Slashdot Mirror


9 MA Cyberbullies Indicted For Causing Suicide

Raul654 writes "Massachusetts teenager Phoebe Prince committed suicide on January 14. After her death, it was revealed that she had been the target of cyberbullying for months (and that her teachers were aware of it and did nothing). Today, nine of her classmates were indicted on charges including harassment, stalking, civil rights violations, and statutory rape. Prince's suicide echoes the earlier case of Megan Meier, who committed suicide after being cyberbullied by a classmate's mother."

709 comments

  1. Your rights OFFLINE! by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This has nothing to do with Facebook, Flicker, FourSquare, Twitter, or any other Web 2.0 website. This happened at school, during school hours, and with the school having knowledge that that something was going on. This is a first round of charges, there could be more including some of the adults who could have taken action. Dating a senior football player and being the "new girl" led to her being teased and hated... leading to violence, leading to a situation where she saw no way out. This should have been cut off with detentions and suspensions long before it got this far.

    I'm pretty sure the lawyers in this case are going to pull all the Web 2.0 content created by the students involved. If they go down this path and find something that can be treated as a confession, then it's "News for nerds." or "Stuff that matters." Until we see that, it's more like the 6pm news here in the Boston area.

    1. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tarun713 · · Score: 5, Informative

      FTA: "According to students, Phoebe was called 'Irish slut' and 'whore' on Twitter, Craigslist, Facebook and Formspring."

    2. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The article is on topic. This incident is a follow up to the Lori Drew case that was previous covered on Slashdot. The slope has been greased up and we're sliding. Everything us liberty minded folks warned would happen as a result of the precedent set by that case is indeed happening.

    3. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by sg_oneill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It does highlight something that really worries me about this case. As a kid I copped a bit of bullying myself, at least till I got big enough to fight back, but I came to the conclusion that kids are, well, shitheads, and that most hopefully grow out of it.

      Whats disturbing, is that the adults did nothing to protect this poor girl when it should have been immediately obvious she was being victimized. Sometimes when your being bullied, simply having an older kid or adult take your side can be immensely comforting.

      When I was around 25 I used to catch a public bus to work, and every morning this scruffy young kid would be on the bus being teased and taunted till I decided to intervene, picked up one of his tormentors and physically launched him off the bus then let the kid sit next to me from that point on. I told the bullies that I would hunt down and beat senselessly any kid that bullied my new little mate, and within a couple of weeks the kid stopped being bullied. I gave the kid a bit of friendship and kind of explained how to work on his goofy demeanor, and within a year he was a reasonably popular kid himself.

      All it takes is someone to care about these kids. To give a damn about them. Show some genuine concern for these kids, and they'll shine. They always do

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    4. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by JustShootMe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What surprises me is that you weren't arrested for assault.

      --
      For linux tips: http://www.linuxtipsblog.com
    5. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by donaggie03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Try that now and you're more likely to get arrested for assault or child abuse... or shot.

      --
      Three days from now?? Thats tomorrow!! ~Peter Griffin
    6. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Derekloffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it. The old style 'give me your lunch money' bully had very little presence at home. If said bully did try to take it home, it was generally in ways that annoyed the parents just as much as the kid (crank calls and the like), which often lead to more action on their part. Now, cyber bullying allows them to hit you even at home, and in ways that can often go unnoticed by the parents, not only of the victim, but of the bully's parents. Not sure what we can do about it, but I wouldn't equate this to a typical school yard bullying situation.

    7. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whats disturbing, is that the adults did nothing to protect this poor girl when it should have been immediately obvious she was being victimized. Sometimes when your being bullied, simply having an older kid or adult take your side can be immensely comforting.

      When I was a kid, nothing disillusioned me about authority figures more than the misguided attempts of school administrators to interfere when I was being bullied. Keep in mind that I went to great lengths to avoid being bullied (sometimes by groups of kids) and sometimes this meant breaking school rules (like going through a hole in the fence around the school during lunch when I was being chased). The school administrators came out against me all too often. Once one principle even brought out boxing gloves and told us we had better fight it out with gloves on.

      Looking back at it, I can see where the administrators were coming from but that doesn't make them any less wrong. I don't even really appreciate the attempts by some teachers to bribe one of the worst of the bullies with candy bars (so that he wouldn't bully me).

      The further sad fact is that nobody can address bullying effectively when it happens, say, when the kid is walking home from school. So what are you gonna do? I did well because I had parents who were willing to discuss the matter with me and provide proper role models. But generally they didn't go to the teachers or administrators about the problems, which was a good thing given how bad of a mess the school officials generally made of things when they got involved.

      The solution here is parenting. And while I find the lack of action by school officials disturbing, I wonder if they would have made things worse by getting involved. In reality they probably should have gotten in touch with the girl's parents proactively and discussed the situation.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    8. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      Good for you. We need more responsible citizens like you.

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    9. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      ...because not being a teacher you had no stake in the school at a whole. Teachers at my school would not act against bullies because they appreciated their role in simplifying the social environment at the school. I had ongoing problems with a student who repeatedly had a go at me at school. It was only when he tried it at the local swimming pool that anything was done and that was by the staff at the pool who told him to GTFO or else. At the pool the staff are free to deal with a simple situation. At the school the bully is likely to be the teachers best friend among the students.

    10. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Asclepius99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can understand what you're trying to say, but the teachers saw kids hit the girl in the hallways. It doesn't matter if it's constant bullying or a one time incident, how does that go on without any sort of reprimand?

    11. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Asclepius99 · · Score: 1

      I think you've got a great point here. The article I read about this earlier today said that they even wrote horrible things about her on a Facebook memorial page. Now I know that was after she was dead, but for all the people saying the "cyber" part doesn't mean anything think about how many of these students would have had the guts to go to an physical memorial service and shout demeaning things about a dead student.

      There were clearly serious problems with the physical bullying (someone threw a red bull can at her out of a car, which could cause serious injury), but there's a definite mental component when you go home to check your e-mail or whatever else and you have a ton of messages saying that you're a whore and everyone hates you.

    12. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      I can understand what you're trying to say, but the teachers saw kids hit the girl in the hallways. It doesn't matter if it's constant bullying or a one time incident, how does that go on without any sort of reprimand?

      I think it should have been reprimanded.

      But we shouldn't delude ourselves that it would have made a difference.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    13. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by bipbop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a particularly geeky product of the public school system, I'm really, really NOT surprised that there was no intervention.

    14. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      School staff rarely do anything about bullying; they are dying to be loved and accepted by these teenage monsters.

      This is sad, but only sad in the fact that she didnt take some of these POSs with her. I would much rather be reading "Bullied teenage girl in custody, hundreds dead." than this pathetic story.

    15. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      I was bullied every day through most of elementary and middle school. Not once did the bullies take my lunch money. They just beat me up with no pretext at least twice a day. Sometimes I would get bullied while walking home from school or walking down the street to a friend's house later in the afternoon.

      To believe what you wrote, you must never have lived in a small town.....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    16. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by religious+freak · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm kind of surprised too, though I wish I wasn't. Sometimes the only way to deal with a shithead is to be the crap out of them

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    17. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Talk it out. They're just doing it to get a rise out of you." The administrators and faculty can't advocate direct action for liability reasons.

      What did get through to the bullies was violence returned sevenfold. Unbridled cruelty. Pencil graphite is hard to get out of a wound track.

      When you want to be left to your own devices, being feared is often the best way to get it. Think of it as percussive maintenance of a social nature.

      Unless you straight up kill someone, everything you do up to the end of Grade 12 means dick anyway. If you're catching shit you don't want, chances are you won't care about anyone in your graduating class after yearbook day anyway. Be a dick, crush your opposition, work on the next step, move to greener pastures and never look back. You are not your brother's keeper and he is not yours.

      You will make plenty of friends in college. Just make sure to remove your prejudice by then.

    18. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm kind of surprised too, though I wish I wasn't. Sometimes the only way to deal with a shithead is to be the crap out of them

      Holy existential typo batman!

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    19. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anachragnome · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sometimes you have to take risks to do what is right.

    20. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      There were clearly serious problems with the physical bullying (someone threw a red bull can at her out of a car, which could cause serious injury), but there's a definite mental component when you go home to check your e-mail or whatever else and you have a ton of messages saying that you're a whore and everyone hates you.

      Apparently you've never looked at the way the mass media reports on celebrities.

      Yeah, people saying bad things about you kinda sucks, but what's the alternative? Arrest people for saying "mean" things? The last thing we need is a nanny state waiting to lock us up for hurting someones feelings.

    21. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it.

      That's bullshit. Most of those web 2.0 thingamobbers give you full control over who can communicate with you. And failing that - as someone else already said, just log out.

      Maybe those services could be a little more explicit about their blocking options, but if the stress is enough to cause some to commit suicide, then its more than enough for them to figure out how to block the bullies too.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    22. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      I can understand what you're trying to say, but the teachers saw kids hit the girl in the hallways. It doesn't matter if it's constant bullying or a one time incident, how does that go on without any sort of reprimand?

      I know a teacher who had the problem students. She wasn't allowed to do hardly anything. If two girls were exchanging blows, all she could do is stand there and talk in a comforting voice.

      Teachers need more authority to break up fights like this. I'm not for corporal punishment, but since it has been outlawed the position of the teacher as an authority figure has diminished in more troubled environments. Perhaps we can find something else that works.

    23. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Locke2005 · · Score: 0

      You can escape it you simply never use your real name online!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    24. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      I have generally operated on the principle that most people do unto others what they want done unto them. Some folks, such as bullies, just tend also to have self-destructive urges, so they take these out on others secretly hoping that someone will return the favor. Hence the fastest way to get respect from a bully is to stand up to them and return the behavior. Even if you lost the fight, showing you cannot be intimidated and are willing to stand up causes things to die back a bit.

      This doesn't always mean direct confrontation. If the bully is indirect, going indirect in response is good too. But if you want things to die down, intentionally respond with less force than the attacker. Control the situation rather than let the other one do it.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    25. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Grimbleton · · Score: 1

      Ach!

    26. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      True, and that is probably the reason many people do not intervene these days. If you do the right thing and step in then you have to be careful you don't open yourself to some legal liability. It happens all the time in our school system and so all we are left with is apathetic teachers and officials who will not take the appropriate actions.

    27. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by stimpleton · · Score: 1

      Reading his language used, I am presuming he was at school about when I was. In those days a "Child assaulting another child" was just not a sentence that could even be concieved. Get in trouble, yes, but not in the definitions today.

      In the vein of todays parlance I can only presume my school life was a violent, abuse filled( verbally, psychologically, physically) deeply traumatic number of years. To me it was just a road travelled: some altercations, some teachers who were assholes, some falls, rough and tumble, some detentions, and couple whacks from a teacher, but generally a pretty ok time.

      --

      In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
    28. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Michael+Kristopeit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      i think more freudian slip... he could be the bully because it's all in his head.

    29. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      What surprises me is that you weren't arrested for assault.

      Assault? I wouldn't have been surprised if someone reported him as a possible pedophile, the way people overreact these days.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    30. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's interesting how I never would have batted an eye at a person calling another those names, but now that it caused the suicide of one, I am infuriated and want to kill those who said them. Thus why humans are not to be trusted when it comes to punishment.

    31. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by muridae · · Score: 1

      Harassment is a crime in some jurisdictions. So is contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Stalking. Hell, if the kids said to each other, online or otherwise, "lets try to get her to kill herself" then you can bump up to conspiracy to commit murder.

      There is no need for any slippery slope, no new cyber laws. If someone sent you 100 postal letters per day, or organized friends to stand outside your house yelling at you, this would get the attention of law enforcement. The laws are there already, and have been for years.

    32. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Tasers?

      Why would a teacher want to put themselves in harms way by breaking up a fight?

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    33. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by calmofthestorm · · Score: 4, Informative

      OR rather this is why we should make laws and then stick to them when a case comes up. Unforutnately, it's a lot easier to push a sob story over a jury than appeal to the actual laws.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    34. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by arose · · Score: 1

      You're assuming an empty can...

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    35. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by carlzum · · Score: 1
      That reminds me of the quote in Bad Santa, after sticking up for the little fat kid...

      I beat the shit out of some kids today. But it was for a purpose. It made me feel good about myself. It was like I did something constructive with my life or something, I dunno, like I accomplished something.

      Kids torment other kids because they get away with it. If an adult grabbed one of these "mean girls" by the hair and told her to cut the crap this girl may have had some hope. Good for you.

    36. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by ady1 · · Score: 1

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it if you can't live without facebook/twitter/omg-the-interwebz-social-networking

      There. Fixed it for you

    37. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Cramer · · Score: 1

      That doesn't matter to a bunch of 12 year olds. They will all know who each other is online. It only takes one person to know your "screen name" for all of them to find it.

      Yes, cyber-crap is easy to avoid. But they won't. That would make them even more of an outsider with no friends.

      The sad fact is, teens get depressed and commit suicide. We simply have new things to blame for it today.

    38. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Reprimand, hell. Why weren't the kids involved suspended from school and thrown in juve for a weekend?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    39. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Times have changed. When I was in middle school, two girls decided to start a fist fight. The gym teacher grabbed one of them and restrained her and another large male teacher grabbed the other similarly. The fight ended. There was no standing around and talking in a comforting voice...

      Nowadays they both would have been up on charges, and there'd be a hue and cry in the news. And not for the reason you think, either. There's one more little tidbit that would have been all the news talked about, even though it was irrelevant to the incident: both girls were black; both teachers were white.

    40. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I probably would have used "society" if I meant humans and laws. I meant humans acting on impulse. So I agree.

    41. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Harassment is a crime in some jurisdictions.

      Sure, but what's that got to do with the price of egss?

      So is contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

      Equally irrelevant, but even more so when the "suspects" are themselves minors.

      Stalking.

      Not an issue here.

      Hell, if the kids said to each other, online or otherwise, "lets try to get her to kill herself" then you can bump up to conspiracy to commit murder.

      How so? If I say to you "let's see if we can get Bill to say bad and inaccurate things about someone", am I guilty of conspiracy to libel?

      As sad as her death is, she's the one who chose to take that path. Outside influences may impact our decision making process, but the final call is always up to the individual. That's why the phrase "I was just following orders" is not considered a valid defense.

      If someone sent you 100 postal letters per day, or organized friends to stand outside your house yelling at you, this would get the attention of law enforcement.

      Once again, that's not the issue here. This isn't a case of one person constantly sending her harassing messages - it's a case of many people exercising their free-speech rights. Some of their other actions are certainly illegal, and should be prosecuted, but let's not invent new "crimes" to charge them with.

    42. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Some folks, such as bullies, just tend also to have self-destructive urges, so they take these out on others secretly hoping that someone will return the favor. Hence the fastest way to get respect from a bully is to stand up to them and return the behavior. ...

      I think I did this inadvertently in first grade. Was being bullied (mostly verbally) by another kid. When I couldn't take it anymore, I hauled off and punched him in the nose! He got a bloody nose, but the assistant principle couldn't figure out what was going on...because I was the one crying (I felt terrible, didn't want to hurt anyone). This same kid became a jock (one of the heavies on the football team) and remained a bully all the way through to 12th grade, but he never bothered me again!

      It would be nice if this could be taught, but in my case it was just a happy accident.

    43. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by moogied · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Or people with balls. When I was in high schools(5 years ago, i'm 23) there was a fight in the exit area of a building and within 15 seconds the football coach was there and slugged the football player who hit the much smaller freshman. What did he get? Nothing. Nothing at all. Why? Because the cameras clearly showed a *CRIME* being committed and a BYSTANDER stepping in to stop it.

      So go tell your teacher friend to go fuck herself, she is just as responsible as every other jerk who walks by someone in trouble and doesn't do crap. Job, no job, she is a bad bad person. Its a frigen CHILD beating hit by another child. Who the hell lets that happen?

      --
      So basically, -1 troll/offtopic is really slashdots way of saying "I hate that you thought of something before me."
    44. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by steveg · · Score: 1

      Are you assuming this was an empty can?

      Maybe it was. The article didn't say, as far as I could see. But I'm not sure you can assume that it *was* empty.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    45. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Lucidus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yours is a deeply disturbing point of view. Yes, we all need to acquire some resilience, and we need to learn to get back up when the world knocks us down. But you are suggesting that we should accept even profoundly antisocial behaviors from both children and adults - that it is better for the meek to learn to deal with abuse than for the strong to be held to basic social standards of courtesy and respect - and you are absolutely wrong.

      As a community and a society, we have a right to define and expect acceptable ways of interacting with each other. That is what civilization is all about, and an essential aspect of it is holding people accountable for the consequences of their actions. The benefits are irrefutable. Things are never going to be perfect, but it is important that we keep trying.

    46. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      What surprises me is that you weren't arrested for assault.

      There are a lot of kids whose parents actually aren't aware of how their kids are behaving out of their sight, and often wouldn't approve of if they knew. For this kid to have gotten the GP arrested would probably have also meant telling his parents *why* he was (literally) thrown off of a bus and thus made it more worthwhile for the kid to keep quiet about it.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    47. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by jafiwam · · Score: 2, Informative

      What are you fucking stupid?

      Red Bull, standard can; 250 mL of water (basically)or 250 grams.

      9 MM hollow point, 115 grains is about 7 grams.

      Throwing a can of Red Bull at someone and hitting carries approximately the same energy as a fast ball pitch. (Baseball 149 grams at 90 mph vs Red Bull 250 grams 60 mph or so.)

      That's assault. And, people have been killed with the right hit in the right place with that force.

      You know shit about physics and bullets.

    48. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Informative

      And that changes ... what exactly?

      Oh, the difference is that the whole world could see it instead of just everyone that knows her? Newsflash: THE WORLD DOESN'T GIVE A SHIT. Does anyone here (provided he doesn't know her) care whether she's called an Irish slut? Call her an Italian dyke for all I care.

      That is in NO way different from "offline" bullying. Whether "the whole world" knows or just the people that know her does not change a thing. Except that in this case there's hard evidence of it happening, compared to the bullying and mobbing that went on when we went to school. If a teenager killed himself before the onset of the internet craze, it was easily blamed on something else and shifted on ... rock music or whatever was the applicable scapegoat. The school could easily claim they didn't have a clue and the bullies certainly didn't come forward.

      The difference is not that it's now "world wide known". The difference is that there's evidence now. And I fear the reaction will be to attempt to eliminate that evidence rather than stop the bullying.

      It's easier to do.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    49. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I understand your Darwinian point, and there's certainly an element of truth to it. The question is, how much do you value human life? You could, for example, send all your kids off to war, and indeed you will have "survival of the fittest." But you will also lose a lot of perfectly good future husbands and office workers, not to mention a lot of senseless, random deaths.

      Kids do need to learn how to stick up for themselves, but in this case you had a 15-year-old who didn't know how. That's a failure of education. Nobody took her aside to explain that there was a legitimate (i.e. non-suicidal) way out.

      There is also an element of gang assault here that is criminal. And it's completely inappropriate that 17-18 year olds were involved in this kind of immaturity.

    50. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by OrangeCatholic · · Score: 1

      Because they're just kids? Man up. How would you feel about sitting by and not doing something?

    51. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe, maybe not. That they (allegedly) didn't make any effort at all is tantamount to an endorsement in my opinion.
      I'm sure you've heard the quote along the lines that "All evil needs to win is for good men to do nothing."

    52. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 3, Insightful

      basic social standards of courtesy and respect

      Where I come from, those include defending those that aren't able to defend themselves.

    53. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      The last thing we need is a nanny state waiting to lock us up for hurting someones feelings.

      Yeah, punching kids in the head really hurts their "feelings".

      The problem is that the prosecutors are apparently under the spell of "Something Must Be Done!" and rather than doing something useful or picking fights they might actually win, they're apparently just throwing random charges at people so that they can appear to be Doing Something.

      Yeah, people saying bad things about you kinda sucks, but what's the alternative?

      Fire with fire. Name the people that did this so that they'll have to live with the consequences of their actions, hoping that their potential employers won't put their names into google or find their facebook entries. What's the matter, can't they handle having people say bad things about them?

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    54. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by LandDolphin · · Score: 1

      Just because they are "kids" does not mean they are incapable of inflicting damage. Plus, not all teachers are men who men to "Man up?. Many are women and/or elderly and can overpowered by students.

      --
      Spelling and Grammar errors have been added to this post for your enjoyment
    55. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      According to students, Phoebe was called 'Irish slut' and 'whore' on Twitter, Craigslist, Facebook and Formspring

      Nothing you wouldn't hear in 90% of the marriages in the English-speaking world.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    56. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Call her an Italian dyke for all I care.

      My mother was an Italian dyke, you insensitive clod!

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    57. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by budgenator · · Score: 1

      A 14 gm can with 252 grams of Red Bull inside at throwing speed is more than enough to break an eye socket, or shatter a temple. If you care to volunteer for some testing, I know some high school kids that can throw such a can about 120Km/Hr; then you could opine with some authority about whether it was "serious" damage or not.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    58. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Yeah, punching kids in the head [mountainsageblog.com] really hurts their "feelings".

      Last I heard, you can't really do that online. Until we perfect holodeck technology, I don't see that changing.

      Fire with fire. Name the people that did this so that they'll have to live with the consequences of their actions, hoping that their potential employers won't put their names into google or find their facebook entries.

      Sounds good to me. Just keep the legal system out of it.

    59. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tftp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I say to you "let's see if we can get Bill to say bad and inaccurate things about someone", am I guilty of conspiracy to libel?

      I think as soon as Bill agrees to do what you suggest, you have a textbook conspiracy on your hands.

      As sad as her death is, she's the one who chose to take that path

      Then it follows that an arsonist is not guilty of murder because people had to jump from the top floor of a tall building. Right?

      In real life, though, there are only so many paths to take. Even if she chose a wrong path, bullies are still responsible because they forced the choice onto the victim. See the concept of "felony murder". Also consider that children are not in control of their life; they can't quit school, they can't sue bullies, they can't leave town... and people who may do something simply ignored the problem. Your objections would be far more valid if an adult is involved.

    60. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mangu · · Score: 1

      9 MM hollow point, 115 grains is about 7 grams

      You don't seem to have followed the link that I posted, which mentions "9.3mm caliber (.366" diameter) ... Bullet weights typically run in the 250-300 grain range"

      As for the beverage CAN, it weighs 14 grams. The CONTENTS are a different matter. If someone is reporting a case of assault as coming from a can, or a bottle, or any other container, it's presumed to be an EMPTY container, unless stated otherwise. After all, it's rather stupid to mention an attack by a "can" if the contents weigh twenty times as much as the can. At the very least, any literate reporter would write a "full can" in his newspiece.

    61. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, at least THIS time, they used real charges, and didn't try to make up and stretch other non-applicable laws to indict the culprits.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    62. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by shentino · · Score: 1

      Sadly the bullies probably know this...which is why they're not afraid to bully.

    63. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by shentino · · Score: 1

      We are society of borg.

      You will be bullied.

      Resistance is futile.

    64. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by ajlisows · · Score: 1

      I think the School administrators/teachers/parents should intervene, but in a different way. Having an adult step in and tell the bully to leave the bullied kid alone isn't going to be effective. The kids will take that as a sign that the kid can't take care of him/herself and bully them further. Taking the bullied kid aside and trying to instill some self confidence in them, in my opinion, is the better route.

      I say this out of experience. I was one of the smallest, smartest, quietest, and most shy boys in school. Obviously that made me an obvious target. First grade in particular was rough for me. I developed a complex where I was afraid to go to the bathroom during school because someone might bully me in the bathroom or on the way. My grades suffered and I was not happy.

      My dad (who probably would have bullied me if we were in school together) sat me down on several occasions about being comfortable with who I was, not being afraid to talk, and generally sticking up for myself. I started to put his words into actions and by 3rd grade...I managed to be pretty popular. By 5th grade, I was pretty much untouchable, as any kid who wanted to mess with me would incur the wrath of the other bullies. Even in Middle/HIgh School I was surprisingly popular for one of the "Smart Kids". I can't imagine that things would have went down this way without some good parental guidance.

      I think this would only work for someone who is past the "Verbal abuse with occasional wedgie" and is on to "Getting physically beat on every other day". I don't really know what to do at that point, but getting a child to come out of their shell earlier on may have prevented that.

    65. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by muridae · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Harassment is a crime in some jurisdictions.

      Sure, but what's that got to do with the price of egss?

      Because that may be what was happening here. Not a case I am following, so don't rightly know. You said, in the post I replied to, that they were "arresting people for saying mean things" and that the "nanny state" was overstepping it's bounds. I am pointing out that there exist laws, to charge people with crimes, for behavior that you may just define as "being mean" or "saying mean things".

      If you do not care for those laws, I suggest you take it up with various local, state, and federal authorities, to get the law changed, instead of making up new crimes on slashdot.

      So is contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

      Equally irrelevant, but even more so when the "suspects" are themselves minors.

      They will likely get charged as adults for the other crimes, that may well follow for this one as well.

      Stalking.

      Not an issue here.

      Really, says who? I don't know all the facts of the case, but if the girl tried to get away from them, say blocking them on her pages or what not, and they found ways around them, that is stalking.

      Hell, if the kids said to each other, online or otherwise, "lets try to get her to kill herself" then you can bump up to conspiracy to commit murder.

      How so? If I say to you "let's see if we can get Bill to say bad and inaccurate things about someone", am I guilty of conspiracy to libel?

      Conspiracy to commit libel is not a crime.
      I know you, and half of slashdot and the internet at large, what this to be a vast conspiracy to criminalize free speech. Maybe the way the DA is going about this case will do so, I don't know. But there are plenty of ways to apply current law, laws that have been upheld by the SCOTUS.

      If someone sent you 100 postal letters per day, or organized friends to stand outside your house yelling at you, this would get the attention of law enforcement.

      Once again, that's not the issue here. This isn't a case of one person constantly sending her harassing messages - it's a case of many people exercising their free-speech rights. Some of their other actions are certainly illegal, and should be prosecuted, but let's not invent new "crimes" to charge them with.

      I agree there should not be new crimes invented. That's why I was pointing out the laws that already exist, for crimes that have been tested already in other case, that could be applied to this case. As I said, conspiracy to commit murder is a crime, there are laws against it. Your straw-man of conspiracy to commit libel is just that, a made up "new crime" that you are using to justify other "new crimes" you think are being created here.

    66. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by shentino · · Score: 1

      Doesn't work if you know someone IRL who is happy to spoil your anonymity for you.

    67. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Hell, back in my day...if an adult saw you pulling shit like this (teacher or one of the other parents in the neighborhood, they'd likely whack you themselves, then call your parents...and they'd whack you when you got home again.

      Sure, we had some bullying back in my day, but it never got further than name calling, etc...no one was heard to commit suicide over being teased or bullied...?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    68. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      At the school the bully is likely to be the teachers best friend among the students.

      Really? How do you figure? Teachers are aware that students can't learn when they are frightened, and therefore bullying is anathema to getting the teacher's job done. Perhaps if the teacher didn't care whether the students learn or not, they might be okay with bullying; hopefully few teachers are that cynical.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    69. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mangu · · Score: 1

      If you care to volunteer for some testing,

      I will gladly volunteer IF you can find a significant statistical sample of people who are familiar with the English language, the American culture, and current supermarket prices that read the following sentence (FTFA) 'As she walked home, one of the "Mean Girls" drove by and threw a can of Red Bull at her' and conclude it was a full can.

      Your English teacher at language interpretation class would ask the following questions:

      1) How much does Red Bull cost?

      2) What is more demeaning, to be hit by a full can of an expensive beverage or by an empty can?

      3) Which is more significant, the 14 grams can or the 250 grams content?

      4) Do people throw full cans of expensive beverage out of their cars?

      Yes, I know that English, just like any other natural language, is ambiguous but there is something like common sense, an accepted meaning among people. The sentence "he saw that gasoline can explode" could mean either "he saw that it's possible for gasoline to explode" or "he witnessed that particular container of gasoline exploding", however I'm ready to bet that the majority of English language speakers would say that 'as she walked home, one of the "Mean Girls" drove by and threw a can of Red Bull at her' means the Red Bull can was empty.

    70. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      ow, cyber bullying allows them to hit you even at home, and in ways that can often go unnoticed by the parents, not only of the victim, but of the bully's parents. Not sure what we can do about it, but I wouldn't equate this to a typical school yard bullying situation.

      Teach the victim how to save screenshots. Have him/her compile a record of the bullying behavior, which can later be used to hold the bullies responsible. One thing real-life bullies do is make sure their bullying happens in situations where they will have plausible deniability later on. On-line bullying, on the other hand, leaves an evidence trail that is hard to cover up.

      (of course, the next round of escalation would see children fabricating incriminating screenshots against each other... but that's next year's problem. Plus that will improve the miscreants' Photoshop skills)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    71. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tftp · · Score: 1

      You don't seem to have followed the link that I posted, which mentions "9.3mm caliber (.366" diameter) ... Bullet weights typically run in the 250-300 grain range"

      9mm FMJ is typically 115 grain. Weight of 250 gr is more standard for .45 ACP. 300 grain is the weight for .50.

    72. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

      back in your day
      - when someone committed suicide, it was swept under the rug so they could get a church burial
      - news about a suicide was local news, at best. this never would have made national news

      so yay, there were kids' suicides, back in your days. you just never heard of them.

      actually, there's a lot less violence today than in your day. it just gets reported and advertised a lot more. dead kids sell.

      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    73. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      That's assault. And, people have been killed with the right hit in the right place with that force.

      Agreed that it is assault, but I want to point out that the assault charge doesn't depend on the projectile being of any particular size or weight to be valid. "Assault" is merely the act of physically attacking or intimidating someone -- if there was actual damage incurred, then you can add "battery" as a separate charge. People are commonly convicted of assault simply for pointing an unloaded gun at someone, or for spitting on someone.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    74. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Angst+Badger · · Score: 1

      And while I find the lack of action by school officials disturbing, I wonder if they would have made things worse by getting involved.

      That's certainly a fear that keeps many victims of bullying from seeking help, and it's often well-founded, since school officials tend not to take any serious action nor watch for reprisals.

      I'd argue that the solution here is definitely not parenting. A victim of bullying in school should not be placed in a position of having to compensate for the actions of the perpetrators any more than a crime victim out in the adult world should be. One might argue that the bullies' parents ought to be doing a better job, but realistically, they're probably bullies themselves, and their kids are acting out what they see at home.

      Instead of having brain-dead zero-tolerance policies on drugs that expel perfectly good kids for having an aspirin, we ought to have zero-tolerance policies on bullying, especially (but not exclusively) when any physical violence is involved. If I punch a coworker, I'm likely to be arrested on assault charges, and I'm definitely out of a job, period, no second chances, no questions asked. If I assault a child -- at least in this state -- we're talking felony assault charges. Is it really asking too much for school bullies to be expelled from the public school system? And, for that matter, is it asking too much for the parents who raise these little thugs to be, at the very least, substantially fined and subject to intense scrutiny from child protective services in case the little thug in question is him- or herself the victim of child abuse and in need of help?

      This shit goes on because it is not treated as the serious problem that it is. If it was met with an official response proportional to the gravity of the situation, most of it would cease to be a problem.

      --
      Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
    75. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True but according to the district attorney the bulk of it was in school

    76. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mangu · · Score: 1

      You say PISTOL bullets, I say RIFLE bullets.

      Anyhow, considering muzzle velocity, weight isn't that important. Energy scales proportionally with weight, but at a square law with velocity. That's why the US armed forces have standardized with 0.223 inch calibers for over forty years.

      For two soldiers carrying the same weight in ammo, the one with the lesser bullet weight has a lot more killing power than the one with the larger caliber bullets.

    77. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big deal. How is this any different from writing it on the wall of a bathroom stall, painting graphitti on the side of a local concrete bridge, tacking it on a piece of paper and posting it on a telephone pole or bulletin board, or simply telling all your friends the same information on the phone or in person?

      The article makes it sound like this is something entirely new because of the technology involved. It isn't. It's just the same old insults with the same malicious intent delivered by stupid, bullying kids using new tools. The problem here is independent of the tools used to deliver the hurtful messages.

    78. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by lorenlal · · Score: 1

      Show some genuine concern for these kids, and they'll shine. They always do

      Always, no... But it's still good to show the concern anyway... Because it's the right thing to do.

      What baffles me is how didn't her parents know? Is it because she didn't want to talk about it with them? Is it because they didn't listen? I ask because if her parents ignored the whole thing, that's negligence. That'd be even sadder. I can only assume that they didn't know. I don't want to pile on parents who lost their child, it's just that these questions are noticeably absent from the article.

      Being a childhood victim of some bullying (I know.. shocker: nerd, on /.) I remember how much I hated being at school. But as parent said, I had a few people who really cared, listened, and helped me greatly.

      This is a terribly sad story, my heart goes out to her family. I only hope that the people who are punished are the people responsible for attacking her, and not the social websites that were used.

    79. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by morari · · Score: 1

      "Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing."
      — Robert E. Howard

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    80. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by morari · · Score: 1

      Teachers don't care if students learn or not. School isn't about learning, it's about conditioning. Bullies play an essential role in said conditioning. Without them, the weak and scared might grow up with a decent amount of self esteem.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    81. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And you're exactly the reason so many bullies get away with this shit. The best way to treat a bully is with a dose of his own medicine. They won't "get it" that it's not ok to hurt someone smaller than them unless someone bigger still shows them how small they are in the scheme of things.

      Had I been there I'd damn well have called the police - adults hitting children is not OK unless it's a case of self-defense.

      He didn't hit the kid, he picked him up and tossed him. That usually won't hurt a child unless he trips or slips when he lands, and even if he had accidentally hurt the kid, kids heal fast. As long as the intention was an overwhelming display of power, and not an actual intention to cause harm, I'm a-ok with it. A safer response would have been to simply pick the kid up, hold him at eye level, and explain exactly what will happen the next time.

      Bully's respond to overwhelming force, not bullshit "you be nice now" sissy crap. They are counting on that, because they know nobody will do anything to stop them. If someone does actually do something, the quit real quick, because being a bully isn't about taking risks.

      Rather than being an adult and handling it right he simply beat up a child.

      Part of being an adult is knowing when to talk and when to act. Bullies don't respond to talk, they never have, and they never will. A verbal reprimand without any physical force behind it is just letting them off the hook, and they damn well know it. For the most part, the GP did the right thing. A touch excessive, perhaps, and definitely put himself in a position where a sissy like you could have gotten him into serious trouble with the law, but it was better he do that than let that poor kid be victimized on his way to school every day, and potentially end up killing himself like the girl in TFA.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    82. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by morari · · Score: 1

      Please. So-called "cyber bullying" should be even easier to avoid and/or deal with than anything physical. No one is pushing you up against the computer screen and forcing you to read the demeaning comments left on Facebook. All you have to do is not give your e-mail out to people, make your social networking accounts private, and ignore "mean poopy-face comments" that others tweet. Subcoming to this new brand of ethereal bullying is more about a lack of fortitude from the "victim" than anything.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    83. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So go tell your teacher friend to go fuck herself, she is just as responsible as every other jerk who walks by someone in trouble and doesn't do crap. Job, no job, she is a bad bad person. Its a frigen CHILD beating hit by another child. Who the hell lets that happen?

      Pretty harsh words for someone who doesn't know she's 5'0" and knows what's in her terms of employment.

    84. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Indeed. My son was having a fit, and I prevented him from running into the street (a busy highway in this case) as he is want to do in such circumstances.

      I was arrested for felony assault of a child and spent four days in jail until I could bail myself out (having money, and getting it place when in jail are two different things), and told if I let him run into the street, I would have been charged with neglect and depraved indifference to human life.

      I am still awaiting what, if any, formal charges will be laid.

    85. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "back in your day - when someone committed suicide, it was swept under the rug so they could get a church burial

      - news about a suicide was local news, at best. this never would have made national news

      so yay, there were kids' suicides, back in your days. you just never heard of them.

      actually, there's a lot less violence today than in your day. it just gets reported and advertised a lot more. dead kids sell."

      Hmm...trust me, in my highschool, if some kid offed themselves, we'd all know...it would have gone around the school quite quickly. I knew lots of kids at the other schools..never hear of it there either.

      I kinda doubt the violence was more....sure, we had fights but you NEVER had anyone bringing guns to school...once or twice a knife did get brought in..and it was IMMEDIATE news in school. It was a rare thing...so rare that news of it spread like wildfire...and I was at a large highschool. No....when there was a fight, it was a fist fight.

      Not sure what a suicide has to do with a church funeral? I don't know of my religion I grew up in saying you couldn't get a church funeral if you killed yourself?!?! What religion does that?

      But, your right..it would be local news, not national news. Then again, when I grew up, we didn't have 24/7 news channels. Hell, we didn't get cable in our neighborhoods will I was like a senior in highschool.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    86. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, because you can't just close the browser or go to a different site. At home you're totally trapped more so than when they are in the same room as you. /s

    87. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Interesting point. Where does that chain of logic end? Should we charge the parents of the perpetrators with negligence, because they failed to instill proper value in their children?

    88. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tftp · · Score: 1

      You say PISTOL bullets, I say RIFLE bullets.

      True, but you can only blame yourself for the confusion. 9mm caliber, as you said earlier, is NOT the 9.3 mm caliber (9.3 x 62 Mauser, perhaps?) that you later referred to. The former is a common handgun caliber, widely used in handguns and not as much in rifles. The latter is a rare rifle caliber, "seldom seen in Australia and the New World, but [...] reasonably popular in Europe and Africa," and this load is specifically made for large game. Basically it's a smaller version of an elephant gun, with a recoil that is marginally less than a horse's kick.

      So no surprise that jafiwam pointed out that 9mm handgun ammo comes with 115-125 gr bullets. Only when you replied to him you cited the 9.3 mm rifle caliber. Now I know what you mean; not that it really affects the thread, really - a kid in the street can have a 9mm gun, but is very unlikely to carry a 40" or longer 9.3mm scoped African rifle :-)

      For two soldiers carrying the same weight in ammo, the one with the lesser bullet weight has a lot more killing power than the one with the larger caliber bullets.

      This is true in part; but another side of the truth is that 5.56 mm FMJ ammo usually wounds, but not kills, humans. This is exactly what the army wants, because wounding one enemy soldier takes two or three other soldiers out of action. With regard to damage, .223 - even HP - is considered to be a light hunting round, more suitable for varmints (like a coyote) but not recommended on larger game, like deer. And you'd need to be certified crazy to shoot a .223 at a feral hog (it will only annoy it, and make it run after you.)

    89. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      Regardless, one way or another, the harsh realities of the world will set in. Certainly some children could certainly benefit from 'protection' (say, so their confidence improves, which changes everything). However, other children will never fit in, and no amount of love, caring, or giving a damn about them will change that.

      I take it you also approve of death by exposure for the physically deformed as well?

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    90. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by nog_lorp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are viewing this in a much more practical way than a teenage girl or boy does.

      If I read online that some girl is an "Irish whore", I'm going to jump thoughts of hot redheads with loose morals - a complement!

      In reality, no one cares what someone says on the internet. But to a teen being bullied it is the difference between being beaten up in an alley
      and being picked on in the high school quad in front of a jeering crowd.

    91. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of people like you think that X could NEVER happen in THEIR school/town without their knowledge. You're all wrong. No exceptions. I'm not saying your school necessarily DID have any suicides while you were there, but they could have, and they could have passed under your radar precisely BECAUSE you think "If I didn't hear about it then it couldn't have happened".

    92. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tftp · · Score: 1

      Should we charge the parents of the perpetrators with negligence, because they failed to instill proper value in their children?

      Parents have no legal duty to ensure that their kids don't kill other kids. They can't be charged, unless some major wrongdoing on their part can be shown (like incitement.) But kids themselves have legal duty to not kill others. Of course courts should look into each specific case and assign blame where it belongs; that's why we have judges and juries, and not computers, deciding cases.

    93. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Zxern · · Score: 1

      Her parents knew and in fact had complained to the school about it. Alas nothing was done.

    94. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by nog_lorp · · Score: 1

      You could have just said "I agree".

    95. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Except that you can like... block people online and never have to hear anything from them through email or twitter or facebook.

      Filter: Assholes@yahoo.com -> Trash

    96. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by thesandtiger · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Wrong answer. You don't lay hands on someone unless they are a direct threat/self-defense. Using physical violence as an adult upon a child as a way to stop bullying is just flat out fucking retarded. And really, "they heal quick!" are you fucking retarded?

      Here's how you fix a bully: Shame them. Humiliate them. Make it clear to them - and most importantly, to them and EVERYONE they think looks up to them - just what a pathetic coward they actually are. And that can be done without actually laying hands on them. Try this one on for size:

      Bigger adult goes up to bully, gets right in his face: "So you like picking on people who are smaller than you, huh? Well, how about you prove what a man you are by taking me on, right now? Get up, take a swing - let's see what that gets you, you pathetic child. Let's see if you're man enough to take a shot at me." If they start to threaten you or talk, say "Shut the fuck up and hit me, you little bitch!" I mean, really get in their fce and back them down, hard. When they inevitably back off - calling you crazy or saying that you're lucky they won't take a swing, follow it up, DEMAND that they take a shot at you. Don't let them off the hook. Make them back down, and when they do, explain to them exactly how they just demonstrated that they are a pathetic coward - explain it to them AND any of their cronies. Completely humiliate them.

      Then explain how if their previous victim says they even looked at him funny you'll make damn sure they won't be able to do it again. Finally, tell them to get off the bus. I mean it - explain to them that they are no longer allowed to be in the same space as you and your friend.

      You won't need to hit them, you'll completely humiliate them, and best of all you won't have to run the risk of going to jail for beating up a child. If they do swing at you - and they won't, but if they do - then it's self defense, and THEN it's justified.

      I never said tell them nicely to stop doing it - I say give them a dose of the absolute terror that they try to instill in their victims. But you don't need to resort to violence to do it - that just reinforces the idea that might makes right and doesn't actually *scare* them. Make them scared - and believe me, the whole mind game of making them think you're going to tear them apart is much Much MUCH more terrifying than anything you'd actually physically do to them. In his mind you've just beaten the everloving shit out of him; in reality the worst you'd do is grab him by the collar and push him away/off the bus or whatever. One of those will stay with him for a long time, the other will make him realize that even if someone does fight back he isn't going to be hurt.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    97. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      "Now, cyber bullying allows them to hit you even at home"

      So stay offline.

      There's this guy on youtube who is trolled constantly. He's got a wiki, an imageboard, and a private forum dedicated to his trolling. If he stopped posting youtube videos, they would stop trolling him. It's been three and a half years. Every time he says "I'm leaving youtube, screw you trolls!" he comes back three days later.

      You have to remove yourself from the online bullying and they can't do shit to you.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    98. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure about assault... I was thinking he'd be arrested for abusing the other kid.

    99. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by thesandtiger · · Score: 1

      Also, I think we actually agree to some extent on the general idea of how it should be handled - but differ in one important detail: Adults don't hit first, period. If it comes to it, if they hit you first, THEN you can hit back, but not before.

      I'm sure it's tempting to want to kick someone's ass when they sorely deserve it, but the fact of the matter is, it's still unfair to do it when they aren't a credible threat and won't *actually* do anything but talk. We are agreed that they need to be shown how pathetic their behavior is - but the adult must ABSOLUTELY not be the first to lay hands.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    100. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Parents have no legal duty to ensure that their kids don't kill other kids. They can't be charged, unless some major wrongdoing on their part can be shown (like incitement.) But kids themselves have legal duty to not kill others.

      Sure, but since when do kids have the legal duty to make sure that others don't kill themselves?

      I agree with the general point which you seem to be making - that people have to be held responsible for the direct results of their action. Where we differ is that you also seem to be indicating that people be held responsible for results which required the input of other individuals. That's where your initial analogy is flawed - people jumping from a burning building have no choice in the matter, and would likely have died if they remained in the building, whereas a suicide victim has plenty of other options, the majority of which would have resulted in her staying alive. In order for me to accept the idea that one person can be held responsible for the suicide of another, I'd have to reject the entire concept of free will. I'd have to treat human beings as nothing more than billiard-balls set in a predestined motion by the cue-stroke of the big bang. And if I accept such a premise, then it makes no sense to hold the perpetrators responsible either, since they have no more influence over their own actions than the girl who committed suicide had over hers.

    101. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by JustOK · · Score: 1, Interesting

      In the days before global instant communication
      Such agitation
      Was local in scope.
      And there was the hope
      It could all go away.
      Now it remains and spreads
      Increasing its threads
      The audience is bigger
      And that's the trigger
      That makes them go away.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    102. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by JustOK · · Score: 2, Funny

      and so's yer old man.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    103. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tc3driver · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I understand your Darwinian point, and there's certainly an element of truth to it. The question is, how much do you value human life? You could, for example, send all your kids off to war, and indeed you will have "survival of the fittest." But you will also lose a lot of perfectly good future husbands and office workers, not to mention a lot of senseless, random deaths.

      Kids do need to learn how to stick up for themselves, but in this case you had a 15-year-old who didn't know how. That's a failure of education. Nobody took her aside to explain that there was a legitimate (i.e. non-suicidal) way out.

      There is also an element of gang assault here that is criminal. And it's completely inappropriate that 17-18 year olds were involved in this kind of immaturity.

      There is two things that I think people are missing here, but I think the grandparent touched on. First Age means nothing, especially when you are trying to separate by one or two years.

      There is no magic that happens when one turns 15, 16, 17, 18 etc. all that happens is you age another day. We all grow and change slowly, which is in part the reason that a company may prefer to hire a 30 something for a professional position, and a 20 something for retail type position. In other words, to me, it sounds like you are saying that what everyone else did was OK! but the 17 and 18 year olds should fry. They all should be punished, I don't know about locked up for life.

      I cannot speak for others, but I had a pretty good idea of what was right and wrong before I was a teenager. That doesn't mean that I always chose to follow the right path. Part of being human is learning as we go, we all make mistakes, we all do dumb things.

      I am not excusing this behavior in any way, on the contrary, I really blame the parents. I cannot blame the school officials, their hands are tied, god forbid these kids have any form of an authority figure in their lives. People say detention, suspension, expulsion. These people forget what it is like to be a kid, most dislike going to school, detention was usually fun, suspension was a vacation, expulsion meant you were going to another school next week.

      I must admit, I am a huge fan of letting kids duke it out. That is the natural way of settling things, I was lucky enough to grow up at a time where fighting was allowed, however, frowned upon. I am not saying with weapons, I am saying with your fists.

      Missed point #2, This could have easily been another Columbine, with lots of dead students and teachers, instead of just one. I should note that I put her parents equally to blame for her suicide as the harassing kids, they should have seen the warning signs, they should have been monitoring internet usage, most of all they should have been there for her. I see the job of a parent as that of someone who is there to help you pick up the pieces after you have fallen, not to prevent the fall in the first place. If you have kids, be there for them when they fall, be there to help them pick up the pieces, and know what is going on in their life so you can be prepared for the fall you can see coming.

      --
      42 69 6C 6C 20 47 61 74 65 73 20 69 73 20 61 20 77 68 6F 72 65 21
    104. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Except that you can like... block people online and never have to hear anything from them through email or twitter or facebook.

      Filter: Assholes@yahoo.com -> Trash

      Mod parent up! I've always told this to my students in media literacy class where there is a component on cyber bullying. Unlike other kinds of bullying you CAN turn it off. Unless the bullies have hacked into your computer and taken control of it (which is illegal), you can simply close your IM chat program. I also remind them it is possible to have multiple e-mail addresses and screen names at no charge. If one of them falls into the wrong hands, simply delete it. Use one e-mail address/screen name for family, another for close trusted friends, and another one that you might share more widely. If you start to receive abuse on one particular account, just delete it, and don't share details of your new account with the same people.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    105. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Newsflash: It's not about you. It's about how the girl felt about it. You might not care that your name is permanently recorded on the internet as being an Irish Slut, but apparently she did.

      I don't mean this with any offense at all, really, but try thinking about other people's perspective.

    106. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mangu · · Score: 1

      This is exactly what the army wants, because wounding one enemy soldier takes two or three other soldiers out of action

      Urban legend, any army in the world would rather kill than wound, as a wounded soldier can still shoot. If this were true, armies would shoot rubber bullets.

      With regard to damage, .223 - even HP - is considered to be a light hunting round, more suitable for varmints (like a coyote) but not recommended on larger game, like deer

      Tell me again about that after you have been shot by an M-16.

    107. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by thesandtiger · · Score: 1

      making them think u will get physical is violence too, but i get what u mean. but u gotta be ready to put them down if they do try to hit u. even with adults u should never swing first, will get u out of a LOT of legal trouble believe me.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    108. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      At the school the bully is likely to be the teachers best friend among the students.

      Really? How do you figure? Teachers are aware that students can't learn when they are frightened, and therefore bullying is anathema to getting the teacher's job done. Perhaps if the teacher didn't care whether the students learn or not, they might be okay with bullying; hopefully few teachers are that cynical.

      Think like a sociopath. Interaction with people is just a way of getting things done. You use threats and violence where it works. Elsewhere you suck up to people in authority, because that is what works.

    109. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tftp · · Score: 1

      since when do kids have the legal duty to make sure that others don't kill themselves?

      Since they started affecting the outcome.

      I must mention again that it can be only decided by courts if their influence was sufficiently harmful or not (and in this sense whether the offenders achieved the "legal duty" status by doing whatever they were doing.) But certainly there are at least two factors that are immediately obvious, and the court will not fail to notice them:

      1. The suicide (this one, at least) wouldn't happen without actions of the defendants
      2. The defendants had "guilty mind" (wanted to hurt the victim.)

      It can be argued that the victim was free to choose another path; for example, she could run away from the hated school, from her uncaring parents, and from the heartless people of the town. That's definitely an option. But you need to have a hope for the future in order to fight for that future. Once the hope is lost, there is no reason to even try to survive. An adult could deal with the situation with relative ease. First of all, adults learned to not give a rat's behind about other people's opinions (they are often worthless - both the people and their opinions.) An emo child, however, is 1% physical and 99% mental creature. The victim probably mostly existed in opinion of others. Once that opinion, that support, dropped through the floor, she was destroyed.

      I still understand your objections, mostly from the POV of the Butterfly Effect. In some cases a minor action can have a large effect. For example, a kid slightly pushes another kid in school, without meaning much harm. But the pushed kid trips over something, falls down the stair and ends up dead. Yes, the offending kid did mean some harm, but not *that* much. Should he be jailed for murder? Note that he had no "guilty mind", but the defendants in this case seemingly had it. That's why I believe there can't be a standard answer to this question; each defendant's actions must be parsed and guilt determined by capable, trained adults (judge, jury.)

      That's where your initial analogy is flawed - people jumping from a burning building have no choice in the matter, and would likely have died if they remained in the building

      Likely? How could anyone know that? For example, if only those people decided to stay on the roof another 3 minutes, the police helicopter would be there to pick them up. They *chose* to jump because they *thought* they are going to burn, but this here CFD analysis on the IBM supercomputer shows that they were wrong. Well, maybe they'd get 50% burns, but they'd survive, most of them at least. So jumping was their own idea, and the arsonist is only responsible for property damage, a misdemeanor perhaps.

      In order for me to accept the idea that one person can be held responsible for the suicide of another, I'd have to reject the entire concept of free will.

      I already suggested some response to that; but here is an example. You are caught by Spanish Inquisition and placed under the Pendulum. In addition to the Poe's setup you also have an option to kill yourself, relatively easily, at any time. The pendulum slowly descends; there is no hope of escape; the blade just cut your clothes; now the blade cut through your skin ... at what point, if ever, you will choose death? Will you never choose it, instead watching your chest cut through, one tiny slice per swing, until it cuts so deep that you pass out from blood loss or from intolerable pain? Most importantly, what will a *reasonable person* choose?

    110. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You seem to think that the online world is a magical separate space where the things we write have absolutely no bearing on the rest of the world.

      That impression is wrong. Threats are still threats, harassment is still harassment (and, for that matter, libel is still libel, agreements are still agreements, etc.) Cyberspace is not "reality 2.0." The internet is a communication media that is part of the same real world where we have laws against threats, libel, harassment, assault (note nothing is said about battery) and the like.

    111. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1, Informative

      You seem to think that the online world is a magical separate space where the things we write have absolutely no bearing on the rest of the world.

      No, I seem to think that you can't punch someone in the head online. The IRC /me command notwithstanding.

    112. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if you're quite good at not beating too much of the crap out of someone. And only if lesser forms of applying power, such as intimidation or bribery failed.
      If you suck at not beating too much of the crap out of people, it is probably wiser to even dish out actually harsher punishments, such as getting the shithead removed from his school / job or put in front of a court.

    113. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could, for example, send all your kids off to war, and indeed you will have "survival of the fittest."

      No; you have "survival of the luckiest".

    114. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by blakedev · · Score: 1

      He was actually Tyler Durden.

      --
      QamuIs Heg qaq law' lorvIs yInqaq puS
    115. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by syousef · · Score: 1

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it.

      What?!?!?! This kind of remark drives me insane!!! Being a slashdot reader you should know better. Teach your kid to turn off the damn cell phone or computer once in a while. You sure can escape it!

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    116. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by daveime · · Score: 1

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it

      Why ? Is is SO difficult simply NOT to log onto Facebook ? Or remove "friends" who are posting shitty content about you ? Jesus, make a new account and only tell those who are your real friends. And heck, if *everyone* is making your life a misery, why the fuck would you want to be on a social network if you are a social outcast ? Just stay OFF the fucking internet and it ceases to be a problem.

      If someone wrote some nasty graffiti about you on a real-life wall, would you keep going back to that wall every day to re-read it and become more depressed ? Or posted some bullshit story in a newspaper, would you get it framed and hang it in your bathroom to read every day ?

      I'm still trying to work out how "statutory rape" can be included as cyber-bullying, unless she was gang-piled in SecondLife ?

      But really, this has NOTHING to do with cyberspace, and everything to do with teachers and parents all trying to push the responsibility onto each other, and if that fails, there's always video nastys / video games / drugs / cyberspace to blame right ?

    117. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      You really don't understand bullying at all.

        WAS a bully as a kid.

      As an adult, I am now a teacher, and one of the things I teach kids (and other teachers) is how to deal with bullying

      First of all, the real bully is NOT the one harassing this kid. The real bully is the kid pulling the strings to get the group to harass this kid.

      You were right about teaching this kid some basic social skills. Any time you have a kid that's being bullied, they are missing some basic social skills (gets more complex in HS, but still applies).

      By keeping kids inside, never letting them out, and the whole 'play date' nonsense, we deprive kids of the opportunity to make friends and learn social skills. The more we do this, the more bullies we will see, because the more victims we create.

      Yes, I am putting blame on those being bullied, and more specifically, the parents of these kids. If you don't accept that these kids are not socially equipped to deal with these situations, you will never fix the problem. Look for it early. If your 2nd grader is getting bullied, teach your kids social skills. If you can't teach these skills, get someonme else to help you.

    118. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by xero314 · · Score: 1

      however I'm ready to bet that the majority of English language speakers would say that 'as she walked home, one of the "Mean Girls" drove by and threw a can of Red Bull at her' means the Red Bull can was empty.

      Not sure you know the use of the word "of" in this sentence. If we simply change the type of container that is used in the sentence the meaning becomes clearer "as she walked home, one of the "Mean Girls" drove by and threw a cup of Red Bull at her." There is no reason to believe that a can is more likely to be empty than a cup, but I am fairly certain in this case, you read the can as being empty and the cup as being full. If the writer had meant an empty can then they would had to have said "a red bull can" or "a can of air." To be completely honest both interpretation could be wrong and it was not a can at all, but the Red Bull contents of the can that where thrown.

      Now I realize that both interpretations are valid in this context. I'm just saying if you are going to be pedantic, don't sound like an idiot while doing it.

      Now excuse me while I pour myself a glass of water.

    119. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A teacher of mine told a nice story about a wheelchair-bound friend of hers. The man was occasionally bullied by idiots (not quite kids anymore) and more than once did he do a little "trick" to such people. He said something like "come on, stop that, I dare you to shake my hand". At that point bullying idiots began to hesitate and he could ask how they could be too scared to shake his hand or if they did shake it, he could squeeze their until they screamed. Since he was in a wheelchair and had to use his hands much more than most people, he had really strong muscles. Any "main bully" that was scared of shaking his hand or cried and screamed if they did, didn't get much respect by his followers anymore. And instead, the followers were quite impressed with how strong the man was despite sitting in a wheelchair.

    120. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Irish slut'

      eh, whats that then, a new shampoo, sounds delightful! Does it do the frizzies down then?

    121. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Fluffeh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I recall a very memorable moment in my life. I was in year eight at the time (about twelve or thirteen years of age for non Australians) and there were two year eleven or year twelve kids both very loud, both very physical and both annoying everyone else on the school bus with their ten minute argument which seemed to be on the edge of a physical conflict at every second. This carried on for a good while, eventually a year nine kid got involved and they sort of turned their built up rage on this new kid.

      Having had enough this ongoing saga, I stood up and rather loudly shouted while staring them both down "You two shut up, else I'm going to beat the shit out of BOTH of you!". Looking back, this clearly must have looked comical. One kid half the size of these two older kids threatening them, yet the effect itself was what made this stick with me.

      The rest of the bus went silent for a split second, then literally BURST out into both laughter and applause. Result? Amazingly the two kids in the main argument both sat down, shut up and remained quiet for the rest of the trip to the train station.

      Sometimes even the perceived threat (however unlikely - a twelve year old kid beating up TWO fifteen year old kids heheh) is enough to stop a tirade.

      Since then, I have never been afraid to step in when I see a kid getting picked on if they are outnumbered and clearly have their tail between their legs so to speak.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    122. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by eam · · Score: 1

      Sorry, there is nothing in "...threw a can of Red Bull at her..." to imply empty or full. You assume it was empty. I could assume it was full. Neither assumption is more valid than the other.

      Maybe they weren't thirsty anymore. Maybe they didn't care about the cost because they didn't have to pay for it, or they didn't have to pay for anything else. Maybe they were trying it for the first time & decided they didn't like it. Maybe they cared more about torturing the girl than finishing a Red Bull.

      Regarding American Culture, there is currently a TV show called "Glee" about a fictitious group of misfit students forming a show choir in their High School. They routinely show unpopular kids getting full slushy drinks (It is supposed to represent a 7-11 "Big Gulp") thrown at them by the popular kids: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWetvraKCA8

      If you want the answers:

      1) The price would be insignificant to me now, and the price would have been even more insignificant to me when I was a teenager and had no expenses.

      2) A full or nearly full beverage container is much, much more demeaning.

      3) As a projectile, mass matters. As humiliation, getting drenched in sticky drink is significant.

      4) Most don't. Some do. Most people also don't bully. Some do. Most people can survive the bullying. Some don't.

    123. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      These were my thoughts. Cyberbullying is everywhere. I have way too much training in IT, cryptography, electronics. As I sit here, I have paper staring at me from several universities and several colleges. I'm not much of a 'dirty deeds done dirt cheap' kind, but the kids that tormented this girl (and maybe their parents too) look like they could use a healthy dose of somewhere in between '50 toilets delivered from Sears, with restocking charges' to 'The Chicago branch of La Casa Nostra Spotted your IP address or cell phone number along with their missing $20000000. They are pissed and they want it back NOW!'

    124. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by victorhooi · · Score: 3, Insightful
      heya,

      I'm going to have to agree with the parent. We used to share our school bus with different high school. I went to James Ruse, basically a selective school, where kids sit an entrance test to get in - think nerdy kids, essentially the top of their state (I was the exception *grins*, I was just lucky). Then the other school on the bus was Gilroy, a local independent Catholic school.

      So we'd get tools on the bus, year 7 Gilroy kids who did stupid things like trip other people over, steal their wallets, spit, annoy the driver, that sort of thing. There was one bunch who kept bugging my friends and I because hey, we went to Ruse. One day, one of the Prefects from Gilroy picked up one of their kids, dragged him by the shirt back to us, and said "Apologise." I said, seriously, it's ok, but the prefect didn't relent. The kid grinned like an idiot, till he realised the prefect was serious. To this day, I'm grateful to that guy, for actually being responsible, because all the stupidity toned down after that.

      Moral of the story, kids will be kids, they do stupid things. And a bit of jostling around isn't going to kill them. Sometimes you just need to show them you're not going to bend over every time.

      And a few years later, those idiotic year 7's decided to put their bags down the middle of the bus, so people would trip over them walking in to the bus. So I walked over, grabbed all the bags, and threw them about 15m out the front door. The bus driver certainly didn't try to stop me. They were being complete tools to him as well.

      Like it or not, for small things, you just have to teach your kids to be less of a wimp. I mean, there is a line - and I think here, what happened was serious enough that somebody should have stepped in. But if some kid flicks a rubber-band at another kid, that's not a reason to call in a teacher - you walk over to the kid, and tell him to stop it, and if he doesn't or says make me, say you'll rain nine kinds of s*it down on him if he doesn't. Bullies look for soft targets, they're not going to risk having their nose bloodied just so they can flick rubberbands or stuff grass down somebody's shirt.

      Cheers, Victor

    125. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you mean bullying like calling names or something inane like that, well fine. But the topic at hand involves physical abuse. I think sopmeone should teach you about why that is wrong for a 5 year old, let along a 15 year old.

      You said you're a teacher? Come on.

    126. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      If the internet is used in a campaign of harassment that also includes punching them in the head (and if the threat to punch someone in the head came over the internet) I see no reason why the legal system should keep out of the internet-based aspects.

    127. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Lucidus · · Score: 1

      Absolutely!

    128. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      1. The suicide (this one, at least) wouldn't happen without actions of the defendants
            2. The defendants had "guilty mind" (wanted to hurt the victim.)

      Actually, this is the only part of your comment that makes me re-think the situation. You're right - intent and consequence do tend to be the major factors in how we judge guilt. However, that can also be taken to extremes, and it probably has no relevance on this case anyway. As a generic guide it may work, as long as it's tempered by reason.

      This part, though:

      Likely? How could anyone know that? For example, if only those people decided to stay on the roof another 3 minutes, the police helicopter would be there to pick them up.

      is rather silly. If I point a gun at you, you have every right to kill me in turn, regardless of whether or not you can prove that I was going to pull the trigger. Even if it turns out that the weapon was unloaded, no court would convince you for defending yourself.

      The legal system hinges on reasonable assumptions. It's reasonable to jump from a burning building in the hope of avoiding being burned alive, so it makes sense to charge the arsonist with murder regardless of the availability of police helicopters. A reasonable person would have known that the act of setting a building on fire would likely result in death, ergo, barring a finding of "innocent due to insanity", the perp should be held responsible.

      On the other hand, it's not reasonable to kill yourself in order to avoid people saying mean things about you, so how can you hold the bullies responsible for that death? Now, yes, you're right, teenagers do tend to be in a hormonal state that is "1% physical and 99% mental", but I'm not sure that it changes anything. The majority of teenagers will not commit suicide due to bullying, so there's clearly something wrong with the few that do. Moreover, the accused in this case are also teenagers, so if you're going to use the 99-1 defense in favor of the victim, why wouldn't you apply the same standards when assessing the perps?

      I simply don't see any justification for holding people responsible for the unreasonable actions of those whom they may have influenced. That's the same logic that opponents of video-games use every time some GTA-playing teenager opens fire in a cafeteria. It's absurd when they do it, and it's absurd here.

    129. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mjwx · · Score: 1

      FTA: "According to students, Phoebe was called 'Irish slut' and 'whore' on Twitter, Craigslist, Facebook and Formspring."

      So back to what the OP said, the problem is not Twitter, Craigslist, Facebook and FormSpring. The problem is the society where these acts are not only tolerated but encouraged.

      For $DEITIES_SON's sake man, go watch a "Teen Sex Comedy" and actual look for the oh so subtle social commentary. Everything about western teen society is to enforce conformity, intelligence is overrated, originality is shunned and bob forbid you actually have an opinion of your own. Just being a little physically different or a foreign accent is reason enough for one to be ostracised and ridiculed.

      This was not caused by social media, it was caused by the acceptance of this kind of enforced conformity in our society, until such a time when this changes and we as a society decide to actually start punishing the people (hello gun nuts :) who enforce conformity and determine who gets accepted this kind of thing will continue to happen.

      But this will not happen, I've just described the basis of the Old Boys Club and the American Fraternity. Perhaps we just need to accept that some people are "unavoidable casualties", yes? Schools will continue to punish and vilify the victims (the bullied) whilst ignoring or worse yet encouraging the bullies.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    130. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I know that English, just like any other natural language, is ambiguous but there is something like common sense, an accepted meaning among people.

      That undermines your otherwise persuasive argument. The "common sense" meaning of a "can of Red Bull" (or a "bottle of beer," "jug of wine," "tank of fuel," etc.) is a can full of Red Bull (and so on). This is as opposed to "a Red Bull can," which clearly refers to the can sans contents.

      And note the difference in a less ambiguous situation: "She poured a glass of beer over him" as opposed to "she poured a beer glass can over him," (this is how I got together with a gf) that latter being more obviously wrong. Contrast with "I threw a bottle of beer at him" (yes it was full), as opposed to "I threw a beer bottle at him," which should leave the reader imagining (falsely) the bottle to be empty. (this is what I did to a guy I found out slept with another gf. As was my intention he ducked just in time and the bottle exploded spectacularly behind him. Wonderful!

      However, as you note, given the ambiguity of the language, and the particular context, the sentence might just as easily refer to an empty Red Bull can as to an actual can of Red Bull.

      There's another possibility of course, imo the most likely one, the can could have been somewhere in between full and empty. ;) In fact the bottle of beer I threw was a 750ml bottle with a few mouthfuls already swallowed.

    131. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Martian_Kyo · · Score: 1

      or pedophilia.

      Seriously though, it was ..well not 'nice'...but a right thing to do I suppose. I am not sure how old are these kids you're talking about. If they were 12-13, maybe using violence was not the best choice....but i suppose if they were around 18..and still bullying it is fair to say they deserve a beating.

      But you are right, support from and adult or older sibling in these situations means a lot. The worst thing about these situations is that the bullied person starts feeling like they are on their own.

    132. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh, I see this argument all the time "Victim is at fault because ____", use one of
      "they are stupid"
      "they are greedy"
      "they are female"
      "they are not white/straight"

      In various MMO games, #1 is used to legitimate scamming newbies of their good gear.
      In #2, is used by 419's
      #3 is primarily used by rapists and pedophiles to justify their abuse.
      #4 is primarily used by murderers (hate crimes)

      They're all the same "victim's fault" excuse, when it's really the aggressor's fault, as they lack the ability to perceive what they are doing as wrong. "Nothing is my fault" is their core belief.

      And of course the reason we have people becoming this way is because of entitlement issues.

      Nobody puts any consequences to anything anymore.

      Bullying is only the tip of the iceburg.

      Perhaps we should start throwing kids in jails. No more free rides.

    133. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh but its news for nerds and may of us nerds were bullied when in high school.

    134. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by yivi · · Score: 1

      The question is, how much do you value human life? You could, for example, send all your kids off to war, and indeed you will have "survival of the fittest."

      Yes, but then only the most fit for war would survive. Survivors would then come back to peacetime, something they wouldn't be fit for. Unless war went on and on, your selection process would severely suck.

      I.-

    135. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by nacturation · · Score: 1

      There's a big difference between "a Red Bull can" and "a can of Red Bull". One implies it's just the can, the other implies it's a can of something. Can you guess which is which?

      Using your example, consider these two phrases:

      1. a gasoline can
      2. a can of gasoline

      Which implies that it contains gasoline? Yeah, same for the Red Bull. Here's some homework you can take to your English tutor:

      http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=54975&dict=CALD (definition: "containing")
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/of (definition 4: "substance or contents")
      http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?lextype=3&search=of (definition 4: "containing a particular substance")
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of

      You get the picture. Maybe if you're in deep redneck country, words have a different meaning. But the majority of the world parses "a can of Red Bull" as it being a can which contains Red Bull. Otherwise, it'd be a Red Bull can, wouldn't it?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    136. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am still awaiting what, if any, formal charges will be laid.

      With those "damned if you {do|don't}" laws, the only way to be sure is to have no children. Why to bring all this pain, worry and expense - and most importantly hostility of the society - onto yourself when you don't have to?

    137. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by religious+freak · · Score: 1

      +1

      --
      If you can read this... 01110101 01110010 00100000 01100001 00100000 01100111 01100101 01100101 01101011
    138. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it follows that an arsonist is not guilty of murder because people had to jump from the top floor of a tall building. Right?

      If the people would have been perfectly alright if they hadn't jumped off the building - then, yes, right.

      (Please think your analogies through before you make them.)

    139. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by AlamedaStone · · Score: 1

      According to students, Phoebe was called 'Irish slut' and 'whore' on Twitter, Craigslist, Facebook and Formspring

      Nothing you wouldn't hear in 90% of the marriages in the English-speaking world.

      Ratzo, that really is terrible. I would never in a million years say that to my wife. She's Swedish.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    140. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Bman21212 · · Score: 1

      This exact thing happened in my school only a few years ago. Two black girls started a fight, two white male teachers grabbed them and stopped it. No problems arose.

      Most of the time normal situations turn out fine. Some don't, but the exceptions are so rare they become newsworthy. Who wants to read about boring normal stuff that happens every day?

    141. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by someone1234 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Statutory rape and physical harrassment (scrubbing pictures, throwing items, knocking items) are more than name calling.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    142. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Not sure what a suicide has to do with a church funeral? I don't know of my religion I grew up in saying you couldn't get a church funeral if you killed yourself?!?! What religion does that?

      It's a pretty obscure one called Catholicism.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    143. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Canie · · Score: 1

      Whats disturbing, is that the adults did nothing to protect this poor girl when it should have been immediately obvious she was being victimized. Sometimes when your being bullied, simply having an older kid or adult take your side can be immensely comforting.

      The solution here is parenting. And while I find the lack of action by school officials disturbing, I wonder if they would have made things worse by getting involved. In reality they probably should have gotten in touch with the girl's parents proactively and discussed the situation.

      As the parent of a child who was bullied, I can say that addressing it myself was the only option I could see. I found out the names of the kids who were doing it, looked them up in the School Directory (which probably no longer exists due to privacy issues), and visited the homes of the kids involved - unannounced. I took my son with me and simply said I was there to speak to the bully's parent or guardian. I wasn't angry in my approach. I was quite matter of fact, presenting a problem and asking for help with the solution. A few of the kids were kept at the door by the parent and none of them disagreed with what was stated.

      It was important enough to my son and he trusted me enough that this succeeded. His willingness to go with me convinced me he was being honest and made it very easy to convey to him that he had my total support. I think shock value - because so few parents did this kind of thing back then - was hugely helpful. Even the parents who may have been belligerent had I called and made an appointment weren't able to muster much bluster, especially if their son was there. Also, the informality and the brevity of the conversations helped prevent making a mountain out of what was still a molehill. I think my calm presentation of a problem that needed a solution was a little disarming. I wasn't there screaming about their terrible kid. I just wanted to figure out exactly what was happening so that we could find a solution.

      While I encountered parents who were convinced that their child could do no wrong, all of the kids left my son alone immediately after the visits. Less than six months later he was invited to play by a couple of the kids and it was just ordinary kid play. Maybe we were just lucky but it worked.

    144. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by hitmark · · Score: 1

      iirc, the catholic church defines suicide as a sin.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    145. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by hitmark · · Score: 1

      senior football player, huh?

      whats the chance that the bullies where the darlings of local sports, and so got a pass as long as they performed in the field?

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    146. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

      "Hey Gary, the new kid doesn't know his grammer. What kind of dork doesn't learn grammer?"

      --
      You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
    147. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by hitmark · · Score: 1

      and then there are those that would sue you for slander on the spot, as their darling offspring could in no way have done what you claim.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    148. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Wrong answer. You don't lay hands on someone unless they are a direct threat

      The bully was a direct threat to the kid's mental well-being, even if he wasn't a direct physical threat.

    149. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      Please. So-called "cyber bullying" should be even easier to avoid and/or deal with than anything physical. No one is pushing you up against the computer screen and forcing you to read the demeaning comments left on Facebook. All you have to do is not give your e-mail out to people, make your social networking accounts private, and ignore "mean poopy-face comments" that others tweet. Subcoming to this new brand of ethereal bullying is more about a lack of fortitude from the "victim" than anything.

      Uhuh, and then you meet someone who acts friendly, develop a modicum of trust, and get sold out again. So what are you gonna do, recreate all your accounts?

      Nice try at blaming the victim though.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    150. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by shnull · · Score: 1

      If that's a reason to commit suicide i think everyone i know would be really very dead by now. How come these kids are so weak ? Is it because of or because of their lack of education ?

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
    151. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There's a beautiful life lesson, right there.

      "See, kid? What you're doing, hitting on this smaller kid, is *WRONG*. And I can prove that to you by hitting on *YOU*, who are smaller than me. You see the difference? Now do you see how right I am?"

      It's no coincidence that bullies are often bullied at home. It just reinforces the lesson that bullying is ok as long as you're bigger and stronger.

    152. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but I assume that the arrest is a technicality (You technically assaulted your son). Good Samaritan laws would seem to apply. Plus, as a parent you're in a caretaker position of responsibility. You acted in the best interests of your child.

      This is the kind of case which (I would sincerely hope) takes roughly 30 minutes for the state prosecution to say "His rights were infringed!" and then your defense lambasts the guy with the reasons for your intervention.

      Either way, I'm sure your son would understand!

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    153. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Work in a school, albeit in the UK. I have a duty of care which means I may only physically intervene in the actions of a child when there is serious risk to themselves or others, and then only in certain ways. I may restrain a child if they are performing an action which is particularly dangerous (running towards a busy road, running with scissors, attacking another pupil with a weapon etc) but otherwise I'm to do nothing. There are others who are trained in proper methods of restraint who can deal with situations of lesser peril (fights, obstructive behaviour etc. Did I mention it was a school for autistic kids?) but I'm not, so I can only act when there's a risk of serious injury or death, and there's no other way for that situation to be mitigated.

      IANAL, but laying out a kid because he's hit another child is not appropriate. What your football coach did would be classed as assault / affray with intent here, and he'd be in jail, or at least out of a job. Standing between the fighting kids, preventing them from getting next to each other, maybe a physical restraint (wrap, elbow hold, nothing employing joint pressure or imparting physical pain). As I said, all bets are off if there's risk of serious injury or life involved, but that doesn't sound like the case.

      Maybe it's different in the US.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    154. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by martyros · · Score: 2, Interesting

      He didn't hit the kid, he picked him up and tossed him. That usually won't hurt a child unless he trips or slips when he lands, and even if he had accidentally hurt the kid, kids heal fast. As long as the intention was an overwhelming display of power, and not an actual intention to cause harm, I'm a-ok with it. A safer response would have been to simply pick the kid up, hold him at eye level, and explain exactly what will happen the next time. Bully's respond to overwhelming force, not bullshit "you be nice now" sissy crap. They are counting on that, because they know nobody will do anything to stop them. If someone does actually do something, the quit real quick, because being a bully isn't about taking risks.

      That's the strange thing about school. As an adult, if another adult threatens you with violence or intimidation, you respond by appealing to another authority authorized to use more violence (i.e., the police). But somehow, it's cultural for kids to be told not to "tell", and to "solve their own problems." Another option you have as an adult is to move jobs or take a different route to work, which you don't have as a high-schooler. The fact is that high school is screwed up, both culturally and structurally, and is socially a poor preparation for the "real world".

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    155. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am able to 'retaliate', but only because of this peculiar opportunity. Due to draconian layoffs, each remaining member of the engineering staff has been assigned a collateral duty - mine is to supervise the three idiots that work in the warehouse. Two of them were former tormentors of mine during high school. They do no recognize me. I make their work life miserable. Tomorrow one of them will be terminated for cause and then be arrested for multiple misdemeanors.

      My loss of karma will be significant, but I plan to continue.

    156. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      If everyone you know was harassed to this extent then I wonder where you're living? Sparta, Kronos, Cthulhu's School of Hard Knocks?

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    157. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      twitter vs the bathroom wall

      same difference.

    158. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by icebrain · · Score: 1

      With regard to damage, .223 - even HP - is considered to be a light hunting round, more suitable for varmints (like a coyote) but not recommended on larger game, like deer. And you'd need to be certified crazy to shoot a .223 at a feral hog (it will only annoy it, and make it run after you.)

      Not necessarily. While lighter .223 bullets (55gr and below) are unsuitable for larger game, there are several bullets available in the 62-75gr range that are quite effective against whitetails out to 150 yards or so. Some of them are specifically designed for hunting deer, and I know several people that have used them to great success. I'm putting together a load using 65gr GameKings, myself. .223 is also be effective against hogs with a heavier bullet; I know one guy that leads hog hunts as a second job, and he uses .223.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    159. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the strange thing about school. As an adult, if another adult threatens you with violence or intimidation, you respond by appealing to another authority authorized to use more violence (i.e., the police). But somehow, it's cultural for kids to be told not to "tell", and to "solve their own problems." Another option you have as an adult is to move jobs or take a different route to work, which you don't have as a high-schooler. The fact is that high school is screwed up, both culturally and structurally, and is socially a poor preparation for the "real world".

      It's a tricky balance. On one hand we shouldn't be encouraging kids to go Charles Bronson on people who threaten them, but we also need them to learn how to resolve conflicts and disagreements without the need to always appeal to an authority. To quote an example, if the neighbours in my apartment block play loud music late at night I can either go talk to them or just call the police. The latter is technically a valid option, but shouldn't be the first choice unless there's a good reason why talking to the neighbours would be dangerous or totally ineffective.

      One would hope that adults would keep a close enough eye on the situation to know when they should step in and mediate. Kids need to learn to assert themselves, but no-one should face harassment of the extent to which she did. If they were adults they'd have long-ago been picked up by the police.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    160. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      nobody offed themselves in my school either but it's not exactly happening every day in every school.
      The point was that it didn't get shouted about as much.

      Nobody ever brought a gun into my school when I was there either.

      church funeral=catholic church, used to be suicide was considered a mortal sin (murdering yourself) and a crime against god hence no church burial.

      For reference I was in high-school when columbine happened so the world isn't all that different even if the news tries to convince us that everything is so much more dangerous now.

    161. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      And this is why parents should be taking this opportunity to educate their children that suicide is not an appropriate response to being bullied. Or being raped. Or just about anything, really. I watched as a similar case unfolded in Korea that ended with mandatory online IDs and the end of anonymity, and as far as I can tell, no one ever stood up and said "that actress shouldn't have committed suicide. She should have dealt with the problem some other way."

    162. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by obarthelemy · · Score: 1
      --
      The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
    163. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Redwin · · Score: 1

      Or people not under the influence of the Bystander Effect

      --
      Warning, comments may not have been passed by the sanity department of my brain.
    164. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by duffbeer703 · · Score: 1

      I disagree.

      Facebook is more than willing to violate your privacy and share your information and social networks with advertisers, yet they stonewall a criminal investigation. They certainly deserve whatever negative publicity they receive relating to this matter.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    165. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, and there are already laws covering them.

    166. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      I didn't assault the kid, I grabbed him fairly firmly, but not harmfully, and with the bus drivers approval forcibly removed him from the bus. The kid was basically beating up his geeky victim and that just wasn't going to fly with me. Half the bus clapped and the other half of the kids just stared realising that shit was going to change.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    167. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by KillaBeave · · Score: 1

      /. Blasphemy Alert!!!

      The kid can just turn the damned computer off.

    168. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      He was beating the kid up. Me physically restraining and ejecting him off the bus was a sure lot less than what his victim had been copping.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    169. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by sg_oneill · · Score: 1

      I didn't assault the kid, I grabbed his arm and launched him off the bus. And we are talking nearly 20 years ago. Fuck back when I was at school your worst violence issue wasn't other kids, it was the fucking teacher and his god damn belt.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    170. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Gandalf1957 · · Score: 1

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it.

      How on earth did this get modded insightful it's just plain wrong !

      Your connection to the internet is a door to the outside just like the physical one and you choose whether to open it or not. Last I checked there is nowhere yet that has mandated the reading of email, visiting Facebook etc and 'always on' does not mean 'can't be turned off' nor do computers follow you around the house hurling abuse!

      The moment you indulge yourself in social networking et al you have stepped OUT of the privacy and safety of your home and into a privately managed, public place just the same as when you go down the local mall. You should expect the same degrees of protection from both the commercial enterprises that run them and ultimately the law of the land as if you had gone down the mall but they are NOT invading your home.

      Not since the Windows net msg exploit has there been any kind of push system that could make you see stuff on your computer against your will, everything else, including trojans etc, requires some kind of pull from you as a user - don't pull !

      The concept of "not being able to escape" only applies if you consider that visiting Facebook, Craigslist etc is somehow an unavoidable part of living that has to be carried out no matter what - it isn't...same deal as your TV, if you don't like what you see then turn it off or change the channel!

      Anyone that thinks cyberbullying is something you can't escape from at home ironically needs to get out more.

    171. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's start with getting one key issue in place: The difference between plain communicative speech and functional speech. This distinction is important: Freedom of speech is only considered to apply to communicative speech, not functional speech, both by the law and by what people that look carefully at this consider important.

      Functional speech is things like yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater, where the direct effect of changing people's behavior is what is wanted from the speech, instead of more indirectly changing people's knowledge / interpretation of knowledge to change their behavior. (This is a fuzzy line that is hard for me to describe well.)

      Hell, if the kids said to each other, online or otherwise, "lets try to get her to kill herself" then you can bump up to conspiracy to commit murder.

      How so? If I say to you "let's see if we can get Bill to say bad and inaccurate things about someone", am I guilty of conspiracy to libel?

      I'd say "Yes, you are guilty, the question is whether that should be punishable", but if you want to get technical, it depends on the laws in your particular location. In the US, as far as I remember, conspiracy only applies to criminal (not civil) law, so it would require you to be in one of the 16 states that have criminal defamation laws and be for a type of defamation that was targeted by those laws. It would also assume that those laws would be upheld under the US constitution. In most of the world, there are criminal defamation laws, so this objection would likely be moot.

      As sad as her death is, she's the one who chose to take that path. Outside influences may impact our decision making process, but the final call is always up to the individual.

      You're diving far into philosophy and psychology here; it would be nice if you were qualified in the area. I can recommend Daniel Dennet's "Freedom Evolves" as a reasonably straightforward introduction to some of the ways to think around this.

      Short summary: There are many, many cases where there is no way to reasonably conclude that an individual has a choice. Start with a baby. Continue with somebody that's injected with drugs that make them psychotic (ie, they can't perceive reality.) Then, how about somebody that gets hypnotized into being psychotic? (I've seen hypnosis trigger schizophrenia; it's not pretty.)

      From working with hypnosis, I'll say that having a group press somebody's buttons is more powerful than direct hypnosis. It can lead to larger changes faster. It can, effectively, take away all choice: If you control what people perceive and how they interpret it, there's no choice left.

      That's why the phrase "I was just following orders" is not considered a valid defense.

      And we come back to the point of fact-checking. "I was just following orders" is considered a valid defense in a lot of cases; just not all. And the defense is considered invalid in a less psychologically coercive environment that above, so you application is moot.

      Also, from my point of view, invalidating "I was only following orders" as a defense is a tactical choice, based on changing consequences. By removing it as a defense, the segment of people for which there *was* a choice will be coerced towards making the right choice, sacrificing the segment for which there was no choice.

      This isn't a case of one person constantly sending her harassing messages - it's a case of many people exercising their free-speech rights.

      No. Their "free-speech rights" end where harassment begins, and spreading this out over many people don't resolve the issue, especially if it was willful. It only makes it harder to punish.

      Some of their other actions are certainly illegal, and should be prosecuted, but let's not invent new "crimes" to charge them with.

      Let's not invent new defenses, either.

    172. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure enough people know this, but these kids continued to spew hatred AFTER she was dead. They posted nasty things on a commemorative page even
      after her suicide. The fact these kids can't even show an inkling of remorse after something like that is pretty sickening.

    173. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by D'Sphitz · · Score: 1

      Yes, they are being charged with those laws...

    174. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The poor girl was PHYSICALLY beaten and raped; that didn't happen on FaceBook. What happened online was trivial, what happened at school was horrendous.

      What I find most appalling about this whole mess was that the bullying took place at school and the school officials did nothing, yet none were charged or disciplined.

      The principal shoulc be in jail with the kids. He let her down more than anybody. Hopefully this waste of tax dollars (the principal) will be economically castrated in a lawsuit by her parents.

    175. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Genda · · Score: 1

      Bullying is an accepted behavior in this country. The statistics are mind boggling... and for every pretty girl that commits suicide, and makes the evening news, there are thousands and thousands of boys and girls who are emotionally scarred for life while school administrators look the other way, and school mates treat the entire behavior as some kind of entertainment in the round. I've seen kid throw bricks at other kids, I heard about a boy who was dragged into a garage and had his chest burned with a hot steam iron. Nobody was punished, in fact, it was all treated as "Kids will be kids."

      Until we implement a zero tolerance for this kind of behavior, the results will sadly be predictable. This behavior is not Okay, it's not acceptable, and that the school doesn't actively prevent it from happening leaves it liable for incredible damages. Maybe if we sue administrators, it will become in their best interest to make certain this behavior isn't tolerated.

    176. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no problem with making the assumption that the can was full because people do stupid shit like this all the time

      Some rednecks driving by in a pickup chucked a full, unopened beer can at me while I was cycling several years ago. They missed me but a second full can hit the person in front of me in the shoulder and almost knocked her off of her bike. She had a pretty good bruise for a week or so.

    177. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mcgrew · · Score: 2, Funny

      HEY! Who let that Vogon in here?

    178. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Bakkster · · Score: 1

      I agree that as far as the law should be concerned, yes they are equivalent. Cyber-bullying should be treated the same as bullying that happens anywhere else, particularly when it crosses the line into (criminal) harassment, as it certainly seems to have done in this case. So, in a concerted campaign of harassment it shouldn't matter whether you are called an 'irish whore' verbally, written of a school bathroom wall, or online: it would fall under the same harassment laws. The big difference is it's generally easier to track down and prove online (as you said).

      But as others have mentioned, to a teenager it certainly can be different. Teenagers aren't rational people, in general. Sure, the same number of people might see something written on the girls bathroom and twitter, but to a teenager it feels more significant on Twitter. Add the fact that the kids doing the harassing may not take it as seriously because it is online (they likely think it is less serious to call someone a 'whore' on Facebook than to throw a Red Bull can at them), and you can see why cyber-bullying has a stronger focus on it than other forms of bullying. It simply can cause greater harm with less action by the aggressor.

      As far as this story being 'Your Rights Online', I attribute that to standard /. posting methods (misread the article and write an attention-grabbing headline) and preemptively expecting that the 'cyber' part of the bullying will get the most attention in the MSM.

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    179. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by cmiller173 · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I am wrong but Lori Drew was acquitted on appeal.

    180. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Genda · · Score: 1

      You create a pervasive environment for zero tolerance to bullying. You have regular assemblies and show kids what's expected, what's allowable, and what's absolutely unacceptable. You let kids know that if they are caught persecuting one of their peers, that they are going to receive the most gruesome of punishments, and make that punishment public and humiliating. Let everyone in school know that there are avenues to deal with upsets, grievances, and frustration, and that attacking another child is not only going to make their lives unpleasant, they will in fact make themselves the social outcast. Then enforce the rules like gravity. Nobody has a problem with gravity because it's perfectly consistent. If you do that, and you screw up, you have nobody to blame but yourself.

    181. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 1

      You kinda have a point right up to where you fail to see that bullying behavior is typically learned. Someone has probably already shown them how small they are in the universe and now they are doing the same, once they find someone smaller to pick on.

      It doesn't matter how it ends, the bully has to learn that he can't get away with that behavior. Either by having the crap kicked out of him or by being not just punished but actively monitored to ensure he doesn't violate "probation". He just needs to know that if he tries something, something negative will happen.

      An equal fighting back will not convince the bully, since some fights will be won and some lost. It's the psychology of slot machines - win a few and you think you'll win the next one as well. The more ingrained the behavior it is, the longer it takes to extinguish. A severe beating can accomplish this, or several attempts at restricting privilages (which involves parents, who may not even care). It's faster to beat the kid, but it might actually feed the need to feel superior and actually work against extinguishing behavior in some cases. It's difficult at best to decide which case will work unless you learna s much as you can about the particular bully, and put aside generalizations.

    182. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by dosilegecko · · Score: 1

      I remember when I was the new kid... I was picked on because I befriended a smart quiet kid and I was therefore a target of a group of bullies. It sucked because one of the bullies was actually a nice kid and always told the rest of the group to stop and was always trying to stick up for us. Anyways, It got to the point where I told my parents. They got extremely upset and tried to deal with it through the school to no avail. Finally, my dad goes "next time they do anything, beat the shit out of them, if you get suspended I'll take you out to lunch". So one day in art class, a bully took a pastel and drew on his face and blamed me. I of course got in trouble. That was the turning point. He pushed me next class and I snapped, I threw him onto a table and began pummeling his face in a brutal fashion. I never got bullied again. I did get suspended though, but who cares, sometimes the only way to deal with those type of people is to make them fear you. It continues on in high school, when I make the Varsity hockey team my freshman year. No one ever picked on the freshman when I was one, so when I was a senior, I did not let the other seniors pick on the freshman either, although they tried. I think some people are just wired to bully.

    183. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Sometimes the only way to deal with a shithead is to be[at] the crap out of them

      Ahh... the raison d'être of the United States.

    184. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      After all, it's rather stupid to mention an attack by a "can" if the contents weigh twenty times as much as the can.

      Did they say she was attacked with a RedBull can, or a can of RedBull?

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    185. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      I seriously doubt the majority of English language speakers would translate it that way, regardless of the cost of Red Bull. If you have an empty carton that previously contained eggs, would you call it an egg carton or a carton of eggs? A can of Red Bull suggests that the can contained Red Bull.

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    186. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Ceriel+Nosforit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Some other way" is so easy to say, and for males it unfortunately it usually means the victim tries to take others with him. You have to understand that the depressed mind only sees depressed options and that to them the positive ones seem unrealistic. This doesn't mean the person is irrational, and in medicine the term "depressive realism" is used to imply that the patient is actually better rooted in reality than their undiagnosed peers, it means the problem is very difficult.

      In my opinion it is wrong to blame or fault the victims of suicide, because all of them have honestly tried to get well. Parents CANNOT educate their children about this because it's not the children who are at fault for becoming depressed. The only way right now to ensure your kid isn't bullied in school is home-schooling. Some say children need to learn social skills in school, but often the particular skills learned are focused on picking on someone weaker so that you don't become the one picked on.

      Blame for this rests squarely on bullies from all walks of life, and you and me for not being brave enough to stop the bullies.
      Actually, it rests less on me because I have on several occasions stood up for people who were being bullied. Earlier in my life I didn't recognize what bullying was because I was socially inept, and in my childhood I did some bullying too. Then I was bullied, and I was depressed and I was suicidal, but I pulled through by simply suffering until the next day could not possibly be worse than the day before. School is something I survived, not something I value nor cherish.

      The only way this very serious problem is going to be fixed is if you yourself start fixing it, and start setting an example not tolerating intolerance. The correct response to bullies is alienation from the social group they're preying on until their malfunction can be sorted out, but time and time again schools opt to alienate the victim and let the bully continue destroying lives. The development of this case is right as it should be, pushing accountability for something you'd seemingly prefer to continue.

      I don't share your opinion, in fact I think it's half-formed like a knee-jerk reaction, and I hope you will take the issue of suicide serious before one of your own loved ones falls victim to it. Then if not sooner you will understand that it just isn't as simple as you, as we all, would like it to be.

      --
      All rites reversed 2010
    187. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Sometimes the only way to deal with a shithead is to be the crap out of them

      A true story from my youth: When I was in the seventh grade there was a bully in gym class who was taller and heavier than me, and as I was smaller than him, like all bullys the coward picked on me relentlessly for three months. Bullies never pick on guys their own size; all bullies are cowards.

      One day I was in a bad mood already, and the shithead went too far and slapped me. I snapped, and started pounding him in the nose. He grabbed his face and spun around, and I jumped on him and took him down, beating him on the back of the head until a gym teacher pulled me off.

      Then they cleaned up the blood, and he got 18 swats and I got one (this was a LONG time ago; they should bring back corporal punishment) Not only did he not bully me again, nobody else fucked with me, either. In the words of James Brown ("The Big Payback"), "I don't know karate but I know ca-razy"

    188. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by OwMyBrain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or to quote one of my favorite Sci-Fi franchises:

      "If you can't do something smart, do something right."

    189. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mea37 · · Score: 1

      I agree with the premise that this is not "cyberbullying", but rather is "bullying" in a society where some communication occurs online. Depending on details of what was said and done, I think it's questionable whether the physical harassment was worse than the verbal/written part.

      But really my question for you is - Do you have knowledge of this case beyond TFA, on which to base the assertion that she was raped? Or are you just working from the fact that statutory rape charges were raised, which TFA doesn't really explain? Keep in mind that statutory rape implies only that she was underage and had sex. Yes it's illegal, yes there's arguably good reason for that, but no that isn't what is meant by the phrase "she was raped".

    190. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That would be extremely cruel. Bash them over the head and have done with it.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    191. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Daengbo · · Score: 1

      I'm not blaming the girl for being depressed, but she took the wrong route. Saying one of those doesn't mean the other is true. I am saying that families can take this opportunity to say "let's talk about it" and encourage communication should the child become depressed. "There's nothing that could have been done" is not a realistic answer.

      Killing yourself is not a solution. Being clinically depressed and thinking it's the answer doesn't make it true. Counselors don't say "Hey, go ahead." They try to treat the disease.

      You're not the only one who was bullied. I've got hearing loss in both ears and had to have my nose drilled out due to having my head kicked in so many times. It's ugly. It's terrible. I never went to school on the last day (when all rules seemingly went out the window) because of it. The world sucks, and based on how whingy you are about your problems, I bet I know more about the suck in the world than you do. What I got in school pales in comparison to what I've seen since then. Having been bullied doesn't somehow make me special, though. At least I wasn't sold by my parents at nine to be chained to a bed and repeatedly raped for years. Or hung from ropes and beaten by my mother. All that shit that happens every day.

      Yeah, sure, stick up for the weak. I do. I step out in traffic to get the kid stuck in the middle of the crosswalk that no cars will stop for. I stand up to adults that abuse kids. Whatever. That doesn't change the fact that saying "bullying caused her suicide" (or "violent video games caused the murder") is just BS (nor does standing up make me a great human being -- it's just mentioned to give you some perspective).

      Who's at fault? Lots of people. There's a whole chain. Her choice is in there somewhere. Tell your kid that's a bad choice that fixes nothing.

    192. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Which in my mind is "so what?" She can easily block cyber stuff.

      The real problem is that she was physically attacked in real life, assaulted, threatened and stalked. The OP is correct; the headline is there to grab attention, when really this was far more than cyberbullying (it was normal bullying, which included a cyber component).

      Might as well said they all played GTA too; could be true, but fairly irrelevent.

    193. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You're correct and it's wrong.

      If you don't want negative consequence to the victims of bulling, you must have an authority they can turn to. Remove that and you end up with emotionally trouble kids, school bombings, and suicide.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    194. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

      You've forgotten high school so quickly. 17-18 are seniors in high school, but they are still high schoolers and still very immature.

    195. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Where did it say she was raped?

    196. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

      One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it.

      Um, log out? Don't use Facebook? Ignore it? Who says you have to participate in social media, can't you actually just be social instead?

      My job is spent on a computer all day. You know what I do when I get off work, turn off the computer! Computers are very useful for business, entertainment and even keeping track of your friends; however you don't need to spend all your time tweeting and playing on Facebook. Actually be social, go out and do something and log out and ignore the crap. Delete your Facebook profile or make it private and only let your closest friends and family actually use it. I login to my Facebook account maybe twice a year to check on old friends that I don't keep in touch with regularly. Other than that I really have no need for it, if I want to find out something about someone I go and talk to them or call them.

      There are bullies all over in the real grown up world, part of school is learning how to deal with bullies. This girl failed that part of school, too bad the consequences for an F in socialization is death. The same is true in the real world.

    197. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by PC9001 · · Score: 1

      THANK YOU. I hate these "cyber bully" scare articles. This is just a case of run of the mill bullying. Sad, yes, but not Slashdot worthy.

    198. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      While I think the kid deserved it, its hard to argue you didn't assault him. In most of the US, assault can be as simple as threat of force. You physically forced him off the bus, and depending on where you're talking about that may also be consider battery.

      Don't get me wrong; you were defending someone else, and in my mind that justifies your actions. But sadly the US is now a bunch of panty wastes that think name calling should be an arrestable offense.

    199. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      but laying out a kid because he's hit another child is not appropriate

      It is absolutely appropriate. If you harm or attempt to harm another, don't be suprised when violence is used against you. It is a choice of last resort, but it must be a choice.

      Perhaps though your line of thinking is why you needed the US to stop the Nazis from stomping all over you.

    200. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or given it was a 'minor', some pedophile crap as well. You even look at someone under 18 nowadays, let alone get into their personal space, and you're slapped with being a child predator.

      And sadly, kids exploit the hell out of this. Sad state of affairs...

    201. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Talizorah · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OR rather this is why we should make laws and then stick to them when a case comes up. Unforutnately, it's a lot easier to push a sob story over a jury than appeal to the actual laws.

      There are "actual laws" against this type of behavior -- civil and criminal. The regular and relentless harassment by the classmates was an intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Facebook and Twitter postings about her referred to her in derisive terms that those knowledgeable of the situation could easily infer as being her; which is still defamation. Depending on the content of the Craigslist postings, there could be more that these students could potentially be held accountable for because of this harassment.

      It offends me how frequently people on /. accept, or even attempt to justify, this type of behavior as "free speech" on the Internet. Our right to free speech does not supersede the human rights of others.

    202. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by JustABlitheringIdiot · · Score: 1

      What surprises me is that you weren't arrested for assault.

      Being here in Philadelphia, in all honesty if I were in that position I'd be less afraid of being charged with assault than having the bully or one of his lackeys come back the next day with a gun and putting an end to my "protection" right there on the bus.

    203. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Talonius · · Score: 1

      Everything about western teen society is to enforce conformity, intelligence is overrated, originality is shunned and bob forbid you actually have an opinion of your own. Just being a little physically different or a foreign accent is reason enough for one to be ostracised and ridiculed.

      Big Bang Theory?

      In all seriousness I find myself fighting this battle with my son every day. He refers to things as gay, as retarded, as any number of slurs routinely spewed forth by the teenagers today. I've told him many times in the past that I don't care if he uses the verbiage, but I want him to consider what he's using and why. He would never use the word retarded around his grandmother, who's a special needs teacher. He would never use the word gay around a family friend who is gay. Yet as soon as those individuals are not around he slips back into using the verbiage.

      I also believe schools today have a great deal of responsibility when it comes to bullying today. They've removed all of the social resolutions to the issue. You can't return the names, lest you both be punished equally. You can't punch back because you'll be suspended along with the instigator. When I was a teen and someone called me a name or picked on me I made a conscious choice and either 1) acknowledged that there was nothing I could do due to greater intellect, size, or numbers, or 2) beat the living hell out of the individual, usually with environmental aid. [There are no rules to a fight.] Now the schools have removed that choice and the only feeling a teen has is helplessness -- they have no choice, lest the system punish them.

      As a side note I have told my son that if he is picked on he is to fight back. He is never, EVER to start a fight or make fun of someone -- that simply isn't right, especially when the target is someone who has no choice in the matter. As soon as someone starts that fight though... he's to finish it. He's won three times [13, football player, 5' 6", 180 lbs], and I've defended his actions twice -- he's never been suspended for defending himself because I've told the school I will sue them into the ground. [When administrators stop trying to apply zero tolerance policies to the world I will stop threatening to sue public institutions -- that's the only threat they'll listen to.]

      Remember that when we remove all the avenues of resolution that only one remains: violence. To ourselves or others.

      --
      My reality check bounced.
    204. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all swimming in shit?

    205. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by GasparGMSwordsman · · Score: 1

      Unforutnately, it's a lot easier to push a sob story over a jury than appeal to the actual laws.

      I would whole heartedly disagree with that. I have been a juror on several civil and criminal trials. Every time the jury reached a verdict after a sane and sound deliberative process. The last time it took longer to debate the issue in the jury room than it did to present the trial in the court room.

      Those are my personal experiences. More broad studies in both the US and in other nations have shown that the likelihood of getting a fair and impartial trial are significantly greater using the jury system than any other system in practice in the last two centuries (we only have reliable data on all point for so far back).

      Without fail, every time I have ever heard this accusation of a wrongfull verdict due to a biased jury, after examination, it has been proven to be nothing more than FUD. If you believe your point to be true, please present a specific case. We can both examine the case in detail, including all evidence presented at the trial, all testimony presented, all statues and precedents under common law. We can, in detail, discuss the issue. I would bet my life savings that without fail, any case you found, after full review of the facts presented during the trial, would stand up as having the correct ruling.

    206. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by tftp · · Score: 1

      While lighter .223 bullets (55gr and below) are unsuitable for larger game, there are several bullets available in the 62-75gr range that are quite effective against whitetails

      But don't you then have to change the barrel from 1:12" twist to something like 1:8" ? Or have a completely different rifle for heavier bullets? My .223 has 1:12" and I use only lighter bullets (for varmints, like V-Max, VG) down to 39 gr. I don't hunt deer, though I probably could do so without even leaving home :-)

      The advice about hogs and .22 calibers was given to me by a hunting instructor. With an optimally placed shot you could take a hog even with a 17HMR, that's not a problem. The problem is when the bullet hits sub-optimally and is deflected (or slowed down) by the hide. Stories were also told, lots of fun :-) Given that you need just a few rounds, the higher cost of larger calibers (and longer rounds) hardly matters (unlike when you are in a pasture with 300 ground squirrels frolicking all around you.) As long as you are set up with the press, an extra set of dies won't be a big deal.

      But all in all, indeed - there are many debates on the Internet about usability of various .223 loads against larger game. Some people swear by it, other play it safe.

    207. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      In the words of depression era humorist Will Rogers, "All I know is what I read in the papers", and the papers have been full of this for a week now. CNN was reporting a few days ago that she had been raped, but the media aren't always accurate. But forceable or statutory shouldn't matter; adults shouldn't have sex with children.

      But at any rate, someone at the school where the non-cyber bullying was taking place who turned a blind eye needs a new job, preferably asking "do you want fries with that?"

    208. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

      Yes, I suppose that's true, but when I was a kid, bullies either got the best of you or you got the best of them...

      Kick the shit out of them. You might lose, but even in a loss you become more trouble to bully than someone who doesn't do anything except cower. And before anyone says "she's a girl"... yeah... I've seen girl fights... I wouldn't want to be in one, that's for sure. :)

      I remember spending some time at home because I beat the snot out of someone for pushing me around and bullying. I also remember doing some time at home after another bully kicked the crap out of me for standing up to him. Funny thing was, in both cases, they left me alone after that. It was worth it... and I got to punch the lights out of a bully. Both bullies left the fight remembering it and more importantly remembering not to fuck with me.

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    209. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      CNN a few days ago.

    210. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by icebrain · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm using a 20" 1:9 barrel. 25.5gr Varget gave me a group I could cover with a dime at 50 yards. We'll see how these work this fall, assuming I can find somewhere to go hunt.

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    211. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The parent was commenting on the name calling. Did you miss something?

    212. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by morari · · Score: 1

      Don't have an account at all then. It's not a requirement of living, and in fact is more a hassle than it's worth even in the best of times. The victim is easy to blame because they have all of the power in the world to stop situations like this from ever occurring.

      Don't sign up and share needless web accounts? Check.
      Don't let name-calling get under your sensitive skin? Check.
      Don't kill yourself? Check.

      See. The victim is the one allowing for everything to happen. Nothing it being forcefully done to bring pain to them.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    213. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by JustOK · · Score: 1

      I was actually listening to Carl Sagan and Stephen Hawking http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSgiXGELjbc

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    214. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by shnull · · Score: 1

      Sparta's close ... no, seriously, i mean it's just words. Young people do a lot of namecalling. My friends and me were at it all the time but no one ever really let it get to his heart to such an extent that someone would kill him or herself. To me, there's no such thing as a 'bad' word. If these socalled cuss-words were to be considered meaningless or harmless, then they would be

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
    215. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by jayp00001 · · Score: 1

      Or you could just punch them in the head- either way they'll get the message. It really depends on how much time to want to spend explaining the error of their ways. If you're in high school I would expect that all the talking in the world isn't going to teach you the lesson you should have already learned as eloquently as a right cross.

    216. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've no idea what the situation is in common law but in my country self defense is a transferable right. I.e. if someone is hitting someone else anyone may assume the self defense rights of the victim and use "a not obviously indefensible amount of violence" (it's clunky in the original language too). That means laying the aggressor out in a fist fight is fine.

      Which is fine by my personal set of morals.

    217. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      So she was raped or had sex with someone three years older instead of the two allowed by law? Most rape victims think "statutory rape" dilutes the real horror of rape. I happen to agree, and we shouldn't be calling consentual sex rape.

      So... was she actually raped, or was her boyfriend simplye "too old?"

    218. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I think CNN misreported.

    219. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure what a suicide has to do with a church funeral? I don't know of my religion I grew up in saying you couldn't get a church funeral if you killed yourself?!?! What religion does that?

      You incredibly stupid, ignorant fucker. I don't know anyone who can tie their own shoelaces who isn't aware that suicide is considered a mortal sin by the bead jigglers.

    220. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Yeah, nobody ever got lynched back in the day...
      br> Bullying has been around forever, and it's killed many times in the past. We are less culturally accepting, so it's news now.

    221. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by chainsaw1 · · Score: 1

      I'll guarantee you that doesn't work. I've seen kids take swings at police officers for making them look less cool in front of their friends (this was in a rural area with no gangs). After the whole "turn your back and walk away" speech we were given in 6th grade, we had about 5 guys that waited outside class for people to walk away so they could hit them in the back of the head.

      If you want gang related examples, ask a Marine at the DC Barracks what the initiation is. It usually involves firearms and whoever is on guard duty at the gate...

      The _only_ way to get these kids to realize they need to change their act is to make them realize they are going to have to submit, and the situation is completely out of their control. This is why you have mega-overreactions like suicide and Columbine--those kids (felt) they had not other choice to their existence.

      As an adult, I would argue tossing a kid off the bus is better than taking a 5% chance the bullied will become a statistic on the death of themselves or others.

      --
      - Sig
    222. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by cavebison · · Score: 1

      I think someone watches too many Hollywood movies.

      You can't stop a bully by force. Consider:
      1. He's probably got mates to gang you afterwards
      2. A punch can be fatal, nevermind being up on charges for it
      3. What if he's got a knife/keys/sharp pencil and gets creative.

      This isn't the Marvel Universe. Adults need to get more involved in how kids behave toward each other. If they don't, kids are fucked. Life nowadays is mostly better than 50 yrs ago, but somewhere along the line kids stopped respecting adults. There are a lot of reasons for that besides parenting.

      But we have a situation where now it's considered child abuse to spank your own child. What, do we really think antisocial kids are going to listen to a talk about ethics and suddenly go, "oh my god, how misguided I was!"?

      I love the hypocrisy. Don't spank the kid for the sake of discipline, rather buy into revenge culture and hope another kid beats him up. Wonderful alternative there.

    223. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by cavebison · · Score: 1

      One more thing.. a school bully is such because there's something wrong with his parenting.

      I know that's an unpopular thing to say, as parenting is somehow sacrosanct, get of my lawn, etc.

      Perhaps about time it stopped being taboo to pull up parents who, often unintentionally of course, just aren't bringing their kid up the right way. If he's a school bully, the parent is doing something wrong. Maybe not their fault - certainly not the kid's fault - but they obviously need help.

    224. Re:Your rights OFFLINE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What surprises me is that Teachers are expected to take responsibility for all of students' online behavior. Bullshit. Parents and students share that responsibility. Teachers would gladly report this sort of thing if 1) they were aware and 2) there were anyplace to report it. There really isn't.

  2. Cyberbullies? by Skyshadow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading the article, you can't really pigeonhole this as a cyberbullying incident -- it seems way more accurate to call this an instance of *comprehensive* asshole behavior. I mean, when I was a kid the bullies knew how to operate the phone, but nobody called that telebullying.

    Don't get me wrong, this is distressing stuff, but reading between the lines it seems awfully simplistic to try and just pass this entire affair off as being a simple result of these kids using the internets in order to torment this girl into killing herself. Really, the most disturbing thing to me in the article is the lack of remorse these girls displayed after the fact. I understand that high school is messed up, but who the hell makes jerk comments on a memorial page? That seems pretty damn sociopathic even by the standards of high school.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coincidentally, the fortune cookie at the bottom of the page when I read this is quite an appropriate response to your comment:

      "Consistency requires you to be as ignorant today as you were a year ago." -- Bernard Berenson

    2. Re:Cyberbullies? by sonnejw0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      This was not cyberbullying, although it may have involved it. These teenagers raped that girl, physically assaulted her in broad daylight with school teachers around and no one did anything.

    3. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      While "cyberbullying" helps remove any responsibility for comments,as often seen on slashdot, and as seen on the memorial page, this does appear to be a full on asshole behavior. I do hope they throw the book at them, and at the school as well.

    4. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The two guys, 17 and 18, were charged with statutory rape.

      Not to split hairs, but that's a pretty significant difference -- you go to any high school in America and you'll find people having sex with folks two years older than they are. Assuming the sex was otherwise consensual, it sucks that these guys are getting charged with such a serious crime in what amounts to a prosecutorial attempt to close the barn door after the cows are out.

    5. Re:Cyberbullies? by russotto · · Score: 1

      Assuming the sex was otherwise consensual, it sucks that these guys are getting charged with such a serious crime in what amounts to a prosecutorial attempt to close the barn door after the cows are out.

      Fortunately if they didn't brag about having sex with her, it's unlikely they'll be convicted; she can't testify against them and they can't be required to testify against themselves.

      Unfortunately, they're teenaged boys, so....

    6. Re:Cyberbullies? by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      Rules change when you turn 18. The 17 year old though should be different. Unless the age of consent is 16 by law there, the 17 year old should walk away all charges dropped. If he did force her into it. Then he is a rapist and should be charged. The age of consent matters.

      The 18 year old might be screwed (pun intended). If they have the four years of age rule he might be OK, if not he is done.

    7. Re:Cyberbullies? by shermo · · Score: 0, Troll

      Good news everyone. We've not only lost the life of one young person, we now get to destroy the lives of two more!

      It wouldn't surprise me if the guys involved fucked her and then had nothing else to do with her and weren't involved in the bullying. That's not the nicest thing to do, but it's hardly strange behaviour for teenage guys.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    8. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's because it's easier to blame outside entities like technology, rather than take responsibility for your actions, or more importantly for your child's actions. If there's anyone that should be blamed (other than the kids who did the bullying), it's their parents for failing to instill any kind of morality or decency. The parents are, in internet terms, epic fail.

    9. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who the hell makes jerk comments on a memorial page? That seems pretty damn sociopathic even by the standards of high school.

      I would call them immature not sociopathic. It's just kids drawing attention to themselves, without understanding what they are doing.
      I hate the "RIP" comment (using an abbreviation as a final goodbye seems insane to me), often used by adults.
      If you ask me memorials do not belong on the internet.

    10. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Good news everyone. We've not only lost the life of one young person, we now get to destroy the lives of two more!

      Are you a professional douche?

    11. Re:Cyberbullies? by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      Really, the most disturbing thing to me in the article is the lack of remorse these girls displayed after the fact. I understand that high school is messed up, but who the hell makes jerk comments on a memorial page? That seems pretty damn sociopathic even by the standards of high school.

      Kids these days are jaded as can be. I can't say that I know the cause of it, but I do know that each successive class following mine (graduated from college 2 years ago) that went through my high school was more and more jaded. I've heard a lot of folk say that it comes from an over exposure to, 'startling/shocking,' content via the internet and TV and such. I've heard a lot of folks attribute it to poor parenting. I've heard even more folks attribute it to drugs and loud music and the like.

      I can't say that I agree with any of that, but one thing I do notice is that younger kids these days can be heartless, cutthroat, brutal, and downright apathetic. Maybe it comes from the fact that kids have fewer venues through which to meaningfully express their feelings and frustrations? If a kid writes a harsh poem or letter at school, he gets suspended/punished for expressing himself. If a kid gets bullied, he can't fight back without all hell being raised over violence at school. As a result, maybe, a lot of kids have just learned to bottle stuff up inside, glaze themselves over with a thick shell of, "I don't give a damn," and, thus, are capable of extraordinary acts of ruthlessness.

      I agree with you that the lack of remorse displayed by the bullies is nauseating. I wouldn't claim that all kids are capable of such jacked up nonsense. However, I think kids may be getting more cynical, bitter, and just plain dark at younger ages these days. Then again, maybe I am just getting older.

    12. Re:Cyberbullies? by fermion · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Cyber bullying was part of it, as it is going to be in any contemporary case of chronic widespread personal assault by a group of organized criminals. One thing that is has not changed is that the authorities cannot do anything if the victim does not want to press charges, and the victim is not going to press charges if they feel like they themselves are going to be persecuted. This is especially the case in which an unpopular high school girl has had sex with popular boys. She will be told that she was delusional, no popular boy would have sex with her. Furthermore, since a underage rape victim is going to undergo the same humiliation common in the past with any single woman, few victims are going to come forward. The male teen age criminal is going to be considered a hero, while the girl is going to be considered a slut.

      The other unfortunate thing is that parent of so-called popular kids think that this kind of behavior is acceptable. Equally unfortunate is that unpopular kids do not feel empowered to do something to solve the mean-kid problem, up to talking to the ones parents. Tell them what is happening, and ask for help. Since their is a cyber element, that is documentation. Show it, report it. If administration want to protect the popular kids, escalate. For instance, I recall in elementary there were a couple kids who harassed everyone, the stupid 5th grade teacher could not believe that these christians could do this. By the end of the year it became obvious that these kids were playing her. This is almost a similar simplistic case in which adults clearly have documentation, but, clearly, the parents of the criminals refuse to do anything about it. Parent should have access to their kids communications, and failure to monitor and stop criminal activity makes them accomplices.

      Kids do need to figure out how to interact with peers. However, when we as adults are victims of a crime, we do not usually solve the problems ourselves. We call in help. We do need to teach our kids to the same, and when there is documentation like a twitter message, to show in, and force adults to act on it. This is not snitching, this is civilized behavior. We see this with the current crop of right wing wackos. A video on you tube threatening and elected official has landed someone in jail. Kids need to learn this lesson as well, before they actual take the it to the level of physical assault.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    13. Re:Cyberbullies? by retchdog · · Score: 1

      As long as he was bragging to students (and not cops), isn't this inadmissible hearsay?

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    14. Re:Cyberbullies? by e9th · · Score: 1

      The age of consent in MA is 18. Phoebe Prince was 15. This seems to be the relevant law.

    15. Re:Cyberbullies? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      And while it might not be legal, 12 of your peers may still railroad you for it. Jury nullification works both ways.

    16. Re:Cyberbullies? by bmo · · Score: 1

      Age of consent is 18? Did you even read the first line of the law?

      It's 16.

      But since Phoebe was 15, they're both screwed.

      --
      BMO

    17. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd assume that it would fall under the hearsay exemption Statement against interests.

    18. Re:Cyberbullies? by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      Yeah, holding people responsible for their barbaric actions is just so wrong. If a kid can't distinguish between right and wrong by age 17 he never will. He's without a conscience.

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    19. Re:Cyberbullies? by e9th · · Score: 1

      Did you bother to continue reading?

    20. Re:Cyberbullies? by Chirs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's been scientifically shown that teenagers have poor impulse control. Their brains aren't yet fully developed.

      There's a difference between sleeping with someone to hurt them, and doing something wrong on the spur of the moment.

      In addition...maybe they didn't know she was under age. Can *you* tell the difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old?

    21. Re:Cyberbullies? by Miaowara_Tomokato · · Score: 1

      Jury nullification works both ways

      The other way around (finding a technically innocent person guilty) may be distinguished as jury vilification.

    22. Re:Cyberbullies? by retchdog · · Score: 1

      According to wikipedia, this exemption is valid only if the declarant is unavailable as a witness. It's vague to me, whether a defendant is or is not available as a witness since of course he can't be compelled to testify against himself.

      Even notwithstanding this exemption, It's not clear to me. There's of course an obvious contrary social interest in dishonestly bragging about such a thing, and this seems to be exactly the kind of thing hearsay was meant to protect against. Basically, bullshitting around shouldn't be enough to convict someone, since plenty of actually innocent people would do the same.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    23. Re:Cyberbullies? by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It wouldn't surprise me if the guys involved fucked her and then had nothing else to do with her and weren't involved in the bullying. That's not the nicest thing to do, but it's hardly strange behaviour for teenage guys.

      I actually agree with you. Too bad you were modded down. But then I was modded down for another comment.

      The idea that we prosecute 17 year olds for having sex with 15 year olds strikes me as a very perverse approach to our age of consent rules. This is nothing more than "let's make it look like we are doing something to make sure no teenage girl ever commits suicide again!"

      It's like the sexting case in PA: Let's prosecute children and sentence them to some time in jail plus being designated as a sex offender for life in order to keep them safe! Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. It;s a good thing I am not from that county or I would give the DA's office an earfull.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    24. Re:Cyberbullies? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      No, no it doesn't. Juries can decide a party is not guilty, despite what the law says, but they can't decide they are guilty without a law being broken. If there's no law being broken, the Judge generally cans the case before it gets to the Jury. If it gets past the Judge despite not actually being a violation of a law, then the problem's with the Judge, rather than the Jury.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    25. Re:Cyberbullies? by LordLucless · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having sex is a barbaric action?

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    26. Re:Cyberbullies? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It might be leverage. From what I read, there seems to be a major lack of remorse/guilt by the group of students who are alleged to be behind this incident. They apparently were still disparaging her after her death. If the rape charges are true, then it's not something that the males can easily avoid. The prosecutor has discretion to charge the males and she has.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    27. Re:Cyberbullies? by severoon · · Score: 1

      If kids are more jaded or somehow more ethically ambivalent than they used to be—a claim I'm a bit skeptical of—perhaps it is more to do with their previous generation's (our) general unwillingness to place judgments upon the morality of others. It's one thing to approach differences between people with an open mind; it's quite another to not be well-enough grounded philosophically to understand when basic freedoms are being infringed. While the previous generation to us was too quick to condemn just because it's different, I think we are perhaps too quick to accept for precisely the same reason. (See this excellent TED talk for a better statement on this than I could ever give you.)

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    28. Re:Cyberbullies? by Asclepius99 · · Score: 1

      I'm really confused about that too. The article doesn't mention the boys specifically doing anything mean to her, just that they've had sex with her. It even says that the girls started going after her after she dated a popular guy (I'm assuming he's one of the boys), so it sounds like at least one of them did like her and it made them jealous. I'm just wondering if these boys did anything besides have consensual sex with her and tell their friends. If they contributed to the actual harassment I hope they get the books thrown at the, but if it was just guys telling their friends they scored it would be an awful shame for them to get branded rapists.

    29. Re:Cyberbullies? by marshallr · · Score: 0

      Did you bother to continue reading?

      This essentially means the age of consent is 16, unless she was still a virgin, in which case it is 18.

    30. Re:Cyberbullies? by Asclepius99 · · Score: 1

      Mod this AC up. Girls threw a can of red bull at another girl's head from a moving vehicle. That's not give someone a wedgie and take the lunch money behavior. And when the girl killed herself they showed how they felt about their actions by writing even more bad stuff about her on a memorial page. Normal teenagers can definitely be disposed to cruel behavior and acting without thinking, but they don't act this horrible and reckless towards someone and when their actions have consequences they show deep remorse. Something is wrong with the way these girls were raised.

    31. Re:Cyberbullies? by coolgeek · · Score: 1

      Going by the charges filed, I think this is more of a case of "doing it online doesn't give you a free pass".

      --

      cat /dev/null >sig
    32. Re:Cyberbullies? by sonnejw0 · · Score: 1

      She dated one of the guys for literally 2 days, and never dated his friend.

    33. Re:Cyberbullies? by coolgeek · · Score: 1

      Here's hoping we can make it 3 by adding you to the list.

      --

      cat /dev/null >sig
    34. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's likely, give the time lapse of atleast 9 months between the alleged crime and the individuals arrest for the crime, he was probably 17 at the time of the crime. Either way, in my opinion, its a silly charge: given the close age proximity between the two I don't see anything wrong, but than again I'm not a puritan.

    35. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Her tormentors actually posted snide comments on the dead girl's Facebook memorial page"

      I wonder what their future potential employers would think of those comments...

    36. Re:Cyberbullies? by sjames · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they perhaps learn it by the examples held up to them. They see psychopaths in business held up as examples of success and nice guys ignored, so what are they to emulate? Then they run up against zero tolerance (no mercy) rules. The politicians all talk about "getting tough", never about merciful justice. They start hearing about how they better get their grades up or be failures at life before they even get to high schools (measure up or else, sound familiar?) Perhaps the adult world needs to set a better example?

    37. Re:Cyberbullies? by bmo · · Score: 1

      I thought about that after I posted and read further and then you replied before I could reply, but I have a "yeah but..."

      Yeah, but...

      1. There has only been one case prosecuted, and the result was "not guilty."
      2. The "victim" has to have led a chaste life for it to be a crime.
      3. It's inducement. If the inducement is unsuccessful, there was no crime (see 1)
      4. If it's mutual, i.e., no inducement, there is no crime.

      The likelihood of being charged and convicted is between slim and slimmer.

      It's also not statutory rape. It's a different law, and the penalties are a big giveaway as to its importance (max 3 years, max $1000 fine).

      --
      BMO

    38. Re:Cyberbullies? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Basically, bullshitting around shouldn't be enough to convict someone,

      Tell that to most of the people convicted of 'conspiracy to commit terrorism' over the last 9 years.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    39. Re:Cyberbullies? by gandhi_2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      First they came for the sexually-active, but I didn't speak up because I'm a nerd.

    40. Re:Cyberbullies? by Locke2005 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      who the hell makes jerk comments on a memorial page?

      this guy, for one. Yeah, I shudder at just how big a dick somebody can be online too.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    41. Re:Cyberbullies? by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      If the possible downside is being on a sex-offender registry for the rest of my life, yes. Even when I was in high school, we knew the statutory rape laws.

    42. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Having sex is a barbaric action?

      if done correctly...yes

    43. Re:Cyberbullies? by cavehobbit · · Score: 1

      Having sex is a barbaric action?

      Only when done correctly

    44. Re:Cyberbullies? by MokuMokuRyoushi · · Score: 0

      Despite only being seventeen, I agree with you completely. If I may offer an observation from a homeschooler's POV - everything today is contributing to the lack of morality and and respect. Like you've mentioned; TV is getting worse(in terms of inappropriate/senseless), the internet doesn't care who sees what. Parents are probably contributing, but mine have been decent and strong all my life, so I can't comment there. Drugs are plentiful and available, 'loud music' is constantly pumping through iPods.

      With that said, I'm on the internet 45% of my days, listen to that music with the help of my iPod, and play far more PC games than I can imagine to be healthy. But, I consider myself to be a cognizant, thoughtful(if a little fuzzy-brained) teenage boy. The problem I'm finding is less that kids today have exposure to loads of crap as mentioned(though that obviously is major), but more that they're told that it's okay. When I was growing up(which wasn't so far in the past, and doesn't seem to be over yet), I saw things like that often - but I turned away, with Mom and Dad's early warnings in my ears. When someone goes to school though(!), they link up with their friends, all of who are doing exactly what they were told off for - and then pushed to believe that it's okay. It's okay, it's okay, it's okay - all the other kids are having sex, why not me too? And if they're nervous or scared, their friends will break them of that - whether through "You can do it man!" or "Pussy, go back home to your momma"(disclaimer: I don't even know what the wording would be, just concentrate on the intention behind the phrases). So then it begins to spiral downwards, where it could have been nipped at the bud. My opinion? It sure as hell ain't okay and never will be. If it's possible to convince the generations this deep in though, I don't know the way.

      --
      Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
    45. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He can just wait and ask the police how old she is when they get there.

    46. Re:Cyberbullies? by CheshireCatCO · · Score: 1

      It depends on the state. There's often (usually?) an exception in place for parties within a given age gap. The only state I can recall for certain sets it at 18 months. A 17-year-old therefore is quite likely outside of that range. An 18-year-old almost certainly is. (Allowing for possible differences in when we've dated the ages of the parties involved.)

      Also, you have to assume that it was consensual (the article is exceedingly sparse on those details) in order to bemoan the charge. You could just as well assume the opposite and condemn the young men right now, with what we know. Unless you know more than I've seen, it's premature to be making judgments either way.

    47. Re:Cyberbullies? by ciaohound · · Score: 2, Funny

      Only if it involves a beard.

      --
      Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
    48. Re:Cyberbullies? by harmonise · · Score: 1

      Having sex is a barbaric action?

      In the US it is. Haven't you seen their media? Violence is glorified while sex and nudity is vile and offensive.

      --
      Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
    49. Re:Cyberbullies? by shermo · · Score: 1

      Wow some people completely miss the point.

      The phrase "good news everyone" is a reference to Professor Farnsworth from Futurama. He often uses this phrase to announce very bad news.

      The death of one child is a tragedy, and the way authorities deal with it is by destroying the lives of two more young people? That's fucked up. I'm dismayed I have to spell it out in black and white but I suppose nuances often go astray in writing.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    50. Re:Cyberbullies? by El+Gigante+de+Justic · · Score: 1

      I believe she was a Freshman; that's generally not 16 year old territory.

    51. Re:Cyberbullies? by MrCrassic · · Score: 1

      Hell; sometimes, you'd be lucky if you could tell the difference between a 14 year old and a 21 year old...

    52. Re:Cyberbullies? by corbettw · · Score: 1

      When it's against the will of one of the participants, you bet it is.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    53. Re:Cyberbullies? by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      Yes. If it's done to degrade a person. In this case it's quite possible that was the purpose. The place for whether or not it was is in court, and if it is proved that it was then someone at 17 knows it's wrong. If they don't, they have no conscience, and never will because the conscience is developed by that age in all normal people.

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    54. Re:Cyberbullies? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Statutory rape, not rape. The latter is done against the will of one participant; the other is when a court decides that the will of the participants is not applicable.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    55. Re:Cyberbullies? by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Yep it sure is! I can tell you with great certainty that barbarians engaged in sex.

      Of course now we also have to throw other acts like eating and sleeping in there as barbaric acts, but that happens when you broaden the scope on things.

    56. Re:Cyberbullies? by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      Can *you* tell the difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old?

      I sure have the ability to ask, and the responsibility to know for sure if I am thinking about getting into a sexual relationship. Not doing that is completely irresponsible. Once again, a 17 year old is old enough to be responsible.

      Poor impulse control is no excuse. Hey, I have a bad temper, so if I kill someone it's just poor impulse control and I shouldn't be held responsible. A very bad argument for me, and for anyone else....

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    57. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having sex is a barbaric action?

      it is if you do it right.

    58. Re:Cyberbullies? by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Your argument is completely without merit. If the two people in question committed a crime, are you suggesting that they ought to go unpunished because a third person is dead?

      If those two are responsible for her death through their actions, or if they committed statutory rape, or both - then they should be in jail. End of discussion.

    59. Re:Cyberbullies? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Oh? Was this done to degrade a person? Because that's not what the charge of statutory rape means. From the article, it looks like the bullying started after and in response to the sex (out of jealousy because the new girl dated the popular guy) rather than the sex being a part of the bullying in general.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    60. Re:Cyberbullies? by shermo · · Score: 1

      I'm saying (rightly or wrongly) they would have gone unpunished if the third person hadn't died.

      They were unlucky enough to have been caught up in the dragnet. If they contributed significantly to her suicide then they're assholes and deserve what they get. If they had nothing to do with it then what possible good can come from ruining their lives?

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    61. Re:Cyberbullies? by budgenator · · Score: 1

      In High School Senior boys generally know Freshman girls are jailbait.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    62. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Everyone seems to be assuming that these boys are part of the bullying since the article on it lumps it all together. Until I see something definitive otherwise, it looks like these are boys that she dated and may or may not have had sex with, but in any case, everyone involved appears to believe that she had sex with them(if you've been to high school you should know that who has and has not slept with who is something really, really difficult to get a true answer on). It sounds like, as a result of having sex with one or both of them, she aroused the ire of the actual bullies who drove her to kill herself. It's possible that one or both of the boys might have become involved in the bullying, or maybe simply in ruining her reputation, but I haven't seen anything suggesting it. Of course, these days, a sexually mature teenager having sex with another sexually mature teenager is still ardently pursued as a felony if they don't hit the strict, but arbitrary, age requirements. Never mind that such policies make at least 50 percent (and probably more) of people felonious sex criminals. Even if the actual reality is that these boys had consensual sex with her with no acrimony, no hard feelings, and they had nothing to do with the events that lead to her suicide, they are going to be punished far worse than the girls who actually hounded her to death and beyond.

      If, on the other hand, the actual reality is that these boys had sex with her, then turned around and started harassing her along with the rest, then I suppose it's just desserts, although I still think the statutory rape is nonsense, but they should face the same punishment as the other miscreants. Another possibility is that these boys did not have sex with her, but went around saying they did, either maliciously, or just for the benefit of their reputations as idiot teenage boys (not to say that all teenage boys are idiots, just that those teenage boys who do that sort of thing clearly are idiots) sometimes will. If that's the case, the statutory rape charges are obviously even more ridiculous, but, once again, punish them along with the other miscreants for the slander and harassment.

    63. Re:Cyberbullies? by ajlisows · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The bummer part is that the two guys, at some point at least, must have been at least SOMEWHAT nice to the girl if they were dating (article states she was "Dating a popular senior football player") and having sex. They will be the ones that get hit the hardest by this. I'm guessing charges such as "Criminal Harassment" and "Stalking" will end up as no more than slaps on the wrist while the two guys will have the sex offender stamp for the rest of their lives.

    64. Re:Cyberbullies? by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      It might be considered highly immature if some kid had died in an unrelated car accident, but when they're the cause of this kid's suicide and damned well KNOW that they're the cause then they're fucking sociopaths and should be treated as such.

    65. Re:Cyberbullies? by fermion · · Score: 1
      This is one of the times I get very conservative and traditional. I think there is still some value in raising men. When I was in school I was taught very directly that men have sex while animals and children fuck any thing that moved. While there are many that say boys will be boys, I think this attitude is what causes some of these problems. We expect boys to grope girls, because that is what boys will do, and for the girls just to take it.

      The fact is that we have age of consent, and that below that age a person cannot consent to sex. A man who is capable of forming relationships with women, i.e two person over the age of consent, should not need to look for someone under the age of consent. If this is to be changed, the way to do it is to change the age of consent.

      In any case, I would say that people need to learn that their actions have consequences, sometime extreme. For instance, there was a kid that held up a liquor store so he could get some money to go on a date and shot the clerk. Murder during a hold up, death penalty. Probably he had been so coddled his own life he never thought there were any penalties.

      Lets take these hypothetical boys who think they can just go around and have sex with anyone who is not beating them off with a stick. No penalty in high school for it. No raising at home to make them into men. Go off to college the next year where people are drinking. Find a drunk girl and use her. She claims rape the next day. They find roofies in her system. The boy did give it to her, the liquor was spiked. No matter,the law say an additional maybe 20 years.

      Fair, of course not, but men take responsibility for their actions. Boys complain that life is not fair, and are always justfying their unfortunate decisions, letting other pay for their mistakes.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    66. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when its with a minor, yes.

    67. Re:Cyberbullies? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The hearsay rule does not apply if the defendant is the declarant.

      In other words, "Bill told me the defendant and the victim had sex" doesn't fly, it gets tossed. However, "The defendant told me the defendant and the victim had sex" stands. If it came straight from the defendant, it isn't inadmissible by hearsay.

      If five people come forward and say the same exact thing, then the defendant doesn't have a leg to stand on in arguing that he never said it. All he can argue is that he never actually did it, which will damn him one way or another - though less so if he didn't actually commit statutory rape.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay_in_United_States_law#Admission_by_party-opponent

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    68. Re:Cyberbullies? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      According to wikipedia, this exemption is valid only if the declarant is unavailable as a witness. It's vague to me, whether a defendant is or is not available as a witness since of course he can't be compelled to testify against himself.

      The question is whether or not the defendant has opportunity to cross examine the person who made the statement. With hearsay, the person who actually made the statement is not the witness, and so the defendant cannot cross-examine the source - he can't face his accuser, basically.

      However, if the statement originated with the defendant himself, he certainly is available for cross-examination if he so chooses, so he has the opportunity to face his accuser (himself) in court. Thus, the hearsay rule does not apply, and the statement is admissible.

      The "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" portion of the miranda rights doesn't start when you are arrested, that is in force continuously.

      While you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself, you also have the right to defend yourself on the witness stand, and that's what lifts the hearsay rule when the statement originated from the defendant.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    69. Re:Cyberbullies? by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      Having sex is a barbaric action?

      In the US it is. Haven't you seen their media? Violence is glorified while sex and nudity is vile and offensive.

      God I hope this is a joke. Judging Americans by our media is like judging the French for liking mimes.

    70. Re:Cyberbullies? by __aamhyo4754 · · Score: 1

      This kind of stuff happens all the time. The 15 year old girl was sleeping around with 2 guys in the space of a year? Of course she would get picked on, called a slut, etc. It's no excuse for the bullies actions, but I think this goes on at every school. And teachers who DO stand up for students often become targets themselves. The other parents of the accused bullies get angry and complain to administrators. The fact is good teachers who wedge themselves into conflict put a target on themselves since administrators want as little hostile-parent interaction as possible.

    71. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's been scientifically shown that teenagers have poor impulse control. Their brains aren't yet fully developed.

      That impulse control is gained through experiencing consequences.

      In addition...maybe they didn't know she was under age. Can *you* tell the difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old?

      They were in school with her. Anybody could be held to a standard of thought that would at least lead them to suspect that a school girl might be under age. Having the suspicion, it is their responsibility to find out.

    72. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you do it right, yes

    73. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One thing that is has not changed is that the authorities cannot do anything if the victim does not want to press charges...

      I don't know where you got that information, but it is not true at all. Prosecutors can charge anyone they feel they have a case against. The victim is not required to testify against the defendant, but if they have made any statements at all, it is pretty much a slam dunk conviction. If you do decide to take it to trial, in the hopes you can convince a jury otherwise, the prosecutor will drop any plea-bargains, and come up with any new charges they think will stick. This will almost certainly result in stiffer penalties than the original plea-bargain.

      I know this is true because it has happened to me.

    74. Re:Cyberbullies? by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      In addition...maybe they didn't know she was under age. Can *you* tell the difference between a 15 year old and a 16 year old?

      In almost all states, statutory rape is a strict liability offense, meaning that it doesn't matter if you thought she was older. I've heard of cases where the "victim" was in a bar with a very good fake ID, and looked about 20, but was actually underage and the partner was convicted of statutory rape on the strict liability doctrine even though nobody contested the fact that the accused couldn't possibly have been aware she was underage.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    75. Re:Cyberbullies? by linzeal · · Score: 1

      It is 2 years in most of the Midwest. My cousin still has statutory rape charges for sleeping with a 14 year old when he was 17. He has to report as a sex offender everywhere he goes even though he eventually married the girl, had two children with her and divorced her after she was sick of him not being able to find any job because of the charges.

    76. Re:Cyberbullies? by xero314 · · Score: 1

      MA has no close in age exemption. MA actually increases the penalties with age difference, but does not exempt anyone based on age difference. My home state also does not have an close in age exemption, though it can be used as an affirmative defense. Age of consent laws really vary pretty significantly from state to state. Most of the age of consent laws are relatively recent. And yes that can be a real bitch for people that live near state borders.

    77. Re:Cyberbullies? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Parent should have access to their kids communications, and failure to monitor and stop criminal activity makes them accomplices.

      Actually, parents having access to kids' communications could make the situation much worse. The victim's parents would have access to the victim's communication as well, and with if his parents are of the "bullying is good, it builds character" kind? (which they most likely are, in cases like this, or else the kid would already have whined to them, and they would have done sth).

      The thing that usually breaks the victim's back is complete lack of support even from their own family. So they try to keep it secret, and carry their cross in isolation.

    78. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The male teen age criminal is going to be considered a hero, while the girl is going to be considered a slut

      Sadly, you are right. However, young women need to take responsibility for their actions. In this case, the students bullying the female student essentially coerced her to commit suicide by creating an environment in which she could not reasonably be expected to seek assistance when authority figures and likely her parents ignored her silent pleas. I feel terrible for this young woman and feel society has died a little more as a consequence of her death.

    79. Re:Cyberbullies? by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

      It was funny , in a B&B sort of way. What, it's not PC to joke about CANCER anymore?

      --
      US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
    80. Re:Cyberbullies? by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      The actors in this entire sorry incident are tied together in their responsibility. If they weren't these two guys wouldn't be getting charged with statutory rape after the victim died.

      I've seen the morals and attitudes of guys this age and it's pretty sickening. My stepdaughter had her life changed forever by one of these self-absorbed "studs" that just don't care. He knocked her up, bullied her into getting an abortion and drove her to an out-of-state abortion clinic without either my wife or I knowing about it. He then just dropped her off at the curb afterwards and had nothing to do with her for the next six months.

      My stepdaughter has never been the same since. He ruined her life. The emotional consequences destroyed her self-respect and she's just never recovered. She despises herself for killing her baby, and is very self-destructive. It turned a friendly, pleasant, artistic, talented girl with a bright future into someone who will never reach their potential. It would have been more merciful if that asshole would have just taken her out and shot her.

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    81. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if done right.

    82. Re:Cyberbullies? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      He has to report as a sex offender everywhere he goes even though he eventually married the girl, had two children with her and divorced her after she was sick of him not being able to find any job because of the charges.

      And this is why he shouldn't have been poking a fourteen year old. It obviously wasn't worth it. He probably didn't deserve to be labeled as a sex offender, but he did deserve to get dumped.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    83. Re:Cyberbullies? by Genda · · Score: 1

      You have a great future here on /.

    84. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It turned a friendly, pleasant, artistic, talented girl with a bright future into someone who will never reach their potential. It would have been more merciful if that asshole would have just taken her out and shot her.

      Better off dead? Many people have recovered from far worse. If you can't help her, please seek out some help for her and yourself. It's clear you've decided to give up on her. You're her parent. You're responsible for helping her heal. It's clear we don't feel the same way about abortion, but making her feel like she killed a baby is not helping. Maybe I'm reading your wrong and I'm trying very hard not to judge you, but it sounds to me like you're as big a problem for her as the boy she had sex with and you're old enough to know better.

    85. Re:Cyberbullies? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry yourself too much about that.
      They'll rectify your problem when they come for you.

    86. Re:Cyberbullies? by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      The actors in this entire sorry incident are tied together in their responsibility. If they weren't these two guys wouldn't be getting charged with statutory rape after the victim died.

      You have a greater faith in the justice system than I do. They're guilty because they were charged, and if they were innocent they wouldn't have been? If there was really a problem with the sex, then why weren't they charged when it happened, before her death? It looks like a mad scramble to be seen doing something after the fact, rather than any pursuit of justice to me.

      He knocked her up, bullied her into getting an abortion and drove her to an out-of-state abortion clinic without either my wife or I knowing about it. He then just dropped her off at the curb afterwards and had nothing to do with her for the next six months.

      He was a total bastard. That doesn't necessarily mean that the people in this case were. And much as what happened to your stepdaughter sucked, it wouldn't have if she'd said no - either to the sex, or the abortion. That's not to say it's her fault, but their is partial responsibility there.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    87. Re:Cyberbullies? by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      You assume an awful lot.

      We got her counseling, but when she turned 18 she refused to keep up with it. The source of her guilt is internal, not external. She's never received any condemnation from us for her decision. We figured she was going through enough torment without any guilt being ladled out by us.

      She took a life and she's still punishing herself for it almost 20 years later. She married an abusive guy, most likely because of it all, and just figures she deserves it as no one can convince her to leave him. That's why I said it would have been more merciful if the asshole had just killed her.

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
    88. Re:Cyberbullies? by ffreeloader · · Score: 1

      We'll just have to agree to disagree about the first half of your post. The second half, I agree with you. Yes, she could have said no, and she was advised not to date the asshole in the first place because we knew he was an asshole. But, once she was in that relationship he bullied her into doing a lot of things she wouldn't have done on her own. Her first mistake was her choice of friends, and it all went downhill from there.

      --
      "while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
  3. Throw the book at them and the school. by Calibax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The daughter of a neighbor experienced a similar problem some time ago. Fortunately a vice-principal at the school did not ignore the reports from teachers and took disciplinary action against the people involved.

    The harassment was vicious, nasty and designed to humiliate and hurt. I understand that the bullies were unrepentant - they felt they had a "right" to hurt someone who didn't kowtow to them.

    I am thankful that these sorts of issues were pretty much unknown when I went to school. I think I'll home-school my kids....

    1. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think I'll home-school my kids....

      Incidents at these levels are fairly isolated, but low level bullying is a part of life. Part of the reason to go to school is to learn how to deal with the idiots you will always have around you. It doesn't end with school, they exist in all areas of society, including the workplace. Office politics can be just a more cerebral version of the bullying.

    2. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Meshach · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am thankful that these sorts of issues were pretty much unknown when I went to school. I think I'll home-school my kids....

      It is all relative. More then anything it depends on the specific area that you live in and the actual teachers and administration (Principal, VP...) that are in that school. The real big change is that we all hear about the really bad cases whereas before we would not have heard if it was not in out local school.

      This is a terrible situation but sometimes it feels like observers are too sensationalistic.

      --
      "Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
      Aldous Huxley
    3. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Bullshit they didn't go on when you were a kid. They sure as hell did when I was growing up. It's been going on since the invention of school. It's been going on since long before then. What's happening now is that society is less tolerant of it and has better methods of communication so you hear more about it. People haven't changed, there's always been intolerant assholes and if you have a large number of small enforced groupings like a school there will always be someone who's low man on the otem poll. Some of them will be unstable enough to kill themselves.

      What you can do as a parent- watch your kids. If they're having trouble, figure out how serious it is. Force the school to take action if it gets bad. If it gets really bad, transfer your kid to another school/district.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    4. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Troll

      I am thankful that these sorts of issues were pretty much unknown when I went to school.

      Bullcrap.

      Three factors here:

      1) The news was much more local and much less national, it certainly wasn't completely soundbyte-based and on 4-5 channels 24/7. There are a lot of things you hear about now that you'd have never heard of pre-CNN.

      2) Until fairly recently, suicide carried a huge stigma in American society. No parent would admit that their kid committed suicide, and the press wouldn't cover it (for fear that it would cause copycat suicides).

      3) Nostalgia is a mind-disease. If you're looking back at the past fondly, most likely, your brain is deluding you. In reality, the past sucked ass.

    5. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Had a similar instance will bullying with my son. It was all offline but during school and on the bus. Simple stuff, knocking his glasses off, taking his mp3 player, poking him in various places blah blah. When I spoke to the school about it, I was told there was nothing they could do other than mention it to the bus driver and possibly say something to the kids. Months later it was still going on. At my next meeting with the school I basically told them that this has gone on WAY too long and I instructed my son to fight back and sucker punch someone in the face if he had too not time someone takes something of his. At that point the principal stated that he would have to file a report about my intending to promote violence and if my son did "start" a fight, he would be expelled from school.

      Long story short, he never had to resort to violence which was our real goal, my son was able to avoid being a target, and the jackass kids eventually grew out of it.

      Don't rely on the school for help or for protection and don't think they are going to be the parent for you. There are a limitless amount of kids that bully in school, out of school, online, at the playground etc.., you CAN NOT stop them all, it will happen and is a fact of life. Take the responsibility as a parent and talk to your kids and find out what is bothering them and why and help them through it. Bullying is nothing new. IMHO, I think not giving small kids awards for winning and complimenting all kids all of the time because you don't want to offend one is fine for parents in a controlled environment and some what good for kids self esteem but kids do NOT treat other kids the same way outside of the parent controlled bubble. You are setting them up to fail but not letting them fail early on. Bring back dodgeball and "pick up" games at gym class and only give kids stars that deserve it. If you want to give every kid a star, find out what some kids are good at that others are not and give the stars are required. The kid who sucks at dodgeball might be good at math.

    6. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      agreed. to suggest this kind of thing never used to happen is to suggest humans previously lacked a social pecking order.

      What makes the problem greater these days is that attacking someone through a website lacks the human feed back. it doesn't feel like a person you attacking it's a faceless computer. a recent study of road rage showed the reason people get so angry at other people on the road is because their anger is directed at a car not a person. when the people driving could see the other persons face, they were much more forgiving. we look at the other person's face for emotional reactions, when we can't see that we feel ok with saying stuff we'd NEVER say to another persons face.

      the scary thing about it is this is the same reason psychopaths are able to violently murder people and feel nothing. the inability to empathize.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    7. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      What you can do as a parent- watch your kids. If they're having trouble, figure out how serious it is. Force the school to take action if it gets bad. If it gets really bad, transfer your kid to another school/district.

      Heh, everyone's got lists of what to do if your kid is being bullied. I've never seen a list yet that involved talking to the bully's parents and telling them to straighten their kid out before you do.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    8. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Calibax · · Score: 1

      Or maybe a Catholic high school does have some advantages.

    9. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I'll home-school my kids....

      ...not to sound like a bully... but you can't protect them forever.

    10. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Asclepius99 · · Score: 1

      Parents do need to play an important part in any child's upbringing and teaching them how to deal with problems. But isn't something wrong with a teacher and sees several teenagers assault another teenager in class/hallways and doesn't blink an eye?

    11. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      Talking to the bully's parents *might* work, and is probably worth a shot. They may have good parents who'll not just blindly take their kid's side. I think its a low probability chance though. And will most likely cause the bullying to get worse due to "tattling" and appearing weak. Actually straightening out the other kid is likely to end up with you in jail (unless you're the type who can intimidate a kid with a glare- some people have that power, most of us don't). So while I understand the desire, I'm not sure it would help.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    12. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The daughter of a neighbor experienced a similar problem some time ago. Fortunately a vice-principal at the school did not ignore the reports from teachers and took disciplinary action against the people involved.

      The harassment was vicious, nasty and designed to humiliate and hurt. I understand that the bullies were unrepentant - they felt they had a "right" to hurt someone who didn't kowtow to them.

      I am thankful that these sorts of issues were pretty much unknown when I went to school. I think I'll home-school my kids....

      You're lucky-- it's same shit different decade. The '70s didn't have the internet but kids could be pretty dang nasty with prank phone calls (especially since Caller ID didn't exist), leaving notes, mailing prank notes, doing stuff to get kids or their parents in trouble, so on and so forth. I was bullied and was a bully at the same time (there seemed to be a bully food chain) and I got phone calls saying I'll be murdered in bed which had me up all night. Some girl who people thought was snobby had some shake planted in her car and managed not to get busted for a drug offense because someone overheard kids talking about calling the cops on her and warned her to get rid of it.

    13. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by cavehobbit · · Score: 0, Troll

      I understand that the bullies were unrepentant - they felt they had a "right" to hurt someone who didn't kowtow to them.

      So you are saying they are Democrats?

    14. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's what lawyers are for. Have a lawyer threaten the parents/kid. You don't go to jail, and it's like straightening them out.

    15. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh yah, I guess there wasn't time for bullying with all that child molestation going on.

      Seriously, though, I still don't buy it. You give me *facts*, then you'll convince me. You give me fuzzy pie-in-the-sky nostalgia, and I call bullshit.

    16. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      Had a similar instance will bullying with my son.... When I spoke to the school about it, I was told there was nothing they could do other than mention it to the bus driver and possibly say something to the kids. Months later it was still going on.

      Who's really at fault here?

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    17. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by timmarhy · · Score: 1
      anything the parent does directly is not going to help anyway, the kids need to work this out for themselfs, parents can only provide support. The anti bully programs being taut are a big part of the current problem, because they don't teach any real direct action on the part of the victim as being effective.

      they give advice like telling the bully to stop. like that's going to do fuck all. if they aren't listening to your gurgled screams of STOP STOP after the first 5 toilet flushings, more of the same won't help. These programs each the kids if telling the bully to stop doesn't work, tell a teacher or parent, who are pretty much useless at doing anything.

      the only real solution for kids being bullied is to grow enough confidence to make bullying them no longer fun. no in school course is going to give them that. they usually these people just suffer throuhg highschool then get out in the real world where life experience teachs them how to cope.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    18. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by bmajik · · Score: 1

      Incidents at these levels are fairly isolated, but low level bullying is a part of life. Part of the reason to go to school is to learn how to deal with the idiots you will always have around you. It doesn't end with school, they exist in all areas of society, including the workplace. Office politics can be just a more cerebral version of the bullying.

      This is what people often say, as a criticism of homeschooling.

      I have carefully arranged my life so that I don't ever deal with anyone I don't like dealing with. I work at a company with a very high hiring bar such that I _never_ deal with people who are stupid _and_ assholes.

      Real life is nothing like school. In the real world, when I don't like someone, I don't invite them to my house. If they insist that they can bother me even after I've retreated to my home, I get to shoot them -- a decidedly righteous outcome. I don't have to let people in my car, I don't have to talk to them, I don't have to answer my phone. Hell, I can shop at private businesses that are members only affairs, and the necessity of interacting with people to even do commerce is all but antiquated at this point.

      In my entire existance, I can make what I do, where I do it, and whom may be present while it is done entirely according to my liking. The unifying factor here is money, and the key thing I learned from public schools is that once someone has money, one never has to deal with anything unpleasant.

      The only exception to any of this is the government. Only they have the power to coerce me; the government is the only entity where I _MUST_ deal with them on their terms instead of on my own.

      Given what I had to put up with in public schools, it is no surprise that I am a libertarian/minarchist, and that my children will be homeschooled. What I cannot understand is that anyone could honestly come to any _other_ conclusion. I mean, I think you are arguing that getting the shit beat out of you and being forbidden from defending yourself is "good" for people; something all kids should experience.

      Well, instead of learning that much of life is about being the punching bag for the socially favored classes, my children will learn marksmanship.

      --
      My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
    19. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am thankful that these sorts of issues were pretty much unknown when I went to school. I think I'll home-school my kids....

      I know that similar kinds of things have been going on for at least 50 years; I talked to a woman in her sixties about her having been tied down and gang raped by kids just before she got into her teens, having been sold by her brother for "popularity". (Incidentally, she considered it an unpleasant memory but didn't consider it to have been particularly damaging - it goes to show how resilient some people can be.)

      The question is how common these kinds of incidents are, and what can be done to make them less common and handle the fallout better. Having teachers just tolerate them even when they happen in front of the teachers probably isn't the way; and removing all areas of respite by having it happen over 24/7 media probably isn't the way either.

      Today's appropriate captcha: miseries

    20. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's arguing that developing some level of thick skin and realizing that other peoples' opinions of you generally should be ignored because most of them are stupid is good for you in the long run.

    21. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who is looking at the same decision I wanted to chime in. Home schooling has numerous advantages. For example, home schooled children are, on the whole, better educated than others (based on placement exams, for example). And to get this level of education takes a couple of hours a day instead of... what, seven or eight? It is more time efficient and provides better education. What isn't there to like?

      Well, home schooling isn't "normal" in many areas so it gets labelled as being "different" and "subpar". The most common criticism I've seen levied is the purported lack of socialization. As a product of the public education system I can safely say that it is quite possible to not be "properly socialized" by it. When other kids talked about what they watched on TV (whether commercials or shows) I never knew what it was about. Somehow, I managed to have two friends through high school, but even they took to distancing themselves from me by eleventh grade because I didn't fit in. Unlike some "outsiders" I was never particularly bullied (it didn't hurt that one hurt himself when he hit me, or that another's taunts finally broke down my reserve and I kicked the shit out of him).

      The point being that culturally and socially I was well outside the norm -- despite being subject to public education. I had little ability to make friends and an almost crippling introversion (which I turned around on my own as a young adult). Public education doesn't necessarily accomplish socialization.

      And a home schooled child doesn't have to be isolated. Most places (even the small town I grew up in) have home schooling groups that provide a means to expose a home schooled child to other children. There are other groups as well (such as 4H for those who are rural). So, really, there are many opportunities to make sure your children learn to deal with their peers.

      And if you haven't realized yet that grade school and high school text books aren't worth the paper they're printed on then you need to expand your knowledge. I've always known that I'd be educating at home even if my kids go to public school. So, given that, why send them to public school at all? So they can be subjected to dishonest administrators who will get them jailed for kick backs? So they can be bullied and tormented with the tacit or explicit support of school administration? So that teachers themselves can harrass them if they don't like them?

      No, those problems aren't the norm -- they just get the press time. But really, what benefit does a kid derive from a public education? When the public schools were established we did not have the ready dissemination of information that we do today. But I can easily obtain curricula to cover the subjects taught in school. So, again, what benefit is derived in this day and age from public education? The public schools are primarily used as a nanny system while both parents work. My wife "retired" to stay at home with the kids -- we don't need the school to take care of/raise our children.

      So what benefit does public education provide?

    22. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bullies, and then the school for letting such harassment to continue on their watch.

      Were you trying to suggest otherwise?

      Perhaps you think the father should have gone down to the school and beat up the bullies?

      About the only thing the parents of a bullied kid can do is try to get in touch with the parents of the bullies. Good luck with that though, the parents are usually the source of such bullying behavior.

    23. Re:Throw the book at them and the school. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, this is a concern of mine with Home Schooling. I always looked down on home schooling thinking that the kids would wind up sheltered. I got to talking to a friend of mine who has a large family and who does home school, I was very surprised to find that his wife actually seeks out certifications and that in their area families who home school get their kids all together for field trips and activities. I was floored! Every other family I've ever spoken to about home schooling did none of this and appeared to do bare minimum to get the kids through. If more families put this kind of effort into teaching their kids I'd be much more positive on the idea of home schooling. I'm not sure it would address the kinds of bullying that went on here but heck maybe the kids will grow up not looking to bully at all - including in the work place! What a breath of fresh air that might be.....

  4. Newsflash: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The world has some assholes in it. They are mean to people for no good reason.

    Altho for some reason we put up with them and work around them instead of throwing them down a deep dark hole and moving on.

    1. Re:Newsflash: by Pichu0102 · · Score: 1

      The world has some assholes in it. They are mean to people for no good reason.

      Altho for some reason we put up with them and work around them instead of throwing them down a deep dark hole and moving on.

      Actually, we give them jobs as CEOs, managers, politicians and the like.

    2. Re:Newsflash: by mgblst · · Score: 1

      If you start throwing people in holes, then you become bigger assholes than the people you are disposing off. Of course, the advantage is that the guy who throws you in the hole will be the a lesser asshole than you, so he can probably survive.

  5. it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Apparently, this poor girl was also raped.

    1. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by russotto · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apparently, this poor girl was also raped.

      No, statutory rape (that is, usually-consensual sex with someone who it isn't legal to have sex with). And nothing in TFA suggests that the two charged with statutory rape had anything to do with the bullying (cyber or otherwise); they aren't charged with the other stuff.

    2. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, she was raped online. No, I believe what actually happened was that she had sex with a boy more than N year old. That's why it's "statutory rape" instead of just "rape". It's rape, only as defined by statute.

      dom

    3. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by VGR · · Score: 1

      Reading the article more closely, one can see that it was "statutory rape." Personally I'm having trouble understanding how a 17-year-old can commit statutory rape against a 15-year-old. I could have sworn such laws explicitly allow sex between any two people within two years of age.

      I'm guessing that's the only charge they could muster against the male participants. All of the charges, against both the male and female students, seem pretty weak.

      --
      The Internet is full. Go away.
    4. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by gedrin · · Score: 1

      You are mis-informed. She apparently had consentual sex with a 17 and/or 18 year old while she was 15. The charge is statutory rape.

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    5. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. "The two males, 17 and 18, are charged with statutory rape."
      That means it was consensual sex with fellow high-school students. That's quite different from saying she was raped.

    6. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends on the state; some have two- or four-year exceptions, some don't, and some have exceptions that only apply when you're under 18 so 17 and 15 is OK but not 18 and 17.

      In this case, barring further evidence, it's all based on the archaic misogynistic concept that the boys corrupted her with sex when she needed to be protected from herself, and that self-loathing from being impure contributed to her death.

    7. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the state laws. In Florida, you can have sex with a 16 or 17 year old if you are under 24, but no one can legally have sex with a 15 year old or younger. So they could certainly be charged under Florida law. I'm guessing MA is similar.

    8. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Totenglocke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, if you RTFA, one of the guys being charged with statutory rape is 17 (the girl was 15). The 18 year old I could see being charged depending on local law, but there's no case against the 17 year old since he's still a minor and extremely close in age with the girl.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    9. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by RedWizzard · · Score: 2, Informative

      And nothing in TFA suggests that the two charged with statutory rape had anything to do with the bullying (cyber or otherwise); they aren't charged with the other stuff.

      The 17yo was. From http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/03/holding_for_pho.html:

      Scheibel's office released this list of those being charged, and the charges they face.

      • Sean Mulveyhill, 17, of South Hadley, charged with statutory rape, violation of civil rights, criminal harassment, disturbance of a school assembly.
      • Austin Renaud, 18, of Springfield, charged with statutory rape.
      • Kayla Narey, 17, of South Hadley, charged with violation of civil rights, criminal harassment, disturbance of a school assembly.
      • Ashley Longe, 16, of South Hadley, charged with violation of civil rights, as a youthful offender.
      • Flannery Mullins, 16, of South Hadley, charged with violation of civil rights as a youthful offender, stalking as a youthful offender.
      • Sharon Chanon Velazquez, 16, of South Hadley, charged with violation of civil rights as a youthful offender, stalking as a youthful offender.

      I'm surprised that "disturbance of a school assembly" is a crime. Do school assemblies really need statutory protection?

    10. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by guyniraxn · · Score: 1

      Actually, if you RTFA, one of the guys being charged with statutory rape is 17 (the girl was 15). The 18 year old I could see being charged depending on local law, but there's no case against the 17 year old since he's still a minor and extremely close in age with the girl.

      So what if he's a minor? Age of consent in Mass is 16. There are no exceptions written in to the law to allow for minors to have sex. It's up to the prosecutor's discretion.

      Chapter 265: Section 23. Rape and abuse of child

      Section 23. Whoever unlawfully has sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse, and abuses a child under 16 years of age, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life or for any term of years or, except as otherwise provided, for any term in a jail or house of correction. A prosecution commenced under this section shall neither be continued without a finding nor placed on file.

    11. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Most states (if not all) only apply those laws to adults and / or people who are not within a certain number of years in age of the other person.

      Statutory rape is one of the most bullshit legal inventions ever. It's prosecuting someone for doing something personal that both people chose to do.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    12. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      Statutory rape is one of the most bullshit legal inventions ever. It's prosecuting someone for doing something personal that both people chose to do.

      Like, prostitution, drug use, and a whole host of other moral laws?

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    13. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Yup, just like anti-sodomy laws too.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    14. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Most states (if not all) only apply those laws to adults and / or people who are not within a certain number of years in age of the other person.

      That's only true if they have statutes on the books stating as much. If not, it is applied word for word.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    15. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by metternich · · Score: 1

      Massachusetts is not one of those States. There was a case a few years back of several 16 and 17 year old boys having group sex with a 15 year old girl. They all faced statutory rape charges. The age of consent in Massachusetts is 16, which is lower than many states.

      --
      Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
    16. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, if you RTFA, one of the guys being charged with statutory rape is 17 (the girl was 15). The 18 year old I could see being charged depending on local law, but there's no case against the 17 year old since he's still a minor and extremely close in age with the girl.

      Not true.

      A case can be brought in cases where one minor is 2 years older than another on grounds that they had superior knowledge and experience. Also, the age of consent in MA is 16, so he was legally able to consent, but she was not.

      I also remember reading something a while ago about an aggressive prosecutor who charged 2 14-year-olds with statutory rape for having (consensual) sex. Smart move to make two consenting partners into lifelong sex offenders just for having the audacity to bump nasties before they were adults.

    17. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by guyniraxn · · Score: 1

      First you said they had no case, now you're applying a different argument. I agree statutory rape is usually bullshit; I was only countering your assertion on the legality of the charge since it had been modded insightful by others who were just as ignorant of the law.

    18. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you may have given the wrong answer to what was in GPs mind a rhetorical question. ;)

    19. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Besides, you can always charge someone with more than you actually can prove. It's a form of prosecutorial slander, because people don't emotionally know the difference between being charged and being guilty.

      I blame CSI, because when was the last time you saw someone charged who was innocent on that program?

    20. Re:it's more than just cyberbullying by eyore15 · · Score: 1

      yea, they were. check out the boston glob article. it even gives the names of those involved and the charges against them.

  6. Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This has been the teacher and administrator MO since I was in school in the 60s. Actually it's worse than that. The teacher/administrator just wants the problem to go away so they tend to persecute and isolate the *victim* rather than the perpetrator (Johny gets bullied by a group of 5 kids on the playground so we'll keep *Johny* inside while all the kids go out to play). This usually ostracizes the victim further by pointing him/her out as the weak odd kid.

    In my experience, the most culpable individuals are spineless teachers followed by spineless administrators. Children can't really be blamed. They know no better. Adults do, or should.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  7. Statutory rape? by wisnoskij · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since when has statutory rape been part of cyber bullying?

    It sounds like cyber bullying was the least of her problems.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:Statutory rape? by gedrin · · Score: 1

      It is likely the statutory rape charges are related to her dating a high school senior of age 17 or older. I do not have the details, but it appears the ages of the charged persons are 17 and 18. It may be outside the law for them to have sex with a freshman, but I seriously doubt it is far outside of normal behavior.

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    2. Re:Statutory rape? by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Look at "Statutory Rape". I don't think it means what you think it means.

    3. Re:Statutory rape? by Knara · · Score: 1

      Yeah, depends on what the AoC laws are like in MA.

    4. Re:Statutory rape? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eh... this isn't real rape. If it was, they'd go for that.

      They're only using the 'statutory' version because the sex was so clearly consensual that it's the only thing that'll stick.

      Sickens the hell out of me, it does.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    5. Re:Statutory rape? by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

      Since when has statutory rape been part of cyber bullying?

      Now that's one hell of a Facebook app.

    6. Re:Statutory rape? by gedrin · · Score: 1

      The AoC in MA is 16. Given the ages of those charged (17 & 18), and her age (15), 16 is probably a bright line which shall not be crossed. However, not a lawyer.

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    7. Re:Statutory rape? by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      IANAL either but I looked it up. In MA, 16 is indeed a bright line rule.

      Really, though, this is an abuse of discretion on the part of the prosecutor although I live all the way across the country, I am inclined to make full use of my first amendment rights on that nature (phone calls, letters, letters to the editors, facebook posts, etc. pointing out that this is the sort of thing that gives lawyers a bad name and that the DA's office must be populated by power-hungry thugs....)

      Oh wait, would that be cyberbullying? I thought it would have been Constitutionally protected.....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    8. Re:Statutory rape? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Eh... this isn't real rape. If it was, they'd go for that.

      Yeah, it's kind of a weird choice of terminology. It's "rape" in the sense that the law doesn't grant minors the authority to legally consent to sex. Thus, sex with a minor is, in legal terms, non-consensual and thus "rape". I can see the logical chain of decisions that lead to this terminology, but if you compare this offense to actual rape, it's like a joke. I think there may be cases where statutory rape is a type or rape - when there's coercion involved, basically... But in general the offense is like a catch-all... Kind of like "open container" laws in cars (i.e. "we don't care what's in the container, you can't drive with an open container because it might be alcohol.")

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    9. Re:Statutory rape? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I'd say the statutory rape was probably the least of her problems...

    10. Re:Statutory rape? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...inconceivable!

    11. Re:Statutory rape? by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      I saw a headline once that ran something like "Community shocked by gang rape" and then when I read the article basically some 15 year old girl offered to go down on a whole bunch of 18+ guys at the same time. Went around a circle or something like that. I was pretty pissed off that the incident earned the headline it got.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    12. Re:Statutory rape? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I haven't read TFA, but it could be non-consensual rape.

      The victim is dead, you can't ask her whether she consented or not. Unless you got a video of the whole thing, or reliable witnesses, the rape charge isn't going to hold.

    13. Re:Statutory rape? by kalirion · · Score: 1

      I'd say consensual intercourse with someone 2-3 years older than her is definitely far less of a problem than cyber bullying.

    14. Re:Statutory rape? by JimFive · · Score: 1

      Eh... this isn't real rape. If it was, they'd go for that.

      They're only using the 'statutory' version because the sex was so clearly consensual that it's the only thing that'll stick.

      Alternatively, they're using the 'statutory' version because it is easier to prove. They may know that the sex happened, and suspect that it was forced. But, they may not be able to prove that it was non-consensual. By going the 'statutory' route it is de jure non-consensual, because she was legally incapable of consent.
      --
      JimFive

      --
      Please stop using the word theory when you mean hypothesis.
    15. Re:Statutory rape? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is real rape.

  8. Now we will see by einhverfr · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Stupid laws passed of dubious Constitutional muster aimed at preventing another tragedy of this sort just as we saw after Megan Meier's suicide. Queue the national histeria.

    Look: this sort of thing has been going on a long time. (While I was bullied extensively in grade school a lot of that stopped at least for me by the time I reached high school, but I can still relate.) It's tragic but not much can be done. The administrators are often clueless and/or helpless, as are the teachers, and there is only so much they can do anyway.

    I survived and thrived because my parents did a good job in helping address this sort of thing with me (by talking to me about it. not by interfering). I found out later that some of my teachers had been bribing some of the bullies to stay away from me, but that didn't matter much since I was beat up by plenty of other kids as well.

    So instead we will turn our schools into prisons.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:Now we will see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, in alternative, teach your kid to defend himself. First time I got teased in high school, it didn't even register. When it got physical, I isolated one of the bullies outside and viciously beat him into a bloody pulp. Broke his nose, got him a black eye, and assorted bruises all over his body. When the kid went back to school a few good days later, he still had bruises, and everyone knew (to some extent) what had happened. I never got even looked at sideways again, ever, and I'm currently finishing University.

      You just have to love parents who say "They insult you, you're better than that, but if they escalate to violence, get inventive. You're a kid. Kids will be kids, and can generally get away with anything."

      Now I'm not encouraging violence here, but if a problem looks like a nail, then a hammer is the tool you want. Let some kids do that, and you'll suddenly have administrators much more worried.

    2. Re:Now we will see by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      I expect to work with my son on martial arts training as he gets a little older. He has had some issues with teasing at school. I have taught him how to deal with that:

      "If you are teased, the best thing to do is to turn it around to a joke on the person teasing you."

      One subtext to this:
      It shows confidence and courage, and it puts you in control. If you get upset, you let them control you. In the end that's what the struggle is about: who is going to control what you do? You or them?

      So I think that even in the realm of insults, there is room to teach kids to be inventive.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    3. Re:Now we will see by moteyalpha · · Score: 1

      It is far worse when you transfer from another location and have no friends. I can also relate to this, but it is a fact of life and it happens in work, military, law enforcement and in homes. Some people have a different social outlook that is very caustic and centric. Whatever the ultimate origin, it is a root cause of many evils that can culminate in serial killers, terrorists, and nationalistic imperialism.
      The public schools are absurd in their policies and my experience is being placed in the remedial classes because the school could not verify my straight A academic record. As a result, I learned what a switch blade was and how desperately disturbed some people really are.
      The problem is that there is a fairly large population of people who cannot function as social individuals for what ever reason. I just consider it the poisonous natural flora. Many things are dangerous and some people fall in that category also. Strangely, the reaction is often prompted by their fear of people who are far more competent and talented.

    4. Re:Now we will see by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Now I'm not encouraging violence here, but if a problem looks like a nail, then a hammer is the tool you want. Let some kids do that, and you'll suddenly have administrators much more worried.

      I tend to agree. I was picked on as a kid, until my ex-Marine uncle took me aside.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:Now we will see by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Girls and boys are different. For boys, the best way to stop the bully is to actually fight him. If you win or even draw, the bully usually stops. if you lose, you are no worse off. With girls, they use much more complex and often meaner methods then boys do.

      I bled every school day for 8 months from bullies. I was not allowed to fight by my parents. I was more afraid of my parents then the bullies. When I arrived home with a stick shoved in one cheek and out the other, I was now allowed to fight back. I could not start it. Funny thing is with boy bullies, beating the crap out of them usually stops them from ever bothering you again.

    6. Re:Now we will see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't live in the city do you? You try shit like that these days and the bully will come back at you with 20 friends armed with knives, bats and the odd gun. You get bullied by a "crip" or a "blood" are you going to isolate him and beat him up? Get real.

    7. Re:Now we will see by einhverfr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is far worse when you transfer from another location and have no friends.

      That was me. I was also raised as a Quaker (which meant I was expected by my parents to respond nonviolently).

      But years later, the father of the worst of the bullies was indicted for sexually abusing a minor. Looking back on things this many years later, there is a realization that although I had it rough, I am willing to bet that I had it easy compared to those who were bullying me.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    8. Re:Now we will see by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      A few years after the bullying stopped for me, I had a run-in with a street gang. I figured out that they were going to try to provoke me into throwing the first punch or to backing off and that either way I was going to be in trouble. I was holding a tennis racket and did the only thing I could think of doing: adopting a "pacifist but not afraid of you" stance, letting them push me around a bit, but refusing to do anything they told me to do and plainly telling them that if they wanted to hit me I was not going to strike back. It wasn't twenty, but there were five folks there and I assumed they were armed.

      I won the confrontation. They never escalated beyond shoving and they looked discouraged when they walked away. I had a spiritual experience during that confrontation. I don't like to credit things to divine intervention but something happened beyond what I can explain in simple terms.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    9. Re:Now we will see by MokuMokuRyoushi · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "...my ex-Marine uncle..."

      I may be nit picking, but there's no such thing as an ex-Marine.

      --
      Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
    10. Re:Now we will see by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      Of course there is. Sure, we drill in to them that there's not, but that doesn't make it true. Same with the whole "a Marine's not a soldier" business; there's possibly a useful distinction that gives the sentiment some merit, but in a generic sense, of course they're soldiers, and of course there's such a thing as an "ex-Marine", at least in the sense that most people would use the term (i.e. someone who was once but no longer is an active member of the Marine Corps).

      In fact, failing to prepend the "ex-" causes any sentence referring to such people to lose some possibly-significant meaning, or forces them to be wordier to retain it.

    11. Re:Now we will see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I'm european, we have none of that shit over here, thank you sir. Biggest shit that happened as far as I know were three to four older guys in motorbikes that came over to beat up some black kid 'cause he robbed one of the guys' brother. Nobody stopped them from going inside, and beat the bloody crap out of the kid.

    12. Re:Now we will see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the bullies are all Roman Catholics and have issues with their priests?

  9. Re:Political correctness run amok by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 0, Troll

    Since when did rape become a joke?

  10. This sends a terrible message to victims by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The authorities have made it plain by their actions that there's no way to get justice and stay alive. This is just going to make suicide look like a more attractive option to targets of bullying.

    The problem also runs deeper than the conduct of the high school authorities. What are the odds that the conscienceless perpetrators didn't present any warning signs in grade school and middle school?

    1. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The authorities have made it plain by their actions that there's no way to get justice and stay alive. This is just going to make suicide look like a more attractive option to targets of bullying.

      Suicide *or* Columbine-style retaliation.

    2. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by gedrin · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This is just going to make suicide look like a more attractive option to targets of bullying

      Yes. All the sympathy, compasion and righteous anger is, not without reason, for the girl. It is likely that those who yearn for sympathy, compasion and someone to defend them will now see killing themselves as a possible avenue to gain these rewards. It is a shame that none of the blame for the girls death seems to be directed at the person who put a noose around her neck and hung her.

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    3. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AKA suicide 2.0.

    4. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and if only she'd had a gun, she could have taken those other bitches with her, amiright?

    5. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      The authorities have made it plain by their actions that there's no way to get justice and stay alive. This is just going to make suicide look like a more attractive option to targets of bullying.

      Suicide *or* Columbine-style retaliation.

      Suicide makes you the victim, the bullies the bad guys. All a Columbine does is make the bullies the victims and you the bad-guy.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    6. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All a Columbine does is make the bullies the victims and you the bad-guy.

      No, it makes the victims dead (usually). The difference is huge, from the perspective of the killer, which is why killing is quite attractive.

      What the wider community thinks about a columbine type incident has little impact on the material rewards for the killer (and therefore on the probability of an incident). The killer knows that the bullies will be viewed as victims, but it doesn't matter as he gets something a lot better (revenge) straightaway.

    7. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Since you are hopefully dead at that point who cares?

    8. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      Exactly - that was my first thought as well. The last thing we should be doing is incentivizing suicide for teenagers. We should punish bullies for their actions, but not punish them extra when their actions cause a suicide. If we did, we're just giving kids a (very powerful) reason to kill themselves - to get revenge against the people who are making them feel so horribly.

    9. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by Caraig · · Score: 1

      > Suicide makes you the victim, the bullies the bad guys. All a Columbine does is make the bullies the victims and you the bad-guy.

      But making the bullies your victims; making them beg and plead with you for their lives in much the same way as you see yourself as having done; and, having been denied their mercy, taking great joy in showing no quarter to them as you scatter their brains across the far wall; saying 'no more, asshole,' with double-ought buckshot; giving the finger to a system that let them bully you by taking away from that system -- teachers, administrators, parents -- their special little snowflakes that were oh so good and could do no wrong, even as they were pounding you into the pavement or making you feel like less than shit; and finishing it all with one last grand 'FUCK YOU!' to the world in a whirlwind of violence and chaos and police-assisted suicide....

      And maybe some of them think, 'Maybe if this happens enough times, bullying will stop forever. Maybe if I kill enough football captains and Heathers in sufficiently gruesome ways, all the other football captains and Heathers of the world will stop. Maybe this one action of mine can help stop it... or at least make other bullies think twice about being assholes.'

      At the point when a kid decides to go Columbine, the kids don't really give a tinker's damn about the bullies. To them, if the bullies are the victims, then that's AWESOME. "It's about fucking time." And if they're made out to be the bad guy, so what? For once in the four years of hell that the rest of us call High School, they see themselves as having some measure of power: over their tormentors, and over themselves and their own lives.

      It's not rational; it's not mentally healthy; it's rather tragic. But from a twisted perspective, it also makes sense.

      Hum, where's Jon Katz? These articles would be right up his alley.

      --
      "I am an Adept of Tantric VAX."
    10. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      The authorities have made it plain by their actions that there's no way to get justice and stay alive. This is just going to make suicide look like a more attractive option to targets of bullying.

      The problem also runs deeper than the conduct of the high school authorities. What are the odds that the conscienceless perpetrators didn't present any warning signs in grade school and middle school?

      A mother in one state used her son's suicide to petition the legislature to pass a bill that requires teacher and administrator intervention in bullying. She wanted to ensure that other students had ways to get justice and intervention without having to resort to suicide or--as mentioned below--homicide.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    11. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by SupremoMan · · Score: 1

      And if you are dead, do you give a fuck? I can surely think about the perpetrators in great length and debate their motives, and put labels on them. But they themselves don't really give a fuck, do they?

      I remember pretty well when Columbine happened. I was in High School myself. I even went online to see the discussions about the events. Someone setup a chatroom and such. All I found was shell-shock morons trying to pin the blame on someone.

    12. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      it makes the bullies *dead* victims. You think these kids care what history paints them as?

    13. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by gedrin · · Score: 1

      How dare I say that pouring sympathy and attention on someone after they kill themselves is likely to make killing themselves more attractive to those who desperately yearn for sympathy and attention!

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    14. Re:This sends a terrible message to victims by ukyoCE · · Score: 1

      Columbine was NOT about being bullied. Harris was a psychopath, he was not bullied, and he was not part of the "trenchcoat mafia". That is all myth spread by the misinformation going around shortly after the incident.

      http://www.slate.com/id/2099203/

      Search for "columbine motives" and you'll find many more articles correcting that misinformation.

  11. "Statutory Rape"? WTF? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Why did the two boys get statutory rape charges thrown in? Did they actually do something, or is that a bullshit charge? If there's a reason for it, were the girls not involved, or shouldn't they have been charged with it as well?

    1. Re:"Statutory Rape"? WTF? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 0, Troll

      They got statutory rape charges because the act in question was so clearly consensual that a regular rape charge wouldn't stick.

      These kids may be grade-A assholes, but those charges need to die in a fire.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    2. Re:"Statutory Rape"? WTF? by fropenn · · Score: 1

      There's no such thing as "consent" for minors.

    3. Re:"Statutory Rape"? WTF? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      I differentiate between the 16 year old minor and the 8 year old minor.

      No offense, but if you think a 16 year old can't consent to sex, you're an idiot or you somehow skipped right from 10 to 20.

      We treat older teenagers like little kids. That's wrong, and it leads to shit like this.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    4. Re:"Statutory Rape"? WTF? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

      Troll? That's a bit rich. How am I fishing for an angry response? It's a very common viewpoint around here...

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  12. Broken Record by ryanisflyboy · · Score: 1

    Here is the standard post, thought I'd help get it out of the way:

    WHERE THE HELL WERE THE PARENTS!??!? *arrggghhh!*

    If you're going to allow your children to use the Internet, understand that its misuse has the potential to cause serious psychological trauma. If your child is pre-disposed to suicidal thoughts to begin with, allowing unsupervised access to the Internet is potentially dangerous. Kind of like leaving your loaded gun within reach. What were the guardian's of this girl doing after the repeated harassment and torment caused by these kids?

    Yes, the kids should not have done it. They now will face the consequences.
    Yes, the teachers should have stopped it. Too bad nothing will happen to them. We wouldn't want to make the teachers responsible for anything.

    However, the people with the ultimate responsibility are the people who brought her in to this world. Don't have kids if you can't be bothered to be responsible enough to do the quite difficult job of being a parent. That job includes engaging your child in regular communication, following up with teachers to know what is going on at school, and knowing what your child is doing (especially on the Internet). The parents will now have to live the rest of their lives asking one of two questions "Why didn't we do something?" or "Who can we blame for this?"

    1. Re:Broken Record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are the bullies' parents?

      Oh wait, they're telling their kids how awesome/manly/whatever they are for driving a kid to kill herself. You go kiddo, show her who's boss!

      The failure of the girl's parents to put her into counseling, the failure of the school to do... something (if they did anything they'd probably force her into counseling) all pales in comparison to the people responsible for raising these sociopathic vermin.

  13. Just as a prominent warning by selven · · Score: 1

    I know most people, including even myself, have the reading style of letting our brains pick out the interesting bits and ignoring everything else, but it's important to point out that this isn't one of those cyberbullying vs free speech type of cases. Specifically:

    The sweeping charges ... include statutory rape, violation of civil rights with bodily injury...

    This isn't about the internet at all.

  14. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    Sadly, due to the extreme power of the teacher's union, it is nearly impossible to fire a teacher, for any reason. The teacher could be openly fondling kids in the hallway, and it would be next to impossible to fire them. (instead, they get a probationary removal from the classroom, stay on school payroll, and go to a "rubber room" for a time out.)

    As such, there is pretty much ZERO motivation for teachers to control their classrooms with anything other than purpetual suggestions to employ psychotropics, and to control only the most disruptive of students, and then only just enough to get by. (They'll be some other teacher's problem next year after all. No worries about them failing and staying in the same grade, afterall. "No child left behind", and all that.)

    What needs to happen in order to reform the public school system, is that FIRST and Foremost, the teacher's union needs to be declawed, and or castrated. There is nothing wrong with them having a union; there is EVERYTHING wrong with that union causing a net degredation of the quality of student education, and circumventing culpability of teacher's behaviors and activities.

    Secondly, parents need to sue teachers who are culpable directly, and not the school board. That way there are no special lawyers present. This helps get around the intricate network of "culpability" and "Responsibility" shell games that these organisations employ, and can effectively do what the school boards cannot (Remove a teacher perminently.)

    Finally, the "No child left behind" policy needs to be redacted. Self Esteem is not nearly as important as actual performance, and it needs to not be used as a boogey man to cover up/ignore teaching incompetence/failure. (likewise with student incompetence/failure)

  15. bullying not entirely enigmatic by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    People acting like assholes happens for actual reasons. Don't wave away the effort of figuring it out. That will just make you less able to cope.

    Want insight? Here's a great starter: http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200910/big-bad-bully

    1. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Reads like some special kind of bullshit to me. 'we should put up with assholes because.....'

      Look. life is an unfair bitch. everyone has problems. MOST of us dont take it out on other people.

    2. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by glwtta · · Score: 1

      People acting like assholes happens for actual reasons.

      True, but in the vast majority of cases, the reason is that they are assholes.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    3. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read that entire article. Nice but it does not seem to reflect reality in most situations. Most bullying is done in groups and when the situation is good to bully, not some individual with an anger or aggressive issue. I personally "picked" on some friends or people I knew throughout my school years. I thought they were harmless comments and jokes about someones girlfriend or making fun of their car, hair cut repeatedly maybe over months etc just as some other friends did. In HS, I literally got punched in the face because of it by two different people because of it. I did not fight back or take advantage of it because I'm not an aggressive person. I took the jokes too far and the people finally snapped, I deserved it and brushed it off and we all went about our business.

    4. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by snowgirl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People acting like assholes happens for actual reasons. Don't wave away the effort of figuring it out. That will just make you less able to cope.

      I think one of the biggest things to realize about this situation is that there is a component of social mania/"hysteria" going on here. Everyone fed upon everyone else. "Oh, everyone is doing X, so, let's try doing X+1..." Or "I got away with doing X, so let's try X+1".

      It's relatively easy for a social group to exploit emotional influences to whip themselves up into a group performing evil actions. This is similar to the group think that led to the holocaust by the Nazis, just on a very much smaller scale.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    5. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      It's because they are allowed to be assholes.

      It's pretty easy to correct early, and almost impossible later. If you're trying to be best friends with your kids, you've probably got a 50% or better chance of producing an asshole.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    6. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Did you miss this part?

      Sometimes the roles peers play in promoting bullying is less marginal. Two bullies kick a kid to the ground and bystander peers, through a process of social contagion, join in, particularly if it's a kid they dislike. The group is empowered by the numbers, their individual responsibility diluted to the vanishing point.

      The fundamentals of bullying are the same regardless of the variety of manifestations. Understand the underlying elements and it all makes better sense. It's not just about "someone with an anger issue". I recommend reading it again and paying closer attention.

    7. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, there are other psychological problems that can make bullying worse, but bullying is its own phenomenon to begin with.

      Conformity, obedience to authority, diffusion of responsibility / bystander effect, anonymity-enabled disinhibition or belittling ("it's just a game"), group mentality... these complicate or exacerbate more fundamental psychological problems.

    8. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      "No details! Just bad! Bad!"

      You have my sincere sympathy for the pain that assholes have caused you. I went through a lot of bullying myself as a kid.

      But don't be so bitter and blinded by rage that you confuse the concept of understanding someone's behavior with the concept of excusing someone's behavior. Refusing to try to understand because you're angry is yet another kind of psychological mistake. No quite on par with being an asshole to others because you were mistreated, but definitely starting down the same road.

    9. Re:bullying not entirely enigmatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reads like some special kind of bullshit to me. 'we should put up with assholes because.....'

      You obviously didn't read far then. The article outlines why it is necessary to stop bullying and give suggestions on how to do it. Not one sentence suggests tolerance of bullying or acceptance of it. How did you get moderated insightful for such a stupid comment?

  16. Re:Political correctness run amok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The only thing not funny about a STATUTORY rape charge is the fact that - because you were 17 and fucked that 15 year old hottie - you're now on the sex offenders list for life.

  17. Re:Political correctness run amok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The boys were charged with statutory rape because of their age; they're not charged with forcing her to have sex. I don't think it's splitting hairs to insist on that distinction.

    Really, this smells way more like the police charging everybody they can find to try to make up for the fact that this girl is dead.

  18. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I used to get jabbed and punched every day one year during middle school after lunch, when we all lined up to leave the cafeteria. Teachers knew it. Administrators knew it. And when I finally fought back, I got sent to the principal's office and got detention for fighting. As if I was picking fights with a group of 4 kids all of whom were twice the size of my short, skinny frame. Like you said, this is how it's always been.

  19. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by hrimhari · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You can look a little further and look for why you get spineless teachers and spineless administrators. Those with spine tend to get prosecuted when they attempt disciplinary actions by overzealous parents that most of the time won't do their part in their children's education, leaving all the burden to school.

    Interesting paradox, isn't it?

    --
    http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
  20. Re:Parenting? by Idbar · · Score: 1

    Which reminds me of this graph

  21. Prosecute the school administrators, too by papa_lizard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "For months, community anger simmered that no punishment had befallen Phoebe's bullies. Petitions were signed and town hall meetings held." Not only do these students need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, but so should the school administrators for gross negligence of their duties. How on earth can you let school bullying get to the point of requiring town hall meetings and still sit back and do nothing about it?

    1. Re:Prosecute the school administrators, too by donaggie03 · · Score: 1

      I believe the town hall meetings were after the suicide.

      --
      Three days from now?? Thats tomorrow!! ~Peter Griffin
    2. Re:Prosecute the school administrators, too by Buelldozer · · Score: 1

      Frankly?

      Because most School Administrator are fucking power hungry shitbags.

      I apologize for the profanity but sometimes it is the only way to carry a depth of feeling when using the written word.

  22. Re:Political correctness run amok by Knara · · Score: 1

    Since when did rape become a joke?

    Ohhh, some people don't like you to talk like that. Ohh, some people like to shut you up for saying those things. You know that. Lots of people. Lots of groups in this country want to tell you how to talk. Tell you what you can't talk about. Well, sometimes they'll say, well you can talk about something but you can't joke about it.

    Say you can't joke about something because it's not funny. Comedians run into that shit all the time.

    Like rape. They'll say, "you can't joke about rape. Rape's not funny."

    I say, "fuck you, I think it's hilarious. How do you like that?"

    I can prove to you that rape is funny. Picture Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd.

    - George Carlin

  23. Re:Political correctness run amok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You sir, are a royal fucktard. You must wear your crown of ignorance and misogyny with distinct pride.

  24. What's in a name? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 0, Troll

    Megan Meier ... Phoebe Prince ...

    Apparently you are more likely to be cyberbullied if your first and last names start with the same letter.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    1. Re:What's in a name? by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Alliteration kills! Ban all alliterations.......for the childrens.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:What's in a name? by twidarkling · · Score: 1

      You're also more likely to be a superhero; Peter Parker, Reed Richards, Susan Storm...

      Or date a superhero; Lois Lane...

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    3. Re:What's in a name? by magarity · · Score: 1

      It's only alliteration if the consonant sounds are the same.

    4. Re:What's in a name? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that's why Lex Luthor turned evil too... probably Mr. Mxyzptlk and Hank Henshaw too.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    5. Re:What's in a name? by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      But those are too easy to turn into taunts:

      M&M
      Peepee

      etc....

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    6. Re:What's in a name? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      You're also more likely to be a superhero; Peter Parker, Reed Richards, Susan Storm...

      Or date a superhero; Lois Lane...

      Don't forget Lana Lang.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:What's in a name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Megan Meier ... Phoebe Prince ... Apparently you are more likely to be cyberbullied if your first and last names start with the same letter.

      Someone please explain how this is a troll. Not particularly funny, maybe, but a troll?

    8. Re:What's in a name? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Or Bruce Banner. But it's probably not a good idea to pick on that guy.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    9. Re:What's in a name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, in the mean time, there were two other similar incidents that did not get national attention: Nancy Newcome and Olivia Osprey.

    10. Re:What's in a name? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Or Bruce Banner. But it's probably not a good idea to pick on that guy.

      Yeah ... you might suffer some cyberretribution.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  25. This needs to be fixed by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But it won't be without a comprehensive solution. Simply kicking the bad kids out of school doesn't help, it requires the action of the parents as well, but frequently the parents have the "not my kid" or "it's not a big deal" attitude. And once you have to get the cops involved it's gone too far.

    A big part of the problem is that the rewards for being a bully are simply too great, vs. any punishment a school can hand out.

    On the other hand there is a fuzzy line between mostly harmless teasing (which learning to deal with builds character) and bullying, although in this case it was clearly so far over the line that there is no question.

    What we don't need is yet another zero tolerance policy. As I stated above, there needs to be a comprehensive solution where the bad kids are held accountable in a material way, and the parents of the bad kids are likewise held responsible. At the same time, the victims need to be to learn that the bullies just don't matter. Unfortunately, society rewards the "cool" kids and punishes the dorks.

    Probably the best current solution is teaching your kids how to beat the living shit out of a bully and to deal with the repercussions of that action.

    I didn't have to deal with this too much when I was in school, probably had something to do with being 6'2" / 160 in 8th grade. It seems to me that most bullies grow up to be extroverted assholes selling cars - just desserts.

    --
    I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
    1. Re:This needs to be fixed by Totenglocke · · Score: 0, Troll

      I just had to point out the irony of your sig, "correlation does not imply causation", and the fact that you are automatically assuming that since kids didn't like her, they caused her to kill herself. No one caused her to kill herself but her own decision. But we live in a world where you never blame the person responsible, you always have to have a scapegoat.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    2. Re:This needs to be fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the time the parents of bullies are assholes themselves. Just think of all the adults you know that are jerks, some probably have kids.

    3. Re:This needs to be fixed by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      The solution is easy, at least for male bullies - they just need the shit kicked out of them once or twice and they'll stop.

      The girls, I don't know, females are incredibly vicious and nasty. I'm not surprised that it was girls doing most of the bullying and that they were able to drive this poor girl to suicide. I don't know how you'd deal with a female bully other than swift, stern, and consistent punishment.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    4. Re:This needs to be fixed by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension. Get some.

      --
      I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
    5. Re:This needs to be fixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably the best current solution is teaching your kids how to beat the living shit out of a bully and to deal with the repercussions of that action.

      Bullies often work in packs on victims much smaller than them. Some of them can actually fight. Most victims of bullying would require weapons to negate the bullies physical advantage.

      In my own case, I was bullied as a young child. The school did nothing, the bus driver did nothing. Eventually my father took action, which was to tell me not to make myself a target. He forced me to acquiesce to the bullies demands. I could never have beaten them up, though, there were too many and most much bigger than me. I did eventually get bigger and learn to fight. Unfortunately by then I despised all forms of authority, was socially fucked up enough to make it extremely hard to make and keep friends. The only way I found to get treated with anything resembling respect in school was to develop enough wit (backed up with fists) to make anybody's life a living hell if they crossed me, and also some who didn't cross me. In short, I became a part of the problem, one of the bullies. I wish I had dealt with it differently, as someone who had been on the receiving end, I really have no excuse.

      It took me 15 years out of school to sort out my social skills and become a decent member of society. I'm sorry for the wrong things I did but I understand why some kids take such drastic action. Some suicide, some murder, some just endure it. Perhaps if I hadn't had the advantage of growing bigger than most people my age, I might have been tempted to do those things. I don't know the answer, but we need a way for bullied kids to win and the payoff bullies get needs to be negated.

    6. Re:This needs to be fixed by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 1

      Probably the best current solution is teaching your kids how to beat the living shit out of a bully and to deal with the repercussions of that action.

      Speaking as someone who was bullied, this is not a realistic option. It might be doable when there's one bully, but in many cases there are ten bullies and one victim. Trying to beat the living shit out of ten people alone is more or less a suicide mission.

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
  26. Re:Political correctness run amok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it started arriving in 40lb boxes I believe.

    Controversial or no, I can certainly understand trying to make some humour out of the frankly fucked-up statutory rape laws.

  27. ask marcus dixon about over the top rape charges a by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    ask Marcus Dixon about over the top rape charges.

  28. Correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I really don't see the connection here either, except the remote connection that some posted "bully-type" comments on her facebook page.
    And, since no one else is going to point it out: The statutory rape charges should never be. I can guarantee the only reason thhey are charged with it is because the kids who pushed the girl to suicide, when confronted and in trouble spouted "but he was having sex with her!" If this is the case, it shows the true person(s) behind the bullying -- scapegoating maniacle children because they grew up watching their parents lie and generally be shit heads.

  29. Re:Political correctness run amok by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    These girls were not joking. Boys beat the crap out of each other. Girls are a hell of a lot meaner.

  30. My thoughts and prayers are with her family. by sirrunsalot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...

    1. Re:My thoughts and prayers are with her family. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we should all say a prayer for Phoebe and her family. May her soul find eternal peace that her earthly being never did.

  31. hanged vs hung by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Phoebe walked into her house and hung herself in a stairwell.

    Not that the failure in copy editing is really the most important part of this story...

  32. You're making me want to kill myself! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or any other Web 2.0 website.

    Seeing people here on Slashdot using marketing hyperbole buzzwords makes me want to commit suicide.

    Expect a call from my wife's lawyer when I'm gone!

    1. Re:You're making me want to kill myself! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Expect a call from my wife's lawyer when I'm gone!

      IAAL. Take it from me, you have no case (yes I know you knew that). ;)

      Though words attacking a persons right to dignity would more commonly form the subject of complaint a term such as "Web 2.0" might conceivably be used criminally to harass someone, by people who knew the victim had a propensity to react adversely to it (it's a very long bow though).

      OP, however, was not targeting you. Additionally the fact that OP neither raped, nor otherwise physically assaulted you makes your case rather weaker than the one under discussion here.

      NB: In no way am I suggesting that killing yourself is a bad idea. Feel free.

  33. I went through this kind of shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I went through this kind of shit when I was kid.

    A couple of kids on the school bus decided they had it in for me. It was pretty constant physical harassment, 45 minutes each way, 5 days a week.

    I was only 11 at the time and had no ability to deal with this on any level. I came home in tears every day. My mom called the school; my mom called the kids' parents; nothing changed.

    After a couple of months, I basically said I wasn't riding the bus any more. That made it my mother's problem. She went to my father and made it his problem. My father went to the principal and made it the principal's problem. I don't know what the principal did. My guess is he called in the two kids and told them to stop it. After that, they restricted themselves to verbal harassment, which I could more or less deal with.

    When one of my own kids was 10, he started reporting harassment at school. We had a few discussions with his teachers, but the harassment continued. So we pulled him from the town school and sent him to a nearby charter school for the duration of Junior High. He was not harassed at the charter school.

    In our state, the per-pupil funding for a student follows the student when they go to a charter school. So for the next 4 years, I got occasional letters from the town school extolling the quality of their faculty and curriculum, asking me to respond to surveys, and even inviting me to attend focus groups (I am not making this up) that they were conducting to try to figure out what they needed to do to hold onto students (and their per-pupil funding).

    I always responded to these, in writing, explaining exactly why we had pulled our son. I never received any response, let alone any indication that school might actually protect my children from harassment.

    Even when their own funding is on the line, town schools are unable(?) unwilling(?) (take your pick) to protect students from harassment.

    1. Re:I went through this kind of shit by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Charter schools have an unfair advantage; they can easily get rid of disruptive students or ineffective teachers. Public schools can't do that, so they are only interested in solutions that don't involve doing the obvious. Let me put it this way: if you were the principle of the public school, what could you have done that wouldn't have brought the bullies' parents down on your ass?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:I went through this kind of shit by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      You have hit upon the root of the problem. The principal shouldn't have care in the slightest about what the parents of a shitbag child think about their precious snowflake being booted out for persistent disruptions.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    3. Re:I went through this kind of shit by MarkGriz · · Score: 1

      Let me put it this way: if you were the principle of the public school, what could you have done that wouldn't have brought the bullies' parents down on your ass?

      Oh gee, I don't know.... how about use your authority as principal to expel their asses.

      A principal who's afraid of what the parents of disruptive bullies thinks has no business being principle.
      If he/she isn't part of the solution, they are part of the problem

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    4. Re:I went through this kind of shit by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Generally, the principal cannot expel kids out of fiat. It requires a long process involving closed hearings in front of the school board, at least in the districts I am familiar with. If the parents want to fight it, they can make a LOT of work for the administrators.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    5. Re:I went through this kind of shit by MarkGriz · · Score: 1

      True, there must be a hearing, and the rules generally vary from state to state.
      Point being, the principal should initiate some form of disciplinary action, despite whatever backlash is to be expected from the parents or even the community. That's their job.

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    6. Re:I went through this kind of shit by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Why bother, when the bullies will be automatically promoted to another school within a few years anyway? Whereas the parents... well, they may have younger children, so you may have to put up with them for a long time.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  34. Re:Political correctness run amok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when did rape become a joke?

    Since George Carlin in the 1980s.

    Ohhh, some people don't like you to talk like that. Ohh, some people like to shut you up for saying those things. You know that. Lots of people. Lots of groups in this country want to tell you how to talk. Tell you what you can't talk about. Well, sometimes they'll say, well you can talk about something but you can't joke about it. Say you can't joke about something because it's not funny. Comedians run into that shit all the time. Like rape. They'll say, "you can't joke about rape. Rape's not funny." I say, "fuck you, I think it's hilarious. How do you like that?" I can prove to you that rape is funny. Picture Porky Pig raping Elmer Fudd. See, hey why do you think they call him "Porky," eh? I know what you're going to say. "Elmer was asking for it. Elmer was coming on to Porky. Porky couldn't help himself, he got a hard-on, he got horny, he lost control, he went out of his mind."

    It's better on VHS.

  35. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some victims, seeing that nobody will bother to help them, take up weapons and go to school to kill as many as possible (the source of their suffering) until being killed by the police or committing suicide. It would be so easy to avoid this by exemplary punish the bullies, but I see that the culture of schools is to encourage the bullies ...

    How many victims will be necessary before a bullie be punished for harming someone?

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  36. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by khallow · · Score: 1

    Let me say it again: Suicide Is Irrational. Without extreme methods, you simply can't drive a mentally healthy person to suicide.

    How many people in high school are mentally healthy?

  37. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    Yep.....

    I remember those days.....

    I was bullied once and (being the smaller and weaker kid) bit my attacker. The principal's approach was to bring out boxing gloves and to tell us to fight it out like men. I'm not joking......

    Not to say it was all bad. Apparently some teachers, wanting the problem to go away, started bribing one of the worst of the bullies to stay away from me. In retrospect I don't really respect that approach either.....

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  38. Reasons -- Vitamin D, community, diet by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1
    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  39. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 2, Informative

    Let's be perfectly clear here. Suicide is irrational. There was de facto something else wrong with this girl.

    True. But my understanding from a Criminal Justice class years ago, is that the victim is accepted as is. So if you rob a bank and the teller has a heart attack and dies because of a congenital heart defect, you're still on the hook. You undertook an illegal act and are repsonsible for the consequences, even if they are not immediately forseeable.

    --
    If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  40. Re:Political correctness run amok by Qzukk · · Score: 1

    How the hell did we end up with an entire generation of precious snowflakes that can't take a joke?

    The same way we ended up with precious snowflakes who slam girls into lockers and punch them in the head.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  41. Re:Mod me up! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    Or else I will kill myself and get you guys into big trouble!

    You don't have the guts, chickenshit!

  42. It is the same tired story. by kuzb · · Score: 1

    They don't do anything when the abuse is physical and real either. There is this prevailing notion that bullying is "normal" and just "kids being kids". I can tell you though, some of those bullies are so vicious it's no wonder some of the victims see suicide as the only viable option.

    It's time to start locking some of these little shits up. They can either reform, or GTFO.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  43. I'll Jump by gedrin · · Score: 1

    While certainly it is a tragedy that this girl has killed herself, and certainly any criminal activity related should be punished, is it really appropriate to hold others responsible for her choice to kill herself? She was called names constantly. People posted insults online relentlessly. Her books were knocked from her hands. High school seniors took advantage of her and had consenting sex with her while she was the age of consent for her state. Most, directly, violent of all, she had a can of Red Bull thrown at her, though it might not have hit her. Certainly, if these were observed or reported, the staff of the school had an obligation to mete out punishments and restraints. However, is there a reasonable expectation that these, even if a regular pattern over the course of four months, lead to someone killing themselves? Is it equally likely that, for whatever reason, this young lady simply did not have the emotional tools to manage the sort of abuse that is frequently dealt in high school?
    Perhaps my experience as a fat, bowlegged, dork in high school has inured me to the torments of others. Personally, I just skipped school when I didn't want to go. Worked just fine, until I got sent to in school detention, which was conveniently isolated...so I can't really complain there either. To me, the logical consequence of school being a place of torment is that the person just not go when it gets to be too much. If going someplace makes you feel like killing yourself, don't go there. Facebook make you feel like dying? Don't click the Facebook link.
    Do we now hold people responsible for another person's actions? Do you want a world where your negative online comments, no matter how vile, can land you in prison because someone else does not have the emotional tools to deal with, or avoid, your vitriol...or what they PERCIEVE as vitriol? Imagine the consequences, manipulations, and abuses that flow from this. Is the suicide a tragedy? Yes, but even as we are certain to punish highschoolers for their cruel behavior, let us keep in mind who chose to kill this girl.

    --
    Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    1. Re:I'll Jump by dkre · · Score: 1

      While you've made some great points their pretty invalid given that all of these issues are about minors. We can easily view this as an issue of responisbility of those in supervision roles or even the children themselves ultimately this and many incidents like this is really a larger society issue of culture and media, the internet being at the core. We've created all of these tools of communication and media which are doing a pretty good job of skewing the concepts of community, friendship and society. Teenagers have enough going on without giving them a cultural and moral vacuum to get completely lost and confused in.

    2. Re:I'll Jump by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Except the internet doesn't promote harassment, if anything it makes it easier to avoid. There's this nifty thing called a "block" button. If you decide you don't want someone talking to you, you click that and you're free from hearing from them. If that doesn't work, then change your s/n and only give it to your friends. If you still get people trying to bug you, then you know that one of your friends is telling people your s/n and you start limiting who you put in that trusted inner circle until the mole is flushed out.

      The only person who can allow cyberbulling to happen is the person being bullied. They have the ability to stop it at any time (sign off, set their page to private, block lists, etc). However, the teenage girls at least (not sure about the boys) refuse to do this even when directly told to do it in order to stop people. I've had several girls I know (younger siblings, cousins, etc) complain about "people posted something mean in my honesty box" - ok, so get rid of the honesty box and then if they post it with their name, you'll know who it is and you can block them - "No, but they're my friend!" - well then don't complain about them doing it when you refuse to do anything to stop it.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    3. Re:I'll Jump by hallucinogen · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking what Phoebe did to her bullies is infinitely worse than what they did to her. Imagine growing up knowing that you pushed a classmate over the edge and in a way caused her death. I used to feel horrible because back in elementary school me and a bunch of others bullied this one poor kid for 6 fucking years. Eventually I came to terms with it. I was, like most kids, a fucking retard shithead. Thankfully most of us become better human beings as we mature. And what about Phoebe's little sister and her parents? Did she think how they'd feel as they found her hanging? Did she consider that they might feel a hell of a lot worse than she ever did? Why did she kill herself? Was it a "I'll fucking show them" kind of act and was she really that desperate? Whatever she went thru really doesn't seem to be that big of a thing.. but what do I know. Nobody ever threw a red bull can at me. One year a kid in a school bus bullied me for some months in a row, but I was all passive about it. That is until one day he spat on me. I stood up and punched him in his face. The bullying ended that day..

    4. Re:I'll Jump by russotto · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking what Phoebe did to her bullies is infinitely worse than what they did to her. Imagine growing up knowing that you pushed a classmate over the edge and in a way caused her death.

      You or I would probably feel bad about that. Perhaps even remorseful. These psychopaths-in-training won't. Don't cry for them.

    5. Re:I'll Jump by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      You've been spewing this crap all over this thread. Cyberbullying was part of it. The larger part of it was constant harassment at school and after school, and the fact that the school administration did nothing to address it. She didn't kill herself because of the "cyber" part of it; that's just there to sex up the story for the readers of the newspaper. She killed herself because her daily environment had become too hostile for her to take it, and the people who should have helped, weren't.

      Suicide wasn't a good answer to that situation, but if you honestly can't sympathize with her situation, then you've forgotten how difficult it can all seem to be, to a teenager.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    6. Re:I'll Jump by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      She chose herself because she wanted to. Bullying had just as much to do with it as having acne or her parents not being interested in her did. I actually did RTFA and what she had going on was so minor compared to what a lot of kids (who don't kill themselves) go through that it's not even funny.

      but if you honestly can't sympathize with her situation, then you've forgotten how difficult it can all seem to be, to a teenager.

      No, I don't sympathize and no, I haven't forgotten what it was like at all. I had similar stuff happen to me, did I kill myself? No. Hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of kids experience this every day, yet only a handful kill themselves - that pretty clearly shows that bullying has nothing to do with suicide, it's just a scapegoat for the family / friends to use instead of accepting that they failed to make the girl realize that she had people who cared about her and wanted her around.

      By you claiming that someone forced her to do this and that they should be punished just for not liking her, you are not only promoting irresponsibility, but promoting people being weak and not ignoring / standing up to bullies.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    7. Re:I'll Jump by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      While certainly it is a tragedy that this girl has killed herself, and certainly any criminal activity related should be punished, is it really appropriate to hold others responsible for her choice to kill herself?

      They're not being charged with her death. They're being charged with the harassment that came before that. I'm sure that the fact this girl killed herself won't work in their favour, but they should have considered the--highly conceivable--consequences of what they were doing.

      These people are twisted sadists and at least one person is dead. How many others have had their lives affected or ruined by these people? This is why we have laws; to deal with this kind of behaviour.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    8. Re:I'll Jump by jjohnson · · Score: 1

      By you claiming that someone forced her to do this

      Show me where I claimed someone forced her to do this.

      they should be punished just for not liking her

      Show me where I claimed they should be punished just for not liking her.

      From everything in the article, it does sound like she had it worse than most teenagers do, and guess what? Teenagers don't always make smart choices or have a mature understanding of how to handle bullies. Or perhaps when the people who are supposed to help them get that mature understanding utterly fail to help her, she draws the correct, from her perspective, message that there's no help available.

      Congratulations on graduating from bully survivor to heartless prick. I guess that since the bullying had nothing to do with her suicide, then there was no reason for anyone in the school administration to actually stop the bullying. Certainly her tormentors have nothing to feel guilty about. It's high school, Sparta style.

      --
      Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
    9. Re:I'll Jump by gedrin · · Score: 1

      I certainly agree that we have laws enough to deal with this sort of behavior, in so far as it is necessary to criminalize the cruelty of highschoolers. However, while they are not being charged legeally with her death, "9 MA Cyberbullies Indicted for Causing Suicide" seems to indicate that they are certainly being blamed for her actions. Indeed, I believe the only reason this litany of charges is being handed down for these actions is due to the suicide. If this were handled rationally, by the girl or her parrents making a formal complaint to the school, it is doubtful any criminal charges would be filed. I believe the only reason the accused, while certainly unsavory children, are "twisted sadists" and not "cruel highschoolers" is that the girl chose to hang herself.
      I am not defending the actions of these bullies. I think they're shameful and cruel. However, the bullies are charged with nothing more physically brutal than throwing a can of soda at the girl. They are not responsible for her death.

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    10. Re:I'll Jump by gedrin · · Score: 1

      Minors have the responsibility not to kill themselves. Minors have the responsibility to use the formal means available to report things they cannot handle. Tragic as it is, it appears that the young girl did not succeed at either. There are no formal records of this harrasment at the school, as would be the case if it had been raised by the girl or her mother. Certainly no such records exist with the police. I suppose we could make these things the responsibility of the supervisors (a horrid idea), but this seems to be an impossilbe responsibility. "Don't kill yourself" and "report things you can't handle to the authorities" are basic tasks of a functional human. The tragedy here is that this girl was not equipped to be a functional human.

      --
      Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
    11. Re:I'll Jump by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not every children see school as optional. When I was kid, I valued getting good grades as family obligation; I was not surprised that I would be disowned if my grade dropped. The day I skip school was that day I would have killed myself.

      Good for me that my bullying in school only extend to people pushing me down the stair, gangs beating, and robbing. There are much worst victim where people lock others in a locker, spiked their foods, being their best "friends" so that they can torture them everyday in the name of "friendship" and "training", and being their boyfriend/girlfriend so that they can dump him/her in the most colourful way.

    12. Re:I'll Jump by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 1

      I used to feel horrible because back in elementary school me and a bunch of others bullied this one poor kid for 6 fucking years. Eventually I came to terms with it. I was, like most kids, a fucking retard shithead.

      So, have you called up this person to apologize for being a fucking retard shithead?

      I was bullied in school, yet none of my bullies have ever as adults apologized for their behavior. But yes, I still remember it, and yes, an apology would be a way to find real closure. The thought that my former bullies are no longer fucking retard shitheads and have given up abusing other people would be a nice thing to know.

      I've gotten over it, I have good self esteem these days and I am successful. But the emotional scars are still there, somewhere beneath the surface.

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    13. Re:I'll Jump by JimFive · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking what Phoebe did to her bullies is infinitely worse than what they did to her.

      Are you fucking serious? Phoebe did nothing to her bullies. If they are punished for their actions prior to her death it is because they committed those actions. If they hadn't harrassed her, they would not have guilt about her death.

      Whatever she went thru really doesn't seem to be that big of a thing.. but what do I know.

      It's pretty clear that you've never been systematically bullied -- or contemplated suicide -- but, criticizing the victim for her lack of consideration is fucking retarded.

      I stood up and punched him in his face. The bullying ended that day..

      How lucky for you. I hate this kind of trite "it worked for me" anecdote. For every one who had it work out, there's someone who was punished even worse. Aside from that it isn't relevant. How do you punch the person in the car that throws stuff at you. How do you respond to the stuff in your email box, text messages, and voice mail. Being bullied by one person with no social support is completely different than being bullied by a group of people who work to keep each other out of trouble. The single bully usually gives up if you fight back, the group jumps you in the locker room, gives you a concussion, and drops you down a flight of stairs.

      --
      JimFive

      --
      Please stop using the word theory when you mean hypothesis.
  44. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by twidarkling · · Score: 1

    The teacher could be openly fondling kids in the hallway, and it would be next to impossible to fire them.

    Sadly, that's bullshit. My favourite teacher was fired due to an *accusation* of improper conduct. Not sex, not fondling, not even kissing. Just talking about a slightly sexual topic. Note, this was on a school trip, and they were *in a bar,* legally. And note I said "accusation." He was eventually cleared when she copped to lying. But he was still fired.

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  45. Cyberbullying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was just reading about another suicide of a high school girl where cyberbullying was involved as well, sad what is happening in high school now a days. http://www.truecrimereport.com/2010/03/alexis_pilkington_17_commits_s.php

  46. Massachusetts statutory rape law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In Massachusetts, anyone having sex with a 16-year-old is guilty of statutory rape. If two 15-year-olds have sex, both are guilty. The sentencing though can depend on the age difference (if it's greater than 10 years or if the victim was much younger, there is a 10 year minimum sentence, but in a case like this there might ordinarily be little or no jail time, though I'd worry these kids might get a heavier sentence somehow because of the suicide).

    While in many cases, I feel like statutory rape laws are a bad idea when applied to other teenagers only a few years older (and obviously the MA law has a lot of potential for abuse), in this case I can't help but think that maybe this is exactly the sort of taking advantage of the young and emotionally vulnerable that the statutory rape law was meant to stop.

    1. Re:Massachusetts statutory rape law by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 1

      In some states, the legislative wording is so broad that masturbating under the age of 18 is "sex involving a minor." Of course, that would mean the whole state could go to jail and be forever listed as sex offenders. Maybe Justice is blind because it beat-off too much.

    2. Re:Massachusetts statutory rape law by snowgirl · · Score: 1

      In some states, the legislative wording is so broad that masturbating under the age of 18 is "sex involving a minor." Of course, that would mean the whole state could go to jail and be forever listed as sex offenders. Maybe Justice is blind because it beat-off too much.

      I find it hard to believe that masturbation would ever qualify as criminal "sex involving a minor". And I believe you're engaging in hyperbole.

      Even if it were, and a minor were sent to juvie for this, it would easily be overturned on appeal under a similar argument to the one that got sodomy removed from all state law books.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
  47. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

    This has been the teacher and administrator MO since I was in school in the 60s. Actually it's worse than that. The teacher/administrator just wants the problem to go away so they tend to persecute and isolate the *victim* rather than the perpetrator (Johny gets bullied by a group of 5 kids on the playground so we'll keep *Johny* inside while all the kids go out to play). This usually ostracizes the victim further by pointing him/her out as the weak odd kid.

    In my experience, the most culpable individuals are spineless teachers followed by spineless administrators. Children can't really be blamed. They know no better. Adults do, or should.

    When I was in elementary school, if you got punched in the face and told a teacher, the puncher and you would both be punished, usually equally. One would be punished for the punch, the other for "tattling."

    --
    "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  48. Re:Mod me up! by gedrin · · Score: 1, Troll

    See, now you're being mean to him. Anything he does to himself might be your fault because you were cruel to him online. Also, this isn't Troll. This is insightful.

    --
    Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
  49. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you claiming that external stimuli and environmental factors are not a significant contributor to mental illness? You're wrong.

    I was a normal, well-adjusted kid who experienced a decade of bullying, parental neglect, and some truly horrifying experiences during my pre-teen to early adult years. (Not to even mention the indifference of the public school system.) During that time, I descended deeper and deeper into mental illness and culminated into a full-blown raging case of bipolar disorder along with a metric assload of other comorbid conditions.

    Were genetics at fault? Partly, perhaps. Was I predisposed? Perhaps. Were the sum of my experiences a substantial contributing factor? Absolutely.

    Torment someone long enough, or mercilessly enough, and they're going to be prone to irrational acts - including suicide.

    Suggesting that the poor girl is wholly responsible is pretty fucking heartless, if you ask me.

  50. Cyber != Physical by mangu · · Score: 1, Insightful

    One the prime reasons that cyber bullying is of particular focus now is that you simply can't escape it

    On the contrary, it's *very* easy to escape: don't log in.

    When I was 9 I had to face a bad case of bullying by a kid that was 11 and had judo classes. Luckily, I managed to fix that by breaking his nose. Once, when he grabbed me from the back in a judo grip, I realized that his face was right behind my head, so I hit his nose with the back of my head. He was so ashamed that he never admitted to anyone that I had done it, he claimed he tripped and fell.

    Compared to that kind of physical abuse, cyber bullying is nothing, just ignore it. You cannot ignore being held from the back in a judo grip by someone who is two years older and way bigger than you are.

    1. Re:Cyber != Physical by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1

      You should have explained that "Jiu-Do" is the "Gentle Way" and Kano would have been very displeased with his actions.

      Then you could have pulled a saeio-nagi throw, follow up with a sit into straight arm bar to break his elbow. But nice job breaking his nose.

    2. Re:Cyber != Physical by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On the contrary, it's *very* easy to escape: don't log in.

      In a literal sense that is easy, but on the other hand it requires you to opt out of what tends to be a fairly normal part of socialising for kids these days and doings so would reinforce the ostracisation rather than alleviate it. I could just as easily suggest that you too had an "easy" escape, you could have simply never left home, however it's a solution which has it's own problems.

      --
      Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
    3. Re:Cyber != Physical by mangu · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine how stupid a kid must be to be two years behind by fourth grade? He had to be a bully to compensate for that. His dad was very rich, that must have been some relief for him, but it didn't make him any more popular among the kids.

      The only problem in being such a bully is that the other kids start to unite against you. Like the day, a few years later, when a contractor came to do some job at the school. Seeing his truck right besides the bully's motorbike, an idea came to us, and we put his bike in the back. The contractor drove away unaware, imagine his amazement the next morning when he found a motorcycle in his truck. The police promised to "investigate" the matter, while barely containing their laughter. His father wasn't very popular in the town, either...

    4. Re:Cyber != Physical by dbcad7 · · Score: 1

      If socializing means participating in being tormented by others.. well then maybe socializing is bad for you and it's best to avoid it. People who torment others, feed off of reaction.. Ignoring tormentors causes some anger, but starve them of reaction long enough and they become bored and look to somewhere else to get the reactions they crave.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    5. Re:Cyber != Physical by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, it's *very* easy to escape: don't log in.

      You're assuming that it's practical for a student to conduct his/her life efficiently these days without using the Internet for anything. Or for that matter, that it's reasonable for bullies to be allowed to effectively DOS someone's entire Internet connectivity if they want to.

      And one last problem... even if you personally don't log in to the Internet anymore, the majority of your peers will continue to use the Internet. That means they will be reading all of the nastygrams about you, and they will be effected by them. By not logging in yourself, you have put yourself at a disadvantage -- you no longer know what your enemies are saying about you, and thus have no way to address the libel.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    6. Re:Cyber != Physical by tftp · · Score: 1

      even if you personally don't log in to the Internet anymore, the majority of your peers will continue to use the Internet. That means they will be reading all of the nastygrams about you, and they will be effected by them. By not logging in yourself, you have put yourself at a disadvantage -- you no longer know what your enemies are saying about you, and thus have no way to address the libel.

      I disagree. It would be the wisest choice to delete her Facebook and Twitter accounts and not read her torturers' pages either. Then the offenders would be only limited to talking amongst themselves, and though that might irritate some, at least the offenders will be denied the pleasure of delivering the pain to their victim. In fact, it would hurt them - they went to some effort to write nasty stuff about someone, and then that someone comes and says "no, I haven't looked at your pages and I don't plan to." The bullies *wanted* her to "address the libel" - and this is a never-ending job. The only winning move here is not to play.

      In this case, though, the bullying was not done only through the Internet; there was a lot of physical damage done too.

    7. Re:Cyber != Physical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, what a great idea. The perfect way to stop people from being bullied for being social outcasts is to make them even more social outcasts by telling them not to use the social networking sites/IM utilities that all their peers are on.

    8. Re:Cyber != Physical by omarius · · Score: 1

      "Sometimes, there is no better recourse but to swallow one's tears and resort to using one's head as a mallet." --Funakoshi

  51. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by twidarkling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let me say it again: Suicide Is Irrational. Without extreme methods, you simply can't drive a mentally healthy person to suicide.

    I ask this honestly, not to flame or troll, but seriously. Were you bullied in school? Like, serious, concerted bullying efforts? Because let me tell you, that qualifies. It's a systematic alienation of a human being, and destruction of their self-image. It's the causing of a mentally healthy person to become unhealthy. When I was in school, I actually saw some of my friends wither and change due to bullying. They were absolutely not the same people they were at the end of the school year as at the start. In fact, one of my friends who ended up dead (not suicide, but a lifestyle next best thing to it) probably could have traced his problems back to bullying. Unfortunately, his biggest bully was his stepfather, making it not a directly analogous case.

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  52. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by okooolo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    that coin has two sides.. I was raised in eastern Europe and I have to say, kids here are spoiled brats with entitlement issues. Teachers are not respected, many parents blame the school for their children's poor academic records and don't bother to actually lend a hand. Back home, bullying was never as bad as it seems to be here.Why? because over there children were taught that they depended on each other. You did not pick your classes. You did not pick you peers. In high school you had all the same classes with the same people, and most of you were friends by the fourth year. As a matter of fact classes had rivalries going on if I a student from a different class tried to bully you, your classmates would defend you no matter how popular you were. I'm astonished every time I hear about bullying in North America. In different cultures it's much less common. Could it be the culture here?

  53. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by cptdondo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At least in our school district, the school adminstration has always met the problem head on. There was a Russian kid who got bullied, he filed a complaint. The administration took action, called the papers, set up school assemblies and had sessions for the kids. No news on kids who did it, but I guess that they got some serious counselling.

    Something similar happened to my daughter; she's a jock and walks like a lumberjack. This kid has bigger arms than most boys her age. So some girls started to make fun of her; she took it to the administration and the behavior stopped immediately.

    So not all districts are like that. Only the bad ones make the headlines.

  54. Re:Political correctness run amok by bmk67 · · Score: 1

    How the hell did we end up with an entire generation of precious snowflakes that can't take a joke?

    Since when are assault, stalking, harassment, and vandalism jokes?

    We ended up with an entire generation of "precious snowflakes" who can't "take a joke" in large part due to many generations of psychopathic assholes who think such things are funny and appropriate. Forgive me if I don't shed a tear for the fucktards who find out that this isn't the case.

  55. Cyberbullying. by Eggbloke · · Score: 1

    (I hate that word)
    Obviously her friends and family have my deepest sympathies but cyberbullying is easily preventable in most mediums (ability to block and report abuse) and if not then contacting the service provider should sort things out.
    I don't think 'Cyberbullying' is really the problem, its 'real life' bullying which does the most harm. Normally it's easy to do things that aren't really punishable (no teacher will have a serious problem with someone knocking books out of some ones hands) or on there own don't really matter but if these things are happening over a long period of time then there is a problem.

    I tend to find with bullies (verbal at least) a good shout of "NO YOU!" at the top of your voice tends to shut them up.

    --
    I care not for your karma and your mod points.
  56. Re:Political correctness run amok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's better on VHS.

    It's best on vinyl.

  57. Spineless teachers? by G00F · · Score: 4, Informative

    More like spineless principal and above. Teachers can't even get a student kicked out of school let alone their classroom when the student HITS them. Parents are allowed to disrupt their classes and yell at the teachers. Teachers are not even allowed to fail students anymore, let alone kick them out.

    Blame the no child is left behind and the principals on up in the chain, not the teachers. They may act like they have no spine, because they can't do anything. Granted they should say something, but teachers learn just saying things is worse when they can never back it up, because their "power" is imaginary, and once that illusion is gone, teachers have nothing.

    You want teachers to have some responsibility? make it so they can kick kids out of their classroom and school.

    --
    The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    1. Re:Spineless teachers? by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      More like spineless principal and above. Teachers can't even get a student kicked out of school let alone their classroom when the student HITS them. Parents are allowed to disrupt their classes and yell at the teachers. Teachers are not even allowed to fail students anymore, let alone kick them out.

      ...snip...

      Source or I call BS.

    2. Re:Spineless teachers? by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      You hit the nail on the head. I just moved out of teaching HS science after 5 years, due in part to that problem.

      I could toss a kid from class for being a disruptive prick, write up a discipline report, and a week later I would get it back with the vice-principal's scribble on it, "Spoke with student." That was it. Did the behavior stop? Nope. If I'd complain, I'd be asked, "Did you contact his parents?" Since the worst kids usually have the least responsive parents, the answer was usually, "No. I left a couple of messages, but they never got back to me." His response would be to tell me to keep trying.

      The lack of discipline from the administration was a twisted joke among the teachers in my school. I might have kept teaching if I could have actually done my job well. The inability to find permanent solutions for disruptive students was one of the reasons I left teaching high school. A bigger one was missing actually doing science.

      I often joked to my co-workers that we should just expel one kid per month. Take the biggest pain in the ass, and kick them out for good. Do it in an assembly, so everyone could see. That would have a bunch of kids looking over their shoulder, wondering where they stood in that line.

      But both that and my idea to have students fighting with each other put into a ring and forced to box/kickbox 3 5-minute rounds got shot down. The lack of creative discipline in HS is quite depressing.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    3. Re:Spineless teachers? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Even if teachers could kick kids out of their classroom, many kids would actually enjoy it. Gee, an hour at the pub, rather than in a boring class! W00t!

    4. Re:Spineless teachers? by fgouget · · Score: 1

      Even if teachers could kick kids out of their classroom, many kids would actually enjoy it. Gee, an hour at the pub, rather than in a boring class! W00t!

      It's not because you're kicked out of your classroom that you get to go to the pub. You may end up being stuck in an office with some administrative personnel for the duration of your class instead. That person may also decide to give you some extra hours of detention.

    5. Re:Spineless teachers? by fgouget · · Score: 1
    6. Re:Spineless teachers? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      I think that depends on the place. Here in Luxembourg, back in the day when I was still a student myself, when you were kicked out, you were usually supposed to wait the rest of the hour (or until the teacher called you back in) before the door of the classroom.

      Younger children did indeed stay.

      Older ones (high-school age) didn't bother, and enjoyed the nice extra free time...

      I remember one memorable time, when several students were playing cards during geography lesson. Eventually the teacher (peace to his soul) got fed up, and kicked them out with the words "if you like playing cards so much, please go play somewhere else". And when the 4 left, the rest of the class left along with them...

      Nowadays, teachers rarely kick anybody out, probably for this reason.

    7. Re:Spineless teachers? by G00F · · Score: 1

      How does someone quote something they see first hand? Many of my friends are teachers and my mother is a teacher, and I volunteer in helping in classrooms/schools. In fact it was my mother who got hit by a student(not the only teacher this student had hit) and took her over a month and threats of legal action to even get that kid out of her classroom. She's 100lbs when wet, the student (5th grader) was taller and bigger, so it's not like some misbehaving toddler. This was Granite School district in Utah of this year.

      And go talk to a good teacher of 4-6th grade, they have at parents all the time coming in yelling why their kids are failing. Some parents taking it to the principal, where either the teacher have to give them passing grades and they get pulled to another classroom where the teacher will give the kid a passing grade. This is a complaint I hear a lot.

      SO, the source, are the teachers themselves.

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    8. Re:Spineless teachers? by G00F · · Score: 1

      Because when kids are no longer allowed in school (read parents free baby sitting service) parents start to care.

      The parents who think nothing of their kids no longer going to school, well, lost cause anyways, so why drag down the other 20-30 kids in the class because 1 or 2 cause all problems?

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    9. Re:Spineless teachers? by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      I'm not doubting that it happens, I am doubting that it is a systemic policy issue and not a issue of some bad administrators/parents.

      It is also possible that the parents have a point about the teachers not doing a good job with their child. Due to low pay and low rewards, the schools are spo desperate that any doofus with a BA can teach in some districts.

      In general I tend to be very pro teacher (although anti teacher union) and very pro education (in a real sense, not in the Texas school board kind of way). All I'm saying is that before you take your own experiences and expect the rest of us to assume it is nationwide you could provide some concrete evidence.

      Anecdotal evidence doesnt mean squat except as an anecdote.

    10. Re:Spineless teachers? by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      See now this is a great example of some good source. At least good enough to start a reasonable debate on the subject.

      The 1st two instances were in 2002 the last in 2005. I did some further reasearch (limited time, sorry) and found one other article from 2010).

      In 2 of the instances, the school board sided with the parents. In the other 2 it appeared that the issue was with a singular administrator rather than a systemic issue.

      Assuming even 99 out of 100 instances of this activity goes unreported (I would be shocked it it were that high, the media loves any sotry which will get people up in arms), you are talking about 400 instances in 8 years.

      Overall that is not horrible percentage. Now that said, it is obviously problematic that there is no oversight above the district level, but the education system in the US does not promote that sort of centralization. It never has. Schools are a locallly controlled institution.

      While such localization is a huge issue from the standpoint of consistancy, it also means that you have a much smaller chance of a nationwide pandemic of kids getting through graduation with law suits.

      the best you can do in these cases (and in the case in the article above) is deal with the localized problem and try to fix it locally.

  58. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do you expect when friends don't stand up for friends?

    Who do you try to blame, bullying adults were bullying kids at one point of their life as well !

    Do ourselves have the guts to speak up for others when unfair things occur?

  59. Statutory Rape = Your Rights Online? by Locke2005 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Damn! How do I do that over the internet?!? Every time I've statutory raped a girl, I've had to meet her in real life... it would be so much easier for me if I could just do it through email or text messaging!

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Statutory Rape = Your Rights Online? by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Well since to hug online you type *hug*, I believe it would be *rape*.....or maybe just to be perfectly clear that it was consensual, *statutory rape*.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    2. Re:Statutory Rape = Your Rights Online? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      What if the girl lies when you ask "a/s/l?"

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    3. Re:Statutory Rape = Your Rights Online? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, don't you hate it when you type *rape*, and then the person you're chatting with types *consents* just to screw you up?

  60. Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The failure here is the lack of action by the school officials to even report what has happened, even in a "let's cover our asses" way.

    I have a sister who is the principle of a school.Her method of dealing with troublesome students is to call the parents and tell them to come to the school to discuss their child's actions. This works wonders for 1 reason. It forces the parents to take time out of their schedule/work hours to deal with their child with no way to skirt around the issue.

    'If you don't want to be bothered while at work and to be shown what a terrible parent you are, discipline your child.'

    Make it clear that every time an incident occurs or a report is made about their child they will be called out of work to deal with it. The results are miraculous to say the least. You can even tell the victims of bullies that they should tell you when something happens so you can follow this exact procedure. Even terrible parents don't want the 'hassle' of their child interfering with their work life.

    Admittedly this only works when the parents have at least a partial interest in their child. For the neighborhoods when there is no parental involvement, there's little you can do sadly, but this has always been the case.

    1. Re:Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummmm.....and the parents that don't show up? I see a minor flaw in the strategy.

      How about a better strategy: If someone is assaulting someone, call the police.

      Next, have a school code of conduct. If a student breaks the code of conduct then THROW THEM OUT.

      Why is bullshit in school by a 15 year old tolerated more than bullshit in the workplace by a 24 year old? ALL 15 year olds know bullying is wrong and that it shouldn't happen. People talk here like the victims are "snowflakes" and too delicate for the "real world". Honestly, that is the opposite. The snowflakes are the asshats who are being treated with kid gloves when they should be shown the door.

      If you want to be anti social, fine. But then you shouldn't be allowed to use societies resources either.

  61. USPS has infected English by CranberryKing · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Is saving 3 characters that valuable? MA is a postal designation for Massachusetts. It is not correct to refer to Massachusetts as MA. If you must abbreviate, use Mass. as even USPS used before they came up with state codes. You can still write Conn., Del. &c. in a mailing address, but they don't like it.

    1. Re:USPS has infected English by martas · · Score: 1

      Why?

    2. Re:USPS has infected English by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      Who knows. My parents house had a unique ZIP+4, you can just write it big on an envelope, throw a stamp on it and mail it, and it would arrive to their mailbox. If you gave them a return address, however, you got it back with a machine generated message "UNABLE TO DELIVER AS ADDRESSED" with no reason why.

      I had an internship with the DOT in high school, and we pretty much had to insert every envelope into a typewriter because all mail had to be machine readable. That means all caps, no punctuation except for the comma between city and state, and the state damn well better be capitalized and the zip has to be right or it's coming back. If you put a certified mail sticker on in the wrong place, it's coming back. Two cents off on the postage? It's coming back.

    3. Re:USPS has infected English by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but they don't like it.

      heh, no kidding.

      I use New York City and no state or zip and it gets there. The do stamp it up quite a bit. And the odd thing, is that it seems to get there faster.

    4. Re:USPS has infected English by Nesman64 · · Score: 1

      Why?

      For the same reason that we drink bottled Hydrogen2Oxygen (or Hydrogen Hydrogen Oxygen, so as to not offend Hydrogen) and run GNU/Mozilla/OpenOffice.org/Nvidia/Google/KDE/Linux on our computers.
      HTH

      --
      coffee | nose > keyboard
  62. I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.... by Jager+Dave · · Score: 1

    ... but having been a victim of bullying in school myself (many MANY moons ago), I say give them all the chair - get them out of the gene pool NOW, before it's too late.

    1. Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.... by Totenglocke · · Score: 0

      And having been a "victim" of bullying in school myself many many years ago, I say you're weak and waste years of your life wanting revenge because someone didn't like you. Ignore them and get over it. Hell, what works really well is to play into it - pretend you like it when they call you $insulting_nickname and after awhile, they'll stop because it's not fun anymore. If you can't accept that some people will never like you and will want to make your life hell, then you're going to have a hard time getting through life.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    2. Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you live? I'd like to come harass your kids, maybe stick my greasy hands in their underwear.

      If they are boot-strappy enough, they can take it.

      If you don't post it, you are a tea-baggot liar coward.

      I'll check back later for your address. Maybe in your bushes!

      For someone whining about screwing someone out of an entry-level job and scolding them to "be nice" you sure are an asshole.

    3. Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and found your PlentyOfFish profile. Get any trim with the christmas pictures of your nephew yet?

      You are a bit skinny and the yellow leather makes you look like a douchebag. Probably easy for a bear like me to break.

      Not trolling. Just a demonstration of how easy it is to be vicious. I am sure your underage family members can take care of themselves. Just kidding bro!

    4. Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.... by Tanuki64 · · Score: 1

      Can't do this. From what pool will you recruit your leaders later when you cull the offspring? Bullying is necessary for your betters to learn how to accomplish something in life. So you cannot punish it too hard.

    5. Re:I'm sure I'll get flamed for this.... by Nesman64 · · Score: 1

      After we've executed all of the bullies, lets move onto all of the smelly kids. After that, maybe the ones that start puberty early.

      (The next step was going to involve hair and eye color, but I don't want to invoke Godwin here)

      --
      coffee | nose > keyboard
  63. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by compro01 · · Score: 1

    Without extreme methods, you simply can't drive a mentally healthy person to suicide.

    does physical and psychological abuse 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, with enforced attendance qualify?

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  64. cyberbullying and the first amendment by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

    Oh wait, would that be cyberbullying? I thought it would have been Constitutionally protected.....

    If it crosses over into harassment or slander, that's another matter. In that case you are (allegedly, at least) harming another person with what you say - and while the federal government may not have a valid claim to curb what you have to say, that person may.

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
    1. Re:cyberbullying and the first amendment by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      If it crosses over into harassment or slander, that's another matter. In that case you are (allegedly, at least) harming another person with what you say - and while the federal government may not have a valid claim to curb what you have to say, that person may.

      Harassment against public officers by attacking their policies in matters of public importance? Since when?

      As for slander, nothing I have said is a clearly incorrect statement of fact so it's not inapplicable.

      "George W Bush is the worst human in history, several orders of magnitude worse than Hitler. I wish he were incarcerated and put in a cell along with murderers who would rape him senseless every day" is not slander...... It might be wrong. It might be damaging to Bush's reputation if someone believes it. However it isn't a statement of fact that I knew or should have known was false. It is just an opinion.

      Indeed everything I have suggested would seem to be at the core of what the First Amendment protects. Do you disagree?

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    2. Re:cyberbullying and the first amendment by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      To phrase my point as a tautology: if you were harassing someone, that would be harassment. What you describe isn't by itself harassment, but you said "Oh wait, would that be cyberbullying?" as though you expected every little thing would be called "cyberbullying". "Cyberbullying" is just a form of harassment in which, conveniently, the whole exchange has been recorded - if it seems there's a rash of cyberbullying cases, that's probably because cyberbullying makes it uniquely easy to build a harassment case.

      Not even political free speech is without limits. The first amendment grants that the government has no stake in what you choose to say. However, that doesn't mean people can't make [i]personal[/i] claims as a result of what you do or say. It is possible that a message that's protected as political free speech could be delivered in a way that qualifies as harassment - and the first amendment would not protect you from the consequences of that action. In practice, it'd have to be something pretty serious, though, or they wouldn't bother. :)

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
  65. Depends by Wooky_linuxer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    On how the reprimand is applied, its intensity, and so on. If there is a real concern from the school board, I'd say it would make a difference. Problem is, most of the times the people responsible see bullying as a nuisance, not as a serious problem that has to be dealt with. They don't want to go to the hassle of educating the bullies on why bullying is bad. Rather, they see the bullied kids as incompetent since they can't deal with it themselves. And the kids do noticed that, which only enhances their despair - bullied kids are usually already lonesome, being seen as a loser by adults that are supposed to be helping them might trigger powerful feelings in the more fragile ones. That said, I think this kind of overly open bullying is a facet of American society, so ultra competitive that it categorizes people as either losers or popular since they are small kids (I am not American, so I might be talking out of my ass here, but that is the impression we got from news such as these).

    --
    Where is that guy who'd die defending what I had to say when I need him?
    1. Re:Depends by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      The worst of the bullies when I was a kid was the son of a police officer. The bully's father (the police officer), years later, was arrested for sexually molesting a child. I would be very surprised if the kid wasn't abused substantially at home.

      Are you going to tell me that anything the school did was going to prevent such a person from beating me up on my way home from school?

      Interestingly more than twenty years later, I actually feel sorry for that bully. I can't imagine the sort of hell he must have gone through as a kid.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    2. Re:Depends by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You cannot educate bullies because, unless they are psychopaths, they already know what they are doing in causing harm. That is the reasons they are doing it - it makes them feel powerful. The only way to get them to stop is to make it not worth the reward they get. Giving people detention is usually not effective because its a very weak deterrent. I would suggest - involve their parents - and have them stand up in front of the entire school and explain their behaviour and what they have done. To make it effective you basically have to embarrass them publicly.

      This kind of bullying is not just an issue in the US. I have lived and gone to school in three different countries and the same behaviour was on display in all three. This is just how kids act.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    3. Re:Depends by shentino · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you think that grownups in the workplace act any differently?

      It's just called "office politics"

    4. Re:Depends by morari · · Score: 1

      An even better way of publicly embarrassing them is to simply fight back. Nothing weakens a bully's resolve quicker than having the crap knocked out of them. The [i]bullied[/i] learns a valuable lesson in that as well; stand up for yourself.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    5. Re:Depends by Macrat · · Score: 1

      Giving people detention is usually not effective because its a very weak deterrent.

      Also because they get to hang out with their friends in detention.

    6. Re:Depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, they will mock you in some way and their power of fear over the other kids will grow. Most kids will have the ultimate confirmation the bully is a credible threat and not to be messed with.

      Also, I think you also thought of the profile of a (most likely male) "muscle bully". There's also plenty of female and male kids that bully some single kids as groups, and even if one of these stops, the group does not. That's also the situation way more likely to cause suicides...

    7. Re:Depends by hitmark · · Score: 1

      and thats the worrying thing. Society is degenerating rather then improving...

      but then i guess part of our brains still see that hill covered with monkeys.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    8. Re:Depends by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      Some bullies can be educated. Kids need adults to make them think about what they're doing why they're doing it.

    9. Re:Depends by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      The worst of the bullies when I was a kid was the son of a police officer.

      I could say that the kid probably went into the same career as his father, but there's a chance he could have failed the entrance exam and ended up as a TSA agent.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:Depends by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      Society is not degenerating - bullying was seen as normal, both in the workplace and in school in the past - now it is out in the open and talked about and raged against. This is actually an improvement.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
    11. Re:Depends by Cassius+Corodes · · Score: 1

      I strongly disagree - and this is the approach I see in school - they encourage children who are bullied to tell the bully that behaviour hurts their feelings - I don't have to say that this doesn't produce results. I would be very surprised if there is even one bully who truly doesn't understand they are hurting people. Even in this story even after the girl committed suicide (i.e. it should be clear they caused pain) they still mocked her. Kids might to be able to do some complex thinking - but the basic stuff - empathy etc. are all developed very early and that is all they need for this situation.

      --
      Control is an illusion, order our comforting lie. From chaos, through chaos, into chaos we fly
  66. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Samah · · Score: 1

    In my experience, the most culpable individuals are spineless teachers followed by spineless administrators...

    The problem is that teachers have little to no power these days. Gone are the days of a rap on the knuckles for not paying attention in class. If they tried to do something like that now, the parents would sue the school. Parents will believe pretty much anything their child tells them, so teachers have to tread VERY carefully.

    Disclaimer: IANAT, but my mother is a principal, so I hear a lot of stories.

    --
    Homonyms are fun!
    You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
  67. Re:Big difference by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

    Exactly. If you could go to jail for being mean to someone, then just about everyone on slashdot would be arrested.

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  68. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by sjames · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Being physically and verbally assaulted daily for long periods of time tends to damage mental health, especially when the authority figures you're supposed to look up to and count on consistently look the other way. Ever heard of PTSD?

  69. Re:No one made her do it by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

    Nothing makes you breathe, you choose to do it of your own accord. Care to try stopping?

  70. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by JerkBoB · · Score: 1

    I was bullied once and (being the smaller and weaker kid) bit my attacker. The principal's approach was to bring out boxing gloves and to tell us to fight it out like men. I'm not joking......

    I have to ask... Why is that such a bad thing?

    Generally speaking, anyhow. I understand that you personally may not have been prepared for a physical fight against someone you perceived to be bigger and stronger, but I see this as a problem with our modern society. Males are effectively neutered in Western society. Evolution has bred us to be muscular and twitchy, and yet we are expected to always be thoughtful and ... soft.

    I was not a jock in high school. I did play soccer in middle school and did field/track in 9th grade, but nothing after that. It's not until the past 10 years that I've discovered that I was missing out. And for the past two years I've been doing Systema... It's totally changed my perception of the world. I feel that kids these days (gerroff mah lawn!) are missing out by not being physically active, and in particular they don't benefit from any martial arts. In the days of yore kids would have fights to settle spats, and it taught everyone their own limits as well as the usefulness (and uselessness in some situations) of fighting as conflict resolution. These days, fighting will get you detention or worse (a trip to the police station for popping some jerk in the mouth?)

    This leads to seriously screwed-up kids with bottled emotions who decide that their only option is to come to school heavily armed and shoot the crap out of everyone. That's not right.

    Let kids settle things out on the schoolyard. They'll learn a lot more from it than if we wait until they bring a bomb to school.

    --
    A host is a host from coast to coast...
    Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
  71. Re:No one made her do it by Totenglocke · · Score: 0

    Breathing is a necessary and automatic function of life. Suicide is a decision you make and completely under your control. Epic analogy fail on your part.

    --
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  72. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by eldepeche · · Score: 1

    Why would you go out of your way to call the recipient of extensive physical and psychological bullying defective?

  73. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by sl149q · · Score: 1

    The rule at law (at least in most common law based systems) is that you "take your victim as you find him".

    The typically cited case is an assault victim with a "thin skull". The defense stating that the blow would not have injured a normal person. Even though the defendant had no reason to believe that his assault would cause injury he is still guilty as he did indeed cause injury with an intentional act.

    So even if your actions would NOT cause a normal person to commit suicide, that may not be an adequate defense if someone pre-disposed to suicide does so after you bully them.

  74. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    I have to ask... Why is that such a bad thing?

    Basically this administrator stacked everything against me. He said that since everyone was picking on me, it must be my fault, and chose a venue for confrontation where I was going down. I am fairly anti-authoritarian and I think this has a lot to do with it.

    Let kids settle things out on the schoolyard. They'll learn a lot more from it than if we wait until they bring a bomb to school.

    I think if you read my posts carefully, I see most of the interference in the bullying directed against me as misguided. The boxing glove incident is a good example. Instead of letting us fight on the playground, tooth and nail as it were, he decided to teach me a lesson. The boxing match was designed to punish me for fighting back the only way I could. If he had let the fight continue in the school yard, that would have been one thing. I probably would have inflicted some substantial pain on my opponent and maybe he would have backed off.

    But that's not what happened. Instead this was an example of where the school administration went out of their way to compound the bullying by restructuring things so that the bullying would be more effective.

    I am not saying the school administration should have coddled me etc. However they ABSOLUTELY should not have come into the fight on the side of the bullies. Looking back on all of the difficulties I went through as a child, this is the only thing that still makes me angry.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  75. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by russotto · · Score: 1

    Let's be perfectly clear here. Suicide is irrational. There was de facto something else wrong with this girl.

    I believe you mean "ipso facto".

    Let me say it again: Suicide Is Irrational. Without extreme methods, you simply can't drive a mentally healthy person to suicide.

    High school bullying counts as "Extreme methods". Take a human being, require them (upon pain of fines and imprisonment, or fines and imprisonment for those they love) to attend a school wherein they are teased, harassed both verbally and physically, and occasionally assaulted. Place them under the control of authority figures who range from indifferent to hostile to the attacks on them, but who make it clear they will come down hard on the victim should she attempt to retaliate or escape.

  76. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by arose · · Score: 1

    Back home, bullying was never as bad as it seems to be here.Why?

    Almost certainly because you weren't involved in it and turned a blind eye.

    Could it be the culture here?

    Yes, the culture is even better at ignoring the problem.

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  77. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by MrCrassic · · Score: 1

    I got it worse. When I was in high school, there was this kid who was taller, stronger and (obviously) way more popular than I was. Since this was the perfect scenario for him to bully me, he did. And for the better part of a year, I did nothing in fear of getting my ass handed to me if I did.

    One year, while we were in gym, he was assigned to the same "team" as I was and as I should've expected, he beamed the ball right to my face. That was my breaking point; when we got back in the locker room, we exchanged words and I punched him square in the nose. We faught; I got my face beat in and won the prize of getting suspended for a week. Despite having told administrators about this for months, if not longer.

    C'est la vie.

  78. Conjecture on why it's barbaric by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

    It's possible they seduced her with the explicit intent of breaking her heart afterwards. It is possible to manipulate an already emotionally distraught girl into sex she might not otherwise have, with the purpose of hurting her afterwards. With two guys charged, it's possible they did it twice.

    Now I know it's not all 'sophisticated' and 'enlightened' to say this, but sex, especially for an inexperienced teenager, is an emotionally significant event- the type of thing sociopaths could use to grind this girl down further.

    Incidentally, this is part of the reason why all those silly old puritanical Americans encourage delaying sex- so that one may be emotionally ready for all it entails.

    Now the response I expect from you is that 'it's only emotionally significant because we're puritans about it!', which, of course, I would disagree with. The truth isn't in the interests of horny males to state- that sex does matter in human relationships, that it's emotionally intensive, and that we should treat engaging in intercourse with due seriousness.

    But we don't, we say it's no big deal, everyone is f*cking, etc, etc. So young people- like this poor girl- get in over their heads, because 'Everyone else can handle it, I should be able to as well.'

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    1. Re:Conjecture on why it's barbaric by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      It's possible they seduced her with the explicit intent of breaking her heart afterwards

      Possible - but is there any evidence to support your assertion? Statutory rape is not, all other things being equal, a barbaric act. To me it looks like - after failing to act correctly to prevent bullying - authorities started looking for scape-goats to punish, which included guys who'd had sex with her. With at least one of these guys, there was no other charges levelled, indicating that he probably didn't take part in any other bullying.

      Incidentally, this is part of the reason why all those silly old puritanical Americans encourage delaying sex

      Puritanism was a British movement, and began before there was an America (well, a USA anyway). Delaying sex in any case has little to do with puritanism - which had more to say about marriage, and sex in general, than sex at a young age. We started delaying sex when we started mandating a 10-year education before adolescents were given any responsibilities. Having retarded their maturity, we then had to try and force restrictions on their sexuality to match - and it generally doesn't work that well.

      Now the response I expect from you is that 'it's only emotionally significant because we're puritans about it!'

      And out comes the straw-man.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    2. Re:Conjecture on why it's barbaric by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would argue that the emotional significance of the first forays into the world of sex, although it does have something to do with age, has more to do with lack of experience. In other words, if a fifteen year olds first time is very significant, an eighteen year old, or twenty-three year olds first time is probably hardly any less significant. It's the same thing with driving ages. Sixteen year olds probably aren't significantly less suited for driving than eighteen or twenty year olds, they're just more dangerous than those other age groups because they've had less experience. If you raise the driving age to eighteen or twenty, those new drivers might be marginally safer than sixteen year olds just starting out, but they'll be a lot more dangerous than people who have had two or four years of driving experience.

      Ultimately, experience is the best teacher, people learn to deal with all the slings and arrows of life by enduring them. Sometimes they don't endure them. You could make the argument that, if this sort of thing hadn't happened until her university years, she would have been less likely to kill herself over it. There's something to that. On the other hand, however, before university, school is a prison for your body and your mind. You're stuck with the same people all the time and you have no freedom, no options, and every petty little thing is remembered and repeated by everyone in a horrible little echo chamber. If you don't make the right moves to start to make friends, you're stuck for years without friends and you know it. Some people have other ecosystems to escape into when they're in high school. Places they can make friends without any of their school baggage. Others don't, especially recent immigrants, like this girl.

      Another thing about immigrants. I came to the US from New Zealand and moved into sixth grade. Maybe it's just that I was in a really small school before I came here, maybe other factors. In any case, the overwhelming impression I got was that US kids were just mean. Not to mention in a good percentage of cases (not all) hostile towards foreigners, or at least towards the idea of being foreign. Some of them were just concerned that I might be a communist spy (not joking, the US really does have a great self-supporting propaganda thing). But, anyway, USians are wierd, but on their own turf, it's the outsiders who are weird and threatening.

    3. Re:Conjecture on why it's barbaric by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

      Possible - but is there any evidence to support your assertion?

      Refer to the word 'conjecture' in my original comment's title.

      As to the rest of your comment on the boys in question, a good ol' 'hate fuck' would be a tough thing to prove in court, and in accordance with the title/subject of my comment, it was conjecture. Being neither a journalist nor a jurist, I am free to do so.

      And out comes the straw-man.

      Can the answers to life and the resolution to a conjecture-based discussion can be found in a rhetoric 101 class?

      If you weren't thinking it, someone else was. I've been commenting on the intreW3bs for quite some time now, and I know where these conversations tend to go.

      We started delaying sex when we started mandating a 10-year education before adolescents were given any responsibilities. Having retarded their maturity, we then had to try and force restrictions on their sexuality to match - and it generally doesn't work that well.

      Quite reasonable. In the realm of giving teenagers responsibility, if societal experience has shown that exclusive pair bonding with a minimum number of sexual partners is beneficial to the community, than a prolonged educational period would also necessitate prolonged chastity.

      Now I also firmly believe that teenagers are quite capable of adopting far more responsibilities than we typically require of them, however, that includes the responsibility to keep it in their pants until they're married.

      Or do you propose sexual responsibility is the one area where we can't expect a damn thing from teenagers?

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  79. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

    Spineless... or criminally negligent. And yeah, there can be a difference.

    This incident reminds me of the "bullying problem" that plagues Japanese schools (their media doesn't report on it anymore, which is unsurprising as they're the Asian equivalent of UK news sans BBC). The similarity is mainly that a bunch of kids team up to make life miserable for their target, and school officials are either clueless or don't lift a damn finger to stop them-- in the worst cases, the bullies essentially run the schoolyard because the faculty is hogtied by their parents from actually disciplining the kids (the "my little angel couldn't possibly be a bully" complex).

    --
    "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
  80. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

    How is years of bullying by multiple people both in school and outside of school, not 'extreme methods' ?

  81. Would it be legal to do this to an adult? by RexDevious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems to me that a lot of activities which are described as "bullying" when done to high school kids, would be legally defined as "assault" if it were done to an adult. I understand the idea of granting minors some leniency in punishment, but I don't understand the downgrading the action simply because of the age of the victim. If those kids threw a full soda can at some 93 year old women, or pushed her down, or knocked her purse out of her hands - wouldn't that be assault, complete with arrest and pressing charges and all that?

    1. Re:Would it be legal to do this to an adult? by masher_oz · · Score: 1

      This.
      Very. Much. This.

      I hear stories along the same lines as these about schools in Australia and I say to myself "That isn't bullying, that's out and out assault!".

      Beatings and bashings aren't the occasional nipple cripple. One you can potentially tolerate, the other requires police intervention.

    2. Re:Would it be legal to do this to an adult? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Most of it would be harassment, some would probably be assault. Stalking is definitely stalking.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    3. Re:Would it be legal to do this to an adult? by proud+american · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. I have never understood why we consider it ok to run schools via the laws of the jungle. Students don't even have a choice to not go or to change schools. Were an adult subjected to any such behavior at work they would expect it to be stopped immediately or they would sue.

    4. Re:Would it be legal to do this to an adult? by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

      They have started doing this in many schools. It used to be that you would get sent to the principal and get in school or out of school suspension for "assault"; now they have police in the schools and kids get arrested for this crap and sent to jail. Trust me that is not the right solution and we are worse off because of it.

  82. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You talk like a piece of shit fundie.

    We don't like your kind of tea-baggot victim blame here.

  83. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by jafiwam · · Score: 1

    By this retard's standards, post traumatic stress disorder is just plain weakness of the will.

  84. Re:Parenting? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    If young people are turning to Yahoo Answers for help then it's not surprising that they have problems. How is babby formed?

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  85. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by JerkBoB · · Score: 1

    I am not saying the school administration should have coddled me etc. However they ABSOLUTELY should not have come into the fight on the side of the bullies. Looking back on all of the difficulties I went through as a child, this is the only thing that still makes me angry.

    I apologize for what was a bit of wine-induced insensitivity. It sounds as if you had a really hard time of it due to bullies and clueless administrators, and I sympathize as someone who has long suffered from anxiety and insecurity.

    My intent wasn't really to undermine your experiences, but to hijack your post to further my agenda of martial arts and general physical fitness as being a great way for males to experience the full range of their genetic potential. Or something like that.

    I just wish I'd discovered the confidence-building experiences of martial arts and strength training when I was young and impressionable. I think I would have been a happier person, and I think that a lot of other guys suffer from social castration in our female-focused modern western societies. Don't get me wrong... I understand that this social model is more stable and generally better for the species; it just often leaves males aimless and impotent unless they're able to channel those energies effectively.

    --
    A host is a host from coast to coast...
    Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
  86. Re:No one made her do it by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No one made her do it, she chose to do it on her own accord.

    The premise behind this thinking has been more or less held invalid since the invention of theaters that may or may not be on fire. Saying something with the intention of causing other people to react in ways that cause harm to themselves or others is generally unacceptable.

    acknowledging that people are responsible for their actions.

    People are responsible for their actions but inhuman assholes get off scot-free?

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  87. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wasn't exactly popular when growing up, but regardless bullying just wasn't all that common. Yes there were fights, but there never was any need for police involvement.

    I spent grade 13(OAC) in Canada and I've noticed
    that students would mostly socialize with other from their ethnic/social groups and the fact that you were in a class together meant absolutely nothing. Teachers here are pretty much just tolerated by the students, and give an impression that they hate the school just as much as the students do.

    Those are of course just my personal impressions.

  88. Re:No one made her do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck you and your Asperger's-tainted worldview, you tiny-brained twat.

    She was a little girl. She wasn't old enough to "make a choice" because she wasn't old enough to know any better. Worse, she was willfully ignored by the very people who were there to help her with that choice.

    It should have been you. You with your stereotypical mouth-breathing hurr hurr basement-dweller holier-than-thou self reliance preach, too stupid to see past your pathetic isolation to ever truly connect with another human being.

    The world is a smaller, sadder place now. Someone who felt something died, and we're stuck with another abhuman piece of shit like you.

    It should have been you.

  89. Don't the indictments just encourage suicide? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

    I find it pretty chilling that we are actually rewarding a teenager for suicide. This is a scary precedent. I mean, there are many teens who are bullied, and feel like they have no way to get back at the people who are making them miserable. But now, we seem to be giving them a means: All they have to do is kill themselves. That way their strongest desire is granted: They ruin the lives of the bullies they hate.

    I can easily imagine some poor, miserable kid threatening to write a long litany about the abuses of the bullies and then killing herself in some horrible way - just to get the bullies to stop. But if they don't, some kid who thinks her life is worthless might just decide that she'll have the last laugh, comforted by the thought that her harassers sit in jail.

    I'm not saying that bullying shouldn't be punished. I'm saying that there shouldn't be an extra punishment when the bullying leads to a suicide. If there is, then our legal policy gives the victims a reason to kill themselves, which is sick.

    1. Re:Don't the indictments just encourage suicide? by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Hold it there buddy, it would take an extremely disturbed person to commit suicide to get back at a bully. That in itself is evidence of how horrific the bullying was.

      I'm saying that there shouldn't be an extra punishment when the bullying leads to a suicide.

      Most of what the bullies did would land you in jail as an adult for assault, harassment, and stalking. Indicting them for these crimes is not giving them extra punishment, it's giving them the exact punishment they deserve. From the sounds of things, death is exactly what these bullies wanted for this girl, particularly judging by their complete lack of remorse.

      Is it not more chilling to reward bullies by condoning their driving someone to commit suicide?

      The "extra" punishment should be directed at the parents and/or the administrators for turning a blind eye to the abuse this girl was receiving.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    2. Re:Don't the indictments just encourage suicide? by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

      The "extra" punishment should be directed at the parents and/or the administrators for turning a blind eye to the abuse this girl was receiving.

      ::APPLAUSE::

      Someone tell me why the parents are not going to be held responsible as well? I'd be held liable if my under-age kid beat up another kid.

      Can you imagine how quickly things would change if the parents and the school administrators were held accountable?

    3. Re:Don't the indictments just encourage suicide? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      Wake up. Kids kill themselves sometimes because they're bullied. They don't (generally) begin "extremely disturbed"; being victimized by bullies is what leads them to completely lose perspective. This is well researched, and if you want to cast aspersions at the victims, spend a year under my heel and see how you feel then, little piggy! Anyone can be broken. You can pretend the victims are some sort of freaks, but this could just as well happen to you.

      Also, learn to read and correctly quote people. It's just straight up dishonest to remove the beginning of my sentence when you quote me, and then pretend I'm saying something completely different.

      Bullied kids are sometimes literally made irrational (or "disturbed" if you prefer that expression), and this makes them incredibly vulnerable. And I expressed a worry that inscentivising their suicide when they're in this state is might have tragic consequences. I explicitly said that bullies should be punished (in the start of the sentence whose second part you quoted), but the punishment should be based on the nature of the bullying, not on the reaction it generated.

  90. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by edalytical · · Score: 1

    So you are saying we should punish bullies because their "victims" may be mass murders? Usually I'd end this with some condescending yet humorous insult, but you just might go on a killing spree and I don't want the law to come down on me...oh wait...

    --
    Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
  91. Dangerous Precedent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe that this sets a dangerous precedent. From now on, any teenage suicide will be scrutinized from the perspective of "Whose fault is this." Everyone has been bullied to some extent, so there will always be someone to blame.

    In this case, the bullying seems to be above and beyond what most children endure. However, do trust the court system to use judicial restraint and only prosecute cases such as these? Probably not.

  92. Re: Having sex is a barbaric action? by ScottCooperDotNet · · Score: 1

    Yes, it is, in way - it forces shame on certain people/groups. I can't imagine an Irish Catholic immigrant girl being willing to tell her parents the full details of why she was being so abused by others.

  93. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    I agree with you about martial arts, btw. There's something about being confident and being able to win a fight that is a great deterrence. It also builds a host of other skills which can be helpful in many other unrelated circumstances.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  94. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't really call it a paradox. If five kids are beating up on one kid, then that tends to represent five parents who will vote for a School Board that will hire teachers that will let their five kids do as they please; meanwhile, the one kid with their one parent will be in a much more difficult position of trying to convince other voters that it's worthwhile to protect their one child through some sort of administrative action instead of leaving it to the child to defend himself/herself, under some belief that it builds character or it's a necessary life skill to fend for oneself amongst one's peers.

    In short, a complacent democracy tends to allow those who have some sort of vested interest to have their way. Of course, as you sort of note, possible lawsuits from those five parents is a pretty good extortion (aka bullying) against a populace who hates higher taxes. But, then, one could argue that bullying is allowed to happen in general because the child's peers aren't willing to be involved either in defending, even in a slight way, a random peer. My point is, bullying is just a rather good example of parental and child behavior being similar and a rather large problem with democracies in general.

    Of course, once a parent perceives a "real" threat against his/her child, they're quite willing to act. So, teacher/administrator action is much more scrutinized. As much as hyperinflating an issue is a bad thing, inflating the importance of peer bullying in actual causing real harm and being a real threat isn't a bad thing. However, there's certainly a lot of communities who aren't really structured with that sort of consideration of protecting the group to protect one's own.

    --
    Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
  95. Grownups? by skids · · Score: 1

    You saw one? Where? Let me get my camera!

    Seriously a lot of workplaces are pretty close to high school in maturity levels -- if it doesn't have to do with raising kids, which somehow manages to freak modern adults out so much they simply have to act somewhat maturely, I seriously doubt that many of the 30-somethings I run into these days have done much growing since they stopped changing pants sizes. (And some of them still do that, though in a different direction :-)

  96. What other recourse... by vell0cet · · Score: 1

    What other course of action was available to her... sadly, this seems to be the way things are heading. Popularity is the rule and people look the other way.

    People who are bullied cannot have outlets, cause if someone sees disturbing journals they get suspended or expelled. After reading about the history of bullying at that school, I'm surprised there hasn't been a shooting yet. But then again, she's from Ireland, probably never even crossed her mind.

  97. Related Charges by kendr · · Score: 1

    Why is it that bullying ending in death of a person has such minimal charges? The appropiate charges should be a minimum of manslaughter if not murder in the 2nd degree. If this was to happen I think there would be a drop in the offences. Also there needs to be more serious charges put in place in regards to cyber bullying.

    1. Re:Related Charges by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Why? If you verbally bully someone today and they finally hit back after endless verbal taunts, they are very often arrested for assault.

      Why would it be any different? Besides, what physical act has occurred, other than the victim killing themselves? Are you in favor of arresting people to prevent a crime from occuring?

  98. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

    I do not need to waste my time arguing with what seems to be a bully angry with what I wrote. I just need to mention the various problems in the U.S. are having with people who, desperate to stop the bullying - and no one bothers to avoid - end up committing even worse acts. But for you a bunch of sociopaths to harass a person she did not see another way out other than suicide is more "acceptable", right?

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  99. Penis size by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    Is being a big dick a way of compensating for having a small dick?

  100. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Macrat · · Score: 1

    Let me say it again: Suicide Is Irrational. Without extreme methods, you simply can't drive a mentally healthy person to suicide.

    Let me guess, YOU were the school bully.

    And you bullied anyone who didn't share your view of the world.

  101. Re:No one made her do it by Qzukk · · Score: 1

    since you were mean to me here

    Mens rea. Intentionally causing a panic is different than coughing loudly and someone thinking it sounded like "fire". I'm sorry you were so easily startled by the noise.

    As for my "lack" of reasoning, I thought it was pretty clear: intentionally causing harm is a limit on free speech that has been accepted for a long time now.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  102. Onion article by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

    http://www.theonion.com/ and search for columbine jocks safely resume bullying.

  103. Re:No one made her do it by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

    No, his reasoning was just fine. Your logic and lack of evidence of his 'being mean' on the other hand smacks of intellectual dwarfism. If you plan on arguing with your betters, you might want to get a book on the art of written persuasion.

    Then again someone who wastes the space in their signature encouraging people to sign an online petition with the fantasy that it will have any effect really would not have the brains to spend on some as intellectual as 'reading'. Try going somewhere else to get all up in arms about something you don’t understand and can't discuss rationally. I know you need such things to validate your pathetic existence, but the rest of the world doesn't need to hear it.....now THAT was being mean. I'm wondering, did it elicit an emotional response? If you were bombarded by it constantly 24/7/365 through every communications channel you had, while at the same time in an emotionally sensitive state (new town, new country, new culture, the emotional and physical turmoil of teen life, no adult response to the problem for months), do you think that might be tough to handle?

    Sorry for the trolling, just trying to make a point.

  104. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    Yes I was. From grade 2 to grade 6. I was the new kid in school in a very close-knit town. My graduating class had 112 people, and all but about 15 of those were born in town.

    Like many nerds, I had terrible social skills, so I already had trouble making friends.

    I went through therapy - both with the school, and group.

    Not even once did I remotely consider suicide.

    You're right. Maybe I had it too easy. But I also was raised right by my parents, who taught me that all the BS was unimportant and that it shouldn't affect me. I'm a much healthier person because of it.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  105. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    I was thinking of torture in a "Saw" type environment.

    I don't think it does qualify. See a sibling post of mine.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  106. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    Are you kidding me? I was ostracized for 6 years. I *never* had more than two friends in high school, and they were uncomfortable around me. I had terrible social skills.

    I couldn't bully anyone if I tried. Literally - I was so pathetic that I couldn't have pulled it off, even if I'd wanted to.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  107. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    Defective? I wouldn't say that. She was maturing, and clearly not getting the emotional support she needed from her parents. And that should've started from birth.

    I went through a terrible, long period of bullying (see a sibling post) and I never considered suicide, even in passing. It simply never occurred to me, because I had a wonderfully supportive family.

    I'm really sorry for her that she didn't seem to have one. But the fact that she didn't develop emotionally to be able to shrug it off, fight her own battles, disregard others' opinions - as she clearly needed to - could be considered a defect (though I wouldn't use that word).

    It's more like she didn't develop the skin she needed because she wasn't there yet. And she could've been. It's sad, but she should've realized that high school is over really quickly in the span of one's life.

    I did, and it got me through just fine.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  108. Amanda Brownell by gawbl · · Score: 2, Informative

    Amanda Brownell is an ex-classmate of my kids here in San Jose, California. In December 2008, Amanda attempted suicide at school. I understand there were texts left on Amanda's cell phone that suggested she had been bullied. Her family apparently had no idea this was happening.

    Today, Amanda lives in a nursing home, and is fed by a tube. You can read her story here:

    http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/amandabrownell/mystory

  109. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    Of course not. It's a well-understood psycological condition in response to severe stress. I once was trying to save a 9 year old's life and failed. I sure know what PTSD is, and there wasn't a thing I could do to snap out of it.

    But if I'd killed myself because of it, there'd be something wrong with me. The deepest instinct we have is self-preservation. To consciously go against that is, by definition, irrational. The struggle for life is so built-in, one can't build a rational argument for it.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  110. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you kidding me? I was ostracized for 6 years. I *never* had more than two friends in high school, and they were uncomfortable around me. I had terrible social skills.

    Ostracized? How about verbally and physically harassed (that is, constantly jeered at, pushed, shoved, smacked, had your books knocked out of your hands frequently?) How about seriously attacked (punched, kicked)? Until you've had the experience of that, 5 days a week, 38 weeks a year, for several years, you've got no idea.

  111. Re:Mod me up! by BitterOak · · Score: 1

    Or else I will kill myself and get you guys into big trouble!

    This is modded flamebait? Either people aren't getting an obvious joke, or perhaps they are playing along and "bullying" him through negative moderation. (I have been similarly victimized myself, but I have gone to therapy!)

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
  112. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by linzeal · · Score: 1

    Its the same reason why most people support the police even if they are blatantly sadistic; because, " If someone is being beaten up by cops they must of done something stupid/wrong/criminal " . We have had police here in PDX kill 6 people with mental illness this year. One of them was shot 10 times in the back with an assault rifle, no charges but the grand jury admonished him and the department anyways.

  113. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by twidarkling · · Score: 1

    Well, I don't want to marginalize what you went through, but I doubt many kids in grade six even know what suicide really is. Saying that from grades two to six that you never considered it is rather disingenuous. Even if you did know all about it, that'd be a severe rarity. And most kids don't get really vicious about the bullying until Junior High. I'd not say you had it easy, since being bullied never is, but I'd also say that you didn't get a true look at how bad it can get. Hell, even I didn't get it as bad as it can be, mostly because I finally took down one of my main aggressors, and they left me alone to my face after that. But I still saw what happened to my friends, so I know that it absolutely can break a person to the point of mental instability.

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  114. internet changes everything by Khashishi · · Score: 1

    When bullying is in the playground, it's just bullying. When it's online, it suddenly becomes cyberbullying. And that's a problem.

    1. Re:internet changes everything by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

      When bullying is in the playground, it's just bullying. When it's online, it suddenly becomes cyberbullying. And that's a problem.

      Excuse me, but, what is your point? By definition, cyberbullying is doing your bullying online.

  115. One thing you can do, is remember these names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sean Mulveyhill, 17, charged with statutory rape, civil rights violations, criminal harassment and disturbance of a school assembly.
    Kayla Narey, 17, civil rights violations, criminal harassment, disturbance of a school assembly.
    Austin Renaud, 18, statutory rape.
    Ashley Longe, 16, civil rights violations.
    Flannery Mullins, 16, civil rights violations, stalking.
    Sharon Chanon Velazquez, 16, civil rights violations, stalking.
    Three other juvenile girls, all unnamed, have been charged with civil rights violations, criminal harassment, and assault.

    If you ever have the opportunity to interview them for a job, bounce them.

    Better yet, maybe someone here knows how to show them a little of their own medicine.

  116. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by mgblst · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but we all hate you. This girl was hot, so completely different situation.

  117. Responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can be argued that the victim was free to choose another path; for example, she could run away from the hated school, from her uncaring parents, and from the heartless people of the town.

    Actually it can't be argued. I agree with the general tenor of your argument and I know you only setting this up to knock it down, but the principle at play here is the eggshell skull principle. You take your victim as you find them. The fact that your victim has a particular weakness or propensity is no defence to a charge or manslaughter, for instance.

    If you stomp on an infant's head and it dies, it is no defence that an adult would have survived said stomp, though it may be true. If you bully a person who has a predisposition to commit suicide and they do, very clearly you are still responsible for their death.

    The suicide (this one, at least) wouldn't happen without actions of the defendants

    That is absolutely true. It is the reason this is very close to manslaughter. It's the reason these kids need to go down. However, the act of suicide is itself novus actus interveniens, but for which the victim would not be dead.

    Nonetheless it is clearly wrong to ascribe all of the responsibility to the victim here and none to the perpetrators. The question of personal responsibility here cuts both ways. The law does hold you responsible for the outcome of your actions, a fortiori where the outcome is obvious and foreseeable, as in a victimised teenager committing suicide.

    But we must not forget that the killers here are teenagers, famously lacking the maturity to discern the foreseeable as well as in compassion. We have to cut them a bit of slack on that account, so I think it would be wrong for the ringleaders to get much more than 10 years.

  118. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by arose · · Score: 1

    Bullying and police involvement have basically nothing in common. I mean who would call the police because I got blackboard erase cloths thrown at me on a regular basis?

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  119. Re:No one made her do it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oi, as a person with AS, I do see the difference between right and wrong, and can appreciate shades of gray.... Just because the parent post was a dick with a mindset better suited to middle management does not mean they had AS. True, human interaction is a little tetchy at times to say the least, but there are limits... Like Bob from the Dresden file books, sometimes something is so "Evil" that even a being with a hazy moral compass can identify it as uncomfortably evil.....

  120. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by arose · · Score: 1

    I have to ask... Why is that such a bad thing?

    Because the only thing that a fight settles is who can win that fight.

    --
    Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
  121. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damned if you do and damned if you don't. At least for these guys. There is a new law (although I'm not sure if it's made its way to PA yet) called the Peterson Law. It's the law that allows for hearsay to be admissable if the accuser is deceased as a result of any relation to the claim. So, they either damn themselves by testifying against themself or allow the hearsay. I want to feel bad for them, but the more I think about it, it was TWO GUYS; it wasn't like they were having a deep meaningful relationship or anything.

  122. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    The physical and blatant bullying stopped at grade 6, but I was always delibrately made an outcast.

    Part of it was I really just stopped caring about what people thought of me - gave up any chance of a social life there. So I was sort of allowed to be a loner, because I wasn't trying to integrate myself.

    And I sure as hell did know what suicide was. I even knew that some people would've attempted it in the situation I was in. The idea just seemed silly to me.

    But I'm eternally indebted to my parents. When I came home, it was to a supportive, normal-feeling family where I fit right in. I never hated, nor even disliked my parents, like the rest of my peers.

    Now that I think of it, my family situation sounds very unusual. That depresses the hell out of me, because it was great.

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  123. Internets ... serious business by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

    People need to get this concept through their thick skulls:

    Being offended is healthy, normal, and a positive feeling.

    Many things will offend you. Deal with it.

    The second thing they need to understand is:

    The internet is a free place. ANYTHING GOES. There are NO crimes on the internet. If the actions on the internet extend to real life actions, then punish those actions, but you can't control the internet. Example: If some guy sends the blueprints for a bomb over the internet to another guy, and this second guy builds the bomb and deploys it, the crime is setting up a fucking bomb, not sending the blueprints over the web.

    Every single other aspect of life is already controlled by some TLA agency. What I do in my own house is my own business. What I say can't be censored. What I do on the internet can't be controlled, censored or restricted in any way.

    --
    WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    1. Re:Internets ... serious business by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

      The internet is a free place. ANYTHING GOES. There are NO crimes on the internet.

      Exactly. That's exactly why you won't have a single problem going to your local police department's web site, and leaving a message saying you intend to blow up the building. Hey, it's "on the internet", fair game. And if you go to Obama's Facebook page and say you intend to shoot him at his next public appearance, there's no way on earth that you should expect the Secret Service to show up at your door because what you did was just "on the internet", where there's no laws. And maybe, just for fun, you could pick out some girl at random, and start leaving her messages that you're going to rape her, and that you know where she lives. No problem there for you, because you're "on the internet" and ANYTHING GOES.

      Go ahead. Try any one of those things. Let us know how it works out for you, but hurry.....after you're sentenced you may not have internet access anymore.

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
    2. Re:Internets ... serious business by geekoid · · Score: 1

      You're in idiot who ahs no idea what it's like to raise a child

      Bulling can be very serious and ahve critical negative effects, like suicide. It's not just the internet.

      If what you do in your house harms or effects other people, then yeah you can be restricted.

      Being on the internet is not being in your own house. Just like putting speakers up to your windows and playing White Snake at 200 db will be restricted.

      "here are NO crimes on the internet. "

      Well done, you have just made the stupidest statement ever made on /.

      Not an easy feat.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Internets ... serious business by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but the guy you are responding to is pretty much right on.

      Lori Drew was not made an example of and neither will these nine kids. They will get off. Because today there is pretty much nothing that can be done.

      If someone (or someone and their friends) decide to do some serious cyberbullying and you are the target you had better have a pretty thick skin. Running to your parents, the principal or the police will do nothing. If someone decides they are going to trash your life online, they can do this and nothing is going to stop them.

      Online has no consequences today.

      So someone creates a Facebook page that purports to be yours and has nothing but pictures of your head on various butch shemale bodies there... and maybe some really hot diaries about what a great time you had with the gangbang at the gay bar. Do you think there is anything on the planet that will get that taken down? Better have a pretty thick skin, because I know that it would be a really nice day when this gets passed around the office. Wait until someone edits some really gross snuff story to make it in the first person with your name featured as the main character, and puts it on "your" page. Any suitably determined person can take someone with any "online" friends and destroy their life, utterly and completely. For most people under 40 today the idea of being able to ignore this sort of assault is over and done with.

      What we have seen so far is very, very mild. A few children have killed themselves. The power of this hasn't been explored yet and in no way is the US legal system ready.

    4. Re:Internets ... serious business by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

      Wow, where are you people coming up with this nonsense?

      Lori Drew was not made an example of

      Irrelevant. The cases are nothing alike. In the case of Megan Meier, Drew and her employee played a seriously sick head-game with a kid, but didn't overtly threaten or harass her. That's why there was no solid charge to make against her. Not the case here.

      and neither will these nine kids. They will get off. Because today there is pretty much nothing that can be done.

      Wrong. They harassed her both physically and in writing, and it would appear that comments they posted were defamatory. They are not being charged with "Making someone commit suicide", they're being charged with criminal harassment, stalking, civil rights violations, assault, and in the case of the two boys, statutory rape. This isn't some nebulous set of charges that may or may not stick, they're pretty specific.

      Online has no consequences today.

      See my other post in this thread, and try one of the things I suggest there. Then let me know how it was all just laughed off as an internet prank.

      So someone creates a Facebook page that purports to be yours and has nothing but pictures of your head on various butch shemale bodies there... and maybe some really hot diaries about what a great time you had with the gangbang at the gay bar. Do you think there is anything on the planet that will get that taken down?

      Really? Because Facebook has policies in place to remove defamatory material, and once a John Doe lawsuit for defamation has been initiated, a court order can be obtained to get your name from them. Sure, maybe you created the account with a fake name, but it's funny how clever folks who "can't possibly be traced" on the internet get found when someone is motivated to find them.

      I know that it would be a really nice day when this gets passed around the office. Wait until someone edits some really gross snuff story to make it in the first person with your name featured as the main character, and puts it on "your" page.

      Yeah, you pretty much just went out of your way to run afoul of libel laws. From the EFF:

      What is defamation?

      Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice. State laws often define defamation in specific ways. Libel is a written defamation; slander is a spoken defamation.

      Sounds pretty much like what you described. False, unprivileged, harmful to reputation, and malicious. Of course, since it's online, it has no consequences according to you, but those of us who actually visit reality once in a while know that just ain't true.

      It amazes me how many people think that appending the phrase "on the internet" fundamentally changes things. Patenting a store "on the internet" is silly, it's still a store. Harassing someone "on the internet" is still harassment, and libel "on the internet" is still libel.

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
  124. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly. Loud mouth kids the teachers can barely control don't get the heat. The kid that gets bullied gets the heat. Yelled at. Outed, and forced to more torture and abuse (physical, emotional, structural). The teachers are often worse than the kids. If the kid brings a gun to school to protect himself, he is a 'nutter with a gun' but its ok for him to be abused daily. Punching, kicking, body slams, spitting, abuse are all fair game. It disgusts me.

  125. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Another Eastern European here, and I concur what Parent said. Bullying may have been a problem in 1st grade when you barely know where your classroom was, but after that it was not a big problem.

    One part of the answer why it was different in Eastern Europe is because the teachers (used to) have authority. It was unheard of to disrupt class, talk back, or, God forbid, fight with a teacher. In most cases the parents would be doing the physical penalty, even if the school only dings a point off your "behavior" number. But then again, parents also had authority back in the days.

    Of course, the mass pussification is slowly taking hold of Europe as well...

  126. Linguistic nitpickety curiousity by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    just desserts

    Unless you literally meant icing and cake, it's spelled just deserts. It comes from the word `deserve' and has nothing to do with low downpour terrain nor the final course of a multicourse meal. It's pronounced like "desserts", though, which confuses a lot of people.

    </picking-of-nits>

    1. Re:Linguistic nitpickety curiousity by Low+Ranked+Craig · · Score: 1

      Ya learn something new every day. Thanks!

      --
      I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
  127. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 1

    Kinda makes me wonder when the school shooting fad will hit again.

  128. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    I also was raised in eastern Europe and I can say that bullying was as bad - or even worse - there as is in western Europe.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  129. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by tftp · · Score: 1

    So you are saying we should punish bullies because their "victims" may be mass murder[er]s?

    Not "may be" but "may become." Kids learn not only from their teachers.

  130. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Mana+Mana · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    "I'm astonished every time I hear about bullying in North America. "

    There was bullying in Mexico reported too?

    Ah, in Canada then?

    South Americans are Americans too.

    As are Central Americans.

    American, or North American is incorrectly used to designate a USA citizen in the Americas especially and it'll be mocked snidely. Sometimes even Latin Americans make the faux pas.

    I particularly love it when USA citizens refer to home as "the States." Syllables are cheap add a U-ni-ted why don't you. Not to mention the trite, beat to the death "on the other side of the pond." Gad, save words, just say "across the Atlantic," you're not cool just pedestrian in your language use.

    Eats shoot and leaves. You pander bear.

  131. Shouldn't it be easy to teach the bullies? by AlgorithMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Shouldn't it be enough to tell a bully, that picking on someone can put you on top of his death list, should he ever snap?...

    --
    The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
    1. Re:Shouldn't it be easy to teach the bullies? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Threaten to take someone's life...

      Boy, you've watched too many movies. That menacing look the protagonist musters while he's being tortured / beaten / intimidated? It's not nearly as menacing in real life as they make it look on film.

      At best you look like you're constipated.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:Shouldn't it be easy to teach the bullies? by AlgorithMan · · Score: 1

      What I meant (and quite clearly stated) was: parents could tell their kids to NEVER pick on ANYONE, because you never know who will snap some day and take revenge... this should work especially well in these hysterical days...

      --
      The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
  132. Something important here by Whuffo · · Score: 1

    You'll note that the adults on the scene - the school administrators and teachers who knew what was happening and did nothing to prevent these crimes - are not being given the legal penalties that they so richly deserve. If the attacks were felonies, then in many states those school employees would be co-conspirators and charged accordingly. What the kids did was very wrong - but they're kids and aren't held to the same standards as adults are. But what the school staff did (or didn't do) is just plain wrong. Any functioning adult that would stand by and watch a child be abused isn't fit to work at a school.

    1. Re:Something important here by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "- the school administrators and teachers who knew what was happening and did nothing to prevent these crimes"

      And I hope to hell the each get sued for it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  133. Fighting back is the only solution by master_p · · Score: 1

    I was bullied in school as I was an introvert guy, up until I decided I couldn't take it any more. After some serious fistfighting that resulted in bloody wounds, the bullying stopped. Unfortunately, the only solution is to fight back.

    1. Re:Fighting back is the only solution by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Too bad all that happens now is that YOU would be punished and the bullies would be ignored.

      I
      Not all kids can fight back, and more often then not fighting back ends up being worse in the long run. Like when 5 football players decide to beat the crap out of you in the locker room.

        would rather live in a civilized world. One where bullies are dealt with at the get go, and inclusion is taught and enforced in the schools.

      I know it's romantic when the 90 pound McFly takes out the 200 pound Bif; in reality that almost never happens.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  134. really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jesus reading thru these slashdot comments by all of you people who were bullied and are now trying to equate your struggles to this poor little girl makes me want to slash my wrists

  135. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

    Otherwise known as eggshell skull rule.

    The term implies that if a person had a skull as delicate as the shell of an egg, and a tortfeasor who was unaware of the condition injured that person's head, causing the skull unexpectedly to break, the defendant would be held liable for all damages resulting from the wrongful contact, even if

          1. such damages were not reasonably foreseeable, or
          2. the tortfeasor did not intend to cause such a severe injury.

  136. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'm astonished every time I hear about bullying in North America. "
    South Americans are Americans too.

    True, but South Americans are not generally considered North Americans.

    I particularly love it when USA citizens refer to home as "the States." Syllables are cheap add a U-ni-ted why don't you.

    For the same reason I say "Germany" and not "Federal Republic of Germany" or "China" and not "People's Republic of China." Human laziness. (Actually, considering that "Mexico" is properly called "United States of Mexico," the moniker "United States" is almost as ambiguous as "States", and one can use the same argument for calling "USA" "America" as one uses for calling "Estados Unidos Mexico" "Mexico")

  137. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by LatencyKills · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'll bite - I was bullied in school, and the thought of suicide never crossed my mind. I did consider murder, though. Perhaps murder is too strong a word. I put a slit in the vinyl cover of my Trapper Keeper and slid in a long knife with the handle removed and replaced with a wrap of duct tape - the whole thing was about 8" long, very thin, and fit inside the cover nicely, invisibly. I said to myself that if those three kids (they were in the 11th grade, I the 8th) ever cornered me on the way home from school I would wait until they crowded me, and simply slide the knife out and drive it into the stomach of whoever was closest. I practiced it at home in my room for literally hours. Slide it out, drive it in. Easy. Would 5 or 6 inches of knife blade have killed someone? Maybe. Why didn't it happen? Because for some reason they moved on to torment someone else. It is essentially pure and random chance that lead me to not killing somone, and that thought is a little chilling. But as I started out saying, bullying, even something like daily bullying for more than a year, with some real physical injuries to show for it, and I never thought of killing myself.

    --
    Jealously hoarding mod points since 2007.
  138. Hmmm... by warGod3 · · Score: 1

    So in the physical world, especially in the past, if you were bullied, you either sucked it up, went to the gym and worked out and sought revenge, or got an upperclassmen or sibling to wreak some havoc on someone. How do kids do this in the virtual world? Hack accounts and seek revenge?

    This stuff has moved from physical bullying to virtual bullying. Here is what I learned from the article or had reinforced:
    * Teenagers suck.
    * Teenagers suck at coping with problems.
    * Teenagers suck at accepting change.
    * If you are teenager, know the laws regarding statutory rape because if you piss off someone, then their parents can press charges.
    * The belief that things will change if left alone is fantasy.
    * That examples like this happen all the time, now a bunch of kids have to cope with the fact that they treated someone like shit and she killed herself because of it. That's something that is probably going to stick with them years from now.
    * Teenagers suck.
    * Teenagers should probably be locked up at home until after high school.
    * Sometimes serving as an example sucks, but who knows what else it has prevented.

    --
    "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet." General James Mattis
  139. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the problems is that in America high school exists to get the kids credentialed into college. It is not run to get the kids civilized into adulthood. These kids are wealthy. If they had been disciplined for bullying this girl, their parents would have threatened to sue the school for compromising their college prospects.

  140. churls beget churls by ncmathsadist · · Score: 1

    I'm sure the parents of these predators have been repeatedly informed of their kids' outrageous behavior. The likely reaction: they abetted it. Now laugh as they cut huge checks to lawyers to defend felony raps. Sometimes, the karma wagon makes a delivery at a correct address.

  141. A message to parents of bullied kids by magamiako1 · · Score: 1

    A) Teach your kids to fight. Flat out, if a bully gets the shit kicked out of them it's usually a good way to get them to stop, because they'll continue to get the shit kicked out of them.

    B) For any of your kids that are being bullied, tell them to think of it this way: "Wouldn't it be a huge disservice to the world if these kids grow up and have children and raise them in the same way?" That's pretty much would helped me get through some of the crap I went through in HS.

    Seriously, fighting back is the only way. You won't get into too much trouble by hitting some kid. Suspension? Okay, big deal. Kid stays home from school and then they get to go outside and do whatever they want. If you're a smart parent, you would realize why your kid was in the right and wouldn't punish them.

  142. WAY Off Topic: Mexico's name by sgtrock · · Score: 1

    Actually, I think the full, official name for Mexico is "Los Estados Unidos de Mexico". The Federal Capital is known as "Mexico." It drove me crazy until my dad, a Spanish teacher, explained what the answer, "a Mexico" to the question, "Adonde va?" really meant.

    (says the gringo from the Upper Midwest who hasn't cracked a Spanish textbook or done more than order a beer in Spanish in probably 25 years. :) )

  143. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to defend the actions, but I know what you mean. I was a target of a group of bullies for a few years while the administration did nothing. It didn't stop until I beat the crap out of one of them with a bat in gym class.

  144. IRS cyberbullying? by tekrat · · Score: 1

    Serious Question:

    Some girl kills herself because she was "bullied" and the individuals are charged with all kinds of things (including rape?)-- THEY ARE AT FAULT, NOT HER...., but, some guy was "bullied" by the IRS, and kills himself by flying his plane into their building, and he's just a loon, no charges, no investigation, HE'S AT FAULT, NOT THEM.

    Why is it that we have one set of laws for some people, and another set of laws for other people?

    Please tell me how these two cases are different.
    Why are the charges different?
    Why is the person to blame for the tragic consequenses different?

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:IRS cyberbullying? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Because the person who flew their plane into the building wasn't actually harassed or bullied by any reasonable measure.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:IRS cyberbullying? by cdrguru · · Score: 1

      How about one of them was an adult and the other a child?

      Children are assumed not to have as much self-control and have a greater need to be protected. Once you are legally classified as an adult, well, you are on your own.

  145. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

    I am not disputing what you say at all. But let's be clear that "eastern Europe" is pretty vague. Experiences in Hungary, for example, might be quite different than those in, say, Bulgaria. And there is a sense of adult entitlement in most of the ex-USSR that is self-destructive to those societies in a way that is far far worse than any punk American kid who thinks he deserves an expensive car because he turned 16.

  146. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    This has been the teacher and administrator MO since I was in school in the 60s.

    I certainly felt the full fury of this one. I actually got kicked out of a school (Del Mar Middle School in Santa Cruz county, California) for beating up a kid... after I'd been there for more than a year of being bullied including treatment like this; stuff knocked out of my hands, physically attacked, continually verbally abused, forced to live in a state of terror which led to years of depression. And he started the fight and wouldn't let me leave, I literally begged him to stop before something in me snapped and I kicked the shit out of him. Time to go to school... I'm sick, I'd rather spend the day in bed, thanks. And my body will happily cook up some physical symptoms, too. Public school is evil and even if your kid is one of the ones who fits in and is only conditioned to accept violence around him rather than actually being bullied, sending them there is still child abuse. And yes, I tell this to my friends with children who send them to public school. I might even argue that allowing your child to attend public school is abuse, e.g., even if they want to go. It teaches them to accept the mob mentality and the cost of that is inestimable for all of us.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  147. Re:No one made her do it by tekrat · · Score: 1

    People are responsible for their actions but inhuman assholes get off scot-free?
    --- ---

    Yes, that's called People VS. Corporations.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  148. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by jockeys · · Score: 1

    I'm sure there were quite a few bullied kids who, upon seeing the events of Columbine unfold on TV, cheered for Klebold and Harris.

    --

    In Soviet Russia jokes are formulaic and decidedly non-humorous.
  149. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Toze · · Score: 1

    When I was in HS (oh so long ago), I got hassled, including waking up one night with a lighter and an aerosol can going off over my head. It lasted until the day I snapped and tried to pound one of my tormentors into the ground. He ran away, I got punished by school administration. Worth it, though; I stopped getting hassled. I have rarely used violence to solve my problems, but every time I have, it's worked really, really well.

    --
    No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
  150. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Toze · · Score: 1

    Ditto-ish. I grew up on a beef ranch, so I never felt emasculated, but martial arts is one of the greatest things for kids, I think. Self-control, self-confidence, self-defense, and a socially acceptable outlet for the desire to enter direct physical contests.

    --
    No OS on the planet can protect itself from a user with the admin password. - Yvan256
  151. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by ebuck · · Score: 1

    You can't respect a profession which takes credit for a community effort and then denies responsibility for something that's supposed to be their domain of excellence.

    Teachers stand up and state that they are building the future minds of the country, but when those minds come out sloppy and misshapen, they blame the parents, the administration, the poor economic conditions, the quality of the classroom, lack of pay, etc.

  152. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    I get this. The thing is, if this happened in a workplace, the perps would be in jail.

    But we allow it to happen to *children* every day.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  153. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    So you are saying we should punish bullies because their "victims" may be mass murders? Usually I'd end this with some condescending yet humorous insult, but you just might go on a killing spree and I don't want the law to come down on me...oh wait...

    We should prevent bullies from harming others because harm begets harm just as violence begets violence. If punishment is necessary, then let it occur. Putting schoolyard bullies to work improving their academic standing is probably the most logical response. I suggest teaching them history. Even if it is only effective as punishment through boredom, it will still likely be superior to other subjects in providing useful reeducation.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  154. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by rwv · · Score: 1

    Could it be the culture here?

    The situation you describe suggests that a sense of competition in America overwhelms the sense of collaboration present in Eastern Europe.

    I think this is consistent with the political and economic models that form the basis of society in these two different parts of the world. If things really are as you say in Eastern Europe, maybe there are different factors that make the competitive model superior to the collaborative one?

  155. truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean, if you've slept with two guys within two weeks of arriving at a school, and are Irish, then being called an "Irish Slut", while rude, is not necessarily libel...

  156. Great by geekoid · · Score: 1

    a bunch of childless nerds telling people about how children are.

    "and that her teachers were aware of it and did nothing"

    That's the real issue here. Chuildren will bully. That behavior needs to be corrected, and instead it gets ignored.

    Children are bullied.
    The victims of bulling can not strike back physically.
    That mean an authority must step in and stop it.

    What happens is that Bullies are ignored by teachers, and kids who strike back get suspended.

    A girls ego/self worth/ and value gets destroyed by bullying.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  157. Yup by phorm · · Score: 1

    From about grade 3 through to the end of high school. I was "well known", but definitely not popular (mainly due to mouthing off the *wrong* individual early on when he tried to assert his dominance).

    We're not talking just the usual name-calling crap either, but some rather extensive beatings that to this day have left small scars on the back of my head, and my two front teeth are a bit lower than they should be due to being punched in the face.

    The GP was likely not the victim of such systematic torment, or is too old to remember being young. It's not just the events happening at the time, it's the steady flow of mind-and-mood adjusting chemicals that tends to lend towards all sorts of rapid swings of mood.

    The funny thing is, I was more or less *voted* by the general populace to be most likely to go off the deep end, and yet I'm not one of those that ended up with scarred wrists, a nasty addiction, or any other such things. For all the torment, I just dove into other things that kept me distanced from the BS that was going on.

    I still remember to this day being very, very confused when there was a period of about a week where everyone in school was being unusually nice to me. I couldn't figure it out until about 2-3 days in when somebody told me about the Columbine incident. It seemed odd to me, since I wasn't a trenchcoat wearer and had little interest in guns/weapons/violence.

    So maybe my hobbies kept me sane, who knows. I did like games like quake, doom, etc, which may have help relieve frustrations (but really it was just fun to get out and compete with people on my level).

    To those in similar situations, life gets much better after high school. In the meantime, get out on your bike or whatever, get some some, and a bit of exercise. Sun = vitamin D = happier.
    After high school, you will likely meet more friends of similar interests in college etc, and if you do something about poor self-maintenance, probably some girls as well.
    Try meeting girls as just friends. Don't try and get in their pants. You'll learn a lot.

    Or, and stay away from drugs and excess. If you survived up until the end of high school, then things that mess up your mental state aren't likely to be all that helpful.

  158. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by okooolo · · Score: 1

    well, education systems in eastern europe are trying to emulate western models (god knows why) so things are changing for the worse all over .. however the sense of entitlement here in schools is in my opinion unmatched. Teachers are the best paid in the world, schools have amazing equipment (comparing to eastern europe), and yet you get all these problems. I won't mention the fact that if you're a good student here you're called a geek, where as in europe you're admired by your peers. I find that really strange. I'm curious about schools in Asia & Africa.. do they have a bullying problem as well? of the same magnitude? anyone?

  159. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

    I'm in pretty much the same boat; I used to seem very well adjusted...

    Then things fell apart, I found out I have no real supports in my life, and I fell. Hard

    Anyone who wants to tell me I'm inferior because I've attempted suicide can fuck right off.

  160. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You had a plan to fight back. A foolish one that would have caused you a lifetime of problems, but a plan. There were those of us that contemplated suicide but never contemplated fighting back. Some kids are just predisposed to being pacifist and in our society it is (often rightly) encouraged. I don't want to trivialize your experience because clearly if you were driven to those extreme measures you had it rough. But it doesn't sound like you truly knew the depths of helplessness some of these kids feel who don't realize that they can and *should* fight back when the system is failing them.

    My son is now nearly 3 years old and is showing a lot of the same traits I showed when I was a kid. He's incredibly kind and conscientious but self-conscious and meek when around other kids. My job over the next 15 years will be to teach him how to be confident and assertive while keeping his kindness. I plan on enrolling him in judo at a young age both to teach him the gentle way, but also to teach him the tools he will need if he ever ends up in the same kind of situations I was in when I was a kid.

  161. Re:Mod me up! by Ltap · · Score: 1

    The irony of this being modded "Troll"...

    --
    Yet Another Tech Blog
    (but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
    http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
  162. Re:Mod me up! by gedrin · · Score: 1

    Well, of course. I was actually refering to Zill's comment as being insightful. But, naturally, that has been degraded to -1 Flamebait at this point.

    --
    Moderation : -1 Conservative Viewpoint
  163. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by bmk67 · · Score: 1

    Of course not. It's a well-understood psycological condition in response to severe stress. I once was trying to save a 9 year old's life and failed. I sure know what PTSD is, and there wasn't a thing I could do to snap out of it.

    But if I'd killed myself because of it, there'd be something wrong with me. The deepest instinct we have is self-preservation. To consciously go against that is, by definition, irrational. The struggle for life is so built-in, one can't build a rational argument for it.

    The situation you describe here and the situation under discussion are like night and day.

    In your example of PTSD, there was no perpetrator. No mens rea, no actus reus. There is no one to be held accountable, as far as I can tell from your brief story.

    PTSD is horrible. My condolences go out to you for what you experienced, and I'm glad that you survived it.

    The fact remains that this girl did NOT survive, and that she was pushed to it by people with intent to inflict harm and/or emotional distress. That in and of itself is a crime.

    They deserve to be held accountable for their actions.

  164. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by ukyoCE · · Score: 1

    That line seems to resonate with the Slashdot crowd, but I can't recall any case of it actually happening. Columbine was misconstrued as a case of fighting back against bullies around here (including comments below), but that wasn't the motive behind Columbine at all.

    http://www.slate.com/id/2099203/

    Can you point out any specific incidents where a bullied kid turned into a mass murderer?

  165. Re:Her teachers were aware of it and did nothing.. by gr8dude · · Score: 1

    Hmm.. I'm from Eastern Europe as well, I've studied in several schools and the situation was different in each of them.

    When I started going to school - everything was 100% user-friendly, I really enjoyed studying during those years.

    At a later stage in my life my family moved to another city, the new school wasn't as good. On my 3min walk to school I could get bullied by people studying in another school (it was on the route), or by people from other grades in my school. And I've seen a lot of intra-class bullying too.

    The culture is the same (the country is very small [Moldova], I suppose there is not much variation here).

    I think the explanation is that in my first school teachers would establish a personal contact with every child and get involved in our lives. In the other schools the teachers would keep the distance and limit themselves to "I've discussed the materials with you, I'm done"; there were a few exceptions - and with those teachers things were always under control.

    Such an attitude has 2 effects:
    - for the good kids: "I know that someone cares" (thus studying is encouraged)
    - for the bad kids: "I know that someone watches me" (thus bullying is discouraged)