10 year old girl kicks cop in groin, gets tasered

[One from the Vaults]

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/south/view/20091118arkansas_police_officer_uses_taser_on_10-year-old_girl/srvc=news&position=also

Apparently this is a controversy somehow. Just thought I'd post it here because it involves a groin kick, although I'm sure someone will complain because it involves a 10 year old girl, and someone else will complain about the tasering.

Article doesn't really have much more in the way of detail, sadly... girl was screaming and kicking, her mother allegedly told the officer he could taser her if he wanted, he tried to restrain her, she kicked him in the groin, so he used the taser, and now the mayor of the town wants an investigation.

[bthauronite]

Meh. He probably did it in anger after being kicked, and shouldn't be held responsible. Especially if the mother told him to do it; CPS should get involved however.

[Rebecca]

While I think it's funny when a young girl gets a guy in the nuts, I support the cop in this case.
I don't like kids (or their parents) who behave so demonically.

Rebecca

[Alec Anaconda]

What kind of nincompoop employs such an incompetent officer?

Would he have shot her if he had a flat battery?

[Dreihundert]

Bring on the bitching ^.^.

[gumbygumby]

Hahahahaha. Totally hilarious and that little girl got a good lesson. Tasing a 10 year old though? Fuck that. He needs a nut tasing.

[Snoodle]

I don't know, I think it's hilarious.

[dharkbus]

f that 10 year old brat. assalting an officer is a serious crime, she got what she deserved.

[bookoo]

What she really needed was a well deserved ass whipping. Apparently simple disipline has been badly lacking. If the cop grabbed her arm and put a bruise on the little bitch the whole world would have been on his ass. The old saying, "you can't please everyone". Oh well. Maybe next time she will behave at least a little more.

[gopballbuster]

To the previous two comments:
Hear, hear!

[Teardrop]

Personally, I don't think it's acceptable to taser children. But it made me laugh that the whole thing seems to be about her not wanting to take a shower. I was kinda like that at her age.

[Makarov]

On one hand, it's kinda funny. On the other hand, I don't like children much, so I'd say that kid got what she deserved.

But then there's the mother. She gave the okay to tase. Fishy, fishy parenting.

[lisbonballs]

it's kind of funny when people here said don't like children, when one day in there lifetime they where children also...well the best "answer" to the police officer was taser her, but if a child of 10 years old acts like that of course there's something wrong with her education...who should be taser it's their parents and the cops should be better training to deal with "angry childrens"!

[eric B]

The cop should have been arrested for assaulting a kid. And then he should have been given the death penalty. What a fucking prick, and what a fucking prick of a parent.

[mick_sl8ter]

While I think it's funny when a young girl gets a guy in the nuts, I support the cop in this case.
I don't like kids (or their parents) who behave so demonically.

Rebecca

I totally agree. I don't like cops and I love when they are being kicked in the balls. But I also can't stand 10 year old girls, (or kids any given age) who act uncontrollably.

The policeman should taser both. The child for being out of control. And the parents for not being able to control their child.

What if we introduce a new law:
People who can't control their children will be sterilized.
And children who cannot be controlled will be euthanized.

I think parents would pay more attention to their offsprings behaviour.

[gopballbuster]

What if we introduce a new law:
People who can't control their children will be sterilized.
And children who cannot be controlled will be euthanized.
I've been advocating postnatal abortions for years. However, I never considered the sterilization part. Nice touch, sir.
:thumbup

[bouncingballs]

I think the article said it all. The child was completely out of control. I question that the mother suggested the use of the taser before it was apparently needed but the fact is that the girl would have very likely been more seriously injured if it hadn't been used.

As to the officer being guilty of assault, it was the kid who did the assault, a sexual assault no less - at least that is what it would have been called if it had been a female officer kicked. Not only does society think it funny when a guy gets kicked in the nuts but tend to think that kids are just as they were in years past. Some are, some aren't. If kids commit adult like crimes, and sexual assault is an adult crime, then they should be treated like adults when brought under control. The kid needs help.

I really do have issues with the parent(s) and think that the mother's action is very questionable. However, we like Monday morning quarterbacks, don't know the whole situation. That good ass spanking mentioned earlier, which I totally agree with by the way, will often end up with the parent being up on charges of child brutality. Parents are like cops who no longer have the authority to pull people over and write speeding or DUI tickets. They wouldn't be very effective that way.

I'm fairly sure the divorce played a big role in this also.

[Egrimm82]

"The child was "violently kicking and verbally combative" when Bradshaw tried to take her into custody, and she kicked him in the groin."

Take her into custody? Note this is before the groinkick so the only reason to "take her into custody" is not taking a shower. To clarify, an 11 year old girl has commited the crime "not shower before bed", a police officer is rushed to the scene where the child is screaming and being unruly. The might of the child is to much for the officer who is ****** to resort to send electric currents through the childs nerve-system to make her unable to move before cuffing her and taking her to the station.

What is wrong with this? First, if you feel the need to call the police because you can't force your 11-year old child to take a shower, then maybe having a child was not such a good idea in the first place? Was ******* her to shower such a good idea? Second, if you as an adult, fully trained police officer think it is a good idea to arrest a child for not taking a shower and tazer her when she resists, then maybe police officer was not such a good career-move? Well I guess it depends on the laws in the country, maybe its a criminal offence there to not shower before bed? So big difference between US and Sweden, really have a hard time sometime to understand the underlying logic. That you, as the only country in the world, execute children always leaves me blank everytime I try to understand you, and I guess that since you have that on your justice-scale this seem like nothing in comparison.

To compare, in Sweden he would have putten off duty and an investigation would have been conducted without the need for the mayor to specifically ask for it. The mother would also be investigated as to how fitting a parent she would be and would probably loose custody, arresting a child for not showering is... stupid.

[gopballbuster]

That you, as the only country in the world, execute children
Not even close to true. The US does not execute children. Iran, N. Korea, Saudi Arabia, and the PRC all do. Microsoft needs to introduce fact check in addition to spell check and grammar check.

[eric B]

What kind of idiot calls the cops on their 10 year old kid? The U.S. must be fucking mental. Is this a new low for the America, or have parents always called cops to their house to electrocute their 10 year old children? I can't believe this actually happened.

[Egrimm82]

Not even close to true. The US does not execute children. Iran, N. Korea, Saudi Arabia, and the PRC all do. Microsoft needs to introduce fact check in addition to spell check and grammar check.


China, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the United States of America are the only countries to have in the past violated the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Of these eight countries spotlighted for having taken part in executions of persons who had committed crimes as minors, the United States is the only nation that openly agrees with this method of correction and claims the right to continue. (my embolding) http://www.anairhoads.org/politics/juvenilepenalty.shtml

I stand corrected. I remembered the intentions of the countries as their praxis, greatly apologize for this mistake.



In the past 25 years, the United States has imposed over 170 death sentences on offenders who were 15, 16, or 17 years old at the time of the crimes. 1994 was the peak year, with 16 death sentences imposed on 16- and 17-year-olds. Not surprisingly, more of these were in Texas than any other state.
http://www.ocadp.org/educate/executing_children.htm



When we confine our attention to the 18 States that have expressly established a minimum age in their death penalty statutes, we find that all of them require that the defendant have attained at least the age of 16 at the time of the capital offense.
http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~leg485/thompson.htm



Texas is one of only three states in the United States that, in the last decade, has executed persons for crimes that occurred when they were under 18 years old.
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/1/7/0/0/p117007_index.html

I, partly, stand corrected. But hey, atleast you're not alone then. Guess I need to clarify in that in my view, sentencing a child to death, waiting for it to ping age 18 and then execute is the same as executing a child, claiming anything else is pointless.

[Messalina]

I think the article said it all. The child was completely out of control. I question that the mother suggested the use of the taser before it was apparently needed but the fact is that the girl would have very likely been more seriously injured if it hadn't been used.

As to the officer being guilty of assault, it was the kid who did the assault, a sexual assault no less - at least that is what it would have been called if it had been a female officer kicked. Not only does society think it funny when a guy gets kicked in the nuts but tend to think that kids are just as they were in years past. Some are, some aren't. If kids commit adult like crimes, and sexual assault is an adult crime, then they should be treated like adults when brought under control. The kid needs help.

I really do have issues with the parent(s) and think that the mother's action is very questionable. However, we like Monday morning quarterbacks, don't know the whole situation. That good ass spanking mentioned earlier, which I totally agree with by the way, will often end up with the parent being up on charges of child brutality. Parents are like cops who no longer have the authority to pull people over and write speeding or DUI tickets. They wouldn't be very effective that way.

I'm fairly sure the divorce played a big role in this also.

Hello there,

How are you? Firstly, I don't take anything printed by; A.P., Baltimore Sun, Boston Globe, New York Times, Newsday, Newsweek, Reuters, or Time at face value. So, I don't know if what was printed is what actually occured. BTW, I've very little confidence in anything broadcast by; BBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, or MSNBC. I'm fast losing confidence in CNN, as well.

However, (assuming what was reported is accurate) I agree with most of what you stated. Certainly, I concur with the overall point you've made. We have to call things what they are and apply a spot of common sense to them. Also, we must cease concerning ourselves with offending the "politically correct" sensibilties of whatever.. "protected group" someone acting badly happens to be a member of. BTW, what are "Monday morning quarterbacks?

Yes, I find a female kicking a man in the genitals (for any reason, other than self-defence) as barbarous as, a man doing the same to a woman. I've NEVER kicked (or otherwise struck) a male in the testes for "Sport". Fantasy is one thing, reality is another. AND I only enjoy it in fantasy as retribution for sexual assault.

For what it's worth I read; Stratford.com, Wallstreet Journal, and Washington Post. Also, I view the Newshour with Jim Lehrer, and the O'Reilly Factor. I prefer to hear & view accurate news reports from "left" leaning and "right" leaning organisations. However, I do miss the far more comprehensive reporting, one receives from European news services. One seldoms hears or reads news reports (in depth or otherwise) re; Asia, Africa, Austraila, or Europe. This is kind of odd, considering the global interests of America.

Messalina

[One from the Vaults]

@Messalina
Have you watched Canadian news, ie, CBC? It's not perfect but it's generally a hell of a lot better than the American stuff.

[Messalina]

@Messalina
Have you watched Canadian news, ie, CBC? It's not perfect but it's generally a hell of a lot better than the American stuff.

Hello there,

How are you? Thank you, for responding to my post. Also, thank you for the suggestion. I shall discover if my cable television provider carries CBC. If so, I'll give them ago. I don't object to a conservative or liberal "perspective" from a news organisition. However, I'll not tolerate distortion due to blatant partisanship. Nor, will I accept "corruption" (consistently) from a journalistic enterprise. That is, not reporting a story for political reasons.

I'm an Irish national living in the U.S.A.. How can journalistic entities (located in a superpower) call themselves "news organisations" when, they ignore so much of what happens in the world???

Thank you (again) :)

Messalina

P.S. Sorry, for off-topic post folks.

[Makarov]

That you, as the only country in the world, execute children always leaves me blank everytime I try to understand you, and I guess that since you have that on your justice-scale this seem like nothing in comparison.

Who's being executed? They're not executing the kid. I've got no idea why you're bringing that up. And in regards to the links you posted, clicking the first link (http://www.ocadp.org/educate/executing_children.htm) at the top of the page there is a picture of a kid named Sean Sellers. He shot a convenience store clerk twice (the first bullet only wounded, the second killed) and the very next year he shot and killed his mother and stepfather. And Texas executes people left and right. Texas and the death penalty are a joke over here, though they don't represent the U.S. as a nation. And in regards to the CRC, did you know that the U.S. helped write it? Apparently there's still an argument on signing it, though one of the major reasons is that it violates the constitution. It's not the first time the U.S. helped the U.N. do something, and then not comply.

Obviously we're not getting the whole picture. There's a big difference between a fussy child, a child who deserves better parenting, and a child with some sort of psychological disorder. Here is an article I randomly found googling children with schizo (http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/schizophrenia_in_children).

My gut feeling tells me that the kid wasn't aiming to kick the cop in the nuts. I'd imagine she just accidently kicked there. I mean...she's only ten. She's probably tall enough to reach his midsection, so her choices might have only been the legs. He might have been hunched over to try to control her. Once again, no complete picture is available, and it will be interesting to find out what actually happens to the mom, the kid and the cop.

[jerpears]

it's kind of funny when people here said don't like children, when one day in there lifetime they where children also...well the best "answer" to the police officer was taser her, but if a child of 10 years old acts like that of course there's something wrong with her education...who should be taser it's their parents and the cops should be better training to deal with "angry childrens"!

I think its even more funny that people on here don't children, which is probabally good because if you get ballbusted anough it won't be possible to have children.


About the article: Taze her again bro!

[One from the Vaults]

Hello there,

How are you? Thank you, for responding to my post. Also, thank you for the suggestion. I shall discover if my cable television provider carries CBC. If so, I'll give them ago. I don't object to a conservative or liberal "perspective" from a news organisition. However, I'll not tolerate distortion due to blatant partisanship. Nor, will I accept "corruption" (consistently) from a journalistic enterprise. That is, not reporting a story for political reasons.

I'm an Irish national living in the U.S.A.. How can journalistic entities (located in a superpower) call themselves "news organisations" when, they ignore so much of what happens in the world???

Thank you (again) :)

Messalina

P.S. Sorry, for off-topic post folks.

Messalina,

I'm doing alright. I agree with you about partisanship and misconstruction of news; personally I prefer to get my news from internet and academic sources. A lot of my friends are academics of various sources and a number are activists, so even just following my Facebook news feed I'll get a fair number of links to interesting articles. If I did want to watch a news network though, CBC definitely isn't bad. It's a crown corporation (which means it's owned by the government), but it isn't controlled by the political party in power and in fact is often critical of them and tends to remain neutral. Obviously there's a major bias towards Canadian stories, but includes international as well. Unlike something like CNN, though, it's not 24 hour constant feed, more traditional (been around a long time)... so it has its own shows and whatnot (some are actually pretty good), and then has news hours at something like 6 and 10 (or was it 11?).

Really, though, with the internet, watching news on television is kind of unnecessary... the Wikipedia main page always has an assortment of news, and they're pretty damn good at being balanced, accurate and actually providing references for things. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Anyway, all the best. :)

[bouncingballs]

Hello there,

How are you? Firstly, I don't take anything printed by; A.P., Baltimore Sun, Boston Globe, New York Times, Newsday, Newsweek, Reuters, or Time at face value. So, I don't know if what was printed is what actually occured. BTW, I've very little confidence in anything broadcast by; BBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, or MSNBC. I'm fast losing confidence in CNN, as well.

However, (assuming what was reported is accurate) I agree with most of what you stated. Certainly, I concur with the overall point you've made. We have to call things what they are and apply a spot of common sense to them. Also, we must cease concerning ourselves with offending the "politically correct" sensibilties of whatever.. "protected group" someone acting badly happens to be a member of. BTW, what are "Monday morning quarterbacks?

{snip}



I usually take new stories with a grain of salt. Discovered how much slant is put on news back during the Vietnam era. Listened to a bunch of shortwave back then. However, in this country the media tends to take the side against the police in a situation such as this so I figured that if anything the story would have been blown up on the girls side.

Monday morning quarterbacking originally referred to pro-football (American football) fans sitting around on Monday discussing Sunday's games and how they would have played it so their team would have won. It is now used to mean someone second guessing another person's actions after the fact.

The original call was for domestic disturbance, which is one of the most dangerous type of calls for police to respond. Even in the case of a spouse beating the spouse who was being beat often turns on the police. So in this case the officer arrived not knowing what to expect.

I agree that I can not understand the mother calling the police for such a trivial matter but once the officer was there he couldn't just shake his head and walk out. He had to help in some manner. Those who think the girl simply accidentally kicked the cop need to open there eyes as to what kids are like in these permissive times. While it is possible it was an accident there are very few 10 year old kids that don't know about what a kick to the balls will do and with the constant exposure of such happenings in the popular media think nothing of it.

As to the poster that figured the officer did it out of anger, maybe but I think unlikely. Putting myself in his shoes I'd been totally pissed off. While I think it is fun getting kicked in the balls in certain situations this was not one of them. Most likely if it would have been me I'd grabbed her by the scuff of the neck and proceeded from there. One reason I could never be a cop.

If he did limit himself to less than a 1 second shock, I think he showed excellent restraint.

[eric B]

Obviously we're not getting the whole picture. There's a big difference between a fussy child, a child who deserves better parenting, and a child with some sort of psychological disorder. Here is an article I randomly found googling children with schizo (http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/schizophrenia_in_children).

-Makarov


There is really no difference between a child who deserves better parenting and "a child with some sort of psychological disorder". Psychological disorders like schizophrenia arise from a lack of good parenting.

[reginauld]

Whether or not the mother "approved" of his actions, the cop had to be out of his mind to taser a 10 year old girl. If that's not excessive use of force, I don't know what is.

The thought of a child being a serious enough threat to warrant the use of a taser is almost laughable.

[Messalina]

Messalina,

I'm doing alright. I agree with you about partisanship and misconstruction of news; personally I prefer to get my news from internet and academic sources. A lot of my friends are academics of various sources and a number are activists, so even just following my Facebook news feed I'll get a fair number of links to interesting articles. If I did want to watch a news network though, CBC definitely isn't bad. It's a crown corporation (which means it's owned by the government), but it isn't controlled by the political party in power and in fact is often critical of them and tends to remain neutral. Obviously there's a major bias towards Canadian stories, but includes international as well. Unlike something like CNN, though, it's not 24 hour constant feed, more traditional (been around a long time)... so it has its own shows and whatnot (some are actually pretty good), and then has news hours at something like 6 and 10 (or was it 11?).

Really, though, with the internet, watching news on television is kind of unnecessary... the Wikipedia main page always has an assortment of news, and they're pretty damn good at being balanced, accurate and actually providing references for things. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Anyway, all the best. :)

Hello there,

I'm pleased to learn you're well. Thank you, for your thoughtful response. Unfortunately, my cable provider doesn't carry CBC. In future, I shall make the suggestion. We shall see what comes of it..

One has to be careful of the internet as a source of news. There are some wonderful sites to visit. But, there are also some dreadful ones, in my opinion. I shan't name them for fear of initiating a "flame war". After all, one man's rose, is another's weed.

As for "Academics"; (in America) in my experience they tend to be overwhelming "left". Also, "blinded" by ideology. However, this tends to be the failing of many academicians of every stripe. They may be experts in their field but, they lose sight of the "real world". Hence, the term "ivory tower".

A scientist may give one a great device or principle but, one needs the engineer to make it "work". The same is true for the social scientist. He or she may come up with a great " idea" but, one needs a bureaucrat or politician, to implement it.

Thank you, for the link. :)

Messalina

[Messalina]

I usually take new stories with a grain of salt. Discovered how much slant is put on news back during the Vietnam era. Listened to a bunch of shortwave back then. However, in this country the media tends to take the side against the police in a situation such as this so I figured that if anything the story would have been blown up on the girls side.

Monday morning quarterbacking originally referred to pro-football (American football) fans sitting around on Monday discussing Sunday's games and how they would have played it so their team would have won. It is now used to mean someone second guessing another person's actions after the fact.

The original call was for domestic disturbance, which is one of the most dangerous type of calls for police to respond. Even in the case of a spouse beating the spouse who was being beat often turns on the police. So in this case the officer arrived not knowing what to expect.

I agree that I can not understand the mother calling the police for such a trivial matter but once the officer was there he couldn't just shake his head and walk out. He had to help in some manner. Those who think the girl simply accidentally kicked the cop need to open there eyes as to what kids are like in these permissive times. While it is possible it was an accident there are very few 10 year old kids that don't know about what a kick to the balls will do and with the constant exposure of such happenings in the popular media think nothing of it.

As to the poster that figured the officer did it out of anger, maybe but I think unlikely. Putting myself in his shoes I'd been totally pissed off. While I think it is fun getting kicked in the balls in certain situations this was not one of them. Most likely if it would have been me I'd grabbed her by the scuff of the neck and proceeded from there. One reason I could never be a cop.

If he did limit himself to less than a 1 second shock, I think he showed excellent restraint.

Hello there,

Firstly, thank you for your military service. I'm not a Yank so, I don't know if it "counts" when, I say "welcome home".

Thank you, for the explanation of "Monday morning quarterback". AND I truly thank you, for specifying "American" football! Else, I should've been hopelessly confused!! lol As I mentioned, I'm not an American..... yet. This may change.... if, a certain lad has his way. <giggles> But, I digress. :o

Yes, I'm familiar with the dicey nature of "domestic disturbance" calls (and other perils) for law enforcement officers. I'm in the security field. Also, I volunteer with organisations that deal with victims of domestic abuse. AND they're not all female, contrary to stereotyping.

I'm not clear as to why the mother (in said incident) contacted authorities, either. As for "Those who think the girl simply accidentally kicked the cop" they're guilty of speculation. There's no substantial evidence to support this assertion or contradict it... for that matter. However, the speculation misses a central point. The girl's foot didn't reach the officer's groin my magic or telekinesis.

The child deliberately kicked the officer. Whether, she intended her foot to land in his testes, is largely irrelevant. Granted, perhaps not to the policeman. The larger issue is a child kicking an adult. AND an authority figure at that! Clearly, something is very wrong here.

I think you've a point re: the constant exposure of children to images (film and television) of women kicking men in the balls. AND it being portrayed comically. One of the worst of these is America's Funniest Home Videos. They often display real images of males being struck in the groin then, cut away to some other image. One doesn't know the level of injury to the man, if any.

The images themselves (most times) aren't the problem. Rather, it may be a lack of parental context. My male cousins grew up viewing violent images (and playing with war toys) yet, they didn't finish up as homicidal maniacs or toughs. Namely, because my aunts and uncles viewed these images with their children, along with providing them a nurturing homelife.

You raise an intriguing point. That is, placing yourself in the officer's position. I wonder, how many of those criticising the policeman's actions have done that? Also, what they would've done had it been them, in the same situation? Particularly, if whatever alternative they suggest (on a board such as this) didn't "work".

Messalina

[One from the Vaults]

As for "Academics"; (in America) in my experience they tend to be overwhelming "left". Also, "blinded" by ideology. However, this tends to be the failing of many academicians of every stripe. They may be experts in their field but, they lose sight of the "real world". Hence, the term "ivory tower".
Messalina,

The construction of academics as "left" says more about American political dichotomies than it does about academic dishonesty. While I agree that science has within it a great capacity for the reproduction of the individual scientist's cultural and political beliefs, I'd like to point out that there are a number of major divisions among social scientists, but they're all pretty much in agreement that American politics is batshit insane. Especially the so-called "right," which has long been estranged from any kind of basis in either reality or morality. The Democratic Party isn't much better, mind you... but if the vast majority of academics from multiple competing disciplines all seem "left" to you, that's more indicative of a failure to meaningfully categorize political leanings on your part.

I don't really want to get into it, but even the construction of left as opposed to right is highly problematic and generally pretty useless. Just tends to lead people to assume that certain kinds of answers are good because of their inherent "leftness" or "rightness" without ever having explored the underlying assumptions.

but, then, I'm a social scientist, and I live in a city which you'd probably describe as overwhelmingly "left," so feel free to discount my opinions accordingly. :P

[eric B]

You raise an intriguing point. That is, placing yourself in the officer's position. I wonder, how many of those criticising the policeman's actions have done that? Also, what they would've done had it been them, in the same situation? Particularly, if whatever alternative they suggest (on a board such as this) didn't "work".

Messalina


I would have talked to the parent and the kid. I wouldn't have electrocuted her. Someone who thinks that's an appropriate response shouldn't be a police officer.

[popmykiwiballs]

the girl got off lightly if it had happened to me she wouldve got a bullet

[Messalina]

Messalina,

The construction of academics as "left" says more about American political dichotomies than it does about academic dishonesty. While I agree that science has within it a great capacity for the reproduction of the individual scientist's cultural and political beliefs, I'd like to point out that there are a number of major divisions among social scientists, but they're all pretty much in agreement that American politics is batshit insane. Especially the so-called "right," which has long been estranged from any kind of basis in either reality or morality. The Democratic Party isn't much better, mind you... but if the vast majority of academics from multiple competing disciplines all seem "left" to you, that's more indicative of a failure to meaningfully categorize political leanings on your part.

I don't really want to get into it, but even the construction of left as opposed to right is highly problematic and generally pretty useless. Just tends to lead people to assume that certain kinds of answers are good because of their inherent "leftness" or "rightness" without ever having explored the underlying assumptions.

but, then, I'm a social scientist, and I live in a city which you'd probably describe as overwhelmingly "left," so feel free to discount my opinions accordingly. :P

Hello there,

How are you? I hope you and yours are well. Thank you, for your significant response. However, I anticipated something of this nature. I wasn't questioning or criticizing academic integrity... in the larger sense. But, you pointed out "Science has within it a great capacity for the reproduction of the individual scientist's cultural and political beliefs". Also, I concur "That there are a number of major divisions among social scientists".

"But they're all pretty much in agreement that American politics is batshit insane. Especially the so-called "right," which has long been estranged from any kind of basis in either reality or morality". This is the type of comment that leads many to conclude "The vast majority of academics from multiple competing disciplines all seem "left"."

You seem to have "read something into" my comments that, I never wrote or intended. AND I'm not sure how. I wrote, ""Academics"; (in America) in my experience they tend to be overwhelmingly "left". Also, "blinded" by ideology." But, I ALSO wrote; "However, this tends to be the failing of many academicians of every stripe".

I never wrote that; ALL academicians seemed "Left" to me. My comments were confined to my experience of the academics I encountered in America. In fact, I never stated that all American academics were "left". Merely that, the ones I met tended to be.

So, as a consequence, your statement seems perplexing to me. I'm referencing; "But if the vast majority of academics from multiple competing disciplines all seem "left" to you, that's more indicative of a failure to meaningfully categorize political leanings on your part". In your defence, you did write "If". ;)

"Tends to lead people to assume that certain kinds of answers are good because of their inherent "leftness" or "rightness" without ever having explored the underlying assumptions". Indeed, well put! :)

Why would I "Discount" your opinions? Simply, because you're a "Social scientist", residing in a city that some might "Describe as overwhelmingly "left""?? I don't have a problem with liberalism or conservatism. Although, it seems clear "certain people" do. lol My only "problem" with either is when, adherents of these philosophies in the communications field, distort the information they're imparting to the public. BTW, I'm aware that, there are many different political philosophies. Also, many varied forms of conservatism and liberalism.

We seem to have gotten a bit off course. My intention was to encourage a certain amount of "caution" when, taking news from "Internet and academic sources". I seem to have "struck a nerve" by listing some of the "reasons" why. My apologies. However, I'm (reasonably) certian that you would agree, there are good and not so good in the sciences. As is the case in ALL fields and professions.

Warm regards,

Messalina

[Messalina]

I would have talked to the parent and the kid. I wouldn't have electrocuted her. Someone who thinks that's an appropriate response shouldn't be a police officer.


Hello there,

How are you? Thank you, for your response. I appreciate your comment about what, you would've done, had you been the responding officer. However, you've not answered the last question I posed. That being, "If whatever alternative they suggest (on a board such as this) didn't "work"". I should really appreciate an answer. Again, thank you for response to my post.

Messalina

[Snoodle]

Messalina,

The construction of academics as "left" says more about American political dichotomies than it does about academic dishonesty. While I agree that science has within it a great capacity for the reproduction of the individual scientist's cultural and political beliefs, I'd like to point out that there are a number of major divisions among social scientists, but they're all pretty much in agreement that American politics is batshit insane. Especially the so-called "right," which has long been estranged from any kind of basis in either reality or morality. The Democratic Party isn't much better, mind you... but if the vast majority of academics from multiple competing disciplines all seem "left" to you, that's more indicative of a failure to meaningfully categorize political leanings on your part.

I don't really want to get into it, but even the construction of left as opposed to right is highly problematic and generally pretty useless. Just tends to lead people to assume that certain kinds of answers are good because of their inherent "leftness" or "rightness" without ever having explored the underlying assumptions.

but, then, I'm a social scientist, and I live in a city which you'd probably describe as overwhelmingly "left," so feel free to discount my opinions accordingly. :P


"Sociology and Classical Liberalism
By Daniel B. Klein and Charlotta Stern--06/29/06

The social science where politics has replaced discipline and Democrats outnumber Republicans 15-to-1."

"A study of 18 elite Law and Journalism faculties by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, shows that faculty Democrats outnumber Republicans by a factor of 7-1."

"...The issues include economic regulations, personal-choice restrictions, and military action abroad. We find that the academics overwhelmingly vote Democratic and that the Democratic dominance has increased significantly since 1970."

Delicious sauces here:

http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/1893/FacultyStudies.htm


Personally, I've never been to a campus that wasn't so liberal my heart bled by proxy.

[eric B]

Hello there,

How are you? Thank you, for your response. I appreciate your comment about what, you would've done, had you been the responding officer. However, you've not answered the last question I posed. That being, "If whatever alternative they suggest (on a board such as this) didn't "work"". I should really appreciate an answer. Again, thank you for response to my post.

Messalina


Howdy, I'm doing just all right thank you very much for asking, and you're welcome to a response from me any time you like, really, don't mention it.
To answer your question, if a kid was out of control and it had to be restrained for the safety of others, I would do just that - restrain them. In an ideal situation there would be other trained child services people who I could contact to help me out with that. Also they would, ideally, be able to have a word with the parent and try to get to the bottom of why her child was behaving so strangely. I hope that answers your question.

[Messalina]

Howdy, I'm doing just all right thank you very much for asking, and you're welcome to a response from me any time you like, really, don't mention it.
To answer your question, if a kid was out of control and it had to be restrained for the safety of others, I would do just that - restrain them. In an ideal situation there would be other trained child services people who I could contact to help me out with that. Also they would, ideally, be able to have a word with the parent and try to get to the bottom of why her child was behaving so strangely. I hope that answers your question.

Hello there,

I'm pleased to learn you're well. There's a nasty influenza bug making the rounds, just now.

No, your response didn't answer my question. You stated that you would "Restrain", an out of control child. AND you specified what you would do "In an Ideal situation". However, in an ideal situation, your initial response "I would have talked to the parent and the kid" would've "worked".

My question (essentially) was what others would've done, had it been them, in that situation.... "Particularly, if whatever alternative they suggest (on a board such as this) didn't "work"".

I'm not trying to be argumentative or "difficult". However, life is seldom kind enough to give one, "Ideal" conditions. Also, I've been employed as a paramedic. As such, I (along with a partner) responded to calls involving violent children. Some were autistic (with uneven hormone levels), whilst, others were using elicit drugs. Yes, children as young as ten, have taken dangerous drugs. Example; the girl at the centre of the Roman Polanski scandal (according to official records) had taken quaaludes at the age of eleven, if memory serves.

It's quite evident you possess strong convictions. As well as, strong opinions. So, I should really like to know, what you would've done re: an out of control and violent child. Assuming that, the "Ideal situation" you stated, didn't exsist.

Again, thank you for corresponding with me. AND, I hope you and yours, remain healthy.

Messalina

[One from the Vaults]

Hey, sorry, didn't mean to ignore you earlier, just been really busy this week. Sorry for earlier antagonism. May eventually respond in more depth.

[Messalina]

Hey, sorry, didn't mean to ignore you earlier, just been really busy this week. Sorry for earlier antagonism. May eventually respond in more depth.

Hello there,

So long as I know you're well, when or if you respond is fine by me.

Warm regards,

Messalina

[Dreihundert]

Hello there,

So long as I know you're well, when or if you respond is fine by me.

Warm regards,

Messalina



I believe that that debate has successfully doubled your post count o.O.

[Messalina]

I believe that that debate has successfully doubled your post count o.O.

Hello there,

How are you? It wasn't my intention to initiate a "Debate". lol But, thank you for responding. What's the next level after "junior member"?

Warm regards,

Messalina

[houdini]

I was just wondering what the levels are too

[Dreihundert]

Hello there,

How are you? It wasn't my intention to initiate a "Debate". lol But, thank you for responding. What's the next level after "junior member"?

Warm regards,

Messalina



Senior member, then supreme poster, then big supporter, I believe.

[gopballbuster]

Senior member, then supreme poster, then big supporter, I believe.
Pretty sure that's it...

[Messalina]

Senior member, then supreme poster, then big supporter, I believe.

Hello there,

Thank you, for the update. :)

Messalina

[eric B]

Hello there,


No, your response didn't answer my question. You stated that you would "Restrain", an out of control child. AND you specified what you would do "In an Ideal situation". However, in an ideal situation, your initial response "I would have talked to the parent and the kid" would've "worked".

Messalina


If no non-cohersive methods yeilded results I would restrain the kid to stop it from being of any harm to anyone, I might even handcuff it if it wasn't calming down then take it to the police station. There's no justification for tazering in this case, children have been arrested ever since there have been cops and there's never been any need to assault or torture them.

[Snoodle]

If no non-cohersive methods yeilded results I would restrain the kid to stop it from being of any harm to anyone, I might even handcuff it if it wasn't calming down then take it to the police station. There's no justification for tazering in this case, children have been arrested ever since there have been cops and there's never been any need to assault or torture them.

There is NOTHING this cop could have done to not be the bad guy. Just by showing up, he subjected himself to a media shitstorm.

Tazers are specifically designed to be nonlethal and less dangerous than physical altercation. There's always risk involved, but by and large they leave no lasting damage, and if the length of the stun is reported accurately, it's the equivalent of a bee sting.

[gary198]

There is NOTHING this cop could have done to not be the bad guy. Just by showing up, he subjected himself to a media shitstorm.

Tazers are specifically designed to be nonlethal and less dangerous than physical altercation. There's always risk involved, but by and large they leave no lasting damage, and if the length of the stun is reported accurately, it's the equivalent of a bee sting.


The cop ended up getting fired. Not for using the taser but for not having the camera attached to it. It seems that a camera is supposed to be attached to the taser by department rules.

[Messalina]

If no non-cohersive methods yeilded results I would restrain the kid to stop it from being of any harm to anyone, I might even handcuff it if it wasn't calming down then take it to the police station. There's no justification for tazering in this case, children have been arrested ever since there have been cops and there's never been any need to assault or torture them.

Hello EricB,

How are you? Thank you, for giving a more detailed response. As I stated (in a previous message), I'm not trying to be difficult. You clearly have strong convictions re: the use of force on children and probably in general. My only question to you would be: have you ever attempted to restrain "a violent and out of control child"? I respect your opinion and wish you well.

Messalina

[Messalina]

There is NOTHING this cop could have done to not be the bad guy. Just by showing up, he subjected himself to a media shitstorm.

Tazers are specifically designed to be nonlethal and less dangerous than physical altercation. There's always risk involved, but by and large they leave no lasting damage, and if the length of the stun is reported accurately, it's the equivalent of a bee sting.

Hello Snoodle,

How are you? I agree with you completely. "There is NOTHING this cop could have done to not be the bad guy", to those that object to his actions. AND of all those that have been critical (on this board), only EricB had the huevos to answer my question; "What would they have done had it been them, in that situation". He has said he would restrain the child (ideally, with the assistance of others) and maybe, "Handcuff it". Then again, he never mentioned exactly how he would physically restrain; a violent and out of control child.

As you know, it's very easy to second guess the actions of another. But, unless one has been in that person's situation (in this case a police officer), one can't fully appreciate the difficulty facing the individual. But, I do give EricB "props" (is that the proper Americanism?) for offering an "alternative", rather than simply being critical. Yea Eric! :) AND for the record, I have had to deal with violent children.

Warm regards,

Messalina

[One from the Vaults]

If I remember correctly, it was specifically mentioned that handcuffing the girl could have broken her arm by accident.

[eric B]

If I was called out to this situation I would first ask the parent why she had called me out to deal with a kid who's only "crime" was that she didn't feel like taking a shower, considering that not taking a shower when your mother tells you is not a criminal offence. I don't think it would get to the point where I had to chose between potential arm breaking and electrocution.

[Snoodle]

If I was called out to this situation I would first ask the parent why she had called me out to deal with a kid who's only "crime" was that she didn't feel like taking a shower, considering that not taking a shower when your mother tells you is not a criminal offence. I don't think it would get to the point where I had to chose between potential arm breaking and electrocution.

Given that the articles says 'police were called' to the home, it sounds to me like it was bad enough that someone else called them. It was filed as a domestic disturbance.

[VanDattum]

Given that the articles says 'police were called' to the home, it sounds to me like it was bad enough that someone else called them. It was filed as a domestic disturbance.

It WAS a domestic disturbance. The mother called the police because the girl didn't want to go to bed. When the cop arrived she didn't change her tune and he tasered her.
This is exactly why regular cops (as opposed to SWAT) aren't allowed to carry tasers where I live.


Cheers!
VD

[Snoodle]

It WAS a domestic disturbance. The mother called the police because the girl didn't want to go to bed. When the cop arrived she didn't change her tune and he tasered her.
This is exactly why regular cops (as opposed to SWAT) aren't allowed to carry tasers where I live.


Cheers!
VD

SWAT aren't supposed to carry tazers. SWAT are supposed to shoot hostage takers and break and enter hot buildings.

Tazers are specifically designed to subdue people without causing harm. That's WHY they're issued. Would it have been better if the cop had physically restrained her? Cuffed her, maybe? Like I said, the cop's job obligates him to end domestic disturbances. There's nothing he could have done and not been the villain. He was called there to resolve a situation, and he did so without anyone being hurt.

Shame on him.

[nightowltrekor]

I agree with you Egrimm 82, the United States does have some very fucked up ways of doing things. It is hard for me to believe what some of the cops do in this country. Of course, cops every where do stupid shit. I really believe a large percentage of them should have their little tin badges ripped off their chests. I'm not a cop but i think i could have handled that in a more sensible manner. What i would have liked to have done in a situation like that is jerk mother and daughter up and bust both their asses with my belt.

[Snoodle]

I could have handled that in a more sensible manner.

...bust both their asses with my belt.

wat

:thumbup

[nightowltrekor]

What exactly does WAT mean Snoodle?

[Snoodle]

What exactly does WAT mean Snoodle?

It's not an anagram. It's pronounced as it's written.

It's like 'what,' but written comically so as to point out the sillyness of a statement or circumstance.

[crushee]

Hello,

Simply a question: is it frequent, in the States, to call for the Police when a child does not want to go to bed ?
Never heard of that on the old continent !

[Snoodle]

Hello,

Simply a question: is it frequent, in the States, to call for the Police when a child does not want to go to bed ?
Never heard of that on the old continent !

No, but when you hear screaming next door and don't know why, it is.