The War On Kids

[Formaldehyde]

As an avid huffpost reader I thought you would have seen this previously!

Once again, you are guilty of making an erroneous assumption about me and my supposed activities. I actually don't look at their website at all, unless it comes up in a google search for something which actually interests me. But since they clearly don't lie and deliberately distort the facts as Fox News does, I'm sure you find nothing wrong with using them as a source when they do appear in a search result. Right?

Rofl. Owned again, Form.

Because the change in policy only happened last month instead of at the end of the Vietnam War?

And how exactly is that "owning me":

Perhaps so. Perhaps not. You certainly haven't provided any corroborable evidence of it reverting back now.

I merely wanted you to actually do some legwork for a change.

And, of course, you knew all along this change was quite recent:

That link is 3 years old. Things have changed, and once again rules have been tightened. People cant get in now like they did back in 2006 or earlier and the requirements to get back in have been raised once more.

Again, you show how behind the times on things military you truly are.

Emphasis mine.

And the change isn't all that great. Chances are that they will still be taking people guilty of multiple misdemeanors, and even some felonies, especially when the judge gives them a choice of where to serve their time:

http://www.army.com/resources/item/2150

Some criminal offences can be waived

The Army divides criminal offenses into one of four categories: Applicants with six or more minor traffic offenses (where the fine was $100 or more per offense), or three or more minor non-traffic offenses, or two or more misdemeanors, or one or more felonies, requires a waiver.

The following are some offenses which can be waived:


•Minor Traffic Offenses. Anyone who has six or more minor traffic offenses, where the fine was $100 or more per offense requires a waiver. Regardless of what state/local law says, the Army has its own list of what it considers minor traffic offenses.
•Minor Non-Traffic Offenses. Anyone who has three or more civil convictions or other adverse dispositions for minor non-traffic offenses requires a waiver. Again, the Army has it's own list of what it considers minor non-traffic offenses.
•Misdemeanor Offenses. Those with two, three, or four, civil convictions or other adverse dispositions for what the Army considers to be a misdemeanor offense require a waiver. Waivers are not authorized for individuals with more than four civil convictions or other adverse dispositions for misdemeanor offenses.
•Combinations. Those who have received three or more civil convictions or other adverse dispositions for a combination of misdemeanor or minor non-traffic offenses require a waiver.
•DWI/DUI. Two or more convictions or other adverse dispositions for DWI/DUI requires a waiver. There is a special waiting time of 12 months from date of conviction before one may receive a waiver for DWI/DUI.
•Felony. Any conviction or adverse disposition for what the Army considers a felony, requires a waiver. Again, the Army has its own list of what it considers to be a felony.

So you can still get waivers for felonies. Just not "serious" ones anymore...

 

[Lord Gay]

We must crush them before the rainy season

No no, before the snows block the passes.

You might say that was the public school system's 9/11 with the resultant fearmongering and knee-jerk reactions.

I agree.

I think it would be most helpful if teachers were better allowed to defend themselves and others without fear of lawsuits. IMHO there seem to be too many restrictions on teachers and educators in terms of physical involvement.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

We must crush them before the rainy season

I think a scorched-classoroom policy of retreat could leave their long supply lines vulnerable.

 

[innonimatu]

The trailer says it all.

The school campus itself, excepting the fact that there are no individual cells is exactly like a prison. There is extreme thought-control and limitations of free speech. Innocuous and innocent things such as a six year old child hugging his teacher is taken as sexual assault. The process of education itself is so contrary to our inclinations and nature to be almost futile. Children are thoroughly indoctrinated with information that is largely questionable, at best, and often flat-out a matter of opinion. The only classes that aren't are math and science, and even some science classes are full of information that is not proven and subject to opinion. Yes, I would have to say that Math is the only pure subject left. And through all of this, by my own experience at least, school seems to be all about making children feel horrible about themselves. This is, at least, partly by design.

Schools are supposed to be like prisons. A dumping ground for those people for whom others have no time, nor inclination to handle. It's just that people are not supposed to acknowledge it.
It was no accident that the rise of organized, compulsory education happened during the industrial revolution, on pair with the enslavement of people to the clock and the job.

The wealthy get far more breaks, of course, and some can even choose schools for their children and have outside those a real, full family life. The poor at least are not forced into labour from childhood. But seek to dump their own children outside their care for as long as possible. Not a perfect world, far from it yet, but I guess it's slowly improving.
What happens to people who are being forced to go through "school" and similar dumping zones for close to two decades now (if current trends hold)? This (the scale of it) has been a recent social experiment.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It was no accident that the rise of organized, compulsory education happened during the industrial revolution, on pair with the enslavement of people to the clock and the job.

Hmm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labor_laws_in_the_United_States

The National Child Labor Committee, an organization dedicated to the abolition of all child labor, was formed in 1904. It managed to pass one law, which was struck down by the Supreme Court two years later for violating a child's right to contract his work. In 1924, Congress attempted to pass a constitutional amendment that would authorize a national child labor law. This measure was blocked, and the bill was eventually dropped. It took the Great Depression to end child labor nationwide; adults had become so desperate for jobs that they would work for the same wage as children. In 1938, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Fair Labor Standards Act, which, among other things, placed limits on many forms of child labor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour

Bertrand Russell wrote that:[7]

The industrial revolution caused unspeakable misery both on England and in America. ... In the Lancashire cotton mills (from which Marx and Engels derived their livelihood), children worked from 12 to 16 hours a day; they often began working at the age of six or seven. Children had to be beaten to keep them from falling asleep while at work; in spite of this, many failed to keep awake and were mutilated or killed. Parents had to submit to the infliction of these atrocities upon their children, because they themselves were in a desperate plight. Craftsmen had been thrown out of work by the machines; rural labourers were compelled to migrate to the towns by the Enclosure Acts, which used Parliament to make landowners richer by making peasants destitute; trade unions were illegal until 1824; the government employed agents provocateurs to try to get revolutionary sentiments out of wage-earners, who were then deported or hanged. Such was the first effect of machinery in England.

A high number of children also worked as prostitutes.[8] Children as young as three were put to work. In coal mines children began work at the age of five and generally died before the age of 25. Many children (and adults) worked 16 hour days. As early as 1802 and 1819 Factory Acts were passed to regulate the working hours of workhouse children in factories and cotton mills to 12 hours per day. These acts were largely ineffective and after radical agitation, by for example the "Short Time Committees" in 1831, a Royal Commission recommended in 1833 that children aged 11-18 should work a maximum of 12 hours per day, children aged 9-11 a maximum of eight hours, and children under the age of nine were no longer permitted to work. This act however only applied to the textile industry, and further agitation led to another act in 1847 limiting both adults and children to 10 hour working days. [8]

I think compulsory education back then meant if you weren't working in a factory.

 

[innonimatu]

Hmm.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labor_laws_in_the_United_States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour

I think compulsory education back then meant if you weren't working in a factory.

You're right, I should have said "rose after the industrial revolution". That was the start, among the middle classes (the minority of "wealthy gentleman" of the the 19th century) to whom unoccupied children became a nuisance. And it was also why I mentioned the child labour among the poor. Still, and I may be wrong, child labour was also the norm before the industrial revolution. It just wasn't as bad, there were more breaks due to the natural agricultural cycles.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Another problem was that would-be governesses were stolen away by factory labor, the infant public-schooling system, and social mores.

 

[MobBoss]

Once again, you are guilty of making an erroneous assumption about me and my supposed activities.

Ah..so you merely link to huffington post a lot, but dont read it. Gotcha.

I actually don't look at their website at all, unless it comes up in a google search for something which actually interests me. But since they clearly don't lie and deliberately distort the facts as Fox News does, I'm sure you find nothing wrong with using them as a source when they do appear in a search result. Right?

Rofl! Thanks for that! Funniest thing I read all day.

Because the change in policy only happened last month instead of at the end of the Vietnam War?

No, the policy changes as the needs of the military changes. Its changed many, many times over the time since Vietnam.

And how exactly is that "owning me":

Because, once again, it highlights your ignorance over things military. A trend which you have yet to change.

And, of course, you knew all along this change was quite recent:

Like I said, I know a few soldiers in recruiting. Those changes happen as the manpower needs of the military change....and that can alter significant over the span of just a few years. Same thing happend when the military downsized under Clinton. Recruiting standards went up, the number of recruits decreased and a lot of people got out of the military early either by choice or not by choice.

And the change isn't all that great. Chances are that they will still be taking people guilty of multiple misdemeanors, and even some felonies, especially when the judge gives them a choice of where to serve their time:

Like I said, even with your google skills you could only come up with 1 real instance of this happening in the last decade or so and in that particular case, was more of an offer by the accused than by the judge. I stand by my claim that its a situation we dont really see anymore and your singular google find does nothing to challenge that at all.

So you can still get waivers for felonies. Just not "serious" ones anymore...

First of all, you may not realize it, but thats not an official US Army website, so its information could be incorrect or dated, and I am positive that this is the case with the link you provide. For example, under the 'offenses which cannot be waived' section, it does not mention misdemeanor or felony conviction of a charge of domestic violence. Because of the Lautenberg Amendment, anyone with a qualifying domestic violence conviction cannot be assessed into the military because they are prohibited from carrying a firearm or ammunition - which is kind of a requirement of military service. Your link doesnt even mention that as being a factor at all, and yet thats been the case for many years now.

About the only way to get an up to date and current list of what is waiveable and what isnt is to call your local recruiting office for the sole reason these requirements can shift up or down from base regulatory requirements via official twix messages from Recruiting and Retention Command. There could be a moritorium on all waivers and someone like you wouldnt have access to that information and you certainly wouldnt see it in a regulation. And right now, I am pretty sure they are not granting waivers for anything.

Also, simply because an offense is waivable doesnt mean you will get that waiver to join. Each is taken on a case by case basis and has to be screened appropriately. The majority dont make the cut even if the waiver is available. Its not an absolute gurantee in any event.

 

[GenMarshall]

Ahh yes, the battle between Formaldehyde and MobBoss. Lets all sit back and eat our popcorn and lolz.

 

[MobBoss]

Ahh yes, the battle between Formaldehyde and MobBoss. Lets all sit back and eat our popcorn and lolz.

Not really much of a battle to be honest.....

 

[civ_king]

Ahh yes, the battle between Formaldehyde and MobBoss. Lets all sit back and eat our popcorn and lolz.

it's happy hour

 

[Formaldehyde]

Not really much of a battle to be honest.....

No, for that I'd need an adversary who actually does some research before he posts, while claiming he must know what I do with my time.

So let's summarize:

Judges do indeed still offer convicted criminals the choice of going to jail or serving in the military. And Sarah Palin's own son was apparently given that choice after vandalizing the brakes of a schoolbus.

The military does indeed still take people who have committed multiple misdemeanors, and even felonies, under their waiver program. The only recent change is that they will no longer give a waiver to a "serious" felony commited as an adult. If the felony was committed in their "youth, they can still get a waiver even if the felony is deemed to be "serious".

 

[GenMarshall]

Not really much of a battle to be honest.....

Well it seems when you and Formaldehyde butt heads, it becomes almost an epic battle of lolz for us as we place bets on who's gonna win (Mostly it all pools into MobBoss) . Wished I could tell him to cease before he embarrass himself but...

There's that popcorn smilie ive been looking for!!

 

[MobBoss]

No, for that I'd need an adversary who actually does some research before he posts, while claiming he must know what I do with my time.

So let's summarize:

I merely said you link to huffington a lot. Do you deny that? I dont think so.

And I always research prior to posting. I even read others links to ensure they say what they allege. In your case even your own link contradicted your claim.

Judges do indeed still offer convicted criminals the choice of going to jail or serving in the military.

No, thats not what you proved at all. You gave a singular instance, and in even that one, it wasnt the judges offer, but the attorney for the accused making the offer to the judge.

If it were something that were done, even occasionally, there should be far more examples for you to proffer. I mean tens of thousands of people join the military each year, and given that fact, I would assume you would be able to give far more concrete examples to back your allegation. But thats simply not the case now is it?

Your own link stated that Judges cant order someone to join the army. Maybe you should reconcile with that fact.

And Sarah Palin's own son was apparently given that choice after vandalizing the brakes of a schoolbus.

Earlier you correctly labeled this rumor. Now all of a sudden its changed from rumor to fact?

Your're a funny guy Form. Very funny.

The military does indeed still take people who have committed multiple misdemeanors, and even felonies, under their waiver program.

You havent actually proven this to any real extent. But I wont contest that some few may sneak in under the radar somehow. I have seen a lot of things happen in my career that werent supposed to happen, so I acknowledge an exception could occur.

But for right now, the truth is that the military, especially the Army, has indeed tightened up its recruiting policy and have greatly cut back the amount of waivers given, and what they are given for. Unlike you, I have indeed proven this to be factual.

The only recent change is that they will no longer give a waiver to a "serious" felony commited as an adult. If the felony was committed in their "youth, they can still get a waiver even if the felony is deemed to be "serious".

Truthfully and factually there have been more changes than just that. Like the fact of the DV conviction I gave earlier that was mysteriously missing from your non-official army website. Depends on if it was filed as a juvenile charge or not.

And once more, the possibility of a waiver isnt a gurantee of one. Each is handled on a case by case basis.

Well it seems when you and Formaldehyde butt heads, it becomes almost an epic battle of lolz for us as we place bets on who's gonna win (Mostly it all pools into MobBoss) . Wished I could tell him to cease before he embarrass himself but...

Well, if your going to bet you may as well bet on a winner... And dont worry about me embarrassing myself on issues involving military matters. Thats not going to happen.

 

[Phlegmak]

Of course they can. Notwithstanding the obvious example of a child bringing a firearm, but there are plenty of makeshift weapons that can be crafted in a classroom, or smuggled in a backpack. If a 12 year old throws a metal chair at you in a fit of rage, its going to hurt.

I'm an adult male, and I also have 3 children in my K-12 school who are roughly my size. There are several 5th graders who are larger than our younger female teachers.

I don't know if I told you before, but you should be weightlifting in your free time. Seriously.

 

[Mad Man]

I hope the kids lose the war and get executed for there war crimes.

 

[Dumanios]

lol ,wait I'm in 8th grade!!!

Can I join the teacher side?

 

[Mad Man]

lol ,wait I'm in 8th grade!!!

Can I join the teacher side?

No, you made your choice by being young and restless so most be punished with the lot of them.