NAPLES — A 15-year-old who fatally stabbed his school mate will no longer face criminal prosecution.
A judge’s ruling, made public Tuesday, granted a motion to dismiss the second-degree murder charge against Jorge Saavedra in the death of 16-year-old Dylan Nuno on the grounds that he acted in self-defense under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law. The State Attorney’s Office has indicated that it will not appeal the ruling.
Nuno’s family and friends criticized Collier County Circuit Judge Lauren Brodie’s decision, calling it “unbelievable” and “heartbreaking.”
“We know this wasn’t the right decision,” said Dylan’s aunt, Adriana Nuno.“(The judge) is showing those kids it’s OK to get away with murder.”
Saavedra, who was 14 at the time of the stabbing, was charged as a juvenile. If found guilty, the former Palmetto Ridge High student would have been released by the age of 21.
Brodie’s ruling concluded that Saavadra, who said he was bullied and tried avoid a fight with Nuno, did not act unlawfully. She added that Saavadra had more than enough reason to believe he was in danger of death or great bodily harm.
Brodie based her decision this week on the findings from a two-day December hearing, during which students who witnessed the events Jan. 24, 2011, testified that several teens announced the fight on the bus, and Saavedra got off several stops early in Golden Gate Estates. Saavedra showed a pocket knife to two teens on the bus that afternoon.
In a nine-page document released Tuesday by the State Attorney’s Office, Brodie stated that by getting off the bus several stops before the location where the fight was to happen, Saavedra “demonstrated that, with or without a knife, (he) had no desire to fight with Dylan Nuno.”
Umm, he should be punished at least somewhat. I read the whole article and Dylan may have followed him off the bus and started the fight, but Jorge ran away and then suddenly stabbed him 12 times in the abdomen and chest. After maybe a couple stabs I don't think it would be self defense anymore unless that Jorge guy was seriously hoped up on goofballs.
There's that bittersweet sense of Justice both being served and denied simotanously. The kid stabbed someone to death on one hand, and stood up to bullying albeit a step above what I consider practical on the other. The judge made the right decision, the family of the erstwhile "victim" will probably spend a great deal of time wringing hands and gnashing teeth ignoring the fact that theirs is the side of a boy who was determined to beat the gak out of a smaller boy and got his comeuppance plus a share.
What more is the kid supposed to do, he got off the bus early and ran away from his attacker. I would have sentenced him to some counseling though, he's probably gonna need it. Twelve times just screams anger issues.
It's unlikely that, as a 14 year-old, he could have counted the stabs and become rational at an accepted point.
If he had been continuously bullied, letting out all that pent up anger, especially at an age where your emotions are by no means mature, could very well have been the cause of the number of stabbings.
I honestly think that the number of stabs here is unimportant; here is a kid who was bullied by someone, was pressured by students who advertised fights, and who showed no willingness to fight, only a desire for self-preservation should it occur. As an adult, it probably would've been more important; we're meant to be in far more control of ourselves, both physically and mentally, whereas a kid of 14 is full of puberty and walking around with an immature mindset.
If a grown man went into a stabbing frenzy, he should've known better, and restrained himself more, but how can you expect someone whose young and immature mind is in a state of mental turmoil, to realise that 12 stabs is too many, when he probably stopped counting after the first as his pent up rage and other emotions boiled over?
Did anyone read the article? He got off the bus multiple stops before to avoid fighting, then when they (a group of kids) found him he tried to run away and they punched him in the back of the head.
So he tried to avoid violence 2 times and found himself facing a group of kids older than himself after everything he did. So he stabbed the kid in defense, good for him he didn't end up the victim.
What I don't get is the people defending the dead bully, if you raise your kid to be an idiot don't be shocked when it bites him in the ass.
Avatar 720 wrote:It's unlikely that, as a 14 year-old, he could have counted the stabs and become rational at an accepted point.
If he had been continuously bullied, letting out all that pent up anger, especially at an age where your emotions are by no means mature, could very well have been the cause of the number of stabbings.
I honestly think that the number of stabs here is unimportant; here is a kid who was bullied by someone, was pressured by students who advertised fights, and who showed no willingness to fight, only a desire for self-preservation should it occur. As an adult, it probably would've been more important; we're meant to be in far more control of ourselves, both physically and mentally, whereas a kid of 14 is full of puberty and walking around with an immature mindset.
If a grown man went into a stabbing frenzy, he should've known better, and restrained himself more, but how can you expect someone whose young and immature mind is in a state of mental turmoil, to realise that 12 stabs is too many, when he probably stopped counting after the first as his pent up rage and other emotions boiled over?
Still, he should get something.
Yes, the bullied is the victim here, but honestly, we are missing a bit of info here;
How long after he pulled the knife did the kids start backing off? Did he warn him or just stab him?
I'm not saying he was wrong to stab the guy, just saying he was a little excessive.
Ahtman wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:But to get off on murdering this kid is a bit much.
He didn't murder anyone, he killed someone in self defense.
Avatar 720 wrote:It's unlikely that, as a 14 year-old, he could have counted the stabs and become rational at an accepted point.
If he had been continuously bullied, letting out all that pent up anger, especially at an age where your emotions are by no means mature, could very well have been the cause of the number of stabbings.
I honestly think that the number of stabs here is unimportant; here is a kid who was bullied by someone, was pressured by students who advertised fights, and who showed no willingness to fight, only a desire for self-preservation should it occur. As an adult, it probably would've been more important; we're meant to be in far more control of ourselves, both physically and mentally, whereas a kid of 14 is full of puberty and walking around with an immature mindset.
If a grown man went into a stabbing frenzy, he should've known better, and restrained himself more, but how can you expect someone whose young and immature mind is in a state of mental turmoil, to realise that 12 stabs is too many, when he probably stopped counting after the first as his pent up rage and other emotions boiled over?
Still, he should get something.
Yes, the bullied is the victim here, but honestly, we are missing a bit of info here;
How long after he pulled the knife did the kids start backing off? Did he warn him or just stab him?
I'm not saying he was wrong to stab the guy, just saying he was a little excessive.
Article wrote:Accompanied by several students, Dylan Nuno, a junior, followed Saavedra, a freshman, off the bus. He then punched him in the back of the head, according to court documents and testimony.
Saavedra attempted to get away once, witnesses said. He then stabbed Dylan Nuno 12 times in the chest and abdomen. Two of the blows caused fatal wounds, including one that nicked his heart.
The kid was assaulted first from behind and chased down, before resorting to the knife. I assume the other guys who followed the bully ran off during the stabbing. It's not like he walked up to Nuno and stabbed him, he was attacked first and then chased when he attempted to get away, I say the blow to the head sort of makes up for the lack of any mentioned warning.
He was essentially cornered, with attempts at getting away being foiled and with no other way of escape apart from using the knife or submitting to, most likely, vicious physical attacks. Even if we don't bring the stuff from my first post into it, blind panic from having no other means of escape could have driven him to a stabbing frenzy on its own; a cornered animal fights twice as hard, I don't see it being any different for cornered people with nothing to lose and only going off immature survival instincts.
Its a tragic event, but one that was perpetuated and escalted multiple times by the deceased.
It is hard to feel much sympathy for a predator who gets some of his own medicine in a situation he willingly created A situation whose purpose was to derive enjoyment in the mental/physical/social anguish of someone weaker then one's self.
If I ever found out one of my kids was bullying someone here would be hell to pay. I have zero tolerance for such predatory stupidity and have conveyed this to my sons clearly and regularly since they have been old enough to understand the spoken word. I pray it is never an issue.
Yay for ignorant comments! I'm sorry, but that's what everyone going on and on about the "12 stabs" has made so far in this thread.
Did any of you stop to consider that the "12 stabs" were not described? Did he suffer 12 serious, inch deep wounds, or did a couple stabs kill him and the rest were nicks?
Did you stop to think that the bully kept coming after the first 10 stabs and it was only the last one or two to put him down?
Did you stop to think that, "Hey, when someone is like 12" away from me I can stab them like 12 times in under 10 seconds..."
What PROBABLY happened was that the VICTIM continued to avoid the BULLY until one day he was finally confronted and forced to fight. Flustered, overcharged with adredaline, and in fear of either physical harm, he reacted in extreme self defensive which resulted in the death of his assailant.
Not once did the VICTIM stop and think "Hey, I really should only stab him once or twice." He was PROBABLY aiming center mass and unleashed a flurry of blows that did not stop until the BULLY was no longer moving. Then he PROBABLY stumbled a way disoriented and in complete shock over what had just occurred.
This was not premeditated murder, this was a fourteen year old defending himself against multiple older and probably larger young men. I am not going to argue over whether or not the bully got what he deserved, but you bleeding hearts should be ashamed of yourselves for even once suggesting that the VICTIM of repeated bullying and harassment should be punished for defending himself.
Until these posts differences of opinion with others on this site have been simply differences of opinion. This is the first time I have been absolutely disgusted by another person's posts here.
Amaya wrote:I am not going to argue over whether or not the bully got what he deserved, but you bleeding hearts should be ashamed of yourselves for even once suggesting that the VICTIM of repeated bullying and harassment should be punished for defending himself.\
No one defended the bully. All people were saying was maybe the kid shouldn't have gotten away scot free. I like Andrew1975's solution; no serious punishment, but counciling and the like to make sure he's sane/keep him sane.
AustonT wrote:It was a pocket knife not an Arkansas toothpick. It might have taken 12. Love to see the weapon though...
That's creepy
Which part?
Love to see the weapon though. It's got that whole creepy murder pornography feeling.
There's a big difference between this:
and this:
You can call it what you would like, I call it looking for the facts. The knife and wound are essential to understanding what happened.
Ah see curiuosity. I just imagined someone really really really wanting to see the bloody knife that actually did the deed. I would assume it was a pen kinfe, I can't really see him sneaking Rambos knife into school.
Yes, the bullied is the victim here, but honestly, we are missing a bit of info here;
How long after he pulled the knife did the kids start backing off? Did he warn him or just stab him?
I'm not saying he was wrong to stab the guy, just saying he was a little excessive.
Ahtman wrote:
Slarg232 wrote:But to get off on murdering this kid is a bit much.
He didn't murder anyone, he killed someone in self defense.
Potato, Potahto. Someone died, didn' they?
The harm that killing Dylan Nuno did to Saavedra's mental health is punishment enough. Killing someone isn't easy, in fact, most people don't have it in them to take a human life without special conditions. Unless Saavedra is psychotic, he's going to have problems the rest of his life. So should the law treat him like a criminal, which would give him even more problems and possibly make him even more unstable?
It's more complicated than potato, potahto. Murder requires mens rea. Self defense is about staying alive, not necessarily killing. Just imagine what you would do if you had an older person assaulting you with a gang at his back and you had a knife in your pocket. I'd use it, I'm sure everyone who's posted on this thread would use it. That doesn't make them a criminal.
Just imagine what you would do if you had an older person assaulting you with a gang at his back and you had a knife in your pocket. I'd use it, I'm sure everyone who's posted on this thread would use it. That doesn't make them a criminal.
Most people probably wouldn't, they would gak themselves and let someone steal their knife while they are getting beat. This kid was no coward, yet he still tried to avoid the situation. He needs counseling, serious and possibly long term. The judges should have gone after the bullies friends as accomplices and charged them with manslaughter. I'm sure they egged him on. If not to actually punish them, then to scare the gak out of them.
Andrew1975 wrote:I would assume it was a pen kinfe, I can't really see him sneaking Rambos knife into school.
I have one of these...
...that never leaves the webbing outside my backpack. If I put it into my backpack, you would never know it was there.
I also have one of these...
...on my person pretty much all the time, and you would never know it if you didn't know what to look for (and you would still find it difficult to tell it apart from a cell phone or wallet).
You are also not a 14 year old. Certainly not the average 14 year old who doesn't have access to a cache of weapons. He most likely (not nessesarily) had a common pen, steak, or swiss army knife. You know the kind of thing most kids can get their hand on. Not this
What ever, bully's have no need to live anyways, I'm glad the kid stabbed the bugger, he grew and pair and showed the guy what really happens if you screw with someone
The latter of the two is something most outdoors shops will sell to a teenager, and is more than capable of inflicting lethal wounds.
Really though, while the MKII I posted a picture of is better at facilitating death than your garden variety pen knife, most any knife is lethal if you know what you're doing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ParatrooperSimon wrote:...he grew and pair and showed the guy what really happens if you screw with someone
Well, no. What really happens is what tends to happen, which is not being stabbed.
From all I can tell in this case, No. No he shouldn't. He attempted repeatedly to avoid physical confrontation, and then when he finally responded with force it was in what certainly qualifies as a deadly force situation (Or, what, you don't think that you can get killed when you have multiple people your size or larger stomping you on the pavement?)
Still, holy gak, 12 stabs.
So? Talk to some people who got in a fight and actually got stabbed. You'll probably be surprised at how many thought the other guy was just throwing punches until they noticed all the blood. Human body will also manage to take a lot of puncture wounds outside the central nervous system and keep fighting. Could very well be the kid had stabbed the guy 12 times before Captain Donkey Cave was incapacitated.
You don't count your punches in a fist fight, or your cuts and thrusts in a sword fight, or your shots in a gunfight, and then stop when you get to a number that might offend someones sensibilities later on, regardless of whether your eyeballs are being introduced to the back of your skull. You punch, kick, stab, cut, or shoot until the "IF I DON'T KEEP DOING THIS I AM DEAD/GOING TO THE ICU" situation ends, and then you stop. From all appearances, this kid did exactly that.
While I can only judge on the information I can find, and always entertain the possibility that there may be something withheld that could change the overall picture entirely....Sounds like the kid needs to be taken out to a steak dinner, given a beer and sent to a hotel room with an escort as a reward for not winding up dead.
Tendons more immediately (Admittedly more limited.) than the arteries. My opponent going lights out in (assuming better case) 5-6 seconds due to blood loss is a long time to wait when those 5-6 seconds are filled with being clubbed in the side of the head with a brick.
Maybe there would be fewer bullies if bullying carried the death penalty... but that's probably true of a lot of things
Seriously though. My sympathy for the bully = 0. Maybe the rest of the dicks in his school will decide to be better people. The only victim is Jorge, who now isn't just a victim of abuse but a killer. He has to live with that for the rest of his life, even though the guy he killed had it coming and deserved ever stab.
I don't know that he deserved to die either, that's a pretty big statement. However, he deserved to die more than the other kid did. I think it is tragic, it didn't need to happen, there are no winners in this situation. This is not the same as the fat kid suplexing the bully. This is permanent, and nobody walked away whole.
He certainly deserved a beating, but its hard to say, without more information, that he deserved to die.
And I say this as a guy that's been bullied, and taken those bullies to task.
Obviously as a former bullied kid, I'm biased
The thing that sucks the most about being bullied, is that adults really are no help. Going to them makes bullying worse, and the advice they give is completely counter productive. If all you do is talk back, the bullies continue to bully. If you ignore them, they continue to bully. Bullies only stopped bullying me when I punched one in the face. Schools don't punish bullies harshly enough (by that I mean they pretty much do nothing unless there is excessive physical contact witnessed by school officials) and they don't help bullied kids because the bullies have rights too. I got suspended for three days for hitting that kid in the face. Nothing ever happened to him over the course of the four years of verbal and physical abuse prior to the incident. After I hit him, people stopped bullying me.
Kids who are bullied have no recourse in our schools because schools don't help them. Sure as hell didn't help me over the course of 12 years.
Killing is extreme and unfortunate. But I'm not shedding a tear for a kid who spends his time hounding another, and for what? There's no practical reason for it other than to derive relief or pleasure from the suffering of another. Either way, the bully is a horrible person and the world is better off without him. Hopefully his friends will look back on this incident and change their behavior. I reserve all sympathy for the living victims who are the ones who truly suffer.
LordofHats wrote:
The thing that sucks the most about being bullied, is that adults really are no help.
I know this is the exception to the rule, but my parents were a big help. I recall my dad saying "Kick his ass, we'll deal with the rest." when I was in 1st grade and being harassed by some 3rd graders (it also helps that I was always a big kid).
LordofHats wrote:
Going to them makes bullying worse, and the advice they give is completely counter productive.
I agree with that.
LordofHats wrote:
If all you do is talk back, the bullies continue to bully.
Until you get better at it than they are. I attribute much of my verbal ability to being harassed in primary school.
LordofHats wrote:
But I'm not shedding a tear for a kid who spends his time hounding another, and for what? There's no practical reason for it other than to derive relief or pleasure from the suffering of another.
Well, as I'm sure you know, I don't care much about the lives of others. But there are practical reasons to bully people (popularity), and lots of people derive pleasure from the suffering of others (failblog).
The thing that sucks the most about being bullied, is that adults really are no help. Going to them makes bullying worse, and the advice they give is completely counter productive. If all you do is talk back, the bullies continue to bully. If you ignore them, they continue to bully. Bullies only stopped bullying me when I punched one in the face. Schools don't punish bullies harshly enough (by that I mean they pretty much do nothing unless there is excessive physical contact witnessed by school officials) and they don't help bullied kids because the bullies have rights too. I got suspended for three days for hitting that kid in the face. Nothing ever happened to him over the course of the four years of verbal and physical abuse prior to the incident. After I hit him, people stopped bullying me.
That is how bullying works. It does teach an important life lesson though. You need to learn to stand up for yourself or you will be a target all your life. Standing up to the bully is very frightening, but the most liberating feeling in the world. That is the lesson that you learn, if you stand up and don't carry yourself like a target, you know what happens...Nothing, you almost never get into a physical confrontation. People pick on the weak or those that appear weak because the never expect them to stand up. If you stand up they will move on and find another target.
It's not a size issue. It is absolutely how you carry and handle yourself. When I was the meekest guy in the world I would attract so much attention. I was amazed when I learned all I had to do was stand up straight, look people in the eye, and not walk around with my tail between my legs. I also learned that if it came to a fight, I could handle myself pretty well, and it doesn't hurt nearly as much as walking around like a looser all day every day.
You don't have to be a jerk about it either, but the second someone steps up, step right up to, they almost always back down unless they really have a personal issue with you.
In a sense bullies are useful, they can teach you self confidence which is a skill that you can use for the rest of your life in many situations.
Slarg232 wrote:But to get off on murdering this kid is a bit much.
He didn't murder anyone, he killed someone in self defense.
Potato, Potahto. Someone died, didn' they?
You don't understand the difference between murdered and killed? Just the act of being dead isn't enough to be considered murdered. If someone has a heart attack in the middle of the night and die in their bed they aren't considered to have been murdered in their sleep.
He obviously did not want to be beaten by a donkey cave and his friends and so ran, when cornered he saw that the only way to stop himself from being hurt was to defend himself.
I'm doubting he even tried to kill the guy, maybe just scare him off or cut him, but it seems to be in self defense.
Also, when a knife is off such a small scale, it may require multiple blows or strikes to have any effect.
Kind of happy he didn't get punished. Everytime I got into a fight against a bully (i'd always win) I either got suspended or arrested. I know what its like to have donkey-caves piss you the feth off everyday and when you finally do something about it you shouldn't be fething punished. To be honest I'm glad that kid died, probably would've saved another kid from being bullied. The filth in this world is unbelievable.
dogma wrote:The latter of the two is something most outdoors shops will sell to a teenager, and is more than capable of inflicting lethal wounds.
Really though, while the MKII I posted a picture of is better at facilitating death than your garden variety pen knife, most any knife is lethal if you know what you're doing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ParatrooperSimon wrote:...he grew and pair and showed the guy what really happens if you screw with someone
Well, no. What really happens is what tends to happen, which is not being stabbed.
Actually, mainly in western countries. If you threaten or try and assualt someone, you will get stabbed, or even shot. You know what bro, why don't you go around the bad parts LA or New York and just start threatning people and then you see what happens. Jesus some people are just really ignorant
ParatrooperSimon wrote:
You know what bro, why don't you go around the bad parts LA or New York and just start threatning people and then you see what happens. Jesus some people are just really ignorant
I enjoyed it as well (/canned response), but I feel like I should elaborate. I've threatened my fair share of people, probably more than my fair share, and have numerous friends that have done the same. I have no stab wound scars, nor do any of them. I imagine that, if I wanted to consult statistics, the statistical evidence would favor people not being stabbed due to threats.
In a nine-page document released Tuesday by the State Attorney’s Office, Brodie stated that by getting off the bus several stops before the location where the fight was to happen, Saavedra “demonstrated that, with or without a knife, (he) had no desire to fight with Dylan Nuno.”
Which courtroom idiot buys that? Getting out early and walking warms you up psyches you up and steels you for what you want to do, it also allows you to pick your ground and timing. If Saavedra didn't want to fight Nuno he should stay on the bus past the stop or get off outside a public building.
There needs to be stronger reasons than that to say the murder was not premeditated. If Saavedra brought a knife it meant he wanted to take a knife to a fight, thats premeditation right there. At that point anything other than the minimum action
Also while actions say murder was intentional beyond reasonable doubt, what actually gives indication the fight was not wanted. Did Saavedra try and call it off? If not did he try to call it off when he had the upper hand? Loss of face is no excuse to say you didn't want to fight, especially if armed. As for twelve stabs, that isnt calling it off either. I see nothing to suggest Saavedra entered the fight without intention to finish it, he did enter the fight and did finish it, that was not contested and therefore should be culpable for the death of Nuno.
Society in America is not based off of stabbing people by threatening them.
As a civil society to which most people play by the informal laws created by centuries of personal interaction with their fellow man, most would not stab a person for threatening them.
We may entertain the idea of violence to counteract threats, but by and large we contain that impulse by thinking about the situation before ultimately deciding a stint in jail is not what we want to do.
Orlanth wrote:Getting out early and walking the rest of the way warms you up psyches you up and steels you for what you want to do.
Or doesn't.
For a guy that likes to argue from "human nature" you are really bad at arguing from "human nature."
Orlanth wrote:
there needs to be stronger reasons than that to say the murder was not premeditated.
Thankfully, his lawyer only needed to argue against the case that he committed murder.
Orlanth wrote:
If Saavedra walked that distance with a knife it meant he wanted to take a knife to a fight, thats premeditation right there.
Depends on the state.
Orlanth wrote:
Also while actions say murder was intentional beyond reasonable doubt, what actual;ly gives indication the fight was not wanted. Did Saavedra try and call it off?
Orlanth wrote:Getting out early and walking the rest of the way warms you up psyches you up and steels you for what you want to do.
Or doesn't.
For a guy that likes to argue from "human nature" you are really bad at arguing from "human nature."
'Your really bad at'.. shtick again dogma. *yawn*
Getting off a bus and walking away with a hothead who wants a fight will have one expected outcome, the hothead will follow you off. If this was accompanied by an intention to get away you get off the bus somewhere safer. This looks like walking Nuno to an ambush. Somewhere where he can be stabbed.
dogma wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
there needs to be stronger reasons than that to say the murder was not premeditated.
Thankfully, his lawyer only needed to argue against the case that he committed murder.
Orlanth wrote:
If Saavedra walked that distance with a knife it meant he wanted to take a knife to a fight, thats premeditation right there.
Depends on the state.
Good lawyer, but not a good outcome. He showed the knife off to his mates, that shows intent to use the knife in the fight. Twelve stabs, means he intended to finish the job
Orlanth wrote:
'Your really bad at'.. shtick again dogma. *yawn*
Yep, people that think you're bad at a thing will tell you that you're bad at that thing.
Orlanth wrote:
Getting off a bus and walking away with a hothead who wants a fight will have one expected outcome, the hothead will follow you off.
The other expected outcome is "He will stay on the bus."
If that is a difficult proposition for you to anticipate, then I expect that you aren't paying attention.
Orlanth wrote:
If this was accompanied by an intention to get away you get off the bus somewhere safer.
Like those 2 places where the stabber got off, provided that no safer alternatives were available.
Orlanth wrote:
there needs to be stronger reasons than that to say the murder was not premeditated.
Ah yes, convict prior to the provision of evidence.
Orlanth wrote:
He showed the knife off to his mates, that shows intent to use the knife in the fight. Twelve stabs, means he intended to finish the job
It means he intended to stab.
I have quite the knife collection, and I have shown said collection to many mates, but that doesn't mean I intend to kill with it a any given time.
Getting off a bus and walking away with a hothead who wants a fight will have one expected outcome, the hothead will follow you off.
I notice the little flag under your name is different than mine. It must truly be a different place, because here, when we have people intent on a fight (Note the bold part of the quote) generally, it's the best of your options to get out of the location ASAP...because...well....Otherwise you sit there and get slugged. He is, after all, intent on beating the everloving <CENSORED> out of you. The "Where" the fight happens is secondary in the mind of the instigator.
This looks like walking Nuno to an ambush. Somewhere where he can be stabbed.
What? Do you really expect me to believe that this kid got off the bus thinking "Ha HA! I'll lead them right to the spot I have planned, using the irresistable lure that is the back of my head and body to draw their attention (And punches!) and then, while they have me outnumbered and their fists and feet are exactly where I want them (impacting me at velocity!) I will whip my knife out and shank that <CENSORED>! That'll teach him!)
Even if I bought it I would have to give it the nod as the worst planned ambush Ever.
In this case the story would require such a chronic case of stupidity that I would believe "Just yanked his knife out on the bus and lunged at the bully!" more quickly.
dogma wrote:Yep, people that think you're bad at a thing will tell you that you're bad at that thing.
Well that sums up your method of argument: more name calling, less deduction . Declaring an argument a non argument rather than explaining why logically.
dogma wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
Getting off a bus and walking away with a hothead who wants a fight will have one expected outcome, the hothead will follow you off.
The other expected outcome is "He will stay on the bus."
If that is a difficult proposition for you to anticipate, then I expect that you aren't paying attention.
Bully on bus, kids on bus announcing fight loudly. Other kid gets off at an estate. Its obvious to see what would happen.
To get away from the fight you stay on the bus past the stop or get off somewhere where there are authorities present.
Now standing up to the bully, thats good. But bringing a knife, concealing it and getting off at an estate where a fight can be expected, thats not so good.
dogma wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
If this was accompanied by an intention to get away you get off the bus somewhere safer.
Like those 2 places where the stabber got off, provided that no safer alternatives were available.
Two places? If he got off then got on a bus and got off again it would change things. However the report said he got off the bus in plain view, and I argue that wasn't really trying to get away.
dogma wrote:
Orlanth wrote:
He showed the knife off to his mates, that shows intent to use the knife in the fight. Twelve stabs, means he intended to finish the job
It means he intended to stab.
So he didn't intend to continue trying to walk away. Thankyou. This is no case of minimum contact. Intent can be proved to be prior by the fact that he showed the knife.
dogma wrote:
I have quite the knife collection, and I have shown said collection to many mates, but that doesn't mean I intend to kill with it a any given time.
At leisure with friends, or a bus on the way to a fight?
Come on now dogma its more than a little facetious to ignore that there is a world of difference between the two.
The prosecution case could have been better handled I think, perhaps they didn't really want to in hindsight. I doubt anyone in the local police, or DA office will be weeping tears for Nuno. I am not saying they threw the case but the idea that trying to get away once in the circumstances indicates trying to get away rather than relocating to a better spot.
We don't have access as of yet to what actually happened in the fight on a step by step level, so far we have 1) Both teens get off bus 2) Nuno hits Saavedro on back. 3) Nuno is repeatedly stabbed.
From what we reported the bully stepped up to Saavedro and started hitting him on the back. This makes sense, you are 'walking away' so he approaches you closely and starting hitting. However if trying to avoid harm at a danger point you don't turn your back, you step backwards or remain in a defensive posture, or you run very fast. Now Saavedro is not expected to run away, the local law understands that. However turning the back was in all likelihood a lure. A bully will not try to finish a fight early unless threatened with damage, its no fun. So what would be expected to come would be a pummeling. Meanwhile Saavedro draws the knife quietly turns around suddenly and stabs.
A quick turn around is a common means of dealing with a bully as the method of attack is normally verty predictable, and allows you to get the drop on the bully, especially if they are lured into thinking you are not going to fight back. Seen it done, done it myself. With a knife its potentially a very deadly counterattack as the bully will be right behind you and in a poor position to defend against the initial attack, which will be a body hit with the force of the turn, possibly also added to the bullies forward momentum.
I don't know this for sure, something else might have happened, but as Nuno was in all likelihood stronger Saavedro probably attacked with surprise. I suggest this was the plan from the start, and showing the knife on the bus is strong evidence of that.
Jan. 24, 2011 at a bus stop on the corner of 47th Avenue NE and Immokalee Road in Golden Gate Estates moments after stepping off the bus.
Moments? So Nuno stepped out to fight and got the knife pretty much immediately.
Looks more like an ambush, Saavedro did not start the fight or the argument that led to it, but Nuno was played by a smarter kid, with a knife.
Do you expect this kid to be some sort of shadow? Able to slip in and out at a whim so that others do not even notice him?
The kid was 14, he was trying to get away from a bully. He brought a knife for self defense in case he could not get away from the bully. He was scared for his life.
The kid did not sit up all night thinking of ways to bait the bully in to fighting him so that he could stab him. It was not murder, it was self defense.
Orlanth wrote:Intent can be proved to be prior by the fact that he showed the knife.
Obviously it could not, otherwise the Judge would have gone that way.
Orlanth wrote:Jan. 24, 2011 at a bus stop on the corner of 47th Avenue NE and Immokalee Road in Golden Gate Estates moments after stepping off the bus.
Moments? So Nuno stepped out to fight and got the knife pretty much immediately.
Looks more like an ambush, Saavedro did not start the fight or the argument that led to it, but Nuno was played by a smarter kid, with a knife.
Can you give me a real measurement to how long a "moment" is? That article is very vague on pretty much everything it states.
The entire quote:
"Jorge Saavedra, 14, is accused of stabbing his 16-year-old Palmetto Ridge High School classmate Dylan Reid Nuno on Monday, Jan. 24, 2011 at a bus stop on the corner of 47th Avenue NE and Immokalee Road in Golden Gate Estates moments after stepping off the bus. Nuno, a junior, was pronounced dead at NCH North Collier Hospital. Saavedra, a freshman, was arrested and charged with manslaughter."
It would seem many folks have never been in an actual fight. I make that statement based on the fact folks seem to think that the number of stabs/cuts iis so high it proves murder.
When your adrenalin is pumping and you are scared of being severely hurt or worse, flight hasn't worked so you fight, you honestly don't count punches/kicks/bites/gouges/stabs or what ever. You keep at it until it is really clear the other guy isn't gonna get up and hurt you. That usually means the other guy is severly hurt. To think a kid can recognize the exact point at which he can stop striking is ludicrious. Even cops/soldiers are trained that if you have to shoot you fire until the target isn't getting up. Those are trained adults. It is always best to keep hitting with what you got until there is no doubt you have won. Often that is way past the point when you have won, because again, you got adrenaline and fear and rage pumping through you.
It is only in lame movies where the fighters have that type of control.
As for 'having a knife proves premeditation'; get real. Lots of folks carry weapons, to include guns. That fact does not mean they are out to kill anyone. It means they are WILLING to kill to protect themselves. That is not a bad thing.
Moments? So Nuno stepped out to fight and got the knife pretty much immediately.
Even if we take "Moment" to mean "Under 10 seconds"...well...if Goomba Leader, Goomba 1, 2, and 3 step off the bus immediately behind you and initiate combat without other warning, well...Time to fight pretty much immediately ain't it?
As for 'having a knife proves premeditation'; get real. Lots of folks carry weapons, to include guns. That fact does not mean they are out to kill anyone. It means they are WILLING to kill to protect themselves. That is not a bad thing.
A US Newspaper Website wrote:Saavedra, a freshman, was arrested and charged with manslaughter.
A Collier judge has upheld the "Stand your ground" defense in the case of Jorge Saavedra, who stabbed Dylan Nuno to death last January. The judge granted the motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that Saavedra acted in self defense according to Florida's "Stand your ground" statute. The order grants Saavedra, now 15, immunity from further criminal prosecution as well as from any eventual civil action regarding Nuno's homicide.
He wasn't prosecuted for murder.
He was found innocent of Manslaughter.
He can't be prosecuted for murder or civil damages.
If you think this makes it a good plan to conspire to murder someone by being nerdy, getting them to bully you, etc. then you probably play too many Phoenix Wright games.
NAPLES — A 15-year-old who fatally stabbed his school mate will no longer face criminal prosecution.
A judge’s ruling, made public Tuesday, granted a motion to dismiss the second-degree murder charge against Jorge Saavedra in the death of 16-year-old Dylan Nuno on the grounds that he acted in self-defense under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law. The State Attorney’s Office has indicated that it will not appeal the ruling.
Nuno’s family and friends criticized Collier County Circuit Judge Lauren Brodie’s decision, calling it “unbelievable” and “heartbreaking.”
“We know this wasn’t the right decision,” said Dylan’s aunt, Adriana Nuno.“(The judge) is showing those kids it’s OK to get away with murder.”
Saavedra, who was 14 at the time of the stabbing, was charged as a juvenile. If found guilty, the former Palmetto Ridge High student would have been released by the age of 21.
Brodie’s ruling concluded that Saavadra, who said he was bullied and tried avoid a fight with Nuno, did not act unlawfully. She added that Saavadra had more than enough reason to believe he was in danger of death or great bodily harm.
Brodie based her decision this week on the findings from a two-day December hearing, during which students who witnessed the events Jan. 24, 2011, testified that several teens announced the fight on the bus, and Saavedra got off several stops early in Golden Gate Estates. Saavedra showed a pocket knife to two teens on the bus that afternoon.
In a nine-page document released Tuesday by the State Attorney’s Office, Brodie stated that by getting off the bus several stops before the location where the fight was to happen, Saavedra “demonstrated that, with or without a knife, (he) had no desire to fight with Dylan Nuno.”
Orlanth wrote: Twelve stabs, means he intended to finish the job
He probably gave as many stabs as it took for Nuno to back off and I guess it took that many stabs for Nuno to realize he was being stabbed. Assuming the knife didn't break, fall or get stuck, the whole thing could have taken less than 10 seconds
Slarg232 wrote:I want to say that bullying is bad, first of all.
But to get off on murdering this kid is a bit much.
One (un)lucky self defensive stab resulting in a death? Ok, slap him on the wrists, give him a record, and make sure he knows he did bad.
Twelve stabs? Waaaaaaay too much.
Horse gak. You're entitled to use appropriate means until the threat is stopped. Pumping someone coming at you repeatedly can happen in a bear few seconds. Until the attacker backs off and is not a threat. You can do what you need to do.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chowderhead wrote:I'm with Slarg.
12 Stabs? Seriously? Overkill in the 1st degree,
Evidently the judge, actually hearing some of the facts of the case, disagreed.
Fortunately.
Also it's known that smaller/weaker people and those not accustomed to violence can panic and go overboard. Partly because they feel so threatened by a much stronger opponent, but also because they can't judge 'reasonable force' in the heat of the moment.
I've read cases where people have killed a burglar by stabbing them 50 times or something ludicrous. They didn't plan to kill the man, they didn't know they were going to be burgled, but they lose all control in a blind panic. People not accustomed to carrying out violent acts can be very unpredictable.
Getting off a bus and walking away with a hothead who wants a fight will have one expected outcome, the hothead will follow you off.
I notice the little flag under your name is different than mine. It must truly be a different place, because here, when we have people intent on a fight (Note the bold part of the quote) generally, it's the best of your options to get out of the location ASAP...because...well....Otherwise you sit there and get slugged. He is, after all, intent on beating the everloving <CENSORED> out of you. The "Where" the fight happens is secondary in the mind of the instigator.
Get out the location quickly means either - withdraw from the bus stop quickly, or - get off somewhere else safer.
Perhaps in the US bullies are happy to beat people up outside cop stations or other public places where they will get arrested, I thought they were smarter than that. "Where" is normally high on the mindset of the aggressor as not getting caught is a priority.
SOFDC wrote:
What? Do you really expect me to believe that this kid got off the bus thinking "Ha HA! I'll lead them right to the spot I have planned, using the irresistable lure that is the back of my head and body to draw their attention (And punches!) and then, while they have me outnumbered and their fists and feet are exactly where I want them (impacting me at velocity!) I will whip my knife out and shank that <CENSORED>! That'll teach him!)
Like that, no. For a start Nuno was operating alone, he had an audience not support, big difference. Secondly as corroborated by eye witnesses Saavedro did not remain with his back to Nuno for long, I wouldnt expect him to either. He needs his back to Nuno only long enough to draw his knife without being seen. Eye witnesses heard Nuno call out that he had been stabbed, and try to run away himself. Check the videos on the link.
Saavedro had a knife, he prepared use of his knife and indicated to friends that he would use it if there was a fight. Saavedro didn't actually avoid a fight, he got off at an earlier bus stop, but then fought at the bus stop. There is no real indication he was actually avoiding the fight at all, but much to show his use of the knife was premeditated.
SOFDC wrote:
Even if I bought it I would have to give it the nod as the worst planned ambush Ever.
It worked Nuno was unarmed and attacked someone he thought unarmed, he was surprised, he tried to retreat, collapsed and died.
Read Sun Tzu, manipulation is a part of combat. I have heard of worse planned ambushes.
dogma wrote:I enjoyed it as well (/canned response), but I feel like I should elaborate. I've threatened my fair share of people, probably more than my fair share, and have numerous friends that have done the same. I have no stab wound scars, nor do any of them. I imagine that, if I wanted to consult statistics, the statistical evidence would favor people not being stabbed due to threats.
You probably didn't live in Compton though. In fiarness neither did I. Growing up the neighborhoods were fine and a fight was usually a boxing match. However, when I moved to California I learned very quickly there many areas very, very different.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote:q
A US Newspaper Website wrote:Saavedra, a freshman, was arrested and charged with manslaughter.
A Collier judge has upheld the "Stand your ground" defense in the case of Jorge Saavedra, who stabbed Dylan Nuno to death last January. The judge granted the motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that Saavedra acted in self defense according to Florida's "Stand your ground" statute. The order grants Saavedra, now 15, immunity from further criminal prosecution as well as from any eventual civil action regarding Nuno's homicide.
He wasn't prosecuted for murder.
He was found innocent of Manslaughter.
He can't be prosecuted for murder or civil damages.
If you think this makes it a good plan to conspire to murder someone by being nerdy, getting them to bully you, etc. then you probably play too many Phoenix Wright games.
Thats not correct KK, he can still be sued civilly. In fact it can stil be pursued criminally depending on the details of the dismissal.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CptJake wrote:It would seem many folks have never been in an actual fight. I make that statement based on the fact folks seem to think that the number of stabs/cuts iis so high it proves murder.
When your adrenalin is pumping and you are scared of being severely hurt or worse, flight hasn't worked so you fight, you honestly don't count punches/kicks/bites/gouges/stabs or what ever. You keep at it until it is really clear the other guy isn't gonna get up and hurt you. That usually means the other guy is severly hurt. To think a kid can recognize the exact point at which he can stop striking is ludicrious. Even cops/soldiers are trained that if you have to shoot you fire until the target isn't getting up. Those are trained adults. It is always best to keep hitting with what you got until there is no doubt you have won. Often that is way past the point when you have won, because again, you got adrenaline and fear and rage pumping through you.
It is only in lame movies where the fighters have that type of control.
As for 'having a knife proves premeditation'; get real. Lots of folks carry weapons, to include guns. That fact does not mean they are out to kill anyone. It means they are WILLING to kill to protect themselves. That is not a bad thing.
Indeed. Further, in most states it is not illegal to have a folding pocket of a certain length. Nothing in the article ( I saw anyway) noted that the knife was illegal.
If you are thinking that 12 stabs is more then excessive and shows intent for manslaughter, when your adrenaline is pumping and you are fighting to protect yourself, don't you think that it is understandable that he kept going until he felt he was safe? It's primal instinct.
Orlanth wrote:Intent can be proved to be prior by the fact that he showed the knife.
Obviously it could not, otherwise the Judge would have gone that way.
Hardly the first time you get a poor decision from a courtroom. I don't blame the judge though, Saavedro's family made sure he got a good lawyer, if the state prosecutors council cant argue well against him then he can get his client off.
Good example of that is how stepping off the bus was counted as trying to avoid a fight, whereas it was in all likelihood anything but that.
CptJake wrote:It would seem many folks have never been in an actual fight. I make that statement based on the fact folks seem to think that the number of stabs/cuts iis so high it proves murder.
When your adrenalin is pumping and you are scared of being severely hurt or worse, flight hasn't worked so you fight, you honestly don't count punches/kicks/bites/gouges/stabs or what ever. You keep at it until it is really clear the other guy isn't gonna get up and hurt you. That usually means the other guy is severly hurt. To think a kid can recognize the exact point at which he can stop striking is ludicrious. Even cops/soldiers are trained that if you have to shoot you fire until the target isn't getting up. Those are trained adults. It is always best to keep hitting with what you got until there is no doubt you have won. Often that is way past the point when you have won, because again, you got adrenaline and fear and rage pumping through you.
It is only in lame movies where the fighters have that type of control.
This is a classic example of the overkill culture that plagues America. Yes you can show and act with restraint even with adrenalin. Being a kid is no excuse, not if you plan to carry a knife and plan to use it. I can accept a self defence frenzy when there is no retreat (Saavedro chose not to retreat) or when yourself surprised (Saavedro knew this was coming, the fight intention was announced and he knew Nuno).
Perhaps it is only outside the US where fighters have that type of control, but it is by no means fictional.
SOFDC wrote:
Moments? So Nuno stepped out to fight and got the knife pretty much immediately.
Even if we take "Moment" to mean "Under 10 seconds"...well...if Goomba Leader, Goomba 1, 2, and 3 step off the bus immediately behind you and initiate combat without other warning, well...Time to fight pretty much immediately ain't it?
However there was no Goomba 2 or 3. While it may make the case easier to understand if you can imagine Saavedro fighting off hordes of bullies leaping from the bus or something else fairly similar. Fact is one attacker, another kid who was unarmed and made it his intention to start a fist fight, as kids often do.
Also Nuno stated his intention, not thats any excuse for his behaviour. Saavedro was not acting on the spur of the moment, as proven when he showed the knife earlier but kept knowledge of it from Nuno. Leaving the bus before the fight destination, back to Nuno, a known hothead, no attempt to get away. What happened was not unexpected until the knife was drawn.
SOFDC wrote:
CptJake wrote:As for 'having a knife proves premeditation'; get real. Lots of folks carry weapons, to include guns. That fact does not mean they are out to kill anyone. It means they are WILLING to kill to protect themselves. That is not a bad thing.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
You mean your couldnt misquote better yourself.
Having a knife on its own cannot be taken into account because of the right to bear arms. yet again Saavedro was a minor so I dont know where your laws stand on that. nevertheless the relevant point, carefully explained, was thw the knife was 1) concealed from Nuno 2) shown off to Saavedro's friends on the bus prior to the killing.
This shows that Saavedro was prepared to use it, in a specific rather than a general way, in other words premeditation.
He didnt draw the knife to scare off Nuno, not that I recommend doing that anyway. He attacked Nuno by suprise with it, knowing a fight would be coming and by all indications when.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BoyMac wrote:If you are thinking that 12 stabs is more then excessive and shows intent for manslaughter, when your adrenaline is pumping and you are fighting to protect yourself, don't you think that it is understandable that he kept going until he felt he was safe? It's primal instinct.
CptJake wrote:So you've never been in a real fight, have you? Consider yourself lucky.
Be specific Cpt Jake, a fight where you could die. Thats what this really is. At 14/15 people have the ability to actually kill each other. Mutliple persons on one is an excellent way to do that.
The fact the victim attempted to get off the bus at an early location is excellent evidence, and properly used, that this was a self defense situation. It sets up the metnal state that this person reasonable believed they were in fear of imminent harm, and had attempted to exhaust means to avoid that harm without inmjury to anyone.
CptJake wrote:So you've never been in a real fight, have you? Consider yourself lucky.
Been mugged once, been in kids fights two or three times, I don't count those. I have met people like Nuno.
Nuno didnt think he was in a 'real' fight either, he and Saavedro had crossed paths before, Saavedro was still around. Nuno was shocked to find that he was stabbed, and rightly so, it was a total over reaction. I don't like bullies, but Nuno didn't deserve to die for being a jerk kid who picks fights with a smaller kid.
As for how I know one can and should have the ability to show restraint even in danger. I know this from knowing local police, people in the armed forces and shadier types. I also lived in East London for a while, and knew some classic tough guys. I know of 'nought to frenzy' but I also know that a real fighter doesnt lose control, they unleash and stop. Anything else is a deathmark. leading to prison or the morgue.
Saavedro wouldnt have touched the sides if it happened here, and I dont consider that a weakpoint of the legal system.
We do have very different laws on carrying weapons though, and those do go too far. Most of the knives shown on this thread so far except the tiny foldable one next to a coin would yield 5 years mandatory if found on your person in a public place, with a very tiny number of allowed exceptions.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:
The fact the victim attempted to get off the bus at an early location is excellent evidence, and properly used, that this was a self defense situation. It sets up the metnal state that this person reasonable believed they were in fear of imminent harm, and had attempted to exhaust means to avoid that harm without injury to anyone.
Saavedros lawyer certainly argued that point more successfully than the state attorney argued against. Fair play to that lawyer, he is going places. A lawyer who can get someone off a charge where they killed someone in broad daylight with witnesses will have great career opportunities in Florida.
The mental state is sets up can be debunked because of evidence that the knife was produced earlier showing an alternative mental state picture.
If you read the article that was lniked in the OP, not just the quote, you'll find that Nuno followed the kid of the boss with several other guys in tow, and clobbered him across the back of the head first, before he and his mates chased the kid down.
If he didn't expect a 'real' fight, why did he assault the kid from behind and deny him the chance to escape? He showed the intent to cause physical harm (the advertisement of the fight by other students also shows premeditation) and Saavedro was forced to retaliate once he was cornered. The fact he showed his knife to people on the bus, but used it only when he had first been assaulted and had his escape routes blocked proves only that he was prepared to defend himself in dire circumstances.
If you want, though, you can go and fight Nuno's case for him seeing as though his lawyers have declined to pursue an appeal; although if they can't see any point in appealing i'm not very confident that you'll get far in it.
The point of bullying is to get one's jollies from the deliberate humiliation and frightening of someone in a position of weakness.
If things go wrong and the bullied person becomes so fearful they lash out with lethal force to protect themselves, it is difficult to be sympathetic with the bully or to feel very punitive towards their victim.
If you read the article that was lniked in the OP, not just the quote, you'll find that Nuno followed the kid of the boss with several other guys in tow, and clobbered him across the back of the head first, before he and his mates chased the kid down.
You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
Avatar 720 wrote:
If he didn't expect a 'real' fight, why did he assault the kid from behind and deny him the chance to escape?
That doesnt mean that it was anything other than a usual kids tussle. Also attacking someone from behind does not deny their escape unless you grab their legs triop them or disable them.
It profited the defence attorney to paint a picture where Saavedra was in deadly danger. However Nuno didn't appear to have that type of rep and Saavedra knew him well enough to know that.
Avatar 720 wrote:
He showed the intent to cause physical harm (the advertisement of the fight by other students also shows premeditation) and Saavedro was forced to retaliate once he was cornered. The fact he showed his knife to people on the bus, but used it only when he had first been assaulted and had his escape routes blocked proves only that he was prepared to defend himself in dire circumstances.
First he wasn't cornered, secondly he concealed the knife from Nuno but showed it off to others. Looks like he was going to spring it on Nuno not scare him off with it. Nuno expressed suprise that her was attacked with a knife and himself attempted to disengage, according to eye witnesses.
Avatar 720 wrote:
If you want, though, you can go and fight Nuno's case for him seeing as though his lawyers have declined to pursue an appeal; although if they can't see any point in appealing i'm not very confident that you'll get far in it.
Nuno's lawyers, by that you mean state prosecutors. They fought the case once out of civic duty, they wont appeal.
Actually, its more amusing that one person is espousing "getting punched in the back of the head" as a valid tactic to surprise somebody that you want to stab.
Andrew1975 wrote:It does teach an important life lesson though. You need to learn to stand up for yourself or you will be a target all your life.
One would think I'd not get suspended (and subsequently grounded) for doing what I was supposed to do from this apparent life lesson.
You can learn to stand up for yourself in more productive and less harmful ways. Being bullied has no practical value to me, and it certainly isn't teaching the bullies to be acceptable members of society. The worst part is that standing up for myself gets me punished (and depending on the bully it doesn't work) so I get left hung out to dry as the victim while my abuser suffers no ill effects from his actions.
Does that teach a lesson? Maybe. But that's a cruel and cold way to teach someone a lesson.
Orlanth wrote:You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
Orlanth wrote:First he wasn't cornered, secondly he concealed the knife from Nuno but showed it off to others. Looks like he was going to spring it on Nuno not scare him off with it. Nuno expressed suprise that her was attacked with a knife and himself attempted to disengage, according to eye witnesses.
Saavedra attempted to get away once, after he had been punched in the head, so you are incorrect that he did not attempt to escape. That Nuno expressed surprise when the subject of his bullying fought back is ... not surprising in the least. Seriously, what do you Brits do when you get attacked by a bully? Turn the other cheek and take your beating (safe in the knowledge that the beating will not be life-threatening)?
The bullying from Nuno was bad enough that Saavedra would skip school or find other ways home to avoid the bus ride when he could.
Your contention that getting off a stop early was somehow an ambush is ridiculous, but may be born of some cultural confusion. Again, I'm not sure how things work in the UK, but a school bus isn't the same thing as the normal public transportation. It follows a set schedule of stops, but these stops are in residential areas, as the goal of the school bus is to return children to their homes, not cart them around to various public city stops.
Also, I suspect that in the UK, the term "estate" is used more commonly to refer to a large, expansive property. Here in the states, it is very common to see a subdivisions or residential communties with a fancy name like, "Riverrock Gardens" or "Golden Estates". This should not be taken to mean that the property or properties contained therein are actual gardens or estates.
For reference, here is the Florida statute (Stand Your Ground) mentioned in the article:
Essentially, if a person is in a place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”
The judge seems to have correctly interpreted this law, so I don't see where there was any legal wrong-doing.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
First this was a school fight, picked on the bus. Not a death struggle in a ghetto.
Second Nuno had fought other kids before, including Saavedra, he did not have a lethal reputation.
Third it was with plenty of witnesses present, anyone who killed or seriously injured anyone would be arrested, as with what happened. Bullies usually dont cross the line, Nuno did not appear to be any exception, except as painted by the defence attorney. To check out what his school rep was like (which would be out as much as Saavedra had to go on) go to Youtube and type in Dylan Nuno.
IcyCool wrote:
Saavedra attempted to get away once, after he had been punched in the head, so you are incorrect that he did not attempt to escape. That Nuno expressed surprise when the subject of his bullying fought back is ... not surprising in the least. Seriously, what do you Brits do when you get attacked by a bully? Turn the other cheek and take your beating (safe in the knowledge that the beating will not be life-threatening)?
Also Saavedra's getting away once was indicated by the fact he left the bus early. He turned around pretty much as soon as Nuno attacked him, with the knife. Its all good word play by the defense attorney, as that still looks like relocation not a retreat.
I see no indication anyone else was helping Nuno, Saavedra showed his knife to people who presumably 'supported' him. This also appears to have meant nothing it was one on one. Not that a bus full of bystanders has anything positive to say about that community.
Orlanth wrote:You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
You forgot option 3
Your friends, cousins, or brothers intervene delivering the asswhopping of a lifetime to your attempted assailant, then taking you home to beat your ass too for being such a pussy.
Andrew1975 wrote:It does teach an important life lesson though. You need to learn to stand up for yourself or you will be a target all your life.
One would think I'd not get suspended (and subsequently grounded) for doing what I was supposed to do from this apparent life lesson.
You can learn to stand up for yourself in more productive and less harmful ways. Being bullied has no practical value to me, and it certainly isn't teaching the bullies to be acceptable members of society. The worst part is that standing up for myself gets me punished (and depending on the bully it doesn't work) so I get left hung out to dry as the victim while my abuser suffers no ill effects from his actions.
Does that teach a lesson? Maybe. But that's a cruel and cold way to teach someone a lesson.
Another lesson then, sometimes life is cruel and cold, sometimes it's random and unfair. Sorry! lesson learned? No here is a hint, the physical bullies that you deal with in life are actually much easier to deal with than many situations in the future.
You can go and take crap from a bully everyday and make yourself a target to all the other bullies......or you can stand up and not be bullied. If you have a reputation for cowing everybody will try to take advantage of that one way or the other for the rest of your life. You can not tell me you never saw "the victim" the kid that walks down the hall head down.........he is an instant target....to EVERYBODY, not just bullies, but everyone that has a chip on their shoulder for one reason or another.
Of course you are still gonna get punished if there is actually a physical confrontation! But I've repeatedly seen administrators give very light punishment to kids that stand up to known bullies, the bullies usually get the brunt of the punishment. My whole point however is that in most situations if you do not cow to a bully, or attract their attention by acting sheepish in general they will usually leave you alone. The second you back down from them they are on top of you. I never advocated attacking the bully or confronting the bully, but you should stand up for yourself and usually they will move on to the next victim.
Almost invariably every time a random bully has come up to me, all I have ever had to do was stand my ground and act like I am confident. The idea is to not make it worth their time.
That being said there is a difference from random bullies to people that actually have a real grievance with you. That is a fight not bullying.
Bullies will never be acceptable members of society, in many ways it is why they are bullies.
Orlanth wrote:First this was a school fight, picked on the bus. Not a death struggle in a ghetto.
Clearly, it turned out to be a death struggle (yes, I'm aware that Saavedra did the escalating). And furthermore, this sort of thing isn't terribly uncommon. I made no mention of ghettos, so I'm not sure where you got that from. "School fights" are not some sort of playful pillow fight here in the states.
Orlanth wrote:Second Nuno had fought other kids before, including Saavedra, he did not have a lethal reputation.
Third it was with plenty of witnesses present, anyone who killed or seriously injured anyone would be arrested, as with what happened. Bullies usually dont cross the line, Nuno did not appear to be any exception, except as painted by the defence attorney. To check out what his school rep was like (which would be out as much as Saavedra had to go on) go to Youtube and type in Dylan Nuno.
So I ask again, your expectation for Saavedra is to take the beating and hope Nuno's "non-lethal" reputation holds true?
I should probably ask, do you agree that Saavedra was assaulted by his bully?
And out of curiosity, do you have an indicator about who was present as a witness?
IcyCool wrote:Also Saavedra's getting away once was indicated by the fact he left the bus early. He turned around pretty much as soon as Nuno attacked him, with the knife. Its all good word play by the defense attorney, as that still looks like relocation not a retreat.
The article indicates that Saavedra got off the bus a stop early, was followed by Nuno and several students, was punched in the back of the head by Nuno, and then attempted to escape. Are we reading the same article or do you have a different source you are pulling your information from? Preferably, if someone can provide a link to the court documents that would be ideal.
From what I've read, the judge seems to have clearly ruled correctly. Saavedra did not break the law.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AustonT wrote:[You forgot option 3
Your friends, cousins, or brothers intervene delivering the asswhopping of a lifetime to your attempted assailant, then taking you home to beat your ass too for being such a pussy.
You are unlikely to have been the target of consistent bullying if you have that many people watching your back.
Andrew1975 wrote:It does teach an important life lesson though. You need to learn to stand up for yourself or you will be a target all your life.
One would think I'd not get suspended (and subsequently grounded) for doing what I was supposed to do from this apparent life lesson.
You can learn to stand up for yourself in more productive and less harmful ways. Being bullied has no practical value to me, and it certainly isn't teaching the bullies to be acceptable members of society. The worst part is that standing up for myself gets me punished (and depending on the bully it doesn't work) so I get left hung out to dry as the victim while my abuser suffers no ill effects from his actions.
Does that teach a lesson? Maybe. But that's a cruel and cold way to teach someone a lesson.
Thats why you catch them outside of school, preferably with no witnesses.
If you read the article that was lniked in the OP, not just the quote, you'll find that Nuno followed the kid of the boss with several other guys in tow, and clobbered him across the back of the head first, before he and his mates chased the kid down.
You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
Avatar 720 wrote:
If he didn't expect a 'real' fight, why did he assault the kid from behind and deny him the chance to escape?
That doesnt mean that it was anything other than a usual kids tussle. Also attacking someone from behind does not deny their escape unless you grab their legs triop them or disable them.
It profited the defence attorney to paint a picture where Saavedra was in deadly danger. However Nuno didn't appear to have that type of rep and Saavedra knew him well enough to know that.
Avatar 720 wrote:
He showed the intent to cause physical harm (the advertisement of the fight by other students also shows premeditation) and Saavedro was forced to retaliate once he was cornered. The fact he showed his knife to people on the bus, but used it only when he had first been assaulted and had his escape routes blocked proves only that he was prepared to defend himself in dire circumstances.
First he wasn't cornered, secondly he concealed the knife from Nuno but showed it off to others. Looks like he was going to spring it on Nuno not scare him off with it. Nuno expressed suprise that her was attacked with a knife and himself attempted to disengage, according to eye witnesses.
Avatar 720 wrote:
If you want, though, you can go and fight Nuno's case for him seeing as though his lawyers have declined to pursue an appeal; although if they can't see any point in appealing i'm not very confident that you'll get far in it.
Nuno's lawyers, by that you mean state prosecutors. They fought the case once out of civic duty, they wont appeal.
I'm not confused with another case, simply by being with Nuno the other people that followed him off the bus were participants in the assault and subsequent chasing down of Saavedra, albeit indirectly. It is very possible that Nuno's mates simply caged Saavedra in whilst Nuno did the dirty work, Saavedra was most likely in a state of panic caused due to being chased by multiple assailants, one of which had already physically assaulted him and very likely meant him further physical harm.
A 'usual kids tussle' involves punching someone across the back of the head and chasing them down? I also never said attacking from behind denies escape, I said he attacked from behind AND denied escape, which is evident in how witnesses report that Saavedra 'attempted' to escape, ultimately meaning he failed to get away. Whether or not Nuno had the reputation is immaterial, he attacked Saavedra in cold blood. Would you be willing to risk great amounts of bodily harm if you were attacked and chased down by someone you didn't think would beat you up? Would you even be in a fit state to think logically if you were a 14 year old in a panicked state of 'Fight or Flight', and had just been attacked from behind?
I don't doubt that there are myriad examples of even grown humans acting illogically when driven by some natural urge. People kill their lovers if they cheat on them, which is illogical when you think about it, but obviously the killer wasn't in a fit state to do that. People kill others out of jealousy, again, illogical when you think about it, not when you're blinded by jealousy. Was Saavedra, a child of 14 with little epxerience of the world, little maturity, and going through a natural stage of change in his life that will undoubtably imbalance emotions and such, thinking logically during the attack? I seriously doubt he was capable of it with that much going on. It's one thing to be logical when you're behind a computer screen, another completely when you're running, frightened, and fearing for your life.
How do you know he wasn't cornered? Witnesses state he attempted to flee, his attempt was unsuccessful, obviously he had to be cornered or otherwise trapped. As for concealing the knife but showing it off, that too is immaterial when you take into account that his first action was flight. That to me says that it was a last resort during the fight, and was always meant as a last resort. If he wanted to spring it on Nuno, why did he get off the bus early, with Nuno, with a mind to cause harm, behind him, and only use it once he was caught? I also see nowhere in the article that Nuno attempted to flee himself, do you have further information that none of us has access to? Witnesses stated Saavedra tried to get away, perhaps you're confusing the two?
Orlanth wrote:You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
.
Orlanth wrote:You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
.
True words.
Are you not aware of hooligans in England. Granted they are not "thuglife" from the hood, but they are not much better. Watch what happens surrounding a soccer match.
Orlanth wrote:You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
.
True words.
Are you not aware of hooligans in England. Granted they are not "thuglife" from the hood, but they are not much better. Watch what happens surrounding a soccer match.
This is a question...do soccer hooligans typically permanently injure their victims? Thats the potential here. If so, then under many states' particularly in the South, the victims can full defend themselves.
Orlanth wrote:You must be confused with another case. Lots of people were watching but Nuno attacked Saavedra alone.
I'm almost certain your confusion on this is tied to cultural differences. When a bully confronts you in a fight here in the states with several of his buddies watching, you can expect one of two outcomes:
1. You lose the fight and the bully beats you (possibly into unconsciousness, possibly life threatening, depending on how much "encouragement" the bully is receiving from his friends). Fighting back against a bully (who is almost certainly larger, stronger, and faster than you are) and losing makes the beating you receive far worse.
2. You start to win the fight, and the bully's friends back him up. The inevitable beatdown you receive at this point will likely be worse.
Maybe there is some sense of honor for you Brits when it comes to a fight with a bully, but no such expectation here in the states exists (outside of heart-warming underdog stories in the movies). In fact, death could very clearly be an expected outcome of such a fight in larger U.S. cities.
.
True words.
Are you not aware of hooligans in England. Granted they are not "thuglife" from the hood, but they are not much better. Watch what happens surrounding a soccer match.
This is a question...do soccer hooligans typically permanently injure their victims? Thats the potential here. If so, then under many states' particularly in the South, the victims can full defend themselves.
Yes they do, but it's England. You know, the place where you can't legally defend your home, or boot squatters from your property.
Andrew1975 wrote:Another lesson then, sometimes life is cruel and cold, sometimes it's random and unfair.
I'm sure some extremists with air planes demonstrated that fairly well in 2001. Just because the world is cold and cruel doesn't mean we should tolerate children degrading other human beings into toys of their amusement.
Bullies will never be acceptable members of society, in many ways it is why they are bullies.
Its funny that you say this when your entire post is basically about bullies being an accepted element of growing up. Its sickening to me, the way we allow our children to treat other children as garbage. If a woman is walking down the street and is accosted by a group of boys, everyone is outraged because its unacceptable. What are their parents teaching them if they're behaving that way?
If a young boy walks down the street and is accosted, berated, beaten, and tortured one day after another, well that's just part of growing up. That's twisted gak and no grand life lesson you can think up will ever justify it.
Andrew1975 wrote:Another lesson then, sometimes life is cruel and cold, sometimes it's random and unfair.
I'm sure some extremists with air planes demonstrated that fairly well in 2001. Just because the world is cold and cruel doesn't mean we should tolerate children degrading other human beings into toys of their amusement.
Bullies will never be acceptable members of society, in many ways it is why they are bullies.
Its funny that you say this when your entire post is basically about bullies being an accepted element of growing up. Its sickening to me, the way we allow our children to treat other children as garbage. If a woman is walking down the street and is accosted by a group of boys, everyone is outraged because its unacceptable. What are their parents teaching them if they're behaving that way?
If a young boy walks down the street and is accosted, berated, beaten, and tortured one day after another, well that's just part of growing up. That's twisted gak and no grand life lesson you can think up will ever justify it.
No you are getting me wrong. I never said they were acceptable, I just said they were a fact of life that is never going to go away no matter how much society tries to stop it. It is however easily dealt with on an individual basis. I would never let my kid be a bully, but I would also never let him be a sheep. These are both failings of parents either way. I find being a sheep just as disgusting as I find being a bully, except that if there weren't so many sheep there would not be so many bullies.
I've said the bully got what was coming to him and that the only sentence this kid should get is counseling because he is gonna need it. What I am saying is that there is NO WAY to eradicate bullies, and they don't just magically disappear after grade school either. So you either learn to deal with them or you end up being a victim all your life.
Dreadwinter wrote:I liked where Orlanth stated that police, army, and special forces know how to hold back, so the kid should have known.
Guy could win this in the court room with talk like that!
You took a few liberties with my words to come up with that.
Must have been too busy wearing stab vests and dodging death from school bullies to learn much English at school.
I was not speaking to you alone but rather to societies attitudes towards bullying in general. At least that's my experience with how society approaches bullying, and I find it revolting.
LordofHats wrote:I was not speaking to you alone but rather to societies attitudes towards bullying in general. At least that's my experience with how society approaches bullying, and I find it revolting.
LordofHats wrote:I was not speaking to you alone but rather to societies attitudes towards bullying in general. At least that's my experience with how society approaches bullying, and I find it revolting.
Sheep may be sheep but they don't hurt anyone.
They do hurt. In many ways the constantly hurt themselves and find ways to blame other people for their own shortcomings, either that or when they do find that one sheep that is even smaller then them, they abuse the crap out of it. I've seen this repeatedly. In many cases the first place they go for help, no matter what the obstacle is, is other people, instead of even attempting to try to resolve situations on their own. Low self esteem and self worth are an abusive downward spiral that really takes so little to get out of.
The other problem with sheep is they flock to those that have learned this life lesson. Do you know how many times I've almost got into a fight defending some sheep. Stand up for yourselves, don't drag me into this. Even worse is the sheep with a big mouth, that will try to hide behind their friend. I remember the look in a friends eye when I told him to handle it himself, he started it.....ABJECT FEAR.
People with a healthy amount of self esteem don't pick on people that are smaller than them, they even defend the sheep. That should be the goal, healthy self esteem. What is not acceptable is creating a society where being a sheep is just completly acceptable. Life is hard sometimes, and the only person you can ever really count on is yourself. I don't need to be surrounded by a bunch of over protected and coddled cry babies. The worst people in the world are sheep that feel validated. I mean the only time they will ever stand for anything is the right to be a sheep? WTF
Sheep are a cause of many of societies i'lls. In many ways I feel that people that do not stand up, get what they deserve. The problem is that in society now I am surrounded by a bunch of sheep that won't stand up for anything and expect everything to just be handed to them because they are weak. Get a spine people!
Andrew1975 wrote:Another lesson then, sometimes life is cruel and cold, sometimes it's random and unfair.
I'm sure some extremists with air planes demonstrated that fairly well in 2001. Just because the world is cold and cruel doesn't mean we should tolerate children degrading other human beings into toys of their amusement.
Bullies will never be acceptable members of society, in many ways it is why they are bullies.
Its funny that you say this when your entire post is basically about bullies being an accepted element of growing up. Its sickening to me, the way we allow our children to treat other children as garbage. If a woman is walking down the street and is accosted by a group of boys, everyone is outraged because its unacceptable. What are their parents teaching them if they're behaving that way?
If a young boy walks down the street and is accosted, berated, beaten, and tortured one day after another, well that's just part of growing up. That's twisted gak and no grand life lesson you can think up will ever justify it.
... if there weren't so many sheep there would not be so many bullies.
Just because you get bullied doesn't make you timid or a sheep. I think that's an unfair assumption you are making. Bullied kids become isolated by their bullies. Do you want to hang out with someone whose always being made fun of and possible beaten? If anyone is sheep, its the people who stand by and do nothing while other human beings are victimized.
You're more sheepish with your position than anyone who has ever been bullied. If parents and student bodies got off their collective butts and did something when they saw someone being victimized there'd be fewer bullied kids. Its not as simple as the bullied kid standing up for himself/herself. Sometimes what is happening to them is made all the worse because no one will help them and everyone just tells them to suck it up. So they suck it up because they don't know what else to do and people like you tell them they're pathetic. You're the sheep walking along with life watching as it goes by and doing absolutely nothing when you see something wrong. This isn't a problem with kids who get bullied. Its a problem with a society that accepts it as normal and does nothing to help them. What can one kid do when dozens of adults and hundreds of his/her own peers appear to be against them?
Orlanth wrote:
Well that sums up your method of argument: more name calling, less deduction . Declaring an argument a non argument rather than explaining why logically.
I've explained why your argument is bad several times.
I start calling things bad once I've explained why they're bad, and have been met with repetition of the same point (Which is to say, "Nuh-uh!"). It saves me time.
Orlanth wrote:
Bully on bus, kids on bus announcing fight loudly. Other kid gets off at an estate. Its obvious to see what would happen.
No it isn't, and claiming that it is points to a poor grasp of prediction. You may believe that to be the most likely outcome, but claiming that its the only possible outcome is simply being obtuse, or claiming the capacity to know future events.
Orlanth wrote:
Two places? If he got off then got on a bus and got off again it would change things.
I misread the article, though that doesn't change my opinion of events, which is: there isn't enough information to draw any sort of conclusion.
Orlanth wrote:
So he didn't intend to continue trying to walk away. Thankyou.
12 stabs means he intended to stab, when that intention took hold is another question.
One can move from "not stab" to "stab" in a very short period of time.
Orlanth wrote:
At leisure with friends, or a bus on the way to a fight?
Both, actually. Its amazing how 6.6 inch blade deters mugging.
Do you want to hang out with someone whose always being made fun of and possible beaten? If anyone is sheep, its the people who stand by and do nothing while other human beings are victimized.
No, sure don't. Why would I? All you will do is come to me whenever you have a problem, and when I have a problem you will run and hide. I will certainly be friends with someone that will stand their ground in the face of adversity though.
It's the difference between giving someone a fish or a fishing pole. I've shown plenty of people how to do this, it changes their entire life. It is not acceptable to live your life in constant fear. Yes it is a leap of faith kind of thing and it is scary, but the pay off is just as big.
You seam to believe that there is a way to stop bullying....There isn't. There is no amount of coddling and sheltering you can do to stop this, no amount of security can stop it. No law has stopped it, no policy has topped it, no social construct on the face of the planet can stop it from happening. School have cameras and hall monitors and even armed guards.....has that stopped it? If a bully has really set his target on you, the thing that will change his mind is you.
American society more than any other has tried to stop it, the only thing that could possibly work is to have a full time bodyguard FOR EVERY CHILD. Should society provide this for you? What will you want next? You blame te teachers and admin, what are they really supposed to do? They are teacher, not bodyguards. Have you seen what parents will do if a teacher touches their kid?
What happens when you are done with school? Look jerks are everywhere and every age. This problem does not just magically go away after school, you will deal with this situation for the rest of your life if you don't learn how to handle it now. It is much better to confront it now!
I'm not defending Bullies believe me. I weighed 85lb my freshman year of high school at an all boys school partially in the ghetto. I know about bullies. When I had a problem with it I asked my brother and he told me how to handle it.
"You know all those beatings I used to give you? Much worse than anything any bully at school is gonna give you." The key was that I would probably never really get into the fight if I just stood up. If I did take a beating they are rarely fatal or even damaging. Yes they can hurt, but not as much as getting bullied and picked on every day. Rarely will you get into a fight with a random bully more than once because they learn you are no longer an easy target, which is all they want. All my friends got picked on in high school until I told them this. The bullies just found another group of kids to pick on eventually.
Here is the thing about a fight, even if you win, you usually sustain some damage, and no one wants to take the chance to look bad by loosing to the perceived geek/nerd/weakling/freak...whatever, so they WILL go to someone else.
Dreadwinter wrote:I liked where Orlanth stated that police, army, and special forces know how to hold back, so the kid should have known.
Guy could win this in the court room with talk like that!
You took a few liberties with my words to come up with that.
Must have been too busy wearing stab vests and dodging death from school bullies to learn much English at school.
Sorry, you didn't say special forces.....
Orlanth wrote:As for how I know one can and should have the ability to show restraint even in danger. I know this from knowing local police, people in the armed forces and shadier types.
LordofHats wrote:
Just because you get bullied doesn't make you timid or a sheep. I think that's an unfair assumption you are making. Bullied kids become isolated by their bullies. Do you want to hang out with someone whose always being made fun of and possible beaten?
There is truth in this, I got bullied more after kicking the crap out of one bully because said bully was upset, and his friends were too.
This was solved by kicking the crap out of some of his friends, but the point still stands.
LordofHats wrote:
If anyone is sheep, its the people who stand by and do nothing while other human beings are victimized.
I don't know about that. I like my skin, and there are very few people I would endanger it for.
I don't think that saying that you're going to have to deal with a dill weed on occasion, which is what I interpret Andrew 1975's main point to be, means you approve of bullying.
Andrew1975 wrote:No, sure don't. Why would I? All you will do is come to me whenever you have a problem, and when I have a problem you will run and hide. I will certainly be friends with someone that will stand their ground in the face of adversity though.
Its nice to know you prefer a society where human beings live in bubbles and can expect no help from anyone for anything. We victimize victims more by doing nothing. They don't want you to solve all their problems. They just want you to not turn a blind eye to the situation their in. One that they cannot escape. Even when you stand up to a bully, there will be more bullies. I'm not talking about ending bullying. I'm talking about making the bullies the ones who are isolated in society. Right now, the victims are the ones who become isolated.
It's the difference between giving someone a fish or a fishing pole. I've shown plenty of people how to do this, it changes their entire life. It is not acceptable to live your life in constant fear. Yes it is a leap of faith kind of thing and it is scary, but the pay off is just as big.
There'd be no need for bullied kids to punch a bully in the face if other people would so much as stand by them and refuse to let the bully isolate them.
You seam to believe that there is a way to stop bullying....There isn't.
There is. I'm not talking about getting rid of all the jerks in the world, or making everyone nice. I'm talking about ending an aspect of our society that allowed people to become isolated and victimized by those people and leaves them with little in ways of options to help themselves.
There is no amount of coddling and sheltering you can do to stop this, no amount of security can stop it.
Who's asking for shelter? Its a very heartless world view you have. I'm talking about admitting society is made of more than one person and that it functions by helping other people do the things they can't do alone. A city can't provide its own food, it has to get it from farmers. Farmers can't make their own tractors, they have to buy them. People live in a society not a bubble. Bullied kids are isolated by society and society tells them to suck it up. Would you tell a rape victim "you should have stood up for yourself?"
Society doesn't need people who can take care of themselves it needs people who can take care of eachother.
No law has stopped it, no policy has topped it, no social construct on the face of the planet can stop it from happening.
Because the ones we have are gak. In my school everyone knew who was and wasn't bullied. No one did anything. Then I got suspended by "zero tolerance" while the bully got off scott free.
School have cameras and hall monitors and even armed guards.....has that stopped it?
Most schools have none of those things.
If a bully has really set his target on you, the thing that will change his mind is you.
And if the bully is the student body? I was alone in a school of 500, and all them treated me like crap. Even after I got the physical harassment to stop I was still alone, isolated, and had no friends, for no reason other than everyone in the school decided that they didn't care what happened to me. Bullying it's some kid being mean to another. Its a prolonged situation of abuse and victimization. We'll never stop rape, or murder, or assault and battery either but we don't tolerate any of those things like we do bullying.
Should society provide this for you?
I was unware I was being horribly unrealistic and unreasonable asking for simple human decency.
What will you want next?
Slippery slope? Really? Bullied kids don't want you to solve all their problems. They just don't want to be treated like something less than human.
You blame te teachers and admin, what are they really supposed to do?
Something other than stand and watch. They let it slide because they're afraid of being sued, or of being unfair, or simply because bullying is so severe that they don't think they can do anything.
Have you seen what parents will do if a teacher touches their kid?
Yeah and its part of the problem.
What happens when you are done with school? Look jerks are everywhere and every age.
There's a difference between someone being a jerk and someone treating you like an play thing for their amusement.
I'm not defending Bullies believe me.
No you're blaming the victim.
I know about bullies.
I don't think you do. Jerks are not bullies. Being bullied is not dealing with jerks. There's are words in law for bullying. Harassment, Assault, and Battery. Bullying is behavior that is semi-tolerated among children but is never tolerated in society at large. It's a prolonged period of verbal and physical abuse and harassment that denies the victim their human dignity. It is not someone being mean to you, it is not someone being rude. That's not bullying. Bullying is being surrounded by five kids who hurl insults at you while dozens of other people stand around and do nothing for days weeks and months. Being touched inappropriately, or punched and kicked while everyone around you laughs. Its the dicks on the sports teams purposely pelting baseballs into your head and calling it an accident. And people just watch. Ppeople who need do nothing more than speak up and do the right thing. Bullies are the popular kids. The kids who get to do whatever they want because we let them. The kids who get idolized for what they do to other people.
I'm not saying bullies go away. I'm saying that society should isolate the bullies instead of isolating the victims because if we do that there will be fewer bullies and fewer kids who get bullied.
Andrew1975 wrote:
You seam to believe that there is a way to stop bullying....There isn't.
There is a difference between believing X can be eliminated, and enacting policy measures which reduce the prevalence of X.
Andrew1975 wrote:
There is no amount of coddling and sheltering you can do to stop this, no amount of security can stop it.
There's also no amount of saying "Stand up for yourself!" that can stop it. There are people in this world who, if I decided to make it my mission to ruin their lives, could do almost nothing about it.
LordofHats wrote: Bullying is behavior that is semi-tolerated among children but is never tolerated in society at large.
Have you read a tabloid?
I believe there's a South Park episode about this.
Look I read your post. It's full of the stereotypical helpless mentality that in all honesty is the reason bullies target people.
You say thing like I don't know what it's like. I know exactly what it's like. You are not a special snowflake. Everybody on the planet has been bullied at one point or the other. Most people figure out how to deal with it. It is pretty simple, you make it not worth their effort or enjoyable.
You say I'm confusing Bullies with jerks. No, I'm not. The difference between a jerk and a bully is that the jerk figured he couldn't bully you and moved on to someone else. That's all there is to it. They really are the same person and once they figure that they can take out all their problems on you guess what, they come back until you give them a reason not to.
You are not asking for simple human decency. You are asking for random strangers who have no involvement with the situation to stand up for you. No worse, you are asking self absorbed, narcissistic, teenagers to give a crap about someone other than themselves. This is highly unlikely. You are asking teacher to risk loosing their jobs. You are asking tax payers to spend money on security. These people are not treating you like less than a human, they are treating you exactly how they treat all humans. What you are asking for is someone to step in and save you. They only person treating you like less than a human are the people actually bullying you. All because you can't sack up and handle some bullies.
Look I know it can feel like the whole school is against you. They aren't they just don't care. Some of them might take a snip at you here or there, but in general you are not even on these peoples radars. There is one thing a high schooler cares about and that is "ME".
These people treat you like a play thing because you let them.
And people just watch. Ppeople who need do nothing more than speak up and do the right thing
This is the best quote yet. This is my point. "People need to do nothing more than speak up and do the right thing" that is essentially all you have to do to. In all my school days the kid that got picked on the longest was the kid that never did anything but take it. Not the different kid, or the smallest kid, or the poorest kid. The sad thing is I always knew that if he could take that mental flailing everyday without killing himself he was tougher than most of the kids taunting him. He just either didn't realize this or believe this himself. I helped some kids in these same situations, the ones that would listen came out fine. The ones that wouldn't well...I mean hanging out with them was putting a target on my back again. I tried and that was all I was gonna do for someone who wouldn't help themselves.
I can understand that people feel like no body does or cares anything about it. In all honesty people do quite a bit to stop it. It's in all the papers and news, ever since colombine it has been an issue. There just isn't much anybody except the victim can do about it.
And again when you get out of school nobody is there to protect you from bullies. They do still exist, It's just not the same on day in and day out for years at a time, but there will always be people who try to get you to be submissive.
There is a difference between believing X can be eliminated, and enacting policy measures which reduce the prevalence of X.
What measures could practically be enacted that haven't been already? Really, I mean my school had arbitration and peer counseling, hell we actually had teachers that would bust heads. we had hall monitors and priests and nuns. That didn't stop it. I don't see anything that can. It's easy to say everybody should be helping, but you have to help yourself out first.
Andrew1975 wrote:
What measures could practically be enacted that haven't been already?
Even enforcement, for one.
I smashed an orange on a kid's head twice (yep, I was a massive dick in highschool) and got off with "Did you smash an orange on his head?", "No.", "Alright then." This was largely because I was one of two NMS kids in the school, the smart kids apparently do no ill.
Andrew1975 wrote:
Really, I mean my school had arbitration and peer counseling, hell we actually had teachers that would bust heads. we had hall monitors and priests and nuns. That didn't stop it. I don't see anything that can. It's easy to say everybody should be helping, but you have to help yourself out first.
Again, the question is about reducing, not stopping.
Right. So you smashed an orange on a kids head. Unless you did it in front of a camera or a teacher there is nothing anyone can do about it. It's not a matter of unequal enforcement, its a matter of them catching you. It's not possible for a school to watch every student every second of the day. Or do you expect teachers to believe every story they hear based on face value, because that would be even worse.
How much more can it possibly be reduced? How much more can be done practically to reduce it than is being done. I don't see anything else.
Andrew1975 wrote:Unless you did it in front of a camera or a teacher there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Well, no, there are plenty of things people can do about it. I did it in the lunch room, during lunch, surrounded by at least 200 kids. The faculty could have asked them if I did it, and punished me for having done it. They didn't. They asked me only, either because they thought I wasn't smart enough to lie effectively, or because they didn't really care.
Andrew1975 wrote:
It's not a matter of unequal enforcement, its a matter of them catching you. It's not possible for a school to watch every student every second of the day.
They don't have to catch you in the sense of seeing you, this isn't the US judicial code.
Not everyone gets bullied. My dad taught me from a young age to go for "as much blood as possible" and said that you learn about where to hit people as an adult, but as a kid just go for blood because it scares them.
I idolised my Dad so i took his go for the nose advice.. During my first year of high school a kid a year older pushed me and called me a queer, and even though I was genuinely terrified i forced myself to do what my dad said and smashed him in the face.
He went down like a knackered lift and i got suspended for three days, but when I got back people thought i was awesome and the bully avoided me until i left.
Long story short, despite what the hippies say, violence solves everything, and you should actively encourage your kids to spread peoples noses across their face without engaging in any dialogue.
Andrew1975 wrote:Unless you did it in front of a camera or a teacher there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Well, no, there are plenty of things people can do about it. I did it in the lunch room, during lunch, surrounded by at least 200 kids. The faculty could have asked them if I did it, and punished me for having done it. They didn't. They asked me only, either because they thought I wasn't smart enough to lie effectively, or because they didn't really care.
Andrew1975 wrote:
It's not a matter of unequal enforcement, its a matter of them catching you. It's not possible for a school to watch every student every second of the day.
They don't have to catch you in the sense of seeing you, this isn't the US judicial code.
Ok, but here is the thing and why that doesn't work. All it takes is a handful of kids to corroborate a story then. You really think that gives the loner any help? Guilt becomes a popularity contest at that point and guess who is losing that one? I have seen this happen actually.
mattyrm wrote:Not everyone gets bullied. My dad taught me from a young age to go for "as much blood as possible" and said that you learn about where to hit people as an adult, but as a kid just go for blood because it scares them.
I idolised my Dad so i took his go for the nose advice.. During my first year of high school a kid a year older pushed me and called me a queer, and even though I was genuinely terrified i forced myself to do what my dad said and smashed him in the face.
He went down like a knackered lift and i got suspended for three days, but when I got back people thought i was awesome and the bully avoided me until i left.
Long story short, despite what the hippies say, violence solves everything, and you should actively encourage your kids to spread peoples noses across their face without engaging in any dialogue.
Yeah i have to agree with Matty (Again...)
Violence did seem to solve several of my more aggressive social disputes in secondary school...
After the second year it wasn't a problem...
mattyrm wrote:Not everyone gets bullied. My dad taught me from a young age to go for "as much blood as possible" and said that you learn about where to hit people as an adult, but as a kid just go for blood because it scares them.
I idolised my Dad so i took his go for the nose advice.. During my first year of high school a kid a year older pushed me and called me a queer, and even though I was genuinely terrified i forced myself to do what my dad said and smashed him in the face.
He went down like a knackered lift and i got suspended for three days, but when I got back people thought i was awesome and the bully avoided me until i left.
Long story short, despite what the hippies say, violence solves everything, and you should actively encourage your kids to spread peoples noses across their face without engaging in any dialogue.
This is all I'm saying. Had you taken that you probably would have been bullied from that day on. Maybe not everybody gets bullied, but attempted bullying just sounded stupid so I said everyone gets bullied. Maybe I should have said everyone gets tested. I usually suggest waiting till a they at least square up with you to punch them. Your tactic is what I would reserve for the first day of prison.
purplefood wrote:
Yeah i have to agree with Matty (Again...)
Violence did seem to solve several of my more aggressive social disputes in secondary school...
After the second year it wasn't a problem...
mattyrm wrote:Not everyone gets bullied. My dad taught me from a young age to go for "as much blood as possible" and said that you learn about where to hit people as an adult, but as a kid just go for blood because it scares them.
I idolised my Dad so i took his go for the nose advice.. During my first year of high school a kid a year older pushed me and called me a queer, and even though I was genuinely terrified i forced myself to do what my dad said and smashed him in the face.
He went down like a knackered lift and i got suspended for three days, but when I got back people thought i was awesome and the bully avoided me until i left.
Long story short, despite what the hippies say, violence solves everything, and you should actively encourage your kids to spread peoples noses across their face without engaging in any dialogue.
I usually suggest waiting till a they at least square up with you to punch them. Your tactic is what I would reserve for the first day of prison.
In prison i raped the wing boss with a broom shank.
Andrew1975 wrote:
Ok, but here is the thing and why that doesn't work. All it takes is a handful of kids to corroborate a story then.
All it takes is one administrator who doesn't like the kid to fabricate a charge.
Its all about judgment.
Andrew1975 wrote:
You really think that gives the loner any help? Guilt becomes a popularity contest at that point and guess who is losing that one? I have seen this happen actually.
Guilt isn't a popularity contest?
Very few people judge impartially, and no one does it all the time. This is called the "He's such a nice boy!" argument.
Andrew1975 wrote:You say thing like I don't know what it's like. I know exactly what it's like. You are not a special snowflake. Everybody on the planet has been bullied at one point or the other. Most people figure out how to deal with it. It is pretty simple, you make it not worth their effort or enjoyable.
This shows you don't know. Most people will never be bullied in a sense that deserves mention. Most people will be picked on at some point, or made fun of but very few kids are truely subjected to years of constant ongoing harassment. There were only two others in my school other than me.
You are not asking for simple human decency. You are asking for random strangers who have no involvement with the situation to stand up for you.
How a student body treats its own members is reflective of itself. They're hardly uninvolved.
This is highly unlikely.
Probably the 4th sadest part of the whole thing.
You are asking teacher to risk loosing their jobs.
I'm asking for society to step up and change the way it deals with the problem.
You are asking tax payers to spend money on security.
Actually I do think more money needs to go into education but for more extensive reasons. I've never really been able to grasp why education budgets are so easy for government to cut. I would think tax payers would care about that a lot more than a lot of things
These people are not treating you like less than a human, they are treating you exactly how they treat all humans.
No they aren't. I was one of only three people in my entire undergraduate experience who suffered real abuse. No one else did.
What you are asking for is someone to step in and save you.
I'm asking for society to step up and refuse to allow people to be treated that way. We don't accept it as acceptable behavior among adults, why is it acceptable among children? You don't tell rape victims to stand up for themselves. Or muder victims. Stand up for yourself can be your mantra all you want but it isn't a solution. Look what happened in the case that started this thread. Someone died and had the situation been properly addressed it may have never reached that point.
They only person treating you like less than a human are the people actually bullying you.
As evident by your own posts I am a sheep. Seems less than human to me.
All because you can't sack up and handle some bullies.
At this point "stand up for yourself" is getting old. How does one kid stand up to a group of 5? How about a 4th graded against a 6th grader? What if the bully is the popular kid who has all the friends? These problems can't be immediately resolved by "standing up for yourself." And the longer the abuse persists the harder it is to escape it. Your solution isn't a solution its an excuse you tell yourself to absolve your conscience of responsibility. You should stand up and lend a helping a hand to someone in need. You don't need to be super man. Just be their friend and stand by them and encourage them. That's not a painstaking struggle on your time and spirit.
Look I know it can feel like the whole school is against you. They aren't they just don't care. Some of them might take a snip at you here or there, but in general you are not even on these peoples radars. There is one thing a high schooler cares about and that is "ME".
Good job realizing the facts of life. Now you face the decision of either living with it or hoping that it will change and maybe even taking action to effect that change.
These people treat you like a play thing because you let them.
They do it because society allows them too and leaves vulnerable kids wide open with no recourse.
The sad thing is I always knew that if he could take that mental flailing everyday without killing himself he was tougher than most of the kids taunting him. He just either didn't realize this or believe this himself. I helped some kids in these same situations, the ones that would listen came out fine.
Now imagine if the entire student body had stepped up. The bully would be the one who was alone and the problem would likely cease to exist. The bully would stop because he wouldn't want to be alone anymore than his victim.
I mean hanging out with them was putting a target on my back again.
Aren't you proud?
There just isn't much anybody except the victim can do about it.
Bull. There's a lot people can do. It's just that no body does it. After all, who wants "target" on their back.
And again when you get out of school nobody is there to protect you from bullies. They do still exist, It's just not the same on day in and day out for years at a time, but there will always be people who try to get you to be submissive.
When you get out of school it isn't called bullying anymore. Its called felonies and misdemeanors.
Long story short, despite what the hippies say, violence solves everything, and you should actively encourage your kids to spread peoples noses across their face without engaging in any dialogue.
This...about a thousand times this. Heinlein said it best but I can't be bothered to find the exact quote.
“Anyone who clings to the historically untrue -- and -- thoroughly immoral doctrine that violence never solves anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler would referee. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor; and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms.”
Not that violence solves everything, we just tend to rule it out when we shouldn't.
. A city can't provide its own food, it has to get it from farmers. Farmers can't make their own tractors, they have to buy them.
Yes people need things that they can't provide themselves. Rarely are the given for free? The city does not get food for free and the farmer does not get the tractor for free. They pay for them. Respect is the currency of high school and it is precious, you appear broke and it's a rare person who is going to spend their currency for you when you don't even show the self worth to defend yourself. There are better people to spend it on.
This shows you don't know. Most people will never be bullied in a sense that deserves mention. Most people will be picked on at some point, or made fun of but very few kids are truely subjected to years of constant ongoing harassment. There were only two others in my school other than me.
Right, because most people learn to deal with it like myself and some of the other posters have suggested. If you don't deal with it it only gets worse.
How a student body treats its own members is reflective of itself. They're hardly uninvolved.
Grade school and highschool students could care less about that. They are the most self centered people on the face of the planet. Asking them to stand up for someone who won't do it for themselves is like asking a thousand cats to share the same dream.
I'm asking for society to step up and change the way it deals with the problem.
Instead of stepping up and changing the way you deal with the problem.
No they aren't. I was one of only three people in my entire undergraduate experience who suffered real abuse. No one else did.
But you wouldn't have if you had chinned a few more people
As evident by your own posts I am a sheep. Seems less than human to me.
I'm trying to help by telling you the best way to solve this problem and shed this victim mentality you have.
At this point "stand up for yourself" is getting old. How does one kid stand up to a group of 5? How about a 4th graded against a 6th grader? What if the bully is the popular kid who has all the friends? These problems can't be immediately resolved by "standing up for yourself." And the longer the abuse persists the harder it is to escape it. Your solution isn't a solution its an excuse you tell yourself to absolve your conscience of responsibility. You should stand up and lend a helping a hand to someone in need. You don't need to be super man. Just be their friend and stand by them and encourage them. That's not a painstaking struggle on your time and spirit.
Why would I be a friend to someones who's own actions reek of self worthlessness. If you don't see the worth in standing up for yourself I find it hard to believe that anyone else should, especially someone that doesn't know you. Again I have stepped up for people, but I can't be everywhere for everyone, you have to do it yourself. Yes there were people I didn't help too, F them, I'm not their superman! After awhile you get sick of helping people that you know full well can do it for themselves.
Good job realizing the facts of life. Now you face the decision of either living with it or hoping that it will change and maybe even taking action to effect that change.
Isn't this advice you you should be taking yourself?
They do it because society allows them too and leaves vulnerable kids wide open with no recourse.
Again what is society supposed to do here? Jump every time someone calls you a name. Schools have counselors, there are programs to help the situation. Take advantage of them. For you to accuse society of callousness every time a kid gets bullied is unfair and unrealistic. We don't live in happy pony land. People have their own lives to deal with.
Now imagine if the entire student body had stepped up. The bully would be the one who was alone and the problem would likely cease to exist. The bully would stop because he wouldn't want to be alone anymore than his victim.
I would have to imagine it because I have never seen it, because it is never going to happen, its a complete fantasy, it might happen in the movies once in awhile, but I've seen monkeys jump out of peoples butts in movies too. What I don't have to imagine is the look on a surprised bullies face when someone stands up to him, that I have seen many times.
Aren't you proud?
Yes. Yes I am. Proud that I learned that I don't have to be a victim everyday. Proud that I taught other people how not to be victims too.
Bull. There's a lot people can do. It's just that no body does it. After all, who wants "target" on their back.
Yes because the realized this is not some fantasy world. Nobody wants to be a target, they don't want to associate with someone who's inaction has made them a target.
When you get out of school it isn't called bullying anymore. Its called felonies and misdemeanors.
This is exactly the kind of response you get from people that are always looking for someone else to help them. Cops, and the courts? For real? You are gonna find that they are really very helpful. They will never be around when something is actually happening.
No it's not. I mean it can be, sure. Bullies exist in many varieties, physical, emotional, financial the list goes on. There will always be people that try to get you to submit and or abuse you, spouses, bosses, superiors, clients and yes even your friends. I'm not kidding when I say it never ends. Sometimes it's subtle, sometimes it's not. Do you think there is always going to be a cop or a witness around, because there isn't. Do you think that what they do every time is even illegal...because it's not.
Look I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees. But that is your choice. I find the easiest think to do is when anybody pulls any kind of cuteness with me is to nip in in the bud. If that means chinning someone every once in a while than so be it. It rarely take more than the threat. Just be very smart about it.
Andrew1975 wrote:Right, because most people learn to deal with it like myself and some of the other posters have suggested. If you don't deal with it it only gets worse.
If only children were as blessed with knowledge as we are.
Grade school and highschool students could care less about that. They are the most self centered people on the face of the planet.
Congratulations on realizing the obvious. Now, do we accept it or do something about it?
Asking them to stand up for someone who won't do it for themselves is like asking a thousand cats to share the same dream.
Do cats dream of electric sheep?
Instead of stepping up and changing the way you deal with the problem.
Have you ever stopped to wonder that maybe the problem can't be solved by one person who is completely alone? Again look at the case that started this thread. That's wht your solution led too.
But you wouldn't have if you had chinned a few more people
Blame the victim.
I'm trying to help by telling you the best way to solve this problem and shed this victim mentality you have.
You're not trying to help me. You're absolving yourself of all responsibility by saying it isn't your problem. Societies do not function because people can do it themselves. The selfishness of society is probably one of the biggest barriers to human progress.
Why would I be a friend to someones who's own actions reek of self worthlessness.
Blame the victim.
If you don't see the worth in standing up for yourself I find it hard to believe that anyone else should, especially someone that doesn't know you.
Is it that they won't or that they can't?
Again what is society supposed to do here? Jump every time someone calls you a name.
I've been over that. I'm not talking about name calling.
Schools have counselors, there are programs to help the situation.
We've been over that too. Go to adults and bullying gets worse because the adults don't do anything.
For you to accuse society of callousness every time a kid gets bullied is unfair and unrealistic.
I didn't realize accusing society of doing nothing when it does nothing was unfair and unrealistic. How shocking. Especially since your entire position basically hinges on society not doing anything being perfectly acceptable.Kitty Genovese would love you.
We don't live in happy pony land. People have their own lives to deal with.
Your knowledge of the facts of life continues to amaze me. Obviously you have no interest in actual discussion as the only words coming out of posts amount to "life sucks" and "blame the victim" How astute of you. We're all well informed now.
This is exactly the kind of response you get from people that are always looking for someone else to help them. Cops, and the courts? For real? You are gonna find that they are really very helpful. They will never be around when something is actually happening.
Everyone who has ever been robbed, assaulted, raped, and murdered would be your best friends.
Look I'd rather die on my feet than live on my knees.
You should give the speeches at the end of action films.
Your experiences may very.
Funny coming from someone advocating one solution fits all. The difference between you and me is that we both recognize how things are but you utterly refuse to comprehend me when I say they should be different. I'm not talking about something realistically happening. It can happen and it should, but I don't expect it too. There are to many people in the world who would rather shrug off all responsibility and let others suffer to effect such change. We can't even get money into the education system, let alone resolve all the social problems that take place under its roof.
I'll bet that if most people chinned me, after having been bullied, they would regret it.
Sometimes, hitting the other person only makes it worse.
Most bullies think that way. You can say whatever you want. Sure there were instances where I took a beating, but I was pretty used to it, I had 4 older brothers and played lots of sports. I learned early that pain is not as painful as fear. But those bullies never touched me again. They learned there were easier targets.
Congratulations on realizing the obvious. Now, do we accept it or do something about it?
Like what, you want drum circles? Tell me please, since you seam to think that society is either too inept or too stupid to have figured this out yet, but their must be an answer, so what is it?
Do cats dream of electric sheep?
No they dream of devouring anything smaller then them much like high schoolers.
Have you ever stopped to wonder that maybe the problem can't be solved by one person who is completely alone?
No, because I've seen it be solved by people that are all alone. YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY LONER THAT EVER EXISTED!
Again look at the case that started this thread. That's wht your solution led too.
Yes, it did. And how often does that situation actually happen? Bulling rarely is fatal. Your solutions lead to ......wait you don't have any! Well no you have one. 1. Someone is bullied. 2. ( ) 3. This makes everybody stand up for the picked on kid. 4. They buy him ice cream, Birds sing. 5. PROFIT
Blame the victim.
Blame cruel society. Yawn
You're absolving yourself of all responsibility by saying it isn't your problem. Societies do not function because people can do it themselves. The selfishness of society is probably one of the biggest barriers to human progress.
No, as I've told you I feel no responsibility to help those who won't help themselves when they are perfectly capable. I'll help cripples, I have even helped the Lazy and cowardly at times. But I am not crazy enough to believe that most people will, or want to, or should have to.
Blame the victim.
Blame everybody but yourself. I mean you have literally blamed everybody but yourself. At what point do you look in the mirror? The "Blame the victim" rant has never effected me in the slightest, there are no unwilling victims especially in a repeated long term abuse like this.
We've been over that too. Go to adults and bullying gets worse because the adults don't do anything.
"The adults can't help me, I can't help me, no body can help me. It must be societies fault" (YAWN)
So again, you say my answer is not an option when you don't have a better one, or one at all.
I didn't realize accusing society of doing nothing when it does nothing was unfair and unrealistic. How shocking. Especially since your entire position basically hinges on society not doing anything being perfectly acceptable.Kitty Genovese would love you.
No what I'm saying, is when you have things like Kitty Genovese where she had no chance to change her situations going on, maybe people should be more concerned about that than some kids getting swirlies and wedgies or got forbid getting a black eye or a bloody nose, who actually has the ability to do something about it, but won't because oh his "poor me" mentality. Seriously, your self centeredness is beyond the pail. Every one should stand up for you, the world owes you a easy life and now you compare yourself to a poor girl that was bumrushed in NY. She had no ability to do anything about her situation, you do, or did, you just don't.
Your knowledge of the facts of life continues to amaze me. Obviously you have no interest in actual discussion as the only words coming out of posts amount to "life sucks" and "blame the victim" How astute of you. We're all well informed now.
All you can do is cry and say the world is unfair, people should do something. I have no idea what, but they should. I never said life sucks. I said it can be cruel and it can, especially when you don't have ownership of your own life. But it's also what you make of it. I personally think life is pretty great right now. But that is because I learned to stop blaming everyone else for what happened to me and took responsibility for myself. I will not be a victim! I will never be a victim, because I refuse to be victimized.
Everyone who has ever been robbed, assaulted, raped, and murdered would be your best friends.
They would be if they counted on themselves more than society to protect them. You know that "bad guys" always wait until the "good guys" are gone right?
Funny coming from someone advocating one solution fits all.
No it doesn't, I'll admit that, it works pretty often though. It works better than anything you have suggested, and it works a hell of a lot better than cursing GOD and society.
The difference between you and me is that we both recognize how things are but you utterly refuse to comprehend me when I say they should be different.
No, I just don't agree with you 1. beacuse there is nothing that can be done that isn't already. 2. Some people need a kick in the ass to get their gak in gear and realize that some things must be earned.
I'm not talking about something realistically happening.
We agree on this, because society is not magically going to change for you. Those that appear weak have always been picked on and they always will. The solution is don't appear weak, It is not change all of society!
It can happen and it should
No it can't. It just can't. Not in reality it can't sorry. Should it is debatable? I've read a lot of biographies about people who's lives have drastically changed for the positive because they were bullied and learned to stand up to it. It is an epiphany and a life changing moment. I would not rob the world of that experience. In many way it is vital.
but I don't expect it too.
Good, because it won't. You should want your situation to change, enough to actually do something about it.
There are to many people in the world who would rather shrug off all responsibility and let others suffer to effect such change.
Again you expect everyone else to be responsible for you. Every body on the face of the planet should change because of as you said 3 in 500 kids in your school. Life should stop for the rest of the world until we figure out how to make everyone get along is essentially what you are saying. You have no answers, no solution and refute every other solution offered to you.
We can't even get money into the education system, let alone resolve all the social problems that take place under its roof.
And yet they need to find more ways to limit bullying when that are already doing everything that can be done.
Bullies only stopped bullying me when I punched one in the face
So my solution did work for you actually. I don't get why you are fighting it.
Look I don't think I'm going to respond to this anymore. I've said my peace. You will never admit that this is the best solution on a personal basis. I think that is sad. I don't like to think of people being abused when they don't have to.
You can wish for the world to change in one hand and gak in the other and let me know which one fills up first. On the list of things in this world that need fixing, bullying has been already addressed as much as is humanly possible so it is way down on the list. Good luck.
Yep, I can. So can you. Great thing about the internet.
Lots of people that aren't bullies seem to think that standing up to bullies is easy, or that bullies can't fight.
It is easy, and while most bullies are decent fighters, standing up to them is almost always better then not. I mean if you are going to get beat. might as well do it on your terms.
People generally will back off from bothering people that they know will hit them back. True, a "bully" might win the fight, but eventually they will probably tire of the effort and move on to a softer target.
It's not nearly as painful as taking the mental and physical beating that bullying provides on a daily bases though. In a week you will not feel that punch, the scars from bullying, especially if you do not deal with it, last a lifetime. I run into people that are still wrecks, not standing up became a habit for them. It will haunt them all their life and fear will affect every decision that they make.
I have a bridge that I need to buy a particular product to maintain, entirely because a dude took a hockey stick (The flimsy crap you use in gym, thankfully.) to my face.
Monster Rain wrote:People generally will back off from bothering people that they know will hit them back. True, a "bully" might win the fight, but eventually they will probably tire of the effort and move on to a softer target.
Getting punched hurts.
The kid in the story that kicked off this whole shebang realized if you bring a knife to the fist fight you help even the odds.
It's Kharma. I still get angry when people were protesting that Gaddafi had his human rights violated when he was torn apart by the crowd when he was found. What about the Human rights violations of the people, he tortured, killed, mutilated, allowed to be raped and brutalized. You reap what you sow.
Andrew1975 wrote:Most bullies think that way. You can say whatever you want. Sure there were instances where I took a beating, but I was pretty used to it, I had 4 older brothers and played lots of sports. I learned early that pain is not as painful as fear. But those bullies never touched me again. They learned there were easier targets.
And if they don't?
Like what, you want drum circles? Tell me please, since you seam to think that society is either too inept or too stupid to have figured this out yet, but their must be an answer, so what is it?
I guess you'd rather keep chanting your mantra than read. I have told what can and should be done. And it can be done. The problem is no one has the balls to do it.
No, because I've seen it be solved by people that are all alone. YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY LONER THAT EVER EXISTED!
How astute of you. Great way to avoid answering the question.
, it did. And how often does that situation actually happen? Bulling rarely is fatal. Your solutions lead to ......wait you don't have any! Well no you have one. 1. Someone is bullied. 2. ( ) 3. This makes everybody stand up for the picked on kid. 4. They buy him ice cream, Birds sing. 5. PROFIT
I take it you don't watch the news. At least once a month a story pops up of someone committing suicide due to bullying. And congrats again on failing to recognize anything I say. I see your mantra is well plugged into your ears.
No, as I've told you I feel no responsibility to help those who won't help themselves when they are perfectly capable.
Some of them can't. And your lack of a sense of responsibility is why this problem persists. People like you are why children die in this situation, not the children themselves. Kitty Genovese still loves you by the way.
I'll help cripples, I have even helped the Lazy and cowardly at times. But I am not crazy enough to believe that most people will, or want to, or should have to.
The can but they won't and they should.
Blame everybody but yourself. I mean you have literally blamed everybody but yourself.
Thank you for your assumptions. You obviously have never read anything about victimization. Most people only blame themselves.
At what point do you look in the mirror?
Et tu Brutus?
The "Blame the victim" rant has never effected me in the slightest, there are no unwilling victims especially in a repeated long term abuse like this.
Then you really don't understand bullying oh might understander of all.
"The adults can't help me, I can't help me, no body can help me. It must be societies fault" (YAWN)
So again, you say my answer is not an option when you don't have a better one, or one at all.
I suppose its easy to say I don't when you don't want to hear it.
No what I'm saying, is when you have things like Kitty Genovese where she had no chance to change her situations going on, maybe people should be more concerned
This is the double standard that frustrates me to no end. What's the difference? By your position she should have "stood up for herself." She's a sheep and she's weak and pathetic and deserved what she got. But you can't actually say that because you're a coward like the rest of society who would rather do nothing. She's a "special" case and saying she deserved it isn't PC.
There is no difference between what happened to Kitty Genovese and what happens to bullied kids every day. They are alone and tortured and everyone knows it and no one does anything because they should "stand up for themselves."
Seriously, your self centeredness is beyond the pail.
Mirror oh great lord of responsibility and awesomeness?
Every one should stand up for you,
Yeah everyone should stand up for each other. There'd be fewer dead kids if people would stop watching from the side lines saying "it's not my responsibility."
the world owes you a easy life
I see your ability to draw inference is running high and well. If I want society to step up and effect change I must want it all handed to everyone on a silver platter. When did I ask society to solve everyone's problems? But I do see your much better at spewing your mantras and rhetoric than actually discussing the issue so I guess its expected.
All you can do is cry and say the world is unfair, people should do something.
Because they should.
I said it can be cruel and it can, especially when you don't have ownership of your own life.
No one has full ownership of their own life. We live with other people and their choices effect ours. Go live in the middle of no where if you want to "own your life." The rest of use live in the real world and in the real world I can't control what person X does that may or may not effect me and the choices of person Y can limit how I respond to X. People do not live in bubbles where they have absolute control over their lives.
I will not be a victim! I will never be a victim, because I refuse to be victimized.
Can we convert that to an speech to be used at the end of the next Home Alone movie?
They would be if they counted on themselves more than society to protect them. You know that "bad guys" always wait until the "good guys" are gone right?
Then I suppose we can just do away with all those pesky laws. They're not effecting anything meaningful after all!
No it doesn't, I'll admit that, it works pretty often though. It works better than anything you have suggested,
And for the people it doesn't work for? What choices do they have?
and it works a hell of a lot better than cursing GOD and society.
Hey now. I never curse god. He could smite me!
The difference between you and me is that we both recognize how things are but you utterly refuse to comprehend me when I say they should be different.
1. beacuse there is nothing that can be done that isn't already.
There is and I've said it multiple times. The difference lies in my willingness to vizualize what should be don't but won't be done while all you can say is "blame the victim" and "stand up for yourself" and "stop being a crybaby." All very helpful and insightful suggestion.
It is not change all of society!
Who asked to change all of society? I want society to recognize a gross hypocrisy that allows people to be abused for years. One that produces emotional and mental disorders and death. People know it exists. They know they can do something to stop it. But it's not their "responsibility."
I would not rob the world of that experience. In many way it is vital.
Tell that to Eric Harris, Pheobe Prince, and Jorge. They've all discovered your "vital" life lesson and the world is so much improved for it.
Good, because it won't. You should want your situation to change, enough to actually do something about it.
I'm just going to schedule a sit down with you and the kids to share you're life's knowledge. Being bullied is a horrible experience. Idolize it all you want but all you do is what everyone else does. Let the bully have his way while another person suffers. I would never wish what I experienced on anyone and children shouldn't have to experience it. They wouldn't if people would grow some balls and accept that when they see something wrong they do have a responsibility to stop it.
Again you expect everyone else to be responsible for you.
You do listen well. I want everyone to be responsible for each other.
Every body on the face of the planet should change because of as you said 3 in 500 kids in your school
Everybody on the face of the planet should change because it will make the world better, but that's asking too much. People would rather live in their ignorance.
Life should stop for the rest of the world until we figure out how to make everyone get along is essentially what you are saying.
Putting words in people's mouths is fun!
refute every other solution offered to you.
That would be you sir. Your only solution is "stand up for yourself." You even admit it doesn't always work but you have no solution to help those it doesn't work for. You can draw inferences about me all you want but your grand standing is absurd and belies the fact that you have no solution. All your posts are and putting words in my mouth and drawing assumptions that I must want society to do every thing for me when I should just "stand up for myself." Stand up for yourself isn't a solution its the mantra you preach so you have an excuse to keep being a bystander.
And yet they need to find more ways to limit bullying when that are already doing everything that can be done.
No they aren't. Getting rid of that stupid zero tolerance crap is a good start and changing laws so that teachers can actually intervene is a good step two (and give schools money for better toilet paper, we can just pork barrel it in there).
So my solution did work for you actually. I don't get why you are fighting it.
Because it doesn't work for everyone and it didn't solve all the problems associated with bullying (suspended for "zero" tolerance remember?). I should have never been in that situation in the first place.
I don't like to think of people being abused when they don't have to.
Monster Rain wrote:People generally will back off from bothering people that they know will hit them back. True, a "bully" might win the fight, but eventually they will probably tire of the effort and move on to a softer target.
Getting punched hurts.
Yeah that was my point. I can see both sides of the argument and I can agree with some of what lord and dogma are saying, but I definitely see things more like Andrew. Ultimately were talking about cowards here, kids, not grizzled veterans or mobsters who cut peoples toes off with pliers. Bullies will always take the easy way out, and there is always someone softer to pick on.
There was a midget in my school called Eddie Marsh, and even though he was small and weak he didn't get bullied because he was game as a pebble. You might beat him up, but the little gak was aggressive and he would always try to hurt you and I think that's the point. If everyone was like him then perhaps he would get bullied regardless, but they aren't and there is always someone who is willing to take all the abuse with zero risk to you.
Even if your only worried about hurting your hand on the blokes head, it makes sense to take lunch money.off the kid who won't fight back at all!
Bullying a smaller guy who is willing to fight is ultimately lose:lose. Either the bully wins, and gains no cred because he's bigger/tougher/meaner and should win, or the bully loses and the guy that was bullied gets huge cred and the bully loses it all.
Bullying will always fail when the small guy is simply willing to take more pain. That assumes a relatively even field, however, if the bully's position is indomitable, like when he and his posse outnumber the bullied by some impossible amount, then there's no real risk to the bully's status.
Even if this went through, it would likely not be murder but manslaughter in self defense. The kid lost control defending himself-- which I think is understandable (although still very regrettable) for someone that age...
In order for everybody to stand up to bullying you would have to assume that everyone agrees on what bullying is and instantly recognizes it. If two kids are fighting and one is bigger than the other, can a teacher or administrator automatically assume it's bullying? In my experience I have to sat it's 50/50. Some little kids are loudmouths, or have napoleon syndrome, some of them pick the fights. People are not mind readers and I can tell you while admins and teachers are aware of school politics they are not experts, they don't know who is in what clique. So your get rid of zero tolerance is crap. The problem is that you refuse to see the situation through anyone else s eyes and you assume everyone is clairvoyant and doesn't care. The truth is that many of them don't know and they honestly don't have the time to know everything about every situation, it's not possible.
You said it yourself, bullies will just isolate their targets. Even if the world changed to the way you want it, the bullies will just wait till they get you alone, who will save you now? If you are wishing for unrealistic societal change like "people should stand up for each other" then you might as well wish for there to be no bullies, these things will happen at about the same time, I'm sure of it. I'm sure you blame society for even creating the bullies.
What if I don't stand up for you because I'm afraid of the bully or the bully and his gang too? How does that make me any different from you. You won't stand up to him because you are scared, well maybe I'm scared too! The bully isn't targeting me, why would I want that to change. I mean maybe if you showed some evidence that you could be of any help if there is a fight, people might help. You can't just assume a stranger wants to get beat up for you while you cower, slink off or run like a girl. You are basically saying everyone else should have more of a sack than you do. Ridiculous! It does happen sometimes but I'm telling you, for you to expect this every time is just wishful thinking. You know a herd of gazelle could probably take down a lion if they all banded together, but it doesn't happen that way.
You are right. In a perfect world everyone would stand by each other when a bully comes along, except that in a perfect world there would be no bullies, so the point is mute. Do you feed every homeless person you see? Do you take in every stray? Do you donate every spare cent to the poverty stricken? Probably not! Are you our right now standing up for the oppressed people of the world. No you are on a forum, crying because no one gives a gak about bullies (which by the way isn't true). You spend your spare money on a hobby when you could be spending it on buying food for the homeless,isn't that uncaring? I'm sure more people die from poverty and homelessness than bullying, and it takes the same cure, all we need to do is stand together.
And yes I expect you to spend every extra cent, because that's what you are asking. Asking everybody to stand up to bullies every time until bullying is gone, is like asking everyone to give up every spare cent until poverty is gone. Is it something considerate people should do, yes, is it realistic to expect them to do, no not at all. Dogma keeps popping in about limiting, this isn't about limiting 3 out of 500 is pretty limited, one or two kids killing themselves a month is pretty limited, you are asking for all bullying to be stopped and it won't and can't be. The best people can do besides what they are already doing is try to teach people how to handle it and look at it as a learning situation.
Until you are out doing your best to effect these changes and help every stranger you see out of every gakky situation that life can throw at them, I really don't think you have the right to expect everyone else to forget about everything else and do that for you. Especially you, as you know the pain of these situations, you should be helping every person with every one of lifes situations. But you don't because the only person you care about is yourself or other people that have been in your situation because you see them as you.
I think the biggest problem for me at least was the way most "responsible" people told me how to handle the situation. They tell you to walk away or go to someone else. Yes, this only ever makes it worse, and they make you feel like you are part of the problem if you resort to physical confrontation. Any body who gives you the pacifist advise (hippies) NEVER had to deal with a REAL bully. I understand that no one in a situation of authority is going to tell you to haul off on the person, but that is usually the best way to handle the situation.
As for all the "Blame the victim talk". Is someone that really refuses to look both ways while crossing the street a victim anymore? They know they should look, especially after the first time they get hit. I understand that there are situations where the victim is absolutely blameless of course. But there are also situations where they are at least in part responsible for their situations.
Andrew1975 wrote:In order for everybody to stand up to bullying you would have to assume that everyone agrees on what bullying is and instantly recognizes it.
That'll depend on the size of the school. Larger ones have a harder time identifying these things than smaller ones, but larger ones also suffer from large budget shortfalls and higher student to teacher ratios.
So your get rid of zero tolerance is crap.
It depends on if you think the current law common in most jurisdictions is worth anything. I find the common usage of zero tolerance to be counter productive. Situations that don't call for intervention get intervention and situations that desperately need it get over looked or the severity is never recognized.
I'm sure you blame society for even creating the bullies.
Human social norms create bullies (that and series' of events that produce that outcome). Some bullies do have their own problems, like neglectful or abusive parents and they take that frustration out on others which is part of a larger social problem pertaining to children. One of the bullies I knew in elementary school (this was before I was ever bullied) had a gak ton of problems at home. He stopped being a bully however once those problems started to get addressed. Social Services is another area of public service that is woefully underfunded. That and there just aren't that many people qualified to do it and its hard to convince those who are to do that job (I think the same is true of teachers and school administrators). No one pays those people enough for the crap the need to deal with.
You know a herd of gazelle could probably take down a lion if they all banded together, but it doesn't happen that way.
Human beings are blessed with a little more brain power than the gazelle (and less cuteness).
No you are on a forum, crying because no one gives a gak about bullies (which by the way isn't true).
It is true. Bullies are something that only gets token attempts at fixing. No one has ever really invested themselves in solving the problem because there just aren't enough people really committed to recognizing its a problem (that and fixing it involves fixing numerous other problems like the piss poor education system).
You spend your spare money on a hobby when you could be spending it on buying food for the homeless,isn't that uncaring?
Some people make enough to do both (I don't my parents do, I'm poor )
I'm sure more people die from poverty and homelessness than bullying
Poverty and homelessness are much huger problems than bullying by magnitudes. The comparison isn't apt.
Until you are out doing your best to effect these changes and help every stranger you see out of every gakky situation that life can throw at them, I really don't think you have the right to expect everyone else to forget about everything else and do that for you.
There's a difference between recognizing that something should be a certain way and knowing it won't be. I alone can't effect these changes and there aren't enough people who care to do it. Most people are in line with what you think of the situation and I don't think that's ever going to change.
Any body who gives you the pacifist advise (hippies) NEVER had to deal with a REAL bully.
I'm willing to bet some of them did and just never used the solution you and I used. I think most bullied kids don't (drawing the distinction that I think my idea of what bullying is is more limited than yours). EDIT: That's also the "appropriate response" school admins, teachers, consolers, and parents are supposed to give and they might give the advice even though they know its crap.
But there are also situations where they are at least in part responsible for their situations.
The problem isn't whether or not they are in part responsible but that they are in some way absolutely capable of escaping it which is most of the time false (in a larger sense than bullying). For that "blame the victim" is considered to be false as a matter of reason.
LordofHats wrote:
That'll depend on the size of the school. Larger ones have a harder time identifying these things than smaller ones, but larger ones also suffer from large budget shortfalls and higher student to teacher ratios.
Small schools also benefit from familiarity. I went to a high school of about 600 kids, and by that time most students had known each other for the majority of their lives, and you generally need better reasons to bully someone you've known for a long time.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Andrew1975 wrote: Any body who gives you the pacifist advise (hippies) NEVER had to deal with a REAL bully.
I disagree. There are plenty of people that I would be more than able to take me apart in a fight, and there are plenty of people that I am more than able to take apart in a fight.
There are circumstances in which escalation is stupid.
It doesn't matter if they tear you apart. That happens sometimes, in fact probably most times small kids fight a bully they are gonna lose and get beat. The abuse still usually ends, as the bully finds someone else to pick on. You can take a good beating and be done with it, or you can get torn apart everyday. I'll take the beating and get it over with, and who knows you might even win.
The problem isn't whether or not they are in part responsible but that they are in some way absolutely capable of escaping it which is most of the time false (in a larger sense than bullying). For that "blame the victim" is considered to be false as a matter of reason.
This is false, most people are capable of dealing with their bullies and do, if they are not able to deal with it then some of that responsibility may lie on them, not all of it but some. They may have certain habits or manners of dress that attract bullies attention. Some of these are fine, some cross the line, I've seen some kids beat and bullied just because they were completely immature and obnoxious. Sometimes I had issues because I had colored my hair, but I stood up for myself. If you are not going to stand up for yourself, maybe you shouldn't attract that kind of attention.
Andrew1975 wrote:It doesn't matter if they tear you apart. That happens sometimes, in fact probably most times small kids fight a bully they are gonna lose and get beat. The abuse still usually ends, as the bully finds someone else to pick on.
That has never been my experience.
In fact, I knew kids that considered it more fun when their targets fought back. It made them feel more dominant.
Andrew1975 wrote:It doesn't matter if they tear you apart. That happens sometimes, in fact probably most times small kids fight a bully they are gonna lose and get beat. The abuse still usually ends, as the bully finds someone else to pick on.
That has never been my experience.
In fact, I knew kids that considered it more fun when their targets fought back. It made them feel more dominant.
Mate they weren't bullies at your school, they were rapists.
Andrew1975 wrote:It doesn't matter if they tear you apart. That happens sometimes, in fact probably most times small kids fight a bully they are gonna lose and get beat. The abuse still usually ends, as the bully finds someone else to pick on.
That has never been my experience.
In fact, I knew kids that considered it more fun when their targets fought back. It made them feel more dominant.
Mate they weren't bullies at your school, they were rapists.
That is because you grew up in juvie, with the other psychopaths!
The range of human behaviour includes anti-social performances such as bullying, rape, serial murder, burglary, drunk driving, and embezzlement. These cannot be eliminated with the social controls at our disposal, so they continue to occur. That does not excuse these behaviours, nor deny people the right to society’s protection against them.
Bottomline why is killing so bad? Plenty of people deserve death and live, others don't and end up murdered. They say "Thou shalt not kill" in christianity, yet Christian Chaplains follow our armed forces?
Murder is illegal, but state sponsored murder is called "Warfare" and is legitimized by calling it fighting.
Some people wish for the release of death from terminal diseases and yet we deny them this right?
We have a real problem as humans, dealing with life an death. It comes from our own supposedly moral compass, but when you look at the laws nature, there is no such thing as morals, just survival. We impose our own imperfect social models, over our baser animal instincts, and wonder why there are so many problems?
Because it generally only leads to more killing, which only perpetuates misery.
mwnciboo wrote:Plenty of people deserve death and live, others don't and end up murdered.
So you are saying you'd be ok if a hit squad was on their way to pick you up and execute you right now becuase some people deserve it? Whoever is sending the aquad over has decided you do so it must be ok.
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."
-Mark Hamill as Frodo in Star Trek
mwnciboo wrote:They say "Thou shalt not kill" in christianity, yet Christian Chaplains follow our armed forces?
Depends on your translation. Some translate it as 'murder' instead of 'kill', which is a fairly big difference.
mwnciboo wrote:Some people wish for the release of death from terminal diseases and yet we deny them this right?
Actually some places allow it, some do not. It is a difficult situation and not as simple as "should I eat an oreo?". It involves a myriad of subjects and issues that are deeply personal to people all over the world.
mwnciboo wrote:It comes from our own supposedly moral compass, but when you look at the laws nature, there is no such thing as morals, just survival.
As Darwin pointed out, humans live in civilization (whether it is a tribal group or a metropolis) and they key to survival is empathy, not strength. If nature is so great, being removed from the group wouldn't be seen as a punishment in almost all cultures in the past and even today. It was a death sentence to be put out into nature. This is assuming by nature you mean wilderness of course. If you mean it in a more existential manner it holds up even less as humans are just as much a part of nature as everything else in the world, therefore our morals and ethics are natural as well. That isn't to say they are static, but that like any extension of a living thing they change and grow, sometimes dieing or being born as well.
mwnciboo wrote:We impose our own imperfect social models, over our baser animal instincts, and wonder why there are so many problems?
I don't think you'll find to many that think that allowing humans to steal, rape, and murder as they please will alleviate problems.
mwnciboo wrote:Murder is illegal, but state sponsored murder is called "Warfare" and is legitimized by calling it fighting.
Again, murder is a specific word with a specific meaning, but you keep using it as a blunt instrument to simply mean "to make dead". It can be complicated sometimes to discern truth but we do make distinctions for the ways human beings perish and it isn't that simple. People do die in war, and some may be murdered, and some may not. People die in peace time, and some may be murdered and some may not. Having only one standard where a person is either alive or murdered is an incredibly naive and simplistic one.
mwnciboo wrote:
Some people wish for the release of death from terminal diseases and yet we deny them this right?
How do you figure? If a guy with terminal cancer caps himself, either with a gun or by refusing treatment, what is the penalty? Do they hold his corpse in a prison for a few years?
I think what we deny is permission for others to cap the terminally ill person.
Also, military Chaplains (or any spiritual advisor as the military also employs Imam's, Rabbis, etc) are considered non-combatant members of an armed force. They fall under the same category as medics.
Well it's always the smart tactic to kill the guy who is patching up your enemies. Especially since non-combatants can't shoot you back!
US medics are very often armed. Part of their job is fighting to and then defending the casualty. Several have gotten awards for capping bad guys while doing so.
Alexzandvar wrote:I said it once, and I will say it again.
This kid would fit right in with the WH40k universe it's not even funny.
Khorne would approve greatly of his actions.
For the Emprah!!!!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CptJake wrote:
mwnciboo wrote:
Some people wish for the release of death from terminal diseases and yet we deny them this right?
How do you figure? If a guy with terminal cancer caps himself, either with a gun or by refusing treatment, what is the penalty? Do they hold his corpse in a prison for a few years?
I think what we deny is permission for others to cap the terminally ill person.
The issue is not them, but their relatives and doctors. At the end, Mom was asking me to do that. I'll remember that until I die, and the Wife knows that when the Big C arrives for me, I'm going to say goodbye to everyone and take a drive.
mwnciboo wrote:We impose our own imperfect social models, over our baser animal instincts, and wonder why there are so many problems?
I don't think you'll find to many that think that allowing humans to steal, rape, and murder as they please will alleviate problems.
Your coming from the wrong direction, I am saying why should people convicted be allowed to live? I am in favour of law and order, but why do we have such a problem with killing? 2 Strikes your out rule. Why not? You'll quote me a thousand left-wing reasons, but bottomline some people are evil and deserve death, a Rapist should be castrated, single murderers imprisoned, multiple murderers put to death. You put a dog down for savaging/killing humans? Why not a Human? whats the difference? Your own country espouses such values in certain states, In Norway this Brevik guy is mental, he killed 70+ People on a killing spree. There is no doubt he did it? Why waste time on a useless trial.
Violence, begets violence? Bollocks, If you kowtow to violence you are subjugated, you subsume your freedom and free will to another. Violence is the only way to deal with violence, Police Officers and Military personel don't hand out flowers when they get shot at. Live in the real world. Human beings will revert to baser human instincts once social cohesion breaks down, look at the aftermath of Hurricane katrina. What keeps 99% of people in line is the fear of the penalties of breaking the law. It's the 1% that cause the problem.
Better die on your feet, than live on your knees. Freedom is everything, tolerance is wonderful, but is easily abused by those who would wish us harm.
I have served all over the world in the last decade which has opened my eyes, I have been to Iraq and 'afgahanistan and they have huge problems and live in general poverty and mostly in misery. Hundreds die around the world, because of terrorists, disadents, people with mis-guided political views and the willpower to impose it on others. Do they deserve a trial? Do they? They seek to annihilate our entire society, why give them what they despise and don't want? Humans inherently are good, we all know what is good for the tribe/ herd/ community. But Oppose it on the basis of "Someone could abuse the power" is ridiculous and shows you live in your own Leftwing world with John Lennon and Yoko ono. Guess what ? People and Governments already do abuse their power and we do nothing! Do you think the Aryan Brotherhood is legitimate organisation that deserves to exist?
mwnciboo wrote:You'll quote me a thousand left-wing reasons...
I'll quote you two common right-wing (American right.) reasons (As if the "wing" mattered.):
1: People should be free to do what they want.
2: The law is not infallible.
mwnciboo wrote:
...but bottomline some people are evil and deserve death...
And here I thought evil was a concept we used to scare children, and prevent them from considering things we're afraid of on the terms of those things.
mwnciboo wrote:
You put a dog down for savaging/killing humans? Why not a Human? whats the difference?
One is a human, and the other is a dog?
mwnciboo wrote:
There is no doubt he did it? Why waste time on a useless trial.
So, "I believe X did Y." is now the same as "I have irrefutable evidence that X did Y."?
mwnciboo wrote:
Better die on your feet, than live on your knees.
Says the man who has never had to make the choice.
Yak9UT wrote:
Getting stab once is painful enough to stop alot of people from attacking you.
This is not true. People tend to keep fighting until basically dead in a knife fight. People tend to not feel stab wounds right away. This is not the movies.
The thing about deadly force is that it is inherently deadly. If you are up to where you are using deadly force AT ALL, then you simply need to use it until the threat stops. If you are in a position to hold back, then you are not in a position to use deadly force at all.
Yak9UT wrote:It seems a little premeditated to have a knife ready to stab someone.
Sounds like he had the knife out, in an attempt to dissuade the bully from attacking him. A 'I've got this so back off' warding gesture. It wouldn't really have made sense for him to have put it away if he sees his antagonists refusing to back down, to the extent of his multiple attempts at avoidance failed.
If he really didnt want to fight/Kill him why would he stab him 12 times!
If he was terrified, in full andrenaline-pumping fight-or-flight-and-flight-failed mode, and the bully was close in as was obviously somewhat the case given he'd already gotten punched in the head, then the number of stabs is probably irrelevant, as he was going to keep doing what he thought would best preserve his life until the threat was gone.
Try making an under-arm stabbing motion as quickly as you can. You can probably complete 12 reps in under 3 seconds. I think it's more likely that the bully eventually fell back/disengaged and the kid with the knife didn't follow him, otherwise it would have been even higher than 12.
This isn't a rational actor we're talking about here, it's someone who's been pushed beyond the snapping point and his primal monkey instincts took over.
Good for the kid. If it's anything like some of the fights that happened when I was in high school it might have been his only chance at not getting seriously hurt.
I was always told as a kid don't start it but end it. My dad had more than one conversation with a principal when I was growing up and I was never suspended. That was 15 years ago though and times change
However I will say whole heartedly that not all bullies are cowards. At that point all you can hope for if you go toe to toe is a mutual respect and that they'll move on. And that is heavily dependent on the psyche and culture of the bully.
When a kid has to uses a knife in a fight its not okay.
I dont beleive he was just defending himself because the report says the bully got stab both in the neck and the heart which people would useually do if they wanted to kill someone not a eractic response to defending themselves.
Rented Tritium wrote:
This is not true.people tend to keep fighting until basically dead in a knife fight. People tend to not feel stab wounds right away. This is not the movies.
a few of my mates have been stab they say its terrible pain, I could imagine that adrenaline could affect the pain but from one of my mates told me he was in a brawl at the time he got stabbed.
I'm not defending the bully he sounds like a right prick if I ever saw one but to kill him?
I mean the guy himself was only 16.
I doubt the bully had any other intention other then to beat him up to make him look like a heroe to other school mates yeah its still bad but killing him was way out of line even in self defence.
from the sound of the report he only managed to make one punch to the back of the headand then got stabbed.
Its not self defense to kill someone with a knife against an unarmed person. Now If the person pulled it on me. And I was unarmed I would have every right to kill the guy with his own knife.
NOW! This is a different situation than the one in the report. In the Report says the kid stabbed him 12 times. Now. This is evidence that the kid did it spontaneous? yes?
So there is no evidence of the bully having a weapon right? So this means this is not self defense but cold harded murder.
Of course i haven't read through the thread. So my point might be double pointed.
Yak9UT wrote:When a kid has to uses a knife in a fight its not okay.
If someone is being violently assaulted... why should they hold back in defending themselves?
Feth holding back. If someone is trying to kill you or beat you to an inch of death, kick them in the nuts, gouge their eyes out, bite their fingers off, break their legs, stab them, shoot them!
Hurt them so badly that they will stop attacking you and never attack you again. I don't get this "just let yourself be beaten/killed" nonsense. Fighting on equal terms is for idiots and those who actually enjoy fighting. I don't enjoy fighting (at least not physical conflict), so I'm not going to fight "fair". I'm going to hurt the other person as badly as I can as quickly as I can.
Otherwise I'll probably get my ass kicked or worse. Still might anyway... but at least fighting tooth and nail and never holding back is going to give me a better chance than merely giving in...
Yak9UT wrote:When a kid has to uses a knife in a fight its not okay.
I dont beleive he was just defending himself because the report says the bully got stab both in the neck and the heart which people would useually do if they wanted to kill someone not a eractic response to defending themselves.
I don't know many people, even people who don't know what they're doing, who don't know that you'll do more damage with a knife if you stab them in the neck and the left side of the chest. Though, really the chest isn't the best target in most circumstances thanks to ye olde rib cage, and the neck is a bit difficult to hit reliably.
And people that do know what they're doing will likely react in self-defense in the manner they have been trained to react when under duress, rather than stop and think to avoid fatal damage. I'm not going to claim to be some kind of knife savant, but given sufficient provocation, and a sudden threat that would make want to use a knife, my first reaction is going to be putting as many holes in your diaphragm as possible; which basically ensures that you're going to die without some pretty quick medical response.
Clthomps wrote:Did anyone read the article? He got off the bus multiple stops before to avoid fighting, then when they (a group of kids) found him he tried to run away and they punched him in the back of the head.
So he tried to avoid violence 2 times and found himself facing a group of kids older than himself after everything he did. So he stabbed the kid in defense, good for him he didn't end up the victim.
What I don't get is the people defending the dead bully, if you raise your kid to be an idiot don't be shocked when it bites him in the ass.
Bullys arent raised like that, they just have a horrible personalitie the same with murderes.
Asherian Command wrote:Its not self defense to kill someone with a knife against an unarmed person. Now If the person pulled it on me. And I was unarmed I would have every right to kill the guy with his own knife.NOW!
So it IS okay to kill the recently disarmed person once you are armed even though you state it would not be self defense?
Asherian Command wrote:Its not self defense to kill someone with a knife against an unarmed person. Now If the person pulled it on me. And I was unarmed I would have every right to kill the guy with his own knife.NOW!
So it IS okay to kill the recently disarmed person once you are armed even though you state it would not be self defense?
Neither is correct, the official legal position (in the UK) is thus:-
Reasonable Force
A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of:
self-defence; or
defence of another; or
defence of property; or
prevention of crime; or
lawful arrest.
In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions:
was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? and
was the force used reasonable in the circumstances?
The courts have indicated that both questions are to answered on the basis of the facts as the accused honestly believed them to be (R v Williams (G) 78 Cr App R 276), (R. v Oatbridge, 94 Cr App R 367).
To that extent it is a subjective test. There is, however, an objective element to the test. The jury must then go on to ask themselves whether, on the basis of the facts as the accused believed them to be, a reasonable person would regard the force used as reasonable or excessive.
It is important to bear in mind when assessing whether the force used was reasonable the words of Lord Morris in (Palmer v R 1971 AC 814);
"If there has been an attack so that self defence is reasonably necessary, it will be recognised that a person defending himself cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his defensive action. If the jury thought that that in a moment of unexpected anguish a person attacked had only done what he honestly and instinctively thought necessary, that would be the most potent evidence that only reasonable defensive action had been taken ..."
I should imagine the US is not very far from this being as they come from the same parentage.
The key here is perception, if you are a small child, the bully is a very large, intimidating and stronger than you, and you are in genuine fear for your life, then it may be proportional. Pulling a knife on someone who attacks you, doesn't mean the roles reverse because the victim is using what you would perceive as more force than you. Assault is initiated by one party on another, it doesn't reverse simply because the victim isn't as weak as you supposed.
So in answer Yes, you can argue and sucessfully dependant on circumstances that stabbing someone is self defence.
There was a case where someone with Samurai Sword went berserk in the 90's in Liverpool, UK and slashed up a police car. The Police Officers in fear of their lives pulled back. An Armed Response unit tried to apprehend him, he attack them, they shot him dead in Self Defence. Massive Enquiry, they were absolved it was a Legal Killing, and they received commendations for protecting the public. On the basis of the arguments by other users above, these Police Officers would have gone to Prison.
As someone who was bullied relentlessly, and a very similar thing as this happened (bully attacked me on the bus then followed me and tried to kick the gak out of me) guess what? If I had a knife I would have bloody well used it. I thought he was going to kill me. And you know what? It wasn't that much longer before he did kill someone. (2 years) Beat the guy to death. Poor guy didn't fight back, died.
In a situation like that the kid with the knife probably brought his knife 'just in case'. And this bully pushed him to much and made him too afraid. He thought he was going to die/be beaten too hard and fought back with everything he could. He's got my full sympathies for having to go that far, and my understanding. This kid was missing school because of fear, had health issues and did everything he could to avoid this.
As for the fighting back and getting left alone, it kind of depends on who you're fighting and where you are. I personally wish I'd fought back. It might have helped my self esteem if nothign else. But where I grew up the spankers never fought 'fair'. It would be 1 on 1... unless you fought back, especially if you started winning. Then you got curb stomped. And if you won that, depending on the bully, you had to watch your back because they'd attack you when you least expected it.
If a crowd of bullies surrounded me and was threatening to beat me within a inch or more of my life I WOULD go crazy.
I would shout crazy things like "FOR THE EMPEROR, "SPACES MAHREENS ATTAAAAACK".
I would rip the arm off one of them and proceed to take a bite out of it and start swinging said severed arm at them in order to scare the rest off. I shall do all of this while chanting the Litany of Battle.
CT GAMER wrote:Its a tragic event, but one that was perpetuated and escalted multiple times by the deceased.
It is hard to feel much sympathy for a predator who gets some of his own medicine in a situation he willingly created A situation whose purpose was to derive enjoyment in the mental/physical/social anguish of someone weaker then one's self.
If I ever found out one of my kids was bullying someone here would be hell to pay. I have zero tolerance for such predatory stupidity and have conveyed this to my sons clearly and regularly since they have been old enough to understand the spoken word. I pray it is never an issue.
Though I don't condone with violence but this is somehow different. For me, it is more like self-defense from a bully that has been taunting him for awhile. Maybe this is the bully's karma for doing the things he did to him. And just like you, if I ever hear my kids that they are bullying even when I raised them to be good and disciplined individuals; then there really will be hell to pay for them. Parents should talk about bullying issues to make the kids aware that this is bad and that it could lead misfortune.
