Friday, June 26, 2009

1957 vs. 2007

So I got this e-mail forward from my dad the other day. Usually these types of e-mail are only good for a quick laugh at best, mild annoyance at filling up my inbox at worst. However, this one kinda stuck out to me. It compares our legal response to student's actions; how we would've responded in 1957 compared to 2007 (today essentially). Yes, some of them are skewed a bit one way or another, and I'm not trying to imply that these course of events would always take place, but... the twist that I'm putting on this forward is that, for as many as I can find legit sources for, I'm going to cite a similar incident that received the same type of response as stated in the forward. These were not provided with the forward, and come directly from me (life experiences), the blogs I read, and the almighty google. What may have seemed funny and obscure at first will now be brought into a much sharper focus. Caution: It may make you think and question the different means of punishment we've used over the years. We're/are things really that bad/good?

HIGH SCHOOL -- 1957 vs. 2007



Scenario 1:

Jack goes quail hunting before school and then pulls into the school parking lot with his shotgun in his truck's gun rack.


1957 - Vice Principal comes over, looks at Jack's shotgun, goes to his car and gets his shotgun to show Jack.

2007 - School goes into lock down, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers.


Ah guns. I don't have any stories of my own to share on this subject. Just a wish that people could learn to use a gun responsibly and need not assume that if someone has a gun in their car, that they're planing to kill you and/or others with it.

Scenario 2:

Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.

1957 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up buddies.

2007 - Police called and SWAT team arrives -- they arrest both Johnny and Mark. They are both charged them with assault and both expelled even though Johnny started it.


My grandmother wrote a story with a similar theme a few months ago. Two boys were having confrontations and one slammed the other into a locker. A teacher then took the boys aside and supervised them as they wrestled out their differences on the mat. The "underdog" used brains along with a little brawn to defeat the other boy (without seriously hurting him) and then the two became friends. She was reprimanded by her teacher for having a teacher in her story who allowed the boys to fight. The thinking is that this isn't something boys should read about in a children's book. I disagree. I'm not saying that fighting is necessarily always the best solution, but under the circumstances presented in this short story, I think it was a valid solution that worked out best in the end. If I can find the story and get my grandmother's permission, I'll post a link to the story later so you can read and decide for yourself.

Scenario 3:

Jeffrey will not be still in class, he disrupts other students.


1957 - Jeffrey sent to the Principal's office and given a good paddling by the Principal. He then returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. He becomes a zombie. He is then tested for ADD. The school gets extra money from the state because Jeffrey has a disability.


This is a cynical way of looking at it. Students who legitimately have ADD need the help of medication in order to function properly. Not to be zombied out, just to focus. I has several friends who fit this situation and would've probably have been spanked as in the 1957 scenario because of not be treated appropriately. However, I do also think they is over medication of children in some cases where simple discipline, counseling, or other alternative treatment would be the best course of action. The hard part is knowing how to tell the difference.



Scenario 4:

Billy breaks a window in his neighbor's car20and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1957 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang. The state psychologist is told by Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goe to prison. Billy's mom has an affair with the psychologist.


Ah, the old corporeal punishment debate. Yes, I believe it is a legit way of disciplining children, though I personally wouldn't go farther than a smack on the butt. I find there are more effective means of punishment. (See that game system? Say bye-bye to it. If you can't respect hos windows, you're not going to be able to respect that system we bought for you. Show us otherwise and you'll get it back.)



Scenario 5:

Mark gets a headache and takes some aspirin to school.


1957 - Mark shares his aspirin with the Principal out on the smoking dock.

2007 - The police are called and Mark is expelled from school for drug violations. His car is then searched for drugs and weapons.


Oh this one is ridiculous. One, I don't agree that you should be smoking, especially underage (and this is coming from someone whose smoked, and, for the most part, quit), but the deal with aspirin? Lame. True story: In middle school I once got a huge migraine. The kind where the lights and sounds hurt and make you want to throw up and rip your head off. I did the "right" thing. I went to the nurse's office, told them, and expected to get Tylenol or something for it. Want to know what they did? They left me curled up wish for death on the bench as they called my father who had to drive over from work to personally give me Tylenol. 45 min later I finally got them. Last time I went by the rules for meds. I admit it, I'm one of those "druggies" who kept Tylenol on my person every day from then on. Dad even told me I should do it too, because he agreed it was absurd. So there. Want to jail my father for giving drugs to a minor?

Scenario 6:

Pedro fails high school English.


1957 - Pedro goes to summer school, passes English and goes to college.

2007 - Pedro's cause is taken up by state. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against the state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English is then banned from core curriculum. Pedro is given his diploma anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.


This bring up several issues, making it much more complicated than it may seem at first glance. This has an under current of social prejudices against Hispanics. Either way though, I think if you live in the USA, you need to be fluent in English. And, I think if you live in areas with a good size population of Spanish speaking individual, do yourself a favor, and learn the language. No matter your race, being bilingual is a highly valuable assent that you can add to your tool belt. This reminds me of a case where a Hispanic student was forced to take English classes at her school and denied graduation when she refused to jump through their prejudiced hoops. She was fluent in English, spoke Spanish at home, and just wanted to be treated as any other student. She was denied graduation for standing up for herself. And I've really really tried to find the link to where I read about this. When I do, I'll put it up here.



Scenario 7:

Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the Fourth of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle and blows up a red ant bed .


1957 - Ants die.

2007 - ATF, Homeland Security and the FBI are all called. Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. The FBI investigates his parents --and all siblings are removed from their home and all computers are confiscated. Johnny's dad is placed on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.


What they forgot to mention is that Johnny is probably poor and/or non-white. Shit like this happens all the time where was should be treated at a minor offense, is blown completely out of proportion to the original crime.


Scenario 8:

Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary hugs him to comfort him.


1957 - In a short time, Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison. Johnny undergoes 5 years of therapy.



Interesting that they did the female teacher, male student thing. Usually, it's the other way around that gets blasted in the media. But yeah... teachers have a lot of unfair regulations about what they are legally and technically allowed to do in the classroom. Punish all for the actions of the few. Good going.

This should hit every email inbox to show how stupid we have become!!


I would say... more narrow minded and assuming, judging the many based on the actions of the few, rather than stupid. Not to say there aren't a good number of stupid people causing issues like those stated above.

1 comment: