A little off topic but this is the one thing that really pisses me off about job centre staff, you look down at people for signing on and think you are better than them. When I was unemployed the worst thing about it was not the lack of money or the boredom it was the way job centre staff made me feel every fortnight. The staff are paid to help not to be so f****ng condescending when speaking to their clients (the unemployed). Before you try and deny you are one of these civil servant muppets perhaps you should reread your post and the context in which you mention the jobcentre. People like you make me sick.
But it's not unacceptable to defend yourself, it's admirable. A school is composed of humans and all humans have to judge the moral validity of violence at one time or another in their life, whether their decision has any impact on people or not. My school had a policy similar to this, anyone involved in a fight got suspended, even if you were simply defending yourself. Now that's bad teaching, to tell kids that it's wrong to defend yourself from violence.
and people like you make me laugh mate. I'll make it clear, I work in a council, not in the JCP and I agree with you, the JCP treats people like utter-crap alot of the time... I know why aswell, because that's how their treated unfortunatly. Don't get me wrong, the 90% of people who want a job to get off JSA/IS/ESA whatever are lovely people, but they are blotted out by the 10% who are slacking, idle and insultive excuses for humans. While that doesn't give them an excuse it certainly changes their view on people. I am nothing but kind, courteous and compassionate towards claimants in my borough, I understand their issues, speak to them and explain the situation in full. I don't give them attitude, I don't look down on them and I certain don't come across condescending. I tell you what buddy, you go have my childhood growing up with that retard... being threatened with knives, knuckledusters and other impliments everyday at school from the age of eight. Then having that one chance, that one glorious chance at moral revenge without the need to even raise a fist. I'm allowed that little victory, because it's the only time I can. 99.9% of people on benefits are lovely, I enjoy my work and conversing with people. It's the 0.01% who ruin it and make Civil Servants (Which I'm not by the way, so stick it) and other officers like me into the nasty people we can be. I have never once lost my temper, composure or even my point of logical thought with a customer. So please, tar me with the same brush, my office is fantastic and you'd be impressed with what we've done the past two years during the recession. Thanks for your time. It's true... tragically a view like this more likely to cause them issues than anything else. We're not allowed to defend ourselves now, it's the law's job to do that and if we do, the law steps in and we're the bad guys. Go figure.
i think casey showed considerable restraint, yes he picked him up and slammed him on the floor, but he could have just kept going, and kept pounding him whilst he was down.
Does the bully think that everyone are idiots? He was attacked first? It would be more convincing if the one taking the video wasn't on his side, the defender that came to his rescue after getting wooped wasn't originally pushed out of the way by the person taking the video and some girl didn't have to step in to help the victim. Must have been everyone seeing things. Unfortunately there isn't a harsher punishment then suspension. They don't do corporal punishment over in Australia right? But then again, the floor has given him a pretty good spanking.
Purely because it's a school they can't get involved in moral judgements. The teacher making the "moral judgement" would more than likely favour the one who was the smaller pain in the ass, which would cause more problems for the school than outright suspending both of the involved parties. The lack of moral judgements in cases like this stem from the school not wanting to garner negative press, and that is never going to change. They can't make moral decisions because they cannot be impartial, and the second you get impartial, it's only fair to suspend both of them as they both committed acts of violence. I'm not saying it's a good thing teaching wise, but it was the most amicable option. Casey could have caused the bully serious damage doing what he did, thank goodness he didn't, and saying "It's okay, you were defending yourself" is not a reasonable option for a school. It should be explained to Casey that he's not being suspended for defending himself, but because he put himself in a position where he could have caused the bully significantly more damage than he had anticipated.
"The measure of a man is not in what he starts, but how he finishes it." --Hellboy So both got suspended. That is standard procedure in a school which tries to maintain order and teach, not act as an arbiter of interpersonal conflict. Don't worry, Casey's going to be just fine. While he isn't at school he can do some homework assignments. And getting a rep amongst his peers for having been suspended for beating the crap out of a kid will do him no harm either. Lesson learnt: don't **** with Casey. Now y'all take a deep breath and remember that your school days are behind you now.
Was Kid #1 a known bully? Was this an ongoing thing involving both kids, or was thing a one-off event that happened to go wrong? I understand the opinion that people have the right to defend themselves, but I'm not sure how to apply that to the scenario at hand without more information about the two kids involved. Kid #2 picked up Kid #1 and threw him to the floor. Judging only from the video, that's a bit extreme for simple defense. Had the angle been slightly different Kid #1 would be dealing with head trauma rather than a bruised ego.
I think that's a pretty horrific idea. Then they're a bad teacher. No-one is impartial, but teachers should be considerably more impartial in their role then many other people are required to be by their professions. You can't ignore good or bad actions just because you might not make the perfect moral judgement, that's another terrible lesson to be teaching children. You do the best you can and cast judgement to the best of your ability. Casey could have caused the bully serious damage doing what he did, thank goodness he didn't, and saying "It's okay, you were defending yourself" is not a reasonable option for a school.[/quote] Honestly I can't say I'd see any problem in him having caused the bully more harm. I also don't see any reason why saying "It's ok, you were defending yourself" is an unreasonable option. Why do people seem to think these days that teaching kids to never defend themselves is more moral then teaching them to stand up for their rights? But he shouldn't be suspended for possibly causing the kid more damage than he had anticipated. Once more: self defence. If the scrawny bully had shattered both his kneecaps upon hitting the ground Casey still should not have been suspended. Defence of oneself is not a crime.
The role of an educator isn't to teach right and wrong, it's to teach the school's curriculum. Their business in a fight is ensuring the safety of their students and the integrity of their learning environment, suspending both students keeps the two away from each other along with any other students who may seek some sort of revenge and also keeps the drama of the event from distracting other students. On Casey's side it's only a few days of school and, making assumptions based on contemporary school policy, will have opportunities to make up any work he might have missed.
Does anyone else think it odd/funny that this video was even released? The person taking the video was obviously part of the assault. So probably not the greatest "friend" of the bully if he is willing to upload a video of him getting his ass beat. Good friend that.
An eye for an eye certainly demonstrates sound logic. Why not - if the whole world is blind we won't all have to go out and buy one of those brand new massive TV's. Then again chances are that the bully is an idiot so that a discussion is out of the question. It's a shame that he did not get to take the high road!
I thought that too. The boy filming probably gave the video to a friend, who...well, you get the picture.
I'm not sure it's the teacher's role, or the school's role, to teach a child the morality of self defense. Maybe it is - and I'm prepared to be shown otherwise - but right now I think that kind of life lesson is best left to the parents. This is why I asked the question earlier: chronic bullying problem or one-off event. If it was an on-going thing then I believe it shouldn't have been allowed to escalate to this level. Edit: As we like to say in D&D, That's the problem with chaotic evil minions. They're chaotic evil."
Interesting. I just watched those with no sound on, the little kid is the bully right but then gets slamdunked?
They did pass moral judgment the minute they decided to suspend both kids whilst they at the same time sent out a clear message to those who may be bullied in the future, that it is not for them or in their place to either defend themselves, let alone engage the person verbally attacking them with conversation, but for the school, the police, or social services, to handle it.
Did you notice that it was the short guy hitting Casey? Did that part of the video just pass you by completely? If some tosser started hitting me, I wouldn't stop to consider whether he was my size or smaller, I'd **** the guy. I wouldn't stand there, waiting for his bigger brother to turn up, just so I could hit someone my own size, all the time getting punched, I'd lay him out.
Well that's you, but Casey just took the beating.... until the brunette turned up. You can even hear the cameraman or one of the spectators saying "looks who's coming in the background" There IS something about that brunette, is it really a coincidence that when she turns up, Casey fires up? Anyone that has been bullied knows, that putting up with and ignoring some bullying is one thing, but to just take it in front of someone that you like really motivates you to stand up for yourself. I know this. Nothing wrong with walking away, but you can hear the brunette telling the bugger bully to back off, you can't hear Casey say a word. If you can't tell that Casey only has the guts to defend himself half his size, then have another watch. I do hope that the bullies finally leave Casey alone, but I dunno if that will be the case if Casey doesn't have miss brunette or someone else to defend him.... He'll probably be fine, i'm guessing the school will make sure of that, given that they now have the eye of the media on them.
So let me ask this... We have a clear case of assault and battery on film. Why isn't the bully in jail? If these people were 20 instead of 12 don't you think the police would be involved? A little consistency would go a long ways. The threat of suspension isn't going to change his behavior, the threat of jail just might, and if it doesn't, that's where he should be anyway.
