Spring Valley High School: Cop Fired, Conservatives Rallying

|

Community outreach

The South Carolina high school resource officer who knocked a female student out of her desk and dragged her across the room has been fired.

Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott made the announcement during a noon press conference. Officer Ben Fields responded inappropriately to the student's defiance, according to Lott.

"When he threw her across the room, that's when I made my decision," said Lott.

The sheriff noted that the student was still in the wrong—she disobeyed orders given to her by teachers, staff, and Officer Fields. But that did not excuse Fields' behavior, according to Lott.

"The student's behavior as not what I looked at," he said. "He was terminated for his actions."

Lott's appraisal of the situation essentially mirrors what I wrote yesterday:

Spring Valley High School Resource Officer Ben Fields' decision to knock a defiant female student out of her desk, drag her across a classroom, and pin her against the floor—a horrific assault captured on video and widely shared on social media—was completely unjustified.

It was unjustified, no matter how much inappropriate behavior preceded it. It was unjustified, even if school authorities had every reason to expel the student from the classroom. It was unjustified, precisely because there is no conceivable circumstance in which it's okay for a cop to brutalize an unarmed, unthreatening teen girl.

Perhaps this will chasten conservatives who leapt to the defense of the officer. National Review's David French wrote:

After watching and re-watching the incident, I keep coming to the same conclusion: This is what happens when a person resists a lawful order from a police officer to move (UPDATE: CNN is now reporting that a third video shows the student hitting the officer in the face when he initially put his hands on her). Unless the school is willing to have one student commandeer the classroom indefinitely, the officer has few options beyond physical force — and the use of physical force is rarely pretty to see. In this instance, the use of force was decisive, brief, and did not physically harm the student.

But the use of force certainly could have harmed the student—she was flung backward out of her desk, onto the floor. Even if physical force was justified, the cop applied it in a manner disproportionate to what was needed.

This isn't just my opinion, evidently. It's the verdict of Fields' boss, the sheriff.

NEXT: Dear Rand Paul: Legalize it, Already!

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I can’t wait until some copsucker moron calls her a “thug”.

    1. Already done. Multiple times.

      1. Of course it has.

    2. Jazz “This Fedora Makes Me Irresistible To The Ladies” Shaw will be on the case shortly.

      1. Ha! Shaw can’t even recognize an obviously reversed video and yet he comments on police videos constantly.

        Skydiving INTO a plane. This is just nuts. https://i.imgur.com/Z41lVaU.gifv

        1. Fucking wow. Have you seen the one where the dude lands on a lake without deploying his chute?

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2xmAWS4akE

    3. I’ve heard “perp” used to describe her.

      “Thug” is an insult, but “perp” belies a different kind of thought process.

  2. “When he threw her across the room, that’s when I made my decision,” said Lott.

    Let’s be clear, Lott, when video of the cop throwing the student across the room made headlines and the story refused to die, that’s when you made your decision.

    1. Yep. Were it not for the video being spread across the internet, the sheriff wouldn’t have batted an eye at the police report of the incident and the king’s man would still be roaming the halls looking for trouble.

      This of course won’t preclude the union from suing the school and the parents on behalf of the poor cop to get his job back.

      1. “During the altercation the girl’s body was dislodged from her seat, causing video of the incident to surface and resulting in the officer’s unfair dismissal.”

        1. During the altercation her assault on the officer the girl’s body was dislodged perpetrator lunged from her seat,

          Totality of the circs. hth. Etc.

      2. Not sure about where this happened, but in most states sheriffs tend to be elected officials. They spend a lot more time listening to voters than your typically appointed police chief.

    2. He made the right decision here, guys. Let’s applaud it absent evidence that he hasn’t made the right decision in cas s where video wasn’t present.

      You all know how I feel about cops in general, but we should applaud them when they make the right decision. Now let’s see if the DA follows suit and files assault and battery charges with a firearm enhancer.

      1. You’re hilarious.

        I’ll give 2 -1 odds he gets his job back, and 20-1 odds he gets another LEO job.

        Charged? Puh-lease.

        1. Charged? Puh-lease.

          This is funny if you imagine Jim Mora saying it.

  3. I am horrified and revolted by everyone who seems to believe the police have the right to do anything they want, up to and including injuring or even killing the person they are dealing with, if they dare to disagree with the policeperson, and especially if they mouth off.

    Deadly force (including throwing someone across the room, where they might have hit their head on a desk edge and died) should be limited to when you actually feel your life is in danger. If this cop felt his life was in danger he’s in the wrong profession. And, apparently, his boss agrees.

    1. From what I’ve read, all the students in the school were terrified of him. Apparently it was not uncommon for him to throw kids across the room and otherwise brutalize them for fun. This was just the first time it was recorded.

      1. From what I’ve read, all the students in the school were terrified of him.

        This being the case, I’m gonna assume that the video was staged, which make him an even bigger moron.

        1. When the administrator called for the cop, a girl in the class spoke up and told the other kids to get their phones out. She knew something was going to happen and wanted a record of it. Smart kid.

    2. The Police have a right to force you to do what you are told… He was the third person to try to get he to comply….

      Is it your contention that people NEVER have to comply with authority figures.

      Had she complied the class could have continued, she was the cause of the problem, not the policeman.

      1. So, violent assault as the penalty for disrupting a classroom. Got. It.

        Next: dpbisme advocates for tazing of disruptive first graders.

        1. Next: dpbisme advocates for tazing of disruptive first graders.

          Well they can be a handful.

      2. The point is that the level of force used by the cop was dangerous and unnecessary, not that the girl was in the right.

        1. Exactly. The choice here was, violently remove disruptive student from the classroom, or leave her in the classroom. I see no way the cop could have removed her from the classroom if she were unwilling to go.

          That said, the better option would have been for the cop to walk away.

          But, the girls disruption of the class would still need to be handled, or do we want to just hand control of the school to the most disruptive students? Note: that is a huge reason for the failings of many inner city schools.

          I fear that we’ve stepped out of civilization and into a law of the jungle situation here. The best way to handle this would have been to not allow the culture to disintegrate as much as it has.

          Students who do not want to learn should be cut loose, those that want to learn should be taught. Laws requiring kids to be in school until they are 18 are not helping. They should let this girl do whatever she wants to do (that isn’t harming someone else) anywhere else but school.

          1. “the better option would have been for the cop to walk away.” If he had walked away there would have been no stopping little brats like her from making the school a living hell for everyone else.

            1. So the teachers and parents can’t do anything? It’s either the Thick Blue Line or total chaos? Your definition of ‘living hell’ would be foreign to anyone who has had even the slightest amount of hardship in their life.

              1. “So the teachers and parents can’t do anything? It’s either the Thick Blue Line or total chaos? ”

                Exactly. If a teacher tells a kid to do something, and the kid says no, the teacher is not allowed to do anything except call for an administrator or the cops. That, by the way, assumes that the unarmed teacher isn’t out massed in every physical department, and if the kid decides to administer an *sswhooping, nothing will be done before the teacher is injured or worse. As for the parents, what makes you think the thugess has any? Mama’s baby, Daddy maybe is the rule.

          2. The choice here was, violently remove disruptive student from the classroom, or leave her in the classroom.

            My point was that the level of violence used by the cop did not fit the situation.

            If you watch the video you see the cop give her a choice between going peacefully or by force, and then he immediately goes for her throat without giving her a chance to respond. Also, he removed the desk behind her before asking the question. This leads me to believe he had no intention of letting her come peacefully.

            Cops are supposed to be trained to use different levels of force, depending upon the situation. I am quite positive that she could have been removed from the desk without flipping it onto the floor and dragging her across the room by her neck.

            It looks to me like this power-lifter was looking for an excuse to show off his muscles while assaulting a child. Of course he is a cop, so that is to be expected. That’s the kind of person who seeks out the job.

            1. That guy can do squats with about 8 times the girl’s weight on his shoulders.

      3. The Police have a right to force you to do what you are told…

        If the school didn’t have a cop in the hall, would they have been unable to handle a student that refused to get out of her chair? Because the vast majority of schools don’t have their own cop and have certainly been able to deal with obstinate kids without thrashing them.

        If a teacher couldn’t have gotten away with that behavior then a cop shouldn’t get away that same behavior. The legitimacy of the use of violence should not depend on one’s costume.

        1. Never been a teacher today, have you?

          In 95%+ of the public schools, the teacher can’t deal with obstinate kids. They simply let them disrupt the class and hope it doesn’t get physical. That’s one reaon kids don’t learn there.

      4. Nominal authority and practical authority are not the same thing. The teacher and the cop had a lot of the former, but apparently not much of the latter. If this incident had passed without media scrutiny, there might have been more obedience in the short term but it would have come at the expense of less respect in the long term. You can often get what you want by force, but it doesn’t come for free.

      5. Actually, they don’t have a “right” to do anything. They only have the “power” to force you to follow a lawful command.

        Of course, they abuse that power all of the time, but the fact remains.

      6. so often people who try to defend cops miss the point. first, no one is saying the victim was right in whatever provoked the officer. second, it is not the concept of force, it is the EXCESSIVE force. if she was being belligerent, and difficult, and he shot her in the face, would you try to defend him for that??! where, exactly, do you draw the line for how extreme is too extreme? (or do you really believe cops should get blank checks for what is OK?) was this really the least violent way a trained cop could think of to deal with a pain in the ass teenager?

      7. It is EXACTLY the point of a lot of the anti-law enforcement schmoes on here that people don’t have to obey orders they don’t like. I am sure none of them let Mama and Daddy tell them what to do while they were growing up.

        1. Idiot.

      8. Is it your contention that people NEVER have to comply with authority figures.

        Sure is my contention.

        If the students were armed – which should be their right – there wouldn’t be an authority figure pulling shit like this in the first place.

        1. Since none of them were legal adults, it was and is NOT their right to be armed. Strike 1.

      9. See, there are crimes and then there are school disciplinary problems. The latter don’t require the intervention of the police. The officer should never have been dispatched to deal with the issue – the principal or other high level administrator should have responded. So I blame the person who called the cop in the first place, which I believe was the teacher.

      1. Yeah, yeah. I know.

        1. Doesn’t count on a story they’re already following. Sheesh.

          1. If you’d clicked on my link you’d have seen the following:

            sarcasmic|10.28.15 @ 1:04PM|#

            School deputy who body slammed student FIRED after emerging smiling from his home… while teen’s lawyer claims she’s been left riddled with injuries including rug burn on her face

            I beat them by twenty six minutes.

            1. By “following” I mean they already reported the original incident and were very likely to report an update – which they did. In other words a H/T was unnecessary.

              1. I still broke the story of him being fired before they did. So nanny-nanny boo-boo.

                1. Here, have a cookie.

                  1. Having a bad day, Rhywun?

                    1. Nah, just bored.

                    2. Not me. I’m writing this message from my hang glider.

      2. If I would have known that hat tips were so rare, I would have enjoyed mine more.

        1. Shut your filthy hole, you.

    1. Or maybe a hat tip to the top story on Google News?

  4. Great? When are they going to file assault charges against him?

    Oh right…..

  5. I’m still trying to wrap my head around the doublespeak of calling a cop in a classroom a “Resource Officer”.

    “Prison guard” seems to be closer to it.

    1. Union Goon.

    2. He’s a resource for students – he’s there to inform them of their rights.

  6. This is what happens when a person resists a lawful order from a police officer to move

    A person. Not “a teenaged girl” or “a minor”.

  7. This is what happens when a person resists a lawful order from a police officer to move

    The “mess with the bull, get the horns” theory of police justice. Good to know we’re holding the people who monopolize legal violence to such high moral standards.

    1. They’re the only thing standing between us and anarchy!

    2. It also assumes that all orders from the police are lawful, which is legally incorrect. But since cops rarely see any consequences for initiating violence when an unlawful order is not obeyed, it may as well be true.

    3. Would we permit mental health professionals to treat psych ward patients like cops are permitted to treat citizens? Somehow nurses and orderlies are able to compel obstinate and often violent patients with a degree of compassion, but our professional LEO class uses the opportunity to mete out some extralegal justice.

      1. MOAR TRAINING!

        Sincerely,
        Officers’ Union

        1. And the attendant overtime…

        2. Honestly, the beatings that cops have committed knowing they were being filmed should long ago have clued people into the fact that law enforcement may have an issue with sociopathy in their ranks. But somehow a man being pummeled by multiple badge-wielding officers is just accepted as the price of civilization.

          1. “the beatings that cops have committed knowing they were being filmed should long ago have clued people into the fact that law enforcement may have an issue with sociopathy in their ranks”

            ^ This.

            I remember when the show Cops premiered and after watching it a few times I said to myself “wow, that’s them on their best behavior. They think they’re showing us how awesome they are. That is very scary.”

  8. The anal rims of the F.O.P. jizzjoy the obedient flicking tongues of schlock-addled cunts like David French who has the goddamn spine of a millipede.

  9. More David French:

    America’s opinion and law-making classes ? walled off in doorman-fronted buildings, gated communities, and generally growing up in the best educational environments ? are making judgments about behaviors and police reactions that are utterly alien to their experience. Having little to no exposure to physical conflict, they have no idea how difficult it is to move an unwilling person, and having blessedly lived in the absence of physical fear, they have no real idea how a human being responds to physical danger.

    Sounds familiar…

    “I, too, don’t believe in drugs. For years I paid my people extra to stay away from that sort of stuff, but someone comes along saying, I’ve got powders where if you put up a three to four thousand dollar investment, you can make fifty thousand distributing, then there is no way to resist it. I want to keep it respectable. I don’t want it near schools. I don’t want it sold to children! That’s an infamia. In my city, we’d keep the traffic to the Dark People, the Coloreds – they’re animals anyway, so let them lose their souls.”

    1. Just watched that the other night. Still an amazing flick.

      1. Meh. It insists upon itself.

    2. It’s funny how French is saying that he and his ilk–because he certainly resides in the opinion-making classes–have no idea what experiencing physical conflict or fear is like, so therefore, he is somehow qualified to excuse the police for experiencing something he has absolutely no knowledge or experience with. Uh…ok.

      I guess the question is, is he retarded, just exceptionally stupid, or mendacious?

      1. He’s ex-military. He seems to have come back from Iraq thinking that America is a war zone as well from looking over his articles on NRO. And his paranoia about Muslims is dialed up to at least 8.

        1. He also handwaved the drone assassination leaks and blamed the DWB hospital bombing on the Taliban who were nowhere near there.

          Basically as far as French is concerned, people with the authority to act violently get those jobs because they are never wrong.

          1. *MSF* hospital, you Americentric barbarian!

      2. yes

    3. Having little to no exposure to physical conflict, they have no idea how difficult it is to move an unwilling person, and having blessedly lived in the absence of physical fear, they have no real idea how a human being responds to physical danger.

      I think he is probably right about that much.

      The problem isn’t that sometimes force might be necessary, but rather that cops are far too quick to use disproportionate force when they really don’t have to. Often because they overestimate the magnitude of the threat they face or contribute to its escalation.

      1. Cops are quick to use disproportionate force because they’re sadists. No need to over-analyze it.

      2. they have no real idea how a human being responds to physical danger

        I’m still trying to figure that part out. From what I can tell from the video, she responded to physical danger by first refusing to move (played dead) but when the beast attacked her she attempted to drive it off by striking at its snout. Is that not “Survival Skills 101: So You’re Being Attacked By A Vicious Predator” ?

        1. The first line of defense is usually to pull your shirt up over your head to make yourself taller and scream bloody murder.

          In addition to securing the student’s safety from attack, the move would’ve given the brave occifer the opportunity to see boobies somewhere other than the mirror. So, win-win.

          1. Bam!

            Arrested for child pornography. Take that you filthy child!

    4. I don’t know why you can’t face the simple truth that the officer was basically dealing with a terrorist/warzone situation. Maybe if you weren’t such a well-educated elitist you’d understand why he needed to bodyslam that obstinate little idiot.

    5. Having little to no exposure to physical conflict, they have no idea how difficult it is to move an unwilling person

      WTF?

      Is there a shadow America where High School Football, Wrestling, Hockey, LaCrosse, etc. no longer includes moving unwilling persons?

      Are there really parents that don’t have daily familiarity with moving human bodies against their will?

  10. UPDATE: CNN is now reporting that a third video shows the student hitting the officer in the face when he initially put his hands on her

    “So it’s only natural that he wanted to get a few licks in before defusing the situation.”

    1. Somehow this is supposed to make an animalistic response excusable for the ostensible professional. Again: would we accept a psych ward nurse winding a schizophrenic patient who bit her with a few jabs to the solar-plexus? Or are we going to hold the line on “no level of retaliatory violence is acceptable for a professional”?

  11. UPDATE: CNN is now reporting that a third video shows the student hitting the officer in the face when he initially put his hands on her

    I love how in the authority fetishist’s mind, there isn’t even the idea that maybe it’s natural and proper to fight back against some fucking asshole goon who puts their hands on you and you don’t want them to. Nope: submit to authoritah! If you don’t, it’s evidence showing why it’s ok to assault you!

    It’s really a shame we can’t just lock the authority goons and their authority whores together somewhere and let them abuse and be abused, as they clearly all like it. Then the rest of us could go do something useful or fun. Plus we could film it.

    1. It’s really a shame we can’t just lock the authority goons and their authority whores together somewhere and let them abuse and be abused, as they clearly all like it.

      Thanks. Now I’ve got Eurythmics stuck in my head. Bastard.

          1. Bless you.

      1. Well I did not…UNTIL I READ YOUR REMARK! Thanks for nothing, sarc!

        *bangs head on desk to shake earworm out*

    2. I have a police acquaintance who bragged to me one time about how he’d engineer arrests.

      He would get in the target’s face nose to nose and literally step on the toes of their shoes. When the person would raise his hands to push the cop away as anyone would in that situation, boom, assaulting a police officer.

      1. I have heard similar stories from cops. When they tell you about it, they go into what I call “cop mode”, and they get this nasty sneaky look on their face as they brag about fucking someone over (and usually hurting them quite a bit). The most amazing thing about it is they are too stupid to realize I can see it. And so can a lot of people. And it’s repulsive.

        1. Start recording those, people.

          1. Someone did. In part two of “Don’t talk to the police”, they let a veteran cop tell you why you shouldn’t talk to the police, and he goes into “cop mode” while doing it.

            Here you go.

      2. I’ve seen cops do that before. And of course the report is a pack of lies.

    3. except for the part where the video i question pretty clearly shows no such thing.

      The officer is standing behind and to the girls left, as he grabs her across the shoulders her left hand extends out from body had open palm facing inward, as he begins to pull her backwards her right had rises up hand open ad palm facing down.

      It is ridiculously obvious to anyone not looking for a cop dick to suck that the girl is not “hitting the officer” anywhere but reacting to having her balance throw off

      1. They showed a slowed down video in the local Columbia station. It was fairly clear that as soon as the cop touched her, she punched him in the face. That does not mean that he did not use too much force. Especially since this appears to be about a teenager looking at her phone in class.

    4. They excused the cop murdering the kid over high beams. They excused murdering the kid for trying to get away from a fat man waving a gun in a Hardee’s parking lot. And on and on and on.

      This girl is supposed to be grateful she is alive and learn obedience.

      1. Neither case drummed up a national response like this did. The video’s pretty damning, the victim is a girl, and a school-age student to boot: there’s not a lot of latitude for rationalizing the incident. Which is why I’m not too keen on embracing the sheriff over finally firing this guy, because it came about only in response to the media exposure. Victims of lesser stature, like the small-time drug dealer and her driver or the teenager who did not immediately assume the fetal position when making contact with the cop, get little exposure. The departments involved get a pass.

    5. Even though I know the world is full of these people, I still can’t believe I know any of them. But I do. They are on FB claiming if it were their child, they’d still approve of his actions because they taught their kids to RESPECT AUTHORITY. They were always docile idiots. No wonder I hated going to school with them so very much.

  12. The sheriff noted that the student was still in the wrong?she disobeyed orders given to her by teachers, staff, and Officer Fields. But that did not excuse Fields’ behavior, according to Lott.

    All of this may be true. None of it matters.

  13. The cop is a major d-bag, but chicks like this are a great example of why compulsory schoolong needs to end. It would be nice if we could just get these people on the welfare treadmill rather than taking up the time of the few kids in urban schools who actually want to learn. Thank god the schools around here are less than 5% “diverse”.

    1. D –

      Needz moar “these people”.

    2. Cool story, bro.

    3. Meh. Back in my day the bigots could at least spell.

  14. In this instance, the use of force was decisive, brief, and did not physically harm the student.

    FWIW:

    But her attorney Todd Rutherford told “Good Morning America” Wednesday the girl suffered neck and back injuries, and is in a cast.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new…..-1.2414453

    I’ll wait for a medical report, personally, since this sounds kinda ambulance-chaserish to me.

    1. Yeah. A report I read said she had a cast on her arm. OK. That’s great. Is there something broken or did her lawyer simply get someone to put a cast on her arm?

      1. Who told you to put the balm on?!

      2. That’s why I’m waiting for a medical report. Casts mean X-rays. Let’s see what the X-ray shows.

  15. There isn’t nearly enough hate for the teacher and administrator who stopped class for probably an extended period of time because some girl texted on her phone. So, basically, their authority being questioned was enough reason alone to turn the entire class into a sideshow where nothing else could happen.

    The girl says no and refuses? Is it so crazy to think that authority figures perhaps could just wait until the class ends and then address it when every other student isn’t involved? Or would that be like one step from anarchy?

    1. My question is this:

      Why do students have their phones with them in class in the first place? If I was running a private school, you’d have to leave your phone in your locker. If your parents just have to get ahold of you during school, call the admin office and we’ll come get you.

      This thing where kids and their parents text each other all day long just strikes as kinda creepy, and not healthy really.

      1. I bet they won’t anymore. Banning of phones in class with be the only policy change that will result from this incident. And when the next girl is thrown across the room by Officer Thugly, no one will hear about it.

        1. Yeah, that’s the downside.

          Maybe its because I’m just old, but I recall when the work and school world worked just fine when people didn’t constantly have their snouts stuck in their phones.

          We are a hugely automated organization, a national leader in many ways. I asked our IT boss if he thought cell phones as “productivity devices” in the workplace are really a net plus.

          He thought it was probably about a break-even, all in all.

          If they don’t have a work or education related purpose (and cell phones in class rooms do not), then they are nothing but a distraction, and shouldn’t be allowed.

          Now get off my lawn.

          1. Without the phones, we would not even know this had happened, RC.

            1. Without the phones, it wouldn’t have happened. But, like I started off the post:

              Yeah, that’s the downside.

          2. I just took a book to class. I got so much reading done in high school.

            1. I spent large chunks of high school too stoned to read, so that wouldn’t have worked for me.

            2. Why did you even go to class if you didn’t want to?

              1. I would have gotten my allowance docked if I skipped. Going to school to get bored was how I paid to shower my bitches in jewels and gold.

                1. Bender: Hey! Bender the Offender doesn’t need YOU! Bender the Offender doesn’t need ANYBODY!

                  Robot Floozy: What about us, Mr. The Offender?

                  Bender: Well, obviously I need floozies.

              2. We used to meet before first period in the student parking lot (the smokers side of the building), everyone would kick in 2 bucks and send the guy with the van to the packy to get a keg. Then we’d all head over to the adjacent woods and build a bonfire and wait for the keg to get there.

          3. Ironically, taking an on-line course on your cell phone is probably more effective than listening to the union idiot try to teach a subject they know jack shit about.

      2. My son carries his cell phone on him because his locker is damaged and he can’t lock it properly.

        I think I have texted him 3 times when he has been at school; nothing urgent – things like reminding him that he has a dental appt that afternoon. I’d be pissed at him if he was observed using his phone in class to look at messages.

        I see nothing wrong with a kid having a phone with the ringer silenced on his person in class if he is paying attention to his lesson.

        1. This. Something about treating kids like adults and they’ll behave like adults. Treat them like ragdolls, well…

          1. Of course, if I was running a business and cell phones had no business purpose, their use would be severely restricted. As in, don’t carry it on you/leave it in your locker, leave the ringer off, etc.

            So I’m willing to treat kids and adults pretty much the same. If that distraction device doesn’t contribute to what you are here for, leave it somewhere else.

            1. It’s a fair point. On the other hand, your employees would be concerned about losing their jobs… students have different priorities.

            2. It’s a fair point. On the other hand, your employees would be concerned about losing their jobs… students have different priorities.

              1. students have different priorities

                Yeah. Texting their BFFs, playing games . . . .

            3. RC, you sound like a typical lawyer – coming up with half-baked rules that only satisfy your personal peeves. Are you going to run for office?

              Either the worker is productive or he isn’t. The use or non-use of a personal phone should be a non-issue. As long as other workers aren’t being disrupted, there is no issue. The companies are usually happy that they aren’t paying for personal phone calls.

              And I can assure you that in the workplaces I see, the actual ergonomics of the office are the #1 reason for lost productivity, not the stealing of company time for 30 minutes of texting.

        2. I see nothing wrong with a kid having a phone with the ringer silenced on his person in class if he is paying attention to his lesson.

          This is probably pretty much what the school’s policy was.

          1. Phones in classrooms are a big issue. The kids “need” the phones because what if the parents have to contact them? So, the kids get to play with the phones and text all the time, and the teachers stop class to tell the students to stop playing with the phones, and time is wasted.

            The actual solution is “if I see you constantly playing with your phone in class I will penalize your grade,” but that is just too easy.

            1. But why should the grade be penalized, and why are they a major issue? If some kid can play on their phone and not distract anyone else and still get an A, then who the hell cares? And frankly – plenty of kids can do that.

              Discipline shouldn’t be tied to academic performance. The issue I have with how they dealt with this is simple. Their reaction was a far bigger distraction than the phone ever will be.

              1. If some kid can play on their phone and not distract anyone else and still get an A, then who the hell cares? And frankly – plenty of kids can do that.

                Discipline shouldn’t be tied to academic performance.

                The problem is the phones aren’t just distractions, but crutches/aids as well. I know I don’t have *the* solution, but I work with people, as I’m sure others do, who can’t do math without a phone/calculator. I don’t think the person who needs the phone and can’t do math faster/better than the person who can do it with or without a phone should get the same grade intrinsically.

                1. Then math shouldn’t be taught with calculators at all. (I don’t think there is anything intrinsically wrong with using a tool to solve a problem.)

                  1. I don’t think there is anything intrinsically wrong with using a tool to solve a problem.

                    Assuming the solution defines the problem, sure.

              2. EXACTLY! Phones are only a big issue because of the authority egos of the adults forcing the children into the education camps in the first place.

                O NOEZ! He’s not paying attention TO ME!!!!

                As long as a student that doesn’t care is being quiet and non-disruptive, let him be. Ask him to sit in the back of the room if necessary. But of course, that would require the teacher to actually make an effort when taking attendance and most would rather do the lazy-ass assigned seating thing.

            2. The better solution is that the teacher simply continues to teach, as long as the students are not being disruptive. Student fails? Not teacher’s problem.

              1. Also, charge parents for grades repeated unless they agree to have the kid downgraded to a remedial, out at 16, track.

              2. In my scenario, in my head (it is a crazy place up there), the student was being disruptive with their phone. If they are not being disruptive, I agree who cares, move on.

              3. The teacher doesn’t get a nice raise or bonus if the student’s fail, so they make it their problem.

            3. The kids “need” the phones because what if the parents have to contact them?

              The parents can call the school’s admin office?

              1. It is impossible to enforce the ban on cell phones.

                However, when cell phones in school were an issue, I remember parents being quoted saying things like “What if there is a school shooting? How will I get in touch with my child if and when the terrorists attack? How will I be able to check up on my child throughout the day.”

                1. It is impossible to enforce the ban on cell phones.

                  Not legally anyway.

                2. I know, I know, parents are neurotic these days. That’s no reason to facilitate their neurosis.

                  “So, if there is an active shooter roaming the school, you want your kid’s phone to be ringing, or him to be distracted tippy typing away on a text? Sure about that?”

              2. The parents can call the school’s admin office?

                There’s a government solution for ya! A ten-minute solution to a 2-second problem, complete with additional employees.

      3. Why do students have their phones with them in class in the first place? If I was running a private school

        It was a public school, so who cares about what you’d do in a private school? Certainly in a private school, if you staffed it with police officers you’d probably have tuition so high no one would put their kids there except the most sociopathic parents (aka cop kids).

        When I went to school in the 70’s, kids would talk while the teacher was trying to teach. He just stopped and said “If you want to talk, just go in the hall. I won’t report you. But don’t come back in.” He was willing to let the people who didn’t want to be there leave, and was willing to put up with the bureaucratic bullshit for doing so. And it worked for him every single time.

        The problem is most teachers have authority hard-on’s and yet are also scared shitless of their own bureaucracy’s authorities.

        Compulsory education for the loss, as usual.

    2. In your situation, I’m not seeing how they get their authority boners hard. That might be the problem.

    3. Look dude, if they let her text in class and the sky fails to come crashing down upon them, people might start to think that maybe the draconian rules enforced on public school kids aren’t altogether necessary, and that, just maybe, the authority assumed by teachers and administrators isn’t really justified. Better to bodyslam a thousand kids into submission than let one get away with mild disobedience.

      1. I guess that one really hits at my point. I’m in a public university that differs only mildly from high school. Many of the same basic issues exist, but the professors aren’t the same sort of cunt you deal with in high school so they don’t become these big issues. Every class has a rule against cellphones, but they actually pick their battles…Probably because students aren’t mandated by the state to attend, but are instead paying for being there.

    4. Why do students have their phones with them in class in the first place?

      Even if there were a rule not to, they’d still probably do it.

      I’m in college currently, and you know plenty of them are playing on their phones in class. I’ve been guilty of using it a time or two myself.

      The rule exists because they are distractions…to the student themselves (as long as they are silenced, which they are unless someone forgets). So, this student was distracting herself from learning, so in order to address that they stopped the entire class. The initial intent or logic behind the rule itself goes out the window the second their authority is questioned and now its a distraction for everyone.

      In your situation, I’m not seeing how they get their authority boners hard.

      I’m sympathetic to society’s authoritarians. I’m aware they need an outlet where they are free to act arbitrarily and petty, but we need to find the right balance.

      1. I’m not. Fuck them.

        1. It’s probably also worth pointing out that the teacher and school staff didn’t make a big deal out of one of their students being ragdolled here. It was another student secretly recording the whole thing that made this a story. Otherwise, it’s just another day.

          For all the talk about conservatives, does anyone want to bet which way the school staff lean here in this school?

          1. The staff leans statist. Conservative or liberal ain’t got nothing to do with it.

  16. Is it okay to think that both the officer and this girl are horrible human beings? The cop was way too aggressive, and he deserves to be fired, but from what it sounds like the girl also deserved being forcefully removed from her desk. Just not from the cops, who have no place in school, and just not that forcefully.

    1. Why not this?

      “Here’s the deal, sweetie. Go to the principal’s office right now. If you don’t, you’ll get weekend detention. If you don’t show, you’re expelled. Your call.”

      1. That’s so ’80’s.

        1. “Don’t mess with the bull, young woman. You’ll get the horns!”

          1. Eat. My. Shorts.

          2. As if !!!

      2. Alternatively: “Not interested in today’s lesson? Fine, you’ve earned a failing grade for the day. Go home and have your parents call the school to let us know when you’re interested in learning again. Until then, don’t come back. Get you shit out of your locker on the way out, because it’ll be someone else’s locker tomorrow.”

        1. So, basically screwing the kids record they’ll need to get into college because they dared question an authority figure?

          1. Really?

          2. “I’m sorry, Mr. Smith, but it seems your daughter got a failing grade for one day in school. Yes, I see that you called and had her in class the next day and that she then graduated with honors, but all the same we just cannot have her in our college… DENIED.”

            1. Oh? And how many days are you going to be kicking kids out. I actually don’t know what a ‘failing’ grade for a day would even mean in most classes unless there was work due. But you are talking about chipping off points from the grade for stuff that has nothing to do with how they perform on the actual course material.

              As in, you are grading them on what kind of person they are instead of just how they perform. This is an institution kids are forced into, and which determines elements of their future.

          3. You say that like keeping her out of college wouldn’t be doing her a huge favor.

        2. They can’t do that, that’s one less kid on the enrollment forms, bringing in those sweet federal dollars.

          1. True enough, which is why parents should just get their kids out of the public prisons that pass for schools.

      3. That is a repercussion continuum. The SRO uses a force continuum. Which is why SRO’s should not be used for disciplinary matters. (SLD: there should not be SRO’s)

  17. Is the kid a disrespectful little shit? Very likely. Does that justify the kind of force used? Not at all. If I had pulled this in Iraq, I would have been up on charges. I do believe, however, if it had been a black cop and a white kid, the outrage roles would be reversed.

  18. Conservatives are in an uproar? Maybe.

    But lest we forget that the liberals in Berkeley retained Officer Pike for some time after he assaulted several students. He was allowed to resign, file a workers comp claim and retained his time in for retirement benefits (after the comp claim was settled). So this is hardly an issue where the right is alone in supporting thugs with badges.

    1. Berkeley supports the union and the union process. Calling that into question would be like calling progressivism into question… not. gonna. happen.

      1. I agree, Paul. It’s just that “Conservatives rally” rubs me wrong in the lede…since it’s exactly two whole conservatives that are saying he was in the right. And they’re now using Media Matters as objective source material as well.

        How low is Reason sinking into the left? I guess we’ll know if they start posting stories where the lefties run cities and their union cop goons (hello, Seattle and Chicago especially) get support from their leftists who can make a difference in whether or not they get to continue their violent ways by keeping them on the job…as opposed to a pair of taking heads that don’t really make a fucking differ nice in the grand scheme of things at all. But I’m skeptical that they’ll do that even though it’s a problem several orders of magnitude greater than the influence Mark fucking Fuhrman has on whether people ar safe from cop violence.

        1. In Seattle, they just make everything about race, but keep absolutely mum on anything which calls into question the overarching authority of government.

          For a bluer-than-blue-found-in-nature-blue city, with outright progressive activists at the helm of every local municipal institution one wonders… one really wonders why these institutions are so racist.

    2. Tulpa spent a good long time defending Fatpig Pepperspray. His main argument is that they were blocking the sidewalk. There was 30 feet of grass on either side so you could walk around them.

      1. Why do I have to move off MY beloved pavement, that I pay taxes for? they’re lucky they only got pepper-sprayed. Had I been the officer, I would have duct-taped flashbangs to the protesters’ faces.

        And set them off.

    3. “Liberals in Berkeley” didn’t retain shit. The administration or the mayor or whoever was in charge did. Regional collectivism is bullshit. It’s basically a guarantee that there are individuals there that thought it was an outrage, they just don’t have the power to do anything about it. It’s like saying everyone in NYC supports DiBlasio or that everyone in Texas is a creationist or something. Just stupid and collectively guilting.

      1. Well, you libertarians would say that.

      2. Collectivizing “Conservatives” on the words of Mark Fuhrman and one other guy is ok? But collectivizing the liberal GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES IN CHARGE OF OVERSIGHT in Berkeley isn’t? Even though they actively participated in making sure that goon stayed on the job? Hell, I’d say all proponents of pubsec unions collectively bargaining for anything other than pay “rallied” to ensure Pike kept his fucking job. It’s less of a stretch than Rico makes in his lede.

        1. You make a valid point that Robby was also unfairly collectivizing “conservatives”, though what I took from his lede was “conservative pundit usual suspects”, not “all conservatives”, but maybe that was generous of me. So both you and Robby are in the wrong. I forgive you both.

          1. Only one of us is a journalist.

            1. I thought you had a real job.

            2. Occupation is irrelevant.

              1. I’m still more correct by a matter of degrees than Rico. The “liberals” I have collectivized actually run the city and they actually acted to retain Pike in a position of authority. That really fucking happened.

                But “conservatives rally” based on the words of two whole people, one of them cited from what is likely a Media Matters cut and paste quote job, is irresponsible journalism.

            3. And when you go out of your way to cite Media Matters in your piece, you’ve lost all credibility on here, in my opinion.

              Fucking MEDIA MATTERS?!?! They’re a fucking laughingstock. He might as well start poring over Alex Jones to get quotes from Obama. They’ll be jut as in context.

              1. If you even click on Media Matters, you’re losing credibility.


            4. Only one of us is claims to be a journalist.

              FIFM.

      3. “Liberals in Berkeley” didn’t retain shit. The administration or the mayor or whoever was in charge did. Regional collectivism is bullshit. It’s basically a guarantee that there are individuals there that thought it was an outrage, they just don’t have the power to do anything about it.

        You ain’t getting to be the mayor of Berkeley if you ain’t towing the lion. that’s like saying that the Mayor of Seattle is just as likely to be a pro-abortion Republican as he is a hard-left progressive.

        It’s no dumber than pointing out that the culture of modern policing attracts the worst kind of cop.

  19. Why does the name Leon Lott sound familiar? Has he been a reason character before? And I’m not thinking of the football player Leon Lett.

    Also, OT LOL. Sometimes The Onion does it funny.

    1. Being a grandparent is fun. It is also a way in which I am similar to others. This is a fun topic through which I can connect with many people. My grandchild’s name is as follows:

      Charlotte.

      Heh.

    2. Maybe this:

      The Richland County, South Carolina Sheriff’s Department (that’s them above) just obtained an armored personnel carrier, complete with a belt-fed, .50-cal turreted machine gun. Sheriff Leon Lott has charmingly named the vehicle “The Peacemaker,” and insists that using a caliber of ammunition that even the U.S. military is reluctant to use against human targets (it’s generally reserved for use against armored vehicles) will “save lives.”

      1. Sheriff Leon Lott has charmingly named the vehicle “The Peacemaker,”

        Such a missed opportunity.

        He should have named it “Reason”.

        1. You know who else named something they loved “Reason”?

          1. Hiro Protaganist. Duh.

          2. Ooh, I know! I know!

          3. Immanuel Kant?

          4. Uh…sloopy?

          5. Episiarch?

            *ducks*

            1. Actually, Kristen, my penis is named Nyarlathotep.

              1. What’s the other one named?

      2. Yeah, that’s it. Plus his Sheriff’s Department is the one that arrested Michael Phelps for pot a few years back.

      3. Ah yes, that’s where I recognize him from. He prompted two fun blog posts by yours truly.

        1) Maybe They Should Call It ‘The Cheese-Maker’

        When I first read that Sheriff Lott named his 50 cal machinegun “The Peace Maker” I was instantly reminded of Tacitus’ tale about the Roman conquest of Britain, specifically the words a Scottish chieftain spoke on the last morning of his life:

        Pillagers of the world, they have exhausted the land by their indiscriminate plunder. East and west alike have failed to satisfy them. To robbery, butchery and rapine, they give the lying name “government”. They create a desert and call it peace.

        2) Aren’t Libertarians Being a Bit Hypocritical and Hoplophobic?

        If we are to defend the individual’s right to own and play with such a monstrous weapon as a .50 cal rifle, shouldn’t we extend the same courtesy to someone who happens to be a policeman? Why can we trust a guy insane enough to buy a .50 cal rifle at a cost of I don’t know how many tens of thousands of dollars while not trusting a guy who happens to join a police force?

        1. Because the guy on the street who’s willing to invest “tens of thousands of dollars” in a rifle is either a sport hunter or an enthusiast? Because murders are far, far likelier to be done using handguns, which cost a fraction of that?

          But mostly because officers enjoy an immunity against legal consequences that private actors do not.

          1. You didn’t read my articles, did you? Because that was my point.

            What About That Endangered Creature ? The Law Abiding, Decent, Policeman?

            However, we should not sacrifice the principle that people should be able to legitimately own the weapons they feel they need to protect themselves and their property merely because we are prejudiced against them. While many policemen are people who want to predate on their neighbors, but decide to select a safer, if less lucrative, form of criminal activity than joining the mafia or MS-13, there are many decent people who chose to join the police because they wish to be a force for good, and want to protect lives and property. Given the territorial monopoly that the gangs of police hold, any person who finds murder abhorrent and decides to dedicate his or her life to bringing murderers to account for their crimes and to deter would-be murderers from committing future murders will have to join some gang of police to practice their avocation. Should we disarm and condemn them because they took the only avenue open to them to accomplish their honorable purpose? I say no!

            1. Gun Control Is Not The Answer ? Ending Police Immunity To Prosecution Is

              While we can guess that the Richland County SWAT team will injure or kill innocent people should they decide to fire that weapon as part of their duties, we don’t know that they will. All we can do is react to the crimes they commit, not sanction them prejudicially for the crimes we fear they might commit in the future. Applying the same laws to the SWAT team (or any other policeman) that are applied to the Brinks Armored Car guard would go a long way to eradicating abuses, and would do much to ensure that the weapon sat gathering cobwebs in some garage somewhere.

        2. Because the individual isn’t buying it for the express purpose of killing people with it, but the police department is?

    3. “Why does the name Leon Lott sound familiar?”

      You’re probably thinking of the great Clutch-Playmaker and master of Athletic Poise for the Dallas Cowboys, the one and only Leon Lett

      1. I really should read people’s entire posts before replying.

    4. Why yes, he’s the man behind The Peacemaker armored personnel carrier.

  20. follow orders or people die. it’s that simple.

    1. You need to change your handle.

      1. Maybe, but we know that’s not ‘Murican, because we know exactly what ‘Murican would say about the girl and the incident.

        1. I wasn’t making reference to the racist troll, I was making reference to the meaning of being an American, which has apparently transformed from “brave and free” to “submissive and obedient”.

    2. When it comes crashing down, and it hurts inside,
      (DUN DUN DUN DUN DUNDUNDUNDUN)
      ya’ gotta take a stand, it don’t help to hide,
      (DUN DUN DUN DUN DUNDUNDUNDUN)
      Well, you hurt my friends, and you hurt my pride,
      I gotta be a man; I can’t let it slide,
      I am a real American, Fight for the rights of every man,
      I am a real American, fight for what’s right, fight for your life

  21. O.K. enough circle jerk. So what should have been done?

    She refused to follow the rules of the classroom, and the instructions of the teacher, and then refused to leave, no matter who the command came from. Does she just get to stay and behave any way she wants, as long as she wants?

    If you do think she should be forced to leave, but physically refuses and fights any physical force applied, then what? Do you give up, or do you overpower her with mace, taser, chokehold, vulcan death grip? Can you do it so it looks really friendly and compassionate?
    To late. Time’s up. You don’t get to think about it for 10 minutes. OK you do get to think about it, so what do you do?

    1. THAT SEATED GIRL WAS COMING RIGHT AT HIM.

      1. So you would suggest he use sarcasm to remove her? What if she countered with even better sarcasm?

        1. Many professionals have jobs dealing with recalcitrant and sometimes violent people. We expect a level of decorum and civility that calls into serious question any breach of authority. Because they’re professionals. And yet a police officer grappling and tossing around a ~120lb schoolgirl is justifiable because she’s being stubborn. I don’t understand this mentality, perhaps you can clarify.

          1. No shit. People making barely more than minimum wage in an inpatient psych ward manage to handle actual, no kidding violent crazy people every single day much better than this highly trained new professional handled a pouting teenage girl.

    2. Escalate force all the way up and through killing her if necessary. Because that’s what you just asked for, though you are apparently not intelligent enough to realize that. If you start down the road of force, the final destination is death if you can’t get the other party to back down and you won’t back down. It’s really not that complicated.

      1. And nobody even thanked the officer for avoiding that scenario.

        1. He’s being thanked properly by being shown the door. See, it all worked out. Is your authority boner good and hard?

        2. You have outed yourself as a troll with that comment. Until that, you had me going. Congrats, for what it’s worth.

    3. O.K. enough circle jerk. So what should have been done?

      Either ignore her during class, and discipline her after, or

      “Here’s the deal, sweetie. Go to the principal’s office right now. If you don’t, you’ll get weekend detention. If you don’t show, you’re expelled. Your call.”

      1. YOU WANT THE TERRORISTS TO WIN

      2. I agree with this, but I’m pretty sure she knew that was a possibility and it was probably threatened before all this. She doesn’t care.

        Regardless, that is not the cop’s job. He was asked to remove her, and she resisted. Will the teacher and administrator be fired for creating this unwinnable situation?

        1. Will the teacher and administrator be fired for creating this unwinnable situation?

          Will the voters, judges, bureaucrats, parents, etc.? Who’s going to be held to account for the disparity between intentions and reality?

          The answer is, apparently, whoever is at the shortest end of the stick.

    4. WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND

    5. A. Failing grade for the day.

      B. Tell her she’ll fail again tomorrow if she’d rather play on her phone than learn the material.

      C. If she fails two days in a row because she’s playing on her phone she’s not allowed in class until her parents call the school and assure them that the girl actually wants to learn something as opposed to playing on her phone.

      1. And Pre-A: You don’t have a school-sponsored bully in a school to begin with.

    6. No, no one thanked him for being some degree of human.
      Assuming there was no other way to resolve the situation than to have a cop there and using physical methods, any cop who can’t handle a simple come along against passive resistance has no business wearing a badge.

    7. Pretending for a second that this isn’t blatant intellectual dishonestly, and merely a stupid person =

      Does she just get to stay and behave any way she wants, as long as she wants?

      False choice = the only alternative is smashing her like a pinata?

      If you do think she should be forced to leave, but physically refuses and fights any physical force applied, then what?

      Irrelevant Hypothetical = the fact is the cop just attacked a seated child.

      Do you give up, or do you overpower her with mace, taser, chokehold, vulcan death grip?

      Again = false choices. Its not “either or”.

      If someone were to be forceably removed from class, there’s ways to do it that don’t involve Pro-Wrestling levels of dramatic, excessive abuse. And I expect you’ll pull some “i know cops” bullshit and say that any kind of use or force is by definition dangerous and harmful and blah blah blah…..

      …bullshit – i’ve seen cops restrain people in riot-like circumstances, drunken violent people, with a far more restrained use of force. One a person is “neutralized” for a few seconds they generally stop struggling. This was a fucking classroom with a seated teenage girl.

      Can you do it so it looks really friendly and compassionate?

      False choice again. Its not a choice between ‘doing nothing’ and body-slamming children. Your bullshit argument would justify shooting Tamir Rice = “Should the cop have done nothing?”

      1. Again, it’s a question. What would you do if she refuses to leave, and your job is to remove her.

        And something reliable – not something that might work with the right person. Not some mysterious unknown cop kung fu like:

        ” i’ve seen cops restrain people in riot-like circumstances, drunken violent people, with a far more restrained use of force.”

        And that was right after saying: ” you’ll pull some “i know cops” bullshit”

        Dude, get some self-awareness.

        1. “Again, it’s a question.'”

          Its a rhetorical question that makes false-choice presumptions, as already noted. Feigning ignorance, or plain dumb?

          Your ‘questions’ assume that any use of force includes acceptance of “maximum” use of force.

          And you’re dodging the obvious fact that the guy is a powerlifter, and the “perp” here was a fucking teenage girl. “Cop Kung Fu” is clearly not needed.

          You apparently misunderstood the point I was making = that cops can and routinely do “restrain” people without wanton excess force. You don’t need to smash a teenage girl like a ragdoll to gain compliance.

          The “i know cops” bullshit i was referring to was me pre-empting the claims of cop-suckers like yourself who assure people that All Officers use force for “preventative measures’ and “you never know what people are capable of” etc etc.

          All you’re doing it repeating the same braindead bullshit i pointed out the first time.

          1. “rhetorical question” Maybe you should look that up.
            There is no false choice in “What would you do if she refuses to leave, and your job is to remove her?” That was exactly what happened, and precisely his dilemma. You admit it by suggesting cops use force for this all the time in ways your fine with. You just think he should have used it in a way that looks better. I agree, but she will get money, and he gets fired.

            1. “There is no false choice in “What would you do if she refuses to leave, and your job is to remove her?” ‘

              again – either you’re dense, or you are intentionally trying to pretend that’s what i accused of that.

              It was your original framing where i specifically pointed out each individual sentence where you tried playing this Either/Or rhetorical-fallacy to the max.

              Its not a “dilemma” to remove the person from the class sans Body Slamming. “Use of force at all” is not the same as “Use of TOTAL force” Its not even close. And its not about “looking better” – its simply about proportionality relative to the “threat”.

              You’re either a moron and don’t understand that, or you are being mendacious. Possibly both.

              1. If no other equally safe and effective measure was available to remove her, would you accept his measure? Out of the measures that are (1) the most effective and (2) the least dangerous for yourself, choose the one that is least dangerous for her. This isn’t about absolute proportionality. If the only way to remove her had been to shoot her, then that would have been the way to go, under this standard.

    8. As a matter of fact you can. There are a number of restraint/compliance techniques that they at least used to teach to officers that could have been used in this situation.

      I haven’t seen any of them even attempted in any of the video clips so far.

      I’ve seen a 5 foot nothing 40 something female officer use these to lead men bigger than me around. If this cop can bench 600 pounds he should easily be able to control this student.

      The officer did not act professionally at any point, and when he uses force it’s like a high school student grab assing out back of the cafeteria.

      1. I think it could have been done a lot better, but he’s not really a “professional” anything. He’s a low-end cop that isn’t paid much, doesn’t have a lot of training, has really difficult people (teenagers) to deal with that few of us would volunteer to police.

        We could insist on very expensive, well-trained, true professionals that might do this kind of thing less often, but it’s fairytale to think you can control the entitlement obsessed teens our culture is creating and empowering without messy shit happening. The cops could be better, but they will never be good enough to overcome the failures that really caused this situation to happen. If you have to call the cops at all, then you have already fucked up somewhere, and that somewhere was with this kid, and what she thought was appropriate behavior.

        Even if you think the cop was wrong, the student was wrong first, and second, and third, and fourth before this happened. She forced it. She wanted this, and she and her family will be rewarded for it. The cop would have prefered to stay asleep in his car, and he’s the only one who is gonna suffer for any of it. Maybe he should, but the real cause of this will get rewarded for making the mess in the first place, all the time claiming to be the victim.

        1. “the student was wrong first, and second, and third, and fourth before this happened. She forced it. She wanted this’

          Just so we’re clear = why don’t you explain *exactly* what it was the student was doing that committed so many fouls in your mind

          1. 1) using her phone in class against school rules
            2) refusing the teacher’s request to stop
            3) refusing the teacher’s request to leave
            4) refusing the administrator’s request to leave
            5) refusing the cop’s request to leave peacefully
            6) refusing to submit to minimal force when it was applied. (He tried to simply lift her up, and she hit him), so
            7) assaulting an officer

            I was being generous with only saying four.

            1. That’s one “broke a rule”, and six cases of “Failed to Respect Authoritah”

              Do you also cut the hands off children when they touch things they shouldn’t?

              1. Ridiculous, Gil. Understand it as continuous rule-breaking, or repeated rule-breaking*. (Compare to unlawful detention, or puring toxic liquids into a lake.) Further she’s not a child, but able to reason, and responsible.

                (Though I assume that you’d see two different legal goods violated when a visitor to your home first insults you and then refuses to leave.)

    9. To[o] late. Time’s up. You don’t get to think about it for 10 minutes. OK you do get to think about it, so what do you do?

      Blathering, semi-literate and intellectually dishonest (time’s up…wait, not it’s not).

      Why even bother engaging it?

      1. So you got nothing?

  22. Why no come how pipple no respict autoritee?

  23. Once againg a lone person disrupts the lives of other people, does not respond to lawful orders and then the person called in to fix the problem is punsihed.

    What a bunch of BULLSHIT!

    I knew the LIBTARDS don’t give a crap about the rest of us but I am suprised that art Reason you don’t care either.

    What about the Teacher and the rest of the students?

    Why is it OK for this one person to screw with their lives?

    You do the crime, you pay for it.’

    1. I’m torn.

      Sarc, or serious?

      1. I’m notoriously bad at this, but I’m guessing real. There’s a lot of similar comments on the Reason Facebook page, and he may have escaped out of Derpbook into our humble abode.

      2. Poe’s Law, dude.

        1. The last line is too far. Sarc.

      3. I’m betting these douchebags are lefty trolls who pump out this Red Blooded bullshit to try and create the impression that ‘extreme right-wing thinking’ is super-common in places like this

        i see it all over the place.

        1. Kind of conspiracy theory, but I like it. [adjusts tinfoil]

        2. You could be right, but that “cop is always right” sentiment is very real.

          1. Yes, and I know that there are a lot of those people out there as well.

            I’m just saying the people who come to H&R with this kind of schtick? Aren’t the cop-suckers. They’re prog trolls far more often than not. They think they’re clever. Genuine Authority Worshipers don’t waste their time trolling libertarian sites … with the rare Dunphy exception

            1. Oh yes. Or, like me they are just regulars who are fucking around.

    2. If your goal is to establish a proper learning environment in the near term, which option would be more effective:

      A)”Here’s the deal, sweetie. Go to the principal’s office right now. If you don’t, you’ll get weekend detention. If you don’t show, you’re expelled. Your call.”

      B)What they did

      1. To be fair, many lessons were learned by the students in that class. So it was a “learning environment” of sorts.

        1. DON’T MOUTH OFF YOU LIPPY FUCKIN’ BITCH OR YOU GET THE FIST.

          Learned her good.

    3. The point is that the level of force used by the cop was dangerous and unnecessary, not that the girl was in the right.

      1. To be fair, violence is probably all he knows.

        HULK SMASH

      2. I couldn’t see a single point where the officer even attempted to apply an actual restraint/compliance hold.

        A number of those are designed to negate or lessen any advantage a physically stronger individual would have, and in the case where you have officer HULK vs High School Girl he should have had no trouble restraining her and leading her wherever he needed to.

        There was a time when this officer would have been ridiculed back at the station. Now, it seems like it SOP.

        1. “Hey man! I saw you that clip on the internet of you beating up that little girl! That was awesome! High five!”

          /what he probably heard at the station

    4. So I’m going to ask you the same thing I’ve asked others.

      What level of violence would be required for you to admit that the officer went too far.
      Would he have had to rape her right there on the floor after throwing her down? Blow her brains all over her classmates?

      Tell me, where in the realm of possible responses from apologizing for bothering her and meekly walking away to slowly and painfully killing the girl and her entire extended family over the course of several weeks is the line over which it would have been inappropriate for the officer to cross?

      See not one single person here or anywhere else has suggested that she should not have been removed from the class and no one has suggested she should not have been punished by the school, however agreeing that the girl broke the rules and deserved to be punished does not mean that officer jackboot is now justified to meet out any punishment he sees fit to deliver.

      You also seem to be overlooking the fact that the girl HAS been punished with criminal charges.

      1. But it wasn’t punishment. It was gaining compliance. A law enforcement officer cannot mete out punishment. It’s not allowed, so therefore they never do it.

        Now, having explained that to you, to gain compliance a law enforcement officer can use force up to the point that the actor’s reaction causes him to fear for his life, at which point he switches from compliance to deadly force mode to protect himself and those around him but mostly himself.

        1. But it wasn’t punishment. It was gaining compliance. A law enforcement officer cannot mete out punishment. It’s not allowed, so therefore they never do it.

          Haaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha! That was pretty good! Got any more?

    1. He will be forced to retire with a large pension.

    2. For a second I thought you meant the prohibitionist congressman. Now I are disappoint.

    3. Awwww scram!

      We now live in a world where a Clinton can use a Kennedy as the scapegoat.

  24. The teacher isn’t getting enough shit over this, in my opinion. A girl sending a quick text or checking her phone is far less disruptive than calling a cop to rough her up.

    I had a teacher like this. Art class in 11th grade. There was this kid she hated, long-haired metal fan who was always late because we had a huge campus and he couldn’t get across it. As fast as he could go and he was still about a minute late every day. OK, he’s tardy. It’s against the rules. But instead of just starting class and letting him slip in a minute late, she’d shut and lock the classroom door, forcing him to knock to be let in and then she’d spend another one or so berating him about disrupting class.

    Who was really the one disrupting class here?

    They are fucking teenagers. Either confiscate their phones or chill the fuck out about the little stuff.

    1. What’s the point of authority if it isn’t absolute?

      1. The funny thing about authority is that it’s a lot like the law. For it to be really effective, it has to be respected. Otherwise, while everybody might appear to be complying, behind the scenes they’re doing everything they can to undermine it.

        1. The funny thing about authority is that it’s a lot like the law. For it to be really effective, it has to be respected respectable.

          ftfy

          1. A lot of people seem to think “respect” is a synonym of “obey”.

            1. A lot of people don’t care if authority/law is obeyed out of respect, or out of fear.

    2. You have no idea the guts it takes to stand up in front of a group of obnoxious, disrespectful little monsters.

      Try it sometime and then get back to me. You would probably crumble under the pressure.

      1. “When you put your hand into a bunch of goo that a moment before was your best friend’s face, you’ll know what to do.”

      2. [raises hand]

        Me. I’ve done that. And these were Upward Bound students which is kind of like HS Head Start.

        Now fuck the hell off.

        1. Please flip your Sarcasm Detector toggle to the ‘on’ position.

  25. That child, or should I say criminal, was obviously not raised properly. When an authority figure orders you to do something, you do it. That is the way I raised my children, who I know would immediately accede to the demands of a teacher, school administrator, and especially a police officer.

    This poor officer was just doing his job, and I am devastated for him and his family. He had been given a difficult task, which was to try and maintain order in a place where most of the children act like animals. In my opinion most of them should just be locked up now, because that is where they are headed anyway. He is in my prayers.

    1. When an authority figure orders you to do something, you do it.

      You do it and you thank him for setting you straight.

    2. Please. Tell us how you really feel.

    3. Been reading the Facebook comments for this article?

      1. I think my vocabulary was a notch or two above your average Facebook poster, thank you very much.

    4. I keep an extra bottle of lube on my person at all times so when one of my brave enforcers requests a blow job, I don’t get chapped lips. I was learned rightly.

      1. If you have to use lube for that application, something is srsly wrong.

    5. He didn’t fling her hard enough as far as I’m concerned. I saw no hair in his hands!

      /’Roided conservative.

  26. One trend I can’t stand is the “lawful orders” bullshit. That is why I got out of the fucking army. So that I would live in an environment whereby just because some cocksucker said something made it lawful. Apparently a great many of my fellow cop sucking American honestly believe that any enunciation that comes out of these small-prick, `rhoided up pieces of shit is lawful.

    I bet if you asked these cop suckers, “so where do you draw the line? If a pig ask you for your car keys, the keys to your safe deposit box, do you just give it to them?” I’d be willing to be many would say, “yeah, sure, I don’t have anything to hide.”

    I think I’m going to vote for the most authoritarian candidate, which at this point looks like Hillary Clinton. You Americans want some authority, I’ll give it to you.

    1. so where do you draw the line

      I don’t really think there is a line any more. Even the classic example of searching your vehicle can be easily turned into a situation of noncompliance. Or rather, the line that is drawn is between the “good cops” and the “bad cops” (with the distinction between the two often being circumstantial rather than intrinsic to the individuals). Get a good cop? He will not search your vehicle, or if he asks and you decline, he will let it go. Get a bad cop? He will ensure that he gets into your vehicle, one way or the other. Then the prosecutors, judges, and even juries will ensure that it gets excused.

      We can’t even get any traction that law enforcement officials should be held to the same standard as the rest of us, never mind a higher one.

  27. I finally got a chance to get to French’s article at NRO.

    The comments are utterly depressing and depraved.

    This is the part where conservatives become the equivalent of a SJW dipshit.

    Especially the ones from women. Such tough people these idiots.

  28. If it was so damn important to remove this bitch from class, why not just grab her chair, cantilever it, and drag it out of there with her riding it?

    1. +1 disability claim

    2. “cantilever it

      (cut to face of School Security Guard, mouthing the word, “Cantilever”…Then bursts out)

      “But i did that, I can’t a-leave-her there!? HULK SMASH!!?”

  29. The real problem here is that we are not educating our youth and the public on the code of conduct required by an individual being apprehended by police. For good or bad and regardless if one feels that the arrest is in error or unjust, one must comply with the officer and go without resistance. There’s no point in resisting. One.

    1. Public schools already teach enough deference to authority as is.

    2. I don’t want to live in a society in which the onus is on me to hope that the meat-headed fuckfaces who volunteer to become cops are going to honor their constitutional obligations when there are few checks on their power. I also don’t think anyone should be locked in a cage for any reason other than a demonstrated immediate threat to public safety. Up until the point where one of the meatheads is escorting a convicted criminal, he is a servant of everyone in the room including the suspect. (I can have utopian dreams too.)

      1. You have no choice Tony, this is the world you live in…PERIOD!!!

        Since you can’t fight the goon with the gun, backup, and law and order on his side RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.

        1. When police are not subject to the laws that they enforce, then there is no law and order. That is rule of man.

  30. Thanks for the update, Robby.

    Did you update everyone on that teacher who dressed as Kanye? The one you thought was some important representation of…something, I have no idea what.

    No disciplinary charges to be filed. They didn’t need libertarian nannies jumping in to get to the right conclusion.

    http://m.nydailynews.com/news/…..-1.2412922

    1. You forgot to update us all on how Ahmed Mohammed’s White House visit went.

  31. When did this country adopt the mind set that every single wrong must be corrected, no matter the cost? There is a point before manhandling, flipping, and dragging a young girl across the floor at which it could simply have been proper to say “OK, young girl, you win this round.”

    1. It wasn’t a choice between dragging her across the room by her neck and walking away. I’m sure that there are ways to remove a stubborn child from a desk without grabbing the kid by the throat and flipping the whole thing onto the floor. This guy is an animal who seeks out to assault children. He should be put down like a dog.

  32. Reason – the magazine for people who always want to be teenage boys.

    1. Hey, cbalducc, I’ve got just the form for you! If you fill it out and you mail into Reason magazine, they’ll definitely change their tune!

    2. Liberals want government to be their mommy.

      Conservatives want government to be their daddy.

      Libertarians want government to treat adults like adults.

      1. .. sooo your thesis is that Cbalducc wants to see that girl spanked the way his daddy spanked him?

        kinky!

        1. My thesis is that Cbalducc is a child in an adult body who wants government to be his/her parent, and projects that onto adults who disagree.

          1. Your thesis is much more boring than the one I thought you were advancing. I think I prefer my version, that Cbalducc dreams about teenage girls crying while their taut buttocks vibrate with each spank.

            1. Who doesn’t?

              1. Your attempts at insults prove my point. You just always have to be the class cut-up no matter how old you are, don’t know?

  33. In principle, I fully agree with that conservative quote. Write down what the proportionate response would have been. Do you hold that the officer has to risk injury rather than put the risk of injury on her? Tranquilizer gun? Lasso?

    1. I’m sure there are ways to get someone out of a desk that don’t involve grabbing their throat, flipping the entire desk onto its back, and dragging the person across the room by their neck. Besides that, if you watch the video he didn’t give her a chance to go peacefully. He pushed the desk behind her out of the way, asked her if she wanted to go peacefully or by force, then choked her before she had a chance to respond. The guy is a sadist who preys on children, and he deserves to be shot like the feral pig that he is.

      1. If the reference to CNN is correct, then he probably gave her a chance before, and got slapped. That doesn’t even count the chances she had gotten before his arrival, which were many. I haven’t watched the several videos. So it’s possible that there was a suitable milder and equally effective approach. It’s not wise to call him that, since he may have been provoked and may have overreacted, without being a sadist. We can argue about how much – if any – abuse, and risk, an officer should be expected to tolerate. And about how much delay the others affected (students, teacher, etc.) should tolerate.

    2. This question has been answered numerous times.

      The proper proportionate response was to simply drag the desk, girl and all out of the room and into any holding office is convenient and then wait the girl out. The girl quite plainly lacked the capability to physically harm the officer in any meaningful way and he quite obviously possessed the strength to drag her desk and all to any location he desired. The only response she could have offered was to then get out of the desk which is precisely what they wanted her to do and at that point he could have used his greater mass and training to apply any number of subdual holds to force her compliance.

      The fact that you choose not to see this plainly obvious and preferable solution shows the lengths you will go to excuse any level of bad behavior on the part of the cops.

      Now however we get to turn it around.

      What level of violence would it have taken for you to agree that he clearly and obviously went too far?

  34. Sadly, this only got media attention because he’s white and she’s black. Had it been a black cop and a black student, a white cop and a white student, or a black cop and a white student, we never would have heard about it, and he’d still be gleefully assaulting children for a living.

    1. Black female. White male.

  35. No, libertarians want to treat people like spoiled teenagers.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.