In which all but the most conservative polypeople have a stroke... - Page 5

The Mad Viking · February 25, 2004, 19:26

Quote:

The use of corporal punishment is outlawed in 28 states this means even if you think it is something allowable in certain circumstances it is strictly outlawed. Given the toolkit of allowable practices teachers/administrators are allowed to employ why necessarily tie their hands by disallowing certain tactics (even if used sparingly).

Because assault is against the law.

Ogie Oglethorpe · February 25, 2004, 23:14

Only in the sense that 28 states define paddling as an assault.

Obviously the other 22 do not and once upon a time all 50 did not. So why the redefinition?

Ben Kenobi · February 26, 2004, 00:43

Quote:

The whole class saw this. The teacher had no more problems.

Interesting.

I used to get spanked, but only when I was too young to understand the consequences of my behavior except through the pain of the spanking.

Add my vote with the Ayes, though I am not a parent.

Ned · February 26, 2004, 05:48

Ogie, nay. There are other ways to discipline a child. The problem seems to be that they are not properly used by many schools. I assume this must be because of the prinicpals and their staffs, as some schools seem to have good discipline while others do not, even here in Kalifornia.

Ogie Oglethorpe · February 26, 2004, 10:47

Fair enough,

And while I agree that other means are availabale, and corporal punishment is a last resort, I would also suggest that theway to getthrough to a kid differs on a case by case basis. For some corporal punishment may be the most effectie way of doing this.

More to your real point tho'. The problem is schools do notproperly discipline kids. The reasons are varied but all stem back to discipline is not a fun task and given the excuse not to do so, you can rest assured that it will not be done.

The fact that teachers have to look over their shoulder to make sure they are not abusive make them that much more reticent to actually apply even mild forms of discipline. It may be an excuse but italso may be theexcuse they were looking for to not have to deal with discipline.

The Mad Viking · February 26, 2004, 15:45

Does somebody come by and smack you when you screw up?

Why is this not a good idea?

*

So why is it a good idea for children?

Either they can understand, in which case it should be explained, or they can't, in which case you a beating them for something they can't help.

There is simply no logical basis for hitting kids. Other than, they are without the power to stop us.

Ogie Oglethorpe · February 26, 2004, 16:06

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Does somebody come by and smack you when you screw up?

Why is this not a good idea?

*

So why is it a good idea for children?

Either they can understand, in which case it should be explained, or they can't, in which case you a beating them for something they can't help.

There is simply no logical basis for hitting kids. Other than, they are without the power to stop us.

Take it a step further. Why apply discipline at all? Your assumption is that it is either a) they can understand or b) they can't.

You neglect option c) where they do understand and choose willingly to misbehave, presumably because there are no consequences.

Punitive action of any sort be it physical or psychological is an asymetrical action. It is applied to the disciplinee without the power to stop it. So therefore I can only assume logically that you prefer no form of discipline from your statements above.

If you raised the arguement to the level that it has the most likelihood for abuse that might be one thing, but you haven't.

Ohh and by the by were I to break the law and be arrested, I could probably assume I would be searched forcibly handcuffed and in other minor ways a bit roughed up. That's probably a good thing as its one of the reasons why I don't go down to the nearby 7/11 and raid the cash register.

The Mad Viking · February 26, 2004, 16:29

DP

Ogie Oglethorpe · February 26, 2004, 16:50

Was that a deliberate second post?

Deity Dude · February 26, 2004, 17:55

Quote:

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Does somebody come by and smack you when you screw up?

No but I would prefer a smack on the butt with a pointer than punishments that are given to adults that continually break the rules.

Being fired from your job, losing your drvier's license, going to prison and being executed are alot worse. At least in my opinion.

Lefty Scaevola · February 26, 2004, 18:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
The problem seems to be that they are not properly used by many schools.

Who thinks a school can do much of anything properly?

Boris Godunov · February 26, 2004, 21:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Deity Dude
No but I would prefer a smack on the butt with a pointer than punishments that are given to adults that continually break the rules.

Being fired from your job, losing your drvier's license, going to prison and being executed are alot worse. At least in my opinion.

So if you screwed up royally at work and they didn't fire you but instead just swatted you on the butt, that would be more incentive to not do it again?

Bizarre...

Ogie Oglethorpe · February 26, 2004, 23:23

kinda depends on whether thats your bag baby.