• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Misbehaving Boy, 8, Pepper Sprayed By Police

First of all teachers do not have any latitude anymore when it comes to discipline, the discipline is strictly outlined by school boards and administrations. When I was a kid a teacher would smack you across the face and my father would tell me I deserved it. Today the teacher would be fired and there would be lawyers swarming all over the school.
Should the boy have been tasered by police...ONLY, if it was determined by the officers on the scene that it was the best or only way to assure they could disarm him without HURTING him. Subdueing and out of control 8yr old with a weapon is easy for a well conditioned man, however, its not easy to assure you dont hurt him in the process. I dont know I wasnt there and I dont have all the facts.
 
How do you know that's not the case. Since my parenting career began, I've met some seriously sub-standard teachers.

Let's not put teachers on too high of a pedestal.

so, it's ok for you to make assumptions about the teachers complicity in the events in question, but someone assumes the kid was actually a possible danger, and that's simply not possible?

:rolleyes:
 
But not the same threat level of an older child.

Completely depends.

Older Child without a weapon would likely be less threatening then an 8 y/o with a knife in my mind.

A large 8 y/o with a very sharp edged stick that is enraged would be more threatening to me than a squaney 15 year old with a knife that's more nervous than anything else

You keep talking in absolutes while acting like you're some big macho genius when it comes to these types of situations, which just makes me think that honestly your opinion on this is roughly jack and **** compartive to the cops at the scene. The fact you are ignorantly suggesting age alone makes someone with a potentially dangerous weapon non-threatening and that you'd just need to "Grab his arm and spank his bottom" to solve the issue speaks volumes.
 
liblady - if a police officer can't control an 8 yr old without pepper spray, i think maybe they need to go back for more training. this is ridiculous.

"apdst likes this."

Everybody put your heads between your legs and kiss your asses goodbye. The world just came to an end. :mrgreen:
 
No it's not. Come on. You really believe that an 8 year old is that dangerous?

Well yes, I believe an 8 year old can be that dangerous. I think its ridiculous to suggest or imply flatly that its ridiculous to assume an 8 year old could put someone in a situation where self defense of some kind if needed.

You know, here in Texas, if a parent was to pepper spray a kid, he or she would be doing hard time.

And your point?

The kid is getting out of line and screaming and throwing a temper tantrum, maybe throwing a plate, because they want a cookie? Yeah, I'd agree. Kid throwing a TV around, waving a sharp weapon at you, threatening you and others, then I'd say the law would be ridiculous to lock someone up for that.

Why does a cop get an exception to that? There are better ways to deal with unruly kids, and pepper spray is definitely not one of them. That cop should be fired.

You've got to be freaking kidding me Dana?

You're definition of an "unruly" kid is one hurling charis and a TELEVISION at teachers and class mates, screaming insults at them, and getting ahold of a sharp object to use incase they "came out" of the door he was trying to break into to continue to go after them?

Would something short of a 20 person killing spree apparently be required for you to call a kid being delinquent if THAT is simply being "unruly"?

I'm sure you'd be in here screaming up a storm and demanding the cop be fired and sued if he had actually tried to physically stop the kid and ended up causing some kind of injury to the 8 y/o while trying to keep from being stabbed.
 
Last edited:
This is ****ing ridiculous...

Question for all the macho hotshots on the thread.

All of you saying how absolutely easy and seemingly unquestionably safe disarming ANYONE, even an 8 y/o, of a potetentially dangerous edged weapon. How much training or actual experience do you have doing such a thing? Or is this all based off the movies, what you THINK is common sense, or because "by god I'm a parent of 6 kids so I know everything there is ever about anything doing with any kind of kid in any fashion"?
 
so, it's ok for you to make assumptions about the teachers complicity in the events in question, but someone assumes the kid was actually a possible danger, and that's simply not possible?

:rolleyes:

I never said the kid wasn't a threat. Stop rolling your eyes and actually read my posts.
 
Best response in this whole thread. Thank you.

Originally Posted by lpast
I dont know I wasnt there and I dont have all the facts.

If that's the "best response?" We'd better just shut down the website, 'cause it's gunna get awful quiet.
 
This is ****ing ridiculous...

Question for all the macho hotshots on the thread.

All of you saying how absolutely easy and seemingly unquestionably safe disarming ANYONE, even an 8 y/o, of a potetentially dangerous edged weapon. How much training or actual experience do you have doing such a thing? Or is this all based off the movies, what you THINK is common sense, or because "by god I'm a parent of 6 kids so I know everything there is ever about anything doing with any kind of kid in any fashion"?

I have quit a bit of training, actually. But, my question is: what dangerous weapon did this kid possess?
 
Completely depends.

Older Child without a weapon would likely be less threatening then an 8 y/o with a knife in my mind.

A large 8 y/o with a very sharp edged stick that is enraged would be more threatening to me than a squaney 15 year old with a knife that's more nervous than anything else

You keep talking in absolutes while acting like you're some big macho genius when it comes to these types of situations, which just makes me think that honestly your opinion on this is roughly jack and **** compartive to the cops at the scene. The fact you are ignorantly suggesting age alone makes someone with a potentially dangerous weapon non-threatening and that you'd just need to "Grab his arm and spank his bottom" to solve the issue speaks volumes.

If an 8 y/o had an M-60 machine gun, then yes he would be a very serious threat, but this kid had a piece of wood trim that he broke off the wall. Gimme a break! What's he going to do, cause an infection with it? Kinda like Clark Griswald taking over Wally World with a BB-gun.
 
But, didn't attempt to defuse the situation, which would have been the most effective defense of the other kids. Right?

How do you know that? The first line of the second story is that the teacher stated no one was able to calm the 8 y/o, which definitely suggests SOME attempt was made to defuse the situation early on. The events apparently started earlier in the day and escalated prior to trying to get the students away. Why is it somehow more reasonable to suggest that during that entire time they just ignored the situtation up until the point that they removed the students and somehow not worth considering that they perhaps DID try to defuse the situation during that time and failed at it?
 
Yeah, grab his arm and spank his little ass.

a) if the cop is able to grab his arm without getting cut himself, then he also takes the chance of hurting the 8 year old, possibly breaking that arm or the 8 yo fighting him until one or both of them get hurt

possible broken arm, plus possible cut to LEO, not to mention likely bruising to both and possibly lacerations to them and others vs. watering, painful burning to eyes that last maybe half a day (depending on what concentration their pepper spray is) for the young boy with very little chance of any harm to others and unlikely to do lasting harm to him

I'd go with the pepper spray and I'm pretty sure that my husband, who carries pepper spray daily at work (sure he has some on him atm, in fact), would agree.

b) depending on the state, spanking the child is a form of child abuse

The mother doing what you suggested long before this incident would have been wonderful, but unfortunately we must base the decision on what happened in the present situation not what should have been done during his previous 7 years to prevent this from happening. This was the decision of the teacher (who is limited by laws of what she can do, including, in some states, not even being legally allowed to yell or touch the student in a disciplinary manner and who must ensure that the other students are not harmed by the one student) and the decision of the LEOs who came to the scene. I have seen nothing wrong with the decision that they made. It is the one likely to result in the least amount of harm to everyone involved.
 
How do you know that? The first line of the second story is that the teacher stated no one was able to calm the 8 y/o, which definitely suggests SOME attempt was made to defuse the situation early on. The events apparently started earlier in the day and escalated prior to trying to get the students away. Why is it somehow more reasonable to suggest that during that entire time they just ignored the situtation up until the point that they removed the students and somehow not worth considering that they perhaps DID try to defuse the situation during that time and failed at it?

That certainly doesn't suggest that they made an asserted attempt, either.
 
I have quit a bit of training, actually. But, my question is: what dangerous weapon did this kid possess?

According to the officers on scene a piece of wood with a knife like point. Again, why should I take your word over that of the officers. I know for a fact you can puncture skin and do damage with wood (on a different school related note, a child recently during a prank had a pencil shoved 2 inches into his body). The officers felt that the tip of the wood was legitimate enough as a weapon. So far all you have going against that is "Well, its just a kid".

And excuse me if I severely doubt either your training, or severely disregard it due to your obvious bravado and chest thumping, as I can't think of a single instance of an individual dealing with an knife-life weapon suggesting that the people involved treat it as essentially a ridiculous and hollow threat akin to your claim of just "grab his arm and spank his bottom".
 
a) if the cop is able to grab his arm without getting cut himself, then he also takes the chance of hurting the 8 year old, possibly breaking that arm or the 8 yo fighting him until one or both of them get hurt

possible broken arm, plus possible cut to LEO, not to mention likely bruising to both and possibly lacerations to them and others vs. watering, painful burning to eyes that last maybe half a day (depending on what concentration their pepper spray is) for the young boy with very little chance of any harm to others and unlikely to do lasting harm to him

I'd go with the pepper spray and I'm pretty sure that my husband, who carries pepper spray daily at work (sure he has some on him atm, in fact), would agree.

b) depending on the state, spanking the child is a form of child abuse

The mother doing what you suggested long before this incident would have been wonderful, but unfortunately we must base the decision on what happened in the present situation not what should have been done during his previous 7 years to prevent this from happening. This was the decision of the teacher (who is limited by laws of what she can do, including, in some states, not even being legally allowed to yell or touch the student in a disciplinary manner and who must ensure that the other students are not harmed by the one student) and the decision of the LEOs who came to the scene. I have seen nothing wrong with the decision that they made. It is the one likely to result in the least amount of harm to everyone involved.


Any cop that can't defend himself from a piece of wooden wall trim, in the hands of an 8 y/o probably shouldn't be a cop and carrying a firearm.
 
That certainly doesn't suggest that they made an asserted attempt, either.

Wait, so them stating that no one was ABLE to do it suggests that no one ATTEMPTED to do it?

Or are you now changing your goal posts to no one trying to defuse the situation to no one trying to defuse the situation up to the standards of apdst, supreme decider of all things involving children?
 
According to the officers on scene a piece of wood with a knife like point. Again, why should I take your word over that of the officers. I know for a fact you can puncture skin and do damage with wood (on a different school related note, a child recently during a prank had a pencil shoved 2 inches into his body). The officers felt that the tip of the wood was legitimate enough as a weapon. So far all you have going against that is "Well, its just a kid".

And excuse me if I severely doubt either your training, or severely disregard it due to your obvious bravado and chest thumping, as I can't think of a single instance of an individual dealing with an knife-life weapon suggesting that the people involved treat it as essentially a ridiculous and hollow threat akin to your claim of just "grab his arm and spank his bottom".

They sound like they're a buncha ******s, then.
 
Any cop that can't defend himself from a piece of wooden wall trim, in the hands of an 8 y/o probably shouldn't be a cop and carrying a firearm.

There's a significantly difference between "defending oneself" from an enraged 8 y/o with a knife-like pointed object and significant defend themselves with the utmost and unquestionable confidence that no harm will come to the child or the officer for it.
 
Wait, so them stating that no one was ABLE to do it suggests that no one ATTEMPTED to do it?

Or are you now changing your goal posts to no one trying to defuse the situation to no one trying to defuse the situation up to the standards of apdst, supreme decider of all things involving children?

You left out my use of, "asserted". Thanks for moving the goal post, for me.
 
There's a significantly difference between "defending oneself" from an enraged 8 y/o with a knife-like pointed object and significant defend themselves with the utmost and unquestionable confidence that no harm will come to the child or the officer for it.

Call it what it is, a piece of wood. :rofl
 
You left out my use of, "asserted". Thanks for moving the goal post, for me.

That's because your initial setting of the goal post didn't say an 'asserted attempt" to defuse, just an attempt to defuse.
 
Call it what it is, a piece of wood. :rofl

I'll call it what the officers that actually saw it called it, which was a foot long piece of wood with a knife-like point. But I forgot, apdst's godly dominance over all things dealing with children apparently also gives him unquestionable claivoyance into scenes of the past and you obviously know what it really was
 
Back
Top Bottom