The state indoctrination camps (public schools)

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
So I was listening to someone at work talk about their kid and an incident at school. Apparently his son and another boy got in a fight. His son was smacked by another kid and he did nothing. The aggressive kid took another swipe but this time cupped his hand around his neck and pulled him forward. At that point his son started throwing blows. Commendable that he didn't fire back the first time. This is where it gets interesting. The principle stated that they don't want you to fight back, that you are supposed to take it to them to take care of. I have some serious problems with this mentality.

1. Conditioning people not to defend themselves

2. Reliance on "authority" to protect you

3. Removing the responsibility of thought to determine right from wrong

Now how does this affect them as adults? If all they know is to reference some authority figure before making a move then its easier to remove guns from them because, you know, they shouldn't need to defend themselves. If right and wrong is decided by authority then morality is thrown out the window and any whim bureaucrats is heeded with righteous fervor. When defending yourself at school garners same punishment as aggressor its time to think about home based education IMO.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
Uh, I was brought up under that same retarded policy. When my parents first heard about it, they took me aside after school one day and told me that if I was attacked I should fight back; that I might be in trouble with the school but I wouldn't be in trouble with them.

And that was that. Nowadays I have a concealed carry permit, so I'd say my sense of moral and physical self reliance is very well intact. If the public school system was attempting to brainwash me they did a pretty shitty job of it.



In any case, the reason for such policy is, at least how it's been explained to me, that kids would get into fights and then both would claim self defense when caught. Rather than set up what amounted to an elementary school trial for assault, it became standard practice to just punish both kids; so as to ensure the attacker was punished.

In short: the "nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure" approach.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
So I was listening to someone at work talk about their kid and an incident at school. Apparently his son and another boy got in a fight. His son was smacked by another kid and he did nothing. The aggressive kid took another swipe but this time cupped his hand around his neck and pulled him forward. At that point his son started throwing blows. Commendable that he didn't fire back the first time. This is where it gets interesting. The principle stated that they don't want you to fight back, that you are supposed to take it to them to take care of. I have some serious problems with this mentality.

1. Conditioning people not to defend themselves

2. Reliance on "authority" to protect you

3. Removing the responsibility of thought to determine right from wrong

Now how does this affect them as adults? If all they know is to reference some authority figure before making a move then its easier to remove guns from them because, you know, they shouldn't need to defend themselves. If right and wrong is decided by authority then morality is thrown out the window and any whim bureaucrats is heeded with righteous fervor. When defending yourself at school garners same punishment as aggressor its time to think about home based education IMO.

It is a profoundly dehumanizing concept to be told not to defend oneself. Freedom from violence is truly the most essential freedom (possibly second only to one keeping one's private thiughts) and without it, or the moral right to attempt to defend oneself from it, you say one has no right to self defense; their physical well being is secondary to a rule.

Every animal population including all human societies recognize the right to physical defense of oneself. A school has no good right to steal this from anybody.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
Uh, I was brought up under that same retarded policy. When my parents first heard about it, they took me aside after school one day and told me that if I was attacked I should fight back; that I might be in trouble with the school but I wouldn't be in trouble with them.

And that was that. Nowadays I have a concealed carry permit, so I'd say my sense of moral and physical self reliance is very well intact. If the public school system was attempting to brainwash me they did a pretty shitty job of it.



In any case, the reason for such policy is, at least how it's been explained to me, that kids would get into fights and then both would claim self defense when caught. Rather than set up what amounted to an elementary school trial for assault, it became standard practice to just punish both kids; so as to ensure the attacker was punished.

In short: the "nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure" approach.
I understand its intent. It is still morally repugnant. Your parents knew it and so did you. The defense of it holds no weight with adults nor with children.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Uh, I was brought up under that same retarded policy. When my parents first heard about it, they took me aside after school one day and told me that if I was attacked I should fight back; that I might be in trouble with the school but I wouldn't be in trouble with them.

And that was that. Nowadays I have a concealed carry permit, so I'd say my sense of moral and physical self reliance is very well intact. If the public school system was attempting to brainwash me they did a pretty shitty job of it.



In any case, the reason for such policy is, at least how it's been explained to me, that kids would get into fights and then both would claim self defense when caught. Rather than set up what amounted to an elementary school trial for assault, it became standard practice to just punish both kids; so as to ensure the attacker was punished.

In short: the "nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure" approach.

Exactly this.

The schools don't want to make the effort to figure out who did what, so instead they just want to punish both kids. That's a stupid approach, obviously coming from the same idiots who push "zero tolerance" and other brain dead policies in schools.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,216
136
A) Many kids aren't capable of determining when to fight back or when violence is even acceptable. Most (all?) kids don't understand the consequences of violence and how much is too much.

B) You are assuming that your friend's kid is telling the entire story, ie: you are a fool. The other kid probably told a similar story to his dad. Or maybe your friend's kid is a bully and/or was an asshole to the other kid. Maybe he stole something from the other kid. You don't know.

C) Jesus said to turn the other cheek. Why have a Christian quote in your sig if you are just going to ignore Jesus' teachings?
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
A) Many kids aren't capable of determining when to fight back or when violence is even acceptable. Most (all?) kids don't understand the consequences of violence and how much is too much.

B) You are assuming that your friend's kid is telling the entire story, ie: you are a fool. The other kid probably told a similar story to his dad. Or maybe your friend's kid is a bully and/or was an asshole to the other kid. Maybe he stole something from the other kid. You don't know.

C) Jesus said to turn the other cheek. Why have a Christian quote in your sig if you are just going to ignore Jesus' teachings?

Uhh, even animals know when to fight back.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
C) Jesus said to turn the other cheek. Why have a Christian quote in your sig if you are just going to ignore Jesus' teachings?

His son was smacked by another kid and he did nothing. The aggressive kid took another swipe but this time cupped his hand around his neck and pulled him forward. At that point his son started throwing blows. Commendable that he didn't fire back the first time.

He did turn the other cheek. But due to basic human anatomy most people have limited number of cheeks :p
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
In any case, the reason for such policy is, at least how it's been explained to me, that kids would get into fights and then both would claim self defense when caught. Rather than set up what amounted to an elementary school trial for assault, it became standard practice to just punish both kids; so as to ensure the attacker was punished.

In short: the "nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure" approach.

pretty much this... I'd assume that if a teacher was around to witness the altercation, some common sense would also apply, but otherwise you've just got 2 kids claiming self defense and witnesses defending their friends saying that the other one started it.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
So I was listening to someone at work talk about their kid and an incident at school. Apparently his son and another boy got in a fight. His son was smacked by another kid and he did nothing. The aggressive kid took another swipe but this time cupped his hand around his neck and pulled him forward. At that point his son started throwing blows. Commendable that he didn't fire back the first time. This is where it gets interesting. The principle stated that they don't want you to fight back, that you are supposed to take it to them to take care of. I have some serious problems with this mentality.

1. Conditioning people not to defend themselves

2. Reliance on "authority" to protect you

3. Removing the responsibility of thought to determine right from wrong

Now how does this affect them as adults? If all they know is to reference some authority figure before making a move then its easier to remove guns from them because, you know, they shouldn't need to defend themselves. If right and wrong is decided by authority then morality is thrown out the window and any whim bureaucrats is heeded with righteous fervor. When defending yourself at school garners same punishment as aggressor its time to think about home based education IMO.

Advise your friend to hire an attorney and sue the school for creating an unsafe environment for kids and allowing a culture where violence could happen without consequence. If the school refuses the right to self-defense, then they have an affirmative obligation to prevent violence rather than deal with it passively after the fact.

The legal process is the only thing schools respect anymore, so give it to them good and hard.
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
I grew up with the "tell the teacher", "just walk away and ignore them" policy. I grew up scared throughout school. Constantly bullied and picked on. I never did anything. I wish I would have just punched a bully in the nose in 1st grade and I would have saved myself lots of torment later on. Word gets around. They pray on the weak. I was.

In high school the last incident I threw the "ignore them" policy right out the window. One of the guys shoved my face into the sink/faucet at a drinking fountain, which I remember could have chipped my tooth (but didn't) but it was smashed into the metal fixtures. I remember just turning around, grabbing the guy by the neck and told him if he wanted to continue we could just end it now. He said "I'm just messing with you bro" with a big grin on his face but I could tell he was scared. I let go and never again did he mess with me again. I don't think I was ever picked on after that.
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
pretty much this... I'd assume that if a teacher was around to witness the altercation, some common sense would also apply, but otherwise you've just got 2 kids claiming self defense and witnesses defending their friends saying that the other one started it.

Yes, just like adults do. Children have as much a right to freedom from harm as adults.

Every criticism in this thread about children defending themselves is applicable to adults. Every single one.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
I understand its intent. It is still morally repugnant. Your parents knew it and so did you. The defense of it holds no weight with adults nor with children.

Not saying I approve, just saying there's a less alarmist explanation than "state indoctrination".
 

schmuckley

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2011
2,335
1
0
The best way to deal with a bully is to sock them in the nose as hard as you can and keep swinging.Even if you get beat..they'll still think twice before doing it again.Sometimes when I was getting bullied a bigger friend would help me out. :)

Columbine never happened before corporal punishment was taken out of homes/schools.
The Humanistic world view is a fail.It is at the root of all these problems.They will defend it to the Nth degree though.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,568
3
0
The best way to deal with a bully is to sock them in the nose as hard as you can and keep swinging.Even if you get beat..they'll still think twice before doing it again.Sometimes when I was getting bullied a bigger friend would help me out. :)

Columbine never happened before corporal punishment was taken out of homes/schools.
The Humanistic world view is a fail.It is at the root of all these problems.They will defend it to the Nth degree though.

Agreed. Which is why I'll be pushing my future kids (be they boys or girls) into taking some kind of martial art. They can pick which one of the options available, but one way or another they'll know how to defend themselves.
 

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
Agreed. Which is why I'll be pushing my future kids (be they boys or girls) into taking some kind of martial art. They can pick which one of the options available, but one way or another they'll know how to defend themselves.


Yep, and avoiding conflict/fights isn't the same as not defending yourself (which parents should also teach...avoid but defend when necessary).
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
The principle stated that they don't want you to fight back, that you are supposed to take it to them to take care of. I have some serious problems with this mentality.

yup, my son went through the exact same thing 2 years ago in jr high. some punk ass kid stated attacking my kid, and he swung back in self defense and beat the shit out of him. the kid who started it got 3 day suspension and my kid got 1 day.

me and the principal had a chat in his office and that is eactly what he told me. the moment a punch is thrown they are guilty of fighting even if its in self defense.

on the ride home i told my kid that if you start a fight you better be afraid to come home but if some kid attacks you, you do what you need to do to defend yourself. fuck the school.

i can not wait until he graduates. 3 more years.

i made a thread about it my experience with this busllshit.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
A) Many kids aren't capable of determining when to fight back or when violence is even acceptable. Most (all?) kids don't understand the consequences of violence and how much is too much.

B) You are assuming that your friend's kid is telling the entire story, ie: you are a fool. The other kid probably told a similar story to his dad. Or maybe your friend's kid is a bully and/or was an asshole to the other kid. Maybe he stole something from the other kid. You don't know.

C) Jesus said to turn the other cheek. Why have a Christian quote in your sig if you are just going to ignore Jesus' teachings?

are you stupid? really, serious question. ARE YOU STUPID???
 

Retro Rob

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2012
8,150
108
106
I grew up with the "tell the teacher", "just walk away and ignore them" policy. I grew up scared throughout school. Constantly bullied and picked on. I never did anything. I wish I would have just punched a bully in the nose in 1st grade and I would have saved myself lots of torment later on. Word gets around. They pray on the weak. I was.

In high school the last incident I threw the "ignore them" policy right out the window. One of the guys shoved my face into the sink/faucet at a drinking fountain, which I remember could have chipped my tooth (but didn't) but it was smashed into the metal fixtures. I remember just turning around, grabbing the guy by the neck and told him if he wanted to continue we could just end it now. He said "I'm just messing with you bro" with a big grin on his face but I could tell he was scared. I let go and never again did he mess with me again. I don't think I was ever picked on after that.

You have, HAVE to teach children to defend themselves....and if anyone wants to live by "turn the other cheek"...well, that isn't "let someone beat the snot out of you".

If one punch ends a fight, then so be it...live to fight another day. Now, I had issues with bullying in high school, and I avoided fighting by taking a different route home, waiting until the bully left and then I'd leave, etc.

But...never should one be taught to do nothing, never! There are more practical and safer options.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,063
1,464
126
I think one of the other reasons schools punish all involved is a liability issue. The school holds a certain amount of responsibility for your child while they're there. So they want to prevent more liability by having a full fledged fight break out.

I remember in 8th grade I saw a kid in my PE class get the shit beat out of him by some other guy in the gym locker room. The kid I knew never fought back and the fight only ended when one of the bigger students walked in and removed the aggressor. Because the aggressor was black and the victim white, it actually came very close to starting a race war as a group of white kids were planning on jumping the black kid when he returned from his suspension. The victim actually talked them out of it, but imagine the liability the school would have had to worry about then.