The use of the police baton, and other defensive tools

Can one apply the police use of the baton, or other tools, to the
discipline of children by parents logically?

Let's see:

http://www.armortrainingacademy.com/bp/meb.asp

"The philosophy of the MEB Program is the same as the Monadnock PR-24
Program. This means the primary purpose for using an expandable,
straight baton is to defend against attacks from fists, feet, and hard,
rigid type weapons. And the Secondary purpose is to apply control
techniques to move, restrain or assist in handcuffing a person. It is
this two-prong philosophy of "Protect & Restrain" which separates
Monadnock programs from most other straight baton systems available
today. Most other baton systems teach that the straight baton should
only be used to strike. However, take into consideration the
implications of such a limited view of this valued law enforcement
tool. The two-pronged philosophy of our training states that once the
person stops being combative, the next logical step is to apply a
control hold with the baton that is already in your hand. The view that
the only purpose of the baton is to strike someone is dangerous both
legally and morally to you, the officer, and to those you are sworn to
protect. The humane and proper approach to all types of baton handling
is to train law enforcement, security, corrections and military police
officers, first on how to employ the baton to block or strike, and once
the person stops the assault, to apply an assisted control technique
using the baton. The objective is to provide law enforcement officers
with as many options as possible on the street."

I find no point made applicable to child rearing. You, the reader,
based on your personal bias about the use of force on children for
purposes of disciplining (teaching) may have different mileage.

In fact I have never found any reference in police training manuals, or
discussions with police trainers (and I worked with prison populations
and lawbreaker populations at one time) any reference to "disciplining"
prisoners by the use of force. Not to say it isn't illegally done.

But let's see if my citation above is simply a rare anomoly. And that
the metaphore of police use of force and that of parents spanking for
discipline have any possible connections logically.

Here we have, for instance and a great example, training information on
the use of force that cites statute, for a major university campus
police. These are, by the way, armed and sworn law officers.

http://www.cpso.pdx.edu/html/forcepolicy.htm

"B. Officers can use force to stop or prevent the commission of a crime
to protect persons or property. Officers will refer to ORS 161.190
through 161.255 for guidance."

Pay close attention to the conditions and circumstances that follow the
section cited above, and point out where they apply to the discipline
of children, and whether or not you believe that there is an
appropriate use of such force based on your child's criminal behavior.

Oh, do you not think you should discipline your child for criminal
behavior...or could it be that you do not see a child's ignorance, lack
of experience, and the subsequent behaviors as "criminal" in nature?

Then you, sir or madam, are not a 'compulsive' spanker.

In fact you are a candidate ripe for considering not even using
spanking, and thus not seeing your child as a criminal.
Congratulations.

And you will find, consistently, if you bother to research it, that
police training and department policy on the use of force limits it to
that needed, and no more, to subdue the subject. Never is it mentioned
or condoned that the baton or any force be used to "teach the subject a
lesson."

While parental discipline is in fact entirely, or should be entirely,
to teach the child.

Do you use a baton to teach your child?

If so are you prepared to give up your child to the state for adoption
by others?

That IS what will happen if you are caught.

Just as police officers that are caught using force to "punish" can,
do, and should lose their jobs.

While society gives police officers access and statute supporting their
use of force up to and including deadly force, they are proscribed
carefully to limit that use...and it does not include "teaching."

If you must use force to subdue your child then of course, do so, but
like the police to no more than is necessary to subdue.

That same force is no more appropriate against the child than beating a
subject into unconsciousness would be by the police to "teach him a
lesson."

Logic and the spanking compulsives. They are incompatible.

0:-

And there you have it. The police can use batons, tasers...
and the anti-spanking zealotS would dare not call it "assault" nor
"beating" but if you as a parent dare to spank your kids... watch
out! ;-)

Doan


On 10 Aug 2005 wrote:

Can one apply the police use of the baton, or other tools, to the
discipline of children by parents logically?

Let's see:

http://www.armortrainingacademy.com/bp/meb.asp

"The philosophy of the MEB Program is the same as the Monadnock PR-24
Program. This means the primary purpose for using an expandable,
straight baton is to defend against attacks from fists, feet, and hard,
rigid type weapons. And the Secondary purpose is to apply control
techniques to move, restrain or assist in handcuffing a person. It is
this two-prong philosophy of "Protect & Restrain" which separates
Monadnock programs from most other straight baton systems available
today. Most other baton systems teach that the straight baton should
only be used to strike. However, take into consideration the
implications of such a limited view of this valued law enforcement
tool. The two-pronged philosophy of our training states that once the
person stops being combative, the next logical step is to apply a
control hold with the baton that is already in your hand. The view that
the only purpose of the baton is to strike someone is dangerous both
legally and morally to you, the officer, and to those you are sworn to
protect. The humane and proper approach to all types of baton handling
is to train law enforcement, security, corrections and military police
officers, first on how to employ the baton to block or strike, and once
the person stops the assault, to apply an assisted control technique
using the baton. The objective is to provide law enforcement officers
with as many options as possible on the street."

I find no point made applicable to child rearing. You, the reader,
based on your personal bias about the use of force on children for
purposes of disciplining (teaching) may have different mileage.

In fact I have never found any reference in police training manuals, or
discussions with police trainers (and I worked with prison populations
and lawbreaker populations at one time) any reference to "disciplining"
prisoners by the use of force. Not to say it isn't illegally done.

But let's see if my citation above is simply a rare anomoly. And that
the metaphore of police use of force and that of parents spanking for
discipline have any possible connections logically.

Here we have, for instance and a great example, training information on
the use of force that cites statute, for a major university campus
police. These are, by the way, armed and sworn law officers.

http://www.cpso.pdx.edu/html/forcepolicy.htm

"B. Officers can use force to stop or prevent the commission of a crime
to protect persons or property. Officers will refer to ORS 161.190
through 161.255 for guidance."

Pay close attention to the conditions and circumstances that follow the
section cited above, and point out where they apply to the discipline
of children, and whether or not you believe that there is an
appropriate use of such force based on your child's criminal behavior.

Oh, do you not think you should discipline your child for criminal
behavior...or could it be that you do not see a child's ignorance, lack
of experience, and the subsequent behaviors as "criminal" in nature?

Then you, sir or madam, are not a 'compulsive' spanker.

In fact you are a candidate ripe for considering not even using
spanking, and thus not seeing your child as a criminal.
Congratulations.

And you will find, consistently, if you bother to research it, that
police training and department policy on the use of force limits it to
that needed, and no more, to subdue the subject. Never is it mentioned
or condoned that the baton or any force be used to "teach the subject a
lesson."

While parental discipline is in fact entirely, or should be entirely,
to teach the child.

Do you use a baton to teach your child?

If so are you prepared to give up your child to the state for adoption
by others?

That IS what will happen if you are caught.

Just as police officers that are caught using force to "punish" can,
do, and should lose their jobs.

While society gives police officers access and statute supporting their
use of force up to and including deadly force, they are proscribed
carefully to limit that use...and it does not include "teaching."

If you must use force to subdue your child then of course, do so, but
like the police to no more than is necessary to subdue.

That same force is no more appropriate against the child than beating a
subject into unconsciousness would be by the police to "teach him a
lesson."

Logic and the spanking compulsives. They are incompatible.

0:-