United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: School Calls Cops, Cops Call Child Services on Boy Who Made Harmless 'Brownies' Remark
Source:
Reason
URL Source: http://reason.com/blog/2016/06/29/s ... ls-cops-cops-call-child-servic
Published: Jun 29, 2016
Author: Robby Soave
Post Date: 2016-06-30 06:17:45 by Deckard
Keywords: Police State
Views: 3331
Comments: 35
This might be the most absurd case of a school mishandling a disciplinary issue yet: an elementary school in Collingswood, New Jersey, called the police because a nine-year-old male student allegedly made a racist remark. As a result, the state's child services division has opened a wholly unnecessary investigation into the boy's parents. It isn't cleared what he actually said—the school, William P. Tatem Elementary, has not returned my request for comment. But a local news story suggests that he did not use the word "brownies" to refer to persons of color. He was actually referring to the chocolate baked good, according to his parents. Given that he made the statement during a class party—it was the last day of school—this explanation makes sense. (His last name sounds Hispanic, if that matters.) In either case, the school had absolutely no reason to involve the police. Administrators should be perfectly capable of dealing with this sort of thing on their own. His teacher, or principal, could have asked the boy and his accuser about the incident and rendered some verdict. They could have punished him, if punishment was called for. Instead, a young boy was interrogated by an officer about a harmless comment he made while in school. It's just never necessary to involve the police in perfectly routine, non-violent, non-criminal disputes between children. The school's decision to do so is indefensible. But according to Philly.com, these kinds of automatic appeals to police authority are common: The incident, which has sparked outrage among some parents, was one of several in the last month when Collingswood police have been called to look into school incidents that parents think hardly merit criminal investigation. Superintendent Scott Oswald estimated that on some occasions over the last month, officers may have been called to as many as five incidents per day in the district of 1,875 students. This has created concern among parents in the 14,000-resident borough, who have phoned their elected officials, met with Mayor James Maley, blasted social-media message boards, and even launched a petition calling on the Camden County Prosecutor's Office to "stop mandated criminal investigation of elementary school students." It gets worse. Philly.com is also reporting that "the incident had been referred to the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency." I will be following up with this agency, the police, and the school. The school turned a non-issue into a police issues, and the cops turned a police issue into a child services issue. All because school officials think it's a police officer's job to tell students to behave themselves, rather than the students' teachers. Truly, it's incidents like these that confirm the suspicions of many Americans (and many Donald Trump supporters) that their country is too politically correct. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 13.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Not just the school, why are police responding to stupid stuff like this? I found this one: Why police were called to a South Jersey third-grade class party (philly.com 6/29/2016)
From your link : The incident, which has sparked outrage among some parents, was one of several in the last month when Collingswood police have been called to look into school incidents that parents think hardly merit criminal investigation. Superintendent Scott Oswald estimated that on some occasions over the last month, officers may have been called to as many as five incidents per day in the district of 1,875 students. The increased police involvement follows a May 25 meeting among the Collingswood Police Department, school officials, and representatives from the Camden County Prosecutor's Office, where school officials and police both said they were told to report to police any incidents that could be considered criminal, including what Police Chief Kevin Carey called anything "as minor as a simple name-calling incident that the school would typically handle internally." The police and schools were also advised that they should report "just about every incident" to the New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency, Carey said. Apparently this is a directive from the County Prosecutor's Office and agreed to by the school. Just when you think that schools can't get any more tyrannical, you see something like this. And some folks still don't think we live in a police state.
This is why when I read an article, I do so with an open-mind in search for truth. I try to find out what is fair in order to form an opinion or before I pass judgment. I simply cannot determine what is accurate and reasonably complete from reading the opinion of one author who has a biased agenda … every author holds opinions that affect his or her presentation of an issue. I try to find out what is missing from their story, and usually something is … something important. Therefore I confess to having demonstrated sufficient skepticism about what is told to me in a article, especially when the author uses unnamed source … I will continue in the mental mode. Far too often I find the authors of articles do not let the evidence speak for itself and they almost never present evidence from BOTH sides. They use loaded words such as reckless, indiscriminate and so on to channel a person’s thought as he or she reads the article. There are far too many articles where the author gets second hand information and then unilaterally decides the police use of force was wrong or someone in a position of power is lying. Or, that the methods used by a police department or officer were unwarranted. There is insufficient information contained and unverified in this article for me to determine that the methods were unneeded or unwarranted. Therefore, I will not form an opinion as to what was done right or wrong or pass judgement on anyone.
So did you click the article's link to the Philadelphia Enquirer, o seeker of truth?
So did you click the article's link to the Philadelphia Enquirer, o seeker of truth? This “Seeker of Truth” has a standard practice to chase all links and also search the Internet for allied articles covering the same subject.
Did you find anything to indicate that the posted article is inaccurate or incomplete?
Did you find anything to indicate that the posted article is inaccurate or incomplete? Yes.
Please do tell.
#16. To: ConservingFreedom (#13)
(Edited)
I will be more than happy to. I found the posted article did not furnish complete information. The second paragraph: The opening phrase in the second paragraph reads: “It isn’t cleared [clear] what he actually said …“ is just fine and the statement that the school had not returned the author’s call to find out is in order. But then the author begins to lead and channel the reader’s thought process with a “suggestion.” Next, the author uses the kids parents for a verification testimonial when they were not even there and never heard what the kid said. The author continues on to make a summary judgment by declaring the second-hand hearsay account “explanation makes sense.” But that was not enough. He next reaches out to play the “minority sympathy card” and says “if that matters.” Which of course in some cases may not, but in this day and time … it sends out a clarion call to all the bleeding heart liberals riding onboard the PC train. Finally, the picture of the little kid eating a brownie is baiting a sympathy conclusion. I don’t know what the kid said, to whom he said it or under what circumstances. There are too many “it could have been” situations since there is absolutely no definitive clarity as to what happened. “It could have been” that the boy opened his picnic box and said to his friend as he pulled a small cake out: “They are serving brownies in here now.” “It could have also been” a black kid walked by to pick up his picnic box and the boy said to his friend: “They are serving brownies in here now.” There could have been many more “could have been” situations … we will never know what the true situation was because the "information presented was incomplete." It was easy for some to jump on board the “sympathy and hate-cops bus” and immediately post a condemning comment … It is even easier for me to not form an opinion and withhold judgment because of the incomplete information. Respectfully yours,
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#3. To: TrappedInMd, Titorite2 (#1)
#4. To: Deckard (#3)
And some folks still don't think we live in a police state.
Actually unlike you Paultards with your warped beliefs, some folk think that news reporting should be objective and accurate so as not to form an opinion or pass judgment on biased information. Footnote: I personally believe that reason.com is agenda driven since it is operated by Reason Magazine … an American libertarian monthly magazine. Please, don’t anyone try to tell me that libertarians are not fiercely agenda driven fanatics.
#8. To: Gatlin, Deckard (#4)
I simply cannot determine what is accurate and reasonably complete from reading the opinion of one author who has a biased agenda
#10. To: ConservingFreedom (#8)
I simply cannot determine what is accurate and reasonably complete from reading the opinion of one author who has a biased agenda
#11. To: Gatlin (#10)
This “Seeker of Truth” has a standard practice to chase all links and also search the Internet for allied articles covering the same subject.
#12. To: ConservingFreedom (#11)
This “Seeker of Truth” has a standard practice to chase all links and also search the Internet for allied articles covering the same subject.
#13. To: Gatlin (#12)
Replies to Comment # 13. Please do tell.
It isn't cleared what he actually said—the school, William P. Tatem Elementary, has not returned my request for comment. But a local news story suggests that he did not use the word "brownies" to refer to persons of color. He was actually referring to the chocolate baked good, according to his parents. Given that he made the statement during a class party—it was the last day of school—this explanation makes sense. (His last name sounds Hispanic, if that matters.)
Seeker of Truth
End Trace Mode for Comment # 13.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]