Dingus in your bin’ess
The Washington Post runs an opinion piece by Aaron Kupchik, an associate professor who wrote a book once about something or other. It seems that liberals loved the idea of armed security in schools until the NRA mentioned it. Look at the President’s kids’ school, the same place that David Gregory’s kids attend. They have at least eleven security guards, not counting the Secret Service folks at Sidwell Friends.
But dingus, here, the associate professor, says security in schools is a bad idea;
But the evidence shows that the expansion of police into schools is a flawed policy that can have harmful effects on students. During many research visits, I have spoken at length with police officers stationed at schools full time. I have found almost all of these officers, usually called school resource officers, to be caring individuals. They are willing to let their professional reputations suffer — being a “kiddie cop” is often looked down upon by other officers — in an attempt to help local youths. Many of them mentor students and seek to be positive role models.
But their presence has effects that help transform the school from an environment of academia to a site of criminal law enforcement. Issues that might otherwise be seen as mental health or social problems can become policing matters once an officer is stationed in a school.
Arrests for fist fights go up, he says. I guess maybe because there’s someone who can arrest two fighting children, because if they weren’t there, there wouldn’t be anyone to arrest them, right? Nope;
…officers can start to see youths as thugs and criminals and begin treating them with hostility and sometimes even abusively. This comes at the expense of students’ rights and their education. Minorities are especially vulnerable to the overpolicing that can take place in schools, which increases both the racial-academic divide and racially skewed arrest rates.
Youths are generally thugs and criminals…see, I’m not even a security guard and I think that. Of course, dingus, the associate professor is more concerned with how children feel and providing them with some self esteem because the pointy-headed academics who think self-esteem is more important that an education in a safe environment have done so well making our education system a huge day care center for idiots.
The NRA proposal is a bad idea not only because it means more policing but also because it would mean policing by the wrong people. While the presence of police officers in schools can have harmful effects, schools with security guards — particularly armed security guards — fare even worse.
Security guards have a harmful effect…more harmful than say a gunman killing 20 children while they’re in school.
A 2011 study published in the Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations, conducted by researchers at the University of South Florida and Loyola University in New Orleans with data from the National Center for Education Statistics, found that schools….blah, blah, f’n blah
These studies by the pointy-headed crowd are the reason that schools are not teaching our children what they need to flourish in their communities.
By the way, Professor Dingus, a New Haven lawyer is already representing a 6-year-old in Newtown who is claiming that the school did not provide enough security to protect her. I guess a hundred million dollar lawsuit won’t impede anyone’s education, will it?
Category: Schools
None of these people scoff at the idea of guarding banks or things like that but the idea to protect people is outrageous to them. And oh no! Criminals in school! Actually being held accountable for their actions?! I can’t think of a better life lesson…
The reason police are dealing with kids in schools is because teachers are basically forbidden. If a kid resists anything the classroom teacher says, the only option they have is to send them to the administrators and in school detention and if they resist that, to call security. When corporal punishment was removed from the schools, the lawyers basically told teachers to not as much as lay a finger on the kids to move them along or confiscate something the kids aren’t supposed to have.
The schools used the cops and have kids arrested for fist fights because there’s nothing they’re allowed to do between telling them to stop or having them arrested. You can’t even expel them for most behaviors because now they have a “right” to an education.
Maybe it’s time for Americans in general and veterans specifically, to take one step farther back to look at the similarities and causes of violence in the schools. It’s the public school system itself- the crown jewel in the liberal addenda. The training ground. Yes. Every one of us went there. Most of us can’t imagine something different. We have a bunch if kids. Send them if to e trained by the state in a facility that houses them like cattle- to be treated in a fashion we would never tolerate as adults. Maybe the problem STARTS with housing 900 fourth graders in one building.
Ouch. I read Kupcake’s piece and I must say that the pain it caused me is lingering. First, his research evidently amounted to site visits by him. How many? Doesn’t say. Where? Doesn’t say. When? Doesn’t say. Validation method? Doesn’t say. So, he apparently goes out to some unspecified schools at some unspecified time and asks some unspecified questions, makes some observations and, voila!, he has evidence from which to opine. That aside, his reasoning is a tad deficient and faulty as well. He says, “Consider also that Columbine High School had armed security guards on staff, and Virginia Tech had a police force, and neither prevented the shootings that occurred there.” Okay, I’ve considered it. By that reasoning, if ever a police investigation comes up empty, if ever a new car breaks down, that’s reason enough to close all police departments and never to buy a new car. In other words, if something is not 100% reliable, it is to be dismissed. This isn’t just bad reasoning, it’s sheer idiocy. I would be embarrassed if I were Kupcake.
My grandmother was a teacher, my aunt was a teacher, 2 of my sisters are teachers. Some live the kids. But like it or not- it’s a job that pays well and you only work 9 months of six hour days. The problems in schools are not just because teachers can’t discipline. Bullshit. Teachers with commitment and half a brain manage to do it. The entire set up is unsustainable.
Increased security at schools was touted as a good idea during the Clinton years:
“Under the new School-Based Partnerships grant program, the Clinton Administration released $16.4 million in grants to 155 law enforcement agencies in September.”
Either this guy is a liar or a shitty researcher, possibly both. Regardles, I hope he doesn’t have tenure. Here’s the entire study he cites to his own ends hoping you don’t read it.
Happy New Year from Afghanistan.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15332586.2011.581511
There you go, RunPatRun, pointing out facts to a liberal ruins their talking points.
As #1 pointed out, they don’t have any problem with guarding a bank, or a nuke power plant, or the First Family, but we certainly can’t have anyone with a gun protect school kids.
And, WTF is “overpolicing”?
The public school model that we have now was designed with an industrial workforce in mind. Our schools have been slow in responding to the change to an information/technological economy, but that change will happen and the public school model that we have now may not survive. There are a lot of good alternatives for motivated individuals who want to see their kids get an appropriate education for the world that we live in-for instance, parents can use Khan Academy free on youtube for high quality content and structure, if they are inclined to home school.
The education model that we have now is familiar, but that does not mean that it is optimal or even functional given the ways that the world has changed since its founding.
My high school never had a single shooting. I graduated in 1996 and during hunting season, every single truck had a fully stocked gun rack in the back window. That’s right, at least fifty guns on the school grounds daily. But, guess what… not a single shooting. Want to know why? Education and respect.
Every single student in my school, a redneck school, was taught by their parents at a young age how to respect firearms. Heck, everyone carried a folding blade knife too, but there were no stabbings (except for one yahoo who accidentally stabbed himself in shop class while paying more attention to a cheerleader than what he was doing).
Me, coming from one year in Sacramento High School, at first found the idea of guns and knives on campus to be something sticky. In my one year at Sac High, there were four shootings and six stabbings during the school day and at least twice that many on campus after the final bell rang. Heck, I got stabbed once.
Then came Thurston High School. At that point, some of the families moved to my little neck of the woods. The moment they saw the guns and knives, they began complaining to the School Board about their student’s safety. Within two years (shortly after Columbine), it was made an expulsion offense to carry a firearm or knife on campus.
It is not the educated and properly raised students who commit crimes. It is the stupid and game-raised kids that feel guns are simply the answer to a problem, like they see in the media, games, and from their friends.
This might be a little bit off topic but I have to share it.
This is the final exam for an eighth grader in 1910.
http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2004/july04/1910.html
Do you think you could pass it?
Now thats a serious test, just reviewing it made me feel dumb and i hold a 4.0 gpa right now…/wrist
I inadvertently put this in the wrong thread earlier. Mea culpa.
Here’s a link to the U of Delaware featuring a pic of Kupcake. You will not be surprised.
http://www.udel.edu/udmessenger/vol18no3/stories/research_kupchik.html
I love that test! And excuse my typos from my phone btw
Guys! He says it, the answer is simple! “We don’t listen to kids”. You know… Those miniature people who don’t know as much as the full sized ones, hence they are in school. If only we asked them what would protect schools from maniacs with assorted weapons…
@#10, “(S)ome of the families moved to my little neck of the woods”. That’s the problem, Flagwaver, they let their own little corner of the world turn into a shithole, then move. But rather than adapt to where they live, they embark on the idiocy that their new home should be just like what they left.
AirCav, this quote from the article kinda sums up the “professor”, “When students got in trouble, the people in charge of discipline didn’t ask questions about why they got into trouble or didn’t try to solve their underlying problems,”. See, it’s all about the kids and why they did it, not that they actually did it. If the kiddie comes up with a good excuse, they should be given a pass. And, this moron teaches criminal justice? We are well and truly doomed.
Unfortunately the media,or press, is not free. They are bankrolled by “right thinking people” and are the venue for their special ideas of civilized behavior. They will spout the vitriol and outrage that their masters feel appropriate.
I just got done thinking about this issue, arms, about as hard as I have thought about anything in a while. Being a moron, it is difficult. Some conclusions that I have come to are that: 1. Guns don’t kill. People who are sick, ill, stupid, or evil kill others with whatever weapons are to hand. Guns are one method, but not the only method; 2. Guns prevent people in the first category from killing people. See crime rates in “gun free zones” and “no gun cities” for proof. If that school had a police resource officer, the event may have been mitigated; 3. If the government wants to take guns away from citizens, the constitution will have to be amended, or a patently unconstitutional law will have to be passed, and enforced against an angry armed group that may oppose them with umbrage.
The media’s masters believe that they have the answers for all of us proles and will spin each other up and cast aspersions on people who believe that the constitution and its bill of rights is an antiquated, quaint, or evil document. The irony is that their ability to spout garbage is the first right protected by the document they love to despise.
In any event, I will attempt to expand on this as see if I can get it posted as a front page document.
Hmmm. Back in the dark ages of the 60’s, we had an armed cop assigned to our high school. When a riot (yes, a literal riot) broke out in the lunchroom, he was close enough to keep the injuries to a minimum by drawing his service revolver on the idiots who were brandishing broken bottles and illegal knives until several teachers got there to back him up.
School continued the next day as if nothing had happened the day before. Except we had at least 16 armed cops among us, some in uniform, some just mingling among us dressed kinda sorta like teenagers. The first few days following there were at least 10 or 15 uniformed (armed, of course) cops patrolling the halls with that number reduced to under 10 for the remainder of the school year.
No more riots. No more problems at all. Teachers went back to teaching, kids went back to learning.
Has human nature really changed so much in the years since then that providing a safe environment for learning should not include armed security? Not really.
When they lack any kind of facts, they make shit up. I was a cooper for 32fuckingyears. being a SRO (School Resource Officer) at least in CA requires a special school and is actually a job many senior officers wanted to do…why? Becuse despite what most assholes think, most cops really want to help kids…all kids, black, white or whatever. We really didn’t want to arrest kids. And for the liberal fucking hippies to think all cops just want to pick on minoiirtes is just typical of the shit we had to put up with.
When I worked at schools, I estimated that over 99% of the kids would talk to me.
Putting more security guards in schools was a stupid idea during the Clinton administration, and it’s a stupid idea now. We had a good resource officer (police officers in schools) who was a good example for kids and had good rapport with them, and a fat obnoxious one who is an embarrassment to policemen everywhere. The good one would get called out on emergencies all the time (he was also on the Metro SWAT team) leaving the short, fat, ridiculous one. He was a joke. He wasn’t a good disciplinarian and couldn’t have protected the school from a Code Pinko assault. I agree with some of what this egghead says, especially this part “one of the worst of which is the popular notion of zero tolerance, policies that assign a certain punishment to an infraction regardless of circumstance.” I think zero tolerance is terrible in execution. You shouldn’t defer to a student’s opinion when meting out punishment, but you should consider the circumstances. A quick example; When I was in 7th grade, I was picked on by a bully in my home ec class. I told on him, he got suspended, and came back madder than ever. He picked on me more, so I kicked the shit out of him. Busted his nose and everything, it was a beautiful fight. He left me alone after that. A couple of weeks later, an assistant principal found out. She and I were on really good terms and she asked me to tell her what happened, so I honestly told her the whole story. She said that according to the rules, I should have been suspended, but because of the circumstances (and lack of evidence) there would be no repercussions. I play a lot of hockey, and I have noticed that high school is like hockey. The kids should be encouraged to police themselves, within reason, and the authorities should step in when things get out of hand. Kids should be able to fight, and they should be punished for it according to their place in it. Obviously, a bully picking on kids… Read more »
Somewhere in all of these replies, lays the answer. That is, if we are able stop long enough, think it through and then assemble that answer out of these replies. *shrugs*
@11. Do I think I could pass it? Absolutely! First, I’d take the test, run some water over the 2 or 3 pages, wad them up into a nice tight ball and fling it.
That’s the only way I could pass that test.
@#20. Only problem with SRO’s is that most communities can’t afford to put them in every school. If you’re not going to put them in every school, then there still needs to be armed security in those schools that don’t have SRO’s.
We had the same problem at the PD I worked for, half the SRO’s really wanted to be there, for the other half, it was a quick and easy way to get off the street and not have to deal with fights, drunks, dopers and the like. Except they didn’t realize that they’d have to deal with that at their school.
CAs6 hit it right on the head when he discussed the bullshit laziness that is the “zero tolerance” policy that has been developed over the past 20-25 years.
Rather than deal with the issues based on the circumstances and who/what/when/where/why was involved, administrators simply make EVERYONE into a criminal. Stand up to a bully? You’re at fault for defending yourself. Point a finger and go, “Bang!” on the playground like we did playing army as kids? You’re fostering a “culture of weapons”, and on, and on, and on.
We’re paying all this money for our kids to be educated, but what we’re getting is indoctrination by people who are giving less and less of a shit about what they put out, and more about them maybe having to pay a small portion of their quite generous benefits, and dammit, that just will not STAND.
Yes, call my idea stupid. Use no facts. Just assume that you would put your most precious in a situation where no one could protect it or them. You prove my point by lack of argument. If you had issue, you would know it was the most important prospect to insure, protect, and defend.
I am not talking about the average SRO, or police, but people you could trust. Namely the very men and women who could populate this blog, by name, who are so trained.
You are a troll, number 20. A 6 you are not. Use your 7th grade example. Exemplary.