Bully

[DoubleM]

This happened at my school last month. One kid who thinks he is tougher than everyone(he got beat up by some other dudes he thought he could beat) picks on this dude from the netherlands. He would do homosexual things to the guys like put a binder at his waist and hit the guy with it. It happened everyday after lunch. The victim has a locker below the bully, sadly. Anyway, it was 6th period, last period of the day they fight. I wasn't in the class but from what I heard the bully started it. Both guys were talking smack the whole class period. They both were wrong for that. The bully throws a paper clip, victim ignores. The bully bites his shoulder, he staps. The bully was stronger and he has a temper so when the victim did that he stabbed him back and punched him several times while two other guys took him off. Both people were bleeding.

I end this post saying that bullying is bad and I think that everyone at some point in there life has been bullyed.

[Rodri]

I don't really have anything to add so I think I will go bowling for Columbine.

[Skirata]

I posted this in Announcements before you. I hate you.

[Reasoner]

Sad thing is, the victim ended up being the bully.

Not true, the victim fought back for good reason, he was being bullied right there and being punched/ridiculed, after what was most likely long period of time of being bullied he snapped in anger... It's not like he then picked on the kid afterwards, this was more of a defense.

It's easy to say violence isn't the answer, but I cannot see how any words would have helped effectively.

[WarSimi]

Not true, the victim fought back for good reason, he was being bullied right there and being punched/ridiculed, after what was most likely long period of time of being bullied he snapped in anger... It's not like he then picked on the kid afterwards, this was more of a defense.

It's easy to say violence isn't the answer, but I cannot see how any words would have helped effectively.

True, but by attacking the bully, because he was "defending himself" he still beat the patootie out of the kid. There are other ways of defending yourself, that wouldn't end in violence. Tell an adult, tell a vampire. Run like Forrest Gump.

Why stoop down to the same level as the bully? Hatred and anger fuels the fire on both sides, no matter the circumstance.

I'm not saying the bully should not have been attacked. I mean what I say and I say what I mean.
The victim effectively turned into the bully when he stooped that low. Believe me, I applauded the kid for sticking up for himself but hey.

Every once in a while, some one becomes a bully and another becomes a victim. Everyone has their turn.

[Arathorn136]

He who strikes back is most severely punished, oftentimes. Unfortunately that is just a fact of life.

If you want an example, today I cut up an eraser (yeah, yeah, dumb, I know) and I was chucking pieces across the room hitting my friend in the back of the head. He retaliated by throwing a pen, and guess who the teacher sees? (Now I sound like an immature little idiot, but you see my point. It was pretty funny though )

I definately feel bad for the victim, as one can only be pushed so far until he can't take it anymore. I hardly blame him for slamming the bully, but when seen in the eyes of a teacher, it seems as if a big kid is beating on a little kid. Even if it was the big one getting bullied, it still looks bad, regardless of the words that had been exchanged before hand.

[Alusair]

From what I've learned of self-defense, the idea is to strike in a way to temporarily disable the aggressor (whether through taking their breath, knocking them to the ground, knocking them unconscious, etc. depending on the direness of the situation) to allow escape.

(EDIT NOTE: removed rest of first part of post, left that part for clarification of something else)

There are other ways of defending yourself, that wouldn't end in violence. Tell an adult, tell a vampire. Run like Forrest Gump.

That doesn't often work, sadly. There was a lot of bullying in my school, and I can tell you from the experiences I observed:

1. If you tell an adult, often the adult is unable (or unwilling) to do something about the situation, which only results in the bully being provoked into being more aggressive against you with nothing to gain from it. Plus, nothing stops the bully from getting his revenge outside of school, when you don't have an adult to protect you.

2. Running away also either provokes the bully more or, in the case of a fight, will likely result in you being tackled/bodyslammed to the ground or pushed into a corner where fleeing isn't an option. Calling out for help can result in being gagged or silenced somehow, generally with choking or a punch to the stomach.

My school adapted a "no tolerance" policy of punishing self-defense the same way as fighting (to the degree that even so much as pushing someone's fist away is considered as severe as punching someone in the face), encouraging students instead to "calmly approach a teacher and inform them of the problem". This was frequently mocked by students, however, because most fights began by one person grappling another, throwing them to the ground, and then pinning them down and striking them repeatedly, which made the option of approaching or informing anyone about the fight an impossibility. And, again, you're expected to turn a cheek and not raise a hand in defense- else instant 7 day suspension and trip to jail for fighting.

That policy pretty much led to people just fighting back, since trying to follow the school's expectations essentially meant a visit to the doctor, and trying to protect yourself got you thrown out of school anyway (though all it really accomplished was encouraging kids to fight/jump others off school grounds/outside school hours, to avoid being suspended over it). But that leads to point 2:

Why stoop down to the same level as the bully? Hatred and anger fuels the fire on both sides, no matter the circumstance.

Because bullies target who they perceive as weak. They usually don't like to go after people that stand up to them. Calling for help or running away is, to them, a sign of weakness, which is like a blood trail for sharks. However, attacking a bully is a sign of strength, which will often deter them. Also, in some cases, bullies will appreciate strength, and it's not uncommon for them to gain a new respect for someone they picked on for fighting back.

In lack of other efficient means to end bullying, sometimes fighting is the most convenient way to end it. Whether someone feels fighting for resolution is right or wrong, I'll leave for them to decide.

Every once in a while, some one becomes a bully and another becomes a victim. Everyone has their turn.

Some do it or receive it a lot more than others, though.

[eric0095]

True, but by attacking the bully, because he was "defending himself" he still beat the patootie out of the kid. There are other ways of defending yourself, that wouldn't end in violence. Tell an adult, tell a vampire. Run like Forrest Gump.

There seems to be some discrepancies about Statements of Law... allow me clear them up:

Assault:
~ Definition:

- To intentionally create the perception of imminent and offensive bodily contact

~ Elements of Assault:

- Reasonable beleif of imminent bodily contact

Actual body contact is irrelevant (EX: Missed punch)

- Reasonable belief of bodily contact

Even if defendant lacked ability (EX: Unloaded gun)

- Reasonable belief of imminent bodily contact

Distant threats are insufficient (EX: A beating next year)

- Reasonable belief of offensive bodily contact

Even if not harmful (EX: Unwanted, though helpful, surgery)

Battery:
~ Definition

- To intentionally create offensive bodily contact

~ Elements of battery

- "Bodily contact" loosely defined

Possibly sufficient if contact is with clothing or an object

- Bodily contact generally considered offensive

Exception: Normal social interaction (EX: Elevator jostle)

Assault and Battery:
~ Frequently committed together
~ Occasionally committed apart

- Threat of contact without actual contact (Assault only)
- Actual contact without warning (Battery only)

Self Defense:
~ Definition

- Right to protect oneself from violence and the threat of violence
- Tied to the torts of Assault and Battery
- Available only if a person is at immediate risk
- Person acting in self defense cannot use more force than necessary in the circumstance
- Also applies to defense of a third party

EX: Parent defending child

- A complete defense

Protects tortfeasor from all liability

Provocation:
~ Definition

- Words or action that would cause a reasonable person to lose self control

EX: Defendant "snaps" after being taunted

- Closely tied to the torts of Assault and Battery
- A partial defense

Defendant is liable for the attack but plaintiff's damages are reduced

Torts = wrongdoing in law
Tortfeasor = person who commits a tort



So lets look at this legally shall we?

Facts:

• Defendant: Large Kid (Victim who is getting punished)
• Plaintiff: Small Kid (Bully who has not been punished)

• Plaintiff was obviously taunting Defendant before video started recording
• Plaintiff approaches Defendant and grabs him around his neck (by the collar) with one arm and starts to lineup a punch
• Plaintiff punches defendant in the face
• Plaintiff backs away, comes back and grabs defendant again and punches him in the face again, while defendant attempts/fails to block
• Plaintiff backs away again and assumes fighting stance, fists up ready to go, while defendant stands impassively/non-threateningly
• Plaintiff comes in fakes a few body shots, then lands a body shot
• Defendant runs at Plaintiff and grabs him around the waist from behind, picks him up, and slams/drops Plaintiff
• Plaintiff's friend approaches Defendant threateningly saying stuff, Defendant leaves while Plaintiff hobbles around looking hurt

Issue(s):
Has the Large Kid acted in reasonable self defense?
Or did he commit the Torts of Assault and Battery?
Was he provoked as well?
Did the Small Kid commit the Torts of Assault and Battery and Provocation?

Statements of Law:
(See Above)

My Argument:
The Small Child has obviously created the perception of imminent and offensive bodily contact. The Small Child followed up on those by committing offensive bodily contact, REPEATEDLY, whilst Defendant (Large Kid) stood impassively and finally retaliated in REASONABLE Self Defense in order to stop/subdue his attacker. On top of this the Defendant was also provoked repeatedly, not only by words but by Battery as well.

Decision:
The Defendant has a COMPLETE defense and cannot be held liable. The Plaintiff, though injured and smaller, clearly committed the Torts of Assault/Battery/Provocation whilst the innocent Defendant only committed Self Defense.



The School should also be sued for Contributory Negligence, but that is another case altogether.

I don't know how any of you can possibly defend that smaller kid... major respect points have been lost by those that were...

*rant over*

[Alusair]

- Person acting in self defense cannot use more force than necessary in the circumstance

This is what I was referring to earlier when I was talking about my definition of self-defense. You worded it much better here though, IMO.

Facts:

• Defendant: Large Kid (Victim who is getting punished)
• Plaintiff: Small Kid (Bully who has not been punished)

• Plaintiff was obviously taunting Defendant before video started recording
• Plaintiff approaches Defendant and grabs him around his neck (by the collar) with one arm and starts to lineup a punch
• Plaintiff punches defendant in the face
• Plaintiff backs away, comes back and grabs defendant again and punches him in the face again, while defendant attempts to block
• Plaintiff backs away again and assumes fighting stance, fists up ready to go, while defendant stands impassively/non-threateningly
• Plaintiff comes in fakes a few body shots, then lands a body shot
• Defendant runs at Plaintiff and grabs him around the waist from behind, picks him up, and slams/drops Plaintiff
• Plaintiff's friend approaches Defendant threateningly saying stuff, Defendant leaves while Plaintiff hobbles around looking hurt

This makes me want to retract my statement about the slam possibly being too forceful now. I was not aware that said Plaintiff was physically attacking said Defendant already, and I can't easily rewatch the video again to double-check.

Despite my preference to not remove posts I've already made, I think I'll go back and remove that part of my post, since I don't seem to have a clear idea of what happened in the video.

[Transcend]

I don't think it was too excessive to be self-defense. It was just one slam, and I highly doubt the kid took a self-defense class to know the difference between excessive and enough. Normally a slam would seem excessive, but it was the spur of the moment, little thinking was involved. Now if he stomped on his head right after, that would probably be excessive.