Disruptive student in class

[Anonymous]

Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

There's a wide gulf between "defending the violent aggressors" and understanding it's no solution to put them in the public school equivalent of an internment camp, which sounds like what you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

There's a wide gulf between "defending the violent aggressors" and understanding it's no solution to put them in the public school equivalent of an internment camp, which sounds like what you want.

Nobody said anything like that but you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

There's a wide gulf between "defending the violent aggressors" and understanding it's no solution to put them in the public school equivalent of an internment camp, which sounds like what you want.

Nobody said anything like that but you.

Please. You've been saying that this whole time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

There's a wide gulf between "defending the violent aggressors" and understanding it's no solution to put them in the public school equivalent of an internment camp, which sounds like what you want.

Nobody said anything like that but you.

Please. You've been saying that this whole time.

There was a suggestion for virtual learning. To call that an internment camp is puzzling to say the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

There's a wide gulf between "defending the violent aggressors" and understanding it's no solution to put them in the public school equivalent of an internment camp, which sounds like what you want.

Nobody said anything like that but you.

Please. You've been saying that this whole time.

There was a suggestion for virtual learning. To call that an internment camp is puzzling to say the least.

"They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

You're talking about locking up eight year olds.

Finding a safe alternative where they cannot harm others. Stop defending the violent aggressors while ignoring the victims. It is nauseating.

There's a wide gulf between "defending the violent aggressors" and understanding it's no solution to put them in the public school equivalent of an internment camp, which sounds like what you want.

Nobody said anything like that but you.

Please. You've been saying that this whole time.

There was a suggestion for virtual learning. To call that an internment camp is puzzling to say the least.

"They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others."

Seems like common sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

And when they turn 18, is your plan to just send them straight to prison? Or do you want them to live on the street for a couple years first? You obviously don’t care about giving them the support they would need to learn critical life skills.

[Anonymous]

Would internet service and technical support be provided for students forced to learn remotely? Free public education and all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conflating learning disabilities with violent, disruptive behavior is insulting. Vast majority of kids with iep’s are not attacking their classmates. There is no excuse for allowing that behavior, there is no accommodation that give a kid a right to hit other kids. They must be removed to a place where they can’t hurt others.

Yes, lock 'em up.

You are so out of touch. We are just talking about protecting the safety of the 99+% of students.

And when they turn 18, is your plan to just send them straight to prison? Or do you want them to live on the street for a couple years first? You obviously don’t care about giving them the support they would need to learn critical life skills.

I cannot imagine what school has to do with this. However, of course the kids would still have access to school, either in-person or virtual.