No surprise, per the article below, experts appear to see the incident far more my way than the gun nut's way.
We have a supposed set of positive comments from the daughter, but I am skeptical of those, since they come from a dad who seems less than scrupulous in his willingness to coerce conduct from his dependent family members. I'm also a bit less willing to believe that either the cops or social services were as encouraging of this technique for abusive discipline, given the guidelines and legal definitions of abuse in the family court system under which they have to operate.
But it doesn't surprise me that this occurred in a 'Southron' red-neck state with poor education, and reactionary political and social attitudes. Firearms and violence have no proper place in discipline or family dynamics. This is entirely about coercion, threats, and control, and nothing whatsoever to do with the much-vaunted claims that y'all only want guns for recreation and self-defense against armed intruders. This puts bullshit to all of those claims about your desire to have firearms only for positive and constructive or defensive use.
Here is the update, from
MSNBC.com:
Laptop-shooting dad, after 21 million views, says he'd do it over again
By Bob Sullivan
On a week when it seemed half of America was weighing why French parents were superior, the other half was cheering for "laptop-shooting dad."
The irony can't be missed. An essay by Pamela Druckerman, based on her new book "Bringing up Bebe," was the most popular story on the Wall Street Journal's website all week. It extolled the virtues of teaching kids patience and of learning the value of a firm, quiet "no."
On the other hand, Tommy Jordan, angry dad from North Carolina, became an overnight Internet folk hero for meting out gunslinging justice to his rebellious 15-year-old, who had recently posted a disrespectful update on her Facebook page. On Thursday night, he posted the act of discipline on his daughter's Facebook wall, and on YouTube. By Monday morning, a stunning 21.4 million people had watched it -- far more than watch an episode of “American Idol”or even NBC's “Today” show. We’ll hear Jordan’s reaction to his viral sensation -- and whether he’d change anything about the incident -- in a moment.
While experts interviewed by msnbc.com were highly critical of the public nature of the discipline, the vast majority of parents expressed enthusiastic approval for Jordan, most pointing out that it's high time "someone stood up to these spoiled kids." An unscientific poll of 93,000 voters on Today.com found 74 percent agreed with Jordan's brand of discipline. Some avid supporters even urged Jordan to jump into the presidential race. He demurred, but publicly endorsed Ron Paul.
Jordan has also used his newfound fame to publicly endorse a website in which he has a financial interest, a classified-ad service called Another Man's Junk. He's encouraged visitors to donate money to the Muscular Dystrophy Association and says he's helped raise $5,000. And, he's monetized some of that YouTube traffic by adding an advertisement at the beginning of the now famous video.
"To those who are pissed because the copyright statements are on the video and it's been monetized.... well, I've got to pay for the attorney's somehow. Get over it," he wrote on his Facebook wall on Saturday.
He needs lawyers because Jordan's opened a Pandora's Box with his video. There is a small army of imitators making parodies, and Jordon expressed fear that some parent may carry gun-wielding discipline too far, and he might get blamed. He's also instructed lawyers to protect his copyrights and threatened to sue others who repost his video without attribution. He's facing some Internet-style harassment himself -- someone posted a good bit of personal information about him on a website.
He was also visited by the police and Child Protective Services during the weekend.
"Of course they came. They received enough ‘Oh my god he's going to kill his daughter’ comments that they had to," he wrote. He made light of the visits, however. The police congratulated him, he said, and one officer added that he planned to use the video in presentations he does for the school system.
The social worker interviewed Jordan and his daughter separately and was satisfied, Jordan wrote.
"At the end of the day, no I'm not losing my kids, no one's in danger of being ripped from our home that I know of, and I actually got to spend some time with the nice lady and learn some cool parenting tips that I didn't know," he wrote.
Despite the surprising notoriety, Jordan said he'd do it all over again in a statement designed to answer questions posed by reporters. (He’s so far not responded to msnbc.com’s request for an interview.)
“If I had it to do again... let's see... I'd do it almost the same," he wrote on his Facebook page in a note addressed to Anita Li of the Toronto Star. He wouldn't be smoking in the video, he said, then added, "I'd have worn my Silverbelly Stetson, not my Tilley hat, if I'd known that image was going to follow me the rest of my life and I'd probably have cleaned my boots. That's it."
More of his response:
"To answer 'Why did you reprimand her over a public medium like Facebook' my answer is this: Because that’s how I was raised. If I did something embarrassing to my parents in public (such as a grocery store) I got my tail tore up right there in front of God and everyone, right there in the store. I put the reprisal in exactly the same medium she did, in the exact same manner.”
Did the video have the intended effect?
"I think it was very effective on one front. She apparently didn’t remember being talked to about previous incidents, nor did she seem to remember the effects of having it taken away, nor did the eventual long-term grounding seem to get through to her. ...This time, she won’t ever forget and it’ll be a long time before she has an opportunity to post on Facebook again. I feel pretty certain that every day from then to now, whenever one of her friends mentions Facebook, she’ll remember it and wish she hadn’t done what she did.”
Jordan said he and his daughter have talked about the video and reached a "semi-truce," and that when he showed his daughter the comments that Internet users left on the YouTube page, she was "astounded."
"People were telling her she was going to commit suicide, commit a gun-related crime, become a drug addict, drop out of school, get pregnant on purpose, and become a stripper because she’s too emotionally damaged now to be a productive member of society. Apparently stripper was the job-choice of most of the commenters. Her response was 'Dude … it’s only a computer. I mean, yeah I’m mad but pfft.' She actually asked me to post a comment on one of the threads (and I did) asking what other job fields the victims of laptop-homicide were eligible for because she wasn’t too keen on the stripping thing.”
And on the biggest lesson learned through the incident:
"She’s seen first-hand through this video the worst possible scenario that can happen. One post, made by her Dad, will probably follow him the rest of his life; just like those mean things she said on Facebook will stick with the people her words hurt for a long time to come. Once you put it out there, you can’t take it back, so think carefully before you use the internet to broadcast your thoughts and feelings."
Dog Gone, your prejudice against the South is obvious, but surely you're not identifying with the Numenorians, are you? You're more of a Grima. . .
ReplyDeleteBut notice that your favorite guardian of public safety, the police, found nothing wrong here. Your favorite way of finding rights, consensus, is on the side of the father.
Or are those only correct when they agree with you?
We don't know what the police found or did not find; we only have the father's word for this, and I don't find him credible. That would also hold true for the social services interviews.
DeleteIt is quite possible, depending on how rural this place is, that there was not enough evidence to arrest him for firing his weapon as he did. But I am very skeptical that the police were as enthusiastic as he claims they were, given the usual standard for domestic abuse guidelines. You see, contrary to how YOU think, I go by objective criteria, like the guidelines for domestic abuse.
But clearly we have established here that this was a case of a firearm being used to intimidate, not for self defense or recreation.
And it was a weapon used for incredibly shitty parenting by an ignorant and violent man.
The standard in North Carolina is evidence of attempted or actual physical harm, sexual abuse, or the fear of imminent harm. None of those apply here.
DeleteYou ignored my comment about consensus, I see.
You are right. The violence, the humanity. I wonder what was going through the laptop's mind in its final minutes of life. The fear, the hopelessness knowing that it was going to get it's PRAM zapped for the final time. I sure hope that his hard drive found Jesus during his last moments.
DeleteOh yeah, I forgot. Its is a piece of plastic and wires.
Act of violence? Give me a break.
Here is a youtube clip of some horrific mass murder. Try not to piss while you watch it:
http://youtu.be/3jsr0TjQLKU
I wonder if those old cars and washing machines full of tannerite waiting on their appointment with death felt the same thing as that laptop or was the laptop somehow more feeling since it had a faster CPU? I guess I am just not sure how this whole violence to inanimate objects works. Maybe you can enlighten us.
Oh dear. The victims are piling up.
Deletehttp://youtu.be/PS3sAWF5S1I
In this video 14 unsuspecting hard drives were herded together and bound with tape in deplorable conditions. They were then placed in harm's way of a Barrett 50 Caliber sniper rifle. You know, the one that the anti's claim shoot down helicopters and jumbo jets every day. These poor, defenseless hardrives were then helplessly subjected to the carnage and violence that is the .50 BMG. One bullet ripped through their young bodies as if they were merely civilian aircraft. They didn't have a chance, poor things.
I wept when I saw this. There are so many more videos like this out there. Everyday untold numbers of computer parts, appliances and empty cars are subject to this violent behavior.
We must stop the carnage. Please, please call your congressmen. If it saves just one iPod, it is worth it.
There are days when my computer asks me if I'm sure that I contemplate which caliber would be the best for a thorough reprogramming. . .
DeleteEmotional abuse is characterized in most states - more civilized places than North or South Carolina in this regard - as acts being intended to hurt, threaten, intimidate, and that includes acts not directly to a person but to their property - sometimes live property like pets, but also causing emotional distress by one person punitively damaging something important to the person being victimized or a threat to do so.
DeleteNow if a person wants to shoot up their own shit, have at it. When it is shooting something belonging to another person to coerce that person into doing something, that's abuse.
It is clearly NOT recreation, and clearly NOT self-defense. Ya'll haven't argued either that the daughter's lap top was shot because it was a dangerous home invading 'goblin', or that there was an absence of more legitimate targets to shoot -- which of course you couldn't argue, given the rant that accompanied the video.
I'm particularly saddened that a man who professes to be a teacher would think this was legitimate discipline of a high school aged girl.
Tragic. Guess it's that backwards southern notion about education and appropriate interpersonal relationships. You just so seldom hear about any way in which either of the Carolinas or other southern states are considered to pioneer good examples of any kind of progress, do you?
So here is just one random definition of abuse, that applies to domestic or romantic partners, but also to acts between parents and children. This one is from the Colorado bar association web page on the topic:
http://www.cobar.org/index.cfm/ID/21062
What Is Domestic Violence?
Domestic violence is a pattern of behavior in which one person attempts to control another through threats or actual use of physical, verbal, or psychological violence or sexual assault on their current or past intimate partner. (Source FVPF2)
In its legal definition:
•Domestic violence means an act or threatened act of violence upon a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship.
•Domestic violence also includes any other crime against a person or against property or any municipal ordinance violation against a person or against property, when used as a method of coercion, control, punishment, intimidation, or revenge directed against a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship.
Domestic violence can include: (Source SD)
Physical Violence...
•stabbing, shooting
•destruction of property
•use of any object to inflict pain, punishment, or to intimidate
Emotional Abuse
•threatening
•harassing
•isolating from friends and family, forbidding to socialize, drive, work, or make certain decisions
•humiliating in public or private
•destroying victim's treasures
Domestic violence can be overt and/or subtle. (Source MSEC)
•overt direct action such as homicide, vandalism to the victim’s car or other property, and threats.
I could provide you with a long laundry list of why these are the accepted standards for abusive behavior.
Of course, so long as someone uses a GUN to commit domestic abuse of this kind, the gun nuts will advocate and celebrate the actions, and condone the abuse, excuse the abuse, justify the abuse, or try to pretend it is anything other than what it clearly is - abuse with a firearm.
It is particularly egregious when a teacher of teens, who in most states is required to observe and report abuse, sides with the abuser because they share a fetish relationship with firearms.
And you wonder why we doubt the judgment and safety, the value to society, of you gun nuts and your firearms.
1. I teach in college. I have taught dual-enrollment classes and Upward Bound and have done some teaching in high school in the past, but primarily, my work is in college.
Delete2. The measurement of progress requires us to agree about what constitutes progress.
3. The laptop was likely bought by the parents with their own money. That means that it belongs to the parents. The daughter had use of it, but unless she paid for it, it wasn't really hers.
4. The contraction of you all is written "y'all." Apostrophes indicate letters that are left out.
5. The whining that I hear about what this father did comes out of a belief that children are in charge.
"Now if a person wants to shoot up their own shit, have at it."
DeleteI'm pretty sure he probably purchased the laptop. So if he produces his receipt, you are now okay with this, right?
1. Are some of the students you teach children - teens under the age of 21, or not?
DeleteIs it possible for a student under the age of 18 to take one of those classes, or is it not?
Do you agree that even when it affects older children, you should object to abuse, or not?
2. The definition of abuse is clearly established; progress here is not significant. People who as a group fail to conform to the accepted norms across the country, including legal norms, or who are behind or below standards are not the benchmark you should be using.
3. He refers to the laptop as his daughters. Therefore it doesn't really matter whether HE paid for it and GAVE it to his daughter, or whether someone else provided it to her. Clearly the SIGNIFICANCE of him shooting it was because she had some sort of recognized relationship to this lap top and he was using that relationship to the object to use violence to punish and control.
Or are you going to continue to be intellectually dishonest about this point?
4. Yes, an apostrophe signifies letters left out. Writing in a manner which approximates a regional or local dialect of some kind reflect pronunciation, not spelling. So glad I can educate the teacher, again.
5. No, that is simply more intellectual dishonesty on your part. The child being in charge is not the issue in any way shape or form.
So, which is it - you're too stupid to understand the point, or you're choosing to lie about what the point is? Or both?
Violence, and intimidation using a firearm IS, and how those with authority or control abuse that power in a harmful way in their relationships IS THE ISSUE.
FatWhiteManFeb 14, 2012 08:37 AM
Delete"Now if a person wants to shoot up their own shit, have at it."
I'm pretty sure he probably purchased the laptop. So if he produces his receipt, you are now okay with this, right?
No. Answer this question FWM, is he trying to discipline the daughter by shooting something of the daughter's, or not? Do you believe that the father for example shooting his own car would be an act that the father would use to discipline the daughter?
If the father refers to this as his DAUGHTER's lap top, it belongs to the daughter, regardless of his paying for it and then giving it to her, or if she bought it.
Read very carefully the links I cut and pasted from the Colorado Bar Association defining both humiliating a child, spouse or romantic partner, AND destroying something that is important to them/ or their property as ABUSE, especially done so wit violence.
That is the customary definition.
This man was not shooting something of his own to punish his daughter, he was shooting something that he and the daughter both considered belonged to the daughter.
1. Since when does the Colorado Bar Association have anything to say to North Carolina?
Delete2. Y'all is the correct contraction of you all. Putting the apostrophe after the "a" as you did doesn't reflect regional pronunciation; it merely shows a lack of understanding of what's going on. How did you educate me on any point here?
The Colorado Bar association cite was just one of many, which I identifed. Are you famliar with providing a single example of multiple sources that affirm something? THAT is the standard nationally for abuse. THAT is the applicablility of the CO bar here, as an example of the national standard, in which North Carolina is sadly deficient.
DeleteIF you believe the father's account of police and social services. I don't. The fact that they showed up shows this triggered their concern about abuse.
DO note, btw, that I cited the source, quoted it, and provided the link, contrary to your claim we (Laci and I )fail to do that.
You, pronounced Yah, would be properly written phonetically as Ya'll, a contraction of 'Yah' and a drawled 'awll' for all.
It reflects where the break is when pronouncing it. But perhaps you aren't familiar with glottal stops, or other linguistic observations?
You have failed to respond to my points 1 - 5 above.
You are once again intellectually dishonest, and probably stupid. I appear to need to educate you on a range of topics, from what constitutes abuse of a teen (which you should know as an educator, even a poor educator) to linguistics.
Are you seriously trying to tell a southerner and an English teacher at that how to pronounce y'all? Dog Gone, I've addressed your points far more often than you've ever addressed mine, but you're an illustration of why we would prefer all y'all damn Yankees to mind your own business.
Delete"Read very carefully the links I cut and pasted from the Colorado Bar Association defining both humiliating a child, spouse or romantic partner, AND destroying something that is important to them/ or their property as ABUSE, especially done so wit violence."
DeleteWhat do you mean "especially done so with violence"? There is no question he destroyed the laptop but why do you contend it was done with "violence"? If he had drilled holes in it with his drill press, it would be just as inoperable. But would that be as "violent"? If not, then why? If he had soaked the laptop in a bucket of water, would that have been "violent"? The laptop would be just as ruined. I think you are hung up on the fact that he used a gun as if it is some magical device with evil intentions of its own. Some would argue that a sledge hammer would have been far more "violent".
Are you seriously trying to tell me that all southerners speak alike? Or do you acknowledge that there is a range of accents and dialects in the south, rather than a single, homogenous and uniform southern accent?
DeleteNo, thank you. I won't mind my own business, so long as what you do is a potential threat and risk to others.
You tried to pretend that the CO bar definition did not apply to North Carolina. I would argue that as it reflects the current normative definition, it is legitimately the standard for assessing bad dad Tommy's conduct.
But like it or not, the DoJ includes federal jurisdiction over North Carolina. The DoJ defines abuse as :
Psychological abuse, also referred to as emotional abuse or mental abuse, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder.[1][2][3] Such abuse is often associated with situations of power imbalance, (in this case, check - power is one-sided) such as abusive relationships, bullying, child abuse (check) and in the workplace.
and
The U.S. Department of Justice defines emotionally abusive traits as including causing fear by intimidation (check, that would include public humiliation), threatening physical harm to self, partner, children, or partner's family or friends, destruction of pets and property (check), forcing isolation from family, friends, (check) or school or work.[5]
and
from wikipedia on child abuse, under psychological/emotional abuse:
..include name-calling, ridicule, degradation, destruction of personal belongings, torture or killing of a pet, excessive criticism, inappropriate or excessive demands, withholding communication, and routine labeling or humiliation.[27]
Looks exactly like the conduct of Bad Dad meets the criteria for child abuse.
Whether or not the state and police and social services of North Carolina recognize the wider national standards for it or not. I noticed that the Governor's commission for North Carolina DID recognize these items as abuse in partner relationships, although they have similar but slightly different definitions for child abuse, which they differentiate.
So, I would love to know how an educator, like yourself Greg, DOESN'T know what child abuse is?
I'm guessing from your failure to address the points above, you are being intellectually dishonest again.
You're losing, you can't admit you were wrong to support or condone what this guy did, so you bluster and bullshit.
That is reprehensible, that you would take the side of an apparent child abuser. Does your obsession with your fetish object override basic human decency such as objecting to child abuse?
What we saw in that video was not child abuse. It was discipline. The child wasn't harmed, and you have no evidence to the contrary. Or are you seriously suggesting that taking away belongings from a child is always inappropriate? Does a child always have the right to a computer, a television, the bag of weed under the bed, and on and on? Or could it be that parents have the right to take away a privilege until the child's behavior changes?
Delete"What we saw in that video was not child abuse. It was discipline. The child wasn't harmed, and you have no evidence to the contrary."
DeleteObviously Dog Gone thinks she knows more than the police and child protective services, who have already investigated this and found nothing.
Anonymous, we don't know what the determination of social services or the police may be; we only have the father's word for it, and he appears to my mind to be spinning it in his favor.
DeleteEven if they did not find enough on which to act - which is NOT the same thing as approving of his conduct -- it was made clear that qualified experts pretty universally condemn his conduct. It was not discipline, it was abuse.
Further, the CDC and the DoJ define using destroying someone's property (BOTH daughter and father identify this as HER property) is not discipline, it is emotional and psychological abuse, especially as this was, when it entails a lethal weapon used in a violent way.
Further it is equally clear that public humiliation of a child by an adult -as this was - is ALSO abuse.
YOU aren't in a position to evaluate the harm. And in fact that kind of harm can be expressed in a variety of forms, many of them not immediately evident, and more subtle than this goon would recognize. No one is going to claim Gun Nut Goober is a well educated or particularly clever individual, on the basis of his video.
Or do you, Anonymous, claim to know more than experts, multiple state definitions which are standardized, the DoJ's standards, and the CDC's standards? That puts it a conclusion that is not specific only to me, but with a lot of other heavy hitters in line backing up that conclusion.
Given that the U.S., in comparison with other countries has a relatively poor record in addressing child abuse, and that the Carolinas have particularly poor levels of human services, that is hardly a big endorsement that it wasn't in fact child abuse, if they don't take action.
Check out the stats for yourself; the southern states are pretty universally abysmal in that regard.
Which tends to explain why Greg wouldn't know what does or does not constitute abuse of teens.
Please, do go to North Carolina and call people Gun Nut Goobers. That's a video that I'd enjoy watching.
DeleteIf a sledge hammer was used to publicly pound a lap top, yes that would also be violence. Taking a big hunting knife and stabbing her dolls, or slashing her clothing would have been similarly abusive conduct.
DeleteWhat part of shooting an object - multiple times, at close range, for destructive purposes ISN'T violent? All the more so coupled by the 8 minute humiliating public rant on top of that.
BOTH those actions are abuse.
Using a gun is not appropriate discipline. What this act says is that if you don't toe the line, I'll shoot what you care about.
A lethal weapon is not appropriate discipline, whether it is shooting a lap top or a teddy bear, or Barbie dolls, to control behavior.
As to the term 'Goober', you may recall that the old classic television series, the Andy Griffith show had a character by that name, and took place in Mayberry, NORTH CAROLINA. It's a southern term for a certain type of person; it is not applicable to ALL North Carolinians, just asses like this guy, who is not nearly as nice as the classic tv sitcom guy.
As to the notion that not everyone was safe to entrust with a firearm, the deputy character Barney Fife was restricted to carrying a single bullet, which he was required to keep buttoned down in his pocket for everyone's safety, because he got carried away with using his firearm inappropriately - in a little rural place in North Carolina.
I think I could make a good justification for that term in North Carolina, and get some support for how I used it. They've long understood the concept of gun nuts in that state, in part because of guys like this who ARE gun nuts. Better educated people don't tend to see this kind of behavior as speaking well for their state.
I seem to recall another character, Gomer. Know what a GOMER is Greg?
I've been to North Carolina - have you?
Dog Gone, I think I've been to North Carolina, SINCE I WAS BORN THERE AND LIVED THERE FOR MANY YEARS. Got it? Your apology will be entertained. And while we're on the subject, I grew up watching the Andy Griffith Show. I always liked Otis and Ernest T. Bass, myself.
DeleteWhat, no apology, Dog Gone? I suppose I'll have to show you my birth certificate, eh?
DeleteWhy can't we all just get along? Do you guys really have to defend this guy? C'mon.
ReplyDeleteOf course we can. Just stop trying to take rights away from us, and there won't be a problem.
DeleteWhen you can clearly understand what that right is, instead of trying to create a right that DOES NOT exist, you won't have to worry about us taking anything away.
DeleteYou DO understand, don't you, that per Heller you have no right whatsoever outside your house under the 2nd Amendment, and even that is limited?
Perhaps not yet, but the right to carry is recognized by many states, and a national recognition is coming. But if you don't like the word, right, how about just leaving people alone when they cause you no harm? I have harmed no one. If I do, the law will address that. Until then, stay out of my business.
DeleteAgain, gun lunatics pose a greater threat to others, not only to themselves.
DeleteOn that basis, until you can prove gun ownership with the kind of stats they have in countries with fewer guns, and more restrictive regulation, you fail to make a point, you fail to justify your guns.
No chance in hell national recognition is going to succeed.
I don't have to justify my guns to you. The majority in this country doesn't feel the need to become like one of the gun grabbing paradises that you love, either.
DeleteGreg, If you shot up a laptop like he did, within sight of a trafficked road, I'd call for your loss of gun rights.
DeleteWould you do something like that? Is that the problem here? Is that why you're defending this idiot?
Mikeb, I've yet to see you support the gun rights of anyone, although it pleases me to note that you do acknowledge a right to guns. I defend this father because I've known too many children whose parents did nothing to stop their idiotic behavior. What he did was strong medicine, but that's what is required at times.
DeleteGreg once again proves he has not idea how to apply logic or critical thinking.
DeleteDefining the choices as calling abuse appropriate, and the alternative is parents who fail to discipline their children is a false argument.
Parents who fail to appropriately discipline their children are not being good parents. No one here has advocated NOT disciplining a child. At fifteen, this is a young woman, not a toddler, not an elementary school kid. Some rebellious behavior is normal for the age, and discipline has to be age appropriate, but also appropriate to the action.
This was NOT appropriate to the action of the daughter. Destruction, particularly violent destruction of children's property is NOT DISCIPLINE.
Using a firearm or a knife, or a hatchet, or any other WEAPON, or item used as a weapon, for discipline is NEVER appropriate. But these gun lunatics are so desperate to defend every abuse with a firearm, they HAVE to defend crap like this.
I'd love to know how it is that Greg can claim to be an educator, and NOT KNOW what defines abuse. Abuse is NEVER 'required'.
How can I claim to be an educator? I have the required graduate education; I have thirteen years of experience, and I teach classes. My students learn.
DeleteBut you've yet to tell us what you do with your time and education.
"No chance in hell national recognition is going to succeed."
ReplyDeleteWe shall see.