that someone had just flown two highjacked planes into the WTC. That's a rather different context.
That's fair. Again, I'm not blaming them. Again, they did what they'd been taught to do for ages, and to say anything against them is definitely arm-chair quarterbacking at this stage of the game. We know more now than they could have. I'm sorry if my use of the term "sheep" was offensive. I worded that poorly, and I apologize.
At the same time, I'm saying that by not doing anything, by not "acting like a hero", devestation occurred. I think that today's society teaches that mantra - "Don't be a hero" - far too much, and this situation at the school is indicative of the problem.
We need more heroes and fewer sheep. We need more people willing to risk something of themselves to help others.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 07, 2013, 12:25:52 PM
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:07:36 PM
Just one minor detail, of course - the people on the planes that were flown into the WTC had no idea that was being planned. Prior to that pretty much all plan highjackings resulted in a landed plane and demands being made.
This is true; before that day, you just figured you were flying to Cuba or Algeria and wait for demands.
QuoteThe passengers on UA 93 KNEW that someone had just flown two highjacked planes into the WTC. That's a rather different context.
Which is also why 9/11-style hijacking would never, ever happen again. Hell, you see passengers jumping somebody who's confused the cockpit door for the bathroom door. The paradigm has changed.
Not so quick there. If we dont have school kids tackling eachother who knows what evil we might unleash onto the world.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on June 05, 2013, 11:15:29 AM
One thing that really bugs me about modern human civilization is that we've gone full retard on avoiding risk. Risk-taking is what got us out of the caves, and it should be encouraged to some extent still.
I agree with Meri. :sleep:
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:34:44 PM
Again, I'm not blaming them.
I'm sure that's a great relief to their families.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 12:36:55 PM
Not so quick there. If we dont have school kids tackling eachother who knows what evil we might unleash onto the world.
Which is why I am not really emotionally able to say who is wrong here. THe phrase 'don't be a hero' kinda pisses me off.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:41:31 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:34:44 PM
Again, I'm not blaming them.
I'm sure that's a great relief to their families.
I am sure it is equally a great relief that the bad advice was caused by the fact that previous hijackers had not harmed anybody, so therefore we just assumed they never would. Warm fuzzies all around!
Wallenberg shouldn't have saved those 100,000 Jews I suppose.
Quote from: Valmy on June 07, 2013, 12:41:39 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 12:36:55 PM
Not so quick there. If we dont have school kids tackling eachother who knows what evil we might unleash onto the world.
Which is why I am not really emotionally able to say who is wrong here. THe phrase 'don't be a hero' kinda pisses me off.
Comparing people who think an aircraft they are on is about to be hijacked to a kid in a school witnessing a violent act is martiesque in magnitude.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:41:31 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:34:44 PM
Again, I'm not blaming them.
I'm sure that's a great relief to their families.
Wow. So discussing them as anything other than paradigms of perfection is now worthy of derision? God forbid that we should learn something from what happened by the mistakes that were made. And I'm sorry - to you and to their families - but mistakes were made that can teach us many, many things.
I think the hole is deep enough now, CC and Jacob.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 12:44:25 PM
Comparing people who think an aircraft they are on is about to be hijacked to a kid in a school witnessing a violent act is martiesque in magnitude.
Which is why...
:lol: My God.
Do have any idea what I was saying? Exactly that: that the aircraft thing made it difficult for me to talk about this topic. Why would I be saying that? Because they are not the same thing.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 12:44:25 PM
Quote from: Valmy on June 07, 2013, 12:41:39 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 12:36:55 PM
Not so quick there. If we dont have school kids tackling eachother who knows what evil we might unleash onto the world.
Which is why I am not really emotionally able to say who is wrong here. THe phrase 'don't be a hero' kinda pisses me off.
Comparing people who think an aircraft they are on is about to be hijacked to a kid in a school witnessing a violent act is martiesque in magnitude.
Is it really so hard for you to recognize the connection? If so, then I'll dumb it down for you.
Taking personal risks to save others = good
Quote from: The Brain on June 07, 2013, 12:45:53 PM
I think the hole is deep enough now, CC and Jacob.
We need a hero to get them out...
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:46:55 PM
Is it really so hard for you to recognize the connection? If so, then I'll dumb it down for you.
Taking personal risks to save others = good
I agree that your position only makes sense if it is dumbed down. Perhaps you might want to consider a more nuanced sophisticated view of the world which considers the surrounding circumstances before jumping to the conclusion that physically intervening is always the right answer.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:45:27 PMWow. So discussing them as anything other than paradigms of perfection is now worthy of derision? God forbid that we should learn something from what happened by the mistakes that were made. And I'm sorry - to you and to their families - but mistakes were made that can teach us many, many things.
No.
But calling victims of an act of terrorism "sheep" to score a point in a discussion about a high-school spat is as tacky as the Brain in with three pigs in a vat of molasses.
For what it's worth, I think the kid did the right thing, and would be proud of him was my son. I also expect that CC is right and the story has been told to sell to a specific audience. I also think the school has the right policy.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 07, 2013, 12:50:26 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:46:55 PM
Is it really so hard for you to recognize the connection? If so, then I'll dumb it down for you.
Taking personal risks to save others = good
I agree that your position only makes sense if it is dumbed down. Perhaps you might want to consider a more nuanced sophisticated view of the world which considers the surrounding circumstances before jumping to the conclusion that physically intervening is always the right answer.
Or I could take your view on the world, which is that physically intervening might hurt me so I'll stand back and hope nothing happens.
I'm not saying that anything is wrong with your view - unlike you seem to think of mine - except that I would likely choose differently, and have done so. I also wouldn't judge others badly for jumping up to help while others sit back because it's safer, like you've done regarding that boy.
I'll concede that using the 9/11 tragedy was a bad idea to make my point. Nonetheless, I still believe that the point is the same. The easy answer is to do nothing. It takes someone special to be willing to step up and help, especially when there's real danger.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:53:16 PM
No.
But calling victims of an act of terrorism "sheep" to score a point in a discussion about a high-school spat is as tacky as the Brain in with three pigs in a vat of molasses.
I've already conceded that. Want it in blood?
QuoteFor what it's worth, I think the kid did the right thing, and would be proud of him was my son. I also expect that CC is right and the story has been told to sell to a specific audience. I also think the school has the right policy.
I agree on all points but the last.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:56:01 PM
I'll concede that using the 9/11 tragedy was a bad idea to make my point. Nonetheless, I still believe that the point is the same.
I am glad you did because I was instantly reacting to that and glad I could talk about it. Thanks.
The school might be doing the right thing here but it immediately brought up bad stuff for me.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:56:01 PM
Or I could take your view on the world, which is that physically intervening might hurt me so I'll stand back and hope nothing happens.
:lol: Please tell me where I stated that is my world view. The fact that you have generalized my view that the school's policy to discourage violence amongst its students to this is, well, astonishing.
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:57:34 PM
I've already conceded that. Want it in blood?
Hmmm... :hmm:
... nah, it's okay. We're good :hug:
Quote from: MerithynQuote from: JacobFor what it's worth, I think the kid did the right thing, and would be proud of him was my son. I also expect that CC is right and the story has been told to sell to a specific audience. I also think the school has the right policy.
I agree on all points but the last.
So let's say we - as a school - have a policy that says "violence is strictly and completely forbidden, under all circumstances; unless it's necessary to defend yourself or heroically protect someone else". Briar in the article doesn't get scolded (nor does he get a newspaper article about him either), and that's great.
What do we do about all the incidents of violence where the participants - possibly on both sides of the conflict - claim they are heroically protecting someone else? Because I'm pretty sure "he started it" and "I was helping my friend" are pretty easy extenuating circumstances to claim for most people involved in schoolyard spats, however true it may be. How do we deal with that?
Quote from: Valmy on June 07, 2013, 01:00:00 PM
I am glad you did because I was instantly reacting to that and glad I could talk about it. Thanks.
The school might be doing the right thing here but it immediately brought up bad stuff for me.
It was the first thing that came to my mind, too. Maybe Seedy is right, and that shift is becoming more pervasive because of what happened on 9/11.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 12:53:16 PM
as tacky as the Brain in with three pigs in a vat of molasses.
What size of vat do you have in mind there :hmm:
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:56:01 PM
I'll concede that using the 9/11 tragedy was a bad idea to make my point. Nonetheless, I still believe that the point is the same. The easy answer is to do nothing. It takes someone special to be willing to step up and help, especially when there's real danger.
When you post something like this, makes it hard to swallow that you aren't blaming 9/11 vics. Not that I think you are but your phrasing leaves you open to criticism on that front.
Quote from: garbon on June 07, 2013, 01:14:57 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 12:56:01 PM
I'll concede that using the 9/11 tragedy was a bad idea to make my point. Nonetheless, I still believe that the point is the same. The easy answer is to do nothing. It takes someone special to be willing to step up and help, especially when there's real danger.
When you post something like this, makes it hard to swallow that you aren't blaming 9/11 vics. Not that I think you are but your phrasing leaves you open to criticism on that front.
As I've said, there are those who act and those who don't. I don't know that "blame" comes into play against those who choose not to act so much as accolades to do to those who do act. The default is to do nothing. In fact, as has been stated, we're actually
taught to do nothing. It's because that's the default that when someone does act we call it heroism.
As an alternative, I don't think that choosing to do nothing is cowardly. It's cowardly to run away and leave others to fend for themselves, but it isn't cowardly to not act. At least not in my mind. Which is why I say that I don't blame anyone on those planes for what happened. At the same time, we can learn from them.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 01:04:43 PM
So let's say we - as a school - have a policy that says "violence is strictly and completely forbidden, under all circumstances; unless it's necessary to defend yourself or heroically protect someone else". Briar in the article doesn't get scolded (nor does he get a newspaper article about him either), and that's great.
What do we do about all the incidents of violence where the participants - possibly on both sides of the conflict - claim they are heroically protecting someone else? Because I'm pretty sure "he started it" and "I was helping my friend" are pretty easy extenuating circumstances to claim for most people involved in schoolyard spats, however true it may be. How do we deal with that?
This is where the "over-worked principal/teacher" dynamic comes into play. It used to be that school administrators tried to work out what happened and why, and then acted based on that. Now, few administrators have time for that kind of thing, and School Boards wouldn't allow it anyway, because of the abuses that were heaped on in the past against various groups of people (racism, rich vs poor, boys vs. girls, etc).
I think, however, that we've grown as a nation and more and more people have learned from our past mistakes in that stuff. We're not perfect, but I do think that we can let the ropes go a little bit slack and let administrators have a bit more leeway. In that, I think we can be more reasonable about how we approach these kinds of situations instead of throwing out the "rules are rules" excuse to handle them poorly.
Quote from: Jacob on June 07, 2013, 01:04:43 PM
So let's say we - as a school - have a policy that says "violence is strictly and completely forbidden, under all circumstances; unless it's necessary to defend yourself or heroically protect someone else". Briar in the article doesn't get scolded (nor does he get a newspaper article about him either), and that's great.
What do we do about all the incidents of violence where the participants - possibly on both sides of the conflict - claim they are heroically protecting someone else? Because I'm pretty sure "he started it" and "I was helping my friend" are pretty easy extenuating circumstances to claim for most people involved in schoolyard spats, however true it may be. How do we deal with that?
That's where the "helicopter parents" come into play.
Generally speaking, schools often will simply impose the same discipline on both participants in a fight regardless. It's the course of least resistance. Teachers etc. lack the ability or willingness to reliably play dectective.
Problem is, this means that the bully and his or her victim get the same punishment when the bully picks on the victim and the victim fights back.
Practically speaking, the only remedy for that, unfortunately, is for the much-reviled parents to exert pressure on the school authorities on the kid's behalf - making punishing the victim not the course of least resistance. Of course, that raises the possibility that the parents of the bully, not the parents of the victim, go assertive. The main benefit of assertive parents is that they can galvanize the school administration into at least attempting to look into these matters.
Quote from: Malthus on June 07, 2013, 02:23:04 PM
That's where the "helicopter parents" come into play.
Generally speaking, schools often will simply impose the same discipline on both participants in a fight regardless. It's the course of least resistance. Teachers etc. lack the ability or willingness to reliably play dectective.
Problem is, this means that the bully and his or her victim get the same punishment when the bully picks on the victim and the victim fights back.
Practically speaking, the only remedy for that, unfortunately, is for the much-reviled parents to exert pressure on the school authorities on the kid's behalf - making punishing the victim not the course of least resistance. Of course, that raises the possibility that the parents of the bully, not the parents of the victim, go assertive. The main benefit of assertive parents is that they can galvanize the school administration into at least attempting to look into these matters.
Or the school administration - and other lazy people - can just complain about "helicopter parents" and how they're ruining society. :P
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 02:07:47 PM
As I've said, there are those who act and those who don't. I don't know that "blame" comes into play against those who choose not to act so much as accolades to do to those who do act. The default is to do nothing. In fact, as has been stated, we're actually taught to do nothing. It's because that's the default that when someone does act we call it heroism.
Let's say the hijacking on 9/11 was just a regular hijacking, and that they were all on their way to Cuba. Would some of the passengers fighting back and causing the plane to crash, killing everyone, still be "heroism" to you? If you wouldn't applaud such actions in that situation, then I don't see how you can legitimately criticize anything the 9/11 passengers did.
Quote from: Kleves on June 07, 2013, 03:09:18 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 07, 2013, 02:07:47 PM
As I've said, there are those who act and those who don't. I don't know that "blame" comes into play against those who choose not to act so much as accolades to do to those who do act. The default is to do nothing. In fact, as has been stated, we're actually taught to do nothing. It's because that's the default that when someone does act we call it heroism.
Let's say the hijacking on 9/11 was just a regular hijacking, and that they were all on their way to Cuba. Would some of the passengers fighting back and causing the plane to crash, killing everyone, still be "heroism" to you? If you wouldn't applaud such actions in that situation, then I don't see how you can legitimately criticize anything the 9/11 passengers did.
To me, yes, it would be heroism. Tragic, but heroic.
I'm not flying with Meri.
I am. Gonna use her boobies as a floatation device.
Only if first class breaks off like the Enterprise-D's saucer section.
That would've meant Picard surrendered. NO DEAL
Quote from: Malthus on June 07, 2013, 02:23:04 PM
Generally speaking, schools often will simply impose the same discipline on both participants in a fight regardless. It's the course of least resistance. Teachers etc. lack the ability or willingness to reliably play dectective.
In my experience, many (though not all) teachers and others in the educational system lack the ability to reliably tell their asses from holes in the ground.
Quote from: dps on June 07, 2013, 06:43:47 PM
Quote from: Malthus on June 07, 2013, 02:23:04 PM
Generally speaking, schools often will simply impose the same discipline on both participants in a fight regardless. It's the course of least resistance. Teachers etc. lack the ability or willingness to reliably play dectective.
In my experience, many (though not all) teachers and others in the educational system lack the ability to reliably tell their asses from holes in the ground.
:lol: and yet they want to get paid even more.
If you don't know whether your destination is Cuba or death, then doesn't it make sense to fight? :huh:
Quote from: 11B4V on June 07, 2013, 07:14:51 PM:lol: and yet they want to get paid even more.
Do teachers get paid a lot where you're at?
Have you guys figured out you're arguing the same side? Sheep could be a good word for both extremes here, since both extremes involve acting (or inaction, as the case may be) as a matter of policy instead of evaluating the situation for what it is.
Quote from: Jacob on June 08, 2013, 12:27:19 AM
Quote from: 11B4V on June 07, 2013, 07:14:51 PM:lol: and yet they want to get paid even more.
Do teachers get paid a lot where you're at?
50k on average
Quote from: 11B4V on June 07, 2013, 07:14:51 PM
:lol: and yet they want to get paid even more.
:lol: and yet so do you.
Quote from: dps on June 07, 2013, 06:43:47 PM
Quote from: Malthus on June 07, 2013, 02:23:04 PM
Generally speaking, schools often will simply impose the same discipline on both participants in a fight regardless. It's the course of least resistance. Teachers etc. lack the ability or willingness to reliably play dectective.
In my experience, many (though not all) teachers and others in the educational system lack the ability to reliably tell their asses from holes in the ground.
I suppose that explains much. Thankfully most people had better teachers than the ones who taught you.
To be fair to dps I teach a lot of Ed Majors in my Western Civilization class. They are often the types to be unable to pour piss out of a boot with instructions written on the heel.
Quote from: PDH on June 09, 2013, 01:23:00 PM
They are often the types to be unable to pour piss out of a boot with instructions written on the heel.
:lol:
I have to remember that one.
I stole that one
You can't reject an analogy for magnitude. That's how analogies work best. Stop being so fucking stupid.
Quote from: PDH on June 09, 2013, 01:23:00 PM
To be fair to dps I teach a lot of Ed Majors in my Western Civilization class. They are often the types to be unable to pour piss out of a boot with instructions written on the heel.
Oh, I have no doubt about that. I taught in public schools, and the only thing worse than the teachers were the administrators. But I'd bet that even people who teach Western Civ at college levels (as I have done) want more money. I teach at the High School level and said I wouldn't teach a second AP course without more money.
Those who can't do, teach.
Those who can't teach, administrate.
Those who can't administrate get elected to the school board.