Check out this disturbing video of Officer cuffing 8 y child

Post Reply New Topic

That's unfortunately true. All that a-hole is going to get is just that...a slap on the wrist.

I heard on the news this morning that the Sheriff is backing his officer, and supporting the same tactics in other schools, despite the fact that use of handcuffs on kids in school is against the law in their state. The local educational system appears to have let these particular citizens down.

Yeah, because why should that law actually restrict their behavior, right?

I think this was the idea behind the memorable line in Ridley Scott's 1982 "Blade Runner:"


For many people, this is just true--law be damned.

This situation just makes the "little people" idea strangely literal.

Only in the southern US will you find cops "support" this behavior. I will never live in KY as long as I live. Nor TN, GA, AR, AL, MS, LA, TX. There are still teachers spanking kids in those states. KY is not on the list, but I'm sure there's more than this child that has been handcuffed/spanked in school.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/1 ... 62304.html

Trying to ignite a flame war, eh?

I'm pretty sure there are some evil bastards who would support this kind of thing all over the US. I think this problem transcends regional differences. You might be interested in reading this (but don't do it on a full stomach):
http://www.propublica.org/article/schoo ... seclusions
For example:

BS. The principal has discretion. He or she can tell the "resource officer" to back the f**k off.

Aside from this specific incident, statistics show that male black and latino students are far more likely than other students to be charged with a crime stemming from something that happened at school, and female black and latino students more likely than any white student.

And what the racist apologists keep missing is that we're not saying that cops go home at the end of the day and b***h to the wife about how the minorities are ruining everything and then go sign into their Stormfront account and vent their bile and vitriol to other foaming-at-the-mouth racists there.

We're saying that a lot of people in positions of power and authority have a subconscious, implicit bias against non-whites, which they may not even realize or even vehemently deny that they have. Despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary.

There should be no law enforcement officers at the school or even at the district office unless and until something has gotten to a point where it can't be handled by the faculty and parents.

I guess that would depend on the location. If what the kid is doing can be even loosely classified as something an LEO would normally intervene in then the cop would have discretion.

Could it be that on the average they do actually f**k up more? This is coming from someone who went to a few very racially diverse public schools and has seen who does what.

If ever I wanted to know what goes on at Stormfront I'd just ask a WP liberal. This is where I found out such a place exists.


I'm no cop lover but I've known several including a relative that worked his way up from patrolman to chief of his department. Let's just say they see get to see and experience things that you and I don't. I'm sure you've noticed that many cops are non-whites themselves.

This I agree with but then school employees have step up and be the johnny-on-the-spot with the firm hand when necessary. People don't want that liability so the cops are put in there and naturally do what cops do best (intimidate, cuff, taser, beat, intimidate some more, etc..) and it'll keep getting worse.

True, and sometimes even then there is no reason to have an officer stationed at the school. Officers can respond to a situation that may arise at the school as they would to any other situation requiring police intervention.

But what we think should be and what is are often not quite the same thing.

I just watched this processes go down at a local level. A foolish 7th grader took his parent's improperly secured gun and brought it to his middle school to show his classmates. One of them immediately reported this to a teacher. The school followed its post-Sandy Hook instituted code-red lockdown procedures and the boy was taken to the principal's office where he waited until the police came and took him away. No one was hurt and everything worked just as it was supposed to.

Nevertheless, the area's parents used all available social media to whip themselves into a level of hysteria seldom seen. Locally, this was a "Death of Princess Diana" or "Murder of Cecil the Lion" level event.

The boy was expelled from the school. One of the boy's parents is facing serious criminal charges for allowing him to access their handgun. The parents called for resignation of the principal who had done everything jut righ. They called for resignation of the superintendent of schools. They did everything short of march on the town hall with pitchforks and torches. There were hearings and the board of ed decided that the middle school will have a resource officer permanently assigned next year. The principal had no say in it.

Now the dumbass parents of the town can rest secure in the knowledge that instead of gun being in the school once every few decades, there will be at least one gun in the school every single day.

I think this principal is pretty good and will draw all kinds of limits around the officer's conduct but the principal is an educator and administrator not a cop or a lawyer and will naturally defer to the police department in specific details of how certain actions are executed.

In studies about resource officers in schools, it's clear that the dynamics of police-school administration relationships vary greatly from school to school and are mostly based on ad hoc arrangements and informal agreements. This is a situation full of potential for abuse and abuses do happen regularly. It's not at all clear that individual principals are empowered to control these situations in most districts. It's plain that in some they are not. It's a BS situation, but what I'm relaying here is not BS.

Typical hysteria. Once the gun was secured a lockdown was hardly needed and only created a school-wide disruption and drew unnecessary attention. The kid should have been suspended, not expelled. It's not like he brought anthrax to school. I would have the cops come get the gun, though. If the parents didnt have the good sense to instill some sense of right and wrong into the kid by then, especially about taking a peice to school, then they can go to the police station and see about getting the gun back.

The school employees can't use a literal firm hand unless the parents sign a release form in advance, allowing it (because liability). When my daughter finally got approved to transfer to a special needs school, I had to sign a release that allowed "restraining hold in the event that de-escalation measures are not sufficient". I signed it but they never used it on her. They are very good at de-escalation. However, de-escalation doesn't have a guarenteed 100% success rate and thus the need for the firm hand i.e. restraining hold in some situations. Thus also the need for a release form because of liability.

Can you imagine the deafening uproar if such a form went home to all the parents of kids at a mainstream school? Judging from Adamantium's post about the gun in school, which was actually a stupid bit of showing off rather than attempted terrorism, the uproar would be nuclear.

"Restraining hold" sounds alarming but it sure beats a taser. The huge catch (besides the need for a release form) is that it requires training to do safely and also requires de-escalation training so it is a last rather than first resort.

Does anyone know if the eight year old's parents have taken action against the school and police?

Then I guess we'll continue to have cops in schools doing what cops do and it'll get worse from there.

One possible solution which ought to be easy to implement but probably won't be, is to make the police themselves experts in de-escalation. We are just acccepting it as a given that cops will only use the tools of taser/intimidate/cuff etc. because that's what cops do with adults. But what if there were a subdivision trained specifically to work with kids instead of just making it a "whoever is available" rotation the way it seems to be now.

Police have other specialty subdivisions. Why not one for this? If SPED teachers in special needs schools can be taught to de-escalate and use restraining holds safely, it should be possible to teach cops. They would still be cops in case there really was an active shooter in the school but they would also be able to respond to a kid who lost control in a better way than cuffing his upper arms and yelling at him. And the schools wouldn't have to deal with learning to do it themselves and all that entails.

From a local (Kentucky) newspaper today in response to the incident: "A northern KY school district says a Sheriff's deputy shown on video handcuffing an elementary student above the elbows was complying with its restraint policy. ...the finding came from an independent investigator hired by the district. ...In a letter to parents, Covington Independent Public Schools Superintendent Alvin Garrison said Sumner complied with the district's policies 'which are designed to ensure that students do not injure themselves or others.' "