Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Pixel Bark)   Best. Principal. EVER   (pixelbark.com) divider line 128
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

11412 clicks; posted to Video » on 05 Jun 2012 at 4:11 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



128 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-05 09:34:31 AM  

9beers: The kid started the assault so fark him.


He also appears to have been wearing a hoodie. Bet he was on DXM.
 
2012-06-05 09:37:14 AM  
1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.

Principal had several opportunities to de-escalate the situation. In fact, de-escalation is his JOB. Had that other kid possessed a larger pair and aimed a lick to the Principal's head, that situation might have ended up in a riot. It took the concerted efforts of multiple teachers (I assume they were teachers) to prevent other students from intervening on the kid's behalf. It's sad that the teachers had more presence of mind than their boss.

It's easy to armchair vision with 20/20 quarterbacking hindsight, but the better approach would have been to let the kid pass and simply instruct him to report to the office immediately. Alternatively, just let the kid up after the take-down and THEN instruct him to report to the office immediately.

Principal was hired presumably due to the public's faith in his wisdom and good judgment. He failed to show either quality, and it's a freaking shame that he's still employed.
 
2012-06-05 09:37:26 AM  
This link is exemplary of the problem with video sites like Wimp, LiveLeak, et. al that include no description or exposition of the context of the video. As many have pointed out, there's nothing really to indicate what set the principal off to stop the kid in the link. Most people wouldn't see this video, absent any context and immediately think "Best. Principal. EVER." but with context it makes perfect sense.

I also agree that the student brought the take-down on himself; the principal just stopped him and you don't hit or shove people that merely block your path. Throw in the upskirt shots and he's just plain guilty.
 
2012-06-05 09:38:10 AM  

Darth_Lukecash: Well, it's old news. But I believe the principal was wrong in his actions in terms of over reaction.

Unless you are stopping violence-then by all means.


As best I can make of it, the kid was trying to take upskirt snaps with his phone, and the principal caught him at it. The kid tried to walk away, the principal tried to stop him, the kid got physical, and the principal sort of snapped at that point. Without knowing more, it sounds to me like the principal wanted to catch the kid with evidence of his crime, and feared the kid would ditch the evidence if he got away.

There are all kinds possible scenarios, but at this point it becomes speculation. Aside from the few available facts, watching the video it looks to me, at least, as if the staff seem to know what's going on. That leads me to suspect that they knew about this already, and were just hoping to catch the kid in the act, with both witnesses and evidence. The kid made a good play for escape, and if all that's true then we can understand why. Upskirts are a serious offence, even for minors in Canada. Kids in schools have slightly constricted civil liberties, so it's a mistake to equate this with a man-on-the-street situation. The school staff enjoy in loco parentis, meaning they have similar authority to a kid's own parents in the parents' absence. If the principal tries to stop you, he's exercising more or less the same authority over your freedom of movement that your own father could, with the same authority, and if you defy him then it's like defying your father. Moreover, the principal is acutely responsible for the welfare of all the school's students, including the upskirt victims, and so he is obliged to take measures towards their protection as well.

So it's not as simple as a lot of people here are casting it. School staff may indeed halt, restrain, and remove a physically resisting pupil even without initial violence -- and it looks like there was a little here anyway -- if it advances some other important goal, such as the protection of other students, the acquisition of vital evidence, or the containment or removal of a potential threat.

/IANAL
 
2012-06-05 09:40:11 AM  
larrycot

Until we get the rest of the story or some more video, I'll side with the administrator.


Because disagreeing with a black man is racist
Because those in authority are to be obeyed w/o question.

Pick one or both.
 
2012-06-05 09:43:43 AM  

tillerman35: It's easy to armchair vision with 20/20 quarterbacking hindsight


Yes, isn't it? Even if you still don't understand what happened. Maybe especially.
 
2012-06-05 09:49:31 AM  

tillerman35: Principal was hired presumably due to the public's faith in his wisdom and good judgment. He failed to show either quality, and it's a freaking shame that he's still employed.


No it's not. It's a shame people who think like you cant seem to figure out why public schools are now more dangerous than ever.

Would your opinion differ if he had done this in response to that kid bullying a gay person, rather than just trying to sexually harass a girl?
 
2012-06-05 09:51:31 AM  

tillerman35: 1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.


This child decides to violate my child? When that photo is probably going online and who knows where else? And then has a problem with the principal who is trying to protect my child?

That principal had crazy restraint. I would've snapped that rodent's neck.
 
2012-06-05 09:51:50 AM  
I'm not really seeing a problem with the principal's actions. He basically makes a grab for the kid and the kid decides to fight him off. When I did my time in high school it wasn't that uncommon to see the principal grab your arm and haul you off. Especially if were a frequent guest of the principal, as I'd imagine some little shiat who walks around taking up skirt photos is. No one at my school ever tried to fight the principal off though as that was asking for more than a headlock.
 
2012-06-05 09:53:43 AM  
Okay, everybody, listen up.

There is too much arguing going on this thread, so I have appointed myself the official Fark authority on the video.

After watching the video, I have concluded that the kid used violence first, and that the principal acted appropriately.

My ruling is final.

Carry on.
 
2012-06-05 10:03:29 AM  

Grables'Daughter: Okay, everybody, listen up.

There is too much arguing going on this thread, so I have appointed myself the official Fark authority on the video.

After watching the video, I have concluded that the kid used violence first, and that the principal acted appropriately.

My ruling is final.

Carry on.


Sorry. Too much ouot of context for a ruling
 
2012-06-05 10:08:52 AM  
Consider if he hadn't stopped the kid that the pictures would be online in 5 minutes.
 
2012-06-05 10:11:31 AM  

Crewmannumber6: Grables'Daughter: Okay, everybody, listen up.

There is too much arguing going on this thread, so I have appointed myself the official Fark authority on the video.

After watching the video, I have concluded that the kid used violence first, and that the principal acted appropriately.

My ruling is final.

Carry on.

Sorry. Too much ouot of context for a ruling


I've already made my ruling.

And you are ouot of order.
 
2012-06-05 10:14:39 AM  

Grables'Daughter: Crewmannumber6: Grables'Daughter: Okay, everybody, listen up.

There is too much arguing going on this thread, so I have appointed myself the official Fark authority on the video.

After watching the video, I have concluded that the kid used violence first, and that the principal acted appropriately.

My ruling is final.

Carry on.

Sorry. Too much ouot of context for a ruling

I've already made my ruling.

And you are ouot of order.


cdn.bleacherreport.net
"No, you're ouot of order! You're ouot of order! The whole trial is ouot of order! They're ouot of order!"
 
2012-06-05 10:15:03 AM  
Sorry kids, I'm with the Principal on this one. You never shove a teacher or the Principal. When they want you to go with them, you go. You shove, you should be taken down.
 
2012-06-05 10:17:59 AM  
Gimme a sec while I adjust this onion on my belt....

Ok. Ready.

We had an electronics teacher who would take a disruptive kid out into the hall, push them against the wall, grab them by the throat and lift. Having received this once, I can tell you for sure, I didn't act up again, and, ended up learning quite a bit in that class. The mind changes focus as ones feet are off the floor.

/off my lawn.
 
2012-06-05 10:18:56 AM  

T-Boy: Sorry kids, I'm with the Principal on this one. You never shove a teacher or the Principal. When they want you to go with them, you go. You shove, you should be taken down.


SEE?!?!?!?!?

Now I don't want to hear a peep ouot of any of you!
 
2012-06-05 10:24:33 AM  

Grables'Daughter: T-Boy: Sorry kids, I'm with the Principal on this one. You never shove a teacher or the Principal. When they want you to go with them, you go. You shove, you should be taken down.

SEE?!?!?!?!?

Now I don't want to hear a peep ouot of any of you!


images29.fotki.com
 
2012-06-05 10:30:55 AM  

Theaetetus: Grables'Daughter: T-Boy: Sorry kids, I'm with the Principal on this one. You never shove a teacher or the Principal. When they want you to go with them, you go. You shove, you should be taken down.

SEE?!?!?!?!?

Now I don't want to hear a peep ouot of any of you!

[images29.fotki.com image 420x352]


What makes that perfect is the "expression" that I seem to see on the other peep's faces.
 
2012-06-05 10:32:24 AM  

tillerman35: It's easy to armchair vision with 20/20 quarterbacking hindsight, but the better approach would have been to let the kid pass and simply instruct him to report to the office immediately. Alternatively, just let the kid up after the take-down and THEN instruct him to report to the office immediately.


Definitely a better solution in other cases, but based on what I could find in this case the principal was getting to the kid because he was trying to sneak upskirt pictures of fellow classmates. I imagine he was trying to get to the kid before he had much of a chance to spread those pictures around and further humiliate some girl(s) at the school.

It is easy to do the Monday morning quarterbacking, though. On that I fully agree.
 
2012-06-05 10:34:38 AM  

jiaxiaobo: tillerman35: 1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.

This child decides to violate my child? When that photo is probably going online and who knows where else? And then has a problem with the principal who is trying to protect my child?

That principal had crazy restraint. I would've snapped that rodent's neck.


Exactly- you make my point. The principal WAS risking snapping that rodent's neck. Dragging people around by the head can result in several varieties of major injury, including paralysis or even death. The principal was a few unlucky steps from a manslaughter charge. And "he squirmed so much he snapped his own spinal cord between two of his cervical vertebrae" isn't a viable defense.

There are appropriate (under the legal system) remedies for the little shiat posting upskirt pictures online, none of which involve clotheslining kids and then putting them into brutal headlocks.

Sorry, but I don't need "context" to tell me when restraint is applied inappropriately and with disregard for potential injury. It's obvious from the video that the student was at risk for serious injury. Even cops don't pull that kind of crap unless it's in a desperate situation. They take down, subdue, and then use non-lethal restraint methods (joint locks, cuffs, etc.) From the video, it was pretty clear that either the principal had no training on how to properly physically restrain the student, or that he ignored his training and employed a method that was likely to cause grave bodily harm.

The principal had the responsibility to de-escalate the situation and restore discipline in a manner that did not injure the offending student or put other students at risk. He failed in all three categories. I know it's viscerally satisfying to see a little snotter get what he deserves for taking upskirt photos (assuming that was the cause of all the ruckus), but none of the potential injuries that might have (but luckily didn't) occurred are appropriate punishments for that offense.
 
2012-06-05 10:35:53 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: larrycot: Until we get the rest of the story or some more video, I'll side with the administrator.

Why?


Because what does the kid have to lose by harassing another student? Nothing.

What does the administrator have to lose by taking down a student and dragging them down the hall? A job, retirement plan, health-benefits, the ability to ever find a job again, jail-time, public-and-community intimidation and threats...

I'm not saying he was right. But until we get the full details, I will guarantee he thought more about the potential impact of his actions than some 15-year old kid.

Not speaking for you larry, but I happen to agree.
 
2012-06-05 10:42:17 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: larrycot: Until we get the rest of the story or some more video, I'll side with the administrator.

Why?


Because the principal was in the right, period. It's nice and all that we treat our kids as "special snowflakes" these days and that everything that teachers and students do is "protected" by some fluffy-duffy OMGNOTMYINNOCENTANDWONDERFULSON/DAUGHTER bullshiat, but the reality is that kids at this age are predisposed to challenging authority and pushing the boundaries, seeing EXACTLY what they can get away with. Kids also are fully aware of the stereotype of "The Teacher/Principal will NEVER touch me, so I can get away with ANYTHING" that is perpetuated in the schools, media, and at home. I'm not saying that schools have the right to bodyslam you into oblivion over roaming the halls between periods, but if your kid resists being taken to the office with violence like that you damn well better be sure your kid is going DOWN.

[coolstorybro]

In the days of my youth whenever I got into trouble my parents always asked this question first: "WHAT DID YOU DO?" - The logic being that a authority figure wouldn't do this unless I had done something pretty bad to provoke them. I'm sure we can all quote real world examples of where this rule is violated but at school we have the general idea that teachers are there to HELP students and kids, and not beat the living shiat out of them.

Catholic schools excluded, of course. "The Answer is Fifteen, Sister Clar-*WHAP* OMG MY KNUCKLES!!"

[/coolstorybro]


jiaxiaobo: tillerman35: 1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.

This child decides to violate my child? When that photo is probably going online and who knows where else? And then has a problem with the principal who is trying to protect my child?

That principal had crazy restraint. I would've snapped that rodent's neck.


cdnimg.visualizeus.com

Agreed. To him it's a youthful teenage prank. To her, its a lifetime of unintended exposure and embarrassment on the internet. He doesn't give a shiat. She'll be crying about this to her therapist for the rest of her life.

If he succeeded he'll be bragging about this to his friends and colleagues for decades to come. He'll point it out to his college buddies and laugh with his male co-workers over beer.

She'll be scared that it'll be brought up in conversation for the rest of her life.

Props to the Principal.

/hot linked pic btw
 
2012-06-05 10:42:48 AM  

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: cameroncrazy1984: oldnewsissoexciting.jpg

You know what's a LOT more annoying than 'old news'? People whining about it in threads.


Normally I'd agree, but the top link he posted is an update to the story...
 
2012-06-05 10:47:06 AM  

tillerman35: jiaxiaobo: tillerman35: 1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.

The principal had the responsibility to de-escalate the situation and restore discipline in a manner that did not injure the offending student or put other students at risk. He failed in all three categories. I know it's viscerally satisfying to see a little snotter get what he deserves for taking upskirt photos (assuming that was the cause of all the ruckus), but none of the potential injuries that might have (but luckily didn't) occurred are appropriat ...


I'm assuming you don't have kids, or if you do you do not have a daughter. I know it's a shiatty thing for me to say...I used to be that guy who farking HATED it when people told me "You don't understand, you don't have a kid".....but there's some truth to that statement. Something changes inside you when it's your kid who's being sexually abused by a snot-nosed little fark who thinks they can get away with taking an unwarranted upskirt pic of my little girl.

And yes - It was sexual abuse that the boy was committing. Convince me otherwise.
 
2012-06-05 10:49:37 AM  

Theaetetus: Grables'Daughter: Crewmannumber6: Grables'Daughter: Okay, everybody, listen up.

There is too much arguing going on this thread, so I have appointed myself the official Fark authority on the video.

After watching the video, I have concluded that the kid used violence first, and that the principal acted appropriately.

My ruling is final.

Carry on.

Sorry. Too much ouot of context for a ruling

I've already made my ruling.

And you are ouot of order.

[cdn.bleacherreport.net image 350x227]
"No, you're ouot of order! You're ouot of order! The whole trial is ouot of order! They're ouot of order!"


Wut?
i32.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-05 10:54:58 AM  

Professor_Falken: tillerman35: jiaxiaobo: tillerman35: 1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.

The principal had the responsibility to de-escalate the situation and restore discipline in a manner that did not injure the offending student or put other students at risk. He failed in all three categories. I know it's viscerally satisfying to see a little snotter get what he deserves for taking upskirt photos (assuming that was the cause of all the ruckus), but none of the potential injuries that might have (but luckily didn't) occurred are appropriat ...

I'm assuming you don't have kids, or if you do you do not have a daughter. I know it's a shiatty thing for me to say...I used to be that guy who farking HATED it when people told me "You don't understand, you don't have a kid".....but there's some truth to that statement. Something changes inside you when it's your kid who's being sexually abused by a snot-nosed little fark who thinks they can get away with taking an unwarranted upskirt pic of my little girl.

And yes - It was sexual abuse that the boy was committing. Convince me otherwise.


I don't have kids -- I don't even like kids -- but I have no problem understanding why someone with kids would feel as you do, and I so I don't understand why other people with no kids wouldn't understand. I think we've all had people we cared about in our lives, and it can't be that hard to draw an allegory from that.

We also don't know that the principle didn't try to de-escalate the situation. A lot can happen in a very short period of time. It looks to me like the kid was determined not to be detained (my own guess is that he had evidence on him), and the principle understood very quickly that he was not going to go quietly.
 
2012-06-05 11:05:32 AM  
AntonSzandorLaVey: oldnews.jpg
Link
Link

Well as along as you saw it... first

You win !
 
2012-06-05 11:08:09 AM  

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: Professor_Falken: tillerman35: jiaxiaobo:
And yes - It was sexual abuse that the boy was committing. Convince me otherwise.

I don't have kids -- I don't even like kids -- but I have no problem understanding why someone with kids would feel as you do, and I so I don't understand why other people with no kids wouldn't understand. I think we've all had people we cared about in our lives, and it can't be that hard to draw an allegory from that.

We also don't know that the principle didn't try to de-escalate the situation. A lot can happen in a very short period of time. It looks to me like the kid was determined not to be detained (my own guess is that he had evidence on him), and the principle understood very quickly that he was not going to go quietly.


I know where you are coming from - I used to be the same way. It's a biological switch, something about your own kids is different from loving someone else. It's just not the same. I love my wife, but its a different love than the love I have for my kids. I'd divorce my wife if I absolutely needed to, but I'd never leave my kids behind. Period. I'll punish, restrict, take away privileges, even spank and "Whup that kids arse" if it came to it....but I'd never EVER leave them behind.

It's just different. Like I said, its something biological - Your wife is part of your family, but your kid is part of you. *shrugs*

/Not a Doc.
 
2012-06-05 11:34:41 AM  
Good luck getting laid creepy picture taker dude. Better choose a college that is far far away.
 
2012-06-05 11:36:39 AM  

stonelotus: that "kid" was wearing a hoodie. he's lucky he didn't get shot.


seriously. If only he'd had some skittles and/or black skin, he'd have gone down in a hail of bullets.
 
2012-06-05 12:09:21 PM  
Oh noes! Upskirt pics! Maybe she should wear some frickin pants.
 
2012-06-05 12:33:47 PM  

lewismarktwo: Oh noes! Upskirt pics! Maybe she should wear some frickin pants.


up-ship.com
 
2012-06-05 12:51:23 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: slayer199: He's going to get his ass sued and he'll probably be fired.

Unless something happened out of view that we don't know about, he's farked and so is the school.

Yup. From that video, it looks like he physically accosted a student, the student pushed him off, and then he overreacted to the student's self-defensive move and beat his ass for no real reason. It'll probably be painted as "just another angry black man abusing his power and taking out his frustrations on that poor white child..."


That is not a beating. Not at all. Not even a good roughing up.
 
2012-06-05 01:16:22 PM  

chewielouie: 9beers: The kid started the assault so fark him.

Kinda like how Zimmerman started the assault on Martin, so fark Zimmerman right?


Yep, pretty much.

/although to be fair, fark Zimmerman because he started something he couldn't finish without a gun
//but hey, what else would you expect a coward to do?
 
2012-06-05 01:20:57 PM  

tillerman35: jiaxiaobo: tillerman35: 1. Kid was a douche
2. Principal was a bigger douche.

This child decides to violate my child? When that photo is probably going online and who knows where else? And then has a problem with the principal who is trying to protect my child?

That principal had crazy restraint. I would've snapped that rodent's neck.

Exactly- you make my point. The principal WAS risking snapping that rodent's neck. Dragging people around by the head can result in several varieties of major injury, including paralysis or even death. The principal was a few unlucky steps from a manslaughter charge. And "he squirmed so much he snapped his own spinal cord between two of his cervical vertebrae" isn't a viable defense.

There are appropriate (under the legal system) remedies for the little shiat posting upskirt pictures online, none of which involve clotheslining kids and then putting them into brutal headlocks.

Sorry, but I don't need "context" to tell me when restraint is applied inappropriately and with disregard for potential injury. It's obvious from the video that the student was at risk for serious injury. Even cops don't pull that kind of crap unless it's in a desperate situation. They take down, subdue, and then use non-lethal restraint methods (joint locks, cuffs, etc.) From the video, it was pretty clear that either the principal had no training on how to properly physically restrain the student, or that he ignored his training and employed a method that was likely to cause grave bodily harm.

The principal had the responsibility to de-escalate the situation and restore discipline in a manner that did not injure the offending student or put other students at risk. He failed in all three categories. I know it's viscerally satisfying to see a little snotter get what he deserves for taking upskirt photos (assuming that was the cause of all the ruckus), but none of the potential injuries that might have (but luckily didn't) occurred are appropriate punishments for that offense.


You are either a) a colossal pussy of cavernous proportions or b) the kid that got man handled for taking pictures of underage panties. Either way, you're pathetic.
 
2012-06-05 02:37:18 PM  
I once took a student down and dragged him to the office. He was taunting a much bigger kid who had, as they say, anger management issues. The much bigger kid looked at me, and I could tell that the smaller kid was about to get his ass beaten. I told the smaller kid to come with me, he said no, and I didn't feel like having a conversation. Into a headlock and dragged, kicking and cursing, all the way down to the office he went. I sat him down in the principal's office, turned to the principal, who remained at his desk without showing any outward concern over the situation, and calmly told him why we were there. The principal looked at the kid and told him that he should thank me for saving his life. His parents agreed. :)

There was also a kid who would not stop being inappropriate (touching) with the girls. I told one of them to go ahead and slap him hard if he did it again and I'd look the other way. It was the right solution for that situation. This was a mixed special ed class -- everything from 13 year old sweet and innocent moderately mentally handicapped girl to a 19 year old man with conduct disorder and learning disabilities. The kid who needed slapping could not be reasoned with -- he needed the direct, immediate, and painful consequence to learn his lesson.

Yes, it was a farked up classroom.
 
2012-06-05 02:51:56 PM  

Theaetetus: Grables'Daughter: Crewmannumber6: Grables'Daughter: Okay, everybody, listen up.

There is too much arguing going on this thread, so I have appointed myself the official Fark authority on the video.

After watching the video, I have concluded that the kid used violence first, and that the principal acted appropriately.

My ruling is final.

Carry on.

Sorry. Too much ouot of context for a ruling

I've already made my ruling.

And you are ouot of order.

[cdn.bleacherreport.net image 350x227]
"No, you're ouot of order! You're ouot of order! The whole trial is ouot of order! They're ouot of order!"


Wrong movie. That line was from Dog Day Afternoon.
 
2012-06-05 03:33:23 PM  
I need to see the upskirt evidence before I can make a judgment
 
2012-06-05 03:52:20 PM  
That wasn't such a smart move. But it was probably out of principal.

Btw, I am probably repeating a pun further up in this thread, but I haven't read it, so I wouldn't know.
 
2012-06-05 04:03:51 PM  

basemetal: AntonSzandorLaVey: oldnews.jpg
Link
Link

OHhhh, so, sounds like the kid was trying to get upskirt pics in the hall. Fark that piece of shiat.


I think we, the public, need to see these pictures to make an unbiased and fair assessment

/chris hanson
 
2012-06-05 04:08:02 PM  

Grables'Daughter: T-Boy: Sorry kids, I'm with the Principal on this one. You never shove a teacher or the Principal. When they want you to go with them, you go. You shove, you should be taken down.

SEE?!?!?!?!?

Now I don't want to hear a peep out of any of you!


The only way the video would have been better is if, after the Principal had the guy in the full nelson, some other students ran up and started taking cell phone pics of his junk and posting them on the interwebs in a gay bondage sort of way.
 
2012-06-05 04:31:39 PM  

Professor_Falken:
I'm assuming you don't have kids, or if you do you do not have a daughter. I know it's a shiatty thing for me to say...I used to be that guy who farking HATED it when people told me "You don't understand, you don't have a kid".....but there's some truth to that statement. Something changes inside you when it's your kid who's being sexually abused by a snot-nosed little fark who thinks they can get away with taking an unwarranted upskirt pic of my little girl.

And yes - It was sexual abuse that the boy was committing. Convince me otherwise.


Kids, no girls, but my boys have had long-term girl friends (and girlfriends) that I have had "tiger-dad" protective instincts towards, so I know where you're coming from. But as far as I've seen in the papers, the penalty for an up-skirt snapshot doesn't include getting dragged around by the neck. Granted, that would be a very satisfying thing to watch. But even in that ridiculous case, it would have been after due process of law had been applied.

The key points I take away from that video are that the principal used force, and continued to use force, when it was unnecessary, and that he did so in a manner that endangered the health and safety of a child. If he can't command enough respect and authority from his students for them to halt when he commands them to, then he shouldn't be in a position of authority over them.

I know a couple of kids with spinal cord injuries. One, now 17, is a full quadriplegic. So I'm more than a little bit sensitive to people doing stupid things that could result in similar injuries. There are some things you just don't do, and dragging someone around by the neck is not one of them. Hell, in that last scene, he DEAD LIFTS the kid up by the head and neck. By the neck, people. Not to mention the fact that (now that I viewed it a second time) it looks like he tried to choke the kid out after he first took him down. Why are people defending this guy? How far would he have to go before it was "too much?" Would he have to shank the kid or pop a cap in the kid's knee or something? Yeah, the kid was being a douche, but the principal puts him to shame in comparison. The guy belongs in some other profession. He's going to pull that same crap and really hurt a kid someday. That's how I view the video. Different eyes, different interpretation I guess.
 
2012-06-05 04:37:35 PM  

tillerman35: The key points I take away from that video are that the principal used force, and continued to use force, when it was unnecessary, and that he did so in a manner that endangered the health and safety of a child. If he can't command enough respect and authority from his students for them to halt when he commands them to, then he shouldn't be in a position of authority over them.


The hipster modern parent equates any physical intervention to a life threatening event. It's the same mentality that feels kids can't bike or walk to school because they'll be kidnapped when the fact is they're in more danger of being abused or killed by a known member or friend of the family instead of a total stranger.

Today's parents are pants-shiatting morans.

dsolter.files.wordpress.com

I survived as have 1000 generations over the millennia -- STOP BUBBLE WRAPPING CHILDREN.
 
2012-06-05 05:04:42 PM  
If I was the kid - knowing there are cameras in the school - I would have faked passing out from the headlock until an EMT was called. If the principal moved me before a professionally trained person evaluated me it would only strengthen my case against him.

If I was the kids father, I would have found out the truth and probably kicked his ass privately but still sued the shiat out of the school/principal.
 
2012-06-05 05:37:00 PM  

mooseyfate: The principal had the responsibility to de-escalate the situation and restore discipline in a manner that did not injure the offending student or put other students at risk. He failed in all three categories. I know it's viscerally satisfying to see a little snotter get what he deserves for taking upskirt photos (assuming that was the cause of all the ruckus), but none of the potential injuries that might have (but luckily didn't) occurred are appropriate punishments for that offense.

You are either a) a colossal pussy of cavernous proportions or b) the kid that got man handled for taking pictures of underage panties. Either way, you're pathetic.


At least he's a grown-up.
 
2012-06-05 05:54:30 PM  

tillerman35: Professor_Falken:
I'm assuming you don't have kids, or if you do you do not have a daughter. I know it's a shiatty thing for me to say...I used to be that guy who farking HATED it when people told me "You don't understand, you don't have a kid".....but there's some truth to that statement. Something changes inside you when it's your kid who's being sexually abused by a snot-nosed little fark who thinks they can get away with taking an unwarranted upskirt pic of my little girl.

And yes - It was sexual abuse that the boy was committing. Convince me otherwise.

Kids, no girls, but my boys have had long-term girl friends (and girlfriends) that I have had "tiger-dad" protective instincts towards, so I know where you're coming from. But as far as I've seen in the papers, the penalty for an up-skirt snapshot doesn't include getting dragged around by the neck. Granted, that would be a very satisfying thing to watch. But even in that ridiculous case, it would have been after due process of law had been applied.

The key points I take away from that video are that the principal used force, and continued to use force, when it was unnecessary, and that he did so in a manner that endangered the health and safety of a child. If he can't command enough respect and authority from his students for them to halt when he commands them to, then he shouldn't be in a position of authority over them.

I know a couple of kids with spinal cord injuries. One, now 17, is a full quadriplegic. So I'm more than a little bit sensitive to people doing stupid things that could result in similar injuries. There are some things you just don't do, and dragging someone around by the neck is not one of them. Hell, in that last scene, he DEAD LIFTS the kid up by the head and neck. By the neck, people. Not to mention the fact that (now that I viewed it a second time) it looks like he tried to choke the kid out after he first took him down. Why are people defending this guy? How far would he h ...


I think you're mistaken about a lot of what you see in the video, and I disagree with many of your thoughts about it. This man is military trained and has made a career out of working with kids -- not just in this context, but much more directly. I think he probably knows what he's doing, and probably had good reasons for it at the time, even if he did overreact someone. I don't believe the kid was ever in any real danger, but I do believe he likely provided good reason for such aggressive restraint.
 
2012-06-05 05:58:56 PM  

b04155: If I was the kid - knowing there are cameras in the school - I would have faked passing out from the headlock until an EMT was called. If the principal moved me before a professionally trained person evaluated me it would only strengthen my case against him.

If I was the kids father, I would have found out the truth and probably kicked his ass privately but still sued the shiat out of the school/principal.


You know what's sad? I believe you. I really believe you're that much of a douchebag.
 
2012-06-05 06:18:24 PM  
This was how it was done back when I was in school 30 years ago. You did not fark with the principal or asst. principals. They were all ex-WW2 marines and would put you in a head-lock and drag you to the office if you stepped the least bit out of line.

I will note that back in those days we had minimal discipline problems in school.

Good to see this principal step up and re-establish how things should be.
 
2012-06-05 06:51:34 PM  
when i was in high school i watched an asst principal take a girl to the office in a headlock. she and another girl were in a huge hallway fight that drew blood. the aggressor was taken to the office screaming obscenities and claims of murder, etc. She was suspended for a week. The other girl was suspended for 1 day, but mostly as a precaution, like a day to get over it and come back to school. It was a small high school so everyone knew everyone. I'm glad 1991 was pre-internet video days for SO many reasons.
 
Displayed 50 of 128 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report