LJ I had an image of your family all looking at eachother and laughing, like the Simpsons do when something bad happens to Grandpa.

Sigh, I guess violence really is funnier in cartoons.

ZG you were quicker on the typeing than me ,
Rodney King WAS tazed MULTIPLE times and kept on comeing , as I said I would have Put 2 in his forehead ( That will stop him !!!!)
Now as to park rangers , they are Wholey under staffed and under equiped ( and underpaid to put up with this shit ) , and yes they have to deal with the folks (drunk , drugged , and deranged ) , they only call the local cops when things get out of hand (from what I understand ).
On reading your reply to LJ , we are saying basicaly the same thing ,
Approperit force to controll the situation , ending with a shot ( if need be )

Hi Zippy,
We're saying something similar, but we have a big difference about what is "appropriate" force.
For me it's about using the minimum force that is necessary to get the job done. To illustrate, Rodney King was captured without shooting. This makes it clear that it was NOT NECESSARY to shoot him. For you to say, even with the benefit of hindsight, that you would have shot him ... wow. I would consider that willful murder.

Next question:
Should high-school teachers be allowed to carry (or issued with) tasers? High school seniors are often bigger, stronger and meaner than the teacher. If park rangers get them, how about teachers? Might stop a school shooting, too.

This didn't look necessary either. Anyone know where this happened?

Hmmm. How easy would it be to overpower a person with a Tazer if you have a gun?

I think this country has become too afraid of the children. Treating them like criminals instead of teaching them is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. Why teach children in fear? WTF are you teaching exactly?!? If you are frightened of your students what does that say about your ability to teach them anything?

I'm imagining my previous English Lit. teachers right now with a tazer.....lol!!!!

Hell- everyone in this country should be sworn to start packing some heat.... fuck it.......
We can militarize the public schools too. Send in the fucking clowns.

We're effectively breeding a paranoid society. It's responsible to protect yourself and your family by ant means necessary, but it is irresponsible to teach fear.

G'day.
:D

Various thoughts:
1. Won't someone please think of the children! The little buggers are armed!
2. When you say "children" it brings up images of sweet little ten year olds. I'm thinking about 16, 17 year olds who are physically bigger than their teachers. You are treating students as one homogenous group. Even in one class there can be a huge variety of attitudes, from, "please help me get out of this urban ghetto" to "I'm only here cause I have to be, I hate you". You don't want the taser for most of them, just a few.
3. Well, it was just an idea. And I note that you are taking any excuse to post. I see though ya!
4. Guns Vs tasers ... true, but schools are supposedly gun free zones, I am thinking about fists Vs tasers.
5. Teaching fear is irresponsible. I agree ... so, how do you feel about fox news, CNN, the war on terror?
6. I teach English. I want a taser, not for security/ discipline, but for error correction. "No, no, little Yuko, it's I before E except after C .... ZZZZZZTTT!!!" :devil:
7. I am relying on you to distinguish between serious comments and humor.
8. I could have posted this in eight separate messages. Nyeh.
:D

1. As for any excuse to post: Don' let me get in your way! Tick! Be a good sportsman!:D

2. You have a problem with people being bigger than you and need a taser too? Everyone I know is bigger than me....so what?

3. Maybe they need a talking to instead of a taser? You are teaching communication skills and how to live in society instead of jail or armed warfare no matter what the individual characteristics of your students are. Aren't you supposed to be able to outwit the snot-nosed craps anyway? Oh, I guess not everyone is not up to doing their job.

4. Fox news hasn't made fear right yet. Well, in all fairness, I don't know...I don't watch it.

5. These kids are bigger'n me? Help?!? They don't like me...help?!? What if? What if?



6. I never indicated that students are homogenized. Yet, students are students no matter what the circumstances, which is why they are called: Students.


It's an idea tick. It's just not very well-crafted or planned out.

I have a lot great of ideas........but even that's not one of them.
;)

Hiya
I'd prefer not to be called tick if you don't mind. I don't like bloodsucking parasites. Still, it's better than Ballbag I suppose ;)

I am a westerner in Japan, which means I am usually bigger ... bahaha. I get to breathe in crowded subways! I had one 11 year old who insisted on Sumo wrestling me. He didn't last long - but once I had him off balance I lowered him gently to the floor, then helped him up and exchanged bows as a sign of mutual respect. He has been good since then.
I didn't mean to imply that I needed or wanted a taser. I was thinking of teachers in schools in high-crime areas.

A "talking to" works most of the time, and I do advocate that as you can see in my early posts. I was never advocating teachers using the taser as punishment, only to immediately stop violent behaviour. Punitive tasing is what I have been arguing against.
It was never about me. Anyway, I am teaching basic grammar and vocabulary, and mostly to adults.

Me neither ... I've seen a few glimpses. I like you more.

Your use of "the children" made it sound like a homogeneous generalization. So does your last sentence here. Sure, they are students, but they can also be criminals (allowing for age, ok, juvenile offenders).

True, it wasn't. So let me demonstrate my openmindedness by abandoning it. You'll notice it was suggested as a question in the first place. Matter of fact, I only put it there to distract Zippy.

If you thought this was wacky ... you wait till you see what I will soon post in the parenting forum when I run out of other things to post.... bahahaha

I tased myself on the shaft and I came out my ass.

I'm thinking of working on a vest that will stop a taser and then, perhaps, feed it back and short-out the cartage, making it unable to insert a new one... or at least buy one some time. I think it will actually be easy to make.

ZG , From what I understand appropret force does start with words , then pepper spray, then tazer , then a bullet .

Do I think a teacher should have a tazer ?
if they want one , are trained in its use and licenced , then I have NO prob with them being able to defend them selfs ,
hell a properly placed tazer zap could have stopped colombine from happening ( or being as bad as it was )
Cops in school , I think it is a SAD commentary that there HAS to be cops in school to keep these heathens in line , but it is as it is

Yeah. I think we differ on how fast to move up the scale, and what makes each step up appropriate. Ah well, dead horse beating time I think.

I think possibly you are under estimating the potential level of menace that a fucked up 16 year old can exude, and the potential level of violence in a classroom. I'm not saying that tazers are a good solution, but I think it's unfair to suggest that any teacher who cannot control every member of their class just by talking to them, is a poor teacher. There are other factors to take into account, such as the level of support within the school for the teachers and overall quality of, and discipline within the school.

If you have a large number of disaffected teenagers, who are only there because they are bound by law to attend, they are likely to be fairly unreceptive. If there is a critical mass of that kind of student (as happens in so-called 'sink schools') then it is difficult, and in some cases nigh-on impossible to actually teach: often in those situations the morale of the teachers and children is low, support is minimal, and discipline erratic and contradictory. In order to 'talk' a child through a crisis, or behaviour problem, it is necessary to build a degree of trust and receptiveness. That is not always possible in the setting in which the teaching takes place.

In terms of their role in teaching children to communicate, frankly by the age of sixteen much of the patterns of communication are set. It isn't impossible to alter those patterns, but it's difficult and messy. If a 16 year old child in your class has learned to deal with the world aggressively, a couple of hours a week in your class for two semesters are not going to rewrite that child's emotional and communicatory toolbox.

~ I think it's unfair to suggest that any teacher who cannot control every member of their class just by talking to them, is a poor teacher.~ snippy snippy from Dana C.

I in no way said that. Any teacher and every member of of their class is a pretty strong interpretation of what I said.

This is my meaning (let's get into my perspective here): My friend's daughter was a member of the honor roll at a local public high school. A student complained that she was carrying a knife. Not threatening people with it etc. etc. The girl had heard that she had one. She and her car were searched right there on the property and inside her car they found a survival kit that included a swiss army knife. She was expelled.

With this kind of paranoid judgement being pervasive in our public schools. NO, I do not think that teachers should be mandated to carry tazers.

As far as rewriting emotional and communicatory tool-boxes? No one said anything had to be rewritten. Just enhanced. We do this our entire lives. Most of us- naturally. Just admit that you have no idea which action turns someone around. As soon as you learn as something as minor as the value of learning, you can rewrite wiring yourself.

The sad fact is, if you can't be proactive- you aren't a professional (or worth your salt) in any career choice.

Your response Dana says that you also concentrate and rely on a small percentage of criminal teenagers to represent the rest of the population of students. Is being a teacher that much gloom and doom do you think? Really?

One of my ex's taught for the "bad" kids at a charter school. He never had a problem with a student. He showed up to work and actually had a great time teaching. The kids had a fun time learning. And learn they did...I don't think it would ever have crossed his mind to get a taser.

I also advocated anyone arming themselves if they feel threatened at any time. Mandating tazers is entirely different.

I understand your arguement Dana. But the US is becoming a paranoia factory, and I think people should tone down their PTSD delusions.

What is PTSD?

Honey if my line was a strong misinterpretation of what you said, then this here qualifies as the same. I did not represent all students through that small minority of criminally minded teens. I referred to a very specific situation involving 'sink-schools'. Maybe things are different in the States, but over here there are a small number of schools which end up with a much higher proportion of troubled children than do neighbouring schools. We have such a school in the ward I represent and it's currently tagged for closure. This school has made into the national press on several occasions and last year 4% of children leaving the school did so with five A to C grade qualifications including English and Maths......4%. This year with the school in Special Measures and the authority therefore allowed to enforce assistance, ploughing money and resources into the school, they are probably going to have 20% leaving with the five quals including English and Maths.

The school has a combination of problems including disruptive and violent behaviour amongst the pupils. Bullying is rife, children have been found with knives, and aggression against teachers is not uncommon.

One of the problems with a situation like that is that it can very easily spiral downwards. One of the causes of that spiral is the 'sink-school' effect: parents who are able to, get their children into other schools, thereby decreasing the number of children/parents for whom this school is their first preference. As intake decreases, so the balance of the student body alters. A higher proportion of the children attending that school have difficult homelives, and are more likely to require additional support. This is further complicated by the requirements upon local authorities to secure an education for children who've been permanently excluded from schools: if a state school has places available within it, then excluded children are given a place at the school. The other schools, where the flight from the sink school has led to higher intake, do not have the spare capacity to take on the excluded children...so the excluded (behaviourally challenging and often violent, as this is the most common reason for permanent exclusion) children tend to end up in the school that is already experiencing a higher than average proportion of troubled children, higher instances of violent or aggressive behaviour and low staff morale.

In most schools, there are some kids who do very well and there are some kids who have serious problems, some kids who have supportive families and some who don't. It more or less balances itself out in the majority of schools. But in a sink school the balance shifts and the situation becomes increasingly difficult to manage.

That's a very simplified look at an incredibly complex problem.

In the school I'm referring to, I know that there have been occasions when teachers have been fearful of their students. I also know that in this school there have been physical attacks on teachers and other students. I also know that there is a fairly well-established knife culture amongst some of the youngsters in this country.

I do apologise if I misread your assertion that That sounded to me like you were suggesting that a teacher who isn't able to control their students (regardless of the individual characters of the students) is not up to doing their job. I am suggesting that whilst that may, in some instances, be the case, it also may, in other instances, not be the case.

I didn't say that someone cannot turn it around. Nor did I say I know what turns people around. What I said, was that the emotional toolbox of a sixteen year old is a hell of a lot more difficult to 'turn around' than a younger child. I haven't got time right now to dig out the stats on behavioural problems and young offenders, but the evidence suggests that in order to effect a major change in behaviour, better results are obtained if the child is reached before they get to secondary school age.

If you think I am advocating the use of tazers, then clearly you do not understand my argument.