Punishment for Criminal Thought

[mugaliens]

CNN carried an article this morning which I found far more disturbing than the content of the student's essay.

Essentially, the student's were given an essay to journal whatever poped into their minds. One student's essay contained some rather uneasy content, involving shootings and some other stuff.

Yet, after being questions, during which time the student said, "In creative writing, you're told to exaggerate," Lee said. "It was supposed to be just junk. ... There definitely is violent content, but they're taking it out of context and making it something it isn't," he was taken to another school and the school district was still evaluating punishment.

Why was he arrested? What law did he break? Why is the school district still evaluating punishment?



Don't they have the slightest clue that such an approach would, if the student really is pathological, only breed further resentment which might lead to a response that's less imaginary than the contents of his assignment?



Why not get him some help, instead? If anything, he should probably have a few sessions with a psychologist, preferrably paid for by the school system (since they're the only ones who're having coniptions about this).

But punishment? Again, for what?



Are they simply grossly overreacting, both wrongly so, and in the wrong direction, because of what happened at Virginia Tech? So this is a CYA issue?



Please, and God help us, let's get off the narcissistic CYA avenue of response and start doing what's right.

In college I was forced to read one of the sickest books I've ever read, by an author named Jerzy Kozinsky (hopefully the spelling is somewhat close). In the book, the leading character is a young boy who is abandoned by his parents, is forced to watch incest, bestiality, is himself sexually abused, he's buried to his neck before being rescued, and all of this is described in pathetically graphic detail.

Well, guess what, folks? This filth was forced on me courtesy of the Virginia Tech English Department.

Ironic, huh?

But now we're arresting and punishing high school students for following assignment guidelines?

What's wrong with this picture?



I think the school administrators need to get a clue, and fast, before they do far greater damage by trying to CYA, blindly, mindlessly thrusting this student into the same category as the psychopath who rampaged my alma mater, rather than recognizing the problem (if there even is one) and responding appropriately with a tentative evaluation and dismissal if it's negative, or continued help if it's positive for certain traits harmful to society.

Hopefully, someone at this administration call pull their head * * * * and make a more salient decision along these lines.

[Dr Nigel]

Based on the content of the article, I agree. It reminds me of a sci-fi story that actually did have thought police, where the leader's tagline was "Be pure, be vigilant, behave!".

If the student is actually charged, I rather suspect a decent lawyer would tear the prosecution to pieces. After all, all he did was write an essay, that only two or three people might ever see, except that the teacher seems to have felt it was his/her duty to disseminate it to a wider audience.

I ask myself: who has actually done anything wrong here? I certainly don't think it's the student.

[mugaliens]

Agreed, Dr. Nigel.

One has to ask what was behind the nature of his writings - such is the duty of the adult world with respect to our youth.

However, there are very clear responsibilities, including that of privacy, with respect to such disclosures, particularly with a minor, and those have apparently be grossly violated by the teacher and the adminstration. The mere fact that his name is plastered around the entire world is clear, bona-fide evidence that his rights to privacy have been violated, and I strongly suspect that the school system is in for a rather large payout should the student or his parents wish to sue.

What a ridiculously stupid administration.

[Matherly]

You are forgetting someing very important.

Thoughtcrime doubleplusungood.

Personally, I blame Goldstien.

(This sarcasm brought to you by Carl Matherly and George Orwell)

[speedfreek]

It reminds me of a sci-fi story that actually did have thought police, where the leader's tagline was "Be pure, be vigilant, behave!".

That sounds like Nemesis from the old 2000AD comics.

[Ronald Brak]

When I was a school kid we were taught that killing people was a good thing. I wish people would make up their minds.

[JohnD]

No one has mentioned Virginia Tech.
The student who killed there had written similar compositions, I beleive, and his teachers are being criticised for not shopping him.
With hysteria like that around, should you be surprosed if someone DOES shop another student with a lurid imagination?

Of more concern is the police officer who can twist thoughts into "disorderly conduct".

John

[Jens]

That's exactly what I was thinking. In fact, there were people on this board saying that people should have seen the signs, that Cho should have been forcibly hospitalized or detained in some way. So now they're doing it, I guess. But like others say, who guarantees they'll always get the right ones. People are not infallible, even psychiatrists.

[ASEI]

As far as dealing with psychos before they go crazy and kill people - after the Virginia tech shootings people demanded to know why he wasn't "dealt with" before he went on a rampage. They wanted to know why the psychologist couldn't stop him, restrain him, ect.

Now they want to know why a high-school student is being charged for disturbing writing.

Well, you can't have it both ways. Society can't, with 100% omniscient accuracy, determine who is going to go nuts. Society is going to err on one side or the other, and you have to choose how you're going to err. Perfect utopias where we infallibly detect and foil these people are not an option.

On the one side, where our nation is right now, we can't treat thought as incriminating and a basis for jailing people. Direct threats, yes. But disturbing rants recorded in private? Stopping people like the Virginia tech psycho entails surveying people for "warning signs" (ie eccentricity, strange thoughts) and using that as a basis to send out police and jail them.

On the other side, which is where we need to go to ensure these sorts of things don't happen, people who start getting hot under the collar, or display odd enough behavior, will be rounded up and confined by well-meaning people in white coats with gunmen as backup. Being weird would pose too great a risk to society. (Many of the great and benificial people in history were also a little odd - imagine what we would have lost if Maimann or Einstein or Edison were jailed) I imagine under this scenario, far more innocent people's lives will be ruined than a lone psycho can destroy.

[ASEI]

Sort of reminds me of one of David Brin's societies - they made the decision to ostracize and control an underclass of people who were determined, by genes, to have elevated tendencies to violence. Weren't allowed to have children, weren't allowed into space, weren't allowed to leave controlled areas because they might be violent. After all, mankind wants to put it's best face forward, and won't allow the wrong sort of people to propogate into space.

[Eckelston]

That's exactly what I was thinking. In fact, there were people on this board saying that people should have seen the signs, that Cho should have been forcibly hospitalized or detained in some way. So now they're doing it, I guess. But like others say, who guarantees they'll always get the right ones. People are not infallible, even psychiatrists.

Maybe the school made a mistake because of public hysteria but it was a mistake anyway. The teacher set a very bad example by asking honesty from a student than punishing him for it.

[HenrikOlsen]

A conviction could bring up to 30 days in jail and a maximum $1,500 fine.

For writing an essay in accordance with the teacher's instructions!

Several people need to get their heads examined.

[Fazor]

Well, can I play it safe and say both sides are wrong? No seriously! Okay let me explaine: I think the reaction of the teachers and now law enforcement was way out of line. If you recieve a work like this, it shouldn't just be ignored but there's a right and a wrong way to handle things. Letting something get blown to these proportions is a very very bad way to handle something like this.

On the flip side, what kind of a moron student do you have to be to write a paper like this and not expect a problem? I'm not saying he's a moron for writing the paper; if he was trying to show extreeme exageration or satire or whatever then good for him. That's what creative writing is. But at least go to the teacher and say, "look, I want to push this to it's furthest edges for [insert the artistic merit here]." And discuss what you're gonig to do before hand. I mean, use some common sense.

[mugaliens]

I agree, Fazor, that the student showed a serious lack of judgement, particularly in light of recent events. However, his ideas may have been born from those same recent events.

That the school administration and the police are grossly, even ridiculously out of line is a foregone conclusion.

[Jim]

"High school student" and "common sense" are oxymorons. Now, "high school teacher" and "common sense" should be companions. Maybe the teacher could have given a few groundrules? You know... no obscenities, no profanities, no express sex or violence... something "common sensical?"

IMO, the school admins overreacted... grossly so. Maybe the paper was an "indicator" or a "cry for help." But, it should be taken in context, and I don't think it was. What other indications were there that this student might be troubled? Had the teacher seen anything else that should trigger concern? Had anyone?

At most, this is a reason to speak with the student and understand why that subject was chosen. To even suggest punishment at this point is absurd.

The VT incident and this one demonstrate once again that people are generally very good at two things, hindsight and knee-jerk response.

[Dr Nigel]

That sounds like Nemesis from the old 2000AD comics.

Spot on. 2000AD is still going, by the way.

"Sleep is no refuge for impure thouights!"

[Dr Nigel]

Sort of reminds me of one of David Brin's societies - they made the decision to ostracize and control an underclass of people who were determined, by genes, to have elevated tendencies to violence. Weren't allowed to have children, weren't allowed into space, weren't allowed to leave controlled areas because they might be violent. After all, mankind wants to put it's best face forward, and won't allow the wrong sort of people to propogate into space.

This whole thread reminds me of the Megadeth song "Sweating Bullets", which includes the line:

"I'm in trouble for the things I haven't got to yet,"

[Dr Nigel]

... Maybe the teacher could have given a few groundrules? You know... no obscenities, no profanities, no express sex or violence... something "common sensical?"

In fact, Jim, the linked article in the OP states that the teacher told the students "... Don't censor yourselves,". It seems to me that the student took this instruction at face value.

Which kind of leads into the question of to what extent should students interpret the instructions of their high-school teachers.

[Doodler]

Curious to see what the ACLU will do if they have the backbone to do something meaningful.

[Gillianren]

Yeah, the teacher is behaving in a very contradictory manner here, I agree. "Do not censor yourself" and "but I'm going to have you arrested for your violent and disturbing essay" probably translates to "the quality of work turned in by future students will suffer." Also "I don't really mean don't censor yourself, but it sounds good." (It's Jerzy Kosinski, Mug, so you were quite close.)

Now, a session or two with a counselor of some kind mightn't be a bad thing. I'm not one of those who thought the VT shooter's writings should have necessarily been "warning signs." But often--not always, but often--such writings are a sign that the person writing them is going through a rough time or having some kind of emotional trouble. Then again, the editor of my high school's literary magazine my sophomore year wrote a lot of this sort of thing. (I know; it had been my job the year before to read through reams of his stuff to pick out a few items for publication.) He was quite well-adjusted, but he had a thing for Dean R. Koontz and Stephen King, and he tried (badly) to emulate their style.

[LurchGS]

Gillian,

(and others)

Exactly - these aren't *indicators*, they're a relatively common thread in those who DO drop off the deep end. The reverse is not true, though - most of those who write darkly don't drop off the cliff and start doing horrible things.

An indicator would be something that says "this individual is in need of help". Torturing animals, for instance, or setting fires. Threats constitute indicators, too.

I've not read the article, and I've certainly not seen the student's work in question. Does he name names and write about doing awful stuff to classmates? If so, I'd say that's a good indicator that he needs to spend time with a doctor. If it's arbitrary names etc., it's more likely to be meaningless.

In either event, the school system overreacted severely.

(Yes, I'm one of those freakoids who doesn't blame VT for not spotting Cho in advance. It's been amply demonstrated that you can't really predict these things. Yet. )

--------------

"Death to the unbelievers! Hay, how come nobody likes me?"

[AstralSpirit]

Yeah, the teacher says tell all and no punishment. The student criticizes the assignment in a very blunt way and is arrested. So much for the teacher standing by his word.

I don't know that counseling is necessary. From reading the article, it looks like the student was attempting to be critical of the assignment. He was saying that the teacher might insight another incident like Virginia Tech. While I don't necessarily agree with this point of view, it is a perfectly valid point of view and there should not be action taken for expressing it.

There was certainly anger in his essay that he may have expressed in an inappropriate manner. But how is he to learn if someone doesn't help him learn how to express such anger appropriately? The response should have been to help the student improve his writing style, not arrest and punish him.

[Sp1ke]

Since we aren't omniscient and the law isn't perfect, the choice is:
1) Do we risk letting guilty people go free?
or
2) Do we risk jailing innocent people?
The over-reaction here sounds like option 2 but I'm firmly in the option 1 camp.

[AstralSpirit]

Gillian,

(and others)

Exactly - these aren't *indicators*, they're a relatively common thread in those who DO drop off the deep end. The reverse is not true, though - most of those who write darkly don't drop off the cliff and start doing horrible things.

Some very great writers have written graphically about the most horrible of actions, their works are considered cultural treasures. Other writers such as Stephen King, have written very bloody stories that will never be considered great, but he has never been arrested for writing them.

[Pinemarten]

My predictions:

The kid will sue and make lots of money.
The lawyers will make more.
The kid will do the talk show circuit and make money.
The talk shows will make more.
Anything he writes will be published, and he will make money.
The publishers will make more.

[publius]

This was one of the things I was worried about with the breathless coverage of that VT lunatic's "disturbing writings".

In the VT case, that guy's writing was but a mere subpart of a wider "pattern of behavior", including setting a fire, stalking women, freaking students and teachers out to the point the students didn't want to be in class with him, and one teacher set up a "code word" to tell an assistant to call security.

Far different. Add all that up, and something ought to be done.

In this case, the arson and stalking are criminal, and that would trigger allowing the state to do something serious. But if we didn't have anything criminal, but still the other "pattern of disturbing" behavior, I still say something should be done.

But not criminal. A school should be allowed to kick someone out like that, no questions, and no lawsuits. You want an education, play by the rules of behavior we set. If you don't, go away. You're still free, but we have our freedom, too.

-Richard

[timb]

.... But if we didn't have anything criminal, but still the other "pattern of disturbing" behavior, I still say something should be done.

But not criminal. A school should be allowed to kick someone out like that, no questions, and no lawsuits. You want an education, play by the rules of behavior we set. If you don't, go away. You're still free, but we have our freedom, too.

What about a refund? if you get kicked out of college for being "disturbing" but not breaking any specific rules, shouldn't you get you tuition back?

[Maksutov]

If this holds up, it means that the writers for every cop show on TV need to be arrested.

Which might not be such a bad thing...

[astromark]

Quickly placing ambulance's at the bottom of every cliff does not lessen the mortality rate. Building a better fence at the top of that cliff and educating people of the dangers might be a better idea. I wildly violent or gruesome imagination can be a good thing. As long as the control function is activated.
Good education is not thought control. Good education is the school of life. Balance, reason and understanding is part of that. Leave this student alone to judge for himself what is right and wrong. Writing about blood curdling violence must not be considered a crime. I will give this some more thought, but do sagest that nothing is actually wrong here. Just a nervous teacher. A little gun shy. ( pun intended ) You must not blame him. He did the right thing, only letting the media in on it was a mistake. That is ironic because the media are often guilty of having a imagination running wild.

[ToSeek]

If this holds up, it means that the writers for every cop show on TV need to be arrested.

Which might not be such a bad thing...

There was some story recently about parties in the US government asking the producers of 24 to stop giving the terrorists ideas....