Outdated Handcuffs Used By Police

[PolyNewbie]

6 year old in handcuffs

Its not the first 6 year old they have arrested. I guess whena 6 year starts crying the teacher can't pick them up they have the empire come and arrest them instead.

No way these guys ever could have carried out 911. Us conspiracy theorists must be crazy. The government loves you.

"“Believe me when I tell you,” said Chief Mercurio, “a 6-year-old can inflict injury to you just as much as any other person.”

Thank god for that body armour. God save the queen.

[Figleaf]

Bastards probably strip searched her too.

Sick world.

[stignasty]

6 year old in handcuffs

Its not the first 6 year old they have arrested. I guess whena 6 year starts crying the teacher can't pick them up they have the empire come and arrest them instead.

No way these guys ever could have carried out 911. Us conspiracy theorists must be crazy. The government loves you.

"“Believe me when I tell you,” said Chief Mercurio, “a 6-year-old can inflict injury to you just as much as any other person.”

Thank god for that body armour. God save the queen.

First of all it wasn't simply a case of a child crying. The kid was throwing chairs and hitting. What if a chair hit a classmate in the head? Why is no one outraged at the danger the other children might have been in? Was it right to arrest a 6 year old? Probably not. Also, it's clearly wrong to press charges against a child that age. However, that kind of behaviour can't be tolerated, and teachers have been 'handcuffed' in what they can and can't do with children.

So, what were the options of the school? They tried to contact the parents, but couldn't. link If she was acting out of control and the teachers or principal did something to restrain her what do you think the response would be from a society that takes every opportunity to criticize educators?

Your leap from the arrest of a six year old to 911 is nonsensical. "Us conspiracy theorists must be crazy." Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

Bastards probably strip searched her too.

Sick world.

What would make you think that? The article gave no mention of abuse of that sort.

[sharkman]

Perhaps this is what it has come to when educators can no longer discipline students. That spoiled silly little child needed to have consequences for her actions. A good spanking would have done the trick.

[guyser]

Perhaps this is what it has come to when educators can no longer discipline students. That spoiled silly little child needed to have consequences for her actions. A good spanking would have done the trick.

And made the parents of that child comfortably monied. IOW , no such response was used nor should it.

[Figleaf]

First of all it wasn't simply a case of a child crying. The kid was throwing chairs and hitting. What if a chair hit a classmate in the head? Why is no one outraged at the danger the other children might have been in?

Maybe because there is absolutely zero point in being 'outraged' at a child of six throwing a rang. You might as well be upset that dogs don't scoop their own poop.

So, what were the options of the school? They tried to contact the parents, but couldn't.

Once she was away from the other children they could have waited for her to calm down.

Bastards probably strip searched her too.

Sick world.

What would make you think that? The article gave no mention of abuse of that sort.

She was arrested, seemingly under 'normal' police procedure. The article suggests that these police have zero sensitivity to the context of the situation, so I'm guessing they would have applied their regular practices. Here was a 'young black perpetrator' being taken into custody ... why wouldn't they strip search her?

Maybe bounce her head off a few door-frames for good measure. Even if she's innocent of these charges, she's sure to be guilty of something else, right?

[ScottSA]

Here was a 'young black perpetrator' being taken into custody ... why wouldn't they strip search her?

Maybe bounce her head off a few door-frames for good measure. Even if she's innocent of these charges, she's sure to be guilty of something else, right?

Probably. Might as well put her away now, before whitey does her any more harm.

[Figleaf]

Probably. Might as well put her away now, before whitey does her any more harm.

Typical silver spoon socialist response.

This little law-breaker needed a good lesson. I only regret that some commie judge somewhere will probably give her credit for time-served, when what she needs is to spend her entire youth in a good harsh institutional setting.

[segnosaur]

Its not the first 6 year old they have arrested. I guess whena 6 year starts crying the teacher can't pick them up they have the empire come and arrest them instead.

No way these guys ever could have carried out 911. Us conspiracy theorists must be crazy. The government loves you.

Ah yes, the 'big bad government' wants to arrest children.

Trouble is, as usual such 'claims' usually ignore a lot of facts. Has anyone ever considered:

- Any child throwing such a tantrum can injure themselves or others. They can also destroy school property... simply allowing them to continue would not be a good idea

- While I'm sure that any teacher there would have the physical ability to control a child, they may be prevented from doing so by the rules of the school. At the very least, the risk of a lawsuit from over-zealous parents might deter any teacher from trying to stop the kid's negative actions. Police are better trained in restraining people.

- Although handcuffs seem cruel, if the student is intent on continuing a destructive tantrum, then SOME way of preventing damage or harm to others is needed. Using physical force may actually put everyone at more risk, both to the police or teacher (one accidental punch to the groin anyone?), or to the child themselves (especially if the child manages to squirm/run away). Last thing anyone (including the teachers) need is some lawsuit because the child they tried to grab to prevent them from throwning a chair ended up with a bruise. So, while handcuffs aren't perfect, they may be safer than the alternatives.

While I don't have a perfect solution to a situation like this, I look at the police involvement as being the best of a bunch of bad alternatives.

This is why I detest people like Jones and the entire 'conspricy theory' movement. When there IS an incident that may need a solution, they divert attention away from possible solutions with their bizare claims and insinuations. There MAY have been a better way to handle the situation (if resources were available)... lets try to find those ways. If anyone has a way to stop a potentially disruptive child WITHOUT touching them yourself, I'd like to hear it.

"“Believe me when I tell you,” said Chief Mercurio, “a 6-year-old can inflict injury to you just as much as any other person.”

Here's a suggestion... just in case someone thinks a 6 year old kid can never harm an adult... I suggest you go find a kindergarden student and allow them to punch and/or kick you in the genitals as hard as they can. While nobody was seriously harmed during THIS incident, if I were a teacher, I'd want to be teaching, not avoiding being punched where it might actually hurt.

First of all it wasn't simply a case of a child crying. The kid was throwing chairs and hitting. What if a chair hit a classmate in the head? Why is no one outraged at the danger the other children might have been in?

Maybe because there is absolutely zero point in being 'outraged' at a child of six throwing a rang. You might as well be upset that dogs don't scoop their own poop.

It would certainly be reasonable for the parents in the school to be 'outraged' that such a child was allowed to risk the health and well being of their own kids during her little temper tantrum. Yes, the kid is too young to be legally responsible for her actions; that does not mean that she should be allowed to continue those actions.

Once she was away from the other children they could have waited for her to calm down.

First of all, the child would have had plenty of time to 'calm down'... The article stated that they waited 20 minutes before they called the police. You would also have to assume that it would have taken at least a few minutes to try to contact the parents, and even after the police were contacted, it would take a while for them to respond (unless of course the school was right next to a donut shop.) So, I figure the kid probably had over half an hour to 'calm down'. That's a half hour that some teacher was not available to instruct her class because she had to watch some student throw a temper tantrum. That's a half hour that either the student could wreck school property, or risk injuring themselves or others.

Oh, and just out of curiosity, how long would you have waited? And what would you have done to prevent the child from damaging property while waiting for her to 'calm down'? Or would you have allowed her to destroy anything she wished?

She was arrested, seemingly under 'normal' police procedure. The article suggests that these police have zero sensitivity to the context of the situation, so I'm guessing they would have applied their regular practices. Here was a 'young black perpetrator' being taken into custody ... why wouldn't they strip search her?

Keep in mind that the 'article' that suggests that police have 'zero sensitivity' appeared on a web site run by a 'conspricy theorist' who finds it convenient to portray police, etc. as tools of an evil empire looking to enslave the population. Do you really think you're going to get an unbiased description of events from such a source?

Also keep in mind that many police procedures are actually designed to prevent harm to both the police themselves, AND the person being arrested. Handcuffs seem cruel, but an individual subdued with them is less likely to injure themselves in the police car on the way to the station.

[PolyNewbie]

Seggie, Your response is very thought provoking and should send shivers down anyones spine that has kids.

[Figleaf]

How about put on some hockey gear and HUG the child?

[ScottSA]

How about put on some hockey gear and HUG the child?

Or beat it with a hockey stick until it subsides. It'll be less likely to do it again, too. I can just imagine the teacher's union when it's suggested to them that their members be issued defensive hockey gear for grades k - 6, combat gear for grades 7- 9, and heavy armour for 10 - 12, although the numerical threat begins to diminish around grade 6 when the dropping out starts.

[segnosaur]

How about put on some hockey gear and HUG the child?

I have no idea if you're serious, but I'm going to assume you were...

How is a child being 'hugged' by a teacher wearing padding any better for the student than being handcuffed? If anything, it would probably be more terrifying for them... you're still restraining them, but the student has even less mobility than they would if they were handcuffed. Not to mention the fact that they may end up terrified of the TEACHERS at the school, people they'd be seeing every day. And of course there is also the more practical problem: Many schools are probably understaffed; do you really want to waste the time of a teacher while they 'hug' a disruptive student instead of having them doing what they're paid to do, namely teach?

And yes, putting on hockey gear (or at least protective gear of some sort) would prevent injury to teachers, etc. who had to restrain the kid. But as I stated before, that is only part of the problem. (Heck, I'm sure an adult can physically restrain a child even without hockey gear on.) You also have to consider potential risk to the child herself. Not to mention that you'd have to get school boards to change their rules to allow teachers to use physical force to restrain a child.

Could you imagine the lawsuit that would have result if some kid were bruised or somehow injured while being 'hugged' by some teacher in protective gear? Could you imagine the headlines, "kindergarden student injured by armoured goon teacher"? If you were a teacher, would you potentially risk your job trying to hold a squirming kid, knowing that you can find yourself the subject of a lawsuit by the parents if that kid manages to squirm away and bump their head, or break a nail while hitting your 'armour'?

How do you prevent schools and teachers from being sued by parents of children who are injured while being 'hugged', even if its not the teacher's fault? Would you be in favour of some sort of blanket amnesty for all teachers who have to restrain kids, to prevent them from being sued?

[PolyNewbie]

Didn't they used to have school nurses for this sort of thing. ?

[Figleaf]

How is a child being 'hugged' by a teacher wearing padding any better for the student than being handcuffed?

Jeez, I hope you're not a teacher.

Maybe you're an academic... if so you can do another of those wonderfully insightful studies -- call this one: "Hugs vs. Handcuffs: a survey of relative merits of pedogological techniques".

Many schools are probably understaffed; do you really want to waste the time of a teacher while they 'hug' a disruptive student instead of having them doing what they're paid to do, namely teach?

Don't you think maybe the police have better things to do than protect teachers from six-year olds?

Not to mention that you'd have to get school boards to change their rules to allow teachers to use physical force to restrain a child.

I don't thnk they'd have to change their rules. Teachers are considered in loco parentis, I believe, respecting kids in their charge.

Could you imagine the lawsuit that would have result if some kid were bruised or somehow injured while being 'hugged' by some teacher in protective gear?

Yes, I can ... about the same, or less, as might result from a police takedown.

[Guthrie]

First of all it wasn't simply a case of a child crying. The kid was throwing chairs and hitting

I'd like to think, with a six year old child, there is a middle ground somewhere in between standing back in cowering fear and pulling out the manacles and truncheons

[Guthrie]

maybe Alberto Gonzalez should have handled that one, personally

[kimmy]

You can bet that regardless of how the school had tried to deal with this child, it would have been the wrong thing according to self-styled defenders of the downtrodden.

And you can bet that in 2 weeks, Alex Jones will be linking to this article as proof that devil-worshiping politicians are abducting children for Luciferian sex-parties.

After watching the video of the kid's mom, I'm not terribly surprised that this kid is having trouble at school.

-k

[Guthrie]

but when did schools forget how to take care of 6 year olds --- do I have to repeat that last part

6 year olds

6 year olds????

[Figleaf]

After watching the video of the kid's mom, I'm not terribly surprised that this kid is having trouble at school.

All the more reason to throw the book at the tyke! SLAMMER TIME!!!

[bush_cheney2004]

In 2000, 6-year-old Dedrick Owens brought a gun to his elementary school and shot his classmate Kayla Rolland after shouting "I don't like you!" at her. The shooting became a prominent example in Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine documentary.

[Guthrie]

6 year old kids need a lot of things

6 year old kids never ever ever ever ever ever ever need to be handcuffed - shame on anyone who can't see that

[PolyNewbie]

Wait until the Haliburtons start taking the cute kiddies off the street to be used in foreign brothels - they will do it right out in the open and guys like Segnosoaur will argue in favour of it.

3000 kids went missing in FL and were found in foreign brothels and dead. Gonzales has been implicated in allowing the jeuvenile halls to be used as brothels. The UN wars always have the sex trade going along with them, see "Boys Will Be Boys" a story by the BBC.

Anything goes for god, queen and empire I guess.

kimmy: Alex Jones will be linking to this article as proof that devil-worshiping politicians are abducting children for Luciferian sex-parties.

Lots of people from the FBI are comming out about that. Ted Gunderson isn't the only one.

[PolyNewbie]

kimmy: it would have been the wrong thing according to self-styled defenders of the downtrodden.

95 % of us will soon be the downtrodden if people like you do not wake up.

"The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values." -Zbigniew Brzezinski

Are kiddie brothels and accepted part of "traditional values" ?

This New World Order is growing up around you kimmy. Even if you live in a ten million dollar house and daddy is a lawyer that will not be enough. Look into Katrina - see how the self proclaimed elites were treated.

[kimmy]

but when did schools forget how to take care of 6 year olds --- do I have to repeat that last part

6 year olds

6 year olds????

Probably around the time that it became easy to find a lawyer who would file a civil suit if a teacher even raised their voice to your little angel.

The lawsuit is in the works. If the school had used bodily force to put her in a room by herself, the lawsuit would be against the school instead of the cops.

After watching the video of the kid's mom, I'm not terribly surprised that this kid is having trouble at school.

All the more reason to throw the book at the tyke! SLAMMER TIME!!!

I've read no suggestion that "the book" will be thrown at her. I do suspect, however, that social services will be investigating to find out why the kid is going berzerk, throwing chairs, and attacking people. Which is probably for the best. I doubt that something like this happens out of the blue.

-k