+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? (/showthread.php?tid=277180)
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - Blankity Blank - 05-17-2023
PeterB wrote:
[quote=Speedy]
“One refused, so he took her phone and she lunged at him.”
The teacher was wrong. He should have sent her to the principal’s office rather than (forcibly) take her phone.
Perhaps, but that hardly justifies assault...
Very true.
An intermediary step? Perhaps, ‘You are required, at the instructor’s request, to surrender your phone or you fail the test’?
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - chopper - 05-17-2023
Who actually thought that teens are not addicted to their phones?
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - Lux Interior - 05-17-2023
Teacher should have been strapped.
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - PeterB - 05-18-2023
Tiangou wrote:
He assaulted her when he grabbed the phone.
Assault and battery.
I don't see any evidence that he grabbed the phone? He confiscated it, but it wasn't stated how. It was stated that this isn't the first time that the teacher had to take away a student's phone, and that the last time, he was punched in the face for it. Obviously it's a problem and one would think that, if the teacher were completely out of line for his behavior, the principal or someone else would have already called him out on it. Instead, the student has been disciplined. This all suggests that either the school has a serious problem with student behavior and/or the administration of the school is seriously incompetent.
And yes, I think all of us know the teens are addicted to their phones, but to assault someone over it...?
As for adults: I can't imagine an adult behaving this way, not if they know that they are not to use their phones in a given circumstance.
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - Tiangou - 05-18-2023
PeterB wrote:
[quote=Tiangou]
He assaulted her when he grabbed the phone.
Assault and battery.
I don't see any evidence that he grabbed the phone?
How do you suppose that he took it from her while she was texting?
Unfortunately, all that we have to go on is the statement from the teacher and the video from the hallway so until the student's family gets an attorney and publishes a statement, the description is entirely one-sided and biased.
From it, we can nevertheless tell a few things...
She reacted inappropriately when he grabbed it, but he was wrong to lay hands on her at all even if it was for a split-second as he confiscated the phone.
The appropriate thing to do would have been to ask her for the phone and if she refused then get the principal and her parents involved.
Any non-consenting physical contact is a battery. Putting someone in apprehension of an inappropriate physical contact is an assault.
Were she an adult, she could easily press criminal charges. As she's a juvenile under his care, most jurisdictions would protect him from liability for the tort and they might require an aggravating factor before pressing criminal charges.
Of course, the district is covering their asses by releasing the video from that point and perspective and their lawyers are clearly trying to get ahead of things by getting their narrative out quickly. Her reaction was so extreme that nobody's paying attention to the provocation or the fact that he grabbed her again as they were exiting the classroom.
I'd like to see how things play out in court. It's not unreasonable to reflexively respond to an assault/battery by using pepper spray and in that state she seems to have a "stand your ground" defense.
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - mrbigstuff - 05-18-2023
I am not sure how familiar folks here are with high schools these days, but "go to the principal's office"... -- that doesn't really exist any longer. this is the reason there are police in schools these days. hardly any but the best behaved student is going to follow orders from their teacher to "go to the principal's office."
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - PeterB - 05-18-2023
Tiangou wrote:
[quote=PeterB]
[quote=Tiangou]
He assaulted her when he grabbed the phone.
Assault and battery.
I don't see any evidence that he grabbed the phone?
How do you suppose that he took it from her while she was texting?
Unfortunately, all that we have to go on is the statement from the teacher and the video from the hallway so until the student's family gets an attorney and publishes a statement, the description is entirely one-sided and biased.
From it, we can nevertheless tell a few things...
She reacted inappropriately when he grabbed it, but he was wrong to lay hands on her at all even if it was for a split-second as he confiscated the phone.
The appropriate thing to do would have been to ask her for the phone and if she refused then get the principal and her parents involved.
Any non-consenting physical contact is a battery. Putting someone in apprehension of an inappropriate physical contact is an assault.
Were she an adult, she could easily press criminal charges. As she's a juvenile under his care, most jurisdictions would protect him from liability for the tort and they might require an aggravating factor before pressing criminal charges.
Of course, the district is covering their asses by releasing the video from that point and perspective and their lawyers are clearly trying to get ahead of things by getting their narrative out quickly. Her reaction was so extreme that nobody's paying attention to the provocation or the fact that he grabbed her again as they were exiting the classroom.
I'd like to see how things play out in court. It's not unreasonable to reflexively respond to an assault/battery by using pepper spray and in that state she seems to have a "stand your ground" defense.
I followed your argument except for one thing. If it was clearly stated in class beforehand that if students were caught using a phone in class, it would be confiscated, then that cannot be battery. By putting yourself in school and consenting to the school's rules, it no longer becomes nonconsensual physical contact-- since you have in fact consented by attending the school, sitting in the classroom, and agreeing to abide by the classroom's rules.
I also disagree that this is a reasonable response, since it was clearly not a threat to her person, and she chose to use a response that is excessive and out of proportion to the threat.
One also has to remember the context: we have teachers getting shot by students bringing weapons into classrooms.
Of relevance, like most schools, this school probably has a student/conduct handbook. I couldn't find the one for their high school, but the middle school one says:
"Cell phones, earbuds/headphones, tablets, or other devices not in a student’s locker during the school day will be confiscated. A parent or guardian may pick up the device from the school office. Devices will not be returned directly to students. Repeated offenses will result in assignment of additional disciplinary consequences."
https://cdnsm5-ss13.sharpschool.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_32981665/File/AMS%20Student%20and%20Family%20Handbook%20(22-23),%20Abridged%20Planner%20Edition.pdf
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - kj - 05-18-2023
hal wrote:
No sure why the op thinks only kids are addicted - try doing that to any adult.
(tu)
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - kj - 05-18-2023
PeterB wrote:
[quote=Tiangou]
[quote=PeterB]
[quote=Tiangou]
He assaulted her when he grabbed the phone.
Assault and battery.
I don't see any evidence that he grabbed the phone?
How do you suppose that he took it from her while she was texting?
Unfortunately, all that we have to go on is the statement from the teacher and the video from the hallway so until the student's family gets an attorney and publishes a statement, the description is entirely one-sided and biased.
From it, we can nevertheless tell a few things...
She reacted inappropriately when he grabbed it, but he was wrong to lay hands on her at all even if it was for a split-second as he confiscated the phone.
The appropriate thing to do would have been to ask her for the phone and if she refused then get the principal and her parents involved.
Any non-consenting physical contact is a battery. Putting someone in apprehension of an inappropriate physical contact is an assault.
Were she an adult, she could easily press criminal charges. As she's a juvenile under his care, most jurisdictions would protect him from liability for the tort and they might require an aggravating factor before pressing criminal charges.
Of course, the district is covering their asses by releasing the video from that point and perspective and their lawyers are clearly trying to get ahead of things by getting their narrative out quickly. Her reaction was so extreme that nobody's paying attention to the provocation or the fact that he grabbed her again as they were exiting the classroom.
I'd like to see how things play out in court. It's not unreasonable to reflexively respond to an assault/battery by using pepper spray and in that state she seems to have a "stand your ground" defense.
I followed your argument except for one thing. If it was clearly stated in class beforehand that if students were caught using a phone in class, it would be confiscated, then that cannot be battery. By putting yourself in school and consenting to the school's rules, it no longer becomes nonconsensual physical contact-- since you have in fact consented by attending the school, sitting in the classroom, and agreeing to abide by the classroom's rules.
I also disagree that this is a reasonable response, since it was clearly not a threat to her person, and she chose to use a response that is excessive and out of proportion to the threat.
One also has to remember the context: we have teachers getting shot by students bringing weapons into classrooms.
Of relevance, like most schools, this school probably has a student/conduct handbook. I couldn't find the one for their high school, but the middle school one says:
"Cell phones, earbuds/headphones, tablets, or other devices not in a student’s locker during the school day will be confiscated. A parent or guardian may pick up the device from the school office. Devices will not be returned directly to students. Repeated offenses will result in assignment of additional disciplinary consequences."
https://cdnsm5-ss13.sharpschool.com/UserFiles/Servers/Server_32981665/File/AMS%20Student%20and%20Family%20Handbook%20(22-23),%20Abridged%20Planner%20Edition.pdf
I'm on PeterB's side basically. My years working in a high school tell me that if he sent her to the principal's office, she would just sit there. If she went, the administration would not back the teacher up AT ALL. They would essentially support or at least enable the student. This is part of the reason there are cops in schools, and then they get thrown under the bus when things go awry. It's just a mess, but the phones are just a new symptom.
Plus, cheating is out of control, and it's frustrating for good teachers. Teachers who just want to make their money with the least trouble have less difficulty.
Re: Still don't think kids are addicted to their phones? - Tiangou - 05-18-2023
If I warn you that I'm going to hit you, and then if I go ahead and hit you, that's still a battery.
And schools have special duties of care of children.
Simply fulfilling a legal obligation to attend school does not represent consent to reckless behavior on the part of teachers.