Kid gets suspended after standing up to bully

[qayak]

I submit this:

Just about any adult that expects kids to 'defuse' situations and otherwise ignore bullies would press charges against any adult that walked up and punched them in the face, and that the punishment that the adult would face would be significant enough to keep them from trying such a thing again.

Why do they expect kids with much less refined coping skills to do more than they are willing to do?

I agree with everything you said, right up until here.

As for the body slam, yes, a bit over the top, but not so different from what we suffered all of the time playing kick ball, falling of the jungle gym, etc.

This is where we diverge. Carrying your analogy to adult assault, no judge would rule that the slammer was not justified in their action. A punch in the face, even a slap, can render one unconscious and cause a concussion, not to mention any other injury as a result of the unconscious person falling.

By suspending the victim, all they have done is guarantee that the bullying will continue and sent a clear message to the bully that what he did was fine.

By the by, how does this video violate Youtubes terms of use agreement? These types of videos are all over it. I suppose the bully, or their parents/attorney had it pulled from Youtube.

 

[Rasmus]

We are not talking about a learned student of marshal arts here. We're talking about whether a normal person understands that throwing someone violently onto their back on concrete is potentially dangerous or not.

So let him know it's dangerous. So what?

Again: The bully has absolutely no right to be treated kindly or carefully.

And yet he remained calm after the first one and only reacted after the 5th. That shows some restraint to me.

Or shock. Or fear. And even if it was restraint: All it got him was further hits from the bully. Restraint didn't work!

 

[qayak]

What does kicking have to do with anything? He very well could have cracked his head open - where would we be if that had happened?

We would be in exactly the same place and the bully would have more to consider.

 

[One Tenth]

The cracked skull that was caused by hitting his head on pavement, which was caused by being knocked unconscious by a punch.

Would you seriously say that it was a lack of oxygen that killed someone, because their lung was punctured by their rib which was fractured when they collided with their steering wheel because it was attached to their car which was struck by another car? Or maybe that they were killed in a car accident caused by a drunk driver?

 

[Rasmus]

I've done my fair share of bullying

I was raised to avoid physical confrontation at all costs.

Right ...

 

[332nd]

I'm just not seeing what the victim did wrong.

Yes he slammed the bully on his face and knocked him senseless but he then stopped. It seems that one of the bully's friends tried to start something then and the big kid walked off and a (seemingly) older student put an end to any pursuit.

 

[Rasmus]

He sought to hurt the bully.

Yes, of course. Good!

The outcome was not pre-determined.

Exactly. So you insist that the bully somehow had a right to be treated with the greatest care and respect and the upmost consideration or what?

What does kicking have to do with anything?

Additional kicking after the bully went down might have been excessive. Still very much understandable and excusable, I think.

He very well could have cracked his head open - where would we be if that had happened?

In a world with one less bully. One less child, too, which would have been regrettable - but that is no reason for the victim to not defend themselves with whatever means they have available.

It is really quite simple: If you pick on other people and punch them in the face you do not get to call the shots afterwards.

 

[MatildaGage]

I submit this:

Just about any adult that expects kids to 'defuse' situations and otherwise ignore bullies would press charges against any adult that walked up and punched them in the face, and that the punishment that the adult would face would be significant enough to keep them from trying such a thing again.

Why do they expect kids with much less refined coping skills to do more than they are willing to do?

ITA. The kid was hitting his face. He didn't retaliate the first few times, then responded. I wouldn't have been as patient as him.

 

[Rasmus]

I'm just not seeing what the victim did wrong.

He didn't go after the other other bully. The one with the phone ...

Yes he slammed the bully on his face and knocked him senseless but he then stopped.

Exactly.

It seems that one of the bully's friends tried to start something then and the big kid walked off and a (seemingly) older student put an end to any pursuit.

Yes. And no teachers to be seen anywhere.

 

[Rasmus]

By suspending the bully

Victim?

 

[IDB87]

So let him know it's dangerous. So what?

Again: The bully has absolutely no right to be treated kindly or carefully.

It's not a matter of the bully understanding what's dangerous or not, it's about the victim understanding that doing something like he did could seriously hurt his attacker. Again, I'm not say what he did was wrong PER SE, only that it was excessive.

All it got him was further hits from the bully. Restraint didn't work!

There is a possibility that any action taken could have resulted in further attacks. You seem to be looking at this situation with some seriously biased hind-sight.

 

[IDB87]

The cracked skull that was caused by hitting his head on pavement, which was caused by being knocked unconscious by a punch.

But we were of course talking about physical, tangible results from a punch to the face, not if the kid falls over or not.

This would be like saying since the kid was thrown to the ground, he forgot math.

Not really relevant..

 

[applecorped]

Mess with the bull, you get the horns.

 

[IDB87]

I'm just not seeing what the victim did wrong.

Yes he slammed the bully on his face and knocked him senseless but he then stopped. It seems that one of the bully's friends tried to start something then and the big kid walked off and a (seemingly) older student put an end to any pursuit.

Would have been interesting to see what would've happened if that older kid had come a few seconds earlier.

The problem I see is that the victim was much bigger, controlled the situation, and used excessive force against someone who was (seemingly) more of a bother than a threat.

 

[Rasmus]

It's not a matter of the bully understanding what's dangerous or not, it's about the victim understanding that doing something like he did could seriously hurt his attacker.

Why should anyone give a ***** about whether the bully gets hurt?

If he didn't want to get hurt, he shouldn't have been punching other kids in the face.

Again, I'm not say what he did was wrong PER SE, only that it was excessive.

And you are quite wrong. You do not fend of attacks by being as gentle and careful as you can. And the law doesn't require you to do that, either.

There is a possibility that any action taken could have resulted in further attacks. You seem to be looking at this situation with some seriously biased hind-sight.

No, I am just granting the victim the right to defend himself as he sees fit. And if whatever strategy he had chosen would have not worked out or even backfired it would still have been the bully's fault.

Yes, any action could have resulted in further attacks. Any action. So why would any one choice be worth than the other? Whatever the victim can do or feels might help him is okay here.

Edited by Locknar: 

Edited, breach of rule 10; please do not curse in your posts or mask curse words in an attempt to avoid the auto-censor.

 

[One Tenth]

But we were of course talking about physical, tangible results from a punch to the face, not if the kid falls over or not.

This would be like saying since the kid was thrown to the ground, he forgot math.

Not really relevant..

It is completely relevant when knocking someone unconscious is a reasonably forseeable outcome of hitting someone in the head.

 

[qayak]

Victim?

Yes, sorry.

 

[IDB87]

Yes, of course. Good!

Lesson learned. And if he had cracked his skull open and died from his injuries?

Exactly. So you insist that the bully somehow had a right to be treated with the greatest care and respect and the upmost consideration or what?

Not at all. I've said this situation could have had the same outcome (bully learns his lesson) from a punch up or a few heavy-handed slaps administered by the larger kid - the situation was not so grave that it required a body slam that could potentially kill or cripple the bully.

Additional kicking after the bully went down might have been excessive. Still very much understandable and excusable, I think.

And if the kid had damaged his spine, a few boot kicks to finish it off wouldn't be excessive. Alright then.

In a world with one less bully. One less child, too, which would have been regrettable - but that is no reason for the victim to not defend themselves with whatever means they have available.

Since we're no longer tip-toeing around the subject of kids dying as a result of bullying, would you support straight-out murder in retaliation? Apparently manslaughter is OK, but whatever it takes to make the bullying stop, right?

It is really quite simple: If you pick on other people and punch them in the face you do not get to call the shots afterwards.

Are you arguing with someone else that has made that claim? I don't seem to recall saying such a thing.

 

[Rasmus]

Yes, sorry.

No need to apologize - it was pretty much the only way that made sense.

 

[IDB87]

It is completely relevant when knocking someone unconscious is a reasonably forseeable outcome of hitting someone in the head.

So then you agree that what the victim did was excessive?