on thursday. let me just say this. you would literally have the blood of great american on your hands. so maybe think again. that's all for us tonight. "ac 360" starts now. "ac 360" starts now. good evening, everyone. we begin tonight keeping them honest with a pastor preaching his plan to eliminate all gays and lesbians. he's laying out a detailed plan from the pulpit to watch them die. the pastor's name is charles worley. that is him right there. he preaches at the providence road baptist church. acco according to his website, a church about a half hour's drive outside of charlotte, north carolina. the sign out front there says home of old time religion. well, tonight, the church is now the focus of a modern day uproar. and pastor worley could be facing legal troubles for mixing politics into his preaching. there by violating rules that

give his church tax exempt status. we're going to talk about that shortly, get reaction from the community live including some church members. the sermon in question heard on mother's day. pastor worley lashed out at president obama's support for same-sex marriage and laid out his plan for eliminating gays and lesbians. >> of our president getting up and saying that it's all right for two women to marry or two men to marry. i tell you right now. i was disappointed bad. i tell you right there as sorry as you can get. the bible's against it. god's against it. i'm against it. and if you've got any sense, you're against it. i had a way -- i figured a way out, a way to get rid of all the lesbians and queers, but i couldn't get it past the congress. build a great big large fence, 150 or 100 mile long, put all the lesbians in there. fly over and drop some food. do the same thing with the queers and the homosexuals.

and have that fence electrified so they can't get out. feed them and you know what? in a few years they'll die out. do you know why? they can't reproduce. >> mr. worley seems to believe gay people are simply the offspring of other gay people. i'm not going to address the lack of logic of that. this was part of the 90 minute long sermon posted on the church's own website. it's not like the church was ashamed of it. not until the story went national last night. then the church took it down. and today, in fact, the entire site was down. a local advocacy group did manage the download the entire sermon but only in small chunks, and they're working to piece it back together. just in case you think what you heard is either fabricated or an aberration or taken out of context or not what this guy meant. it turns out this isn't the first time that pastor worley has said something like this.

here's part of a sermon he gave back in 1978. >> we're living in a day when you know what? it saddens my heart to think that homosexuals can go around and get the applause of a lot of people. lesbians and the rest of it. blessed god from a white oak tree. wouldn't they? amen. >> that was in 1978. these are obviously his long-held beliefs. as we said, though, his mother's day sermon came in response to current events, namely president obama's public endorsement of same-sex marriage. and here's where the pastor may have put himself in legal trouble. >> i tell you right now. somebody said who you going to vote for? i ain't going to vote for a baby killer and a homosexual lover. you said did you mean to say that? you better believe i did. god have mercy. it makes me puking sick to think

about -- i don't even know whether you ought to say this in a pulpit or not. could you imagine kissing some man? >> well, the tape cuts off. he goes on to say quote, my god i love you fellas but not that much. he also said quote, i'm against the sin but i'm not against them. i want them to get saved but i will not accept that way of life here nor hereafter. the federal government won't be concerned, obviously, with those comments, only with the politics that pastor worley seems to be preaching. churches can lose their tax exempt status for that. pastor worley knows that, according to the local station, he says in that sermon, quote, they say you're going to get in trouble with the government. well, i just want you to know i like that bubble gum stuff so bring it to me. and i like sunflower seeds so bring me them.

if you have to go to jail for preaching the word of god, said you'll be the first one locked up. i said thank god, amen, hallelujah, that's good preaching. more on the legal angle shortly. but first gary tuchman outside the church in north carolina where there are late developments. gary, what is the latest there? >> reporter: well, right now as we speak, a special meeting is taking place at the providence road baptist church, a prayer meeting. scores of people inside all supporters of pastor worley hoping for the best of their church and their pastor. is worley inside? we don't know that for sure. he's staying away from us. church security and sheriff's deputies are telling us we cannot step foot on church property. earlier we went to pastor worley's house to try to talk to him. when we got there, many members of his family were outside. we parked the car. they scattered inside the house so quickly we found a lighted cigarette still on the windowsill. and sheriff's deputies came

there too and told us we have to stay off their property also. this is a very small town but there are many people not affiliated with this church who are embarrassed by the situation. among the people who are friends with this pastor and belong to his church, there is strong support for him. >> he would give you the shirt off his back. he would do anything he could for you. >> i mean, he said in church that he wants to put gay people behind electric fences and have them all die out. what do you think about that? >> well, that's not really what he said. he said yes he says some of that, but he was going to feed them and everything else. and you know that. >> but you're saying that it's okay if you feed them? >> well, i'm not saying it's okay one way or the other. what i'm saying is that is his opinion. >> probably the most compassionate man i've ever known. i don't know. he's just got a big heart for people. takes a real firm stand on the bible and what it says about different things. whether i like it or not or

whether anybody else likes it or not. he stands for the bible. >> being gay and lesbian or whatever, homosexual, is wrong according to the bible. it's wrong. >> even if you believe that, though, his words they should be put in an electrified fence don't you think that's dramatic and rude? and a little scary. >> no, because his point and reasoning was to see if they reproduce. but like it is -- >> there's a lot of heterosexual couples that don't reproduce either. >> adam and eve. that's what was in the very beginning. adam and eve. not adam and steve. >> but why put adam and steve in an electrified jail? that's just mean. it's not the bible -- it's not what god wants to be mean to fellow man. >> he's not saying that to be mean. >> if that's not mean, what is it? >> we love the people, hate the scene, okay? point blank. you need to lay off my pastor.

>> reporter: now, as you pointed out, anderson, pastor worley puts this on his website. so he knows it's out there. we expected he would talk about this today to members of the news media. he hasn't. i can think of two possible reasons for that. one, he doesn't have the guts. or two, he doesn't really care what we think. >> or combination thereof. it's interesting to me to see what the reaction would have been if pastor worley had been advocating putting african-americans in electrified cages or jewish people or, for some reason, christians, or any group, how people would have responded in that community, in that church, if the response had been any different. do -- did you get a sense of how much support he has? >> well, i can tell you -- and this is really important. this is the middle of the bible belt, but not everyone agrees with this guy. certainly the people we talked to today who go to this church agree with him. many people in this town can't believe what he said.

what they tell us is that this is an intolerant man who runs an intolerant church. >> gary, appreciate it. again, we offer an invitation to the pastor to come on the program any time. we'd love to talk to him about his beliefs. i want to bring in reverend barry lynn. he's the founder and director of the americans united for separation of church and state. reverend, thanks for being with us. most people don't know the intricacies of the federal tax code. but you say what this pastor has done in north carolina is a clear violation of it. how so? >> yeah. look. unless you were asleep during the sermon which has been known to happen, but this went on for 90 minutes. you know unequivocally you are not supposed to be voting for barack obama. this means it's a clear violation of the tax code that says, again, without equivocation, you cannot oppose or endorse a candidate for public office and retain your tax exemption, whether you're a church or any other kind of charity.

these aren't even close to the line. we reported another pastor from eastern kentucky just yesterday filed a complaint. a man who went on a tear about why he opposed president obama's support for marriage equality. then he said, i'm going to go on record. i don't care who knows. we have to get him out. he wasn't talking about taking him out to lunch. he was talking about getting him out of office. this is not why people go to church. in fact, a new poll just a few days ago suggests that about 2/3 of americans do not want their pastor, their priest, their rabbi to tell them who to vote for. that's not why they're in a sacred space on a saturday or sunday. >> do you plan to file a complaint against this pastor worley? >> we are. we are going to file against this pastor. we don't even think this is close to the line. it's like the pastor in kentucky or just a few weeks ago when the peoria, illinois, bishop compared obama to hitler and stalin in the same sermon. nobody would mistake that for an

endorsement of barack obama. these are so far over the line. there's nothing nuanced about it. and there's no guarantee under the first amendment that you can say anything you want and keep your tax exemption. a lot of people think, well, doesn't the constitution guarantee tax exemptions for churches? it does not. no supreme court cases ever said that either. when you get the valuable privilege of a tax exemption, which means somebody is paying the taxes you aren't paying, the one and only thing you can't do is turn your religious institution into what amounts to a political action committee supporting or opposing a candidate. that's what all these fellas have done. >> you say you are going to file on this. if the i.r.a. goes after this pastor or checks into this pastor based on his comments, there are those who will say

this is the obama administration waging a war against religion. the government is not to tell churches what they can or cannot do. does your group only focus on churches against democratic presidents? >> hardly. we are an absolutely fair minded, pro democrats, republicans. we're concerned about the principle here. that's people go to church for a lot of reasons. they go to learn about the bible. they go if they're christians to learn about the life of jesus, how it applies to their life. they do not go to church to be told who to vote for because they missed the political action committee on saturday night. that's not why they're in church on sunday. this has been going on and there are groups that are actually organizing to get churches deliberately this fall in the campaign to go and have preachers preach against candidates. of course, in this case it's a group called the alliance defense fund. they only end up having churches preach against democrats. we think it's just as wrong for michelle obama about a week or so before the last election in

2008 to go to the north carolina baptist council of churches meeting, their convention there, and give a pep rally speech for her husband. that is not what churches are about. that's not what charities are about. that's not why they get tax exemptions. they get them. it's incredibly valuable to them and they ought to play by the one simple rule. don't endorse or oppose candidates for public office. these pastors, anderson, knew exactly what they were getting into in both the kentucky case and the case you're just talking about and showed the video of. these pastors made comments to suggest that well somebody told them this would be wrong or the government might come after them. they do it in defiance of not only the laws, but as is i think apparent to me in my pastoral, in defiance of everything that christianity could and should mean. >> they can say whatever they want, it's just a question of whether or not they can get a tax exempt status.

>> some churches, very few, give up their tax exemption, and they say anything they want. you want to talk about marriage equality and why it's right or wrong and want to give a sermon from now until the end of time on that subject, you can do that. that does not violate the tax code. what violates the tax code is getting partisan, starting to say, well, you should vote for the republicans, you should vote for the democrat, you should vote for somebody else. >> he's saying he's just preaching the word of god saying the word of god is telling you how to vote. >> you may remember earlier in the campaign cycle, there were four -- count them, four candidates in one political party all of whom said god had told them, in rick santorum's case, god had told his wife who told him they would be the next president of the united states. you have to be very careful as a pastor or a layperson when you think you're hearing from god you better be awfully sure that is god speaking. because otherwise you do tremendous damage. you do the kind of damage that's going on in communities all over this country with this kind of hateful rhetoric coming out of

an institution that is supposed to care about people, that's supposed to be involved in the love of all, not the hatred of some. >> reverend lynn, we appreciate your time. >> thank you. let us know what you think on facebook, follow me on twitter @andersoncooper. up ahead, mitt romney's record at bain capital. ari fleischer and james carville square off next. "ñfñ

raw politics now. the continuing battle over mitt romney's record at bain capital. they're trying to use each other as surrogates. democrats showing up in republican ads, republicans showing up in democratic ads. cats and dogs living together. that's actually a line from ghost busters. the rest is pure raw politics. today a day after republican supporters use barack obama in an ad. now opponents show rick perry attacking romney on bain. >> they sit there and they wait until they see a distressed company then they swoop in and pick the carcass clean and fly away. >> companies leave behind companies, people, broken towns. >> governor romney enjoys firing people. i enjoy creating jobs. >> it's the ultimate insult for mitt romney to come to south carolina and tell you he feels your pain. he caused it. >> now not long ago abc news is

reporting a top obama donor, a guy named jonathan levine, is a longtime bain executive. president obama has hired a number of private equity employees. last night i asked obama campaign spokesman ben labolt about that contradiction. why it's okay for the president's private equity supporters to bankrupt companies and put people out of work but it's not okay for mitt romney's equity firm to do that. >> the president has support from business leaders across industries who agree with his vision of building an economy that's built to last, where hard work and responsibility are rewarded, where everybody from main street to wall street plays by a set of rules -- >> you yourself said that's what private equity is about, and yet president obama is accepting money from private equity firms. >> we believe we need to put in

those protections to ensure we never have a financial crisis like we did in 2008 and that families across the country are not held hostage by risky financial deals. governor romney would repeal those protections. >> you're not answering the question. i'm trying to figure out what is difference between bain and governor romney's experience with private equity and that of private equity firms that the president is taking money from. that actually went on quite a while and we never got an answer to that question. hopefully, we'll get answers from democratic strategist james carville and republican strategist ari fleischer coming up right now. president obama has said this is going to be the centerpiece of his campaign, governor romney's record at bain, and how he would govern as president. is it smart for him to double down on this? >> you have to understand. what happened is romney made his experience at bain central to his candidacy. he said he created a net 100,000 jobs. he talked about that.

he never talked about being governor of massachusetts or anything else. it's not an attack on private equity. it's an attack on what romney said he did. wait a minute, there's other things that happened there. i don't even understand the whining about this. romney has resources. go find the people whose job you saved and put them on television. this is unbelievable. in my opinion, it's a very legitimate thing to talk about. it's not an attack on free enterprise. it's one guy saying, i just want credit for all the good things that happened. if you say anything bad happened, then you're some kind of terrible person. answer the ads and go on about your business. >> ari, how about that? is romney's record fair game? >> i hope they continue to go after bain and do it through november because i have a feeling it's going to continue to backfire. i think that's one of the reasons democrats are so uneasy with these attacks. if you look at what governor romney has said, he's said a very balanced statements. some of these businesses were successful and made money and created jobs, some didn't.

>> he has said 100,000 jobs created. >> he has made that balanced statement about it. what's really wrong about the ads, while it's certainly fair game to talk about what people did, he was gone from bain. he was gone from both companies they attacked him for years before the companies went bankrupt. even if you think bankruptcy in itself is disqualifying in the private sector, mitt romney was no longer part of the company. >> he has claimed 100,000 jobs were created, and that's kind of fuzzy. he has walked away from things that happened in bain after he left, but he wants to take credit for good things that happened after he left. >> you're always going to find politicians who claim they created jobs, and they're always going to be arguable numbers. but when you look at the role that private equity plays, they always create some jobs and lose some jobs. you look at the net positive.

certainly with a successful company like bain, the net has been positive. they have an excellent reputation, which is something that has been talked about by the democrats. one of the reasons people believe in mitt romney, because they think he can turn around a broken economy. that's what we need in this country. >> isn't the obama administration in their ads, isn't the campaign cherry picking what they're focusing on about bain? >> mitt romney started this. understand, bain was central to his case. it is what he talked about. it is the central part of his stump speech. he says he creates a net 100,000 jobs. they're talking about his experience, what he did and what he didn't do, and the whining and the carping and the complaining and everything else, you know, it's saying, if you're afraid of snakes, don't go in the swamp. if you're afraid that your record is going to get examined, don't run for president. that's the simple thing here. he put it front and center about who he is, and they're saying, hold to, wait, this is what you did. romney is a man with considerable resources. he can answer it. he can put people on. he can do anything that he

wants. but the idea that there's something wrong with discussing mitt romney's record at bain, it's just, i don't even understand what the charge is. >> james, does it surprise you that the obama campaign hasn't focused more on his record creating jobs as governor of massachusetts? his whole argument is what i learned at bain teaches me in government how to create jobs. >> i suspect that they will, but you wouldn't ever know that romney was governor of massachusetts if you ever go to his stump speeches or watch his ads during the republican primary. of course at some point they're going to do that, but this thing has sort of engaged, and romney wanted to create this story of, hey, i'm a guy, i'm all successful all the time. i did all these wonderful things, and they're saying, wait a minute, there's another side to the story. it's a totally legitimate thing in politics. >> ari, is romney vulnerable on his record in massachusetts creating jobs? >> no, i don't think so. i think when you look at his record and totality and the

reputation he has as a fixer of economies, this is what this election is going to come down to. let me remind james, it wasn't mitt romney who initially objected to this ad, it was your own. it was cory booker on "meet the press" and quickly followed up by ed rendell, the former chairman of the democratic national committee. so the whining and complaining you're talking about is on your own side. they blew the whistle on their own player. i think this debate actually helps mitt romney. the more this election is fought over economic matters, the economy, barack obama acts as if he hasn't been the president of the united states for the last 3 1/2 years. he wants to blame everything on anybody that came before him. he acts as if none of his policies has anything to do with the bad economy we have right now. the more the election is fought on those issues, the stronger i think it's going to be for mitt romney and republicans. >> how does a guy from the bush administration sit here and blame obama? it's vexing. obama takes office losing 750,000 jobs, and mitt romney

wants to talk about carter, but if you say something about bush, you can't do that. you say something about bain -- you know, ari, i didn't interrupt you. there are people out there complaining and whining about this bain thing forever. you get in the game, they're going to come after you. you don't get to tell just your side of the story. they're going to tell the side of obama, they're going to say you lost jobs, you did this. that's what happens when you run for re-election. j i'm just simply saying his record at bain, he put it at front and center. it's very valid to dissect. it's valid for romney to say he came back and did all these wonderful things. as governor of massachusetts, he was 47th in job creation. louisiana was one, and we had hurricane katrina, but i think we had a little disadvantage. it's certainly not unfair for me to point out they were 47th. >> ari, i'll let you respond. >> i'm doing no complaining it. i think it is an appropriate thing to talk about.

and that's why the democrats have said the things that they say because they get the role that the private economy plays. you get the sense from president obama that he doesn't like all things private, private economy, private sector. he criticizes the corporations for riding on private planes, but he doesn't mention the celebrities or athletes who ride on private planes. just corporate. he has an anti-business approach. it's reflected in the way he governs, the things he says. that's why we have little job creation. businesses are worried with barack obama that there are going to be taxes and regulations that suppress job growth. up ahead, on board this airline, what a woman said was inside and what happened next. f!

a controversial massachusetts school under fire for shocking students with painful electricity, electric shocks. they are not backing down. the so-called adversive therapy is fda approved. turns out it's not.

a lot more we're following tonight. isha with the 360 bull ten. a woman who caused a flight to be diverted today didn't pose any real threat and will likely get psychological testing. the woman was on board a u.s. airways flight from paris to north carolina. she claimed to have a device surgically implanted in her body. the man who was held for months in aruba last year after the woman he was traveling with disappeared is back in the news. gary jordgiordano was charged w indecent exposure in maryland after police found him naked, cuddling with a woman in a car in the back of a parking garage.

a man has become the fourth person ever to survive going over niagara falls without any protective gear. he climbed over a retaining wall and was swept over the falls. he suffered broken ribs and a collapsed lung. anderson, the first private spacecraft bound for the international space station blasted off from cape canaveral early this morning. the unmanned rocket is delivering supplies to astronauts in the space station. i know you're a space geek, so that one's for you. >> thanks. disturbing video of treatment still being used at a massachusetts school. shows a former student, autistic young man strapped down being shocked with electrodes. the mom calls it torture. what does the school say? the director of research joins us to explain why they're doing it. to give it a sense of direction, at&t created a mobile asset solution to protect and track everything. so every piece of equipment knows where it is, how it's doing or where it goes next. ♪ this is the bell on the cat.

[ male announcer ] it's a network of possibilities -- helping you do what you do... even better. ♪ but proven technologies allow natural gas producers to supply affordable, cleaner energy, while protecting our environment. across america, these technologies protect air - by monitoring air quality and reducing emissions... ...protect water - through conservation and self-contained recycling systems... ... and protect land - by reducing our footprint and respecting wildlife. america's natural gas... domestic, abundant, clean energy to power our lives... that's smarter power today.

a school psychologist behind racially offensive tweets is stepping down. what he said about "young black thugs" needing to, quote, be put down, is only the beginning.

tonight a "360" follow-up. a controversial center for teens and others with severe emotional behavior and developmental issues, including severe autism, the school is the judge rodenberg center in massachusetts. it's controversial because a student's behavior is controlled with painful electric shocks. the school calls it aversive therapy for hard to control kids who are a danger to themselves and haven't been helped by anything else. but a recently released video that the school fought hard to keep secret has renewed calls to close the school. we need to warn you the video you're about to see is disturbing. [ screaming ] >> that's a young man named andre mccollins, a former student who was shocked 31 times over seven hours, ultimately strapped down and continued to be shocked. andre has autism. the video was evidence in a

lawsuit his family recently settled. last week the school told us what happened to andre isn't the norm, but they are not backing off claims that skin shocks help their students and even save lives, preventing them from very dangerous behaviors. but some of their claims don't seem to hold up to the facts. for instance, the school says the device used to shock students is fda approved. it isn't. we checked with the fda, and they told us they cleared the device -- that's the word. cleared the device in 1994 for use at the judge rodenberg center on the basis it was the same as an aversive conditioning device already on the market. in 2010 the fda discovered they have a souped up device that used much more powerful shocks. they were concerned about burns. the agency then told the school in 2010 that the device was no longer quote, unquote, cleared under its earlier ruling. it's not clear what's happened since then. the fda declined to comment when they asked. but they did say the school

should not be referring to its skin shock device as fda approved. they also said, "behavior modification techniques involving the use of aversive regulations, including skin shock, are heavily regulated in massachusetts by the massachusetts dds and the massachusetts department of early education and care." what the website doesn't mention is that skin shocks have been banned in massachusetts since last september. the massachusetts health and human services department told us, "the administration filed regulations last year to ban the use of aversive therapies for any student who was not already receiving aversive therapies by order of the probate and family court. as a result, no new behavioral plans with aversive therapies have been put in place since september." in other words, any student who enrolled in judge rodenberg center after 2011 cannot be shocked under the new state guidelines. students who were enrolled before then can still be shocked. a research director at the judge

rodenberg center joins me. and then a research scientist at the library. kevin, describe what happens in the body when a shock like this is administered, particularly in the case of andre when it's 31 times in seven hours. >> sure. from the point of view of the experience of the person being shocked, obviously, it's painful. that sets off a cascade of biological events. essentially, an activation of what we call the stress response. so the type of response you f l feel, if you narrowly escape a car accident, a fight or flight response. and so that unleashes a set of stress hormones that we know are very bad for the body, that cause all types of illnesses over time. so chronic exposure to this type of stress hor known is well-known to cause harm to individuals, types of things we

try to avoid in our daily lives. >> nathan, you're a board certified analyst for this center. you also have 20 students with severe disabilities who you care for and you oversee. why is it okay to shock autistic students, others with severe developmental disabilities, when prisoners aren't shocked, murderers aren't shocked to control their behavior? >> well, you have to remember that this is not retribution. we're not trying to get back at people for engaging in problem behaviors. what we're trying to do is reduce their problem behaviors to near zero levels so that they can learn additional skills and so that they can be free of psychotropic medications and free of mechanical and physical restraint. >> with that logic, why not shock prisoners who are unruly, prisoners who are difficult? people view that as inhumane? >> what we're looking to do here is -- prisoners are often removed from society because

they're dangerous to others and because that's the way the legal system works. this is a different process here. what we're trying to do is to treat these individuals so that they no longer require skin shock in many cases soar that they can discontinue other procedures that are dangerous or that have side effects that are worse. >> but i've talked to parents whose kids are now grown adults and are still at the center. they've been there since the '80s and are still receiving shocks. >> there's a certain type of behavior problem where the behavior is maintained by unknown causes. and where we find that on a long-term basis the procedure that's required in order for the person to maintain a good quality of life. n now, that's not that different that a lot of procedures that many of us use that are prosthetic in nature. a lot of anti-psychotic medications are prosthetic in nature, and they work as long as

people are taking them. people take all kinds of drugs that the moment they stop taking them, the symptoms or problems return. if we can give someone that exhibits extraordinarily dangerous behavior problems, such as hitting their heads until they blind themselves or pulling out all their own teeth or physical aggression that's so severe that they injure everyone who cares for them, if we can eliminate those behaviors and that person can live and have a good quality of life -- >> has this been peer reviewed? >> there are a whole slough of studies related to the use of contingent skin shock for the treatment of -- >> studies that come from this center. but has it been peer reviewed? that's how it works. you submit this stuff, and it's been peer reviewed. >> most of the studies have not come from the judge rodenberg center. >> has it been peer reviewed? >> they've been published in peer reviewed journals and published by multiple authors, and there's numerous papers that

show this treatment is safe and the side effects are mostly positive. >> kevin, you not only study autism, you're the father of two autistic children. if these have been peer reviewed, why is this the only center who knows about it? >> i spent my time looking for peer reviewed articles and all the sources we use to find biomedical research, and we just couldn't find anything that wasn't published online without peer review supporting the efficacy. and the other component was what we could find coming out online -- again, not peer reviewed -- as far as we could tell, was not comparing this therapy to other therapies that have -- that don't have the experience of pain as a component, which would be absolutely critical to evaluate

its scientific effectiveness. >> supporters of the school say, look, these are kids or teens or adults who no one else will accept. they're violent in some cases and they're a danger to themselves. this seems to control their behavior whereas psychotropic medication, they gain weight, they're listless, they're not themselves. >> i understand the point of view, but i would argue that given the long literature, and it goes back about 100 years in terms of behavioral research, we know that punishment in the long term does relative ly little to effect behavior in the long term. once it's removed, behaviors come back. and it doesn't treat the underlying cause. the psychotropic medications are designed to treat the underlying cause. the brain imbalances that lead to these behaviors. they're biologically based. they're evidence based, and they

can be combined with behavioral techniques that are absolutely wonderful that focus on reward and positive reinforcement. and the two combined, i would hypothesize, would work much better than this form of punishment. >> you say it's like a bee sting, but bee stings done for seven years multiple times like done on andre is painful. and you've also developed a device that's even stronger because, for some people, the lower levels of shock doesn't seem to work. >> what we want to do with all treatments is we want to weigh the risks and the benefits of the treatments that we're looking at. and so all treatments have a certain probability of success. they have certain side effects associated with them, and they have a certain efficacy. and going back to what the other

speaker was talking about, i would be more than happy to share the peer reviewed studies with them. second of all, these people have been on all types of treatments for decades. they've received positive only features, special education traini training, and they've been on massive doses of pharmacological agents that weren't effective and didn't prevent them from engaging in these behaviors and that caused them to have obesity that increase the risk of sudden cardiac death. some people have come to our program, and because of the medications they were given, they experienced neuromalithic syndrome where they had a seizure and had to go to the hospital. one person nearly died from

these drugs. if you look at it from a risk benefit profile, the skin shock is extremely effective for the rare problem behaviors that can't be treated anywhere else, and they're far superior to the long term restraints, high doses of anti-psychotic medications. remember we're using this after all the procedures, such as positive reinforcement procedures, have been used and have failed for a number of years. >> nathan, i appreciate you being on. kevin, thank you very much as well. it's a difficult topic. there's parents on both sides of this. coming up, disturbing, racially charged statements from a school psychologist in louisiana. he posted on twitter that, quote, young black thugs -- those were his words -- should be, quote, put down like the dogs they are. this is a school psychologist. ♪ i can do anything today ♪ i can go anywhere ♪ i can go anywhere today ♪ la la la la la la la

[ male announcer ] dow solutions help millions of people by helping to make gluten free bread that doesn't taste gluten free. together, the elements of science and the human element can solve anything. solutionism. the new optimism.

another 360 bull ten. according to times picayune, a school psychologist in jefferson parish, louisiana, has resigned after tweeting several racially offensive comments, including this one. quote, we're faced with a black army of thugs who have declared war on the american way of life holding america hostage as we speak. he told the newspaper his comments were not racist. more than a year after japan's earthquake and tsunami, debris from the disaster is washing ashore, more than 4,000 miles away in alaska. they say the debris is polluting

the pacific and endangering wildlife. the anniversary today of another disaster. a year ago today a massive tornado hit joplin, missouri. 161 people were killed and hundreds of buildings were destroyed or damaged. and who made millions of dollars in paintings, drawings, and a silk screen by andy warhol disappear? they vanished from a detroit art collector's business last month? that's the word from the fbi, who says the hot artwork may have already left the country. coming up, one man's crus e crusade, him against the intricacies of an all you can get fish fry. neosporin® plus pain relief. for a two dollar coupon, visit neosporin.com.

i tell you what i can spend. i do my best to make it work. i'm back on the road safely. and i saved you money on brakes. that's personal pricing.

time for the ridiculist. tonight we are reeling over the tale of a fish fry gone awry. at a restaurant in wisconsin everything was going swimmingly at the friday night all you can eat fish fry until a guy started carping about, well, what the definition of all is. >> i need more fish on my dish. >> his name is bill and he ate a bunch of fried fish on his dish. even got some more to go, something like 20 pieces of fried fish in all. reportedly, the restaurant started to run out. finally, they told bill that he was cut off. >> we asked for more fish and they refused to give us any more fish. it's false advertising. >> so bill did what anyone would do when faced with this type of egregious trout withholding. this deficiency, if you will. he called the police. >> what do you need the police department for? >> well, i'm eating at this restaurant all you can eat fish.

>> uh-huh. >> and i just asked for more fish. they gave me four pieces. and they refused to give me more fish. and it's on the sign in front of the building. all you can eat friday fish fry. >> yeah. he called the sheriff's dispatcher. not only did bill call the sheriff's office, he started picketing the restaurant. if i'm not mistaken, i think he wrote his slogan on cardboard with ballpoint pen so we can hardly make it out. i think it says poor business practices. i don't know how many times i have to say this, people, when you picket an all you can eat fish fry, you've got to use a fish fry. everyone knows that. some people are thinking, hey, all you can eat should mean all you can eat, including what bill can eat. bill's whole beef could be a red herring because our crusader for the more fish on the dish has a history of being a problem customer at this restaurant. for one thing, he was reportedly