Had a high school math teacher who was awesome, but had a small aneurism and had to be replaced for a few months second year by a fricken PE teacher with delusions of grandeur.

Was so certain I was cheating, wrote out a problem on the board hoping to humiliate me in front of everyone, but i just wrote down the answer, tossed him the chalk and walked out.

This was long before mic drops were a thing, but it was the same idea.

You're right: it doesn't achieve much because it doesn't go far enough. These people should be openly mocked, ridiculed and humiliated. Every time they open their stupid mouths, someone with a bullhorn should shriek, "That's interesting, BUT YOU'RE A FUCKING MOUTH-BREATHING, BOTTOM-FEEDING, DRIBBLING, DROOLING MORON!" three inches from their cow-like faces. They should get anonymous phone calls at 3:00am, "IDIOT, it's GET-A-FUCKING-EDUCATION-O'-CLOCK!". Gales of derisive laughter should greet their every utterance until they're so phobic of speaking again that they finally just shut the fuck up.

Maybe then, when the concept of "being ashamed of being stupid" is thoroughly drilled into their putty-like brain, we can be done with this anti-vaccine bullshit.

Can we assume this kid is expelled permanently? Not from this class, not from this school, but from all normal public school?

If not, and this is accepted behavior in school today, I change my mind on arming teachers and I give each one one free shot per year. That teacher's restraint was legendary.

If his parents haven't publicly apologized, they deserve public outing and humiliation. He learned that behavior, likely at home, and if they don't forcefully denounce it, they're encouraging it.

His courage is only as deep as his collection which hides his cowardice or is a measure of it.

His first line of defense is to make others fear him first.

It would be humiliating for him to die falling down a flight of steps.

The belt isn't the answer, it is a tool. The same way physical punishments like Push-Ups are for Military discipline. The same way solitary confinement or hard labor is used as a tool to provide discipline in prison.

I do not subscribe to the notion that non-punitive punishment is effective. Offering Johnny a new game if he doesn't torment his sister is teaching him that being bad is rewarded.

In the case of this incident, the belt was used as a tool to indicate that he had broken the rules and it was reinforced later by grounding.

Conversely, she could have taken the other available option and simply called the police to report her car stolen, which it was. His being her son does not excuse him from a crime of taking a vehicle that does not belong to you. That method would not be considered child abuse according to the guidelines you propose, however it would lead to juvenile charges, exposure to the legal system, and a simmering hatred of his mother that I suggest a simple embarrassing spanking/grounding would not.

Can you take it too far with physical punishment? Absolutely, and then it is most definitely abuse. Beating a child with an improvised switch until the child bleeds is abuse. Spanking them with a belt a few times in public, which adds a humiliation factor to the punishment, is not.

some *quality cox there. Love me some thermodynamics. Gives me an opportunity to bust out one of my favourite science quotes:

"The law that entropy always increases holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes. But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation."
Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington

Entropy is, somewhat perversely, information.
*related=https://videosift.com/video/What-is-NOT-Random

Very analogous to Westboro Baptist "church" stooges. They (ab)use their constitutionally protected rights to free speech to say the most offensive and provocative crap that they can come up with, specifically with the intention to incite a (violent) reaction against them. Why? Because pretty much the entire Phelps family are lawyers, and they know that they can generally win any assault case that they can provoke people into. All that hate they spew boils down to a stupid, petty moneymaking scam.

Is the Seattle Nazi that devious and cunning? I doubt it. Probably just a crazy / fucked up guy, as Maher said. That doesn't excuse his fuckwittery, but it does reinforce Maher's argument that punching the guy is NOT the best response.

Morello is awesome, with RATM and Audioslave, and now Prophets of Rage, etc. But he's dead wrong on this issue, and comes across as a bit of an "internet tough guy". Outside of just ignoring them, I kinda think the only way to one-up these people is to know the law, what constitutes assault etc., and essentially beat them at their own game (ie. provoke them into doing something to you). On the other hand, there's something to be said for using using passive-aggressive snark to mock / humiliate them in a nonviolent way, ala the Foo Fighters:

I love that he was clearly out of his depth, and i love that he committed to it and took his humiliation like a woman.

So yeah, im a half in, half out of the closet trans person living a genderfluid reality. Complicated existence, and unlesz you're in the demographic or a serious ally, you just don't understand what it's like. This isn't a new revelation, I have known this about myself as long as i have had self awareness.

I grew up during the Reagan era, so no one gave a shit that I thought I was a girl.

Literally just shit on and reshaped and fear thunderstruck, raped, molested as a form of homosexual comversion -- you got this shit?

I just didn't understand what people meant when they were trying to explain the differencez between male and female because i was CERTAIN i was a girl when I was 3 years old. And yes i have those memories. In fact, the age of 4 through 7 are the most vivid and awful memories of my reality an you may stare theough me and rwfuse to understand if you want, but like the song says "We exist." (By Arcade Fire; Cool song even if the musician isnt trans.)

Anyway. We are just shit on. I'm used to it. A friend of mine used to call me a white nigger and honestly, as racial insensitive as that is (a black guy telling me this) that is the feeling. Police brutality and all. Whatever. You dont want to understand so just dont bother. I got sick to death of explaining this so long ago it doent matter to me. How fu king sad is that? How fu ling sad is my goddamn perspective? How can I even be happy in this world? Its shit.

Logic: If you are so afraid we are a bunch of rapists, what about gay people who aren't transgender -- where do they take a pee where people won't fear them molesting people of the same sex? I mean, is there going to be a "Gays Only" and "Transgender Only" bathroom?? It doesn't make sense even if you fear us.

And in my humble and humiliated existence, gay people have wanted nothing to do with me and have even tried to convert and change my opinions of myself. Even in the middle of FUCKING LA PRIDE. Assholez like that CUNT Milo. He can go DIE.

It doesn't make sense. Have you ever peed in a Men's Restroom with a dress on? Totally awkward.

I know I'm using colloquialisms and non-PC language, but I'm just really depressed about this -- as if I wasn't already depressed about everything all the time lol

Republicans. Fuck you. I have no other means of relating my disappointment in the entirity of all reality -- the very fabric of this universe is hate.

The biggest question that Japanese television leaves in my head is, why would anyone ever want to appear in one? It's not like they offer great prizes to the winners. The only prize I've ever seen is not being humiliated. And you can have that experience simply by staying home, or doing pretty much anything else.

and what angle would that be?
YOU said mike ward was "rightly sued" for basically calling a kid ugly,and i asked for you to explain how this is a legal matter.

or is it your contention that because mike ward "punched down" instead of "punching up" IS the legal precedent?

what if he spoke on how ugly patton oswald is?
or ridiculed michael j fox's parkinsons?

would THAT be acceptable?
or would that be acceptable,but just in poor taste?

and you still haven't addressed how this young boys reputation has been ruined.from what i have been reading it was not his reputation,but how mike wards joke had become semi-popular and the kids in his school started busting this young boys balls to a degree where school was becoming an anxiety riddled event for the young man.

why aren't his school mates also being fined?
i mean,if we are going to bring in the state to handle every and all social issues..let us at least be fair.

and what about the people in the audiences that found the joke funny?
aren't they contributing to the continuation of this young mans suffering in school?

see,i think you are viewing this as a bullying situation (my assumption),and you are viewing this young man as a victim.a victim to bad jokes done in poor taste,and maybe you are correct,but jokes are subjective..NOT objective..and there is no tangible evidence that this young mans reputation has been affected.

it is the INTENT of the joke that should be scrutinized,and that is something that is also subjective and an issue we all deal with on an individual basis.the legal system should NEVER be used to decide such arbitrary and subjective material,because now you setting precedent and punishment based on "feelings",and this tactic can be easily abused.

so you may "feel" mike wards jokes are offensive and damaging,and that in your country mike ward should be executed for his crimes (fascist much?).

but remember...that pandoras box door swings BOTH ways,and the abuse can come from a direction that you,and i for that matter,would be appalled in its application.

and to even suggest that this is not a free speech issue is incredibly naive'.
if you think being charged in a civil case,and having to show in court multiple times to defend "joke" with the possibility of even MORE financial hardship,will not affect how a comedian approaches his routine and the jokes he writes,you are simply NOT thinking this whole situation through and the unintended consequences of situations such as these.

this is most certainly a free speech issue.

let me give you a hypothetical,but using the same parameters.

the wesboro baptist church goes to protest an abortion clinic,and are met with counter protesters.

the counter protesters begin to chastise and berate the westboro people.ridicule their stance on abortion and their religion.so much so that one of the younger westboro children becomes distraught,and anxious and begins to cry.someone films the exchange and posts to youtube,and it goes viral.

now the young westboro kid is being harassed in school,being picked on and being called names.the young kid is so vexed and humiliated that he avoids school at every step and is having self esteem issues.

so much so that the westboro church decides to sue the counter protesters in court.

what do you think the outcome should be?
should they even be allowed to sue?
and if so,should the young westboro kid receive damages?
or should those counter protesters receive the death penalty in your country?

do you see what i am saying?
you getting what i am laying down?

because free speech means that you are free to express yourself,but you are NOT free from offense,and offense is subjective.what offends YOU might not offend ME,and vice versa.

free speech means you are free to express every little thought that pops into your pretty little head and share with the world,and i am free to ridicule you relentlessly if i so choose.

and i will.
with gusto.

How humiliating. Elect my dog for a ban on all human immigrants and a wall with only doggy door access. #Dogmerica 2020

You know I agree with you, right? I am the one who said that this incident is the worst example of racism, after all.

To me, things like this are just more proof that every person who interacts with police should treat them like dangerous people they have the potential to be and show absolutely nothing but abject subservience. Because you absolutely can't trust them, whether you are white or not.

It can get you shot, making your point that "you can't do this to me" patently untrue. They can and they do.

So unless you are mentally ill or intent on "suicide by police", allow the humiliation and tug at your forelock.

Live to fight another day. Save yourself legal fees. Don't spend the night in jail. DON'T ARGUE. Seethe and GET EVEN.

Revenge is a dish best served cold.

And get the training and the resources where they need to be.

Playing meek does not protect you from any abuse you've mentioned, including being shot to death. It doesn't keep one from being arrested, beaten, humiliated, having false charges levied, etc. It only perpetuates the idea that the police are 'just doing their job's' when they abuse citizens. Fight back. This guy played meek until an asshat illegally grabbed his phone, then attacked him, and remained meek afterwards. He could have destroyed that cop if he fought back....but would have probably been shot if he had exercised his right to self defense.

If you are black and armed and you get stopped, shoot first. Being armed is now considered a legitimate reason for police to kill you. You don't have to be threatening, pointing that gun, or doing anything wrong at all, just having it is 'reason' enough for them to shoot you dead today. Prison is better than dead, imo.

Cops have squandered the good will and trust granted them by the public. They no longer get the benefit of a doubt.

It's 25 times more likely a cop will murder you than the odds you might murder them, they are all armed and dangerous, and turnabout is fair play. In my opinion, citizens have more right to shoot cops in self defence than vice versa.