South Carolina Woman Arrested For Cheering Too Loudly at Daughter's Graduation

[rtimgray]

As the previous poster said, and several other sources support this, I don't believe she was arrested because of her disruption; rather, she was asked to leave the venue (as she was aware was the consequence of her action). Her arrest came about because of events subsequent and in addition to her cheering, not because of her cheering. I don't think the school board/principal ordered the arrest of those who cheered, but rather their removal. Aczlan offers an additional perfect example.

I'm all for questioning authority. I've got no problem with the "no cheering" rule, but I respect the opinion of those who think it's a dumb rule. However, the method to challenge this authority and rule should not be to raise a ruckus at graduation, but rather contact your school board representative, district superintendent, principal(s), etc. You could also gather a formal signed petition and if you get enough constituents to agree that the rule is a stupid rule, then it is very likely that it would be repealed. Performing such due diligence will lend credibility to your position and you will be less likely to be dismissed as a crackpot troublemaker that gets kicked out of a graduation ceremony.

If after the powers that be are presented with the overwhelming public opinion that a rule is a stupid rule and they still choose to enforce it unjustly, then and only then would I condone civil disobedience. But, in my opinion, it is better to exhaust peaceful alternatives prior to open rebellion.

Good luck and take care.

 

[toppop52]

Yes, the arrests were for public disruption, trespassing, etc... not the act of cheering which is a civil violation of a private rule at an optional event.

 

[Mace Canute]

Your name calling smacks of the 14 year olds on Facebook. Perhaps you would be better served to see if you have some input they might appreciate. Otherwise I think we would all welcome real conversation instead of name calling.

And yet somehow you think this sarcastic bit was ok. Being sarcastic is an insult to all who posted valid reasons why all the noise was not ok and who posted alternatives to unrestrained cheering, but you seem to think they are all wrong and instead chose to make a reply that would be more expected from the said 14 yo. My reply was one that I believed was in line with your chosen level.

Henceforth all cheering and belligerent people shall be arrested and removed from our perfect society. After this has been completed we will remove all persons who curse on a public forum. We will not tolerate such insufferable behavior in these United States. If anyone acts out of line and ruffles our Utopian way let them suffer the consequence of a nation that was built on perfect men and women that never got a little excited and/or belligerent. Hear Ye Hear Ye Bow to the crown you presumptious tea sippin' brits.

I am willing to offer forgiveness and a clean slate on our conversation if you could keep it to legitimate conversation. I don't mind some light-hearted goofy stuff but calling me obscene female genetalia names is unwarranted and not so good for our young tractor owners on the site.
Would you like to start over?

It's fine with me if you want to appologize.

 

[DwightD123]

Aaron,
Keep in mind..I am not supporting the actions of this woman. I am supporting a very close eye on the authority we are releasing to arrest civilians based on the school board or faculty decision of appropriate behavior. I am not even saying she shouldn't have been arrested. I wasn't there and don't know the situation circumstances. My point has the same tint of "rights of individuals" that your signature quote has from Mr John Stuart Mill. Ironic. I don't mean that smart-aleck like.

I know it is hard to distinguish my position with my empathy (or lack of) for this lady. As I have said many times, I don't support, nor do I like the kind of person she is, or at least this article makes her out to be. What I don't support is the fact that if something bugs us too much or gets under our skin we give a school board or faculty the right to call for their arrest.
What if the Principal had it out for her kid for years and the emotion of her kid overcoming such a person got the better of her? What if her husband were an alcoholic and beat her child and tried to keep him down? What if he had been bullied hard for years? Perhaps she is just an ignorant stupid anti-social moronic idiot that can't behave in public. All of these are possible.

Let me give you an example of something that actually happened in my high school and let's overlay that with the authority that we seem to have agreed the school should have.
My cousin grew a moustache his senior year at Valley R-6 Caledonia High School. Public school...very very small town.
The principal called him into the office and told him to shave it off, that moustaches were not allowed. My cousin said he would not. The principal said his picture would not appear in the yearbook nor would he be allowed to attend graduation. Well this turned into a pissing match between my cousins family and the principal. The family went to graduation uninvited and made a good healthy ruckus when he walked up on stage when his name "should" have been called.

**Now let's pause a moment and overlay this with the school faculty's newly granted rights to call for arrest of civilians that you all have so graciously given to them. This power hungry principal can now call for the arrest all of my cousin & my cousin's family. They are now subject to fines, court costs and possibly a misdemeanor all on the whim of this principal when the only thing criminal was my cousin's puny moustache. But they made a ruckus, and a good one and I for one was proud of them and him. I saw individuals standing up for personal freedom in the face of authority abused.**

Can you see the danger of the abuse of power potential here? How many of us know teachers and principals that are already power hungry? Plenty of them I have seen in my short 42 years.

In your new civilized graduation world we now have to remain silent in the seats or not attend a graduation because this person/persons power trip can be backed up by threat and authority of placing us under criminal arrest. My cousin and his family would have been denied the joy of seeing their son graduate. Does this sound like what you want?
Later there was an official apology and the next year's Yearbook had a full page picture of my cousin and his 'stache in all it's glory with a nice apology written underneath it.

Be careful of the power that you give away because you don't like something. It will be used against you when someone doesn't like something about you.

 

[DwightD123]

And yet somehow you think this sarcastic bit was ok. Being sarcastic is an insult to all who posted valid reasons why all the noise was not ok and who posted alternatives to unrestrained cheering, but you seem to think they are all wrong and instead chose to make a reply that would be more expected from the said 14 yo. My reply was one that I believed was in line with your chosen level.

It's fine with me if you want to appologize.

Sarcasm compared to lewd name calling? Yes that would be considered more appropriate from most reasonable folks.

I was trying to give you the opportunity to graciously come back into the conversation and debate this. I know if I had called someone that name I would probably be regretful. I would have appreciated the extended hand of peace. I see your reaction and while I hoped for something different I guess I am not surprised.

You know you went over the line by calling me that name and I am thankful TBN removed it.
It didnt do anything to forward the discussion...It was a personal attack..you can do better than that, I know you can! Next time write your thoughts out and have someone read them aloud to you.. I am sure with a little help you'll be productive in conversations...I believe in you...or at least those around you

 

[aczlan]

<SNIP/>
Can you see the danger of the abuse of power potential here? How many of us know teachers and principals that are already power hungry? Plenty of them I have seen in my short 42 years.
In your new civilized graduation world we now have to remain silent in the seats or not attend a graduation because this person/persons power trip can be backed up by threat and authority of placing us under criminal arrest. My cousin and his family would have been denied the joy of seeing their son graduate. Does this sound like what you want?
Later there was an official apology and the next year's Yearbook had a full page picture of my cousin and his 'stache in all it's glory with a nice apology written underneath it.
Be careful of the power that you give away because you don't like something. It will be used against you when someone doesn't like something about you.

This power is already gone... Has been for hundreds of years, its called property rights. If you are on someone else's property, they make the rules.
How is this different than a bar telling someone that thy have to leave as they wont leave the other customers alone, then calling the cops when they refuse to leave?
Another example, how often is someone asked to leave a concert be security because they wont stop trying to get on stage? If they put up a fight, its not uncommon for them to be arrested.
Same at a store if someone is causing problems
In your brothers case, I could see them being asked to quiet down and/or leave when he caused a ruckus and if they refused being arrested.

What it boils down to is that if you are on private property and refuse to leave when the property owner asks you to, you are then trespassing and you CAN be arrested. If you dont cooperate when the cops show up, they may add resisting arrest, disorderly conduct, etc depending on your attitude and actions.

Aaron Z

 

[rtimgray]

Dwight, I have yet to see any documentation that the principal/teachers/schoolboard could actually order the arrest of rule-breakers, only their removal from the venue. That's a pretty big difference that seems like you keep running together. The four people that were arrested were arrested from actions that took place after their removal.

There was never any power bequeathed upon nor taken by a principal or school district to have people arrested; only removed if they caused a disturbance. Local Florence news sources indicated that around twenty people were removed, and only four were arrested.

As far as your example goes, did your cousin's family take the matter to the Superintendent or school board representative? Was the "no mustache" rule a documented one or an arbitrary one? Was the apology and the full page in the subsequent yearbook due simply to the ruckus-raising at graduation or were there additional actions that furthered the cause?

Again, I'm with you as far as limiting power, but it should be done in a civil manner until that is exhausted.

Let's play the following make-believe: You are aware of a no-ruckus-raising policy for an upcoming graduation. You systematically personally appeal to the principal, superintendent and school board and are denied. To try to reinforce your point, you decide to use a petition. However, you can only get, let's say, 50 people out of 500 attendents who will sign, because the rest either don't care or want people to behave so they can be assured that they get to hear their child's name called. Given this, if you attend the ceremony, will you abide by the rules or disrupt the ceremony because you still feel the need to "fight the power" or whatever, even though the majority of folks would prefer silence? Do the desires of many override the desires of the few?

Were the opposite true, and 450 of 500 signed up and this was presented to the school system, and the rule was still not lifted, then I would support the folks that choose to cheer because they had exhausted their peaceful options.

War is a continuation of politics by other means.

But personally, I'm not concerned about the School Board ****'s asking/telling everybody to be quiet at graduation. Our local school has had years where they have had to limit the number of attendents that can have chair seats (as opposed to bleachers) to 4 per graduate, due to the old gym where it is held. What if a graduate wants 6 people to set in the chair seats? Should they get their first and refuse to move? As others have said many times in this thread, you rights end where mine begin.

I do appreciate your civil tone in this discussion - I think you were being sarcastic earlier just to get a point across - and there is a great need for a sarcasm font.

Good luck and take care.

 

[rtimgray]

I can't believe I didn't notice this earlier - we are more or less living out this very scenario in this thread.

Beginning where Mace chose to call Dwight a bad name. I'm sure that Mace knew (or has known at some time) that profanity, vulgarity and personal attackes aren't allowed. He either chose to run the risk of punishment OR he didn't think it was that big of a deal (like Shannon Cooper's little cheer, right?). Maybe he thinks that's a stupid rule (the no personal attacks thing). BTW, Mace - I'm not trying to pick on your or put words in your mouth, I'm just playing make-believe again.

Anyway, the post gets removed because it violates a rule on a private forum (Shannon Cooper removed from venue). Now, if Mace posts more vulgar stuff or if he sends PM after PM to moderators or owners of the site and is obscene in those, I bet he might get banned (Ms. Cooper arrested). However, all this stuff could take place without most or any of us seeing it, so all we see it Mace got banned for one little comment. (like poor Ms. Cooper).

Now I don't think Mace got banned and I don't think he's too worked up that a post was removed; even if he did, he, like the rest of us, is a guest here and IF WE WANT TO STAY WE HAVE TO OBEY THE RULES. Even rules that we think are stupid.

If a bunch of us got together and sent a note to the owners, maybe the rules might change. I think that the Friendly Politics forum is an example of this. Political posts got removed, but because enough folks wanted it, the owners made a forum for it in it's own separate place (I think - I'm not on it and don't care to be). But the point is the posters asked and were rewarded rather than being rebellious and raising a ruckus. That, in my opinion, is the best way to effect change.

I just can't believe I didn't notice that earlier.

 

[DwightD123]

AaronZ
Good points...I do support the right to remove someone from private property. The school graduation is a ceremony paid for by public taxes and not private revenue. This lends (or should if feasable) sightly more public freedom of attendance than a person's business or residence.
I do still agree this does not give someone the right to go overboard as apparently this lady did, and ruin it for everyone. It is difficult for most people to separate my argument of rights of freedom and abuse of power from any empathy I might have for this lady. It is my desire that this is a reminder to closely guard our freedoms and to not give over authority or abuse authority ourself because something aggravates us.

It was apparent to me that many people who responded had let their experience of similar situations get under their skin. Many people had been to graduations and had people cheer to long or act up in some other way. Now perhaps they feel justified in the potential arrest of these immature people. It is at this point that I started asking people to check themselves. Was anyone saying..."Good they deserve to get arrested" not because of the things this gal apparently did but because they got perturbed the last time they went to a graduation and someone cheered for 5 seconds instead of 4.
I thought it should be talked over and thought out very carefully. I saw several people looking at the small picture of solving the "over-cheering" and losing sight of the big picture of our country's biggest prize- freedom.

I hope this discussion has at least caused some to look at their hearts and ask if they were willing to go down this path for such a small (in the realm of things) issue.

 

[DwightD123]

rtim,
Quite a parrallel there although I don't know this Mrs Cooper of which you speak. It is interesting how this stuff will play in many levels often at the same time. More than once in my life I have had to admit to hypocracy as I was pointing a finger at someone else. I will surely have to do it again.

Regarding seeing documentation that the school board could order the arrest, I think you need to not rely on finding a piece of paper and rather follow the trail to see where it leads.
Regarding why they put in a full page apology, I assume they knew they screwed up. I didn't mean to relate the ruckus to the apology..I would be awful naive if I thought that's the way the world worked.

I am very ignorant of the details of the story. I did not read the story not to be purposely ignorant of the facts but rather to be purposefully ignorant of any slant. I have tried to remind people that I very well could support the arrest of her and apparently these other 3(?). I am making a jump regarding the school board being able to call for the arrest of attendees. However this is not as big of a difference as you might think. Having most of my family either serving in law enforcement or having served, it is a very small difference/jump. It's the way things work, fair or not and I would be careful not to be naive about these goings on. There is no paper that says it...it just gets done.

It's late and I have a headache (I think I learned that from my wife). I will respond to your majority rules question later.

I think it is also interesting the irony in AaronZ's signature line.