Kid gets suspended after standing up to bully

[Checkmite]

I am not Republican. Wrong religion, for one thing.

And what does politics have to do with the price of tea in China? I'm not the one in this thread cheerleading the severe injury of a little kid.

 

[332nd]

Ummm....no. Guys, how old is the "bully" here...9? He doesn't "deserve" to get spinal injuries or broken bones any more than than the bigger kid who body slammed him deserved to be punched in the face. What the hell is wrong with you?

What broken bones & spinal did the smaller kid get?

 

[HistoryGal]

It wasn't a fair fight from the beginning, as you seem to be pointing out.

Exactly. The bully should be smarter in picking his fights. Again - potential Darwin Award here.

The bully is obviously smaller than the victim, and it looked as if the big kid shrugged off his punches. What he was doing was taking out frustration on the kid by smashing him to the ground (nothing a slap around wouldn't have fixed) - he wasn't in physical danger or seemingly badly hurt.

Again, whatever happened to the bully was caused by the bully. Actions have consequences. If one is being assaulted, one has a right to defend oneself. The victim picked up the bully and tossed him aside. He did not follow up with any violent actions after that, did he? No, he walked away.

The victim is not a mind reader. He did not know how far the bully was going to go. He didn't know if the bully's friends were going to join in. He didn't know if he was going to be hurt or how badly. He had every right to defend himself, and he picked the simplest method by just picking up the trash and tossing it away.

You also assume that the victim knew how to slap or punch - not every person does.

You have this problem with the sizes of the kids. The sizes are irrelevant, as the bully chose his victim. Bad choice on his part, I guess.

I was beaten up by bullies when I was about 8-9 years old. After I came home, bruised and crying, my mother taught me how to fight back, and she told me that I should never, ever let a bully get away with it, that bullies were basically cowards, and that one good beat down would stop it.

She was absolutely right. I had a chance to test it out when I was 12, and it worked. Fighting back has worked every time - whether the bullying was physical or verbal. And no, I've never punched anyone for a verbal attack, so don't even go there.

I know it's silly to compare, but what if the victim had simply attempted to kill the kid? Apparently any repercussion on the bully is fine as long as he learns his lesson.

It is silly, since it didn't happen. Once the bully was on the ground, the victim walked away, which is exactly what he should have done. He didn't go for revenge or retaliation - he simply defended himself and left the area.

But, had his toss down of the bully resulted in the bully's death, well, as I said above, whatever happened to the bully was caused by the bully. I don't think that would have mitigated the guilt the victim would have felt, but I don't believe he would have been criminally liable, either.

I sense from your arguments here that you were far more the bully and not so much the victim when you were a kid.

Maybe by reading this thread you're just now realizing how very close you came to being maimed or killed by a childhood victim who had just had enough.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Apparently you're adding a stipulation that is not relevant to the thread in any way. Where'd you come up with that idea?

Oh hey, ignore that part...no you won't die...I promise, yeah. Sure we will pay for your dental work

 

[qayak]

Ummm....no. Guys, how old is the "bully" here...9? He doesn't "deserve" to get spinal injuries or broken bones any more than than the bigger kid who body slammed him deserved to be punched in the face. What the hell is wrong with you?

You should be running that past the bully, not us. Everything that happened did so because the bully couldn't keep his hands to himself.

The victim did not deserve the punch in the face but the bully did deserve the slamming on the ground. He was slammed on his front so no spinal injjuries for you to get all emotional about.

For real - look, and I know somebody's going to come back with "when I was little I was picked on by bullies yadda yadda"...that's sad, but now you're an adult who has grown past it; and getting all horny over vicarious childhood revenge fantasies while watching videos of young children actually injuring each other is frankly disturbing to say the least.

My experience as a kid was that the sooner and harder you took down a bully, the better for all concerned. Trot out all the tripe you want about how to stop bullies but the fact remains, the only thing that works is a good ass kicking.

 

[qayak]

And what does politics have to do with the price of tea in China? I'm not the one in this thread cheerleading the severe injury of a little kid.

No one else is either. We are cheering the fact that a bully got his just reward. Big difference.

 

[a_unique_person]

Something remarkably similar happened to one of my sons. He was at school, and one little jerk, like the one in the video, wanted to harass him again. He told him to go away. The jerk getting going, so my son pushed him over. He fell and broke his wrist.

We got called to the school, the jerk's parents wanted the police called in. When the facts were made clear, no police, the jerk's parents shut up. He had been specifically told to go away. There was no body slam, but a broken wrist was good enough. Didn't make up for the rest of the **** he had to put with, but it was something.

 

[Rasmus]

Personally, I would find it hard to hit someone else in the face. Even if they had hit me in the face first I am not sure I could overcome the inhibition threshold to actually ram my fist into someones face.

But if i can't do that, what options do I have to hit him back in a way that is likely to stop it? Picking the attacker up and throwing him down might be much easier in that regard. (So would be the use of an object of some kind to distance oneself from the act of hitting someone's face.)

 

[3point14]

1) Someone needs to teach the fat kid to fight. He got bullied because the little punk saw him as a punching bag.

Had to pick up on this - haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but really? In order to get through school a kid needs to learn to fight? Really? What is this, the stone age?

'Here my son, here are your books and pens and things of learning as you go off to accumulate all of the knowledge of the last six millennia, take them and go and learn to be wise and work hard and be fruitful. Oh, and there are some serious ********* about, so you'd best take your boxing gloves and mouthpiece so you can fight your way to the wisdom, because the establishment sure won't stop the other kids perpetrating physical violence upon you that would cause an adult to see the inside of a courtroom pretty damn quickly, so you need to learn to defend yourself as no-one in a position of authority has the stones to do it.


Oh, and the little kid got what he deserved - if you hit a passive kid till he snaps you're not going to get a 'considered and appropriate response', you're going to get the response of a man who's just snapped. You snapped him, deal with it. If you have to walk with a limp for the rest of your life then lesson learned.

 

[3point14]

Right, and I'm saying I'm not comfortable watching children using unrestrained attacks to defend themselves when no one is around (no teachers, that is) to mitigate any sort of excessive violence.

(snipped - bolding mine.)


I'm sure you meant to say 'prevent any violence. Otherwise you're suggesting that there's an acceptable level of violence from one kid to another.

 

[One Tenth]

Ugh, so we're back to the Mr. Miyagi stuff. You seriously seem to expect the kid to be some sort of MMA fighter. He's outnumbered, he's being attacked, running is not a guaranteed option, and he's supposed to calmly assess the situation and realize that he can stop things with a couple of well-placed punches? That wouldn't be true even if he was some seasoned badass street fighter.

I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't know how to throw a punch. Yes, he's bigger and stronger. Yes, it would be tragic if the bully was seriously injured (although less tragic than if he continues to bully). No, the force used was not excessive. He was being physically assaulted and he defended himself.

 

[aggle-rithm]

When I saw this video, I was reminded of a fight my younger brother got into when he was around 14. A smaller, very aggressive kid picked a fight with him, and the two began to tussle. The kid was overmatched quite a bit, and my brother took what I thought was a very measured approach by simply pinning him to the ground and waiting for him to calm down.

As soon as he got up, however, the kid attacked him again. And once again, he was pinned to the ground.

This went on, and on, and on.

So how long should one keep doing this until more aggressive measures are called for?

 

[Rasmus]

(snipped - bolding mine.)


I'm sure you meant to say 'prevent any violence. Otherwise you're suggesting that there's an acceptable level of violence from one kid to another.

Which would tie in nicely with the various claims that the big kid could just laugh off being punched in the face or should have chosen a "fair" method of fighting back.

Even the idea that a bruised eye or a broken nose would have been okay vs. the risk of death through accident wouldn't - ignoring for a moment that any fight always carries the risk of death - relates to the same problem: No, a broken nose or a bruised eye would not have been okay per se. i.e. trying to break the bully's nose for any reasons other than ending the current fight would not have been okay. It would not have been okay to agree to have the fight somewhere else away from the concrete and the pesky adults, either. (Or at least then it would no longer have been okay in the sense of it being self-defense. I'd need to think about the overall situation here ...)

 

[Rasmus]

FWIW, when I was little I twice managed to hospitalize my younger sister. All I had to do was shove her. She once fell and another time hit her head against a wall - that was enough for a concussion. A simple shove, not a punch in the face or anywhere on the head, mind you.

We were a lot younger than the kids in the video, so chances are she was a lot more fragile, but it really doesn't take a lot to cause serious harm.

 

[Dancing David]

I haven't found a good news source, the name of the child who acts back is Casey Heynes and news.yahoo doesn't have good account yet. It looks as though he received a four ay suspension. So I can't really say much at this point.

I do know that in my school district we tend to side with the 'victim' when fights start, so punching back is not encouraged, but it is considered a mutual response to violence. So in general the child who started the fight receives a longer suspension than the child who did not.

But the proportion of the response is also considered, not like in this case. For example: If a student takes a brick and slams someone for verbal taunting that is disproportionate. Then the harder part is the 'self defense' notion, which also does not apply in this case. If someone punches you and you punch them back, you are going to get a lesser suspension. But then if the bully runs a way and you grab them, throw them down and stomp on them, well that is not self defense. The other issue is history, depending on the history the 'victim' may or may not be considered the 'victim', if they have a history of bullying the other child.

Now this case is very hard to judge with such little evidence, so I do not know what they would do in this case, it seems self defense, it is a single response to a violent act. Check. But the proportionate response, hmm, judgment of a nine year old, probably proportionate. Check.

But we don't know the history here. And that is always a major factor in the actual decision, my guess is that in my school district they would have both been suspended equally and the initiator would have been marked for starting the fight. Unless the history indicates other wise.

 

[Cayvmann]

Can you really say massively? Repeatedly, yes, but that's the only thing you have going for your argument, and it's paper-thin considering the disparity in WEIGHT between the two. You've seen people here saying the bully got what he deserved for attacking someone much bigger than him - well why does it matter if apparently the kid's weight has nothing to do with how he takes the punches?



Self-defense can also get out of hand.



To be aware of his weight and to know how and when to use it when potentially fighting a kid much smaller than himself?

It is possible that the big kid, never having to deal with violent jerks, did not know how to deal with them. Not everybody is brought up learning to fight. Some people ( parents ) even frown upon fighting, for some reason. It's just possible that the only thing he knew he could do was to grab and throw.

His size doesn't make him a fighter either. The little guy needed a lesson. I really hope it's a permanently remembered lesson, and not permanently disfiguring, but...

 

[Cayvmann]

It was the pavement that almost killed him, not the punch.

I guess the guy would have hit the pavement without the punch.... The pavement was a direct consequence of the punch. Do you really not get that?



It seems you really want to defend bullying and violent acts for some reason.

 

[3point14]

I haven't found a good news source, the name of the child who acts back is Casey Heynes and news.yahoo doesn't have good account yet. It looks as though he received a four ay suspension. So I can't really say much at this point.

I do know that in my school district we tend to side with the 'victim' when fights start, so punching back is not encouraged, but it is considered a mutual response to violence. So in general the child who started the fight receives a longer suspension than the child who did not.

But the proportion of the response is also considered, not like in this case. For example: If a student takes a brick and slams someone for verbal taunting that is disproportionate. Then the harder part is the 'self defense' notion, which also does not apply in this case. If someone punches you and you punch them back, you are going to get a lesser suspension. But then if the bully runs a way and you grab them, throw them down and stomp on them, well that is not self defense. The other issue is history, depending on the history the 'victim' may or may not be considered the 'victim', if they have a history of bullying the other child.

Now this case is very hard to judge with such little evidence, so I do not know what they would do in this case, it seems self defense, it is a single response to a violent act. Check. But the proportionate response, hmm, judgment of a nine year old, probably proportionate. Check.

But we don't know the history here. And that is always a major factor in the actual decision, my guess is that in my school district they would have both been suspended equally and the initiator would have been marked for starting the fight. Unless the history indicates other wise.

How does a kid, standing around minding his own business, who is violently assaulted by another kid avoid having a suspension at all? Just let the attacker hit him?

Defending yourself gets you suspeneded, but it's okay cos it's not as harsh a sentence as the attacker?

 

[Rasmus]

How does a kid, standing around minding his own business, who is violently assaulted by another kid avoid having a suspension at all? Just let the attacker hit him?

Defending yourself gets you suspeneded, but it's okay cos it's not as harsh a sentence as the attacker?

I don't follow the logic here, either. I also see no other way than just enduring whatever happens to you lest you be punished for defending yourself or others.

In the case of the video news say that both children have been suspended for four days according to regulations - which clearly shows me that the regulations are laughable at best.

 

[IDB87]

What broken bones & spinal did the smaller kid get?

I'm sure he meant the possibility of receiving those injures was not worth this little altercation.