A Fight Broke Out Today

[Thesemindz]

As a teacher, I have to assume that a fist fight can turn into a knife fight.

I wanted to address this seperately.

I'm right there with you. This is the basis for my entire self defense philosophy, because as a man of peace, I must also assume that a fist fight can turn into a knife fight.

I wish more people understood this.


-Rob

 

[Bruno@MT]

Assuming this situation really happened like this guy says what makes you think that admitting what he did would make it's way back to the law enforcment agency that came to investigate this incedent? How many people know this guys real name anyways and actually knows where this all happened at? A person could admit to a minor crime on this forum and more than likely it would go unreported to anyone. Not very many people know each others real FULL name on this forum. I could say I started a fight at a bar last night and lied to the police about everything but who here really knows my full name, where I live, and at which bar I was at last night? It's not going to make it back to my local police station that I lied. Come on guys/gals......lets be realistic here.

Yes. Let's be. I moderate a board of 10000 people (so roughly the same order of magnitude as this one). Let me explain something to you.
I agree that the likely hood of the police finding this by themselves is practically zero.

But on every board, there is a number of people who dislike each other. Sometimes they flame each other, but depending on how you run the board, this can remain largely invisible to the general population.

Take a membership count of 10000, and then simply apply census statistics-> On the board will be con men, thieves and frauds, predators, and virtually every type of scum out there. They may even be respected senior members, because noone really knows them for real. I've seen it happen. The numbers may be skewed because of the board demographic, but it's impossible to have a group of 10000 persons that are all nice chaps.

If there is someone who has an axe to grind with the OP, then you can be reasonably sure that an anonymous tip will find its way to the police. Hell, it might even be a griefer who doesn't even know the OP.

Knowing where the OP is located is sufficient. The local police will have a record of the incident, so they can figure out the names, even if we here don't. Or vice versa, with the names, any police dept can figure out location of the incident.

And then the OP will get a visit from some cops who didn't really like being lied to, let alone that the OP started bragging about it. They'd almost have to throw the book at him/her.

Rule number 1 when posting anything on the net (or via email):
Do not write anything down that you wouldn't want your partner, kids, family, employer, banker, district attorney, or worst enemy to find out.

 

[Shinobi Teikiatsu]

No one really cares about the situation at my school anyways. The cops didn't reprimand me or my friend considering she has a perfectly clean record (somehow) and the other guy wasn't too upset about it either, he saw it as just rough-housing. He actually came up to me and started joking about it

 

[Gordon Nore]

No one really cares about the situation at my school anyways. The cops didn't reprimand me or my friend considering she has a perfectly clean record (somehow) and the other guy wasn't too upset about it either, he saw it as just rough-housing. He actually came up to me and started joking about it

They obviously cared enough to bring in the police and to question those involved in the fight -- that's something educators and administrators do to keep schools safe. The fact that you and the milk thrower had a laugh about it tells us all very clearly about who doesn't care.

I go to a dangerous school, we have a mini gang-war that just broke out so now we're pretty much on lockdown.

And picking fights during lunch hour helps this situation how...?

 

[blindsage]

Before the advent of mandatory government schooling we had a 97% functional literacy rate amongst the free people of this country, and education rates between 75 and 99 percent by region. Since then, the definition of functionally literate has gone from the ability to read and comprehend the founding documents of this nation, to the ability to fill out a job resume. And still by this new definition, less than half of american adults are functionally literate. 20% of high school graduates can't read their own diplomas, and these are the kids who succeeded in the government school system.

I would love to see sources on these statistics since I've never heard anything remotely like it before. I do believe there is a strong element in our schools design to create workers and promote the state, but your statistics don't sound even remotely believable.

 

[Thesemindz]

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not attacking the teachers. I have many teachers in my family, and most of them are hard working dedicated people who sacrifice their own time and money because they believe in what they are doing.

I'm attacking a system which I believe, and I believe that this is easily provable, has no interest in educating children. Educated children ask questions and challenge authority. Instead, they want to create workers who will believe the government when they tell them they are fixing the problem, and will hate who they point at and buy what they're selling.

When I entered a government high school my parents were sent a letter where the school bragged about how they create young adults who are ready for the work force. Not young adults ready to change the world, or build a better mouse trap, or cure cancer, or write poetry. Join the work force. Because that was their goal, and they were proud of it. I had to drop Calculus to take a class called "workplace readiness" because it became a mandatory credit for graduation my junior year. Despite the fact that I had held a job for over two years already. That is what is going on in the government school system.


-Rob

 

[sgtmac_46]

They dropped out... isn't the first goal in school to educate the students... ten days is a bit harsh, what if they were just defending themselfs.

Welcoming to the wonderfully asinine world of 'Zero Tolerance' teaching.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Yeah, the rule is a bit harsh, arbitrary, and sometimes unfair. If you can prove you were just trying to defend yourself and get away, the administrators will take that into consideration. But generally, it's a tough sell. Kinda like the real world, eh? Anyway, I work in a big district, and my opinions on these things don't matter for squat. Thems the rules.

Actually, in the real world, we acknowledge the right of self-defense. Most states have codified self-defense to protect citizens from arbitrary punishment.

 

[Raynac]

Actually, in the real world, we acknowledge the right of self-defense. Most states have codified self-defense to protect citizens from arbitrary punishment.

yeah well from what I've seen the real world and the school world don't always mix. as seen in the examples given earlier. teachers and princaples don't want the responability for figureing out who was in the fault so punishments are handed out across the board.

 

[Gordon Nore]

yeah well from what I've seen the real world and the school world don't always mix. as seen in the examples given earlier. teachers and princaples don't want the responability for figureing out who was in the fault so punishments are handed out across the board.

Which isn't too far from the real world. In many jobs, fighting is grounds for dismissal. It's in employee handbooks as a major no-no. Nobody has any time for it.

 

[Jade Tigress]

Mod Note -

The posts discussing literacy have been split and moved to The Study. You can continue that discussion here.

Pamela Piszczek
MT Super Moderator

 

[sgtmac_46]

yeah well from what I've seen the real world and the school world don't always mix. as seen in the examples given earlier. teachers and princaples don't want the responability for figureing out who was in the fault so punishments are handed out across the board.

That's exactly true.......it's out of laziness and a desire to abdicate personal responsibility to bureaucratic rules.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Which isn't too far from the real world. In many jobs, fighting is grounds for dismissal. It's in employee handbooks as a major no-no. Nobody has any time for it.

There is a fundamental difference, however, between 'fighting' and 'self-defense'. If you're in the employee parking lot, and someone attacks you, and you defend yourself that's not a 'fight'......but many schools would suspend you if you raised so much as a finger to defend yourself from an unprovoked beating.

In most schools the only legitimate response to a beating is to assume the turtle position and think of Christmas.

Of course we are talking about the same school bureaucrats who would expel and attempt to bring felony charges against a 10 year old girl because her mother packed a steak knife in her lunch to cut her steak.http://www.wftv.com/news/14858405/detail.html

There are those of a bureaucratic mindset who would say 'But those are the rules' who would merely prove my point about the intellectual power of bureaucracies.

 

[BrandonLucas]

From my experience...

Schools concentrate on education, and how much concentration is placed on education is the difference between different schools and school systems. Schools are schools. They are there for education.

That being said, in light of the events over the past 15 years or so, schools have become more and more strict on their policies and procedures, but this is as a result of society pushing the envelope....maybe not society as a whole, but the bottom-of-the-barrell people who cast a bad light on society. In other words, the few bad apples that ruin the barrell...

So schools have had to react. When I was in the 11th grade, the Columbine shootings happened. As a result of that, our school went into an almost lockdown status. We used to eat lunch in a courtyard, but the school administration decided that we shouldn't be allowed to eat outside, for fear of a sniper, since our school was bordered by wooded areas on 3 of the 4 sides. They employed police officers to stand in each hallway, throughout the day.

So, given that schools have to have more security in light of somewhat recent events, they still have to uphold a reputation. Even public schools. If all the parents decided that they wanted to put their kids in a different school, there wouldn't be a need for a "less desirable" school.

It's almost the same regarding pregnant girls in highschool. There was a big deal a few years back, before I got to highschool, where a girl was in her third trimester when it came time for her to graduate. The school board tried to prevent her from walking, saying that they were concerned that the stress of the graduation ceremony would make her go into labor, but what the real issue was was that they didn't want to be known as a school that allows its students to get pregnant. They viewed it like allowing a pregnant girl to walk with her class, that they were "condoning" teen pregnancy. And in a way, I can see that...but it's doesn't make it fair.

Like someone else posted before, it's a beurocratic response.

The same thing goes for fighting. I think they're looking at the act of fighting more than who's at fault. Even if you're being picked on, and you do nothing to protect yourself, and get beat up, the school board has the right to look into the incident. I think if an unfair judgement is given, it can and should be challenged, even if it goes to court, and a lawyer is required.

But try to look at it from how the school is viewing it, whether their view is right or wrong. It's 99.9% about being politically correct. If there are 2 students that are in an altercation, they don't want to take the time to investigate it. The quickest way to deal with it is to punish all parties involved, and be done with it, and move on to the next item on the agenda.

The problem with that is that it doesn't send out the right message. It's sending the message that you may as well try to beat the crap out of the guy picking on you, since you're going to get in trouble anyway. If they wanted to send a better message, each case should be investiged, and the person or people involved that are responsible for causing the initial incident should be punished.

It should be dealt with on a case by case basis, because not every fight is cut and dry, with one person being the bully and one person being the victim.

Just like anything else in life, there is no one-size-fits-all answer.

Now, regarding the issue of posting on a public forum not going back to the authorities:

I actually had this happen to me, so I know that it's possible:

I was posting comments on a site about martial arts in general, and ninja powers were being debated.

Without getting into particulars about the entire conversation, this is basically what happened:

(other guy): I'm a ninja, and I know how to make myself invisible.


(me): ok, so prove it.

That was the extent of it. Nothing was said to provoke the guy, make him angry, or to cause him to direct his anger toward me. I simply said that I won't believe a claim like that unless I see it. It just so happens that this guy was crazy.

He looked up my ip address using some kind of software, got my information from my ip address, and got my phone number. Then the guy actually called me and left a message on my answering machine at 4 am:

"Hey, I just wanted you to know how easy it is to find you. I know you have a family, and I know how to get to your house. I'm going to use my ninja abilities to kill you and your entire family, and prove to you that I can do what I told you I can do."

So, yeah, I called the cops. They tracked the guy down, but basically gave him a slap on the wrist and told him to never do it again. (He was in Oregon, and I'm in south Ga...the chances of him appearing on my doorstep are pretty slim).

So don't ever assume that just because you post something on a site that it won't come back to haunt you outside of cyberspace.

 

[Gordon Nore]

From my experience...

Schools concentrate on education, and how much concentration is placed on education is the difference between different schools and school systems. Schools are schools. They are there for education.

Ideally yes. Depending on the grade and community, schools are also dispensing clothing and food. Teachers forfeit after-school time to telephone or corespond with parents over many issues. And on and on. If the sum of my job were the three Rs, we would be successful beyond anyone's expectations.

Like someone else posted before, it's a beurocratic response.

Yep. We just ordered thirty pairs of goggles for badminton. Somewhere, perhaps not even in our own board, someone took a shuttlecock to the eye, and then there meetings, paperwork, lawyers, recommendations, a decision was made that PE depts had to order goggles to teach badmintion to grade six.

The same thing goes for fighting. I think they're looking at the act of fighting more than who's at fault. Even if you're being picked on, and you do nothing to protect yourself, and get beat up, the school board has the right to look into the incident. I think if an unfair judgement is given, it can and should be challenged, even if it goes to court, and a lawyer is required.

Any suspension over one day can be challenged in my jurisdiction, and hearings roll out pretty promptly. Absolutely, I agree, a student defending himself should not face discipline, but school discipline generally does not operate in a manner consistent with criminal justice. An administrator here can discipline based on a preponderence of the evidence. It's not a question of reasonable doubt; thus a police officer needs probable cause to open a locker. A principal can simply open it.

But try to look at it from how the school is viewing it, whether their view is right or wrong. It's 99.9% about being politically correct. If there are 2 students that are in an altercation, they don't want to take the time to investigate it. The quickest way to deal with it is to punish all parties involved, and be done with it, and move on to the next item on the agenda.

Yes and no. I can't speak for other jurisidictions, but administrators here have a duty to investigate under the Education Act of the Province. A principal who fails exercise that duty will eventually be sued or sacked. If s/he fouls it up badly enough, s/he'll will be reading about it in the papers. As to the PCness of the matter, I would say that we don't have the consistent binding sense of authority and ethics that we once did. We are not all creatures of a specific church or clan -- the school is probably one of the last community institutions charged with maintaining a code of ethics and behaviour.

The problem with that is that it doesn't send out the right message. It's sending the message that you may as well try to beat the crap out of the guy picking on you, since you're going to get in trouble anyway. If they wanted to send a better message, each case should be investiged, and the person or people involved that are responsible for causing the initial incident should be punished.

I agree somewhat -- it certainly makes kids who are vulnerable to abuse in school feel more isolated. At the same time, I've mourned dead children as both a teacher in a school and the parent of a student in school. I think many kinds of "zero tolerance" is risky. You wanna have zero tolerance for knives in school, I'm all for it. Zero tolerance for fighting -- there's always an exception worth examining.

 

[BrandonLucas]

Ideally yes. Depending on the grade and community, schools are also dispensing clothing and food. Teachers forfeit after-school time to telephone or corespond with parents over many issues. And on and on. If the sum of my job were the three Rs, we would be successful beyond anyone's expectations.



Yep. We just ordered thirty pairs of goggles for badminton. Somewhere, perhaps not even in our own board, someone took a shuttlecock to the eye, and then there meetings, paperwork, lawyers, recommendations, a decision was made that PE depts had to order goggles to teach badmintion to grade six.



Any suspension over one day can be challenged in my jurisdiction, and hearings roll out pretty promptly. Absolutely, I agree, a student defending himself should not face discipline, but school discipline generally does not operate in a manner consistent with criminal justice. An administrator here can discipline based on a preponderence of the evidence. It's not a question of reasonable doubt; thus a police officer needs probable cause to open a locker. A principal can simply open it.



Yes and no. I can't speak for other jurisidictions, but administrators here have a duty to investigate under the Education Act of the Province. A principal who fails exercise that duty will eventually be sued or sacked. If s/he fouls it up badly enough, s/he'll will be reading about it in the papers. As to the PCness of the matter, I would say that we don't have the consistent binding sense of authority and ethics that we once did. We are not all creatures of a specific church or clan -- the school is probably one of the last community institutions charged with maintaining a code of ethics and behaviour.



I agree somewhat -- it certainly makes kids who are vulnerable to abuse in school feel more isolated. At the same time, I've mourned dead children as both a teacher in a school and the parent of a student in school. I think many kinds of "zero tolerance" is risky. You wanna have zero tolerance for knives in school, I'm all for it. Zero tolerance for fighting -- there's always an exception worth examining.

First, I just want to say that it's sad when a school enforces wearing protective equipment for badminton. It's a little like wearing a bullet-proof vest to play "go fish".

The only other thing I can really add to your post, is that when I'm saying that each case should be examined seperately, I'm referring mainly to simply fighting. I agree with zero tolerance for knives, even for the child who was caught with a steak knife to cut her steak. There is simply no reason to have a knife at school. Period. The girl's parent(s) could have cut the steak up for her before it was packed, or simply given her something else to take that doesn't require cutting.

There still isn't a one-size-fits-all rule that applies to all situations. Because situations can be different and the same at the same time, each situation has to be examined seperately, as its own case.

The problem is that school boards just don't want to take the time to do that...and honestly, unless they had someone appointed to make those decisions, they wouldn't have the time.