Bullying

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2013 9:58 PM GMT
    A victory for bullies everywhere:

    http://triblive.com/mobile/4146203-96/students-judge-ruling
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2013 10:00 PM GMT
    3rd US circuit court of appeals rules that public schools do not have a constitutional duty to protect our children from each other. Unacceptable.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jun 13, 2013 10:29 PM GMT
    That's sad.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2013 11:31 PM GMT
    popoman74 said3rd US circuit court of appeals rules that public schools do not have a constitutional duty to protect our children from each other. Unacceptable.


    Problem: the word "constitutional" - remove it and the statement would be more true. Though what is the definition of "protect our children from each other?"
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jun 13, 2013 11:40 PM GMT
    CallMeAnytime said
    popoman74 said3rd US circuit court of appeals rules that public schools do not have a constitutional duty to protect our children from each other. Unacceptable.


    Problem: the word "constitutional" - remove it and the statement would be more true. Though what is the definition of "protect our children from each other?"


    That's what I was wondering... the article didn't say if physical violence was involved, which would obviously be appropriate to police. Name calling should be dealt with, but it's more of a gray area---you'd practically have to expel every student, I gather.icon_confused.gif

    The dissenting judges noted that compulsory education should mean that all students are protected, because they have no recourse other than to keep attending school. They also noted that prisoners recieve more protection than students.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 13, 2013 11:48 PM GMT
    Sounds like we're splitting hairs and we're doing so at the expense of our children. Without a federal mandate, there would be no oversight into whether or not individual states are protecting our children. If we has citizens have a constitutional right to the freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and if we further have an expectation of security by way of US force, up to and including a US Marshal - not unlike the Integrated Schools act of 1965 - then we are undermining our own rights outlines by not only previous courts, but also by the US Constitution.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jun 14, 2013 12:14 AM GMT
    popoman74 saidSounds like we're splitting hairs and we're doing so at the expense of our children. Without a federal mandate, there would be no oversight into whether or not individual states are protecting our children. If we has citizens have a constitutional right to the freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and if we further have an expectation of security by way of US force, up to and including a US Marshal - not unlike the Integrated Schools act of 1965 - then we are undermining our own rights outlines by not only previous courts, but also by the US Constitution.


    I agree.... The trouble, then, is the punishment, and the loose definition of bullying. If you expel people for one-time bullying offenses, then (millions, perhaps of) students won't get an education, and that would also degrade the country. I'm not excusing bullies, by any stretch, but if you deny them an education, then that's not justice, either, especially since they are not adults, and they might be victims of bullying themselves. Most people have said something they regret to someone else. There has to be a learning moment, so students learn not to bully and are appropriately punished for bullying.

    I would propose that if there were federal mandates then the punishment has to fit the crime, and hate crimes have to distinguishable from non hate crimes. Perhaps more detention, etc. IDK. But you can't start expeling students in droves. Hell, Mitt Romney was a bully, and he ran for president. Not that I voted that asshat.icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2013 12:27 AM GMT
    The mandate would set the framework for a committee that would create the necessary guidelines of punishment. The way it is now, kids are being held accountable for missing school - not to mention they are hurting themselves in the long run - because the schools don't have the ability to expel bullies. The incident that precipitated this case began at a school.near me, outside of Pittsburgh. The victim suffered multiple assaults, leading up to ling term physical trauma. So, I don't honestly think that every child would suffer federal punishment over any circumstance of bullying, but there were several times in THIS child's life that someone needed to intervene with stiffer penalties, but failed to act, hiding behind jurisdiction.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Jun 14, 2013 12:33 AM GMT
    popoman74 saidThe mandate would set the framework for a committee that would create the necessary guidelines of punishment. The way it is now, kids are being held accountable for missing school - not to mention they are hurting themselves in the long run - because the schools don't have the ability to expel bullies. The incident that precipitated this case began at a school.near me, outside of Pittsburgh. The VI Tim suffered multiple assaults, leading up to ling term physical trauma. So, I don't honestly think that every child would suffer federal punishment over any circumstance of bullying, but there were several times in THIS child's life that someone needed to intervene with stiffer penalties, but failed to act, hiding behind jurisdiction.


    That's a lot more information than the article provided. If someone is being phyically assaulted, and no one steps in, then teachers, etc, who knew of the abuse should be held accountable, with fines or job loss, or both.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2013 2:35 PM GMT
    The school system is screwed anyway. Federal punishment should be needed, kids should already know not to bully and what bullying is. If a lot of kids are expelled then so be it, the more harsh and scary the rules are they should be more fearful and obey. If an incident like the one above causes a kid trauma then the assaulters need a lot of punishment or for my own pleasing capitol punishment or higher or extreme for most people's levels. If I have kids they will not be in that kind of hazardous and dangerous environment. If anyone is still listening, if your a bully you have got to go. The student's are the schools responsibility, so they should protect the student's from each other or deal with the parent's wrath.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 14, 2013 3:33 PM GMT
    popoman74 saidWithout a federal mandate, there would be no oversight into whether or not individual states are protecting our children.


    The Federal government is not the best in terms of providing oversight. They can't even keep their own affairs in order.

    Why would the states NOT be the proper controlling authority? Schools are the responsibility of each state, not the Federal government.

    If you're saying that the states can't be trusted to oversee their own schools and that they themselves need someone to oversee them, then who will oversee the overseers?

    With so much power going to Washington DC over the past few years, soon there will be no need for states at all.