ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

A failure of parenting

On the part of the parents of the bullies and the bullied alike:
Brimming with outrage and incredulity, the sheriff said in a news conference on Tuesday that he was stunned by the older girl’s Saturday Facebook posting. But he reserved his harshest words for the girl’s parents for failing to monitor her behavior, after she had been questioned by the police, and for allowing her to keep her cellphone.

“I’m aggravated that the parents are not doing what parents should do: after she is questioned and involved in this, why does she even have a device?” Sheriff Judd said. “Parents, who instead of taking that device and smashing it into a thousand pieces in front of that child, say her account was hacked.”

The police said the dispute with Rebecca began over a boy. The older girl was upset that Rebecca had once dated her boyfriend, they said.

“She began to harass and ultimately torment Rebecca,” said the sheriff, describing the 14-year-old as a girl with a long history of bullying behavior.

The police said the older girl began to turn Rebecca’s friends against her, including her former best friend, the 12-year-old who was charged. She told anyone who tried to befriend Rebecca that they also would be bullied, the affidavit said.

The bullying leapt into the virtual world, Sheriff Judd said, and Rebecca began receiving sordid messages instructing her to “go kill yourself.” The police said Rebecca’s mother was reluctant to take her cellphone away because she did not want to alienate her daughter and wanted her to be able to communicate with her friends. Ms. Norman tried, she has said, to monitor Rebecca’s cellphone activity.

In December, the bullying grew so intense that Rebecca began cutting herself and was sent to a hospital by her mother to receive psychiatric care. Ultimately, her mother pulled her out of Crystal Lake Middle School. She home schooled her for a while and then enrolled her in a new school in August.

But the bullying did not stop.
Like the sheriff, a lot of people will be upset with the parents of the female bully. The sheriff was right, the mother shouldn't have worried about preserving either her relationship with her daughter or her daughter's ability to communicate - that was half the problem, as it happens.

But parents of children who are bullied also have to learn to stand up for their children where necessary. If any of my kids was being plagued in such an insidious manner, I'd not only warn the parents it had better stop, I'd speak to the bully and let them know in no uncertain terms that they had better pray to whatever deity or scientific process they believe in that nothing happened to my child, because neither they nor their family would survive the day it did. The one thing bullies always understand is hard targets; if your child is simply too soft to be one, then you have a responsibility to step into the incoming fire as a parent.

Of course everyone will throw a complete fit if you threaten consequences, especially the women. So what? The point isn't your reputation among the wicked and the foolish, it is the protection of your children. And the best defense is a strong offense.

Society has become far too soft and tolerant of the wicked. On an old episode of QI the other night, Stephen Fry mentioned Dangerous Dan, a sheriff who cleaned up a town called Shakespeare. One of the men he hanged was executed for the crime of "being a damned nuisance". If the sheriff in this case had been more like Dangerous Dan, the bullies would be the dead ones rather than their victim. That being said, I'm glad he had the stones to charge the girls with felony offenses. The bullies and the parents deserve to be put through years of legal hell; perhaps that will encourage parents to shut down such behavior on the part of their children in the future.

Ender got in trouble about two weeks ago after a huge younger kid - he's six feet tall and weighs about 200 pounds - who has bullied his fellow students for years decided to start testing his ability to push the older kids around. Ender couldn't manage to flip the kid or put him in a judo hold because he was too big and strong, so as the kid tried to force him down to the ground, he switched tactics and threw a pair of hard uppercuts that split the kid's lip and bloodied his nose. That sent the kid reeling, at which point the adult team players broke them up.  Lesson: mixed martial arts training works. It's always good to have multiple tools in the toolbox.

The problem is that the idiot first-year coach, who has no sons, no experience, and less sense, overreacted, suspended both boys for three games apiece for fighting, (which will almost surely cost the team all three games since they are two of the four starting defenders), and warned them that they'd be kicked off the team if they got into it again. When Ender asked SB and me what he should do if the kid is dumb enough to try it again, we told him to simply take care of business and let me sort it out with the club, to which we both belong. I've already written a letter asking the governing committee to specifically endorse the right of the players to defend themselves without consequence and spoken to two of my teammates who are on the committee. Both of them were incredulous that the coach would suspend someone who was simply defending himself.

Meanwhile, Ender is a hero to the entire younger half of the team, who have been victimized by this kid for nearly their entire school lives. And, perhaps more importantly, he knows his parents have his back no matter what happens.

On a weirdly related note, the Utah Supreme Court is about to decide if an employer has the right to fire an employee on the basis of the employee's legal exercise of his right to self-defense.
Now, the federal district court in Ray v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (D. Utah Oct. 9, 2013) has just certified this question as to Utah state law to the Utah Supreme Court. The Utah Supreme Court may either issue an opinion answering the question, in which case the federal judge will follow it (since federal judges are supposed to follow state court decisions about state law), or the Utah Supreme Court may decline to do so, in which case the federal judge will decide the matter for himself, drawing inferences from more general Utah state cases. And if the state supreme court does answer the question, then the result should prove quite influential.
I think it is unwise to work or play anywhere you do not have the right to freely defend yourself against an attacker.

Labels:

143 Comments:

Blogger pdwalker October 16, 2013 5:41 AM  

If someone had stood up to that 6' bully earlier on, he might not have a split lip now.

And the suspension is worth fighting.

Anonymous Peter Garstig October 16, 2013 5:58 AM  

The first target of any bully: his parents. Make sure it's his last.

Anonymous Outlaw X October 16, 2013 5:59 AM  

Vox that story was on our local news this morning in DFW.

Anonymous Outlaw X October 16, 2013 6:13 AM  

People on social networks should watch the movie "Disconnect". especially if you have children on them.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 6:35 AM  

Yeah, our kids aren't on any social media. There is no need for them to be on it.

Blogger Hacked acctount 2018/19? hcaacked! October 16, 2013 6:42 AM  

Special congratulations to Ender, in his single of self defense, he protected those who could not protect themselves.

Using a strong offense on the trouble makers in my life creates much humor and protects dad. I told a certain woman she must take responsibility, self responsibility for her mistakes (or acts of outright rebellion and danger). I was told "to shove it." We have not spoken since then.

Anonymous Rosalys October 16, 2013 6:52 AM  

The best thing that can happen to a bully is to get the crap beat out of him at an early age. Your son not only protected himself and those who were weak, but he probably did that big kid the biggest favor anyone has ever done him, whether he realizes it now or not.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 7:11 AM  

So now we've come to the point where nothing short of a clan war will stop bullies.

It's over. There's no civilization left to preserve.

Blogger IM2L844 October 16, 2013 7:23 AM  

Good life lesson for Ender all the way around. Even the coach's idiotic response serves. Good job, Vox.

Blogger Glen Filthie October 16, 2013 7:24 AM  

Yes and no, VD. Children need to fight their own battles. It's part of growing up and it is actually good for them in the long run. 'Helicopter parenting' is just as bad for kids as indifferent parenting,

This is why you spank your kids when they need it. This is why they need the strap in schools. This is why you teach your kid to defend themselves. Good grief - kids are indoctrinated right from day 1 in school that fighting is wrong, that there is always going to be an adult they can run to, that there will always be a nanny around to help them out. Hell, kids get expelled and suspended for defending themselves because those public school ass hats don't want to get involved and find out who is responsible - it's easier for those pooch screwing cretins to punish both kids and sanctimoniously proclaim that 'all violence is bad'. And this is what happens when there isn't an adult around to sort things out for the kids.

The truth of it is that our public schools are animal factories run by union entitlement slobs that don't care about your kid. It is up to the parent to street/school proof their kids. Take precautions accordingly.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 7:33 AM  

Children need to fight their own battles. It's part of growing up and it is actually good for them in the long run. 'Helicopter parenting' is just as bad for kids as indifferent parenting

Of course they do. But you have to be there in case they not only lose a skirmish, but are in danger of losing the war. Such as was the case with the little girl who killed herself. As it happens, I was on the scene of the fight literally seconds after it ended because my team practices after Ender's team. I just checked to see that he was all right, then joined my teammates. I didn't go and beat the hell out of the other kid, or warn him, or even pay him the slightest bit of attention. But if it had been necessary, I would have done so.

That being said, the kid clearly knows who I am and has done his best to stay out of my way since.

Anonymous Bobo October 16, 2013 7:35 AM  

When I was 12 or so, my friend Larry (not a strapping lad) was harassed by an older green-tooth kid, along the lines of "you gonna squel like a piggie, boy".
Larry's dad, 6'4" & named "Tex", told the green-tooth that he was going to put a knot in his ass that would take 3 grown men to pull out.
End of problem.

Anonymous RedJack October 16, 2013 7:39 AM  

Legal liability. If you go after a kid bullying your kid, the parents of the bully can have you arrested.

My Dad told me that you can fight back, and accept the consequences of it. I got a few detentions, but the bullying stopped when I threw the high school quarter back in to a locker and was trying to close it on him when the rest of the offensive line grabbed me. I wasn't popular, but was on the list of "To nuts to mess with" after that.

I would have been ashamed if my Dad or Mom got inolved.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 7:46 AM  

Legal liability. If you go after a kid bullying your kid, the parents of the bully can have you arrested.

No, really? What part of "you have a responsibility to step into the incoming fire as a parent" did you not understand? I'm sure the parents of the dead little girl are congratulating themselves for having avoided any legal difficulties.

As society decays, doing the right thing will increasingly come at a price. If you're willing to disavow defending your own children for fear of legal liability, I suppose disavowing any faith in Jesus Christ would be even easier.

Anonymous DW October 16, 2013 7:50 AM  

I was bullied once (and only once) by a neighborhood bully and his friends. I was six, they were a few years older than me. After chasing me around the neighborhood, I got home and told my folks what had happened. My parents went outside and started shouting at the kids that they'd better leave me alone or they'd call the cops.

Well, an idiot mother of one of the boys didn't like that so she came over and told my parents to never talk to her kid again. Mom and Dad called the cops and told them everything. This kid was a troublemaker and the cops knew it, they'd been called there before. Multiple cop cars came and threatened the kid, in no uncertain terms, that the next time he bullied anyone and they got a call, he'd be going with them.

Never had a problem again from anyone in the neighborhood.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 7:58 AM  

Parents, don't let your kids have social media. Or smart phones.

If the parents of the victim had talked to the parents of the bullies, what records would have had to have been kept to make the parents of the bullies liable? I have absolutely no problem with the victim's parents absolutely destroying the lives of not only the bullies, but their parents as well.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 8:04 AM  

How long until a parent takes justice into their own hands?

If the parents in this case had killed both the other girls, they might have a good shot with a jury. I know I wouldn't convict them.

Anonymous Anonymous October 16, 2013 8:05 AM  

It amazes me to see kids -- even the kids of parents I thought reasonably sensible -- walking around with devices with full Internet and social media access. It's as if their parents said, "What can we get little Johnny and little Sally for Christmas this year that will cost a good chunk of money, expose them to all sorts of questionable people and influences, provide a major distraction from their studies, alienate them from their family, and allow them to hide most of this activity away where we can't monitor it?" "I know, a new iPhone!"

For some reason, the same parents don't hand the kid the keys to a sports car with a 500hp engine on his 16th birthday. I don't know why not.

Anonymous allyn71 October 16, 2013 8:26 AM  

"Legal liability. If you go after a kid bullying your kid, the parents of the bully can have you arrested." - RedJack October 16, 2013 7:39 AM

I would rather go to a court date than my kids funeral.

Anonymous Blaster October 16, 2013 8:27 AM  

Additionally, this can be filed under "real life fails the bechdel test"

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:29 AM  

It hurts the pride of americans... but the truth is... in some ways... america is far more feminized than Europe.

Not all ways... and not all of Europe. But some.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:34 AM  

"I would have been ashamed if my Dad or Mom got inolved."

That's cute. We're all proud of you for handling the situation yourself. Now here in the real world there are people, especially female people, who are not equipped to handle the situation themselves.

Honestly I'm not sure Vox's solution would work with a teen female bully anyway. I would simply go to her home... sit her and her parents down and tell all of them at the same time. I would also record the conversation.

Anonymous Van October 16, 2013 8:35 AM  

Nate -

Even to argue that point is like saying, "well, at least I'm not as big a pussy as that guy."

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:36 AM  

A primary problem here is that parents almost never realize the severity of a problem until its far to late. They talk themselves into ignoring it. If I made a credible threat to you... if I came to you and told you... "I'm going to kill your kid next week." and you knew there was nothing you could do to stop it. You'd do anything to stop me. Quit your job... move to a new state... anything. But parents don't allow themselves to grasp the seriousness of the problem till after its all over.

Blogger tz October 16, 2013 8:38 AM  

Where were the FATHERS?

But isn't the bully-ette exactly what feminists want women to be?

And in the scazied gammified environment, I can see why there was no defenders for the bullied girl. Though I expect hand-wringing blog posts and such now.

In Christendom, we are our brother's and sister's keeper. The strong protect the weak, the rich help the poor, the smart help the ignorant, as things are seen as grace and not entitlement or karma. That has been done away with. God the Father is ignored or minimized even in the church (except muslims), so the image of Fatherhood is defaced (Dalrock's review of Craven [courageous] comes to mjnd).

Men used to protect their mothers, wives, and daughters. And even women they didn't know. Feminism told them they didn't need protection. They got their wish. Men now stand by and watch passively. The Men on Strike has gone beyond marriage.

Where is the gun-toting gamma gang when you need them?

Anonymous DT October 16, 2013 8:43 AM  

Of course everyone will throw a complete fit if you threaten consequences, especially the women. So what? The point isn't your reputation among the wicked and the foolish, it is the protection of your children.

Well said, and it applies to so much more then just bullying.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:45 AM  

"Even to argue that point is like saying, "well, at least I'm not as big a pussy as that guy." "

And here's the thing... some people really are big pussies. And.. those people have parents.

Also remember I was specifically addressing female on female bullying... which is very different than male on male bullying.

Anonymous MendoScot October 16, 2013 8:47 AM  

OT (sorta): She's baaack:

What I conclude from my own research is that despite the transformation in gender roles at certain colorful moments in history, such as Shakespeare’s London, when Puritan preachers inveighed against a fad for cross-dressing, there is eventually and predictably a return to a polarized norm. Furthermore, gender experimentation, while very intriguing to us today, has usually remained an exceptional practice that was not embraced by the majority in any given society. Finally, a volatility in gender roles is usually symptomatic of tensions and anxieties about larger issues. That is, sexual identity becomes a primary focus only when other forms of identification and affiliation—religious, national, tribal, familial—break down. Furthermore, while androgyny or transgender fluidity is currently regarded as progressive, such phenomena have at times helped trigger a severe counter-reaction that could last for centuries. For example, the permissiveness of imperial Rome, with its empty, ritualistic religion, created an ethical vacuum soon filled by a massive spiritual movement from the eastern Mediterranean— Christianity, which two millennia later remains a powerful global presence. Elite Romans vacationing in Pompeii or Capri undoubtedly felt that their relaxed, hedonistic world would go on forever.
...
Our present system of primary and secondary education should be stringently reviewed for its confinement of boys to a prison-like setting that curtails their energy and requires ideological renunciation of male traits. By the time young middleclass men emerge from college these days, they have been smoothed and ground down to obedient clones. The elite universities have become police states where an army of deans, sub-deans and faculty committees monitor and sanction male undergraduate speech and behavior if it violates the establishment feminist code. The now routine surveillance of students’ dating lives on American campuses would be unthinkable in Europe. Campus gender theorists can merrily wave their anti-male flag, when every man within ten miles has fled underground.


Anonymous DT October 16, 2013 8:48 AM  

Nate - A primary problem here is that parents almost never realize the severity of a problem until its far to late.

Parents and teachers can't seem to calibrate their responses. They will treat behavior that would be criminal in the adult world as kids being kids. Then, after a few suicides or murders, they flip out and start suspending 2nd graders for squirt guns. Or even half eaten sandwiches that sort of, maybe, at the right angle, look kind of like guns.

I've never been able to figure out the reason. Are these people really this binary and stupid?

Anonymous Van October 16, 2013 8:49 AM  

Oh, I know. I'm just saying it's a sad state of affairs when the best we can do is say, those people in Europe are bigger pussies than we are. Big deal, we're still pussies.

Maybe not you, me, most of the regulars here, or even a decent chunk of Americans. But Americans, in general? Yes.

Anonymous RedJack October 16, 2013 8:50 AM  

My point is one of perspective. (I will admit I am not familiar with the case in question)

Physicially confronting the bully as an adult is problematic. A better choice might have been to remove the child from the school. Now if your child is in immediate danger, then yes go in and put an end to the threat. But most of this is verbal. My bride is a teacher, and has taught in public and private schools. We have a good lawyer on retainer for such things. His advice has been that if the bullying is physical, get involved. Verbal or ebullying, report to the supervisors and document. Getting involved in a verbal situation will lead to the parents of the bully charging you with bullying. It has happened often enough that many of the teachers at the school have looked into legal represenation. My favorite is the kid who was beating the crap out of others suddenly claiming it was because he was gay in order to sue the school and the parents of his victums.

Yes she teaches in IL, and the legal climate is stupid. Which is another reason why we are going to send our kids to private school or home school once our finances get in line.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:52 AM  

"Where were the FATHERS?"

There aren't any. There are only neutered facsimilies of fathers that co-habitate but have no voice.

In the 60s and 70s everyone knew that fighting and fueding and bullying could only go so far... but at some point parents would get involved... and if one dad talked to the other dad... one or both kids was going to get the beating of their father.

That doesn't happen anymore... because there is no community anymore. Every family is an island.

Anonymous Maximus October 16, 2013 8:53 AM  

#fatshaming

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:54 AM  

"A better choice might have been to remove the child from the school"

The parents of the girl in question did this. The bullying continued.

Next suggestion.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 8:57 AM  

"Oh, I know. I'm just saying it's a sad state of affairs when the best we can do is say, those people in Europe are bigger pussies than we are. Big deal, we're still pussies. "

oh. you were responding to that comment. I apologize. The synapses fire slowly this morning... though the coffee is strong.

Anonymous Van October 16, 2013 9:04 AM  

Nate-

Not a problem. Miscommunications on the interwebs are common.

Blogger Rantor October 16, 2013 9:08 AM  

The last time I was bullied (8th grade I think) my mother had had enough. She had talked to bullies' parents before to no avail... It was off to Karate class. For the next few years I had Karate two to three days a week. Mom could probably barely afford it, but it was the right thing to do.

Over 30 years later and I've only had one fight since, I'd call it a draw, although the part were I fell down a flight of stairs and went through a glass door was kinda exciting. Polizei came, took the other guy and his knife away.

Anonymous Van October 16, 2013 9:19 AM  

I have an older brother who got me accustomed to fighting bigger and stronger opponents - nothing like experience and training.
---
A nephew just started middle school. Towards the end of 5th grade, his teacher spent significant time explaining to the kids how they would likely be bullied when they started at the new school. Seems like this does nothing but put ideas into the bully-prone kids' heads while conditioning the other kids to expect it as a normal part of life.

This, combined with the fact that kids are taught that to fight back makes them just as bad as their attacker.

Anonymous Golf Pro October 16, 2013 9:32 AM  

My dad passed when I was fairly young. But not before teaching me how to throw an elbow when down by the baseline, early in the first quarter while being held by a larger and taller player. Scoring by the basket became much easier after that.

If you don't teach your child to defend themselves (and make sure they know its OK to defend themselves) they'll miss out on too many opportunities and experiences.

The corollary to this is the ability to take a punch and continue on. Lots of kids won't stand up for themselves because they fear being hit. But once they realize that they can actually take a punch, that fear goes away and it's a much different game.

Finally, if parents don't want to expose their children to potential physical confrontations in sports, there's always golf. In years of playing, I've only seen one fight on a golf course. The accused cheater was never accused of cheating again, he got his money and there was no mention of the incident at the club. As it should be.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 9:36 AM  

Getting involved in a verbal situation will lead to the parents of the bully charging you with bullying.

I don't think you understand. It's not "getting involved in a verbal situation". And people tend to take those who clearly don't give a flying fuck about the law fairly seriously.

The inability of the criminal justice system to do anything significant to criminals cuts both ways, after all. As for me, well, my father went to federal prison for 12 years for a principle I deem considerably less important than protecting my children's lives. I don't care in the slightest about the possibility of a suspended 30-day sentence for telling some parents "either you will make it stop or I will".

Anonymous rho October 16, 2013 9:37 AM  

Honestly, I'm not sure we're wired to deal with the kind of bullying that can happen on Facebook or whatever social media. It's not one-on-one, and many times it's not even physical. Add to that the stew of hormones and half-formed brains of teens and pre-teens, plus the herd instinct that seems inherent in social animals like humans, and you've got a bad situation.

I don't have a relevant example in my past that is equal to, say, my entire junior high class sending me a message to fuck off and die. It's not even enough to keep my kids off of social media. Just the knowledge that there's a "Suzy Smithers is a Bitch and Everybody Hates Her" Facebook page can be pretty traumatizing to a young kid.

I dunno what the answer is. Maybe it's to make the parents responsible for their children's actions. All those anti-bullying campaigns tend to be limp, but it's clear that something needs to be said.

I wonder what our "webscale" society will be like in a generation.

Anonymous ? October 16, 2013 9:38 AM  

Yeah, our kids aren't on any social media. There is no need for them to be on it.

No email accounts either?

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 9:39 AM  

If you don't teach your child to defend themselves (and make sure they know its OK to defend themselves) they'll miss out on too many opportunities and experiences.

This is absolutely true. But, as I noted, you also have to be willing to step in and help them when they find defend themselves but find themselves outnumbered, outgunned, or otherwise overwhelmed to a life-threatening extent. That's your job, as a parent, and particularly as a father.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 9:43 AM  

Just the knowledge that there's a "Suzy Smithers is a Bitch and Everybody Hates Her" Facebook page can be pretty traumatizing to a young kid.

That's true. I wonder if part of the inability of so many members of the warren to grasp that I am simply not concerned about their approval is somehow related to that observation. A lot of people do find that sort of thing difficult and likely find it hard to understand someone who doesn't.

Anonymous Golf Pro October 16, 2013 9:47 AM  

"This is absolutely true. But, as I noted, you also have to be willing to step in and help them when they find defend themselves but find themselves outnumbered, outgunned, or otherwise overwhelmed to a life-threatening extent. That's your job, as a parent, and particularly as a father."

Of course you do. That would be the definition of good parenting. And I think the corollary to this is one of the things my father taught me that we passed on consciously and regularly to our kids: "Pick your battles well, then commit". It applies to confrontations, business, and nearly everything else.

Anonymous Thomas Brother October 16, 2013 9:49 AM  

God forgive me, but when I was bullied I never thought about harming myself, I thought about harming the bully. And if my child was bullied, I'd hold the other child's parents personally responsible.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 9:51 AM  

Honestly, I'm not sure we're wired to deal with the kind of bullying that can happen on Facebook or whatever social media. It's not one-on-one, and many times it's not even physical. Add to that the stew of hormones and half-formed brains of teens and pre-teens, plus the herd instinct that seems inherent in social animals like humans, and you've got a bad situation.

I agree. This isn't like the bullying that took place when most of y'all were kids. The girl probably received messages on a daily or hourly basis from several people telling her to kill herself. For months.

Blogger IM2L844 October 16, 2013 9:51 AM  

Next suggestion.

Shock and awe. There was a boy giving my daughter some grief in high school once and it looked to me like it had the potential to get out of hand. I sought the boy out at a track meet. He knew who I was and greeted me as I put my face nose to nose with his. I simply said, "I have no qualms about spending the rest of my life in prison" and walked away. I was only half bluffing.

Later, my daughter told me he said to her, "Your dad's crazy" and she replied, "little bit". That was the end of that. She still likes telling that story.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 9:55 AM  

God forgive me, but when I was bullied I never thought about harming myself, I thought about harming the bully.

Are you a teenage girl?

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:01 AM  

"Shock and awe. "

Again... we're talking about girls here. male vs male bullying is not the same as girl vs girl bullying.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:03 AM  

"Honestly, I'm not sure we're wired to deal with the kind of bullying that can happen on Facebook or whatever social media. It's not one-on-one, and many times it's not even physical. Add to that the stew of hormones and half-formed brains of teens and pre-teens, plus the herd instinct that seems inherent in social animals like humans, and you've got a bad situation."

Oh bullshit. Yes it is different. But you tell me how parents are inequpped to deal with it when all they have to do is take away the kid's cellphone and kill all access to their social media.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 10:07 AM  

Oh bullshit. Yes it is different. But you tell me how parents are inequpped to deal with it when all they have to do is take away the kid's cellphone and kill all access to their social media.

I think sending screenshots of the messages to the bully's parents might be an effective way of informing them what a little monster their girl is.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:10 AM  

"I think sending screenshots of the messages to the bully's parents might be an effective way of informing them what a little monster their girl is."

My girl didn't send those! Her account got hacked!

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:16 AM  

Nate's solution to female cyber bullying:

Parent of victim screenshots the offensive messages... a lot of them. Parent then sends friend requests to the parents of the bullies. Parent then posts the screen shots to his own facebook wall... and tags all the parents in the screenshots.

Problem Solved.

Anonymous rho October 16, 2013 10:24 AM  

Oh bullshit. Yes it is different. But you tell me how parents are inequpped to deal with it when all they have to do is take away the kid's cellphone and kill all access to their social media.

Like I said, just knowing it's out there is bad. Maybe it's not suicide bad, but it's probably not zero.

The best analog equivalent I can think of is a giant billboard, with an unflattering picture of you, saying what a huge douche you are. Even if that billboard is in a part of town you never visit, it's unlikely to have zero effect on your psyche. Now imagine being thirteen with that billboard.

If you're super confident, or possibly mildly autistic, maybe it wouldn't bother you. Some people are wired to be contrarian, and might even see it as a badge of honor. But that's a small number of people.

Sure, you can yank your kid out of the public schools, but you can't unring that bell.

Blogger IM2L844 October 16, 2013 10:28 AM  

Again... we're talking about girls here.

With minimal creativity, it's an adaptively malleable strategy. Just because you can't see how it might work with girls doesn't mean that it can't or wouldn't. The point is that as a parent you can't be afraid or hesitant about throwing yourself into the mix whenever you think it's necessary. You don't waste time over-thinking every possible consequence or fretting over every potential scenario.

Blogger Greatheart October 16, 2013 10:29 AM  

Josh October 16, 2013 8:04 AM, "How long until a parent takes justice into their own hands?"

A former coworker of mine's young son was being bullied, so he decided to go to the boys house and shoot him... in the face. He was given a life sentence. The boy will never bully anyone again, but Tab will never be able to watch his grow up or do anything with him, at least not until he is too old to do very much. Was it worth it?

Blogger Miguel D'Anconia October 16, 2013 10:35 AM  

A great reason to homeschool. Also, had that been my child, I would have told the parents of the f'ed up kids picking on her that they either handle it or I will. If they didn't stop it, the kids disappear for a while.....

Also, girls are exceptionally cruel, always have been. Modern parenting is a joke.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:38 AM  

"Sure, you can yank your kid out of the public schools, but you can't unring that bell."

yes. you can. You can take action against the parents to insure that they see that the groups are removed. Then you can show your kid that they are removed. You can contact the various social media companies involved and they can remove the groups.

Isolating your child from the incoming barrage will absolutely take the pressure off. Will it completely alleviate everything? No. But its step one.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:41 AM  

"Was it worth it?"

I don't know where it happened... but generally life sentences are actually only 20 years for the purposes of parole... and you generally only serve 25% of your sentence in many states. So odds are Tab will actually have his dad back in a few years... depending on where it happened and the actual specifics of the sentence.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 10:42 AM  

Also... I will note that Tab is alive... and so yes. It was worth it.

Anonymous Heh October 16, 2013 11:04 AM  

God forgive me, but when I was bullied I never thought about harming myself, I thought about harming the bully.

Oh I didn't just think about it...

And you're not just fighting this bully, you are sending a message to all other potential bullies.

Anonymous RC October 16, 2013 11:14 AM  

There is deep satisfaction once you've reached a point with a son that you no longer worry about his being able to take care of himself. I'm traveling a lot during the week right now and we live in a remote area, so the night before I left the family, I asked the boy: "Locked and loaded?" "Yes." "Good night son." "Good night dad." Sweet sleep.

Anonymous Not Steve Sailer October 16, 2013 11:18 AM  

Breaking story...

Exercise-loving mother-of-three is branded a 'fat-shaming bully' after posing for advert asking 'what's your excuse?'



PS... you'll like this one too:

Photo of couple engaging in public sex act actually picture of rape, female student says




Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 11:19 AM  

Breaking story...

You don't read alpha game, do you?

Anonymous rho October 16, 2013 11:28 AM  

Isolating your child from the incoming barrage will absolutely take the pressure off. Will it completely alleviate everything? No. But its step one.

I agree that it is step one. But "out of sight, out of mind" only really works on infants and dogs.

There's a difference between a remedy and a solution. Yours is a decent remedy; I don't know that there is a solution. But dismissing it as trivial is neither a remedy nor a solution.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 11:31 AM  

Was it worth it?

It totally depends upon how bad the bullying was. Did his son get called a fairy once? Then no. Was there reason to believe his life was in danger after the bully had been told to stop harassing him? Then yes.

Anonymous Temujin October 16, 2013 11:33 AM  

Mendo Scot:"By the time young middleclass men emerge from college these days, they have been smoothed and ground down to obedient clones."

Sadly, it will take another mass war to forge a revived manhood. Over sixty years have passed since our last one. As long as we win it and don't subsequently suffer a Nuremberg trial that kills off our most heroic survivors.

Anonymous VD October 16, 2013 11:34 AM  

My girl didn't send those! Her account got hacked!

Do such people even realize that it can easily be checked if an account was, in fact, hacked or not? I'm assuming not, under the MPAI principle.

Anonymous Sheila October 16, 2013 11:41 AM  

tz - you were one of the only ones to mention what I first wondered upon reading this story at the Mail online - WHERE ARE THE FATHERS? There are multiple issues here - beginning and ending with single mothers. From that evil issues all the others: mommies being "friends" with their children, mommies being more concerned with their children having the latest toys than with their inability to make good choices, mommies falsely boosting a child's self esteem, mommies being unaware of what their child is doing or what their child is going through, mommies not teaching their children themselves. . . ad infinitum. That the bully ought to have been confronted long before this goes without saying. That female bullying can be far more insidious than male bullying should also be assumed. Cyber bullying merely puts this in a different scale, but does not fundamentally alter the nature of the problem. Girls have been socially isolating other girls for decades, at least. Obviously, the bullying girl's mother was a huge part of the problem. That said, WHY DOES A GIRL OF 13 HAVE A "FORMER" BOYFRIEND?!!!! If your barely pubescent daughter isn't dating (as she shouldn't be) and if that same barely pubescent daughter is being properly supervised (i.e. leading a healthy life including eating and exercising as necessary for normal development which does not lead to being fat - either in the teenage-girl sense or the real sense) then there is no problem to begin with.

A plague on both their houses!!

Anonymous Carlotta October 16, 2013 11:42 AM  

Girl bullying is very different then guy bullying. Girls want to destroy other girls. Guys really just shit test until they get knocked out.

Girls really need someone to step in.

I cannot fathom being that hopeless child where someone is torturing you and no one defends you. My Father made it known that he would defend our family with his life on the few occasions we were unable to handle the bullying. Usually the Mothers would talk, if that did not work. The Dads did. My Father made it clear that it had better be handled. It was.

My parents also threatened lawsuits the one time this gigantic girl wanted to fight me constantly. I honestly couldn't take her. I told them. The public apology they insisted on was enjoyable. So was the expensive private school telling her in no uncertain terms that she was gone if I told them she bothered me again.

Of course, now the school would have probably threatened my parents.

Hence, homeschooling, strict supervision of children (duh) and self defense.

I don't understand why Ender was punished and I think Vox is right to fight to get that changed. If you make the rule "no fighting" then the bullying is going to explode. If you make the rule "no bullying, self defense is allowed" then children are going to watch themselves.



Anonymous Carlotta October 16, 2013 11:45 AM  

Do such people even realize that it can easily be checked if an account was, in fact, hacked or not? I'm assuming not, under the MPAI principle.

I think you might be surprised how many people just bold face lie. I am talking, "No, the sky is purple and if you correct me I will get violent!" kind of lying.
You say MPAI, I say sadly that they are also MPAL.

Anonymous hausfrau October 16, 2013 11:53 AM  

The article doesn't provide many details but the mother of the victim clearly didn't do enough or know how to address this. What I think she should have done?
-take screen shot of all the bullying messages. Document everything and deliver it to the police station and the school. Then confront the parents with a copy of records and let them know you gave copies to authorities. Let the parents know you will seek legal remedy through a civil suit for psych damages, restraining order, etc.
-Why was the victim allowed to access her iphone and social media once it became clear she was crumbling emotionally? It seems from the article that she was still able to see all these messages even after being pulled out of school and self-mutilating. What the hell was her mother thinking?
-A child who is victimized to the point of self-mutilating shouldn't have been allowed out alone. When did these bullies have access to her in person? Why was there no adult there? That would be the time to physically confront them if needed.
Bullying among girls and women, as noted, is not like boys. You can beat up a girl bully and she will still spread rumors that you're a lesbian or a slut. If her parents don't address the problem they need to be punished legally

Anonymous Anonymous October 16, 2013 12:09 PM  

> Girls really need someone to step in.

Oh, depends on the girl. One of my friends' daughters, 9 years old at the time, had the cool kids decide she'd be a good target.

One pencil stabbed completely through a hand later, that stopped.

Anonymous Credo in Unum Deum October 16, 2013 12:12 PM  

"Start no fights. Finishing all fights."

That is the advice one should give to their children with regards to bullying and fighting in general. If someone is bothering you, tell them forcefully to leave you alone. It is best to walk away, but if they do put their hands on you, all bets are off, and whatever you do, know that I got your back and will be there when the smoke clears.

The reverse is also applicable: If I can see that my child is becoming, or already is, a bully, I will sit them down, and talk some sense into them. If they start something, and end up getting their ass kicked, or arrested, or if they get shot like Trayvon Martin did, they'll get no sympathy from me.



At the end of the day, VD, it is still just a soccer club, it isn't like the last seat on Noah's Ark. You survived just fine before you joined, you'll be fine if you get kicked out, or if you voluntarily leave it.

Anonymous Susan October 16, 2013 12:21 PM  

Great comments by Nate, Josh and Carlotta today. Punishing a kid for defending himself is an issue that has been around for a long time. School administrators will never admit it, but their refusal to stand up to the bullies as the authority in charge has only exacerbated the problem until it is now pretty much out of control. Vox is right on the money for addressing this on behalf of his son.

The problem of "my little Johnny or Jane would never do that" syndrome has been around for as long as there have been public schools. And from previous posts here by our host, we all know how "mean as a snake" nasty some women can be. What we are witnessing now is that same phenomena, with the help of technology, starting earlier in the female life.

That technology tends to render both parties essentially faceless, so the most brazen cowardly bully can viscously attack someone without the threat of getting hit back for their efforts.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 12:25 PM  

This is a new thing.....involving law enforcement in children's squabbles. When I was growing up, a bully was someone who beat the tar out of the other kids on a fairly frequent basis.....sometimes on the playground but usually on the way home from school when there is no adults around. Later, bullies changed with the times. There was still the occasional fist fight, but mostly what we got was strong-armed robbery, intimidation, and humiliation. The political issue to bullying was first racial conflict and then added similar protections for sissy boys. Now they want to define bullying to include the catty behavior of hateful little girls. (I hate her. She called me a name. She is so mean and all my friends hate her too.) This is not a matter for the police.

Anonymous Susan October 16, 2013 12:29 PM  

Carlotta, I have come to believe that most parents are liars regarding their kids, because they can't face the undeniable truth, known by everyone else, that they have totally failed their kids by raising children who are monsters and that nobody likes at all.
It is really hard for people to admit they are failures at the basics. When a parent of a bullied child tries to talk to the parents of the bully, the first response they will probably get is the old "are you calling me a bad(rotten) parent"? Most people would rather not get into the hysterics of that whole situation at all. I have been told by reliable sources that most teachers want to avoid that too.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 12:39 PM  

"This is a new thing.....involving law enforcement in children's squabbles"

It stopped being a squabble when the kid killed herself.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 12:41 PM  

Nate....."It stopped being a squabble when the kid killed herself."

Killing yourself does not mean it is someone else's fault.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 12:44 PM  

Nate....."It stopped being a squabble when the kid killed herself."

Killing yourself does not mean it is someone else's fault.

The same goes for homosexuals who are "outed". I have no obligation to tiptoe around their sensibilities so they won't jump off a bridge or hang themselves or slit their wrists. If they get ashamed or embarassed and off themselves, I really do not care.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 12:52 PM  

Now they want to define bullying to include the catty behavior of hateful little girls. (I hate her. She called me a name. She is so mean and all my friends hate her too.) This is not a matter for the police.

Do you consider stalking or harassment a matter for the police?

Anonymous Jack Amok October 16, 2013 12:52 PM  

Where were the FATHERS?

But isn't the bully-ette exactly what feminists want women to be?

And in the scazied gammified environment, I can see why there was no defenders for the bullied girl.
Men used to protect their mothers, wives, and daughters. And even women they didn't know. Feminism told them they didn't need protection. They got their wish. Men now stand by and watch passively. The Men on Strike has gone beyond marriage.


When I was in High School, a friend of mine was dating a girl who started bullying another girl. She thought the other girl was flirting with my friend, so she started the same sort of social mean-girl crap. My friend found out about it and - 15 year old him - told his girlfriend to knock it off and apologize.

She knocked it off and apologized.

But that was three decades ago. We're not the same people we used to be.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 12:58 PM  

" If they get ashamed or embarassed and off themselves, I really do not care."

When Tad's comments are several standard deviations more intelligent than Don's... there is a problem.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 1:21 PM  

Josh....."Do you consider stalking or harassment a matter for the police?"

This is another example of behaviors that have become criminalized in my lifetime. Trespassing is an old body of laws that predate the modern era. Stalking and harassment are not something I would call the fuzz about, since I do not consider it a crime. I cannot even imagine explaining to the cop how I counted the number of times so-and-so drove down my street or maybe even walked in front of my house on the sidewalk. Oh My God, officer......YOU have to DO something!

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 1:25 PM  

" If they get ashamed or embarassed and off themselves, I really do not care."

Nate...."When Tad's comments are several standard deviations more intelligent than Don's... there is a problem."

Not a problem, Nate. I am just not in favor of a police state.....or even worse.....a nanny state. I never thought you were a statist until now.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 2:09 PM  

Not I, said the pig.

Anonymous Northern Observer October 16, 2013 2:09 PM  

VD: "The bullies and the parents deserve to be put through years of legal hell"

Could you expand on that?

Was there physical violence involved? I know that there was a text from the bully saying that she wanted to fight the victim, but I don't see much beyond that.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 2:19 PM  

Stalking and harassment are not something I would call the fuzz about, since I do not consider it a crime. I cannot even imagine explaining to the cop how I counted the number of times so-and-so drove down my street or maybe even walked in front of my house on the sidewalk.

You are, presumably, not a fourteen year old girl.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 2:21 PM  

Not a problem, Nate. I am just not in favor of a police state.....or even worse.....a nanny state. I never thought you were a statist until now

Don, I'll have to put it in terms you can understand.

Imagine that instead of two girls threatening the victim, it was two pitbulls...

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 2:22 PM  

Am I reading this thread correctly? Are some of you actually favoring the idea of criminal charges in the case of the girls?

If their actions met the legal definition of stalking, harassment, or something else, yes.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 2:33 PM  

"Am I reading this thread correctly? Are some of you actually favoring the idea of criminal charges in the case of the girls?"

Yes. Though I wouldn't create a new law for it.

I would apply Man Slaughter. Though... given the texts that say things like "Go Drink Bleach and Die" a case could be made for 2nd degree murder as well.

The victim of the bullying is to blame for her own suicide. That is not in question. However blame is not a zero sum game. More than one party can be 100% at fault.

So absolutely I applaud the charges and wish they were stiffer.

If someone wants to argue that the parents of the bullies should be charged instead... I'm ok with that.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 2:34 PM  

" I never thought you were a statist until now."

Is one a status for arguing that murder should be illegal? Is one a status for arguing for the existence of Man Slaughter laws?

What a curious definition of "statist" you must have.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 2:43 PM  

also note that the same "anti-statists" complaining about the law being involved are the very ones that want to run straight for the police when we start talking about scary doggies.

Anonymous Passinthrough October 16, 2013 2:45 PM  

There are numerous adult aged people who do not know how to act like adults. I submit there is no longer a standard for "adult behaviour." This is a challenge to the rising generation. How can children learn adult behaviour if the so called "adults" in their lives do not act like adults? The young tyrants are proliferating because they have no adult supervision. The young victims are dying for the same reason.

Anonymous Scintan October 16, 2013 2:50 PM  

My posts seem to be disappearing, so I'll try one more and hope it sticks...


The idea of anyone being charged because of 'threats' or 'comments' made over the computer should be a cause for revulsion. The fact that any of the sane regulars from here, much less someone like Nate, would be in favor of such a thing, is a black mark of shame on this place.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 2:55 PM  

"The idea of anyone being charged because of 'threats' or 'comments' made over the computer should be a cause for revulsion. "

Strange... it appears no law enforcement in the world makes a distinquishment between written threats and digital threats.

Do enlighten us.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 2:57 PM  

Also... it is with no small amusement that I note that Slander and Libel laws exist.

And now... we mock you. As you well deserve... for going full retard.

Anonymous Scintan October 16, 2013 3:03 PM  

Also... it is with no small amusement that I note that Slander and Libel laws exist.

And now... we mock you. As you well deserve... for going full retard.


You apparently didn't bother to actually read the article.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 3:16 PM  

Nate....."Is one a status for arguing that murder should be illegal? Is one a status for arguing for the existence of Man Slaughter laws?
What a curious definition of "statist" you must have."

As well you know, suicide is not murder and it is not manslaughter. Any suggestion that you kill yourself, is rude and hateful speech, for sure......but it is hardly a felony in a free society. Some people would like to make unhappiness a felony and find someone to blame. They have already legislated "hate speech" to be a felony. (Anyboody have some rope hanging around?) Is that enough? No, it will never be enough.

Nate......"also note that the same "anti-statists" complaining about the law being involved are the very ones that want to run straight for the police when we start talking about scary doggies."

English (and American) common law holds people absolutely responsible for what their dogs do to the public. This is not a new concept and since some individuals have yet to confer civil rights on pets, it is not a matter that need involve the police. Many places enforce disturbing the peace violations and consider some actions by dogs to be a public nuisance. This is not an opinion. Even when dogs kill people, and they sometimes do, I know of no one who was charged with murder or manslaughter because of the actions of their doggie. Legally speaking, it is no different from using a revolver or a few sticks of dynamite. Even in the absense of a crime, there remains the tort liability.

Comparing family pets to underage girls is not the issue. Pets would never be charged with a crime. You, sir, would charge children with crimes (which we do not do in this society) because of something they said? (When I was a child, I spake as a child.)

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 3:18 PM  

The same goes for homosexuals who are "outed". I have no obligation to tiptoe around their sensibilities so they won't jump off a bridge or hang themselves or slit their wrists. If they get ashamed or embarassed and off themselves, I really do not care.

This is different. This is more than "Hey, you did X!" in a society where X is increasingly accepted.

This is "I'm going to destroy you and everything you ever cared about. I'm going to ensure that the rest of your life has no meaning. You will have this following you around for the rest of your foreseeable life, and nobody can stop me. Nobody WILL stop me. You are all alone in the world, and I will say about you and do to you anything I like...as long as I want to. And I want to do it until the day you die. Death is your only escape."

There's a point at which it stops being bullying and starts being systematic destruction of people, and society does have a demonstrable stake in ensuring that innocent people don't get destroyed on someone else's whim. The king is supposed to protect the weak and innocent as well.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 3:24 PM  

"English (and American) common law holds people absolutely responsible for what their dogs do to the public."

And what does English Common Law hold on libel and slander?

And what does English Common Law hold on parents being responsible for the actions of their children in EXACTLY the same way they are responsible for the actions of their dogs?

Or did you skip the bit where I said it was fine if someone wanted to charge the parents instead of the kids as well?

Take a minute and think Don.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 3:26 PM  

Personally, I do not give a crap is my neighbor keeps a bear, or a tiger, or a lion for a pet......as long as they keep it in their own yard. When said pet gets in my back yard, I have reason to be interested.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 3:30 PM  

To add another thought to what I just wrote, consider this:

Kids are told often and repeatedly how easy it is to make and keep friends. Children's programming always has the protagonists "just be themselves" and even the bad kids will eventually become their friends. Kids are taught that all they have to do is "turn the other cheek" and bullies will magically go away.

Sometimes there's a "loner" character. He's kind of weird. But even he seldom lasts more than a half-hour episode before he too becomes folded into the Circle of Friends, unless he's pure evil (and even then, sometimes).

And even the evil kids have "friends", or at least minions. Nobody is ever depicted as alone in kids' literature or TV or movies.

Fill a kid's head with this, and then see how well they deal with suddenly being a complete outcast. After all, unless you possess qualities that make you utterly undesirable, you will always have friends, right? Right?

The question then comes up...What's wrong with me?

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 3:34 PM  

"Personally, I do not give a crap is my neighbor keeps a bear, or a tiger, or a lion for a pet......as long as they keep it in their own yard. When said pet gets in my back yard, I have reason to be interested."

Which is precisely my opinion as well. The difference is... I shoot the critter... and you run to the State to save you.

Then you call me a statist.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 3:37 PM  

"You apparently didn't bother to actually read the article."

And you apparently aren't bothering to think before you comment.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 3:39 PM  

The question then comes up...What's wrong with me?

Your meatloaf, for starters

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 3:41 PM  

Nate......"And what does English Common Law hold on libel and slander?"

Neither libel or slander have been traditionally a felony crime. They are torts. Modern law has removed the requirement that the statement be untrue. (The fact that it is a true statement is not a defense.) Modern law has also removed the malicious intent. (One need not intend to cause harm by the statement.) But it is very difficult to hold children accountable for libel or slander and even more difficult to sue their parents because the kids said "mean things". We notice extraordinary events, like this well-publicized case resulting in a tragic suicide of a child, but there is not a ready and reliable remedy at law, even if the police are called in.

Nate......"And what does English Common Law hold on parents being responsible for the actions of their children in EXACTLY the same way they are responsible for the actions of their dogs?"

Once again, there is no felony crime, at most a lawyer might squeeze a tort out of the parents of the bullies. If a prosecutor wants to grab some headlines in time for the upcoming re-election, they might make a showtrial out of the tragedy, but the voters would much rather see adults tried and punished than children (or their hapless parents). Maybe a juvenile judge would ban the accused kids from using the internet till they were 18 (that has happened), or make them pick up trash along the roadside on Saturdays until they graduate high school.....but I honestly do not see much more than this.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 3:45 PM  

"The question then comes up...What's wrong with me?"

Your meatloaf, for starters


That's what I get for omitting the quotation marks.

And by the way, my meat loaf works perfectly fine, thank you--as long as I intend to do what it does.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 3:48 PM  

Nate....."Which is precisely my opinion as well. The difference is... I shoot the critter... and you run to the State to save you.
Then you call me a statist."

My good fellow.....(grin)......I have shot plenty of them.
One very early morning, the chief of police got me out of bed to tell me he was looking for an "Indian Dog". I told him I have no idea what kind of dog that might be. He said, it is a dog running around the neighborhood with an arrow through his middle. I laughed. Then he asked me if it was my arrow. So I told him, when you find this "Indian Dog", you can bring the arrow and compare it to the ones I have and see if there is a match.....but no, I have not seen your "Indian Dog".
I do not call the cops.
In fact....the cops call me.

Blogger Nate October 16, 2013 3:51 PM  

Don

You know damned well we try children as adults in cases involving death quite frequently.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 3:54 PM  

Okay, Don. Let's try this.

Let's say a nation with a powerful military takes a prisoner. Instead of killing him or physically torturing him, they don't even lock him in a room by himself. They allow the other prisoners to terrorize him until he begs to be put in solitary.

Then they start delivering "messages" and giving him "news". His wife has been seen out on the town with his brother; here's the photos. His parents have disavowed him; here's the press release. His unit calls him a traitor because they SOMEHOW got the idea he'd already talked. Does he know that his children are begging on the streets and his oldest daughter is prostituting herself to the [military] soldiers? What a shame...

They then "accidentally" leave him a length of rope, and are shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, to find out the next morning that he's committed suicide.

But because this is just "saying mean things", the [military] guys aren't REALLY responsible for his death--even though that was the plan all along. Right?

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 4:17 PM  

Sigyn......Why go to so much trouble? Just hang him, if that is necessary, and say it was suicide......or say he got sick.....or he tried to escape and was shot......or he killed another prisoner and was executed for the crime. Really not that hard to fake a suicide in this situation. Would they lie about it?

Blogger tz October 16, 2013 4:20 PM  

@Passingthru There are numerous adult aged people who do not know how to act like adults. I submit there is no longer a standard for "adult behaviour." This is a challenge to the rising generation. How can children learn adult behaviour if the so called "adults" in their lives do not act like adults? The young tyrants are proliferating because they have no adult supervision. The young victims are dying for the same reason.

You confuse adult with civilized. Feminism tends toward barbarism, and worse, tends to open or even knock down the gates. The trojan horse must have been a mare. Beware the mare bearing men who dont' care.

Anonymous civilServant October 16, 2013 4:22 PM  

I'd not only warn the parents it had better stop, I'd speak to the bully and let them know in no uncertain terms that they had better pray to whatever deity or scientific process they believe in that nothing happened to my child, because neither they nor their family would survive the day it did.

For juveniles to speak this way to each other is one thing. For adults to speak this way to each other is similar. But for an adult to speak this way to a juvenile is another matter altogether and such an adult is likely to be scooped up the next day and given a new hobby.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 4:24 PM  

Why go to so much trouble? Just hang him, if that is necessary, and say it was suicide......or say he got sick.....or he tried to escape and was shot......or he killed another prisoner and was executed for the crime. Really not that hard to fake a suicide in this situation. Would they lie about it?

That's not the point. Are they or aren't they responsible for his death in that scenario?

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 4:26 PM  

Nate....."You know damned well we try children as adults in cases involving death quite frequently."

Absolutely. When underage persons kill someone, some states allow for charging them as adults. But saying "mean things" about or to someone is hardly a crime for adults, much less going to the difficulty of charging a minor.

If you (an adult) call me "fat" (which I am not) and "stupid" (which may have already happened) and it made me feel bad about myself.....and I killed myself (somehow).....would you be guilty of murder? manslaughter? libel/slander? OK, but guilty or not, would you ever be charged with a felony and sent to prison because of what you told me on this blog? I seriously doubt it.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 4:28 PM  

But for an adult to speak this way to a juvenile is another matter altogether and such an adult is likely to be scooped up the next day and given a new hobby.

So your take is, "Don't say mean things to people or else bigger people might get YOU." And you say this with the intent of deterring people from it.

You're always a treasure, cS, especially when you agree without realizing you agree.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 4:36 PM  

If you (an adult) call me "fat" (which I am not) and "stupid" (which may have already happened) and it made me feel bad about myself.....and I killed myself (somehow).....would you be guilty of murder?

Don, you still don't get that this goes way beyond "saying mean things once or twice". They isolated this girl, took away her ability to defend herself, took away even the safety of her own space, and then proceeded to stalk her and torment her until she broke and did what they said they wanted.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 4:38 PM  

Why go to so much trouble? Just hang him, if that is necessary, and say it was suicide......or say he got sick.....or he tried to escape and was shot......or he killed another prisoner and was executed for the crime. Really not that hard to fake a suicide in this situation. Would they lie about it?

Sigyn....."That's not the point. Are they or aren't they responsible for his death in that scenario?"

Very honestly, Sigyn. I do not believe ANYBODY would be held responsible for his death in that scenario.

Hermann Goering is believed to have killed himself with a cyanide tablet the night before his scheduled execution. (U.S. Army Private Herbert Lee Stivers, who served in the 1st Infantry Division's 26th Infantry Regiment—the honor guard for the Nuremberg Trials—claimed he gave Göring "medicine" hidden inside a fountain pen a German woman had asked him to smuggle into the prison.)

Heinrich Himmler ate a cyanide tablet hiden in his mouth, soon after being captured by the British. He did not live long enough to be put on trial.

Both men were notorious and known prisoners and both chose suicide. Who was held responsible for their deaths?

Anonymous civilServant October 16, 2013 4:47 PM  

But for an adult to speak this way to a juvenile is another matter altogether and such an adult is likely to be scooped up the next day and given a new hobby.

So your take is, "Don't say mean things to people or else bigger people might get YOU."


Well. If "that nothing happened to my child, because neither they nor their family would survive the day it did" is "mean".

And you say this with the intent of deterring people from it.

Are you deterred?

Reading through the comments I detect much raging anger at bullies. Talk of knives and faked suicides. Add this to all the raging anger against "government" and "churchianity" and so on and a certain picture begins to emerge.

Anonymous Josh October 16, 2013 4:49 PM  

Don, you're missing the point...badly.

However, you are providing an outstanding example of what mentioned this morning.

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 4:53 PM  

If you (an adult) call me "fat" (which I am not) and "stupid" (which may have already happened) and it made me feel bad about myself.....and I killed myself (somehow).....would you be guilty of murder?

Sigyn....."Don, you still don't get that this goes way beyond "saying mean things once or twice". They isolated this girl, took away her ability to defend herself, took away even the safety of her own space, and then proceeded to stalk her and torment her until she broke and did what they said they wanted."

Oh, I think I have been called "stupid" by Nate, much more than once or twice. Ha Ha.

Tragic event, to be sure. Go ahead.....charge them with "practicing medicine without a license".....charge them with participating in "assisted suicide"..... I would find it more interesting if one or more of the surviving girls were to admit that they are a jilted lesbian, who had it in for the victim because she would not join in their little reindeer games. Or maybe, they really hated her cause a boy they liked said she was cute. Or maybe she would not help them cheat on tests in class or ratted on them to one of the teachers. There is no end to this story and I am sure there will be more as the reporters dig deeper.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 4:58 PM  

I do not believe ANYBODY would be held responsible for his death in that scenario.

Being HELD responsible for something and BEING responsible for something are two very different things. Stop splitting hairs and answer the question: Are the jailers responsible for the prisoner's death, or not?

charge them with participating in "assisted suicide"...

Okay, now I know you're not even participating in this discussion in good faith.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 5:00 PM  

Well. If "that nothing happened to my child, because neither they nor their family would survive the day it did" is "mean".

It doesn't do anything more than make them feel bad, so yeah.

Are you deterred?

Does intent always result in outcome?

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 5:01 PM  

Josh......"Don, you're missing the point...badly.
However, you are providing an outstanding example of what mentioned this morning."

This is not even a Lord of The Flies moment, Josh. What are you going to do when there there is no lawful way to stone people to death for thought crimes or for blasphemy or otherwise abusing their "free speech" rights?

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 5:09 PM  

I do not believe ANYBODY would be held responsible for his death in that scenario.

Sigyn......"Being HELD responsible for something and BEING responsible for something are two very different things. Stop splitting hairs and answer the question: Are the jailers responsible for the prisoner's death, or not?"

A jailer is always responsible for the safety of his prisoner. When you accept a prisoner, you accept responsibility for their safety until they can be delivered to the executioner or otherwise transferred. It does not matter if they make the prisoner feel bad or drive them insane or cause them to kill themselves or even IF THEY DO NOTHING TO CAUSE IT. He is still their prisoner, and that includes protecting the prisoner from the other prisoners as well. A prisoner death is a failure not an achievement. The only exceptions I can think of is punishment of the prisoner for crimes committed as a prisoner and attempted escape.

Does that answer your question?

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 5:11 PM  

Oh, something occurs to me.

Since this is at least clearly a case of stalking, can the ringleader be charged with contributing to the delinquency of minors, seeing as she roped other kids into it?

God, it would be hilarious if they tried to use RICO here. Not that it would work, but it would be hilarious.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 5:14 PM  

Does that answer your question?

Yes, it does. Thank you. It also reminds me that my example is not quite "on" at all four corners, because of the absolute liability involved.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 5:15 PM  

And now I want to read "The Count of Monte Cristo" again.

Anonymous I Am Irony, Man October 16, 2013 5:27 PM  

Poor Tad commits suicide, and a LOT of people going to jail for manslaughter, round here.

Ayup.

Anonymous Sigyn October 16, 2013 5:50 PM  

Poor Tad commits suicide, and a LOT of people going to jail for manslaughter, round here.

Pfft. If he did and named VP in his suicide note, we would anyway. Remember the college kid?

Anyway, if any of the Ilk are spamming his Facebook and e-mail accounts with nasty-grams, I'd be surprised.

Blogger Revelation Means Hope October 16, 2013 5:56 PM  

@Don
"Even when dogs kill people, and they sometimes do, I know of no one who was charged with murder or manslaughter because of the actions of their doggie."

Yeah, except for all the people serving time in jail for exactly that crime. One of which made national news out of San Francisco about 12 years ago, especially when the husband and wife turned out to be complete wackos while in jail.

Anonymous I Am Irony, Man October 16, 2013 5:58 PM  

Ah, bully for him, then.

Anonymous Jay October 16, 2013 6:10 PM  

Bully children are created by bully parents.

Dear shitty parents: Stop fucking up your kids.

Anonymous Marellus October 16, 2013 6:56 PM  

What is the MPAI-principle ?

Anonymous WaterBoy October 16, 2013 8:34 PM  

MPAI = Most People Are Idiots

Blogger mmaier2112 October 16, 2013 8:35 PM  

Most
People
Are
Idiots

Anonymous Kat October 16, 2013 8:57 PM  

One could easily see how inducing criminal penalties on children for involvement in a suicide could lead to some very, very bad places.

We've heard about the scourge of "anti gay bullying" for years. What happens when the state decides that a classmate's disapproval of homosexuality was a contributing factor in the suicide of one of those gay teens? What if they decide that his pastor was responsible when he was reading from the Bible? What about an abortion clinic escort who is upset by a pro-life protester? Or a feminist who accidentally hears Blurred Lines played at a party?

Suicide (or threats of it) don't even have to be involved in these types of situations. All the victim has to do is claim emotional distress and she can throw anyone who upsets into jail. It's a great way to get rid of your political enemies. Or romantic rivals.

If this kind of thing is repeated amongst vicious little girls, it will be very easy for the aggressors to punish their victims by claiming they were bullied first.

Some sort of action may be warranted in this case, but it's a very fine line. There are plenty of people out there who would love nothing more than to throw their ideological opponents in jail for daring to oppose their POV.

(And before you ask, yes, I was bullied as a child. The bullies were never punished because they were deemed to have "bad home lives" while I was from the home of stable, married parents. The one time a black girl beat me up, the question of punishing her was never even considered, and the counselors didn't even bother looking for an excuse. Eventually I stopped complaining because it was hopeless. So I've been there. I just think getting the law involved in these situations will lead to nothing positive).

Anonymous DonReynolds October 16, 2013 9:48 PM  

Bravo, Kat.

Anonymous Marellus October 17, 2013 7:43 AM  

@WateBoy & @mmaier2012

If only I had as much pleasure reading that, as you did writing that ...

Oh well.

Blogger Nate October 17, 2013 8:44 AM  

"What are you going to do when there there is no lawful way to stone people to death for thought crimes or for blasphemy or otherwise abusing their "free speech" rights?"

And so "free speech" rights apply then to obscene phone calls?

Anonymous WaterBoy October 17, 2013 1:02 PM  

Marellus: "If only I had as much pleasure reading that"

Yes, reality sucks sometimes. Sorry to have spoiled your day, but you asked.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts