Hmmm...you need some more Kool-Aid.

http://ciberbosque.org/images/sycamore/koolaid3.gif

You sure like to mention Kool-Aid a lot. Perhaps it's because you have the intellect of a small child. Unlike the brainwashed and ignorant masses you represent, I'm not brainwashed and haven't swallowed the Kool-Aid. But you sure do enjoy it. So by all means, throw on a dark blue jogging outfit, some Nike shoes, read a Jim Jones book, and drink a big gulp sized Kool-Aid.

Radar, no matter how you position it, the "prank" was still a physical assault, and should be treated as such.

Today is not the world you grew up in. The teacher that was held hostage (I am not exaggerating for effect, that's what those kids did) is teaching in a post-Columbine and Pearl, Mississippi world. You, and from the description in the article, those kids, do not see the seriousness of their actions. This isn't the usual zero-tolerance bullshit about nail clippers and aspirin that typically makes the news. This is real, physical violence. You can't have it both ways ... being a prank when kids with youthful high spirits do it, and a crime when prison guards in Iraq do it.

No matter what you say or how you try to twist the truth tying someone to a chair is NOT an assault and is not taking someone "hostage".

That's because there was no seriousness in their actions. Only super-sensitive assholes think this harmless prank was serious in any way. You are fucking seriously and genuinely insane if you honestly believe this was anything other than a light-hearted prank that deserves absolutely no punishment. I don't mean that in a joking way. I mean you should check yourself in to a mental health facility immediately.

That's exactly what it is. It's no different than the people who expelled the 6 year old boy from school because he chased a girl and kissed her on the cheek.

NO, IT'S NOT!!! There was no violence, there was just holding someone to a chair and taping them to it which is not violence.

The kids weren't beating the teacher, stripping him and other teachers naked, torturing them, forcing them to perform homosexual acts on each other, raping them, and murdering them. Any comparison between taping someone to a chair and the torture that happened to people in Iraq is beyond stupid.

Yes, it's violence by definition, even if being done gently, if it is done without consent. The teacher was not a willing participant in an S&M scene here. He was held, against his will, with either force or threat of force, and an attempt was made to physically restrain him.

The kids are actually lucky to get off with a misdemeanor charge and not being able to attend graduation. They should have been expelled. Yes, that's right ... goodbye college expelled. Need to get a GED expelled. You broke the law expelled. Teachers should not lay hands on a student, students should not lay hands on a teacher. If the victim did not think it was an assault, there would not have been charges filed.

This is NOT handing a marble to the superintendent of schools when you accept your diploma cover, nor is it released 5,000 ping pong balls in a stairwell. THOSE are pranks. The difference is clear to everybody here, except you.

You're a libertarian...and you live in California.

Who's drinking the Kool-Aid here?

Your intellect, such as it is, is far exceeded by your opinion of yourself. :rolleyes:

Anyway, nice tap dance Billy Flynn, but you didn't address the issue. What those boys intended to do constitutes unlawful detainment. Are you seriously saying that the teacher's rights may be abrogated by private citizens for the purposes of a prank?

Getting back to the facts of the case: from the original post in this thread...

So what we have here is an attempted practical joke/prank/whatever. And the arrest was made not after the teacher called 911 but after an off-duty deputy heard about it.

Nothing happened and nothing should happen. Expulsion? Unthinkable for such a non-event. This is an overreaction and a misuse of police power, imho.

Absolutely correct Beetsie. It's nice to see someone in here using their head for something other than a hat rack.

FWIW, I don't think a resource officer is "off-duty." I think he's the school's cop, making him the most likely person to arrest anyone in the school.

Our school cop was great. She was breaking up a fight once, the two girls teamed up on her, and she pinned both of them in under a few seconds. It was so cool. But then later I saw her doing traffic duty, which was sad. But come to think of it, I don't know that she would have considered it a demotion.

You're still dancing, kid. The question of the arrest is a separate issue.

You already agreed that the young men did not have the right to touch the teacher without his consent, but then go on to say that it was really ok because it was a joke.

The question at hand is whether it was moral and legal to abrogate the rights of the teacher because the intent was "a prank".

Wrong. I'm not dancing and it's not an issue of rights, so stop trying to make it such. This is not an issue of rights, it's not an issue of violence, it's not an issue of someone being held hostage, it's not any of that. It's nothing other than a harmless prank. If someone wants to make more of it than that, they are ignorant, pathetic, worthless, idiotic, assholes without a life or a sense of humor, period.

There's a reason you still haven't answered a simple yes or no question.

Tappity-tappity-tap. Still dancing.

<Looking at my feet> Nope, still not dancing. It's not a rights issue and it never has been one. You're still trying to confuse the issue. Keep squirming, and twisting, and wiggling, but you'll never make it a rights issue. No matter how hard you try to throw a red herring into this mix, you'll never succeed.

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye ...