Teacher Punches Student

Off Topic
221

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

[quote]defenderofTruth wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
With point 6, Texas teachers are not allowed to unionize so they don’t even have that.[/quote]

I know…I currently work with a bunch of Texans. Increasingly, I am getting Texas envy. No state income tax, no teachers unions, I could go on…[/quote]

With Rick Perry and republican super majority, education is taking a hard hit so Perry can say that Texas is fiscally responsible which will help him pander to the far right wingers to have a run as the republican presidential candidate. Education is not the place to cut funding. That’s the future right there. Although, I guess when you can afford to put your kids into private school that doesn’t matter.

Soon enough, Texas’s education system will be as piss poor as Louisiana’s without some sort of intervention. Teachers are having to work more hours, the legislature is trying to make it to where teacher’s pays will be reduced, and there’s also major lay offs of some good teachers due to budget concerns. Insurance premiums are also on the rise. I’m surprised they haven’t tried to tap into teacher’s retirement. At least not yet anyway. What I really love is how ignorant parents will buy into the republican vitriol about the teachers not working hard enough when in reality the teachers and the parent’s kids are the victims in all this.

Since teachers are not allowed to unionize, teachers can’t do anything about it. I understand too much power for unions can be bad, but the opposite can cause harm too. There’s a happy medium.

Other than teaching, do you know of any Texas government jobs suffering like this?

Although, the no state income tax thing is pretty cool. I love the gun and self-defense laws too (stand-your-ground castle doctrine). [/quote]

First off, I’m not a Rick Perry fan. There is just something about that doesn’t sit well.

Second, public education is broken. It isn’t about the kids anymore. It’s about politics. Legislators, parents, administrators, school boards, whatever, its about power. The dialogue is not set by the Democrats or the Republicans, but by the teacher’s unions. Someone coronated them as the epitome of educational wisdom, when they simply exist to get their constituents decent pay and decent benefits. Unions cannot set the dialogue about what is good for kids when all they really want is what is good for teachers. When people talk about the slacking teachers who aren’t fired, they aren’t complaining about teachers in general, but the system the union has put in place. Lets face it: we all know teachers who were simply worthless, and became teachers because they didn’t have to do anything and they were set for life. This is true, and highly unfair. Unfortunately, much of this can be blamed on teachers’ unions.

Third, why shouldn’t teacher’s salaries be cut when budgets are cut? I’d rather my salary get cut then my job be terminated (although sometimes that is inevitable)…which has happened. No other profession has this entitlement mentality. When times are tough, private institutions furlough their employees all the time, in addition to cutting or freezing wages. The issue I have is when good teachers get cut due to seniority. I know several newer teachers that were much more effective teachers than individuals who had been in the profession for years. Why should the newer teacher get cut when s/he’s doing a much more effective job? Who suffers when that happens? The kids. They get stuck with an ineffective teacher.

In sum, your comments about the state of teachers in the great state of Texas only serve to strengthen my growing antipathy towards public education…as a public school teacher. The whole thing is about power and control, not about educating kids. Why do the unions and their Democratic partners fight so vehemently against school choice? Why do the unions detest merit pay so much (and lets face it, nearly every job in the private sector has some sort of merit pay for effectiveness and success)? Why do legislators toy with educational spending like they do?

222

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
What made this confrontation “violent” was the teacher taking swings at this kid. [/quote]

Assuming you are not full of shit, which I have no reason to believe you are, you HAVE to be aware it is very unlikely this woman has been in even .01% of the violent situations you have.

The fact that you see the situation the way you do is based on your personal experience.

Now if you honestly think a “teacher of the year” didn’t do what she thought was the correct thing leading up to the point where the video kicks in, then you are assuming inconsistently. You have made a ton of assumptions throughout your argument, but never once have you taken the time to assume she HAD already exhausted every other option.

I got my wife’s droid on “video” mode in less than 3 seconds, btw. High Def video in 3 seconds.

That kid threatened that woman. If you can’t see that, it is because of your fucked up experiences in life. He threatened someone half his size. The fucking legal system agrees she was okay to react the way she did.

You, a reject from canada that thinks 4 fucking family vacations makes him a world expert, and this Td person are the only people that see this situation differently.

You have alluded to the fact that you behaved similarly to this guy in the video, is that why you have to cling to this ridiculous notion that the woman was wrong in her action?[/quote]

I believe what this situation really comes down to is whether or not hitting this kid will have taught him a better lesson than going to get help. I don’t know the answer to that, but certainly there is nothing wrong with her behaving like an adult and going to get help, is there?[/quote]

This is ridiculous. A person’s right to defend themselves has nothing to do with teaching lessons and behaving in a way the would benefit both parties. It is very simply about ONE thing, protecting herself from a threat. AND IT WORKED. She punched him OUT of her space, he retreated and the confrontations fucking ended immediately. That sounds to me like a pretty fucking successful diffusion of a threatening situation.

I’ve been in a similar situation and a bully who thinks you won’t punch him in the face in my experience is too fucking stunned to react and then you can retreat.

223

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
… A bunch of people here think it’s perfectly acceptable for a grown woman to punch a kid in the face 'cause he got close enough to smell what she ate for breakfast, when there were probably [I said probably, y’all] better options. Have fun with that.[/quote]

Dude that is the prevailing belief and it is supported by the law. The fact that you and a few others and this kid fail to understand that a person’s boundaries and personal space are real and can be defended and you don’t understand what assault really means is disturbing.

224

By getting rid of or drastically reducing public education funds, you’ll reduce the size of the middle class and increase the divide between rich and poor. I’ve known so many people that rose above there lot in life through public education. Without public education, they would have never been able to make the opportunity for themselves because their piss-poor parents would have never payed for it, much less been able to. Essentially, it will create a caste system.

225

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
What made this confrontation “violent” was the teacher taking swings at this kid. [/quote]

Assuming you are not full of shit, which I have no reason to believe you are, you HAVE to be aware it is very unlikely this woman has been in even .01% of the violent situations you have.

The fact that you see the situation the way you do is based on your personal experience.

Now if you honestly think a “teacher of the year” didn’t do what she thought was the correct thing leading up to the point where the video kicks in, then you are assuming inconsistently. You have made a ton of assumptions throughout your argument, but never once have you taken the time to assume she HAD already exhausted every other option.

I got my wife’s droid on “video” mode in less than 3 seconds, btw. High Def video in 3 seconds.

That kid threatened that woman. If you can’t see that, it is because of your fucked up experiences in life. He threatened someone half his size. The fucking legal system agrees she was okay to react the way she did.

You, a reject from canada that thinks 4 fucking family vacations makes him a world expert, and this Td person are the only people that see this situation differently.

You have alluded to the fact that you behaved similarly to this guy in the video, is that why you have to cling to this ridiculous notion that the woman was wrong in her action?[/quote]

I believe what this situation really comes down to is whether or not hitting this kid will have taught him a better lesson than going to get help. I don’t know the answer to that, but certainly there is nothing wrong with her behaving like an adult and going to get help, is there?[/quote]

This is ridiculous. A person’s right to defend themselves has nothing to do with teaching lessons and behaving in a way the would benefit both parties. It is very simply about ONE thing, protecting herself from a threat. AND IT WORKED. She punched him OUT of her space, he retreated and the confrontations fucking ended immediately. That sounds to me like a pretty fucking successful diffusion of a threatening situation.

I’ve been in a similar situation and a bully who thinks you won’t punch him in the face in my experience is too fucking stunned to react and then you can retreat.[/quote]

What i meant by “what this situation really comes down to” was based off of what people were arguiong over. I should have said “debate” not “situation.” I am sorry if i was not clearer there, i should have been. What WH was arguing with everyone about was whether or not hitting the kid was the best choice in regards to it being the more mature/responsible thing to do. So with regards to that, this argument comes down to the effect that hitting the kid would have had vs. not hitting the kid and going to get help

Now… If we are talking about what was the best decision for her to make in order to ensure her safety, OBVIOUSLY hitting the kid was a good decision because she didn’t get touched. We don’t know if walking away to get helped would have elicited the same response form the kid, but i think we can assume he wouldn’t have done anything…

If you are arguing that if a similar situation to this were to happen again, the best decision would be to hit the kid, then i couldn’t disagree more. In your experience, hitting the bully proved to stop his threats, but leaving the situation to get help would have done the same thing, assuming that there was help near, like there was in this situation

226

[quote]angus_beef wrote:
Too many emotional responses to have a logical conversation at this point.
[/quote]

It couldn’t be that your analysis is just wrong? Because it is.

227

As an aside, it seems to be INSANE that criminal law and the very basics of this stuff is not taught in grade school because having an understanding of what your rights are and what other peoples rights are could go a long way to curtailing stuff like this because this kid was behaving under the same incorrect premise as the handful of guys arguing here.

228

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
What made this confrontation “violent” was the teacher taking swings at this kid. [/quote]

Assuming you are not full of shit, which I have no reason to believe you are, you HAVE to be aware it is very unlikely this woman has been in even .01% of the violent situations you have.

The fact that you see the situation the way you do is based on your personal experience.

Now if you honestly think a “teacher of the year” didn’t do what she thought was the correct thing leading up to the point where the video kicks in, then you are assuming inconsistently. You have made a ton of assumptions throughout your argument, but never once have you taken the time to assume she HAD already exhausted every other option.

I got my wife’s droid on “video” mode in less than 3 seconds, btw. High Def video in 3 seconds.

That kid threatened that woman. If you can’t see that, it is because of your fucked up experiences in life. He threatened someone half his size. The fucking legal system agrees she was okay to react the way she did.

You, a reject from canada that thinks 4 fucking family vacations makes him a world expert, and this Td person are the only people that see this situation differently.

You have alluded to the fact that you behaved similarly to this guy in the video, is that why you have to cling to this ridiculous notion that the woman was wrong in her action?[/quote]

I believe what this situation really comes down to is whether or not hitting this kid will have taught him a better lesson than going to get help. I don’t know the answer to that, but certainly there is nothing wrong with her behaving like an adult and going to get help, is there?[/quote]

This is ridiculous. A person’s right to defend themselves has nothing to do with teaching lessons and behaving in a way the would benefit both parties. It is very simply about ONE thing, protecting herself from a threat. AND IT WORKED. She punched him OUT of her space, he retreated and the confrontations fucking ended immediately. That sounds to me like a pretty fucking successful diffusion of a threatening situation.

I’ve been in a similar situation and a bully who thinks you won’t punch him in the face in my experience is too fucking stunned to react and then you can retreat.[/quote]

What i meant by “what this situation really comes down to” was based off of what people were arguiong over. I should have said “debate” not “situation.” I am sorry if i was not clearer there, i should have been. What WH was arguing with everyone about was whether or not hitting the kid was the best choice in regards to it being the more mature/responsible thing to do. So with regards to that, this argument comes down to the effect that hitting the kid would have had vs. not hitting the kid and going to get help

Now… If we are talking about what was the best decision for her to make in order to ensure her safety, OBVIOUSLY hitting the kid was a good decision because she didn’t get touched. We don’t know if walking away to get helped would have elicited the same response form the kid, but i think we can assume he wouldn’t have done anything…

If you are arguing that if a similar situation to this were to happen again, the best decision would be to hit the kid, then i couldn’t disagree more. In your experience, hitting the bully proved to stop his threats, but leaving the situation to get help would have done the same thing, assuming that there was help near, like there was in this situation[/quote]

You are assuming there wasn’t first a walking away that resulted in yet another confrontation. You would be wrong. I stand by my statement that punching a bully in the face is not only the right and just thing to do but an effective way to get him to back the fuck off and stay away.

And my experience supports this.

229

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
I don’t know man. While what he said was fucked up, he was just trying to intimidate her. He had no intention of hitting her, 'cause if he did it would’ve happened by the time she took a swing. And, he didn’t hit her back when he easily could’ve. She completely overreacted, and I can pretty much guarantee that they had been “at eachother” throughout the year. Being a teacher [or any position of authority] doesn’t make one immune to natural human feelings, and it’s pretty clear that there was a mutual dislike there. That may be an isolated incident, but we now know she’s capable of pretty irrational behavior. [/quote]

I think you’re waaaay off here. I have a simple question:

Would you ever allow anyone to invade your personal space like this? Ever? While calling you a cunt or the male equivalent? Because to do so is a good way to become a victim.

If anyone is talking aggressively to me and they get that close (not even that close, but close enough to hit me should they choose), I’m hitting first. Although I am shocked by what she did, NO ONE should have to tolerate someone threatening them in such a manner - and it’s absolutely a threat and intimidation. What do you do? Wait to get hit to be sure?

If my kid did that, I’d be kicking his ass when he got home and I’d have no complaint to the school. You just don’t do that.[/quote]

That’s a good point, and if it were me I’d do as you say you would and if I felt threatened I’d start throwing. But, I wouldn’t be his teacher and in a school setting. Not sure why this simple concept is so hard for y’all to grasp.[/quote]

Because it’s moronic. Teachers are not fucking punching bags and have the same right to self defense as you and the cunt doing the intimidating.

Self-defense: why can’t you grasp that simple concept? It’s not hard…
[/quote]

Self defense? He was in her face, not hitting her. This isn’t the street, it’s her proffesional setting. Once again: this kid is a douche and needs a monumental beating, but his 64 year old teacher was not the one to try and deliver it.[/quote]

Among other things, your first mistake is that this is a “professional setting”. It is not. It’s not a workplace where actual violence is rare and even in a “professional setting”, such a demonstration of intimidation would result in discipline, up to and including getting fired.

This is a school setting, where kids can sometimes be out of control and the threat of violence is very real. The legal standard doesn’t change just because they are in school. The only issue here is if she reasonably feared for her safety and whether her response was reasonable to the threat.

Are you prepared to argue that she didn’t have a reasonable fear for her safety?

Are you prepared to argue that if she did reasonably fear for her safety, that her response to protect herself was unreasonable?

I just don’t think you (or anyone else) can offer any serious rebuttal to either of the two questions above. And if you cannot, your personal feelings aside, you’re just wrong about this.

230

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
… A bunch of people here think it’s perfectly acceptable for a grown woman to punch a kid in the face 'cause he got close enough to smell what she ate for breakfast, when there were probably [I said probably, y’all] better options. Have fun with that.[/quote]

Dude that is the prevailing belief and it is supported by the law. The fact that you and a few others and this kid fail to understand that a person’s boundaries and personal space are real and can be defended and you don’t understand what assault really means is disturbing.
[/quote]

WE ALL UNDERSTAND THIS. But punching the kid was definitely not necessary because all she had to do was walk out of that door and get help. If he stopped her, then clearly the best decision is to now hit him, because he isn’t allowing her to get help. But she easily could have lowered her voice, remained calm, and walked out of the door to get help from another teacher. i personally don’t care that she punched the kid in the face, but i do think there was a better way to handle it.

231

[quote]angus_beef wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]angus_beef wrote:
Lol… i get the impression people viewed my post as a defense for the kid when i clearly stated what this kid did was wrong. I am NOT saying what this kid did was right, i am saying what the teacher did was wrong.
[/quote]

No the teacher was absolutely right. The law agrees too. I’m not really sure what the argument is. In what way does her actions not qualify as self-defense?

I said before and I’ll repeat, if I’m in the situation I am throwing punches without hesitation.[/quote]

By all means if you feel threatened defend yourself. I just don’t think teachers should punch students in the face, it could have been handled differently. This isn’t a street situation. We haven’t seen the entire video but i question whether the teacher was legitimately intimidated by this kid. She seemed to have handled herself well.

To me, a logically response for someone who is truly terrified would be to leave the room the moment the student left his seat.

I quoted brother chris because his sole argument was based on the fact that this teacher was a woman which is weak… & his response further reiterated that. Then because i decide to be level headed i suddenly don’t open doors for women or i let them walk all over me.

I’m saying what if it was a smaller male teacher being aggressively approached by a bigger female student and he punched her in the face because he felt threaten? Basically some here are saying this would not be ok solely based on gender and not the individuals perceived fear of danger. This doesn’t make sense to me.[/quote]

To suggest that this teacher should have to leave the room because this pubescent dickhead left his seat is laughable, outrageous and out of touch with reality. She’s in charge in that room. She doesn’t have to leave that room, and she doesn’t have to assume that every little fucktard leaving his seat is going to invade her personal space in a threatening manner.

And yes, your gender, your size, that of the aggressor - all these things are weighed in the legal analysis. That it doesn’t make sense to you is apparent.

Is anyone around here capable of admitting when their wrong, even after it’s painfully obvious that they are?!

232

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
What made this confrontation “violent” was the teacher taking swings at this kid. [/quote]

Assuming you are not full of shit, which I have no reason to believe you are, you HAVE to be aware it is very unlikely this woman has been in even .01% of the violent situations you have.

The fact that you see the situation the way you do is based on your personal experience.

Now if you honestly think a “teacher of the year” didn’t do what she thought was the correct thing leading up to the point where the video kicks in, then you are assuming inconsistently. You have made a ton of assumptions throughout your argument, but never once have you taken the time to assume she HAD already exhausted every other option.

I got my wife’s droid on “video” mode in less than 3 seconds, btw. High Def video in 3 seconds.

That kid threatened that woman. If you can’t see that, it is because of your fucked up experiences in life. He threatened someone half his size. The fucking legal system agrees she was okay to react the way she did.

You, a reject from canada that thinks 4 fucking family vacations makes him a world expert, and this Td person are the only people that see this situation differently.

You have alluded to the fact that you behaved similarly to this guy in the video, is that why you have to cling to this ridiculous notion that the woman was wrong in her action?[/quote]

I believe what this situation really comes down to is whether or not hitting this kid will have taught him a better lesson than going to get help. I don’t know the answer to that, but certainly there is nothing wrong with her behaving like an adult and going to get help, is there?[/quote]

This is ridiculous. A person’s right to defend themselves has nothing to do with teaching lessons and behaving in a way the would benefit both parties. It is very simply about ONE thing, protecting herself from a threat. AND IT WORKED. She punched him OUT of her space, he retreated and the confrontations fucking ended immediately. That sounds to me like a pretty fucking successful diffusion of a threatening situation.

I’ve been in a similar situation and a bully who thinks you won’t punch him in the face in my experience is too fucking stunned to react and then you can retreat.[/quote]

What i meant by “what this situation really comes down to” was based off of what people were arguiong over. I should have said “debate” not “situation.” I am sorry if i was not clearer there, i should have been. What WH was arguing with everyone about was whether or not hitting the kid was the best choice in regards to it being the more mature/responsible thing to do. So with regards to that, this argument comes down to the effect that hitting the kid would have had vs. not hitting the kid and going to get help

Now… If we are talking about what was the best decision for her to make in order to ensure her safety, OBVIOUSLY hitting the kid was a good decision because she didn’t get touched. We don’t know if walking away to get helped would have elicited the same response form the kid, but i think we can assume he wouldn’t have done anything…

If you are arguing that if a similar situation to this were to happen again, the best decision would be to hit the kid, then i couldn’t disagree more. In your experience, hitting the bully proved to stop his threats, but leaving the situation to get help would have done the same thing, assuming that there was help near, like there was in this situation[/quote]

You are assuming there wasn’t first a walking away that resulted in yet another confrontation. You would be wrong. I stand by my statement that punching a bully in the face is not only the right and just thing to do but an effective way to get him to back the fuck off and stay away.

And my experience supports this.
[/quote]

You are basing this experience off of one encounter? C’mon. I sincerely hope that if a man significantly bigger and stronger than you gets in your face, you don’t try to punch him in the face to “diffuse” the situtation. Not your smartest decision when you can get help nearby.

233

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
What made this confrontation “violent” was the teacher taking swings at this kid. [/quote]

Assuming you are not full of shit, which I have no reason to believe you are, you HAVE to be aware it is very unlikely this woman has been in even .01% of the violent situations you have.

The fact that you see the situation the way you do is based on your personal experience.

Now if you honestly think a “teacher of the year” didn’t do what she thought was the correct thing leading up to the point where the video kicks in, then you are assuming inconsistently. You have made a ton of assumptions throughout your argument, but never once have you taken the time to assume she HAD already exhausted every other option.

I got my wife’s droid on “video” mode in less than 3 seconds, btw. High Def video in 3 seconds.

That kid threatened that woman. If you can’t see that, it is because of your fucked up experiences in life. He threatened someone half his size. The fucking legal system agrees she was okay to react the way she did.

You, a reject from canada that thinks 4 fucking family vacations makes him a world expert, and this Td person are the only people that see this situation differently.

You have alluded to the fact that you behaved similarly to this guy in the video, is that why you have to cling to this ridiculous notion that the woman was wrong in her action?[/quote]

I believe what this situation really comes down to is whether or not hitting this kid will have taught him a better lesson than going to get help. I don’t know the answer to that, but certainly there is nothing wrong with her behaving like an adult and going to get help, is there?[/quote]

This is ridiculous. A person’s right to defend themselves has nothing to do with teaching lessons and behaving in a way the would benefit both parties. It is very simply about ONE thing, protecting herself from a threat. AND IT WORKED. She punched him OUT of her space, he retreated and the confrontations fucking ended immediately. That sounds to me like a pretty fucking successful diffusion of a threatening situation.

I’ve been in a similar situation and a bully who thinks you won’t punch him in the face in my experience is too fucking stunned to react and then you can retreat.[/quote]

What i meant by “what this situation really comes down to” was based off of what people were arguiong over. I should have said “debate” not “situation.” I am sorry if i was not clearer there, i should have been. What WH was arguing with everyone about was whether or not hitting the kid was the best choice in regards to it being the more mature/responsible thing to do. So with regards to that, this argument comes down to the effect that hitting the kid would have had vs. not hitting the kid and going to get help

Now… If we are talking about what was the best decision for her to make in order to ensure her safety, OBVIOUSLY hitting the kid was a good decision because she didn’t get touched. We don’t know if walking away to get helped would have elicited the same response form the kid, but i think we can assume he wouldn’t have done anything…

If you are arguing that if a similar situation to this were to happen again, the best decision would be to hit the kid, then i couldn’t disagree more. In your experience, hitting the bully proved to stop his threats, but leaving the situation to get help would have done the same thing, assuming that there was help near, like there was in this situation[/quote]

You are assuming there wasn’t first a walking away that resulted in yet another confrontation. You would be wrong. I stand by my statement that punching a bully in the face is not only the right and just thing to do but an effective way to get him to back the fuck off and stay away.

And my experience supports this.
[/quote]

You are basing this experience off of one encounter? C’mon. I sincerely hope that if a man significantly bigger and stronger than you gets in your face, you don’t try to punch him in the face to “diffuse” the situtation. Not your smartest decision when you can get help nearby.[/quote]

No I am not. How many encounters are you basing your experience off of? Unless you are a petite woman I’m guessing none.

I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can. You don’t fumble with a fucking whistle, you don’t fuck around with a phone and you don’t attempt to contort yourself to open a door that you might not even know is behind you, you just start fucking swinging.

234

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

Not at all. just providing personal experience. My “mid 90’s post office” line was said in jest, but those posts kinda proved one of my points. The world is dangerous, and it has nothing to do with chronological progression. But, there needs to be preventative measures taken and/or established before things escelate to that point. Like I said earlier, there’s no way what happened in that classroom was their first altercation. As soon as the kid has been in trouble more than once in that class, someone needs to keep an eye on the situation. And, if the kid has mental problems as the article suggests, he doesn’t need to be in that class in the first place.[/quote]

You are speculating that there is a history there…there may or may not be, and its really irrelevant as it is not really on the topic…the teacher can’t remove the student from the class–that would have to be done at a higher pay grade than hers…so what is she supposed to do? Endure verbal and physical abuse and intimidation because someone else didn’t do their job?

I just don’t see how anyone can think the teacher did anything except the right thing in this situation…She handled the situation extremely well IMO…in hindsight, maybe pushing the kid back instead of decking him may have been a better option, but when a much weaker person is put in an intimidating and potentially dangerous situation such as this, I think that is very forgiveable…I doubt she had time and clear thinking to weigh all her options and balance out the pros and cons–she reacted instinctively because she was placed in a situation where that is natural…[/quote]

Of course it’s speculation, but things like that generally don’t just happen unless there’s some sort of history. And, as I said earlier she was standing in a doorway. Why not open the door, go grab a security guard or officer [ I know some schools have actual police officers on campus] and have them remove the kid? Busting him in the face wasn’t the smartest move. Agreed that she felt threatened and her instinct kicked in, so she obviously wasn’t thinking, but that’s my point. She needed to be thinking. Hauling off and busting on him was a really bad idea.[/quote]

Continuing your logic, if someone approached you speaking aggressively, and then got right in your face, looking down on you, still talking…

Do you run off and look for a police officer? Or do you feel you have a legal right to extinguish and/or respond to the threat?

Do you not understand the legal standard doesn’t change just because they are in school? I’m 46 and fuck, when I was in high school (freshman) in 79, I pushed a teacher (tried to push past him, not assault him) trying to get to another student after a fight was broken up (he was talking mad shit on the way to the principals office, and I wasn’t having it) and the police showed up at my house Saturday morning. That was 79/80.

Legal standards are legal standards. Your opinion here is unduly influenced by the setting. The setting is irrelevant. Further, whether she COULD have handled it “better” or “differently” is rhetorical and irrelevant. We are not required to be perfect. The only question here is whether she perceived a threat, and whether her response was reasonable. That’s it. The end.

235

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
What made this confrontation “violent” was the teacher taking swings at this kid. [/quote]

Assuming you are not full of shit, which I have no reason to believe you are, you HAVE to be aware it is very unlikely this woman has been in even .01% of the violent situations you have.

The fact that you see the situation the way you do is based on your personal experience.

Now if you honestly think a “teacher of the year” didn’t do what she thought was the correct thing leading up to the point where the video kicks in, then you are assuming inconsistently. You have made a ton of assumptions throughout your argument, but never once have you taken the time to assume she HAD already exhausted every other option.

I got my wife’s droid on “video” mode in less than 3 seconds, btw. High Def video in 3 seconds.

That kid threatened that woman. If you can’t see that, it is because of your fucked up experiences in life. He threatened someone half his size. The fucking legal system agrees she was okay to react the way she did.

You, a reject from canada that thinks 4 fucking family vacations makes him a world expert, and this Td person are the only people that see this situation differently.

You have alluded to the fact that you behaved similarly to this guy in the video, is that why you have to cling to this ridiculous notion that the woman was wrong in her action?[/quote]

I believe what this situation really comes down to is whether or not hitting this kid will have taught him a better lesson than going to get help. I don’t know the answer to that, but certainly there is nothing wrong with her behaving like an adult and going to get help, is there?[/quote]

This is ridiculous. A person’s right to defend themselves has nothing to do with teaching lessons and behaving in a way the would benefit both parties. It is very simply about ONE thing, protecting herself from a threat. AND IT WORKED. She punched him OUT of her space, he retreated and the confrontations fucking ended immediately. That sounds to me like a pretty fucking successful diffusion of a threatening situation.

I’ve been in a similar situation and a bully who thinks you won’t punch him in the face in my experience is too fucking stunned to react and then you can retreat.[/quote]

What i meant by “what this situation really comes down to” was based off of what people were arguiong over. I should have said “debate” not “situation.” I am sorry if i was not clearer there, i should have been. What WH was arguing with everyone about was whether or not hitting the kid was the best choice in regards to it being the more mature/responsible thing to do. So with regards to that, this argument comes down to the effect that hitting the kid would have had vs. not hitting the kid and going to get help

Now… If we are talking about what was the best decision for her to make in order to ensure her safety, OBVIOUSLY hitting the kid was a good decision because she didn’t get touched. We don’t know if walking away to get helped would have elicited the same response form the kid, but i think we can assume he wouldn’t have done anything…

If you are arguing that if a similar situation to this were to happen again, the best decision would be to hit the kid, then i couldn’t disagree more. In your experience, hitting the bully proved to stop his threats, but leaving the situation to get help would have done the same thing, assuming that there was help near, like there was in this situation[/quote]

You are assuming there wasn’t first a walking away that resulted in yet another confrontation. You would be wrong. I stand by my statement that punching a bully in the face is not only the right and just thing to do but an effective way to get him to back the fuck off and stay away.

And my experience supports this.
[/quote]

You are basing this experience off of one encounter? C’mon. I sincerely hope that if a man significantly bigger and stronger than you gets in your face, you don’t try to punch him in the face to “diffuse” the situtation. Not your smartest decision when you can get help nearby.[/quote]

No I am not. How many encounters are you basing your experience off of? Unless you are a petite woman I’m guessing none.

I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can. You don’t fumble with a fucking whistle, you don’t fuck around with a phone and you don’t attempt to contort yourself to open a door that you might not even know is behind you, you just start fucking swinging.
[/quote]

The situation involved a teacher and a student who was significantly bigger than she was, and if he chose to, could have definitely kicked her ass. She was right next to the door, she could have opened it and walked to the next classroom to get help from a male teacher.

You said “I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can.” She didn’t need to wait for help. Go next door. She wasn’t trapped. The kid was in her face, she could have easily walked to the door, opened it, and left. IF he held her and did not allow her to move, then i definitely agree hitting him was the best option.

In your personal experience, if there was no help near, and you felt threatened, then obviously you have to handle it yourself. So hitting the bully definitely was the right decision. But we are talking about a situation in which the teacher could easily have gotten help.

Also, if someone hits a bully who is much bigger and stronger than them, and the bully doesn’t retaliate, then he wasn’t ever going to physically harm the person anyway. He certainly isn’t going to hit the person when they walk away from the situation. In your personal experience, the bully that did not retaliate was NEVER going to physically harm you, just try to intimidate you i’m sure.

If you seriously think that the best choice for someone being bullied by a much bigger and stronger person is to hit them in face, WHEN HELP IS NEAR AND ACCESSIBLE, then i guess we can just agree to disagree.

236

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Also, the courts agree that she didn’t “act like a fucking child”.

Lawyers & judges are typically more educated and sophisticated than a bunch of meat-heads arguing on the internet. Their opinion on the matter shouldn’t be ignored.[/quote]

Lets also remember that today’s court system will almost always side with “the poor child” in any situation. So for this teacher to come out of this situation without a legal scratch pretty much shows that she was COMPLETELY correct in her actions. So the people arguing that point have already been proven wrong by the court and through the school boards actions. So think to yourself: “Why am I one of the only people thinking this way?”

237

[quote]TD54 wrote:
The situation involved a teacher and a student who was significantly bigger than she was, and if he chose to, could have definitely kicked her ass. She was right next to the door, she could have opened it and walked to the next classroom to get help from a male teacher.

You said “I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can.” She didn’t need to wait for help. Go next door. She wasn’t trapped. The kid was in her face, she could have easily walked to the door, opened it, and left. IF he held her and did not allow her to move, then i definitely agree hitting him was the best option.

In your personal experience, if there was no help near, and you felt threatened, then obviously you have to handle it yourself. So hitting the bully definitely was the right decision. But we are talking about a situation in which the teacher could easily have gotten help.

If you seriously think that the best choice for someone being bullied by a much bigger and stronger person is to hit them in face, WHEN HELP IS NEAR AND ACCESSIBLE, then i guess we can just agree to disagree.[/quote]

All I can say is I think you must be inexperienced in physical confrontations if you would conclude that help was near and accessible. Because if you have ever been in a truly threatening situation you would know there is no time to do anything but fight.

I challenge you to have a friend shove you up against a door like that, with your back to it and see how well you do opening it, without adrenaline and having the foresight to be aware of exactly where the doorknob is at that time.

When you are in a fight or flight situation, it is fast blurr of tunnel vision of the threat and fists flying. You are not reaching backwards for doorknobs.

238

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:
The situation involved a teacher and a student who was significantly bigger than she was, and if he chose to, could have definitely kicked her ass. She was right next to the door, she could have opened it and walked to the next classroom to get help from a male teacher.

You said “I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can.” She didn’t need to wait for help. Go next door. She wasn’t trapped. The kid was in her face, she could have easily walked to the door, opened it, and left. IF he held her and did not allow her to move, then i definitely agree hitting him was the best option.

In your personal experience, if there was no help near, and you felt threatened, then obviously you have to handle it yourself. So hitting the bully definitely was the right decision. But we are talking about a situation in which the teacher could easily have gotten help.

If you seriously think that the best choice for someone being bullied by a much bigger and stronger person is to hit them in face, WHEN HELP IS NEAR AND ACCESSIBLE, then i guess we can just agree to disagree.[/quote]

All I can say is I think you must be inexperienced in physical confrontations if you would conclude that help was near and accessible. Because if you have ever been in a truly threatening situation you would know there is no time to do anything but fight.

I challenge you to have a friend shove you up against a door like that, with your back to it and see how well you do opening it, without adrenaline and having the foresight to be aware of exactly where the doorknob is at that time.

When you are in a fight or flight situation, it is fast blurr of tunnel vision of the threat and fists flying. You are not reaching backwards for doorknobs.[/quote]

I am plenty experienced in physical confrontations. I know what you’re saying, your adrenaline is pumping and you aren’t doing much thinking when a confrontation like that occurs. It’s a very stressful situation that doesn’t leave much time for rational thought. With that said there is still a “best” decision to make in that situation. You think it’s hitting the bully in the face, I think it’s exiting the door to get help. Like you said it’s a very stressful situation in which your adrenaline is pumping like no other, so I don’t blame the teacher for making the decision she did. I just believe she made the wrong one.

239

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:
The situation involved a teacher and a student who was significantly bigger than she was, and if he chose to, could have definitely kicked her ass. She was right next to the door, she could have opened it and walked to the next classroom to get help from a male teacher.

You said “I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can.” She didn’t need to wait for help. Go next door. She wasn’t trapped. The kid was in her face, she could have easily walked to the door, opened it, and left. IF he held her and did not allow her to move, then i definitely agree hitting him was the best option.

In your personal experience, if there was no help near, and you felt threatened, then obviously you have to handle it yourself. So hitting the bully definitely was the right decision. But we are talking about a situation in which the teacher could easily have gotten help.

If you seriously think that the best choice for someone being bullied by a much bigger and stronger person is to hit them in face, WHEN HELP IS NEAR AND ACCESSIBLE, then i guess we can just agree to disagree.[/quote]

All I can say is I think you must be inexperienced in physical confrontations if you would conclude that help was near and accessible. Because if you have ever been in a truly threatening situation you would know there is no time to do anything but fight.

I challenge you to have a friend shove you up against a door like that, with your back to it and see how well you do opening it, without adrenaline and having the foresight to be aware of exactly where the doorknob is at that time.

When you are in a fight or flight situation, it is fast blurr of tunnel vision of the threat and fists flying. You are not reaching backwards for doorknobs.[/quote]

I am plenty experienced in physical confrontations. I know what you’re saying, your adrenaline is pumping and you aren’t doing much thinking when a confrontation like that occurs. It’s a very stressful situation that doesn’t leave much time for rational thought. With that said there is still a “best” decision to make in that situation. You think it’s hitting the bully in the face, I think it’s exiting the door to get help. Like you said it’s a very stressful situation in which your adrenaline is pumping like no other, so I don’t blame the teacher for making the decision she did. I just believe she made the wrong one. [/quote]

You must not be very good at those confrontations then. Aren’t you the one that said she should have just shoved the kid? Every fight I’ve been in the person who shoved got punched in the face. Physical contact has been made so it’s on. The teacher did exactly the right thing, which can be seen by the fact that it ended the conflict immediately. The kid stopped advancing and everything was done after that.

Also, a shove is exactly the same as a punch in this situation. A teacher made physical contact with a student. In this case it was justified, but most times a teacher would get fired for just shoving the kid.

240

[quote]brnforce wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]TD54 wrote:
The situation involved a teacher and a student who was significantly bigger than she was, and if he chose to, could have definitely kicked her ass. She was right next to the door, she could have opened it and walked to the next classroom to get help from a male teacher.

You said “I can assure you that waiting for someone to help is a lost fucking cause and you cannot get away from someone who has you trapped without getting them the fuck out of your face as violently as you can.” She didn’t need to wait for help. Go next door. She wasn’t trapped. The kid was in her face, she could have easily walked to the door, opened it, and left. IF he held her and did not allow her to move, then i definitely agree hitting him was the best option.

In your personal experience, if there was no help near, and you felt threatened, then obviously you have to handle it yourself. So hitting the bully definitely was the right decision. But we are talking about a situation in which the teacher could easily have gotten help.

If you seriously think that the best choice for someone being bullied by a much bigger and stronger person is to hit them in face, WHEN HELP IS NEAR AND ACCESSIBLE, then i guess we can just agree to disagree.[/quote]

All I can say is I think you must be inexperienced in physical confrontations if you would conclude that help was near and accessible. Because if you have ever been in a truly threatening situation you would know there is no time to do anything but fight.

I challenge you to have a friend shove you up against a door like that, with your back to it and see how well you do opening it, without adrenaline and having the foresight to be aware of exactly where the doorknob is at that time.

When you are in a fight or flight situation, it is fast blurr of tunnel vision of the threat and fists flying. You are not reaching backwards for doorknobs.[/quote]

I am plenty experienced in physical confrontations. I know what you’re saying, your adrenaline is pumping and you aren’t doing much thinking when a confrontation like that occurs. It’s a very stressful situation that doesn’t leave much time for rational thought. With that said there is still a “best” decision to make in that situation. You think it’s hitting the bully in the face, I think it’s exiting the door to get help. Like you said it’s a very stressful situation in which your adrenaline is pumping like no other, so I don’t blame the teacher for making the decision she did. I just believe she made the wrong one. [/quote]

You must not be very good at those confrontations then. Aren’t you the one that said she should have just shoved the kid? Every fight I’ve been in the person who shoved got punched in the face. Physical contact has been made so it’s on. The teacher did exactly the right thing, which can be seen by the fact that it ended the conflict immediately. The kid stopped advancing and everything was done after that.

Also, a shove is exactly the same as a punch in this situation. A teacher made physical contact with a student. In this case it was justified, but most times a teacher would get fired for just shoving the kid.[/quote]

No, i never said she should have shoved him… C’mon man. You are way behind in this debate and i have no desire to go back and explain everything to you. You are not even arguing about the same thing as i am.