Online Bullying

[Pyrotex]

As one who has stood before a judge in such a situation, and still pays with both time and money for the ruling from the bench, I can attest to the success of such a system. ...

Wow! Thanks for sharing that. It's a privilege to know you. :naughty:

[J.B]

Names calling only offends the weaker groups of people on the planet.

 

Example:

 

Saying white boy is OK

 

but, saying black boy is not OK.

[learnin to learn]

Names calling only offends the weaker groups of people on the planet.

 

Example:

 

Saying white boy is OK

 

but, saying black boy is not OK.

 

 

I am in no way trying to sound racist, but are you saying that a black boy is weaker than a white boy? Or did I misinterpreting what you were trying to say?

 

I get what yall mean about how schools should stay out of the issue. I mean if they get involved in "internet bullying", where will they draw the line!? Are schools going to start regulating what time their students go to sleep? what they eat for breakfast? what they watch on TV?

[TheBigDog]

I am in no way trying to sound racist, but are you saying that a black boy is weaker than a white boy? Or did I misinterpreting what you were trying to say?

 

I get what yall mean about how schools should stay out of the issue. I mean if they get involved in "internet bullying", where will they draw the line!? Are schools going to start regulating what time their students go to sleep? what they eat for breakfast? what they watch on TV?

Learnin,

 

Don't be offended by JB until you read more of his stuff here online. Then when you have figured him out, decide if you want to ask him any more quesitons. You can't make a tiger change it's stripes. You can however understand that there are tigers, and take their stripes as harmless at internet distances. He moves from thread to thread seeking to engage people in such dialog. He will eventually do one of three things 1)get bored and leave, 2) actually participate in conversations not racist centric, or 3) be banned.

 

In the mean time, enjoy the forums!

 

Bill

[Racoon]

Getting back to the Discussion, and not side tracked by Irrelevant Subjects.

(JB is good for increasing thread activity!:confused: )

 

I can see both sides of the coin here.

The schools May be doing some good by "preventing" abuse and fights!

It's tough enough to be growing up in todays world without having to be fearful of Bully's.

I had a Bully when I was in Elementary school. I 'dreaded' having to walk home and possibly encountering them.

 

But as people mentioned Before, If you allow schools to Regulate Off-School activities, then what's next?

 

1st Ammendment rights really Test people. Words CAN HURT people, especially at that age. But Kids will need to learn to do deal with that eventually anyway for when they *get into the real world*.

 

Threatening Death or Serious Bodily harm seems to be the Main concern here, and not just teasing or even insensitive Ethnic remarks.

But Threats are said all the time.

"I'll kill you" and "I'LL KILL YOU!!" may or may not have anything behind it, other than a feeling of intimidation.

 

But after Columbine, and SPRINGFIELD here a few years ago with Kip Kinkle, It does Give school Authorities something palpable and real to be concerned about. :hihi:

 

I think the Lawyers will win this case in Eugene, due to politics here. But different outcomes might be reached elsewhere...

 

Murky indeed.

[TheBigDog]

Just as long as it doesn't become Federal Law, so I can still move if my state goes to seed.

 

Bill

[learnin to learn]

Big Dog,

I understand what you mean, but does the school system have any right to punish children for what they do or say on the internet? I have noticed that the school system has changed a lot since those tragic incidents at Columbine, and other schools across the nation. But how can the school system justify punishing students for what they do outside of school? Should'nt those issues be taken up with the childs parents or the local police department? (if the child's parents will not punish them.) What would really solve the problem is if the government created an agency where there job is to handle cases like these. But that is unlikely!

If a child is playing baseball on a city team, and they find it necessary to bully one of their fellow team mates, who is responsible for that child's actions? The schoolboard or the team's coach? Likewise, if A child is bulling another child outside of school, on the internet or off the internet, who is responsible? The schoolboard or the childrens parents? and if the childs parents will not take care of the problem who then? The schoolboard or local law enforcement?

[InfiniteNow]

In all honesty, school rules didn't ever have much effect on my behavior, except maybe by promoting some of my rebellion. Again, why is this any different from a phone call from house to house of two students or a letter mailed through the USPS?

[Racoon]

In all honesty, school rules didn't ever have much effect on my behavior, except maybe by promoting some of my rebellion. Again, why is this any different from a phone call from house to house of two students or a letter mailed through the USPS?

 

Maybe you guys missed the part about Springfield School shooting. not far from Eugene. I think they are Desperately trying to avoid another one of those sh*t storms.

 

Bloody lip > not good, but healable.

Semi-automatic pistols in the Hallways > Nip it in the Bud Quick!

 

Too much GrandTheftAuto combined with bad parenting and access to guns.:hihi:

 

Ounce of prevention.

So I think they may have to Document individual cases and bring in a psychological assesor.

 

But we shouldn't live under fear rule!

Schools are in a tough corner.

[TheBigDog]

Big Dog,

I understand what you mean, but does the school system have any right to punish children for what they do or say on the internet? I have noticed that the school system has changed a lot since those tragic incidents at Columbine, and other schools across the nation. But how can the school system justify punishing students for what they do outside of school? Should'nt those issues be taken up with the childs parents or the local police department? (if the child's parents will not punish them.) What would really solve the problem is if the government created an agency where there job is to handle cases like these. But that is unlikely!

If a child is playing baseball on a city team, and they find it necessary to bully one of their fellow team mates, who is responsible for that child's actions? The schoolboard or the team's coach? Likewise, if A child is bulling another child outside of school, on the internet or off the internet, who is responsible? The schoolboard or the childrens parents? and if the childs parents will not take care of the problem who then? The schoolboard or local law enforcement?

There already is a government agency. It is the school system. Years ago honorable behavior in school was still valued and enforced by families. Now the schools are not allowed to place values on behavior, lest they be caught judging somebody and get sued by those same families. And they have to act more like mindless cops without the ability to use practical sense in the dealings with kids. It is the evil of zero tolerance BS that has come into play. In cases that fall into the realm of zero tolerance administrators are not allowed to use their judgement. If they are caught listening to circumstances and thinking they will be sued and fired. The only way to protect themselves is to treat everyone equally poorly.

 

Examples: A girl in the 9th grade gives a classmate 2 asprine for a headache. Gets 5 days suspension for dealing drugs. An 8th grader in a fit of frustration rights a note to himself talking about how he wants to blow up the school. The note is found by a bus driver when it falls out of his bag. The kid is expelled. He had one bad day, wrote on paper to purge his fealings, and his life is ruined at 13. That is what zero tolerance gets you. It is terrible when things like Columbine happen. It is no picnic when reactive forces strip compassion and forgiveness from the tool sets of public policy in reaction to such events. And that does nothing to prevent more Columbines.

 

Police are in the same boat, but the circumstances for your kid are even worse when dealing with them. Rember people streaking? How about mooning? Favorite sport of the college aged. In Colorado public nudity makes you a registered sex offender. No slack, no excuses, no exceptions. You get caught mooning and you register for ten years minimum. Mandatory rehab therapy where you are grouped with real deviants. Think about that the next time you see people shouting about minimum prison sentences and how many people are registered offenders.

 

Issues with kids should be resolved among families and school. If a school finds out about threats from one student toward another they are in my eyes obligated to act to prevent the threat from escalating. That means talking to the kids, talking to the parents, and evaluating each situation on its unique circumstance. And then with the parents taking action to change the behaviors that lead to the threats. The police should only be brought in when there are serious criminal problems. And a good police officer can go a long way to help parents who teach their kids to respect the police.

 

2 antecdotes just to separate the post readers from the post browsers.

 

The happy story: When #1 was a wee lad he went into a phase where he refused to wear a safety belt. Being the stubborn type he would not listen to his mother and insisted on removing his belt while she was driving the car, over and over and over. Now this was a criminal offense, so Shannon took him to the police department, and asked an officer to talk to him about his safety belt. A five minute "gruff" talking to by the kind gentleman, and #1 was back in the belt, and had a well founded admiration and respect for the professionalism of police.

 

An unhappy story: #3 is one of my favorite people in the world. He charms me like none other. He has communication issues. His speach is terribly delayed and to this day at 9 he is difficult to understand all the time. And while he has been diagnosed as either a very high functioning autistic, or having Asphergers Syndrome, I like to think he is just weird. I make every effort to keep the bar high for him and have him deal with issues rather than surrender to them with his so-called condition as an excuse for the easier road, while at the same time insuring that I take into account the emotional challenges that he is facing on a daily basis to do things that you and I take for granted. When he was seven he was home with his brothers. My wife had gone out with her friend and taken her friend's car (she normally took her own car). Well, he saw that mom was not home, and that her car was home, so he decided that mom must have gotten lost in the neighborhood. So being a person who seeks adventure (adventures are a very big deal to #3) he decided to go and find mom. Well, he got about two blocks from the house and someone decided he was lost. He was near the main road, but following the rules I had shown him for walking alongside roads. This person pulls their car over and begins questioning him. He is embarrassed, so on top of his normal communications issues, all he wants to do is run home and hide, but they don't let him because he seems so out of it. The semaritan calls the police. The police call social services. They all end up at the house before my wife gets home (she was out for 45 minutes total). During the ensuing coversation my wife gets the distinct feeling that she is being looked at as a suspicious person, and gets heated with the lady cop that had responded. The woman from social services looks at the whole situation and tries to cool everybody down. Everyone leaves. The next day later we get a letter in the mail that my wife has been sighted for child abuse. Yes, child abuse. You see, half a block from my house was the line between the city and the county. He had wandered out of the county juristiction and into the city juristiction. This act made it mandatory for reports to be filed, and mandatory for charges to be filed if reports are filed... No contest was the plea. 1 year of unsupervised probation was the sentence. Imagine if some chance event had happened during that year, the **** that would have come down on my wife. Thank you zero tolerance. Thank you mandatory sentencing. All very neat and tidy, and no thinking is needed, and no circumstances matter, and that makes it nobody's fault at all. Everyone gets to pass the buck and be devoid of responsibility and victim of the system. The social worker is sorry, she HAD to write the report. The cop is sorry she HAD to write the citation. The judge is sorry he HAD to give the sentence. I was sorry that I was travelling for work when this all went down. #1 was sorry that he didn't see #3 leave the room where they were watching TV. One thing I am not sorry about. I am not sorry for teaching my child that he is allowed to walk around his neighborhood, and know his own way home, and choose to not talk to strangers who pullover their car to talk to him, and explore the world with a sense of adventure. If if if if if.... *sigh*

 

I have zero tolerance for zero tolerance. It makes authorities unable to be members of a community. They must get involved, we expect that for safety's sake. But they must do so as human beings, not blindly enforcing policy that was not written for each circumstance.

 

Bill

[learnin to learn]

That is incredible! Shows you what zero tolerance gets you! But this world is changing! I am only 16 years old and I have seen the change in the world! When I was little a mans word was his bond! I remember when I was little my grandpa and I went to gas up his van. After he filled it up he realized his wallet was at the house. So he went inside and explained his situation to the man who owned the gas station, and the man told him to come back and pay him when he could. Who knows what would have happened nowdays! I think the main reason for zero tolerance is that this world has changed a lot over the past years! I remember in 2nd grade, we played games like hide and go seek; carried around pictures of our favorite cartoon characters; and listend to songs that were written for kids. A good friend of mine found a picture,that his 7year old son had, of the characters from sesime street holding weapons and flashing gang signs. He has told me stories about kids listening to rap music that talks about killing and drugs. These kids play games Where they are gangsters and they are trying to kill other students. These kids that I am talking about are in 2nd grade. Do we have any other choice than to go by the rules of zero tolerance? There is a new breed of kids today. How can anyone tell who is lieing and who is telling the truth?

[CraigD]

Do schools have the right to expell students who E-Mail Hateful, Racist, or Threatening remarks to other students when it occurs OUTSIDE of school property and not from school computers???

…

Some Lawyers say that infringes on 1st Ammendment rights of Free Speech!

From a strict Constitutional perspective, I believe public schools or other fully or partially publicly funded institutions can do pretty much whatever they wish to assure anything they wish, provided it doesn’t violate a public law. Such institutions aren’t legislative bodies, so aren’t subject to the limitations of infringement of the individual student or parent’s rights granted by the US or state constitution, nor are they depriving these individuals of anything protected within these documents – “life, liberty, or property.” These students and individuals certainly have a protected right to say, print, post, or email all manner of offensive speech, even bullying speech, but the privilege of attending school or any other institution is not subject to a guarantee of due process. In essence, despite the common attitude that public institutions are a sort of “shared private property” belonging to the taxpayers who fund them, this is not legally true – if you are expelled from school, you have not had your “property” taken from you.

 

People in this situation are guaranteed the right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances” – that is, to sue the school for damages. Being expelled from school undeniably inflicts damage – the parent must bear the financial burden of providing care and schooling from another source, and the future earnings of the student may be reduced by the damage to their academic record – so, depending on the merits of the suit and the skill with which it is brought and defended against, they might receive substantial compensation. Other than guaranteeing this right, however, the constitutions are mute.

 

Despite the benefits of universal public education in the US, the policy creates a burden, both in taxes, and to liberty. The policy is well-entrenched, but certainly not guaranteed Constitutionally, or even long standing when compared to the 230 year history of the Republic. I fear that, as long as the social and political conditions that caused the policy to come into effect – the need for literacy and other academic skills among the children of the poor and middle-class, and the high cost of private education relative to the financial resources of these groups – public education will continue to throw up troubling conflicts between perceived individual and collective rights that cannot be easily resolved. Although legislation could improve the situation, I am skeptical that any such will be forthcoming – such legislation would require legal and political brilliance that, if even possible, appears exceedingly rare.

[TheFaithfulStone]

I have zero tolerance for zero tolerance. It makes authorities unable to be members of a community. They must get involved, we expect that for safety's sake. But they must do so as human beings, not blindly enforcing policy that was not written for each circumstance.

 

I agree 200%. If that's possible. It's odd that "zero tolerance" has the effect of making noone responsible for anything.

 

Back in my school days, some friends and I played a prank involving light bulbs in a university garden. The police showed up, with the freaking CSI team and fingerprinted the light bulbs. Because of "vandalism"

 

Ridiculous. Zero tolerance is what you do when you have zero intelligence.

 

TFS

[i fight authority, but you know what happens]

[Cedars]

OK, I have .02 cents worth here too ! :)

 

I found no information on exactly what the words said were, so to make a solid opinion is very hard on the allegation of "threats made" via email. If someone has a link to these things it would be appreciated.

 

I have also found that you can make very racist remarks and not actually commit a crime. So, where is the line between what a school can punish for and what is protected under free speech becomes the question for me.

 

It seems the standard held for children in a school setting is different and seemingly higher than what adults can legally do. And the issue of confidentiality seems to benefit the schools (and other agencies) to the detriment of the accused.

 

On the other hand you have the parents, who all to often present the image of their child as a saint. "My Johnny would never do such a thing" and the refusal to meet the system half way. Mostly due to the fear that the system will not stop at half way.

 

But the school does have an obligation to protect its charges. Making a threat against a person within or outside of school doesnt really matter. If the threat is enough that an adult could get a restraining order against another adult, the school has the obligation to issue its own version of a restraining order, that being suspension or expulsion. It is the only way a school can insure that the distance kept between offender and victim does not fall within the border of the school property and the schools responsiblity to its charges.

 

Additionally, we who are allowed free speech have obligations and limits placed on ourselves too. I know an email threat sent by me to anyone can result in my being charged under the law. So the students here have their own responsiblity to their 5th amendment right to not incriminate themselves. Sending out death threats or violence threats in a written form that can be traced back to a particular person negates the 5th amendment right and that being self inflicted, leaves me little choice but to agree with the school.

[Cedars]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12937962/

 

But here the school goes too far. Inappropriate behavior leaves too much open for the schools to interpret. What happens to students who refuse to sign such a form?

[ronthepon]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12937962/

 

But here the school goes too far. Inappropriate behavior leaves too much open for the schools to interpret. What happens to students who refuse to sign such a form?

This is outrageous!

 

Where is the world headed to?

[GAHD]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12937962/

 

But here the school goes too far. Inappropriate behavior leaves too much open for the schools to interpret. What happens to students who refuse to sign such a form?

I'd just tell the school to stuff their form:

 

The concept that searching a blog site is an invasion of privacy is almost an oxymoron, It is called the World Wide Web.

If that's true, you don't need a flippin form. Stop standing on the limb you're cutting off from the tree superintendant.

 

Or even better just take the forms home (to be assessed by my lawyer:lol:) and never return them, paperwork is never tracked too well.