# Fighting in schools



## Kickboxer101 (Aug 4, 2016)

So my younger cousin who's 12 got into a fight at school the other day he was getting picked on by this kid in his class and the kid was pushing him and slapping him and threatening him.he then said he was going to smash his face I so my cousin punched him in the face and they got into a fight and got separated. But my cousin got in trouble because he threw the first /punch/ even though the other kid was slapping him and pushing him it was only the punch that they took notice about which to me is ridiculous. Also the fact he threatened him with physical violence as well.

I mean if the other guy was the other side of the room and yelled at him he was going to smash him I'm not saying it'd be right for him to run across the room and start beating him up but when someone's in your face being aggressive then says that I think that gives you a right to attack first because they're in close proximity in an aggressive situation and threatening violence.

I think with schools they just look at it image wise they see someone throw a punch automatically they're the one to blame but pushing and slaps that's agressive and could be counted as assault.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Aug 4, 2016)

Yup. In school whoever punches first will be the one in trouble. It sucks, but that's the way it works.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 4, 2016)

This is where reputation will help you or sink you. The better your reputation is the less likely the student will get in trouble. It's always important to have teachers think highly of you (general ).  Your cousin should have first walked away and tell a teacher.  This is the first step in building a case against the bully.  If the teacher can stop the behavior then great.  If not, then at least a teacher is aware of the problem. For me I try to report an issue at least 2 times to show that there is a pattern of me getting bullied.  By the 3rd incident I'm all ready to fight knowing that I have a history of being assaulted by a bully.

Keep in mind that this is a best case scenario for fighting in school settings that will land you in the least amount of trouble.

Sometimes life just sucks even when you are in the right.  The good news is that legal rights weigh in more these days.  I don't know where you are but in the U.S. charges could have been pressed the moment the boy slapped your cousin.  A call to the police would have been justified


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 4, 2016)

Use the rules of "the game" to your full advantage. ALL OF the rules.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Aug 4, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> This is where reputation will help you or sink you. The better your reputation is the less likely the student will get in trouble. It's always important to have teachers think highly of you (general ).  Your cousin should have first walked away and tell a teacher.  This is the first step in building a case against the bully.  If the teacher can stop the behavior then great.  If not, then at least a teacher is aware of the problem. For me I try to report an issue at least 2 times to show that there is a pattern of me getting bullied.  By the 3rd incident I'm all ready to fight knowing that I have a history of being assaulted by a bully.
> 
> Keep in mind that this is a best case scenario for fighting in school settings that will land you in the least amount of trouble.
> 
> Sometimes life just sucks even when you are in the right.  The good news is that legal rights weigh in more these days.  I don't know where you are but in the U.S. charges could have been pressed the moment the boy slapped your cousin.  A call to the police would have been justified


That's the point he was pushed against a wall and was pretty much pinned so he couldn't walk away that was my point about aggressive intention and he never fights in school he does boxing a bit but doesn't Compete and he never gets in fights. Yeah maybe but that's the fight most people probably won't call the police for school fights as it's seen as different to a fight in the street if that wasnt the case then surely teachers could call the police for assault the same way they do if someone's dealing drugs at school


----------



## lklawson (Aug 4, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> So my younger cousin who's 12 got into a fight at school the other day he was getting picked on by this kid in his class and the kid was pushing him and *slapping* him and threatening him.he then said he was going to smash his face I so my cousin punched him in the face and they got into a fight and got separated. But my cousin got in trouble because he threw the first /punch/ even though the other kid was slapping him and pushing him it was only the punch that they took notice about which to me is ridiculous.


Nope.  Slapping is assault.  He can claim self defense and press charges.



> Also the fact he threatened him with physical violence as well.


"Threatened?"  The threat was made good by physical assault - the slapping.



> I think with schools they just look at it image wise they see someone throw a punch automatically they're the one to blame but pushing and slaps that's agressive and could be counted as assault.


Oh, he'll still get kicked out anyway.  The only acceptable behavior now is to curl up in a fetal position and cry.  Any sort of fighting, whether or not it is fighting back, is grounds for punishment.  He'll just have to suck that up.  Zero Tolerance ("Zero Thought") policies have that effect.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Aug 4, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> That's the point he was pushed against a wall and was pretty much pinned so he couldn't walk away that was my point about aggressive intention and he never fights in school he does boxing a bit but doesn't Compete and he never gets in fights. Yeah maybe but that's the fight most people probably won't call the police for school fights as it's seen as different to a fight in the street if that wasnt the case then surely teachers could call the police for assault the same way they do if someone's dealing drugs at school


Tell him to press charges and sue the school for not protecting him.

Yes, I'm serious.  Once a lawyer gets in on it, even if the case sucks, schools will often decide that they can use discretion after all.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Aug 4, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> That's the point he was pushed against a wall and was pretty much pinned so he couldn't walk away that was my point about aggressive intention and he never fights in school he does boxing a bit but doesn't Compete and he never gets in fights. Yeah maybe but that's the fight most people probably won't call the police for school fights as it's seen as different to a fight in the street if that wasnt the case then surely teachers could call the police for assault the same way they do if someone's dealing drugs at school


How reliable is he as a reporter (in the eyes of the teachers at the school, not your own)? And did anyone witness this? If he was pinned that much and there's evidence to support that, he can definitely take action about it.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 4, 2016)

Crack the guy.  And accept you will get punishment for it. 

Fighting should have consequences but is sometimes the best thing you can do.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Aug 4, 2016)

kempodisciple said:


> How reliable is he as a reporter (in the eyes of the teachers at the school, not your own)? And did anyone witness this? If he was pinned that much and there's evidence to support that, he can definitely take action about it.


If there aren't any witnesses/videotape/evidence, and either the other guy doesn't get in trouble much or he gets in trouble a lot, not really much you can do.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 4, 2016)

Sometimes it boils down to get in temporary trouble with the school vs continuing harassment from student.  After all of this has happened I wonder if the boy will continue to slap your cousin or pick on your cousin.  If your cousin isn't harassed any more by this student then at least it solved that problem.  If your cousin is less likely to be harassed by other bullies then that's even better, then he can focus on school without someone trying to pick on him.

I know times are different, but when I was a kid, fewer kids were willing to pick on me once they knew I was willing to fight back.  Lets face it, no one likes to get punched in the face when all you want to do is pick on someone


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 5, 2016)

I'm a school teacher.  The rules in school are different than out of school.  They definitely shouldn't be, but unfortunately that's how it is.

Every state's laws are different, every school district will handle it differently, and every principal within the individual school somehow handles it differently.

I've seen kids throw the first punch that was completely justified in self defense and still get suspended for it.  I was on very good terms with one student and his parents who this happened to.  All I could tell him and his parents is sometimes you get punished for doing the right thing.  After talking to the parents and explaining what actually happened (off the record), the parents viewed it as an unscheduled week's vacation.  Justifiably so.

In all fairness to school administration, they need to maintain order and set a firm example.  Very, vary rarely does a kid act purely out of self defense in school fights.  Students very rarely exhaust all options before fighting.  There are students who defend themselves appropriately every day and you hear tons of justified SD stories where a kid got suspended anyway.  But percentage-wise, it's quite rare.  

In order to get out of any punishment for fighting in school, it has to be on camera or in front of a staff member where the student was clearly trying to walk away and basically got hit from behind.  In 6 years, I've seen one instance where a kid was found justified in fighting and I'm quite sure I won't see it again (and hopefully in this particular regard)... A kid was walking down the hallway and a girl was hiding around a corner her and waiting to walk by.  The "victim" beat up the other kid pretty good without going overboard.  Fortunately the incident was on video, and the "victim" (for lack of a better word) didn't receive any punishment other than sitting in in-school suspension for a period or two until the principal sorted out what was actually happening.

Sucks that your brother got suspended for doing the right thing.  Most likely it won't happen again.  Bullies would rather pick on someone who won't fight back any day.  If it were my kid, I'd have no problem with what he did.


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 5, 2016)

Unless it's caught on cctv or there's very reliable witnesses ie adults ( which is always going to be unlikely given what bullies are) there is nothing that can be done because it's one child's word against another's.
It's very hard for teachers as it is the police to tell what happened when it's children fighting and there's no proof, other children's accounts will be muddled to say the least for a number of reasons.
The OP is obviously taking his cousin's side and believing every word because he's family which is a natural thing to do but others have to take a neutral, disinterested look and perhaps things aren't always what they seem which makes it very difficult to determine what happened. The question is how to be fair when you don't know what happened.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 5, 2016)

I wish schools would teach traditional martial arts as part of their health curriculum.  I think it would help reduce the number of fights and reduce incidents of bullying.  Plus punching and kicking pads does wonders for releasing stress.  Schools don't have programs that help manage aggression and I think that's where they go wrong.


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 5, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I wish schools would teach traditional martial arts as part of their health curriculum.  I think it would help reduce the number of fights and reduce incidents of bullying.  Plus punching and kicking pads does wonders for releasing stress.  Schools don't have programs that help manage aggression and I think that's where they go wrong.



Wishful thinking. There's plenty of bullies in martial arts, many are instructors. Bullying is something that needs to be tackled properly, looking at bullying in all walks and parts of life. Acceptance of differences would be a start, politicians and rabble rousing has a lot to answer for. All physical exercise does wonders for relieving stress, making anything compulsory like martial arts, games etc causes more stress than it relieves.
Why should schools have programmes for managing aggression? Are you thinking that children are so naturally aggressive that they need to be tamed? How about bringing them up decently instead as well rounded individuals with good role models instead. When bad behaviour by public figures is rewarded you will have children who think it's fine to bully and barge their way through life.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Aug 5, 2016)

JR 137 said:


> I'm a school teacher.  The rules in school are different than out of school.  They definitely shouldn't be, but unfortunately that's how it is.
> 
> Every state's laws are different, every school district will handle it differently, and every principal within the individual school somehow handles it differently.
> 
> ...



Thanks for your input.  I have often been critical of teachers over the last few years.  But I will also be the first to admit we have taken away many of their tools.  Corporately we don't want kids to be punished corporally.  Yet we demand that teachers keep peace in the classroom and the school yard.  Many parents have bought into the idea that 'Johnny' should never be punished lest he feel stifled.  But how does a child learn the boundaries?  Or the difference in severity of different indiscretions?

I salute you JR 137.  But I sure don't envy you.

EDIT:  I am speaking of the USA, as I presume most other poster are.  I can't account for other countries' procedures.


----------



## lklawson (Aug 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I wish schools would teach traditional martial arts as part of their health curriculum.


"Therapeutic Martial Arts" as part of the health and exercise curriculum does exist in some schools.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 8, 2016)

lklawson said:


> "Therapeutic Martial Arts" as part of the health and exercise curriculum does exist in some schools.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


After I put the post I took a look saw a couple of schools that had martial arts but most were part of an after school component like sports.  There was one school that had a martial arts class during normal school hours and they stated that those who took the class had a reduction in aggressive behavior compared to those who did not take the class.  I should have bookmarked that page.  I was hoping to find more statistics but there's not much on it in terms of school having martial arts programs.


----------



## lklawson (Aug 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> After I put the post I took a look saw a couple of schools that had martial arts but most were part of an after school component like sports.  There was one school that had a martial arts class during normal school hours and they stated that those who took the class had a reduction in aggressive behavior compared to those who did not take the class.  I should have bookmarked that page.  I was hoping to find more statistics but there's not much on it in terms of school having martial arts programs.


Public Schools Partnering with Martial Arts | Facebook
Martial Arts | Summit Academy Schools

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 8, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Public Schools Partnering with Martial Arts | Facebook
> Martial Arts | Summit Academy Schools
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Thanks


----------



## oftheherd1 (Aug 8, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> After I put the post I took a look saw a couple of schools that had martial arts but most were part of an after school component like sports.  There was one school that had a martial arts class during normal school hours and they stated that those who took the class had a reduction in aggressive behavior compared to those who did not take the class.  I should have bookmarked that page.  I was hoping to find more statistics but there's not much on it in terms of school having martial arts programs.



Some schools seem to fear litigation for any number of possible scenarios, from likely to improbable.  I once offered the local school system the opportunity to have my Grand Master teach.  He was experienced in teaching Hapkido in high schools.  They didn't want it as part of the curriculum, nor even as an after hours program.  I don't know if they considered any benefits, but they sure found a lot of concerns.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Aug 8, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Some schools seem to fear litigation for any number of possible scenarios, from likely to improbable.  I once offered the local school system the opportunity to have my Grand Master teach.  He was experienced in teaching Hapkido in high schools.  They didn't want it as part of the curriculum, nor even as an after hours program.  I don't know if they considered any benefits, but they sure found a lot of concerns.


I think it's stupid they say about risks when they have sports like American football and rugby much more dangerous than martial arts in my opinion


----------



## mograph (Aug 8, 2016)

I wonder ... if your cousin had _shoved_ the aggressor away (using the wall behind as leverage), would that have been seen as less combative by the authorities?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 8, 2016)

oftheherd1 said:


> Some schools seem to fear litigation for any number of possible scenarios, from likely to improbable.  I once offered the local school system the opportunity to have my Grand Master teach.  He was experienced in teaching Hapkido in high schools.  They didn't want it as part of the curriculum, nor even as an after hours program.  I don't know if they considered any benefits, but they sure found a lot of concerns.


This is unfortunate since Martial Arts has a lot to offer and it doesn't always have to be about fighting.  There are so many approaches that can be taken with Martial Art.  If they are afraid that someone will use it to fight then, put a Tai Chi class since that takes years to learn how to actually use in fighting.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 8, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> I mean if the other guy was the other side of the room and yelled at him he was going to smash him I'm not saying it'd be right for him to run across the room and start beating him up but when someone's in your face being aggressive then says that I think that gives you a right to attack first because they're in close proximity in an aggressive situation and threatening violence.



No; just because someone is in your face and threatening you, is not a good enough of a reason to attack first. It's a juvenile reason, which, in this case was an understandable response seeing as he is indeed a juvenile. Nonetheless, it would have been better for him to smile sweetly and cheerfully ask the aggressor, "Do you want a pineapple?!" If he says something along the lines of "No, I don't want a stupid pineapple." then the kid should have just shrugged, and replied "Suit yourself!" while walking away on his merry little trail to leave the bully in a flurry of confusion, disorientation, and utter dissatisfaction in not getting to raise any excitement in this boring old middle-school. XD


----------



## hoshin1600 (Aug 8, 2016)

Take the kid out to a movie, pizza and ice cream.  Tell him life sucks   he did the right thing and move on.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Aug 8, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> No; just because someone is in your face and threatening you, is not a good enough of a reason to attack first. It's a juvenile reason, which, in this case was an understandable response seeing as he is indeed a juvenile. Nonetheless, it would have been better for him to smile sweetly and cheerfully ask the aggressor, "Do you want a pineapple?!" If he says something along the lines of "No, I don't want a stupid pineapple." then the kid should have just shrugged, and replied "Suit yourself!" while walking away on his merry little trail to leave the bully in a flurry of confusion, disorientation, and utter dissatisfaction in not getting to raise any excitement in this boring old middle-school. XD


Well since he couldn't walk along on his merry little way since he was pinned against the wall and no sorry but it's not juevinalle at all. What happens if that same thing happens in an alley at 1 in the morning outside a nightclub if you just stand there with your hands behind your back and a guys got you pinned to a wall being aggressive and threatens to kill you do you just stand there? If you do that you may end with a knife in you


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 8, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> No; just because someone is in your face and threatening you, is not a good enough of a reason to attack first. It's a juvenile reason, which, in this case was an understandable response seeing as he is indeed a juvenile. Nonetheless, it would have been better for him to smile sweetly and cheerfully ask the aggressor, "Do you want a pineapple?!" If he says something along the lines of "No, I don't want a stupid pineapple." then the kid should have just shrugged, and replied "Suit yourself!" while walking away on his merry little trail to leave the bully in a flurry of confusion, disorientation, and utter dissatisfaction in not getting to raise any excitement in this boring old middle-school. XD



The tone of this is correct even if that action wouldn't have been so appropriate in the case of the OP, de-escalation, 'verbal Judo' and throwing the bully/attacker off track is a good first action.  Much of what bullies do is to raise a reaction, they hope it's fear but if they don't get the rise or reaction they want they will often back off, if they don't then you have the option of reasonable violence, better to try other options first.


----------



## Paul_D (Aug 8, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> No; just because someone is in your face and threatening you, is not a good enough of a reason to attack first. It's a juvenile reason, which, in this case was an understandable response seeing as he is indeed a juvenile. Nonetheless, it would have been better for him to smile sweetly and cheerfully ask the aggressor, "Do you want a pineapple?!" If he says something along the lines of "No, I don't want a stupid pineapple." then the kid should have just shrugged, and replied "Suit yourself!" while walking away on his merry little trail to leave the bully in a flurry of confusion, disorientation, and utter dissatisfaction in not getting to raise any excitement in this boring old middle-school. XD


The bully had him pinned ot the wall, he was slapping him and threatening him with violence, and you think he is not justified in defending himself?  

To paraphrase Lee Morrison, How more information than that do you need to know you need to do something?


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 8, 2016)

Paul_D said:


> The bully had him pinned ot the wall, he was slapping him and threatening him with violence, and you think he is not justified in defending himself?
> 
> To paraphrase Lee Morrison, How more information than that do you need to know you need to do something?





Kickboxer101 said:


> So my younger cousin who's 12 got into a fight at school the other day he was getting picked on by this kid in his class and the kid was pushing him and slapping him and threatening him.he then said he was going to smash his face I so my cousin punched him in the face and they got into a fight and got separated. But my cousin got in trouble because he threw the first /punch/ even though the other kid was slapping him and pushing him it was only the punch that they took notice about which to me is ridiculous. Also the fact he threatened him with physical violence as well.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> ...




Actually the OP doesn't say his cousin was pinned to the wall.
Now whether he could have de-escalated the situation is now moot but it's certainly the first thing to reach for before using violence, this is why I said the post was the right tone if not the right action for that particular situation.


----------



## Buka (Aug 8, 2016)

I think a school teacher is the most under appreciated, under paid, most difficult job job in the United States. And the single most important, bar none. Our kids - are our future.

School fighting happens. Always has, but it has to be kept in check. Fighting back, even when striking first, is a fact of life. I don't envy anyone dealing with it, it's a tough nut.

I worked in Boston Public Schools for years. I'm familiar with school fighting, but in a different way. It happened every single day for years, hundreds of kids at a time, adults, too. It was during the desegregation of Boston schools through forced busing. It's the ugliest term in my memory.
And it looked like this.

















May all your children, and your friend's children, be safe.


----------



## Buka (Aug 8, 2016)

Uh oh, I busted something.

(Ah, fixed it. Hey, guys, what image hosting site can you recommend?)


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 8, 2016)

I wanted to do karate as a unit when I was teaching Phys Ed.  The department chair, who's a good friend and great colleague said its a great idea, but the administration would never go for it.  With his blessing, I asked the principal.  He thought it would lead to bullying during the class, much like dodgeball, and it would be forcing kids to do a high risk activity against their own will.  I explained that just like dodgeball (and everything else), it's the teacher's job to set the tone and make sure it's not tolerated.  I'm a professional educator who knows what to look for, how to minimize the chances, and how to stop it immediately before it gets out of hand.  He genuinely liked and respected my response, but said if I wanted to do karate and/or dodgeball, it would have to be after school.  A voluntary activity such as those is fine; mandating them in class isn't.

I get where he was coming from.  Forcing a kid who fits the bully's target profile to spar against say, the kid who just got a Div I basketball scholarship could cause some serious anxiety.  I wouldn't allow contact during sparring, just moving and practicing blocking slow and controlled punches and kicks that won't land.

I'm pretty sure he was far more concerned with parents' and students' perceptions and dealing with them than what actually would've happened.  And add to that the absurdity he'd have to deal with if a kid got hurt.

It seems like every time someone gets hurt, the activity gets banned.  A kid tripped over another kid's floor hockey stick and fell into the bleachers, requiring stitches.  No more floor hockey.  A kid walked into the backswing of another student when we were doing golf.  Golf was banned.  The best part about that one was it was it was 10 minutes into the first golf lesson ever at that school, and the teacher had just finished telling the kids to stay behind a line 10 feet away for the 3rd time.  $3k worth of golf clubs, bags, balls etc. thrown out by the end of the day.  Tax dollars at work.  All of this was at a high school level, so the kids knew better.  I kept saying there will be a day when we're only allowed to let kids walk (not run) around the track because every other activity got banned due to injuries.


----------



## mograph (Aug 8, 2016)

Buka said:


> Uh oh, I busted something.


This is why we can't have nice things.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Aug 8, 2016)

JR 137 said:


> I wanted to do karate as a unit when I was teaching Phys Ed.  The department chair, who's a good friend and great colleague said its a great idea, but the administration would never go for it.  With his blessing, I asked the principal.  He thought it would lead to bullying during the class, much like dodgeball, and it would be forcing kids to do a high risk activity against their own will.  I explained that just like dodgeball (and everything else), it's the teacher's job to set the tone and make sure it's not tolerated.  I'm a professional educator who knows what to look for, how to minimize the chances, and how to stop it immediately before it gets out of hand.  He genuinely liked and respected my response, but said if I wanted to do karate and/or dodgeball, it would have to be after school.  A voluntary activity such as those is fine; mandating them in class isn't.
> 
> I get where he was coming from.  Forcing a kid who fits the bully's target profile to spar against say, the kid who just got a Div I basketball scholarship could cause some serious anxiety.  I wouldn't allow contact during sparring, just moving and practicing blocking slow and controlled punches and kicks that won't land.
> 
> ...


Did you do it after class then?


----------



## lklawson (Aug 8, 2016)

Paul_D said:


> he was slapping him and threatening him with *ADDITIONAL* violence


Fixed that for you.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 8, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> Did you do it after class then?



I wanted to, but I had too many after school commitments to be able to.


----------



## Tames D (Aug 8, 2016)

Well the good news for Kickboxer101's cousin is he probably won't have to worry about being bullied at that school again. 
It should be a requirement to fight a bully very early in the school year just to get it out of the way .


----------



## housemouse (Aug 8, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> Actually the OP doesn't say his cousin was pinned to the wall.



The guy who made the op said he was pinned against the wall in a follow up post.



Kickboxer101 said:


> Well since he couldn't walk along on his merry little way since he was pinned against the wall and no sorry but it's not juevinalle at all.



Kid has you pinned against the wall and is pushing you and slapping you. You're totally in the wrong for not just taking the beating and reporting it later when the bully can just deny it. Hopefully you wont end up with any bruises or broken bones in the process.


----------



## drop bear (Aug 8, 2016)

Ok.  I have altered my opinion. Ask them if they want a pineapple. Then crack them.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

I don't think the original post said he was pinned against a wall. Regardless of whether he was or not, it was still wrong to punch him: There is a big difference between defending yourself and responding with violence.

ALSO, if I recall correctly, the original post also said that his cousin got in trouble for punching the kid, implying a person of authority was nearby; could have gone over to them; if he was pinned against a wall then he can scream and break away from the bully's grip without hurting him. Bottom line, there are correct ways of handling things and incorrect ways of handling things. My way would have likely resulted in nobody getting hurt and nobody getting in serious trouble and everyone being content. Violence doesn't achieve that.

But there IS a time and a place for violence. When you're in an alley at one in the morning, outside a nightclub with your hands behind your back and a guys got you pinned to a wall being aggressive and threatens to kill you, NO, you do not just stand there. A middle-school environment with undeveloped children in the presence of authority figures who have a disgustingly large amount of influence over your future is NOT a dark alley behind a nightclub against people who want to KILL you. Goofball.

PS: No, fighting shouldn't be mandatory in schools, in my opinion. Learning to calm the mind and seek inner peace should be though, if you ask me. That would solve a lot of the problems right there. 

High School is a good time to begin learning how to fight; middle schoolers and elementary kids though should just bloody be allowed to enjoy being kids and not feel like they have to prepare for war; we're the adults, it's OUR job to protect THEM, especially from themselves. Teach your young kids compassion and peaceful resolution; there will be plenty of time for them to learn about the darker side of life when they come of age. What we need, is balance. Light and dark. Yin and yang.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

...There's ways of fighting, without fighting.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

Look up "NSD/Nonviolent Self Defense".


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 9, 2016)

I don't have a problem with teaching people how to fight off bullies but I do think we also need to be teaching people not to be bullies. Too often the opportunities for bullying are given to those who will take advantage of them. Too often those in control allow bullying because it's easier than trying to stop it and often the bullies are those in control.
It's a collective responsibility not just a parental or school one. We need to turn our societies into ones where there aren't bullies to start with. That may sound idealistic but it doesn't stop each one of us playing our part in many ways.
Teaching Social Skills to Prevent Bullying in Young Children | Blog | StopBullying.gov


----------



## lklawson (Aug 9, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> I don't think the original post said he was pinned against a wall. Regardless of whether he was or not, it was still wrong to punch him: There is a big difference between defending yourself and responding with violence.


Did you miss the part where the victim was *ALREADY BEING ASSAULTED*?  Pushed up against a wall (Assault and Battery) and being struck with "open hands" (Assault and Battery).  This is THE VERY LEGAL DEFINITION OF "ASSAULT AND BATTERY." 
What Is the Difference Between Assault and Battery?



> ALSO, if I recall correctly, the original post also said that his cousin got in trouble for punching the kid, implying a person of authority was nearby; could have gone over to them; if he was pinned against a wall then he can scream and break away from the bully's grip without hurting him.


That is an assumption on your part.



> Bottom line, there are correct ways of handling things and incorrect ways of handling things.


Which including being able to exercise reasonable force to defend oneself from Assault and Battery.



> My way would have likely resulted in nobody getting hurt and nobody getting in serious trouble and everyone being content. Violence doesn't achieve that.


Well, unless you elaborate on "your way" we can't know for sure but I'm guessing that "your way" would have merely lead to the boy continuing to get his *** kicked (which was already happening).



> But there IS a time and a place for violence.


Such as when you are being assaulted and physically attacked ("Battery").

Do you need some more legal references?
https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=25695
Assault, Battery, and Aggravated Assault | Nolo.com
Assault & Battery | Assault vs Battery | Difference Between Assault & Battery
Assault and Battery



> PS: No, fighting shouldn't be mandatory in schools, in my opinion. Learning to calm the mind and seek inner peace should be though, if you ask me. That would solve a lot of the problems right there.


Well, we still don't know what your way would have been but it sure sounds like the usual phycho-babble that gets kids asses kicked on an ongoing basis, which doesn't actually solve anything but does help hide the problem and make it look like we're "doing something."



> High School is a good time to begin learning how to fight; middle schoolers and elementary kids though should just bloody be allowed to enjoy being kids and not feel like they have to prepare for war; we're the adults, it's OUR job to protect THEM, especially from themselves. Teach your young kids compassion and peaceful resolution; there will be plenty of time for them to learn about the darker side of life when they come of age. What we need, is balance. Light and dark. Yin and yang.


Use the Force, Luke!






Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Aug 9, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> Look up "NSD/Nonviolent Self Defense".


OK, I gotta ask.  What is your personal experience with bullying and assults in schools and effective vs ineffective responses for the victims?


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

So your argument is that because it is LEGAL, it makes it right? I don't agree. When your legal system's definition of assault is merely placing hands on someone who doesn't want to be touched, then by your justification, violence is the solution to someone giving you a push? I'll never see that as the Way.

What's "My Way"? The way of least resistance possible, and avoiding conflict in the first place by developing exceptional situational awareness. Using the aggressor's own force against them, instead of your force on them, if at all possible. Blocking, redirecting, and simply getting out of the way, "When fighting angry blind man, best to just stay out of the way." haha. None of these techniques would have hurt the bully kid, and the kid being bullied would have been able to retreat to a Safety Zone, (firefighter lingo; always keep your LCES up; Lookouts, Communications, Escape routes & Safety zones).

...Just because an action is LEGAL, does NOT make it RIGHT.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

What's my experience with school bullying?

I was bullied in school. I responded in anger, and violence. The school board overreacted, and I was facing charges. Some people approached my parents and told them they had two options, their twelve year old son could go to jail, or he could be placed in a residential treatment center. To protect me from jail, my parents sent me to the suggested center thousands of miles away in Utah. I wouldn't see them again until I was seventeen years old. I was beaten, raped, shanked, drugged, brainwashed, tortured, and experimented on more times than I can count.

Looking back....I really wished my father taught me peaceful conflict resolution, instead of his former military training....I needed a father; not a drill sergeant. Violence RUINED my life....


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

....Middle school....twelve years old....this kid could have ended up JUST...LIKE....ME.....that's why I feel so strongly.


----------



## lklawson (Aug 9, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> So your argument is that because it is LEGAL, it makes it right?


No.  I'm saying that if someone is taking illegal and violent action against you, THAT makes it right.



> What's "My Way"? The way of least resistance possible, and avoiding conflict in the first place by developing exceptional situational awareness. Using the aggressor's own force against them, instead of your force on them,


That **** doesn't work.



> if at all possible. Blocking, redirecting, and simply getting out of the way,


Which still looks like "fighting" to someone watching.



> and the kid being bullied would have been able to retreat to a Safety Zone, (firefighter lingo; always keep your LCES up; Lookouts, Communications, Escape routes & Safety zones).


Safe Zones?!?!  Those are fantasies.



> ...Just because an action is LEGAL, does NOT make it RIGHT.


Apparently you misread or read with preconceived notions.


----------



## lklawson (Aug 9, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> What's my experience with school bullying?
> 
> I was bullied in school. I responded in anger, and violence. The school board overreacted, and I was facing charges. Some people approached my parents and told them they had two options, their twelve year old son could go to jail, or he could be placed in a residential treatment center. To protect me from jail, my parents sent me to the suggested center thousands of miles away in Utah. I wouldn't see them again until I was seventeen years old. I was beaten, raped, shanked, drugged, brainwashed, tortured, and experimented on more times than I can count.
> 
> Looking back....I really wished my father taught me peaceful conflict resolution, instead of his former military training....I needed a father; not a drill sergeant. Violence RUINED my life....


No.  What ruined your life was a bunch of anti-reality idiots with ignorant fantasies about violence and self defense, coupled with equally ignorant and stupid "Zero Tolerance" policies.  What happened to you wasn't your fault.  It wasn't your dad's fault either.  It was the fault of the bully, the school, and the people who insisted on sending you.  If you believe in Karma then they've got some very bad times coming.

Nevertheless, I've not seen anything you've yet to suggest which would actually work.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

lklawson said:


> No.  I'm saying that if someone is taking illegal and violent action against you, THAT makes it right.



Is it right to punch someone in the face for slapping you on the cheek? Sure, it's legal, but it seems like an over-reaction to me; seems like you'd just do it simply because you felt they _deserved_ it; perhaps your need for retribution is what truly "makes it right" for you.



lklawson said:


> That **** doesn't work.



Yes it does. Use common sense. If someone approaches you looking for trouble, walk the other way. Cut across the street instead of walking through the groups of Crips and Bloods on the street. Try not to upset people; dress bland and casually so as to not attract attention to yourself. You can learn how to avoid a whole lot of trouble without ever having to face it head on. It sounds pretty rudimentary, I know, but simply not looking for trouble (or dare I say being eager for trouble so you can justify an assertion of your dominance, hint hint), can save you a whole lot of grief. 



lklawson said:


> Which still looks like "fighting" to someone watching.



Not nearly as much as punching them in the face and destroying them does.



lklawson said:


> Safe Zones?!?!  Those are fantasies.



No they're not; you can have contingencies and back-ups in place; build the right fortress for the right defense. On the Fire Line, it's natural barriers like rivers and rock formations or large wet areas or beaches. Fire can't go to those places. Fire is just like _any_ overwhelming powerful threat; it can be fought and contained; overcame. Just Anchor, Flank, and _Pinch_. 



lklawson said:


> Apparently you misread or read with preconceived notions.



Maybe. But I'm right.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

I guess you're right though; Violence wasn't what ruined my life. It wasn't the bullies or the school-boards fault; it was the corrupt multi-billion dollar Mormon company that got their hands on me. They're the ones to blame. Still though, if I had just had a little bit more self control, none of all that came next would have ever have happened. I can't help but blame myself a little bit; I was an obnoxious little trouble maker with a short fuse, and I really wished that I could have found another way of handling that situation other than using violence. Same old stuff too; just getting pushed and "playfully" slapped on the sides of my face. Didn't hurt me at all, but it ticked me off and I wanted it to stop so I punched him and he went down screaming to the floor; suddenly I looked like the bad guy.


----------



## lklawson (Aug 9, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> Is it right to punch someone in the face for slapping you on the cheek?


Yes.  Because they are physically attacking.



> Sure, it's legal, but it seems like an over-reaction to me; seems like you'd just do it simply because you felt they _deserved_ it; perhaps your need for retribution is what truly "makes it right" for you.


Deserved?  Retribution?  Again, you're reading in what was not written.  I don't know where you got that but I didn't write it and didn't imply it.  It's about self defense, not about the other stuff that you've jammed on top of it.



> Yes it does.


The hell it does.  Your suggestions of "[t]he way of least resistance possible, and avoiding conflict in the first place by developing exceptional situational awareness" absolutely don't work within the context of a school setting.  "Least resistance" gets you beaten and you can't "avoid conflict" in the hallway or lunch room.  It doesn't work.  

Don't assume that I'm speaking from a place of inexperience here.  I'm not.  I tried that ****.  It doesn't work.



> Use common sense. If someone approaches you looking for trouble, walk the other way. Cut across the street instead of walking through the groups of Crips and Bloods on the street. Try not to upset people; dress bland and casually so as to not attract attention to yourself. You can learn how to avoid a whole lot of trouble without ever having to face it head on. It sounds pretty rudimentary, I know, but simply not looking for trouble (or dare I say being eager for trouble so you can justify an assertion of your dominance, hint hint), can save you a whole lot of grief.


Crips and Bloods?  What the hell are you talking about?  This isn't Gang Violence, it's schoolyard fights and bullying.  The two aren't the same.  And, again, from experience, "just go to the other side of the street" is foolishness that didn't work.  They just followed me.  It's not like when I went to the other side their feet magically disappeared.



> Not nearly as much as punching them in the face and destroying them does.


Destroying them?  What the hell are you talking about?  Look, I don't know where you're getting half of this stuff.  Are you arguing with someone else?  I certainly never wrote anything about "destroying" anyone.



> No they're not; you can have contingencies and back-ups in place; build the right fortress for the right defense. On the Fire Line, it's natural barriers like rivers and rock formations or large wet areas or beaches. Fire can't go to those places. Fire is just like _any_ overwhelming powerful threat; it can be fought and contained; overcame. Just Anchor, Flank, and _Pinch_.


Mule Muffins.  "Safe Zones" don't work to prevent assaults.  I know.  I tried using them.  I watched other people try to use them.  All it means is that any time the victim is not in the "Safe Zone," they're still a victim.  They can't live in the "Safe Zone" and there's only one way to carry a "Safe Zone" with you; the way you are opposed to.



> Maybe. But I'm right.


If you were right, then it would have worked for me.  But it didn't.  If you were right, then it would have worked for many other people that I saw.  But it didn't.  Safe Zones, avoidance, verbal conflict resolution, all of them did jack **** for a friend of mine in High School.  He was thin, red haired, and smaller than most others.  After gym class, in the locker room, his tormentor, Carlos, would regularly force him into a secluded area between locker rows and then loudly make sounds as if they were having homosexual sex.  The purpose was to humiliate the boy, to prove that Carlos had control over him, to establish Carlos' top spot in the male dominance peer order. Who knows where it would have eventually taken it.  The boy couldn't avoid the lockers.  "Adults" did **** about it.  Just trying to "go along," laugh, and make a joke out of it didn't work for the boy, and he did try all of those things.  You know what made Carlos stop?  *ME*.  After a while I realized that I couldn't just stand by and watch.  So I intervened and made Carlos stop.

I had learned my own lessons about what it took to make them stop earlier in my school career.  I also tried all of that stuff.  Avoidance, leaving the area, trying to joke/make/friends/"understand," telling adults, staying in "Safe Zones" (they didn't call it a "Safe Zone" back then, but it was the same idea).  I learned it didn't work.

I'm truly sorry about all the **** that happened to you.  I really am.   What was done to you was wrong and horrible beyond measure.  But the advice you seem to be offering just doesn't work within the confines of the school environment.  I wish it did.  Man, how I wish it did.  It would have make my early school career much nicer.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## lklawson (Aug 9, 2016)

Zumorito said:


> I guess you're right though; Violence wasn't what ruined my life. It wasn't the bullies or the school-boards fault; it was the corrupt multi-billion dollar Mormon company that got their hands on me. They're the ones to blame. Still though, if I had just had a little bit more self control, none of all that came next would have ever have happened. I can't help but blame myself a little bit; I was an obnoxious little trouble maker with a short fuse, and I really wished that I could have found another way of handling that situation other than using violence. Same old stuff too; just getting pushed and "playfully" slapped on the sides of my face. Didn't hurt me at all, but it ticked me off and I wanted it to stop so I punched him and he went down screaming to the floor; suddenly I looked like the bad guy.


Still not your fault.

Self Defense is a Human Right.  If someone does all that horrible crap that happened to you for simply exercising a basic Human Right, then that is a travesty of justice.

You didn't do anything wrong.

If this is the first time you've heard that then I'm sorry you had to wait so long to be told that, yes, you do have basic rights to prevent other people from assaulting and abusing you.  You were screwed by the system and it makes me sad to see that it happened to you.  Doubly a victim.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 9, 2016)

Yep...Still gonna try to solve things without violence though. If nothing else, just because I'm sick of violence. Coming back home one of the first things I learned about kids my age as they like acting violent just for fun; fake-punches towards your face, obnoxious hollering, jokes about fighting; I ended up dropping out of regular High School after hearing a group joking about rape. High School felt like a disgusting place that's not for smart people, so I dropped out after five days, got my GED then immediately got a job working for the government as an FFT2 for the DOF. That did a lot of good for me; helped teach me how to work under pressure and center myself when rocketing down the highway towards a mushroom cloud. In the winter months I take up working for the VFD and running into building fires instead of wild fires. Good training. I think I'm more into the intellectual/zen/spirituality aspects of martial training. To me martial arts is just all about "how to conquer". Ho to conquer your mind and body, how to conquer the minds and bodies of those who seek to cause you harm, how to conquer mother nature itself...doesn't seem like a discipline, so much as a Way of Life. ...I think freedom means "No fear.". I can't wait until I'm not scared of the world anymore.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 9, 2016)

Keep in mind that a lot of us here are old guys who haven't stepped foot in a high school for a few decades.  A lot has changed since I graduated in '94.  Some things haven't.

I think overall, the bullying as we saw/lived it has decreased quite a bit.  The schools aren't as cliquey as they were when I was there - jocks, heads, nerds, stoners, preps, etc.  Kids are far more accepting of each other now, especially of special needs kids.  Of course there's still the bullies, but more kids stand up for the kids being bullied nowadays.

What really changes the game is the cyber bullying.  Far more goes on there and spills over into school than you can imagine.

I know this stuff because it was culture shock to me going back to teach at my old high school 19 years after I graduated.  Perhaps where I was was unique, but I highly doubt it.

As for the locker room stuff, locker rooms were probably monitored better than anywhere else.  When I taught there was was always 1, and usually 2 teachers in the locker room whenever students were in there.  I guess my school learned their lesson.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Aug 9, 2016)

JR 137 said:


> I think overall, the bullying as we saw/lived it has decreased quite a bit.


I think it has become more brutal both physically and emotionally. When I was in school it was unthinkable that a student would actually attack a teacher.  Now it's no big deal and not a surprise when it happens.  Fighting in school back then also wasn't so restricted where a person defending him or herself from harm would be punished as if they are the problem.  Cyber bullying is small compared to the "in your face" verbal assaults.  Literally if someone is bullying another online then that person can hit ignore or just not socialize on that website.  When I was in school, there was no off button and I had to face bullies and their harassment or possible harassment every day. 

I'm always like WTF? when people say they are getting bullied online and they can't take it anymore. Not sure where kids logic is but I wish my days of standing up to bullies came with all the options that kids get to handle Cyber Bullies.

The biggest difference for me where I went to school is probably my freedom to punch a bully in the mouth was encouraged where no we try to be "civil."

Not sure what went wrong but many of today's kids have a logic where they don't understand consequence.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 10, 2016)

Violence has increased because the severity of the consequences have increased. Back in the day, as I think you mentioned, kids could get into fights and it was no big deal. It's not that way anymore though after 9/11 and Columbine or Virginia Tech. Nowadays kids can face _imprisonment_ for even threatening someone or assaulting someone; they get they're whole futures messed up by the System now. This is supposed to deter violence, supposedly, but what it does instead, is force kids to _suppress_ their rage and _ignore_ threats instead of finding _solutions_ to them. This causes the child's anger to build up and swell inside of him like a balloon until one day he decides to bring a gun or a knife to school; ready to kill the next bully that crosses his path. All because the legal consequences for violence scare children into holding it all in until it explodes out all over the place like a hand grenade.....Kids aren't allowed to be kids anymore. And it's not right.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 10, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Tell him to press charges and sue the school for not protecting him.
> 
> Yes, I'm serious.  Once a lawyer gets in on it, even if the case sucks, schools will often decide that they can use discretion after all.
> 
> ...



If the account is true the above is true.  Here is the thing schools have basically been forced to have "zero tolerance" violence policies.  Doesn't matter how, who, what, where or why, that is the initial reaction.  However, if one parent threatens to take them out of the Schools District Administrative realm into a Court of Law, where there are set burdens of proof vs a "because we say so" standard, suddenly things change.


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> When I was in school it was unthinkable that a student would actually attack a teacher.



It's often the parents who now come in an assault the teacher so why wouldn't the students think it's fine to do it as well? Now as well so many children see adults bullying online, making disparaging comments etc they think it's fine to do that as well. After the recent Olympic road race a British rider who really did try his best, it was obvious but didn't win had mostly good messages sent to him but some were just plain nasty for no reason at all. We had a female here threatened with being raped and murdered because she suggested Florence Nightingale be put on our new five pound notes after the Bank of England had asked for suggestions! A friend of mine attracted the same type of attention after an MMA fight, she had comments from around the world aimed at her. She's tough, articulate and very intelligent but those messages knocked her for six, the sheer nastiness aimed at her by so people she didn't know and never would. How must children feel when the same happens to them, when there's an insidious campaign against them? 
Adults must take the lead here and teach children it's not right to bully, we must also make sure it's not the adults who are doing the bullying and if you look to public life, the politicians, the so called divas of the entertainment world, the media etc they need to understand bullying is wrong as well. Then perhaps the children will learn that bullying is wrong and the consequences will be nothing they like.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 10, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> It's often the parents who now come in an assault the teacher so why wouldn't the students think it's fine to do it as well? Now as well so many children see adults bullying online, making disparaging comments etc they think it's fine to do that as well. After the recent Olympic road race a British rider who really did try his best, it was obvious but didn't win had mostly good messages sent to him but some were just plain nasty for no reason at all. We had a female here threatened with being raped and murdered because she suggested Florence Nightingale be put on our new five pound notes after the Bank of England had asked for suggestions! A friend of mine attracted the same type of attention after an MMA fight, she had comments from around the world aimed at her. She's tough, articulate and very intelligent but those messages knocked her for six, the sheer nastiness aimed at her by so people she didn't know and never would. How must children feel when the same happens to them, when there's an insidious campaign against them?
> Adults must take the lead here and teach children it's not right to bully, we must also make sure it's not the adults who are doing the bullying and if you look to public life, the politicians, the so called divas of the entertainment world, the media etc they need to understand bullying is wrong as well. Then perhaps the children will learn that bullying is wrong and the consequences will be nothing they like.


This forum doesn't have a <3 emote or that would have been done.


----------



## Zumorito (Aug 10, 2016)

Wonderfully spoken!


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 10, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> It's often the parents who now come in an assault the teacher so why wouldn't the students think it's fine to do it as well? Now as well so many children see adults bullying online, making disparaging comments etc they think it's fine to do that as well. After the recent Olympic road race a British rider who really did try his best, it was obvious but didn't win had mostly good messages sent to him but some were just plain nasty for no reason at all. We had a female here threatened with being raped and murdered because she suggested Florence Nightingale be put on our new five pound notes after the Bank of England had asked for suggestions! A friend of mine attracted the same type of attention after an MMA fight, she had comments from around the world aimed at her. She's tough, articulate and very intelligent but those messages knocked her for six, the sheer nastiness aimed at her by so people she didn't know and never would. How must children feel when the same happens to them, when there's an insidious campaign against them?
> Adults must take the lead here and teach children it's not right to bully, we must also make sure it's not the adults who are doing the bullying and if you look to public life, the politicians, the so called divas of the entertainment world, the media etc they need to understand bullying is wrong as well. Then perhaps the children will learn that bullying is wrong and the consequences will be nothing they like.



One thing that I've learned time and time again while teaching - the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 10, 2016)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think it has become more brutal both physically and emotionally. When I was in school it was unthinkable that a student would actually attack a teacher.  Now it's no big deal and not a surprise when it happens.  Fighting in school back then also wasn't so restricted where a person defending him or herself from harm would be punished as if they are the problem.  Cyber bullying is small compared to the "in your face" verbal assaults.  Literally if someone is bullying another online then that person can hit ignore or just not socialize on that website.  When I was in school, there was no off button and I had to face bullies and their harassment or possible harassment every day.
> 
> I'm always like WTF? when people say they are getting bullied online and they can't take it anymore. Not sure where kids logic is but I wish my days of standing up to bullies came with all the options that kids get to handle Cyber Bullies.
> 
> ...



My anecdotal observation compared to the early 90s...

More fights
Less bullying for prolonged periods

More threats against teacher and administrators
I can't say it's taken more or less seriously, as I don't remember anyone threatening teachers/admins when I was in school

Threats against teachers/admin taken very seriously, usually suspension every time.  My wife (also a teacher and still teaches where I initially taught; we both graduated from that school) was the 3rd teacher a student threatened.  The admin (and surprisingly the parent) found it was best to press charges against him due to this and his whole history.  He's currently at an alternative school and under probation.

Physical violence against a teacher is definitely not tolerated at all.  It's one of the quickest and easiest ways to expell a student.  Everything else requires a ton of red tape.  

You're looking at cyber bullying through the eyes of an adult.  We tell them to ignore it, save it and report it, etc.  Kids are kids, and somehow can't ignore it.


----------



## JR 137 (Aug 10, 2016)

Juany118 said:


> If the account is true the above is true.  Here is the thing schools have basically been forced to have "zero tolerance" violence policies.  Doesn't matter how, who, what, where or why, that is the initial reaction.  However, if one parent threatens to take them out of the Schools District Administrative realm into a Court of Law, where there are set burdens of proof vs a "because we say so" standard, suddenly things change.



Everything changes once a parent threatens to get a lawyer.  Parents and kids have learned they can get away with anything this way.  Only exception is public and/or written (paper and/or electronic) threats of violence.


----------



## Juany118 (Aug 10, 2016)

JR 137 said:


> Everything changes once a parent threatens to get a lawyer.  Parents and kids have learned they can get away with anything this way.  Only exception is public and/or written (paper and/or electronic) threats of violence.



Not in all District's.  Some are good at having policies that comport with the law.  We talk about "target hardening" in self defense cases, they do so in legal cases.  So the parents can walk in there and they get told by the school "see ya in court."


----------



## Tez3 (Aug 11, 2016)

In the UK people don't tend to go to lawyers, they are expensive for one thing and they don't pay you which the tabloids do so here it's off to the tabloid gutter press to spill all in 'exclusive' interviews. The so called reporters can bling up the story ( often against the person they are interviewing funnily enough) and sell their disgusting rags.
The Daily Mail is one of the worst so called newspapers, here they are complaining about the fact that children who are using abusive comments are being reported, these comments they have obviously learnt from their parents. here primary age is between four and a half and eleven. Daily Mail angry that kids are disciplined for homophobia


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Nov 10, 2016)

The fact they suspended your cousin is ******. Everyone has the right of self defense at any time/place.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 10, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> The fact they suspended your cousin is ******. Everyone has the right of self defense at any time/place.



Interesting language.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 10, 2016)

Rather than complain to me about MY language how about making sure the profanity blocker works. I'd rather you removed my post altogether rather than blaming me.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 10, 2016)

JR 137 said:


> My anecdotal observation compared to the early 90s...
> 
> More fights
> Less bullying for prolonged periods
> ...



Being a kid is like prision. You have one social group you cannot escape. So your reputation becomes a survival mechanism.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Nov 12, 2016)

[QUOTE="Tez3, post: 1779221, member: 10553] Daily Mail angry that kids are disciplined for homophobia[/QUOTE] God help us.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 12, 2016)

Your post has nothing to do with the thread but if you are going to quote from the Daily Heil....

The Daily Heil is a hate 'newspaper', it consistently publishes hate filled articles and comments that are full of lies, it supports the extreme right wing including the Nazis and Mosley's blackshirts when they were going strong. Most sensible, sane people do not read it nor do they believe what is written in it. It screams hateful headlines and is often reprimanded by the newspaper regulator for its untrue stories.   There is a campaign at the moment going on called 'Stop funding hate' to get advertisers to stop putting ads in the Mail and a couple of other gutter press rags.
Daily Mail[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


----------



## Transk53 (Nov 12, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Being a kid is like prision. You have one social group you cannot escape. So your reputation becomes a survival mechanism.



Yes. It is like boarding school, where there is no escape other than to fight. An excepted norm for the teachers. Boarding school is a form of accepted rights, and the reputation garnered. So yes I would agree, reputation is everything in that context.


----------



## Transk53 (Nov 12, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> The fact they suspended your cousin is ******. Everyone has the right of self defense at any time/place.



Yes, but that would depend on what is self defence, weighed against those looking for for it, and are just pissed off, using SD as a tool!


----------



## wingchun100 (Nov 16, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> So my younger cousin who's 12 got into a fight at school the other day he was getting picked on by this kid in his class and the kid was pushing him and slapping him and threatening him.he then said he was going to smash his face I so my cousin punched him in the face and they got into a fight and got separated. But my cousin got in trouble because he threw the first /punch/ even though the other kid was slapping him and pushing him it was only the punch that they took notice about which to me is ridiculous. Also the fact he threatened him with physical violence as well.
> 
> I mean if the other guy was the other side of the room and yelled at him he was going to smash him I'm not saying it'd be right for him to run across the room and start beating him up but when someone's in your face being aggressive then says that I think that gives you a right to attack first because they're in close proximity in an aggressive situation and threatening violence.
> 
> I think with schools they just look at it image wise they see someone throw a punch automatically they're the one to blame but pushing and slaps that's agressive and could be counted as assault.


 
And if your cousin had been punched but did not punch back, he would have been in trouble then too. I knew a friend who made a conscious choice to not hit back, thinking only the bully would get suspended.

Nope, my friend got suspended too.

He was so angry over that. I felt his pain. I mean, if you are going to get suspended anyway, then fight back!!!


----------



## stonewall1350 (Nov 16, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> So my younger cousin who's 12 got into a fight at school the other day he was getting picked on by this kid in his class and the kid was pushing him and slapping him and threatening him.he then said he was going to smash his face I so my cousin punched him in the face and they got into a fight and got separated. But my cousin got in trouble because he threw the first /punch/ even though the other kid was slapping him and pushing him it was only the punch that they took notice about which to me is ridiculous. Also the fact he threatened him with physical violence as well.
> 
> I mean if the other guy was the other side of the room and yelled at him he was going to smash him I'm not saying it'd be right for him to run across the room and start beating him up but when someone's in your face being aggressive then says that I think that gives you a right to attack first because they're in close proximity in an aggressive situation and threatening violence.
> 
> I think with schools they just look at it image wise they see someone throw a punch automatically they're the one to blame but pushing and slaps that's agressive and could be counted as assault.



I have a zero tolerance policy for zero tolerance policies. Sounds like your cousin is a victim of it. Too bad. Fighting is against the rules. Doesn't matter if you are the victim or not. You don't have a right to self defense in a school. And why? Because it is a major liability for the school. Your cousin gets hit first...even if it is bad and he didn't throw the first punch? And then he beats the hell out of the other kid...or just 1 punch and that kid dies or gets seriously injured? The school is liable. Not the parents. Not the kids. The school is.

Sucks doesn't it? Doesn't matter. When I was teaching I had to break up a particularly nasty fight. An 18 year old junior started trying to physically move and harm a true freshman in the cafeteria. The freshman was resisted and the 18 year old slapped him on the back of the head and tried to grab him around the neck. The freshman took a swing (and missed by a tiny bit sadly), and then the fight got broken up by me and a senior who happened to be there as well (and 18 year old even tried to fight me...thought I was a student I guess...but I had him in a control hold walking him out of the cafeteria).

Anyway. Both students got suspended. We called the freshman parents and told them, "your son is getting suspended for fighting. Don't punish him. Consider it a vacation. We will send his school work home. He was defending himself. We just have to follow school policy because of insurance liability concerns." All your cousin can hope for is that the teachers do right by him. After all...it is grade school. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve (Nov 16, 2016)

That sounds terrible.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 16, 2016)

stonewall1350 said:


> I have a zero tolerance policy for zero tolerance policies. Sounds like your cousin is a victim of it. Too bad. Fighting is against the rules. Doesn't matter if you are the victim or not. You don't have a right to self defense in a school. And why? Because it is a major liability for the school. Your cousin gets hit first...even if it is bad and he didn't throw the first punch? And then he beats the hell out of the other kid...or just 1 punch and that kid dies or gets seriously injured? The school is liable. Not the parents. Not the kids. The school is.
> 
> Sucks doesn't it? Doesn't matter. When I was teaching I had to break up a particularly nasty fight. An 18 year old junior started trying to physically move and harm a true freshman in the cafeteria. The freshman was resisted and the 18 year old slapped him on the back of the head and tried to grab him around the neck. The freshman took a swing (and missed by a tiny bit sadly), and then the fight got broken up by me and a senior who happened to be there as well (and 18 year old even tried to fight me...thought I was a student I guess...but I had him in a control hold walking him out of the cafeteria).
> 
> ...



Such is life. 

Sometimes you have to break the rules.  Get caught and do the grind. 

Of course i also come country founded by convicts.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Nov 17, 2016)

Transk53 said:


> Yes, but that would depend on what is self defence, weighed against those looking for for it, and are just pissed off, using SD as a tool!



well sd is when someone throws the first punch and someone fights back. we both know that. using sd as an excuse because someone pissed you off isn't really an excuse.


----------



## Transk53 (Nov 17, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> well sd is when someone throws the first punch and someone fights back. we both know that. using sd as an excuse because someone pissed you off isn't really an excuse.



Absolutely. Why I never threw the first punch, or at all was my preference. Saw to many people when arrested say, "it was self defence guv" As long as it is actually SD, and someone actually defending themselves. Bashing them because they hit you, and bashing them more, is not SD. IMHO


----------



## stonewall1350 (Nov 17, 2016)

drop bear said:


> Such is life.
> 
> Sometimes you have to break the rules.  Get caught and do the grind.
> 
> Of course i also come country founded by convicts.



Lol. Well. I guess to each there own. I get why the schools run the policy. It sucks. We used to have a choice on punishment there (I went to the school where I taught). You could call your parents or the dean could come up with something. I never called my parents lol. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear (Nov 17, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> well sd is when someone throws the first punch and someone fights back. we both know that. using sd as an excuse because someone pissed you off isn't really an excuse.



The pope will punch you if you insult his mother.


----------



## KenpoBoxer (Nov 17, 2016)

To me I don't care where I am or what the rules are if someone tries to hurt me i'll fight back I won't just stand there like an idiot because im scared to get in trouble. The truth is a single punch to the face can kill someone so if someone takes a swing at me they could kill me so I'm not just going to let them. I wouldn't go over the top but I'd block it and put them down in any way possible and I'd face whatever happens with no regrets whether suspension or doing time or a fine or community service or whatever I'd have no regrets about it


----------



## Paul_D (Nov 20, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> well sd is when someone throws the first punch and someone fights back.


Not necessarily, you do not have to wait until you are attacked for it to be self defence.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Nov 20, 2016)

Paul_D said:


> Not necessarily, you do not have to wait until you are attacked for it to be self defence.


That depends upon how we define that term. I've always defined "self-defense" as what you do after someone starts an attack. Everything before that point is avoidance, which is a different skill (which I also incorporate in my program).


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Nov 26, 2016)

drop bear said:


> The pope will punch you if you insult his mother.



popes too religious to punch someone if they insult his mum.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 26, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> popes too religious to punch someone if they insult his mum.



I wouldn't be so sure, he's been a nightclub bouncer. If he belts someone he can easily go confess and be forgiven.


----------



## drop bear (Nov 26, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> popes too religious to punch someone if they insult his mum.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Nov 28, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> I wouldn't be so sure, he's been a nightclub bouncer. If he belts someone he can easily go confess and be forgiven.



confess to who?


----------



## Buka (Nov 29, 2016)

My bet is everyone on this forum went to school as a kid. And every kid that ever went to a school knows what "defending yourself" is, was and always will be. 

Ain't easy being a kid.


----------



## Buka (Nov 29, 2016)

Double post computer burp.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Nov 29, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> confess to who?



I don't recall who does it now.  It used to be the Jesuit General.  But for sure, even the Pope has a priest to confess to.


----------



## BigMotor (Nov 29, 2016)

Kickboxer101 said:


> So my younger cousin who's 12 got into a fight at school the other day he was getting picked on by this kid in his class and the kid was pushing him and slapping him and threatening him.he then said he was going to smash his face I so my cousin punched him in the face and they got into a fight and got separated. But my cousin got in trouble because he threw the first /punch/ even though the other kid was slapping him and pushing him it was only the punch that they took notice about which to me is ridiculous. Also the fact he threatened him with physical violence as well.
> 
> I mean if the other guy was the other side of the room and yelled at him he was going to smash him I'm not saying it'd be right for him to run across the room and start beating him up but when someone's in your face being aggressive then says that I think that gives you a right to attack first because they're in close proximity in an aggressive situation and threatening violence.
> 
> I think with schools they just look at it image wise they see someone throw a punch automatically they're the one to blame but pushing and slaps that's agressive and could be counted as assault.



Teach him some hard slaps, that is martial arts too. You can smack the blood out of a nose, or temporarily blind the eyes with that technique. 
No need for permanent injury or spite or anything like that. But the punk that gets slapped will feel like he has a lasting injury.
Show him how to turn one into a virtual punch. If he puts them right into the nose or the eyes, it can be very effective, if it is delivered with force.
PS: a hard kick to the shins will take out a punk too.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> the newspaper regulator


This phrase both frightens and offends my American sensibilities.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2016)

lklawson said:


> This phrase both frightens and offends my American sensibilities.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk



That's because you don't know what they do. It's not a censor but somewhere you can complain to if you think a story is unfair or untrue. No one can afford to take newspapers to court here and sue them. The other thing the regulator does is to make sure journalists are honest, you may not have heard of the phone hacking problems here where certain journalists on the orders of their editors were using people to hack into phones for stories. This included the phone of a teenage murder victim whose phone was hacked so that her texts and messages appeared to have looked like they were read leading her parents to believe she was still alive when in fact she'd been brutally killed. The phone hacking was rampant, many were celebrities but more often than not it was the phones of people who'd been victims of crimes.
The IPSO is funded by the industry not government. it's as much for the journalists as anything.
About IPSO


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> confess to who?



Roman Catholics go to confession, the Pope has a confessor just like other Catholics.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> That's because you don't know what they do. It's not a censor but somewhere you can complain to if you think a story is unfair or untrue. No one can afford to take newspapers to court here and sue them. The other thing the regulator does is to make sure journalists are honest, you may not have heard of the phone hacking problems here where certain journalists on the orders of their editors were using people to hack into phones for stories. This included the phone of a teenage murder victim whose phone was hacked so that her texts and messages appeared to have looked like they were read leading her parents to believe she was still alive when in fact she'd been brutally killed. The phone hacking was rampant, many were celebrities but more often than not it was the phones of people who'd been victims of crimes.
> The IPSO is funded by the industry not government. it's as much for the journalists as anything.
> About IPSO


Through the honest, compassionate, incorrupt, efficient mechanisms of government.

For some reason, I'm still frightened and offended.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Through the honest, compassionate, incorrupt, efficient mechanisms of government.
> 
> For some reason, I'm still frightened and offended.
> 
> ...



It's not anything to do with the government, it's the journalist's own organisation.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 1, 2016)

senseiblackbelt said:


> popes too religious to punch someone if they insult his mum.



Yeah, but no one was too religious to wield the steel.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> It's not anything to do with the government, it's the journalist's own organisation.



Both as destructive.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2016)

Transk53 said:


> Both as destructive.



That as may be but the industry is self regulating as many other industries are, it's not government censorship.


----------



## lklawson (Dec 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> It's not anything to do with the government, it's the journalist's own organisation.


Even better.  

Miss Tez?  I'd like to complain to you about... um... you.  Promise you'll do something about it?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Dec 1, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Even better.
> 
> Miss Tez?  I'd like to complain to you about... um... you.  Promise you'll do something about it?


Seems a reasonable answer to having some level of oversight without allowing the government to have a hand in it.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Even better.
> 
> Miss Tez?  I'd like to complain to you about... um... you.  Promise you'll do something about it?



If you complain to a regulatory body you don't get the person complained about dealing with it, that's against common sense, your peers deal with it, the idea being they don't want their industry brought into disrepute so they do something about it. Now whether that works or not depends on the integrity of the members but you have to admit it's not what you thought it was, a government censor.
Recently we had a case of a journalist who fabricated evidence against a celebrity, the case went to criminal court before it came out it was a fraud and the journalist himself was arrested, charges and taken to court, he was convicted. ‘Fake sheikh’ jailed for 15 months for tampering with evidence in collapsed Tulisa drugs trial


----------



## lklawson (Dec 1, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> If you complain to a regulatory body you don't get the person complained about dealing with it, that's against common sense, your peers deal with it, the idea being they don't want their industry brought into disrepute so they do something about it.


The point being that they all have vested interests other than being "fair" to the complainant.  These vested interests might sometimes align with the complainant due to competitive pressures (trying to reduce the competition), regardless of whether or not the complaint is actually valid.  Sometimes it might not align even if the complaint is valid.  "Self Policing" of industries rarely works well.  The only thing worse than Self Policing is Government Oversight.  Unaffiliated Market Watchdogs are most often far better.

Have your say (reply if you want) but I'll just leave it there for fear of treading too close into prohibited Politics discussion.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2016)

lklawson said:


> The point being that they all have vested interests other than being "fair" to the complainant.  These vested interests might sometimes align with the complainant due to competitive pressures (trying to reduce the competition), regardless of whether or not the complaint is actually valid.  Sometimes it might not align even if the complaint is valid.  "Self Policing" of industries rarely works well.  The only thing worse than Self Policing is Government Oversight.  Unaffiliated Market Watchdogs are most often far better.
> 
> Have your say (reply if you want) but I'll just leave it there for fear of treading too close into prohibited Politics discussion.
> 
> ...



I never said it was fair, I said it wasn't government censorship lol.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2016)

On the other hand they do sometimes sort out the idiots.... Ruling


----------



## Buka (Dec 2, 2016)

drop bear said:


>



The "insulting mothers" thing had me smiling with sweet reminiscence. In my neighborhood as a teen, we insulted each others mothers as a national sport, as a joke. It's kind of all we did.

 "Your mama is SO fat, other fat mamas revolve around her like moons." 

We would never, and I mean never, use something like that with anyone from outside our circle. Point of fact - the people involved remain best friends to this day, some fifty years later. If someone were to insult one of our mothers, we probably wouldn't laugh unless it was a really, really good line. We'd reply, "That's it? That's the best you have about my mom?" Then we would lay them to waste with lines we've been throwing since the dark ages. Each more nasty than the last.

I don't really have a point in all this, just wanted to share. We considered each other's mom (and dad) just like our own. Thy were sacrosanct.  And we were just as scared of them as we were of our own parents (when we were 13). 

In a tactical Martial sense - if you were to insult MY mom, or anybody I'm friends with, mom - you wouldn't even get a raised eyebrow. But the retort would probably get you to swing.....and miss. And then, obviously, to go to sleep. (And don't worry, your momma would tuck you in)

All I can end this with is......Your f'n momma!

Hey, that's sixties Boston in a nutshell.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Dec 2, 2016)

Tez3 said:


> On the other hand they do sometimes sort out the idiots.... Ruling



That was too funny.  The paper corrected and apologized for the inaccuracy of the reason.  But got in a jab at a "bonkers council" without having to apologize.

Ya gotta love it!


----------



## Flying Crane (Dec 2, 2016)

lklawson said:


> The point being that they all have vested interests other than being "fair" to the complainant.  These vested interests might sometimes align with the complainant due to competitive pressures (trying to reduce the competition), regardless of whether or not the complaint is actually valid.  Sometimes it might not align even if the complaint is valid.  "Self Policing" of industries rarely works well.  The only thing worse than Self Policing is Government Oversight.  Unaffiliated Market Watchdogs are most often far better.
> 
> Have your say (reply if you want) but I'll just leave it there for fear of treading too close into prohibited Politics discussion.
> 
> ...


The scuba industry comes to mind.


----------



## Balrog (Dec 5, 2016)

lklawson said:


> Oh, he'll still get kicked out anyway.  The only acceptable behavior now is to curl up in a fetal position and cry.  Any sort of fighting, whether or not it is fighting back, is grounds for punishment.  He'll just have to suck that up.  Zero Tolerance ("Zero Thought") policies have that effect.


The proper action to take if a student is being punished under zero tolerance is to immediately contact the local TV stations and report it.  They will jump on that like a duck on a junebug and the principal will have to put up with cameras and microphones.  In addition, contact your lawyer and file a massive lawsuit against the principal and the school board.

Sometimes slapping government morons across the face with The Wet Trout Of Reality (tm) is the only way to get their attention.  No one has the right or the authority to say that students cannot defend themselves against a physical assault.


----------

