Parenting pickle

[Just_A_Guy]

I asked how long it would take them to arrive... and I told him that's how long I'd beat him... until they arrived to pull me off.

I told him that decisions have consequences, and that I was willing to go to jail for my decision to stand up for my son's wrongful punishment...

Was he willing to take a beating for his decision to be politically correct, and punish my son for standing up to a bully?

I was with you up until that point. It seems to me you just came perilously close to becoming the kind of bully you claim to want to protect your kid from.

[applepansy]

In a perfect world, applepansy.

I remember my friend's lament to me sometime last year when I saw her in the elementary school hallway... she just had a kid in her class throw his poop at her smack dab on the middle of her blouse. I would like to see you teach that kid to behave. Yes, he has some form of autism.

Unfortunately, there are so many of us who doesn't bother to analyze the situation to identify the presence of a disorder. I mean, he acts normal enough, right. Not that they couldn't learn, eventually. But, they need that special somebody who will have the patience to teach them instead of just calling it "an excuse" when they don't learn to behave as fast as them "normal kids" do.

What perfect world? Did the parents of the autistic boy say "boys will be boys"?

I wasn't referring to autistic children. I have a severely autistic nephew. I understand those issues well.

I was referring to parents like the ones Wingnut described. Making poor excuses for bad behavior will only reinforce the bad behavior. Therefore, I'll repeat I do not believe in making those type of excuses for children. That's my world.

[DMGNUT]

WHOA! I know I'm not supposed to laugh but this is awesome... did you really beat up the principal??? There have been plenty plenty plenty plenty times I've been wanting to do that to my son's elementary school principal...

I'm sorry if the post was unclear (it was pretty late when I wrote it), but no, I did not touch the principal.

He decided "against" calling the police and asked what I thought would be a fair resolution.

I told him that in real life, someone might get away with bad behavior for a while, but eventually, there would be a consequence for their meanness (or as I saw it, lawlessness).

I further said that I thought it was pretty much one of the basic laws of nature.

I said, as long as the instigator bore the greater part of the punishment, I'd be happy... often, even doing the right thing will bring about a consequence...

He came up with the reversal on who would be suspended for 1 day versus 3 days.

I'd like to think that in the time I've been a member of the church, I've learned a lot and become more understanding... but I'm not sure if I wouldn't do the same thing again.

Edited April 17, 2013 by DMGNUT

[DMGNUT]

I was with you up until that point. It seems to me you just came perilously close to becoming the kind of bully you claim to want to protect your kid from.

Guy, thanks for the response, and I can find no fault with your point of view.

In my defense though, I wasn't protecting my son from a bully... he did that very well on his own.

As simply as I can put it, I viewed the school's arbitrary rule on punishment for "fighting", as being part of a corrupt system of justice (blind justice, might be one way to describe it).

That's what I was standing up to, and I knew there could be consequences for doing so... but I was willing to accept them.

Fortunately for me, it ended ok. :)

On an interesting side note, I expect that a similar confrontation will be coming with our government (possibly in the not too distant future).

When we begin to be treated in a similar fashion, i.e. losing our rights to defend and/or protect ourselves, or others, without there being consequences for doing so.

When this happens, I wonder who among us will stand up and say, "No", to the government?

And when those who will say "no", actually do it, will they be called bullies... or patriots... or maybe even terrorists?

Edited April 17, 2013 by DMGNUT

[selek]

I was with you up until that point. It seems to me you just came perilously close to becoming the kind of bully you claim to want to protect your kid from.

Perhaps- but self-important cowards who hide behind their title and presumed authority need object lessons, too.

Instead of the polite offer of an up-close-and-personal calibration of his priorities, DMGNut might just as readily offered to sue the principal for harassment, creating a hostile work environment (or school environment) and aiding and abetting a felony assault.

What you fail to recognize here is that DMG's child was being victimized twice: once by the bully, and once by an indifferent bureaucracy intent on punishing the victim instead of the perpetrator.

And yes- if someone is trying to victimize my child in the name of protecting his own ego and bureaucratic prerogatives, you can bet cashy money that my ugly side will come out.

[selek]

On an interesting side note, I expect that a similar confrontation will be coming with our government (possibly in the not too distant future).

When we begin to be treated in a similar fashion (i.e., losing our rights to defend and/or protect ourselves, or others), I wonder who among us will stand up and say, "No", to the government?

And when those who will say "no", actually do, will they be called bullies... or patriots?

Veteran Arrested for 'Rudely Displaying' Gun - Todd Starnes - Page 1

[DMGNUT]

Veteran Arrested for 'Rudely Displaying' Gun - Todd Starnes - Page 1

On the surface this seems to be a case of an officer over stepping his bounds (and/or authority), but I wasn't there and would wonder why the Veteran didn't simply offer up his CCW permit without being asked?

Its my experience that once an officer knows you're one of the "good guys" (i.e. they've seen your CCW, and therefore know you're a productive member of society, and not the common riff-raff they're used to encountering), they have no issue with you holding your own gun.

I'm not familiar with the laws in TX, but I think pretty much anywhere, an officer of the law is allowed to secure himself from imminent danger in a given situation, until he understands what's going on. I know this doesn't allow him to step on one's rights, but he's allowed a lot of "latitude" to investigate something "suspicious".

On a side note regarding the charge of "rudely displaying his gun"...

In AZ we recently did away with the "brandishing" law.

Of course this is irrelevant if you're interacting with law enforcement, but based on the title alone, I initially thought the article was about him interacting with another citizen who claimed to have been threatened or something like that...