Racist Officer Beats Girl Over Cake

My friend Mishy sent me this.  As Jessica says “This is going to ruin your day” (Feministing):

A young woman of color in Los Angeles had her wrist broken by a school security officer after not cleaning up a piece of dropped birthday cake to his satisfaction. During the attack he said, “hold still nappy head.”

The girl, 16 year-old Pleajhai Mervin, was subsequently expelled and arrested for littering and battery. Because as you can clearly see from the video still above, this teenage girl was battering the shit out a full grown, beefy security guard. Uh huh.

But it gets worse. When the girl’s mother went to the school to complain and rightfully demand that this guard be arrested–she was arrested and suspended from her job with the school district.

My outrage meter is pretty much broken.

Students at the scene captured the assault on their cell phones; one such student was also beaten.

What is this school district thinking?

Students have planned a walk-out in protest. Do your part–spread the word. Oh No a WoC PhD has the contact info for the school and school district office.

Via Women of Color Blog.

Here’s the high school’s site.  And the district’s info:

Antelope Valley Union High School District Office
44811 Sierra Highway
Lancaster, CA 93534
Phone: (661)948-7655 Fax: (661) 726-0673

I’ll end with this from Oh No a WO:

I am asking that everyone send in the official complaint form indicating this incident to both the high school and the school district fax. Please circulate this information including the story, the fax numbers, and the official school district complaint form.

Don’t let this story get buried.

Advertisements

23 Responses

  1. Behold the inevitable results of the government near monopoly on “education”.

  2. Say what? Fitness I think your blog has being invaded by the irrational/delusional element. Whoever this dude is, he makes no sense what so ever.

  3. Rafael, lol.

    Darrin, then why isn’t this widespread? The proper reaction isn’t “omfg the guvmint is evil ban schools!”. It is “This school district violated the rights of several students and one parent, and everyone involved should be held accountable.”

  4. I agree the guard looks beefy but what’s the rest of the story? There has to be more to this story than some roided out military wannabe smacking around girls. Doesn’t there? Please tell me there is more to this story than a grown man emphasizing his training on a school girl. Can anyone tell me that? ? ? ? ?

  5. Michael D,
    Yes, there is more. Other students who tried to record the event were beaten. The mother who complained, was fired from her job. I share your shock and disbelief. Something this horrible is startling in the very worst way.

  6. Rafael:
    once again you fail to construct a argument or assert some political point. You only present me with attacks upon my person. Your love of government as some protector, when they in essence must rob and force others and YOU to do X action is decidedly counter productive to the very liberty you believe (falsely) that they protect. Your support for them “makes no sense what so ever”, it is illogical.

    Fitness:

    This is wide spread and has been an ongoing epidemic for quite some time. Police have been utilizing force against students in various manners and increasingly so, to the point of outrage since the 90s. Do a five minute Google search on police brutality and schools.

    That you expect police and other government minions to act in accordance with peace and property rights (assuming you cherish either of those) is absolutely irrational considering that the institution of government violates the rights to life liberty and property by its very nature. They are funded only through robbery and yet you charge them with protecting your property from it. They exist only through subjugation, outlawing dissent or peaceful or refusal to cooperate, yet you claim they are there to liberate. They enforce their tyrannical rule through punishments of death and imprisonment yet you claim they protect and promote a value of life.

    This sort of behavior will only continue to increase so long as schools are run by these governments, so long as we allow the criminal organization large and rich enough to shape society to shape schools, all under the veneer of democracy. So long as they (schools) share the governments golden calf status they will continue to be a money sink where children are indoctrinated to the latest political scheme, and most assuredly will be taught that the government is god. They will continue to be financially unaccountable and fiscally irresponsible, at the detriment of your children.

  7. Darrin,
    Rafael’s attack was on your argument and logic: Nonexistant. This isn’t the case in all of your arguments, but here? Sure. And you are assuming an awful lot about Rafael’s beliefs.

    Actually that is quite a good point Darrin. The over use of force and a slide towards a jail mentality is an epidemic. Majorly my bad. But I still don’t believe that to be a result of government monopoly on education, but rather a mix of the methods employed, and how we view children as a society. (And what kinds of violence we accept). Some private schools are notorious for actively torturing and sometimes killing students, and some people found that acceptable. I think that mentality seeps into our public school systems.

    It isn’t irrational to expect government officials and officers to act morally. There are plenty of those who do, and I’ll stand by that statement. Not all police officers are awful. The problem is the extent to which we, as a society, accept certain violence by the police, and create environments where it becomes more likely. The reaction of the school district is very very telling.

    This sort of behavior happens in private schools too. Making public schools private won’t solve this at all. That’s a non sequitor. The issue is violence, discipline, and student rights. It is also an issue of racism, as evident in the guard’s behavior and language.

  8. “your argument and logic: Nonexistant. ”
    – show me how in any way it is logical to charge a organization who depends upon crimes upon Life Liberty and Property (hereafter referred to as LLP) with the protection of one FROM crimes upon LLP. It is illogical to claim that theft is necessary to prevent theft.

    “Actually that is quite a good point Darrin. The over use of force and a slide towards a jail mentality is an epidemic.”
    – I despise prisons themselves on many grounds. Not in the least that they share the same brainwashing purposes of state schools.

    “But I still don’t believe that to be a result of government monopoly on education”
    – Monopolization of education is exceptionally detrimental to the free spread of ideas and beliefs varying and even conflicting. The argument of evolution vs Creationism would not even exist if schools were not collectivized. Collectivization and state monopolization simply eliminates choice.

    “Some private schools are notorious for actively torturing and sometimes killing students, and some people found that acceptable. I think that mentality seeps into our public school systems.”
    – I have never heard of any such accusations and would ask for sources. I would also challenge that ANYONE, at least to any significant number to even be worth mentioning, would find that behavior acceptable… even in the current decadent American culture. However I am not arguing for the saintly nature of private schools.

    “It isn’t irrational to expect government officials and officers to act morally.”
    – I fail to see how. I will post in a separate reply a quote from Lysander Spooner in his work ‘No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority’ that illustrates my stance far better than I can, admitting my own in-eloquence with words 😛

    “This sort of behavior happens in private schools too. Making public schools private won’t solve this at all. That’s a non sequitor”
    – This is where I disagree. Collective policy and democracy breeds a false face for government policy. It places a mirror between you and another man and tell you that he is you and you are he. And by that association he is not to blame… YOU ARE. It is yet another horror of democracy.
    Schools face no repercussions for failure. Private schools go out of business, private schools like all business can only exist by voluntary association. And thus if one does not like ones service or product they are NOT obligated to further fund it. They are NOT obligated to attend the institution again. They are NOT obligated to be involved with it in the least.
    THE EXACT OPPOSITE is true for ANY government provided “service”. Especially of schools. No child or parent may choose to abstain from government approved educational standards or rooms. No man or woman may choose not to fund them. And since they have this endless captive audience and a endless supply of pilfered dollars, they may do as they please with little repercussion.
    (It is why private schools out perform public ones, and why even charter schools on the average perform better than public ones. )
    The choice to abstain and withdraw funds is the STRONGEST form of influence one can have and the STRONGEST way in which such warrantless violence can be opposed within a school.

  9. Ok Darin, we know that your feeding from the Libertarian handbook that uses such words as theft among others to describe a rather narrow world view.

    But your statement does not in anyway shape or form concur with what is being talked about in this post. It could have been a private school guard doing the same, a Mall Cop, etc. How does your statement fit with the gist of your argument, and where are the statistics to back up your statements? Considering how public education is funded (by property taxes) the tendency is for areas which are more affluent have better schools, period. Just drive around any town mid size town in America. Besides, not everybody can afford private schools, should they then remain ignorant?

    The problem is that your view the modern nation-state through the lens of its 19th century predecessors. Ultimately what your proposing would not work.

    What you suggest in an anarchistic (and extremely selfish) world view of society one that has being proven not to have worked time and time again. Is goverment the perfect solution, of course not, but its not the enemy either.

  10. Darrin,

    – show me how in any way it is logical to charge a organization who depends upon crimes upon Life Liberty and Property (hereafter referred to as LLP) with the protection of one FROM crimes upon LLP. It is illogical to claim that theft is necessary to prevent theft.

    Huh?

    Dead on, unfortunately, on most public schools. There are some very notable exceptions. Check out Sudbury Valley, for example. I bet you’d get a kick out of it.

    Collectivization doesn’t have to eliminate choice a priori. This is just how we go about it. That could be changed (and should be changed).

    Here are a couple links you might find interesting: “boot camps”, torture school, schools for rebellious teenagers.

    Your “horror of democracy” doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t get rid of blame or identity.

    Public schools face no repercussions because, I believe, they are designed to fail. This is desirable behavior, and that is something, that poisonous belief, that needs radical change.

    I think its fine to be able to fire teachers and administrators who don’t perform. At the same time, I know for a fact that some districts do go overboard with this.

    Hmmmm. I don’t know that it is the strongest, but it is a very strong motivating factor. Perhaps we should find a way to work that power into the school structure. I don’t realistically see public schools being abolished, but I could see some adventuresome towns putting policies into place that allow them to withdraw funding or fire personel who abuse the rights of students. It would be an interesting argument to see played out.

  11. Rafael, good points.
    Imagine if the mother had worked at a private school, and after her child was assaulted by an security guard, she was fired for complaining. Same issue, only difference is they would probably be more skilled at covering it up.

  12. And no Constitutional protection, since as you know, the Constitution does not operate over private actors (except in some narrow situations, like the 13th Amendment).

  13. Rafael:

    Sorry there is no libertarian handbook. Aside from maybe ethics of liberty, but that is merely a widely referenced source among radical libertarians of all shades. Especially those who prefer to be called market anarchists.

    Perhaps you should show me how theft is not implicit and explicit through government policy? That would be far superior to being pissed off that I am calling a rose a rose and declaring such, ‘a narrow view point’.

    your statement does not in anyway shape or form concur with what is being talked about in this post. It could have been a private school guard doing the same, a Mall Cop, etc. How does your statement fit with the gist of your argument, and where are the statistics to back up your statements?

    Which statement are you talking about? That government employees are not answerable to government courts?

    Considering how public education is funded (by property taxes) the tendency is for areas which are more affluent have better schools, period. Just drive around any town mid size town in America. Besides, not everybody can afford private schools, should they then remain ignorant?

    Why do you not abolish your guns pointed at my head to threaten me to give to schools and instead ask me to give to my local schools? Why do you insist on forcing me to pay for them? Is my abstaining from the various charitable causes you approve of make me a criminal? Should churches and the salvation army start coming to my door with a gun demanding my tithe? I never implied that the poor should or that I would want them to go without education. Only that I should not be obligated through threats of force to fund them.
    But I see you are switching from an argument upon theft and robbery, upon ethics, of the “right” to education at the involuntary expense of others… to a argument of utility.
    You will find that if people were not fleeced to the degree they are through the governments on this planet that they would have a lot more wealth to keep to themselves to best ascribe their resources to matters they see fitting to their own ends. With more money, and free markets in education, like all other services, they would have more choices and the competing schools would become as efficient as possible in order to compete for the business of individuals. Providing superior services to the government.
    One also ignores that through such an increase in income and a decrease of the costs of goods and services would afford the possibility of home schooling much more often to many more people. You also ignore the role of charity and other voluntary forms of funding. (Which of course you destroy when you eliminate choice as you do, there is no such thing as charity once the threat of force is applied).
    Public school teachers receive more than their market value in pay, public schools spend more per capita per student than private schools, they spend more on resources and locale than private schools do and yet the private school outperforms them.
    Governments and collective policy of theft requires no performance or efficiency because there is no need to CONVINCE one to fund them, they merely TAKE.

    The problem is that your view the modern nation-state through the lens of its 19th century predecessors. Ultimately what your proposing would not work.

    I cant wait to see why…

    What you suggest in an anarchistic (and extremely selfish) world view of society one that has being proven not to have worked time and time again. Is government the perfect solution, of course not, but its not the enemy either.

    Why is it always viewed as selfish to not want to be coerced into action? Why is it selfish to view individual liberty as superior and more important than any collective want of a majority or whims of a minority of individuals? Why is opposition to your support of pointing federal guns to my head, archaic? Is the ideal of freedom some relic of the past best left to scholars and historians for contemplation while we march forward towards less individual freedom? Is progress synonymous with the destruction of voluntary action?

    No, you are the archaic proponent of ancient systems. Systems of statehood where one must rule another. The great enlightenment was the first truly significant step toward freedom, which IS stepping forward, in history and YOU are the one helping to assure we are pushed back. The phrase “progressives against progress” comes to mind.

    If you look at the declining state of our schools and education systems it is clear that children are not more educated than even in the recent past. In fact the government actually gives more money to schools today than it ever has, and yet our standing int he world has not increased. And your damning of academic performance in times of free markets in education is hard to judge in America because its existence was ALWAYS rare and ALWAYS sporadic. Not to mention the increase of overall knowledge by the efforts of man making the relative comparison harder to judge when one would go back to a time that could even conceivably be used as reference.

  14. The constitution does not make distinctions between violence at private vs public institutions. Further the Constitution is surely not working as a bulwark against this sort of crime.

    You certainly are an odd animal to call for protections from the constitution… seeing as you are so ready to smash it. Then again, convenience of constitutional calling is common among statists.

  15. Fitness:

    What do you mean “Huh?”. It is completely illogical to assert that states, who require the destruction of LLP to be necessary for the protection of LLP. How can LLP be protected by a organization that preys upon it?

    Collectivization doesn’t have to eliminate choice a priori. This is just how we go about it. That could be changed (and should be changed).

    How does it not? May I choose to abstain from your collective structure? May I choose not to participate in your government? No. You will not allow such to happen. Certainly any lie of the rule of self government was exposed as fallacious in 1861.

    Here are a couple links you might find interesting: “boot camps”, torture school, schools for rebellious teenagers.

    I will visit them in due time.

    Your “horror of democracy” doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t get rid of blame or identity.

    It does get rid of blame. It gives people the illusion that the state is employed by them. That it is their servant, when it is in fact the complete opposite.

    I think its fine to be able to fire teachers and administrators who don’t perform. At the same time, I know for a fact that some districts do go overboard with this.

    Obviously you are not the son of a teacher… I would like to point you to the teacher Union nightmare and the following chart (I am not sure what tags will work here so I am just gonna add the URL) http://cgood.org/assets/attachments/firing_chart.pdf

    Hmmmm. I don’t know that it is the strongest, but it is a very strong motivating factor. Perhaps we should find a way to work that power into the school structure.

    I believe charter schools allow for that to some extent, as do vouchers… though they both do not solve the problem of government approved curriculum and method as requirement for the funds. And I am still required to fund the interest that pays the debts that governments owe on loans that fund (whew!) these policies.

  16. promised quote from Lysander Spooner:

    …But this theory of our government is wholly different from the practical fact. The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: ‘Your money, or your life.’ And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat. The government does not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a ‘protector,’ and that he takes men’s money against their will, merely to enable him to ‘protect’ those infatuated travelers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful ‘sovereign,’ on account of the ‘protection’ he affords you. He does not keep ‘protecting’ you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.

  17. But isn’t vouchers taking my money, at “gun point” and giving it to somebody else so they have a choice? While your arguments intriguing, I can not see a world without “states” or goverment or corporations. What would look like? I am all for personal freedom but we are social creatures, interdependent on one another, unless you want to back to the days of the Hunter-Gatherers, I don’t see this more than fanciful utopia mentality, no difference from Plato’s Republic or Marx socialist revolution leading to the global communist state. It doesn’t work that way because fundamentally we are not wired that way.

    As for the Constitution, their are arguments about civil rights in this case, as well as discrimination.

  18. But isn’t vouchers taking my money, at “gun point” and giving it to somebody else so they have a choice?

    I never said I supported vouchers. In essence you can be right. However one can also view it as getting ones money BACK from those who stole it… albeit with extreme conditionals…

    While your arguments intriguing, I can not see a world without “states” or goverment or corporations.

    Well thats sad. I surely can and strive to see it come to fruition.

    What would look like?

    the machinery of freedom… buy it… (damn I hope those underline tags work…)

    I am all for personal freedom but we are social creatures, interdependent on one another, unless you want to back to the days of the Hunter-Gatherers, I don’t see this more than fanciful utopia mentality, no difference from Plato’s Republic or Marx socialist revolution leading to the global communist state. It doesn’t work that way because fundamentally we are not wired that way.

    I disagree. the market is the culmination of the division of labor. The free and open market is the unhindered and absolute ability and right of every man to use his skills to work towards his own benefit.

    I would greatly encourage you to look into Agorism. In market anarchy the market for all things is unhindered and non coerced. All mutually consensual agreements are valid so long as they remain that… mutually consensual. Market anarchists and their various collectivist cousins such as anarcho-primitivists or anarcho-socialists can sometimes agree upon (almost always the problem laying with the various collectivists through my experience) and have taken great pains on both sides to promote is that freedom of association.

    There is NOTHING to stop you in a society as I promote here to prevent you from obtaining land and forming some governemnt collective by the consent of those who freely enter that governemnt… which with consent involved essentially makes it a contractual club of some sort…
    Or to stop you or anyone else from pooling all your resources and distributing them amongst yourselves equally.
    [I myself am a strong proponent of militias for defense, which at their core are voluntary in every sense of themselves. They are an organization freely entered into, not for profit of a governing body, not for a wage, only for the benefit of achieving a defense within a community and actively taking part in it. Perhaps even alongside for-profit groups… though for profit is misleading as I am ‘profiting’ subjectively in the organization of my own defense… I do not trust, perhaps irrationally at times, mercenary forces. And would rather put my trust (for no cost i might add :-P) for my defense in my neighbors and friends and colleagues whom have volunteered for no other reason that love of me and the others. Its probably as close to communal volunteer ANYTHING as you will see me get.]

    There would exist a free market with ideas ideals religions and associations as well as products services and trade

    Only in THIS society people are also free to ENFORCE their right NOT to associate and can oppose with force any such group or individual who attempts to violate that freedom of association. Who transgresses upon the mutual consent sought by eliminating consent from one or more persons.
    The principle of non-aggression would apply.

    As for the Constitution, their are arguments about civil rights in this case, as well as discrimination.

    Discrimination, by the government (yes, I am using that as a qualifier), is indeed criminal and against the notions and precedents set forth by the Constitution and its amendments. As well as any ideal of liberty I support.

  19. “No child or parent may choose to abstain from government approved educational standards or rooms. No man or woman may choose not to fund them. And since they have this endless captive audience and a endless supply of pilfered dollars, they may do as they please with little repercussion.”
    Amen!
    Had I the resources that were taken from me (forcefully), when it was time to educate my children, I would certainly have home schooled my children. I was forced to give up the resources that would have enabled me to make a free choice to do as a free man would choose. It is a lose lose situation and we cannot win.
    Fitness, of course my equivocation about “more to the story” was shortened for effect, as I did read the post entirely but played upon the preposterous imagery of the photo.
    When in the fifth grade (1976) I was not a little bastard but certainly not a model student I was ejected from art class for being disruptive. When the teacher tossed me she slammed the door behind me and the glass in the door shattered. The teacher next door immediately entered the hall and to his first impression it appeared that I had broke the glass. He grabbed my skinny neck and slammed me to the wall saying in a forceful, threatening, (and downright scary at the time) voice “you little bastard I’m sick of you kids thinking you own this damn school” or something to that effect. There was more to the story than meets the eye. There were no cameras, I-phones, etc. to capture his assault on me. His assault was based on his preconceived notion that I broke the glass. And today I understand fully what transpired as I did then.
    The “whole story” is always subject to interpretation. Even if it is captured on a video.
    While using derogatory terms such as “nappy headed” is no way for a professional to act, (unless you’re Imus) I must question the entire event. If it is known that what happened with the girl and the guard was as it is stated then my outrage with the scenario is justified. If on the other hand there was/is extenuating circumstances resulting in the mans reaction then I would be premature to judge the situation based on a photo. The possibilities are limitless. A picture can be worth a thousand words but if the words are not the truth then there is a limit to how many words the picture is worth.
    Reminds me of The Quest For The Holy Grail witch scene.
    If you show me a picture it may be art or it may be artfully done. See my point?
    My initial response to the picture of a grown man in a guards uniform holding a school girls head to the desk is that there has to be more to it. I mean prior not post. If merely for the fact that it defies logic. If there is not more to it then the man needs to be in a room of equally sized men wearing a probation number. At first glance it looks bad for the guard.

  20. The curriculum in public schools is teaching that this is a democracy, the definition in the dictionaries is that this is a democracy, these are false depictions. There are many problems and falsities in the public school system and teachers expressing personal/ political views on students is not what I would consider curriculum. Dumbing down math computations does not benefit students. Ensuring students pass regardless of their ability is not beneficial. The examples of public schools shortcomings are many.

    And something to think about, the “R” in USSR stands for republic. The concept of communal living and of socialism is not a bad idea but greed will never allow for the proper implementation. No solutions offered just an observation.

  21. Why don’t Darrin and Rafeal exchange phone numbers so that they can carry on thier private conversations in private.

  22. Rose…if your going to write my name, have the decency to write it correctly.

    Thank You.

  23. There is a lot going on in this thread. It is straying somewhat off the topic of the post, as Rose noted diplomatically. But its a good discussion.

    Michael D, Very interesting points. I can share a number of interesting school stories myself… Public schools have a shitload of problems, many of them systemic. At the same time, there are several unsavory reasons for ending public school altogether, such as out and out racism, militant religious fundamentalism, etc. At the same time the unschooling movement is extremely promising.

    For myself, I think the balance lies in making educational resources available, but working more freedom into the system and the goal. To be cynical, schools exist for two reasons: to produce good workers, and to keep kids off the streets during the work day. That’s not ideal!

    But all of this, while a conversation I absolutely want to have, doesn’t really have much to do with the sickening violence in LA, and the even worse response of the school district (which validated and defended that violence).

    I think we can all agree that we need to work on punishing offenders (including the district officials), and finding root causes and working to prevent further racism and violence in the schools.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: