ForumGarden

A 6 year old boy pointed his finger at a friend and said pow. Earlier in the day he was sent to the office for pretending his fingers were scissors. Apparently this habitual pretending your fingers are dangerous weapons constitutes suspension.

1st Grader Suspended for Gun Gesture - Yahoo!

Remember pretending your fingers were legs and doing sexy little dances on your desk?

Maybe it was just me then.

SnoozeAgain;1415110 wrote: Remember pretending your fingers were legs and doing sexy little dances on your desk?

Maybe it was just me then.


I knew you always wanted to be a stripper. I bet you used your pencil as a stripper pole.

His fingers should be confiscated and melted down.

Fingers don't kill...

Ahso!;1415116 wrote: Fingers don't kill...


So why the suspension?

Ahso!;1415116 wrote: Fingers don't kill...
oops! Or do they?

Guns dont kill people. Fingers do.

What a crazy mixed up world we live in

Ahso!;1415116 wrote: Fingers don't kill...


Ahso!;1415118 wrote: oops! Or do they?


Well, in the wrongs hands.. Who knows.

YZGI;1415117 wrote: So why the suspension?We're becoming more paranoid. It's completely understandable in the grand scheme.

Snowfire;1415119 wrote: Guns dont kill people. Fingers do.

What a crazy mixed up world we live inYes, that's what I meant. Thanks! (uh oh, I should go hide)

I honestly would like to own the most destructive nuclear bomb known to mankind. Would anyone feel comfortable living next door(Or perhaps across the city) to me if I own such a weapon? If not, why?

He wasn't suspended for the finger gesture, he was suspended for "chronically making people nervous and not having any common sense to know that." It was for his own protection to keep the other kids from kicking his a$$...

K.Snyder;1415185 wrote: I honestly would like to own the most destructive nuclear bomb known to mankind. Would anyone feel comfortable living next door(Or perhaps across the city) to me if I own such a weapon? If not, why?


No, because you are known to be both unstable and lethally sarcastic.

Cops and robbers, army, cowboys and Indians.....ahh to be 6 again!

halfway;1415229 wrote: Cops and robbers, army, cowboys and Indians.....ahh to be 6 again!The thing is - those activities are not essential to enjoying life as a young boy.

This is about conditioning.

Saint_;1415197 wrote: No, because you are known to be both unstable and lethally sarcastic.So if one were known to be stable then you wouldn't mind at all to live next door to someone who possessed a nuclear bomb?

K.Snyder;1415254 wrote: So if one were known to be stable then you wouldn't mind at all to live next door to someone who possessed a nuclear bomb?
I wouldn't. Why should I?

Accountable;1415260 wrote: I wouldn't. Why should I?


I must be hearing things.

K.Snyder;1415185 wrote: I honestly would like to own the most destructive nuclear bomb known to mankind. Would anyone feel comfortable living next door(Or perhaps across the city) to me if I own such a weapon? If not, why?


Well we live next door to the french and those bastards keep trying to invade us so we have them as well.

Sounds like a way too severe consequence for a 6 year old.

YZGI;1415106 wrote: A 6 year old boy pointed his finger at a friend and said pow. Earlier in the day he was sent to the office for pretending his fingers were scissors. Apparently this habitual pretending your fingers are dangerous weapons constitutes suspension.

1st Grader Suspended for Gun Gesture - Yahoo! Pretending your fingers are scissors can be detrimental to the well being of any child especially when combined with paper and stone.

Peter Lake;1415448 wrote: Pretending your fingers are scissors can be detrimental to the well being of any child especially when combined with paper and stone.
:wah:

K.Snyder;1415185 wrote: I honestly would like to own the most destructive nuclear bomb known to mankind. Would anyone feel comfortable living next door(Or perhaps across the city) to me if I own such a weapon? If not, why?


Canada did just that....and felt very safe from the communist / socialist threat for many years until the threat was destroyed.

Having provided safety and security for many, many years to those who could not defend themselves around the globe, the level of appreciation I received was amazing and very heartfelt. When that security went away, fear and chaos quickly ensued.

What do you do if the once peaceful stable neighbour with the nuclear weapon starts exhibiting somewhat irrational behaviour and you have concerns about their mental health?

gmc;1415465 wrote: What do you do if the once peaceful stable neighbour with the nuclear weapon starts exhibiting somewhat irrational behaviour and you have concerns about their mental health?
You visit and have a nice cup of tea ... or plate of haggis, whatever you Scots do. Ask how she's doing. Keep in touch with the rest of the family.

K.Snyder;1415254 wrote: So if one were known to be stable then you wouldn't mind at all to live next door to someone who possessed a nuclear bomb?


I live next to crazy Mormans and psycho Arizonans on one side, arrogant Texans and twitchy Mexicans on another, and stoned Coloradans above me. I honestly have no idea what "living next to someone stable" would be like..

I think the violence problem our society is facing today is due to the way we have been forced to raise kids these days.



We played green beret when I was little - the whole neighborhood would be out there at war. We even did it at recess at school. To date, not one of those kids has shown up on the evening news.



Kids got mad at each other and hit one another... if they did it hard enough, they got their ass spanked by their parents and had to apologize.



Kids played sports and were allowed to lose at the game.



Kids were allowed to get mad and not like each other - openly.



When kids crossed a certain line, there were consequences, not therapy sessions. They learned what was acceptable.



Today it is all about pretending that everything is 'okay'. If we can't pay someone to tell a kid they are okay we'll pay them to tell that kid why it isn't his/her fault. Kids act up, they get therapy rather than a smack on the butt. They get a 'pill' instead of being made to work that problem out.



We make todays kids bottle up all their real feelings in order to be PC. I think from time to time we should expect that cork to pop.

flopstock;1415682 wrote: I think the violence problem our society is facing today is due to the way we have been forced to raise kids these days.



We played green beret when I was little - the whole neighborhood would be out there at war. We even did it at recess at school. To date, not one of those kids has shown up on the evening news.



Kids got mad at each other and hit one another... if they did it hard enough, they got their ass spanked by their parents and had to apologize.



Kids played sports and were allowed to lose at the game.



Kids were allowed to get mad and not like each other - openly.



When kids crossed a certain line, there were consequences, not therapy sessions. They learned what was acceptable.



Today it is all about pretending that everything is 'okay'. If we can't pay someone to tell a kid they are okay we'll pay them to tell that kid why it isn't his/her fault. Kids act up, they get therapy rather than a smack on the butt. They get a 'pill' instead of being made to work that problem out.



We make todays kids bottle up all their real feelings in order to be PC. I think from time to time we should expect that cork to pop.


You're right. If I opened fire in a crowded theater my Dad would kick my ass for sure. Still scares the hell out of me.

Well said, Flop.

I agree with Flop.... when we were kids It was called ' The school of hard knocks.

flopstock;1415682 wrote: I think the violence problem our society is facing today is due to the way we have been forced to raise kids these days.



We played green beret when I was little - the whole neighborhood would be out there at war. We even did it at recess at school. To date, not one of those kids has shown up on the evening news.



Kids got mad at each other and hit one another... if they did it hard enough, they got their ass spanked by their parents and had to apologize.



Kids played sports and were allowed to lose at the game.



Kids were allowed to get mad and not like each other - openly.



When kids crossed a certain line, there were consequences, not therapy sessions. They learned what was acceptable.



Today it is all about pretending that everything is 'okay'. If we can't pay someone to tell a kid they are okay we'll pay them to tell that kid why it isn't his/her fault. Kids act up, they get therapy rather than a smack on the butt. They get a 'pill' instead of being made to work that problem out.



We make todays kids bottle up all their real feelings in order to be PC. I think from time to time we should expect that cork to pop.


An excellent description of the real world - can we now leave the artificial one we currently inhabit?

A couple more?

Parents took responsibility for their kids and taught them respect

Teachers taught the children and earned their respect - without the first how can you have the second?

Now children are taught (by society) that whatever they do, no-one can touch them - they push to find their limits and they're given none

oscar;1415697 wrote: I agree with Flop.... when we were kids It was called ' The school of hard knocks.


How to Know When You're Getting Old

It's when you start saying "when we were kids!" :wah:

flopstock;1415682 wrote: I think the violence problem our society is facing today is due to the way we have been forced to raise kids these days.

We played green beret when I was little - the whole neighborhood would be out there at war. We even did it at recess at school. To date, not one of those kids has shown up on the evening news.



Kids got mad at each other and hit one another... if they did it hard enough, they got their ass spanked by their parents and had to apologize.



Kids played sports and were allowed to lose at the game.



Kids were allowed to get mad and not like each other - openly.



When kids crossed a certain line, there were consequences, not therapy sessions. They learned what was acceptable.



Today it is all about pretending that everything is 'okay'. If we can't pay someone to tell a kid they are okay we'll pay them to tell that kid why it isn't his/her fault. Kids act up, they get therapy rather than a smack on the butt. They get a 'pill' instead of being made to work that problem out.



We make todays kids bottle up all their real feelings in order to be PC. I think from time to time we should expect that cork to pop.I'd like to know who it is you're talking about. Is it your group of friends only or is your analysis nationwide? Does it include kids of all races, regions, income levels, sexual orientation and all religious/non-religious backgrounds and values?

Bryn Mawr;1415757 wrote: An excellent description of the real world - can we now leave the artificial one we currently inhabit?

A couple more?

Parents took responsibility for their kids and taught them respect

Teachers taught the children and earned their respect - without the first how can you have the second?

Now children are taught (by society) that whatever they do, no-one can touch them - they push to find their limits and they're given noneWhy is it then that the generation the two or three of you are a talking about (you) have screwed up so badly?

None of you are talking about any of my kids - they're great, thank you very much.

The two of you are making wild generalizations and using your very limited personal experience as evidence.

Perhaps you can supply the rest of us with some peer reviewed research that can back any of this up?

You sound like my parents who sounded like their parents who sounded like their parents. This is one reason death is so important to the evolutionary process. Age appears to bring with it a sort of self-righteousness that is suffocatingly accusatory to younger generations.

Ahso!;1415831 wrote: I'd like to know who it is you're talking about. Is it your group of friends only or is your analysis nationwide? Does it include kids of all races, regions, income levels, sexual orientation and all religious/non-religious backgrounds and values?
Assume it's general nationwide. How would you adjust the analysis?

Accountable;1415833 wrote: Assume it's general nationwide. How would you adjust the analysis?It's not mine. Perhaps Flopstock would like to answer.

Nor is it an analysis, in the proper sense of the word.

Ahso!;1415834 wrote: It's not mine. Perhaps Flopstock would like to answer.


Ahso!;1415835 wrote: Nor is it an analysis, in the proper sense of the word.


I see. So then you weren't looking for a response, but rather were passive-aggressively commenting on her comment.

Personally, I prefer conversation. You're pretty good at that sometimes, too.

Accountable;1415838 wrote: I see. So then you weren't looking for a response, but rather were passive-aggressively commenting on her comment.

Personally, I prefer conversation. You're pretty good at that sometimes, too.It isn't an analysis until the data is supplied. I've asked for it and am awaiting a response. I offered Flopstock the benefit of the doubt in my first post. Why don't you allow Flopstock to stand on her own two feet? It's a value both of you assert time and again. she's a big person.

Ahso!;1415832 wrote: Why is it then that the generation the two or three of you are a talking about (you) have screwed up so badly?

None of you are talking about any of my kids - they're great, thank you very much.

The two of you are making wild generalizations and using your very limited personal experience as evidence.

Perhaps you can supply the rest of us with some peer reviewed research that can back any of this up?

You sound like my parents who sounded like their parents who sounded like their parents. This is one reason death is so important to the evolutionary process. Age appears to bring with it a sort of self-righteousness that is suffocatingly accusatory to younger generations.


Not my kids either, or my grandkids, they've been brought up with and to respect and they're all doing very well as a result of it.

Nope, can't provide any evidence to back it up - all I can go on is my observations over the past thirty years of the kids who go wrong and the way they're brung up.

A wild generalisation? Obviously - anything short of an in depth analysis is bound to be in a case like this but is is based on long observation and much discussion. At a guess, fairly much the same as you're basing your opinions on.

Ahso!;1415842 wrote: It isn't an analysis until the data is supplied. I've asked for it and am awaiting a response. I offered Flopstock the benefit of the doubt in my first post. Why don't you allow Flopstock to stand on her own two feet? It's a value both of you assert time and again. she's a big person.
Rather than pointlessly attacking Flop, perhaps you can continue the conversation. I know it takes more thought and energy, but still.

Here, Ahso, let me demonstrate:

flopstock;1415682 wrote: I think the violence problem our society is facing today is due to the way we have been forced to raise kids these days.



We played green beret when I was little - the whole neighborhood would be out there at war. We even did it at recess at school. To date, not one of those kids has shown up on the evening news.



Kids got mad at each other and hit one another... if they did it hard enough, they got their ass spanked by their parents and had to apologize.



Kids played sports and were allowed to lose at the game.



Kids were allowed to get mad and not like each other - openly.



When kids crossed a certain line, there were consequences, not therapy sessions. They learned what was acceptable.



Today it is all about pretending that everything is 'okay'. If we can't pay someone to tell a kid they are okay we'll pay them to tell that kid why it isn't his/her fault. Kids act up, they get therapy rather than a smack on the butt. They get a 'pill' instead of being made to work that problem out.



We make todays kids bottle up all their real feelings in order to be PC. I think from time to time we should expect that cork to pop.
I'm not so sure that applies generally. Most kids I run into are quite respectful. Sure, spanking is not acceptable anymore, but you really can't equate that to no discipline at all, can you?



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

like that.

Accountable;1415888 wrote: Rather than pointlessly attacking Flop, perhaps you can continue the conversation. I know it takes more thought and energy, but still.If you think this...

I'd like to know who it is you're talking about. Is it your group of friends only or is your analysis nationwide? Does it include kids of all races, regions, income levels, sexual orientation and all religious/non-religious backgrounds and values? ...is an attack, you're delusional.

My post to Bryn was much more harsh and he didn't need any help from you.

You insult Flopstock, not me.

Accountable;1415889 wrote: Here, Ahso, let me demonstrate:



I'm not so sure that applies generally. Most kids I run into are quite respectful. Sure, spanking is not acceptable anymore, but you really can't equate that to no discipline at all, can you?



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

like that.Good for you. I'm not you.

Bryn Mawr;1415884 wrote: Not my kids either, or my grandkids, they've been brought up with and to respect and they're all doing very well as a result of it.

Nope, can't provide any evidence to back it up - all I can go on is my observations over the past thirty years of the kids who go wrong and the way they're brung up.

A wild generalisation? Obviously - anything short of an in depth analysis is bound to be in a case like this but is is based on long observation and much discussion. At a guess, fairly much the same as you're basing your opinions on.So then you weren't "forced" to raise your kids any particular way outside of meeting certain conditions such as educating, feeding and clothing them and not abusing them. And that there are programs in place to assist those who at any given time have difficulty meeting those standards, right?

gmc;1415445 wrote: Well we live next door to the french and those bastards keep trying to invade us so we have them as well.It's probably something to do with needing a much larger fleet of ships to transport all of their horses.

Saint_;1415595 wrote: I live next to crazy Mormans and psycho Arizonans on one side, arrogant Texans and twitchy Mexicans on another, and stoned Coloradans above me. I honestly have no idea what "living next to someone stable" would be like..If you didn't know what "stable" was then how do you expect you'd defend yourself in a justified way?

halfway;1415454 wrote: Canada did just that....and felt very safe from the communist / socialist threat for many years until the threat was destroyed.

Having provided safety and security for many, many years to those who could not defend themselves around the globe, the level of appreciation I received was amazing and very heartfelt. When that security went away, fear and chaos quickly ensued.


I'm honestly curious why so many people seem to think that a socialist is even light years similar to a communist but anyway...

Just as many communists have the same anxieties toward capitalists. The ironic part is that guns and any other weapons have not a millimeter to do with it(Or at least didn't in the beginning of such "fear and chaos").