To Protect and to Serve...

Status
Not open for further replies.
#11,479
#11,479
Rasputin_Vol said:
In the overall scheme of things, what is the difference between 2 people standing next to each other having a conversation and a person standing by themselves having a conversation on a cellphone?
Click to expand...

Probably not much..... It's more of a perception issue is my guess. Nurses talk to one another, but they're not walking up the hallway talking to whoever on a cell......
 
#11,482
#11,482
Carl Pickens said:
Probably not much..... It's more of a perception issue is my guess. Nurses talk to one another, but they're not walking up the hallway talking to whoever on a cell......
Click to expand...

Exactly the point I'm making. There is very little difference in the 2, yet we set up these ridiculous and arbitray rules based on some flawed perception or misguided logic.

An overreaction to using a cellphone vs just having a regular conversation is to fire someone, just as an overreaction to someone not putting away their cellphone in a timely manner is to call the cops and have them bodyslam the perp.

Nor should people have to die or lose their freedoms over reefer, loose cigarettes, eye rolling, improper signals, busted taillights, rolling stops or any of these other trivial items that most of you people want to enforce with the threat of violence.
 
#11,483
#11,483
Carl Pickens said:
Sure it is possibe...but... Would you want to see nurses walking the halls of the hospital talking on their cell? I see no issue at all with a company policy prohibiting their use.
Click to expand...

IDK, maybe it's just me, but I don't get worked up over trivial stuff like that as long as the people are doing their jobs. I really wouldn't feel any differently if they were on a cellphone or chatting in the hall. As long as they are providing quality care in a timely fashion, I'm ok.
 
#11,484
#11,484
Carl Pickens said:
I'm saying I think many of you grew up without seeing bad behavior up close Numbnuts....and as a result you're overly shocked when you see unfortunate reprecussions.
Click to expand...

Your original rant talked about street punks, goons and thugs. I would assume that the picture you were trying to paint in our minds was of peole engaged in violence and a threat to society.

What people are having a problem with is you trying to link thse sorts of people with the girl and the cellphone. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. It doesn't matter if a person grew up in the suburbs or the City of Compton. Most reasonable people from either location would have a hard time making a connection between bloodthirsty killers & rapists vs a teenager with a cellphone in class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11,485
#11,485
Rasputin_Vol said:
Exactly the point I'm making. There is very little difference in the 2, yet we set up these ridiculous and arbitray rules based on some flawed perception or misguided logic.

An overreaction to using a cellphone vs just having a regular conversation is to fire someone, just as an overreaction to someone not putting away their cellphone in a timely manner is to call the cops and have them bodyslam the perp.

Nor should people have to die or lose their freedoms over reefer, loose cigarettes, eye rolling, improper signals, busted taillights, rolling stops or any of these other trivial items that most of you people want to enforce with the threat of violence.
Click to expand...

Its not misguided logic.....in my business it is very perception based and you have to seem professional in every area....We also have a dress code where you will be sent home and could be written up over...Its a very competitive environment. Even if the CNA's are doing their job and a patient's family is wondering why it took 5 minutes for the family member to be treated and the CNA comes down the hall chatting on a cell phone then the family member will be in our administrator's office. Its really not that much to ask to use your phone in designated areas or during your break.
 
#11,486
#11,486
volbeast33 said:
As long as it's professional..... Cellphones are not allowed..... When I went back to school to change careers I got written up at Lowes home improvement for using my cellphone on the floor.
Click to expand...

Good thing they didn't call a roided up stormtrooper to throw a bunk of 2x6's on you instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11,489
#11,489
volbeast33 said:
I don't think the teacher was making an example of her.... It was probably a regular rule like it is at my kids school.... If you have your cellphone out class it is confiscated no questions asked.... Students know the rule at the beginning of the school year. I like rules and feel it's chaos without them... How can a teacher teach a class if everyone is doing their own thing
Click to expand...

I understand the rule against using cellphones in class. My issue here is how and why did the teacher allow it to escalate so far? Continue to teach your class and deal with it afterwards. The teacher appeared to want to show what happens when you refuse to comply with her request. The teacher was at least as guilty for disrupting class as the student.

And since when does disobeying your teacher become an arrestable offence? As though our system isn't bogged down enough with this war on drugs crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#11,490
#11,490
2 comments:

1. Cell phone policies are not enforced uniformly across most schools. Most are strict, use it or lose it policies (typical zero tolerance) but then teachers will say, "put this in your cell phone" or "take out your phone and look this up." Happens all the time and I'm sure kids are confused and/or taking advantage of whatever wiggle room they find.

2. Turns out the student recently lost her mother and was placed in foster care. I wonder if that affected her judgement in any way? Not saying she was right or wrong, but does add some context to the behavior.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/king-s-teen-assaulted-deputy-orphan-article-1.2414901
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#11,491
#11,491
Well, looks like the diet racist remarks on her parental supervision (or lack thereof) are somewhat invalid, wouldn't you think?

It's like that same crowd tends to screech, you just don't always know the full story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11,497
#11,497
DinkinFlicka said:
How about you answer the question and figure out why I asked it instead.
Click to expand...
If you are trying to relate it to what happened to the girl...she is not forced to be in school either. I do feel sorry for her losing her parents....there is nothing worse in this world than losing a parent or a child.
 
#11,500
#11,500
Rasputin_Vol said:
Your original rant talked about street punks, goons and thugs. I would assume that the picture you were trying to paint in our minds was of peole engaged in violence and a threat to society.

What people are having a problem with is you trying to link thse sorts of people with the girl and the cellphone. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. It doesn't matter if a person grew up in the suburbs or the City of Compton. Most reasonable people from either location would have a hard time making a connection between bloodthirsty killers & rapists vs a teenager with a cellphone in class.
Click to expand...

I said I didn't agree with the cops actions. The point I was trying to make is that I think a lot of posters here grew up sheltered and as a result are more appalled by acts of violence regardless of the severity or reasons for them.
I grew up in a decent neighborhood but there was still a large number of white trash types with their homemade tattoos and etc. I saw them do things at school and elsewhere and they didn't give a damn what the consequences were..... The only thing that got their attention was an ass whipping
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement

Back
Top