Middleman
Defender of the month
So, the socially liberal folk never engage in indoctrination, are never hypocritical, nor do they ever possess zombie-like characteristics?
Last edited:
Federal Anti-Bullying Law
- Thread starter Madeline
- Start date
So, the socially liberal folk never engage in indoctrination, are never hypocritical, nor do they ever possess zombie-like characteristics?
Peach
Gold Member
- Jan 10, 2009
- 20,864
- 2,732
- 245
*****************************************
True.
chanel
Silver Member
School districts say state's anti-bullying law costs at least $2 million to implement - pressofAtlanticCity.com: Breaking News
$2 million a year, and the jury is out whether it is effective or CONSTITUTIONAL.
This shit has got to stop.
Not2BSubjugated
Callous Individualist
Seems to me that the vast majority of proposed anti-bullying legislation ranges from pointless to dangerous. There's already laws against harassment. If someone is blowing up your phone and you don't like it, you can already take legal action for that. Perhaps a few of the anti-harassment laws should be updated to include harassment via email and social networking, but even that doesn't seem to me to require much meddling from the government level (state -or- federal). I especially wouldn't support doing even -that- in a way that allowed for more government intrusion into peoples' private internet correspondence. There's also laws against committing acts of physical violence against others. Ultimately, it seems to me that bullies who press the issue directly against the target of their bullying are already crossing legal and school-based rules of conduct. How are more laws supposed to stop this?
If the bullying isn't directed at the target (i.e., the kid being bullied has already made use of the ignore function on their social networking and instant messaging sites and now the bully is just talking trash about the target to those people who -are- still subscribing to his/her Twitter account) then I would argue that legal action would be ridiculous. If I'm not actually harassing someone directly, I should be able to say whatever I want about them to my friends/acquaintances. Not because I'm a big shit talker, but who knows? Maybe at some point I'm going to want to talk some shit. I have that right.
What this proposed legislation (and much of the proposed anti bullying legislation does) is attempts to define certain speech as damaging/dangerous, and then condone the government taking action against said speech. If you folks that are crusading to round off all the soft plastic corners on the playground equipment don't see a potential problem with the Republicans and the Democrats being able to define speech as dangerous and then take legal action against it, you need to stop wearing those dark shades indoors.
Now get this. I'm not saying that every kid can just pop their bully(ies) in the nose and put a stop to it, mind you. That said, I do think that we need to realize and accept that no amount of government social engineering is going to stop bullying. Ever. There always have been bullies and there always will be bullies. Unleashing pent up aggression against convenient targets as a reaction to shitty, or perceived shitty things happening to the pent up aggressor is a pretty common function of human psychology. People were bullies in my day in school, too, and this idea that the internet has made it worse is ridiculous. The internet has made more bullying verbal. Lemme let you in on a little secret: A bully who's currently typing about what a ****** someone is doesn't have his hands free to stuff them into a locker. If kids weren't offing themselves back then, maybe we might take a look into what kinds of kids we're dealing with.
In my day we also had steel jungle gyms 10 feet high. Fall through those two or three times as a kid and you get an instant lesson in the profundity of "sticks and stones". More parents were quicker to the belt section of the closet when you f'ed up, too. There was actually a time when the common forms of parenting introduced a child, at a very young age, to the very real probability that, in life, you're going to come up against people and situations that are quite capable of dominating you. These days more and more parenting is devolving to child leashes, time out, and "We don't like little Timmy to play with things like toy guns and militant action figures because we try to keep him away from activities that promote aggression." I hate to break this to you helicopter parent types out there, but once that kid hits 18 (assuming he doesn't down a bottle of aspirin all one time to avoid having to deal with the emotional fallout of some mean words) they're stuck in the real world, and even in modern society, the real world is competitive and cold. In real life, everyone doesn't get a trophy.
This last bit's going to sound totally non humanitarian, but **** it, here goes. Any child that offs themselves because of the mean things bullies at school said to them is too soft for the real world. Period. It's still sad when any kid dies, but the blame doesn't fall on the law or even the bully. The only blame for that child's death that falls anywhere other than on the hand with which that child took their own life, is on that child's parents for not properly preparing that child for the hardship that is life. It's a cold, cruel fact, but a fact, that when you don't prepare your child for real life, you make them a strong candidate for natural selection. Sad though it may be, the suicides these days that are in response to bullies are survival of the fittest working as intended.
If the bullying isn't directed at the target (i.e., the kid being bullied has already made use of the ignore function on their social networking and instant messaging sites and now the bully is just talking trash about the target to those people who -are- still subscribing to his/her Twitter account) then I would argue that legal action would be ridiculous. If I'm not actually harassing someone directly, I should be able to say whatever I want about them to my friends/acquaintances. Not because I'm a big shit talker, but who knows? Maybe at some point I'm going to want to talk some shit. I have that right.
What this proposed legislation (and much of the proposed anti bullying legislation does) is attempts to define certain speech as damaging/dangerous, and then condone the government taking action against said speech. If you folks that are crusading to round off all the soft plastic corners on the playground equipment don't see a potential problem with the Republicans and the Democrats being able to define speech as dangerous and then take legal action against it, you need to stop wearing those dark shades indoors.
Now get this. I'm not saying that every kid can just pop their bully(ies) in the nose and put a stop to it, mind you. That said, I do think that we need to realize and accept that no amount of government social engineering is going to stop bullying. Ever. There always have been bullies and there always will be bullies. Unleashing pent up aggression against convenient targets as a reaction to shitty, or perceived shitty things happening to the pent up aggressor is a pretty common function of human psychology. People were bullies in my day in school, too, and this idea that the internet has made it worse is ridiculous. The internet has made more bullying verbal. Lemme let you in on a little secret: A bully who's currently typing about what a ****** someone is doesn't have his hands free to stuff them into a locker. If kids weren't offing themselves back then, maybe we might take a look into what kinds of kids we're dealing with.
In my day we also had steel jungle gyms 10 feet high. Fall through those two or three times as a kid and you get an instant lesson in the profundity of "sticks and stones". More parents were quicker to the belt section of the closet when you f'ed up, too. There was actually a time when the common forms of parenting introduced a child, at a very young age, to the very real probability that, in life, you're going to come up against people and situations that are quite capable of dominating you. These days more and more parenting is devolving to child leashes, time out, and "We don't like little Timmy to play with things like toy guns and militant action figures because we try to keep him away from activities that promote aggression." I hate to break this to you helicopter parent types out there, but once that kid hits 18 (assuming he doesn't down a bottle of aspirin all one time to avoid having to deal with the emotional fallout of some mean words) they're stuck in the real world, and even in modern society, the real world is competitive and cold. In real life, everyone doesn't get a trophy.
This last bit's going to sound totally non humanitarian, but **** it, here goes. Any child that offs themselves because of the mean things bullies at school said to them is too soft for the real world. Period. It's still sad when any kid dies, but the blame doesn't fall on the law or even the bully. The only blame for that child's death that falls anywhere other than on the hand with which that child took their own life, is on that child's parents for not properly preparing that child for the hardship that is life. It's a cold, cruel fact, but a fact, that when you don't prepare your child for real life, you make them a strong candidate for natural selection. Sad though it may be, the suicides these days that are in response to bullies are survival of the fittest working as intended.
Last edited:
So you can't make fun of or bully based on:
Guess that means you can still bully someone of your own race/gender.
Kids usually get bullied because they are smaller or perceived as 'weak'. Don't see anything in there to stop that.
Guess that means you can still bully someone of your own race/gender.
Kids usually get bullied because they are smaller or perceived as 'weak'. Don't see anything in there to stop that.
The issue isn't state laws against bullying. The issue is Federal Laws against bullying. This is a way for the federal government to get around double jeopardy protections afforded under the Constitution. A person can be found innocent of violating state bullying laws, then find themselves charged for violating federal laws and retried. The additional benefit is, the feds already know exactly what the defense case is, and can design a prosecution to address each issue that resulted in an acquittal and make sure of a guilty verdict.
It is exactly what was done to the officers accused of excessive force in the Rodney King case.
It is exactly what was done to the officers accused of excessive force in the Rodney King case.
New Topics
-
-
-
The Great White Grift: How SC Turned School Vouchers Into a White Welfare Scam- Started by IM2
- Replies: 2
-
The Wages of Trump- All HELL BREAKS LOOSE as World Leaders DITCH Trump OVER WAR!!!
- Started by IM2
- Replies: 1
-
