Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Also for those in support of the guy getting pepper sprayed:

Would you be in support of a school teacher pepper spraying a mouthy 7 grader?
   since said teacher would have the same practically the same level of authority (if not more) over that child
***Its a false comparison. They don't have the same level of authority. A teacher can give you D hall. A border guard can shoot you. Slight difference there.

What if the guy was a lady, would that make any difference?
****Nope.

What if he wasn't a dance instructor and had a more macho occupation?
****Occupation is irrelevant. Besides no dance instructor has two houses. I think he's a spy. He's got Betty Davis eyes.

LuciusAR wrote:Who even had a go at America in general?

Orlanth wrote:This situation, and who is defending whome is quite illuminating regarding the way American unculture conflicts with people outside.

Also, I second all of Frazzled's answers.

A teacher does not have any legal right to use pepper spray on a child, a border officer does have the right to use it. There's no comparison.

I have been pulled over by the police a few times (for speeding). I never once mouthed off. I never once had any problems. They almost never say "please", "thank you", "Would you be so kind", "Sorry to be a bother". They say, "Show me” this and I give it to them. A few minutes later, I am on the road. Border agents deal with drug pushers, human traffickers, and hundreds of other individuals who try to push their way through the borders. Some try to hide, other try to talk their way in. Pepper spray in the face is a just punishment for failing to comply in a dangerous place (border crossing).

You leave Betty Davis and her eyes out of this!
That's just uncalled for shenanigans.
Betty Davis has the power to derail any serious thread!

With the teacher having less authority, I disagree.
That teacher is pretty much saddled with protecting and maintaining the safety of those 20-30 students under his/her care.
Said teacher can handle the situation in locally (ie in her class) or the teach can functionally arrest and imprison the disruptive student (ie the detention and the isolation facilities of the school)
Some students need to be physically 'taken down', yes even in 7th grade.
though I might be confusing the teacher's authority with the teacher's responsibility

But you don't arm teachers........right ?

Belphegor wrote:though I might be confusing the teacher's authority with the teacher's responsibility

Sounds like you might.

If a person continuously interrupts a judge during a trial, they can be held in contempt of court and arrested.

A teacher does not have the right to forcibly put a child in a jail for the night for interrupting class.

Same concept.

meh, they're just as armed as the students.
of coarse my experience is with MCLPS (my-crappy-local-public-school), which does not translate well to people not coming from a similar place

come on, with conceal-and-carry a teacher should be able to should be able to pick off any freedom-hating student
It would make for a safer learning environment
(ouch, brains starting to hurt with cross threading....)

must.... focus.... on jerks... being jerks.... jerking each other.... around.....

Belphegor wrote:You leave Betty Davis and her eyes out of this!
That's just uncalled for shenanigans.
Betty Davis has the power to derail any serious thread!

With the teacher having less authority, I disagree.
That teacher is pretty much saddled with protecting and maintaining the safety of those 20-30 students under his/her care.
Said teacher can handle the situation in locally (ie in her class) or the teach can functionally arrest and imprison the disruptive student (ie the detention and the isolation facilities of the school)
Some students need to be physically 'taken down', yes even in 7th grade.
though I might be confusing the teacher's authority with the teacher's responsibility

Teachers cannot:
*Shoot suspects
*Detain suspects
*Taser suspects
*Pepper spray suspects
*Beat suspects with PR-24s if they are resisting arrest
*Did I mention shoot suspects?

The dance studio guy was a jerk. If he's had previous issues with this, then it's very likely it'll happen again. He was going to get sprayed eventually.

Having said that, yeah it would have been easier and simpler if the guard had just said please. (No paperwork that way) But you simply do not disopbey a direct order from an officer of the law 3 times and expect no consequences.

Orkeosaurus: If a person continuously interrupts a judge during a trial, they can be held in contempt of court and arrested.

how distracting to the case would it be if said person was pepper-sprayed because they demanded the bailiff to say "please" before they got up

Jail no, but a school has legal authority to functional but a student under home arrest for up to 5 days (when I went to school) before expulsion (out of school suspension)
during which time if a student is found out of their home they would be treated as though they were both skipping school and breaking from a school mandated punishment, also depending on the nature of the suspension the parent could get some flack as well for being negligent - which generally means that the school would be forcibly making the parent call out of work for that time (ie docking their pay and threatening their job)

not to de-rail further but:

Frazzled: Teachers cannot: *Shoot suspects

Out of curiosity, conceal and carry, who are you allowed to shoot? (damn screws keep getting cross-threaded)

This side-rail is why I'm a fan of marshals and police officers in schools. Some schools that need them are still in limbo.

Belphegor wrote:not to de-rail further but:

Frazzled: Teachers cannot: *Shoot suspects

Out of curiosity, conceal and carry, who are you allowed to shoot? (damn screws keep getting cross-threaded)

This side-rail is why I'm a fan of marshals and police officers in schools. Some schools that need them are still in limbo.

This varies State to State, but here in Arizona a shooting is consdered justified when:

You or somebody else is in IMMEDIATE danger of their life, and CANNOT run away far or fast enough.
When defending a person from rape (again when the victim CANNOT run away).
When stopping the arson of a occupied building.

In all cases you are expected to try to resolve the situation without violence first. If somebody was being raped, and you shot the suspect before saying something like "Stop! I'm calling the Police!" then you go to prison, unless you can get a VERY good lawyer. The courts and District Attourney will assume that the suspect would cease and desist when confronted.

Ironically, if you start an argument, then BACK DOWN when it starts to get violent, and the other party continues to be aggressive, you are justified in shooting them as long as the above criteria are met (Immediate danger of severe injury or death, unable to run away).

Belphegor wrote:

Orkeosaurus: If a person continuously interrupts a judge during a trial, they can be held in contempt of court and arrested.

how distracting to the case would it be if said person was pepper-sprayed because they demanded the bailiff to say "please" before they got up

I think you're mixing the scenarios up now, but if someone was refusing to leave the courthouse I wouldn't be surprised if they were pepper sprayed. They would be grabbed and forcibly removed at the very least.

The Canadian guy was sprayed for refusing to turn off his car engine and get out of the car.

Jail no, but a school has legal authority to functional but a student under home arrest for up to 5 days (when I went to school) before expulsion (out of school suspension) during which time if a student is found out of their home they would be treated as though they were both skipping school and breaking from a school mandated punishment, also depending on the nature of the suspension the parent could get some flack as well for being negligent - which generally means that the school would be forcibly making the parent call out of work for that time (ie docking their pay and threatening their job)

Umm... okay?

You see what I'm saying then; the school does not have the right to put a child in prison while a judge has the right to put an adult in prison, because they're completely different circumstances. What you described is nothing like being held in contempt of court.

Also, the powers you described are not vested in the individual teachers anyways.

Saying a policeman can't do something to an adult because a teacher can't do it to a child is illogical, there's no reason at all for those to be analogous to each other.

Orkeosarurus: Saying a policeman can't do something to an adult because a teacher can't do it to a child is illogical, there's no reason at all for those to be analogous to each other.

I guess I'm trying to figure out more about what people see as acceptable force rather than what is legally allowed.
-------

Orkeosarurus: [...] What you described is nothing like being held in contempt of court.

the comment about the school and the court were separate, sorry about that, I should have made it more clear :(
-------

Orkeosarurus: Also, the powers you described are not vested in the individual teachers anyways.

I somewhat disagree with this since a particular teacher would be setting the process into motion.
It's like a clerk that caught a kid shop lifting, that clerk has the ability to have that person arrested (via the police) or simple taking the item back a asking the kid to leave. The direct power to jail someone is the officers, but the clerk really wields that since the clerk is responsible for making that call. The teacher has a similar power, but much more authority over the child, since the teacher is responsible for the safety of the other children (like the boarder cop).
and often lacks the over sight, also like board cops

So what if the Canadian was a dick? He was in his car, turned on, strapped in his seat. He couldn't defend himself, and the officer could have drawn the pepperspray gun and threatened him. That would have shown he was serious, and would have resolved the issue.

Um...are people actually defending the dance-instructing jackass? I'm a card-carrying liberal (really, my Michigan Democratic Party membership card is in my wallet) and I feel the Border Guard was fully justified in what he did.

For whatever reason, the decision was made to detain this individual. He was asked, three times, to turn off his car. The asshat refused to do so three times, while behind the wheel of a running car...a potentially deadly weapon.

As to not saying "please" - c'mon here. The Border Patrol was issuing an ORDER. "Please" implies that the subject has a choice in this matter.

Cheese Elemental wrote:So what if the Canadian was a dick? He was in his car, turned on, strapped in his seat. He couldn't defend himself, and the officer could have drawn the pepperspray gun and threatened him. That would have shown he was serious, and would have resolved the issue.

The officer specifically told the guy that he would be pepper sprayed if he didn't turn off his car engine.

It wasn't anything unexpected, it was the Canadian guy either being stubborn and then expecting pity afterwards or trying to play chicken.

Cheese Elemental wrote:So what if the Canadian was a dick? He was in his car, turned on, strapped in his seat. He couldn't defend himself, and the officer could have drawn the pepperspray gun and threatened him. That would have shown he was serious, and would have resolved the issue.

Guard thinking:
I've just told this guy to turn his engine off because he's done something suspicious.
He's not turning his engine off. Why?

He's still not.

I've warned him and he still hasn't. This guy is hiding something or a threat. Pepper time.


Or inversely.
I've just told this guy to turn his engine off because he's done something suspicious.
He's not turning his engine off. Why?

Smart off to me will you? Pepper time.

The Canadian was a or a threat. Either way its pepper time.

Gen. Lee Losing wrote:I have been pulled over by the police a few times (for speeding). I never once mouthed off. I never once had any problems. They almost never say "please", "thank you", "Would you be so kind", "Sorry to be a bother". They say, "Show me” this and I give it to them. A few minutes later, I am on the road. Border agents deal with drug pushers, human traffickers, and hundreds of other individuals who try to push their way through the borders. Some try to hide, other try to talk their way in. Pepper spray in the face is a just punishment for failing to comply in a dangerous place (border crossing).

Contrary to what many people seem to believe it is possible to be forceful and polite. I realize they may deal with some scumbags but that's no excuse. I frequently deal with morons in my job but that's not excuse not to be polite as possible to everyone else I come into contact with.

Centurian99 wrote:Um...are people actually defending the dance-instructing jackass? I'm a card-carrying liberal (really, my Michigan Democratic Party membership card is in my wallet) and I feel the Border Guard was fully justified in what he did.

I'm not necessary defending the Canadian. I am however condemning the border guard. I don't see how using pepper spray could possibly be appropriate in this situation. Unless the officer had good reason to suspect the Canadian was going to become physically aggressive this sort of force just isn't justified.

Pepper spay is a defensive tool to protect the officer and those around him from harm. It is not an offensive tool to be used to force people to comply.

or maybe he was just a harmless (but annoying) mentally (or socially) handicap.
(hmmm OCD, ok.. ok, just say ok... please.. just say ok. ok, ok please just say ok..)

I don't see a shred of evidence for this guy being mentally handicapped.

Aside from regular stupidity and pig-headedness.

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Aside from regular stupidity and pig-headedness.

Stupidity and pig-headedness doesn't justify a face full of pepper spray.

LuciusAR: Pepper spay is a defensive tool to protect the officer and those around him from harm. It is not an offensive tool to be used to force people to comply.

oh come on, In America pepper spray is used as a deterrent for peaceful protest for decades and we're safer and more even-tempered than ever before
I mean what sort of nation would be able to protect their freedoms without forcing non-violent people to comply with the legitimate authorities through the ever present threat of violence.
I mean officers should be able slightly injure people to remind them that it's a dangerous world and that the police are there to protect them.
Citizens should know better, and comply without hesitation, because they are in safe and caring hands.
and in times of war even more so.
*cringe*
::chewing back the vomit::

LuciusAR wrote:
Pepper spay is a defensive tool to protect the officer and those around him from harm. It is not an offensive tool to be used to force people to comply.

This is the disconnect. Pepper spray certainly IS an offensive tool to force people to comply. In the hands of a civillian, it is a defensive tool because it is against the law for a citizen to take offensive action. In the hands of the police force, it is yet another tool to aid in the performance of a job. What is the job of the police? To ensure compliance with the law.

LuciusAR wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Aside from regular stupidity and pig-headedness.

Stupidity and pig-headedness doesn't justify a face full of pepper spray.

Hey if its good enough for day care its good enough for, oh wait, never mind.

Orkeosaurus: I don't see a shred of evidence for this guy being mentally handicapped.

That's part of my point. You can't tell most of the time without a bit of patience. The boarder cop, probably wouldn't be the type to take the time to figure it out. That's the kind of thing I find worry some, and why I'm not such a fan of the pepper spray method of controlling that particular situation. (also props to ShumaGorath's point of situational change)

LuciusAR wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Aside from regular stupidity and pig-headedness.

Stupidity and pig-headedness doesn't justify a face full of pepper spray.

Depends on what stupidity and pig-headedness are causing a person to do.

Frazzled: Hey if its good enough for day care its good enough for, oh wait, never mind.

Someone can only complain if they can breath. A quiet world is a kind world.

How else would you have handled it? The dillweed was not complying with a lawful order. We know he was a dillweed because they had pulled him out of the car for three hours sometime before.

Of course the old standby alternative was an emergency search of the vehicle with a coincidental discovery that the guy's front lights were broken...

Frazzled: How else would you have handled it?

Taken his plate number and information.
Let him know he needs to wait until he complies and can only drive away when he is told he may do so and may not leave his vehicle without an officer immediately present.
have him wait 20 minutes
repeat (he's being held non-violently with reason)
inform shift-change if he's really stubborn
if he behaves threateningly or attempts to drive off or leave his vehicle unsupervised, then you can 'take-him-down"