Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Frazzled wrote:Wall of text makes baby Jebus cry.

YOU HAD TO GO MAKE THIS RELIGIOUS!!!!! I thought Texas was a progressive state...

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.

12 stabs? Killing someone with just a pocket knife? The holy fury is strong with this one.

Sounds like an excellent Black Templar recruit to me! .

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.

dogma wrote:

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.

Yeah, that is rather creepy to say the least...

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.

mattyrm wrote:

dogma wrote:

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!

mattyrm wrote:
Mate they weren't bullies at your school, they were rapists.

I went to school with three rapists as well.

Andrew1975 wrote:
That is because you grew up in juvie, with the other psychopaths!

Upper middle class suburb, and one of the best public schools in the state.

I can't say it often enough, being rich doesn't mean being law abiding, it just means having the facility to conceal your transgressions.

I can't say it often enough, being rich doesn't mean being law abiding, it just means having the facility to conceal your transgressions.

And in other news the sky is blue!

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?

I don't think a return to nature is likely or desireable.

Most things which exist in nature are poisonous or deadly in some way.

dogma wrote:I went to school with three rapists as well.

There was probably at least one in my school as well... and sometimes the bullies made threats of such...

mwnciboo wrote:Bottomline why is killing so bad?

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.

But in TF2 you shoot the medic first.

dogma wrote:But in TF2 you shoot the medic first.

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!

dogma wrote:But in TF2 you shoot the medic first.

Well of course. If you want to win the healer has to die

Andrew1975 wrote:

dogma wrote:But in TF2 you shoot the medic first.

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.

The ubersaw medic duo is also very dangerous.

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.

It seems a little premeditated to have a knife ready to stab someone.

I can understand that the boy was in danger but it seems like he was wanting to stab the bully.

If he really didnt want to fight/Kill him why would he stab him 12 times!

Getting stab once is painful enough to stop alot of people from attacking you.

Ahtman wrote:

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.