Facebook Comment Prompts Arrests In Cyberbullying Suicide Case

An anonymous reader writes "The NY Times reports on the arrests of two girls, ages 12 and 14, who allegedly harassed another 12-year-old girl who committed suicide. The girls are facing third-degree felony charges, and the police involvement was spurred by a comment on Facebook by the older of the two. 'In Internet shorthand it began "Yes, ik" — I know — "I bullied Rebecca nd she killed herself." The writer concluded that she didn't care, using an obscenity to make the point and a heart as a perverse flourish. Five weeks ago, Rebecca Ann Sedwick, a seventh grader in Lakeland in central Florida, jumped to her death from an abandoned cement factory silo after enduring a year, on and off, of face-to-face and online bullying. ... Brimming with outrage and incredulity, the sheriff said in a news conference on Tuesday that he was stunned by the older girl's Saturday Facebook posting. But he reserved his harshest words for the girl's parents for failing to monitor her behavior, after she had been questioned by the police, and for allowing her to keep her cellphone.'"

Comments

This

[barlevg]

But he reserved his harshest words for the girl's parents for failing to monitor her behavior

Children are sociopaths until they learn better / their frontal lobes finish developing. It's the parents who are at fault here.

Re:This

[Anonymous Coward]

Not all children are like that, and many adults are themselves sociopaths.

It's the parents who are at fault here.

Hardly.

Re:This

[ClassicASP]

I agree with the frontal lobe thing. I remember being bullied in Junior High. Some of my worst years in life were spent there. I don't like going back there because it brings back bad memories. I feel bad for kids going through the same thing because I'm sure technology has made the experience much worse today than it was back in my day. The truth is that kids have their own little privately-run societies in school (on a social plane) that the adults are quite powerless to have any real control over. And by granting them access to the internet, they wield a weapon that can be used to cause great harm to one another on that plane. Perhaps the internet should be regulated like Alcohol and Tobacco, where access is permitted only once a certain age of maturity has been reached. Not that I condone smoking or claim that setting an age limit has prevented drunk driving, but think of where we would be today had we legalized those kinds of things for minors. We've let them use the internet, and this "bullying" epidemic is what it has led up to. Perhaps change is in order and this is one of those lessons that should go in the history textbooks.

Re:This

[Vermonter]

I blame the grandparents for raising the parents so poorly that they raised the daughter poorly.

Re:This

[Wingsy]

You obviously don't have children.

Please take my advice: don't.

Re:This

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

Perhaps the internet should be regulated like Alcohol and Tobacco, where access is permitted only once a certain age of maturity has been reached.

Not only would that be completely unenforceable, but it's also an awful, draconian idea.

We've let them use the internet, and this "bullying" epidemic is what it has led up to.

So you suggest that we punish everyone (in a certain group) because of some bullies and an imaginary epidemic. Not sure I agree.

Re: This

[techprophet]

All the parents involved bear responsibility for this travesty. The parents of the dead girl needed to be there to support her, while the parents of the bullies needed to pay enough fucking attention to see how cruel their daughters are. Cruelty is not easily hidden if you pay attention to how people act to each other. I see it far too often even on a college campus, though still far less than in high school.

Re: This

[Twon]

I love how /. has truly grown up from being the "Voices From The Hellmouth" crowd to the "waaah, poor baby can't handle a little teasing" crowd. It's the classic "fuck you, got mine" but for advancing through life rather than up the income ladder. Where's the line for deserving sympathy, or even empathy? Does she have to shoot some classmates and THEN kill herself? Does she have to play video games first, and do people have to make that a public issue?

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

Children are sociopaths until they learn better / their frontal lobes finish developing. It's the parents who are at fault here.

Two year olds are sociopaths. Fourteen year olds shouldn't be- they can sometimes be stereotypically *insensitive* due to their brains still developing, but that's absolutely nothing like this.

The fact that she made comments like that even *after* the girl died (due to their bullying) indicates pure sociopathy. 14 (or even 12) is easily old enough to know right from wrong, whether or not they feel guilty about it. Regardless of whether the parents are to blame for not bringing them up with any sense of morality or empathy, they're easily old enough to accept (or made to accept) responsibility for what was done.

The most appropriate outcome in this case would be for that girl's actions to be widely publicised and for her to be subjected to endless harassment, abuse and ostracism for the rest of her life, until she does the decent thing (*) and kills herself.

(*) Albeit for purely selfish reasons- but you can't teach empathy.

Re:This

[Jade_Wayfarer]

Oh, please, many kids (especially teenagers) would not even answer the direct questions from their parents about bullying and similar stuff. It is normal to just say "It's nothing, it's okay" and go cry in your room (and maybe even try to kill yourself), rather than sit and tell your story to your parents - even if they are truly caring and compassionate.

People who are prone to the real suicide are much more quiet about it than some drama queens who are shouting "I'm going to kill myself!" several times a day. Well, the same thing with the real homicide, too - even as adults we are prone to exclamations like "I swear, I'm going to kill that guy!", but these exclamations do not correlate with the real murders so often, right?

It is truly a challenge for any parent to admit that there is something wrong with their kid (not mentioning some crazy hypochondriacs and the like), be it a suicidal or sociopathical motives. In this particular case I personally would put more blame on the parents of the bullies, than on the parents of the victim. At least with sociopathy there are often other signs that are hard to miss, and often there is something wrong with the whole family - abusive or neglectful parents, for example, or some other emotional disfunction.

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

The news report states...

In Internet shorthand it began “Yes, ik” — I know — “I bullied Rebecca nd she killed herself.” The writer concluded that she didn’t care, using an obscenity to make the point and a heart as a perverse flourish.

...suggesting a blatantly sociopathic personality and the likelihood that it was far more than just "teasing" in the first place.

The "coping skills" you advocate would- in this case- consist of figuring out a way of ruining the evil bitch's life.

Re: This

[bfandreas]

I love how /. has truly grown up from being the "Voices From The Hellmouth" crowd to the "waaah, poor baby can't handle a little teasing" crowd. It's the classic "fuck you, got mine" but for advancing through life rather than up the income ladder. Where's the line for deserving sympathy, or even empathy? Does she have to shoot some classmates and THEN kill herself? Does she have to play video games first, and do people have to make that a public issue?

I've been wondering myself. These past 15 years have changed the general tone on the net. It has become much more selfish and callous. And yet we wonder if a 14 year old is selfish and callous on the net?
If OTOH you refer to the brow-beaten bullied nerd we all claimed to be 15 years ago then I'm sorry. The internet has now become simple enough for anybody to use. Evidently you don't even have to be literate to use Facebook.

Re:This

[msauve]

Or instead, maybe simply expect parents to be responsible parents, instead of dual-income welfare providers.

Re:This

[dfenstrate]

The truth is that kids have their own little privately-run societies in school (on a social plane) that the adults are quite powerless to have any real control over.

You can find similar social structures in prisons, which calls into question the fundamental design of the public school system.

The kid's presence there is largely wasted effort, so they invent oft-destructive social games to use up their intellect and energy. This suggests that making school more rigourous & purposeful.

Specifically:

1) more difficult academics for the kids that can take it

2) meaningful job training in later grades for those whose interests lie elsewhere

We also need to nuke 'no child left behind' and anything that looks like it, so we can acknowledge that different children have different interests & capabilities, and handle them accordingly.

Re: This

[NatasRevol]

Gen Y sucks.

Re: This

[goose-incarnated]

Kill yourself. Drink some bleach and die. Now. Do it now. Now. Now. Now. Uh. Did I just commit a felony?

It's interesting that in this age of near-universal anonymity that people take pride in being arseholes. Do you take similar pride in being stupid? Do you proudly walk around saying "Hey, if I'm unable to perform simple arithmetic that's your fault"? Hmm? But here you (and others) are, proudly going around saying "I'm unable to fit into society and live by its rules, and anyone who faces the fallout... well, it's their fault for being thin-skinned and not my fault for being stupid..

Re:This

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of trying to arrest children for teasing each other parents need to pay attention to their kids.

Teasing is not the same thing as relentless humiliation on a day to day basis.

The girl is 14 fucking years old and doesn't give a shit if her actions potentially led this girl to suicide. If you don't think that failure is directly related to her parents choices then you are a fucking dolt. Normal people don't have this kind of emotional detachment to society, especially not at the age of 14.

Re:This

[archer, the]

The parents of all three girls failed in my opinion.

One set of parents did not teach their daughter how to deal with bullying, nor did they monitor her social life. Words *do* hurt, if one doesn't know how to handle bullying. We are not born with this ability.

Two sets of parents did not monitor their daughters. Not only could this protect the daughters from abuse/predators, it should've stopped the girls from abusing the victim.

Re:This

[Anonymous Coward]

FTA: Rebecca was told to “kill herself” and “drink bleach and die” among other things, the police added.

You lack of sympathy for this girl disgusts me. You, the bully, and her sociopath parents should all "drink bleach and die"

Re:This

[jythie]

Not all bullying is easily shrugged off. If someone chooses death over living with a situation, then it was probably somewhat worse then 'someone said something mean'.

While we like to think of ourselves as strong and can just decide 'it does not matter', people also have a rather bad habit of taking whatever they went through and assuming that other cases are as easily dismissed. I have seen some very strong people taken down by systematic harassment over an extended period. They knew how to 'deal' with bullies, but similar to how knowing how to walk is of limited utility when one has a broken leg, situations can be worse then what can be simply shrugged off.

Re:This

[sumdumass]

http://www.cracked.com/article_15658_the-ten-minute-suicide-guide.html

People should read that article.

You are likely correct. People i know of that has actually commited suicide hid their plans until they did it. I don't know a bunch of people who did it, but of the 4 or 5 over the last 45 years who have, we never really saw it comming. The one suicide that the person constantly claimed they would, was actually shot and killed buy a cop who responded to her threat of suicide. Of course no one thought she was serious about killing herself but the cop that saw the knife she was threatening to slit her wrists with.

Re:This

[MBGMorden]

If you'd read the article you'd see that they DID take her to get medical and psychological attention.

Re:This

[omnichad]

Mass genocide is the answer? Are you sure you're not the sociopath?

Re: This

[bfandreas]

The Baby Boomers were pretty bad. At least Gen X smelled nice. Seems like this generation stuff is like a Star Trek movie. The odd ones stink.

Re:This

[0111 1110]

Well from what I understand the way to deal with bullies is to actually fight them. Were these two girls so much better fighters? This girl should have just kicked their asses and then no more bullying. Of course usually bullies pick on weaker victims they are confident they can best in a fight, but I haven't seen any evidence of that here. Even in those cases you can always just pull a knife and stab them a few times or just hit them in the face with a sharp rock. Problem solved. No one will ever fuck with you again after that. I was mercilessly bullied as a child, in the sense that I was beaten if I did not obey orders. I should have used a weapon to even the odds and told them to fuck off.

Re:This

[BitZtream]

What you need is counseling.

Re: This

[jitterman]

How old are you?

Re:This

[Anonymous Coward]

That's why it is a parent's job to be a parent rather than a friend. If they are regularly clearly upset and don't want to talk about it, it's time to do some investigating or pressuring of your own. I'm not talking about if they have a mood one day, but if they are consistently having problems, you need to find out what it is.

That said, I blame the parents of the bullies far more as well. All parties were at fault, but you are right that it is easy to miss actual suicidal tendencies (particularly if you don't have training in such things. I say this as someone that was a crisis counselor in high school.) than it is to miss abusive tendencies, but as you said, that often comes out of the children not knowing how to have normal relationships because their house is just as screwed up or more.

I actually possibly feel bad for the girls that were doing the bullying too. They could be really, really horrible people, but chances are better that they simply were not raised well and didn't understand the depth of the impact of their actions. It's potentially very traumatic to cause someone to kill themselves as well. If they have any measure of humanity in them at all, it should be a very hard thing to live with.

Re:This

[SirGarlon]

I blame the grandparents for raising the parents so poorly that they raised the daughter poorly.

It's turtles all the way down! :-)

Re:This

[Anonymous Coward]

The most appropriate outcome would be for you to shut the fuck up. You're exactly like this girl. You go on about other people being sociopaths, then you say she should be harassed and then kill herself. Idiot.

The comments she made indicate perfectly normal cognitive dissonance. I'm surprised none of the armchair psychologists on here have spotted that. They don't indicate any form of sociopathy, not that you can diagnose someone based on internet gossip anyway.

Teens bully each other, the weird part here is the suicide, not the bullying or the comments afterwards, however they may look to the uninformed.

Re:This

[RazorSharp]

I would also add that we need smaller classrooms. It's easy to get distracted when the teacher has to give a generic lecture for 30+ kids. When I was in high school we'd play euchre in most classes and the teachers wouldn't even know. Some kids would chew dip, some kids would sleep. It just wasn't possible for the teachers to ensure that everyone was doing something constructive or paying attention. Class size is one of the most important distinctions between a crappy school and a good one, and unfortunately reducing class size costs a lot.

Re:This

[Kohath]

So you suggest that we punish everyone (in a certain group) because of some bullies and an imaginary epidemic.

Just like we do with alcohol, tobacco, firearms, pot, and not buying overpriced health insurance. Can we all finally agree that it's wrong to have the government punish the innocent?

Re:This

[PopeRatzo]

I blame all parents for everything.

Teaching your children the difference between right and wrong only takes a little bit of time and attention.

Plus, you have to know the difference yourself, first.

I don't know if the parents in this case were busy making a living or smoking crack, but they fell down on the job.

But I can't even imagine what it would be like to have your kid be a sociopath. It would feel like dying, I think.

Re: This

[cyborg_zx]

You obviously don't! Have children: don't ever stop.

Re:This

[Bigbutt]

Girls are verbal in their bullying. Guys are physical.

I was bullied in school as well and getting into a fight certainly stopped it. But girls actually physically fighting was pretty rare.

[John]

Re: This

[Jade_Wayfarer]

...a lot of people are like you and seem to romanticize the suicidal while aiming to punish perfectly normal adolescent behaviour.

Oh, man, I'd hate to live in the world you consider normal. Luckily it exists only in your imagination.

Re:This

[dfenstrate]

I just listened to Malcolm Gladwell's latest book (I forget the title), and he makes the point that a small class size is also a detriment to learning. Apparently the ideal class size is 18-24 students- too few and the classroom energy goes down and the students are like siblings in the back of a car.

Re: This

[omnichad]

No. That was not the aggravated stalking the article talks about. First of all, there's no stalking to speak of - it's a standalone comment. Second, even I'm missing some history and it was stalking, it didn't result in anyone's death.

Re:This

[omnichad]

It might not strictly be her parents. Not every parent has to deal with a sociopath child. And that's more likely a genetic cause. You could argue that every parent should be ready to handle a sociopathic child, but certainly most parents don't have to. On the other hand, it could be directly caused by abuse and harassment from her parents that made her this way. We don't know and we can't say.

Re:This

[WOOFYGOOFY]

Exactly correct. Children are not adults, just smaller and with less knowledge. That was society's idea of children when we were total know-nothings. Their brains are not fully developed, specifically the evolutionarily late the part of their brains which can process real morality- your frontal cortex, which represses, transmutes, modifies and finally governs the other more primitive parts of your brain- the amygdala especially. The amygdala is well developed in children and is the center for aggression, sexual motivation and the perception of your place in a hierarchy. The frontal cortex processes consequences and when developed its functions include complex and sophisticated capacities such as having pity on your perceived enemies, understanding the consequences of an action, understanding what the phrase "long term consequences" actually means, what "permanent" actually means beyond its literal definition etc etc etc.

Sure, perhaps she'll become an adult sociopath, but we have no way of distinguishing her as such at this age and don't let anyone tell you we do. I was bullied to an extent when I was young so I took an interest in this when I was in school studying the brain; I am not making things up or inventing an excuse for this girl. Facts are facts, and prosecuting this child as an adult is a regressive step borne of outrage, anger and fear.

Law enforcement looks to solve problems with the tools it understands how to use. Those tools are not always the appropriate ones. That's why there are other disciplines in the world other than law enforcement. The DA and sherriff doing the prosecuting here are not bad people, but they need to be stopped. We are skeptical when people start claiming we need new laws "to protect the children". So should we be skeptical when the criminal justice industry looks to expand its reach - and revenue base- into our children based on an appeal to the the medieval notion that children are just little adults, or more coyly, that while they're NOT adults there are SOME things they can surely understand and THIS is one of them.

The fact is , they don't understand right from wrong the way we do. This is a chronic fact of childhood that is not going away or getting better because it's not a disease. Even the "good kids" who do what we want are not good for the reasons we project onto them using our adult imaginations.

Consider this also. The de-criminalization of marijuana is going to result in a projected drop in revenues for the prison industrial complex. Don't think they don't know that and aren't extremely worried After all, they were the ones who pushed the legislature for the radical "three strikes laws" -, which put people in prison for life because they stole a piece of pizza ("third strike ! ") that led to their "booming business" in California and other states. Those states had so many people in prison that SCOTUS told them they HAD to start letting some of them go or raise taxes for more prisons.

Don't think they aren't now casting around to for new populations and behaviors to criminalize , because they are. One reliable source of "customers" would be our children who can be counted out to act in what would otherwise be considered criminal and outrageous ways were they fully adult. What we want to see is statistically fewer people in prison and involved with the criminal justice system overall as a result of the new decriminalization laws, not a steady state of our population thus engaged. You would think that would be a universal value we all share, but you would be wrong.

Re:This

[0111 1110]

Girls are verbal in their bullying. Guys are physical.

So IOW girls don't get bullied. Instead they get teased, insulted, and taunted and socially excluded by the more popular girls. Well guess what? Guys also get teased and taunted and insulted and socially excluded. Is it still bullying when that happens to a guy? Using the word 'bullying' to represent both physical intimidation and teasing is confusing. I suspect the confusion is intentional and politically motivated. It's an attempt to get around the first amendment and try to make certain kinds of speech that you don't happen to like illegal.

Look. I don't like people who tease other people either. I think they are assholes. I've never teased anyone in my life. But if we are going to put everyone who has ever teased someone else in jail we aren't going to have many people walking around in the outside world. If we are going to put everyone who has ever insulted someone else in jail then pretty much everyone would be in jail. I'm sorry, but that is just not the kind of world I want to live in.

Re:This

[Jeremi]

Who know who doesn't get bullied? Kids with backbones. Because it's no fun to bully kids who stand up for themselves.

Granting for the sake of argument that the above is true, how does one "stand up for oneself" against a flood of anonymous or pseudonymous nasty comments posted on the Internet?

Re: This

[Princeofcups]

I love how /. has truly grown up from being the "Voices From The Hellmouth" crowd to the "waaah, poor baby can't handle a little teasing" crowd. It's the classic "fuck you, got mine" but for advancing through life rather than up the income ladder. Where's the line for deserving sympathy, or even empathy? Does she have to shoot some classmates and THEN kill herself? Does she have to play video games first, and do people have to make that a public issue?

The Truth about De-Evolution.

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

So now saying mean things to someone is attempted murder? Nice.

Perhaps and perhaps not - depends on what you refer to by "mean things."

Saying "that's an ugly dress" would not really qualify; however, saying "You should drink bleach and die," as occurred in this circumstance, can be construed as either enticement or incitement, both of which are legally culpable actions.

Kind of like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater - Person A specifically directed Person B to harm, and thus, Person A is legally culpable.

Re: This

[0111 1110]

Well they had to try to get her for stalking because there actually aren't any laws on the books against "telling someone to kill themselves" or "relentlessly teasing" or "being impolite". I highly doubt there was actually any real stalking going on. Stalking is when you sit waiting outside someone's house and follow them around everywhere they go. That's why the (then controverisal) stalking laws exist. To prevent that particular behavior. Using those laws to go after these little girls is absurd and a perfect example of why slippery slope legal arguments are so compelling. The police and courts will *always* eventually attempt to overextend laws for some purpose for which they were not intended. This case is a simple attack on the freedom of speech in the US.

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

OP is referring to eugenics, not "mass genocide," whatever that's supposed to mean.

Re:This

[Aerokii]

I don't know if it's in the article since I heard this story last night on the news, but she did move to a different school. The bullying persisted over mobile devices and the internet. Admins and other parents were contacted, but alas, it proved too little, and now everyone involved suffers.

Re:This

[phorm]

I would argue that a 2-yr-old isn't a sociopath but may share some basic tendencies with such due to a lack of personal/mental development, but more to the issue at hand...

What *should* be the reaction to this death? Looking at many such cases, a common response from a normal reasonable human being would be shock, sadness, maybe guilt depending on one's association with the deceased. This girl doesn't seem to show any of these. In fact, she's showing smug satisfaction. It definitely feels like there's some mental/emotional gears missing in that one.

Re:This

[sumdumass]

Yes, the cop who was called to stop her from harming herself shot and killed her because she had a knife. A lot of people were pissed over that. Some of the cops were even outraged as they had dealt with her before and knew she wasn't a threat to anyone but herself. She had mental issues and had done the attemped suicide thing a couple times before.

Re:This

[omnichad]

And eugenics is just a euphemism. Hitler had a "eugenics" program. What is genocide supposed to mean? Killing people with a certain genotype. That's exactly what we're talking about.

Re: This

[omnichad]

Facebook and cell phones follow you into your own home. Clearly the girl didn't feel she had any other option, so why are you so quick to assume she wasn't being stalked? This has nothing to do with free speech.

Re: This

[RattFink]

Stalking is when you sit waiting outside someone's house and follow them around everywhere they go.

It's not:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0784/Sections/0784.048.html

Re:This

[LordLimecat]

If you don't think that failure is directly related to her parents choices then you are a fucking dolt

TIL theres no personal responsibility; if youre a messed up person, its not YOUR fault, its your parents fault!

Re: This

[0111 1110]

Wow. That's scary. Florida could put half the world in jail with that law. My state has no such insanity yet. Yet another reason not to live in Florida I guess. Notice how "cyberstalking" is specifically mentioned. That is a recent law. Not one of the controversial new laws from the 90s that I was referring to.

Until some point in the 90s it was perfectly legal to sit in your car outside your ex-girlfriend's house all day and then follow her around everywhere. I don't really see how that can be extended to the internet. There is no such thing as a "where" on the internet. Using the justification for that law as an excuse to outlaw cyberstalking is a perfect example of the sort of slippery slope thinking that I was referring to.

Re:This

[Eunuchswear]

"Teasing", "saying mean things", "it's not real bullying if there's no physical violence".

Do you have a problem?

How does it fit in with your sig?

"Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave."

Bullies victims tend to live in fear.

Re: This

[0111 1110]

Facebook and cell phones follow you into your own home.

Speak for yourself. I don't have a Facebook account or a cell phone. It actually is possible to live without those things. Of course if you are going to kill yourself every time someone says something mean to you then I don't think it would matter. People say mean things IRL too.

Re:This

[tlhIngan]

It's only an epidemic because the media portrays it that way. People being mean to other people is just a fact of life. It's nothing new, and I'd argue it was a lot worse in the past than it is today. The only difference is that today stories like this go national rather than remain confined to a local news station. Then the various news outlets beat the dead horse until a new salacious scandal can take its place.

The biggest problem with bullying today is this attitude that children need to be insulated from it rather than stand up against it. What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'? If we're going to blame anyone I blame this girl's parents for raising her to be so emotionally weak that she would rather die than stand up for herself.

Bullying is "less" today in that its less physical these days than in the past. However, it's also "more" these days because it's less physical and more emotional. And for kids who are still developing their emotional centers, it's traumatic.

Also, the internet does not forget An anonymous post on ask.fm telling a kid to go kill themselves does not disappear. And it's global - the old tactic of moving to another school or city? Doesn't work anymore.

Back in the old days, you knew your bullies. These days, getting an anonymous text is just as common, especially when spammed across an entire school. And stuff like that unfortunately lasts - a schoolyard bully goes away when the school day ends or they move ,etc. Today's bully, doesn't.

One can argue that perhaps the bullied should clean up their facebook page daily, but that gets tiresome quick, and just reinforces the bullying.

Perhaps if we rephrased bullying as harassment, which is what it really is, things get turned into a new light. Before it was local and gone from memory in a few minutes. Now it's global and permanent - "Sally is a poopy-head" disappears the moment it's said on a schoolyard, but stays forever on the internet.

Heck, it's the same problem we're seeing where one's casual after hours recreation suddenly has very real career-limiting effects. Where once no one cared you got drunk off your ass because once you recovered, only a few friends knew, well these days you post that on your social network page and not only does the world (and your future employer) know, well, it's there pretty much permanently. Except in that case, you had a choice to not post it. The harassed or bullied, well, that's not an option.

And grow a backbone? To whom? You don't know who sent the text, who posted the update, who set up the website, who called you the name. The internet is great at letting people be anonymous. You can't even face your bully.

Re:This

[stdarg]

Being "exactly like this girl" would involve picking on some arbitrary innocent person and bullying them into killing themselves.

Well you are suggesting that people harass a 12 year old girl and a 14 year old girl until they kill themselves.

Oh, because they did something bad?

When do we put the dead girl on trial so that we can determine whether these girls did a service to the world in getting her to kill herself, like you're suggesting? Because you'd agree with that I'm sure... if the girl deserved it, then the bullying was justice

Re:This

[cusco]

I tried fighting back, several times, and it just made matters worse. Bullies don't fight one-on-one, they come in packs. It wouldn't have mattered if I had trained with Bruce Lee, when there are seven or eight of them you're going down. Then the next day books and homework end up in the snowbank and your pants get ripped, because it's still seven or eight to one and now they're pissed off.

Re:This

[Eunuchswear]

What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'?

It was always a lie, mostly spread by bullies. Human beings are what they are because words are so powerful.

Standard bullying tactics is to use words until the victim snaps, then claim to be in the right because they didn't "initiate violence".

Re: This

[omnichad]

People say mean things IRL too.

And that's not a crime until it gets to the level these girls were at. You implied that this girl should get rid of her Facebook account and her cell phone. Of course she could live without it. But she shouldn't have to. Her freedoms were being trampled on.

Re:This

[Eunuchswear]

The comments she made indicate perfectly normal cognitive dissonance. I'm surprised none of the armchair psychologists on here have spotted that. They don't indicate any form of sociopathy, not that you can diagnose someone based on internet gossip anyway.

The only sensible comment in this thread so far,

Re: This

[0111 1110]

How did they force her to listen to their teasing? Last time I checked you can turn down a friend request on Facebook and make your page private so that only your friends can read it. You can even block people.

If someone is communicating to you and saying things that you don't like how about, I don't know, stop fucking listening to them? No. That would make too much sense. Those two girls had the right to speak their minds, to say whatever they wanted. They weren't forcing SuicideGirl to listen to them. They certainly committed no real crime and no SuicideGirl's freedom was in no way being trampled.

Re: This

[NatasRevol]

Won't argue with that.

But that doesn't invalidate my point.

Re: This

[pr0fessor]

The thing I find to be a problem is that the girl had already started cutting herself and received psychiatric care but no one actually addressed the issue. I imagine they put her on antidepressants, which we all know is worthless because it doesn't make the other girls nicer or teach you how to deal with the situation. They home schooled her and then transfered her to a different school, which is enough to cause problems for a normal well adjusted kid {at least short term}.

Addressing the issue would be talking to the other kids parents, or taking some kind of legal action {like a no contact order}.

Re:This

[stdarg]

GP is totally right. You can't control other people's children. You're not gonna get the bullies locked away in jail until AFTER your kid commits suicide, if ever. So don't bother fantasizing about that. All you can do is be involved with your own children and know what's going on.

Re:This

[stdarg]

Don't you mean that if you're a messed up person, it's not YOUR fault, it's the kids who tease you?

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

Genocide is the complete extermination of a race.

Eugenics is selectively eliminating less-desirable traits from the gene pool.

There's a world of difference between the two goals, regardless of how many traits they share.

Re:This

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Even in those cases you can always just pull a knife and stab them a few times or just hit them in the face with a sharp rock. Problem solved. No one will ever fuck with you again after that.

You say that as if "being left alone" would be the most significant result of an assault with a deadly weapon. It's probably true that no one would mess with you after that, but only because you'd probably be forced out of normal society.

Re: This

[BancBoy]

You ... children ... stop...

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

Well you are suggesting that people harass a 12 year old girl and a 14 year old girl until they kill themselves.

The 14-year-old one at least, if the evidence as reported is correct.

When do we put the dead girl on trial so that we can determine whether these girls did a service to the world in getting her to kill herself, like you're suggesting?

Not sure what point this borderline smartassery is trying to make. Is there any evidence that the dead girl behaved in a way that would have justified their behaviour towards her?

Though I do agree we should wait for the trial to see if the 14-year-old has her own explanation and/or justification for events that- as presented here- make her come across as utterly worthless, sociopathic vermin that deserves everything she was happy to dole out to others. Perhaps the dead girl really *did* do something that warranted that behaviour- I really doubt it, but we'll see.

Re: This

[TripleE78]

THIS!!!! I remember reading /. when Columbine happened. The sentiment was much more "I remember being teased and angry but unsure what to do. Thank goodness I didn't do that." and then a hearty middle finger and solidarity against Tipper Gore wanting to ban video games. I think there were some teen suicides[0], and it was the same thing of "I almost did that too." Sure, we had the usual "I fought my bullies, etc." but it was almost more of a how to guide, or "throw a fist before a bullet" sort of thing, not "Wow, what a pussy."

Seriously, /., remember where you came from.

[0] Note that as a child of the 80's, "teen suicide" was an "epidemic" then too. Our parents' media blamed it on punk rock and D&D. Same shit, different day.

Re:This

[gmack]

You know who got bullied a lot in my school? The kid with the pacemaker. Please tell me how he was supposed to stand up for himself. Also in my experience the kids who fought back ended up with the bullies coming back in groups.

The problem is the kids who bully and not the victims.

Re: This

[SecurityTheatre]

While it was a bit stupid, he's making a point.

How does bullying fall into the "serious crime" level, and when?

If I call someone ugly and they're already so down that it tips them over the edge and they kill themselves on the spot, am I liable?

When do I become liable? What if they are being abused at home, and that causes their poor mental state? Am I liable for "tipping the scale"?

Hmmm... think about it.

Re:This

[cusco]

I can't even imagine what it would be like to have your kid be a sociopath

For the financially privileged set it frequently feels like success. They're not at the top of the social pyramid because they're nice people.

Re:This

[gnasher719]

It was always a lie, mostly spread by bullies. Human beings are what they are because words are so powerful.
Standard bullying tactics is to use words until the victim snaps, then claim to be in the right because they didn't "initiate violence".

Remember that bullies are experienced sociopaths. Teachers are often socially inept or cowards or both, so they will side with the bully because they are socially inept and fall for the sociopath, or because they are cowards and expect less trouble from the victim than from the sociopath.

Re:This

[Dcnjoe60]

But he reserved his harshest words for the girl's parents for failing to monitor her behavior

Children are sociopaths until they learn better / their frontal lobes finish developing. It's the parents who are at fault here.

I'd like a citation please. It's pretty well accepted that the "age of reason" where a child can tell right from wrong is well before the age of the girl in this story. If you are saying that a teenager has insufficient frontal lobe development, then it would hardly be her parent's fault as she would be mentally handicapped.

Re:This

[omnichad]

Genocide doesn't mean race. That's just one thing it could mean.

You want to go back to sterilizing sociopaths and add to that forcing abortions?

Re:This

[Nyder]

But he reserved his harshest words for the girl's parents for failing to monitor her behavior

Children are sociopaths until they learn better / their frontal lobes finish developing. It's the parents who are at fault here.

No they aren't. Kids are find when they are younger, it's when they start going to school that the bad shit happens. Suddenly kids are put in a world of other kids, and who do all the kids emulate? Us. People older then them. TV shows, movies, books. We show them an "adult" world and expect kids to not behave like we do? They are not mentally able to deal with an adult world, yet that is what they emulate.

But other then that, kids need to develop a backbone. Ya, it sucks when you get bullied, but it's not the end of the world. But then for kids, when you haven't had that much of a life and you have years and years of school left, maybe it is the end of the world as they can see it.

Re:This

[tompaulco]

Well from what I understand the way to deal with bullies is to actually fight them.

No, that is not the way to deal with them. If you do that, the school system will punish you and not the bully. The school system has centuries of tradition to uphold and you fighting back against a bully violates that tradition.
When I was in junior high, I got fed up with getting bullied all year by one guy. Then one day, he hit me in the eye with a pencil, and that was the last straw. I struck back and, of course, him being much bigger and a wrestler, he knocked me down to the ground and started hitting me. I hit him back as well. Well, the teacher came into the room and broke it up, and we were both sent to the principal's office. My mother was called and she told them "its about time, He has been getting picked on all year by that guy." The school said they were going to give me corporal punishment and she said "no, you aren't". Well, they did anyway. And the bully got nothing. But I learned an important lesson. That is that you should always just lie down and take it, because the system is on the side of the bully. Same thing happened to my best friend, with a different bully. My friend got suspended for the rest of the year and the bully got nothing.

Re:This

[XcepticZP]

Seems like your answer to everything is violence. Like the other person told you, you need counselling. Something very wrong went badly in your life, and you need someone to talk to. I know that venting like this on the internet, talking about violence, and stabbing is soothing to you, but it's sadly only a temporary solution. You have deep-seated issues with violence, and you need professional help to help guide you out of such a place.

I hope you get the help that you deserve. Good day.

Re:This

[jythie]

Actually, no, fighting bullies works really well in the movies and some real life cases, but is often a very bad idea. Generally bullies do what they do because they are getting some benefit form it. If you challenge one you switch from 'source of benefit' to 'source of risk', at which point they often have a powerful incentive to not loose face. Even if you can take them once, they will often make an example of the person later. Escalation CAN be a solution, but by increasing the stakes one increases the blowback too, and the idea that bullies are just cowards who will back down is a common but dangerous myth.

So as with many things, the solution is pretty situation specific.

Re:This

[jythie]

Well, the key point is not teasing, but harassment. In theory at least it has to rise to a pretty significant level to actually cross the law. Kinda like stalking, you don't get arrested for stalking just because you happened to walk behind someone one day, it takes a pattern of behavior and a significant impact on the victim.

Re: This

[mdielmann]

How does bullying fall into the "serious crime" level, and when?

Let's say we're both adults. What if I lived in the same neighborhood as you, and worked in the same building as you? In this situation, I went out of my way to cross paths with you multiple times a day, and would verbally abuse you, taunt you, and say harmful untrue things about you. Every now and then, I hit you. Do we have names for this? Yes we do: stalking, harassment, slander, and assault. If you were an adult (and I could prove these things), you would be at risk for a restraining order, fines, and jail time.

Now we have a law, targeted at children, which simplifies the proof of and amalgamates these four laws with respect to children. So my question to you is: Why do you think that kids should be allowed, or even encouraged, to do these things to other people?

Re:This

[0111 1110]

Yeah. That can happen, but it's not always the case. When I was a kid, at least where I lived, it was considered dishonorable to gang up on someone. You'd be considered kind of a pussy if you couldn't fight one on one. So it could work some of the time if the bully has a sense of pride in showing that he can best you in a fair fight and not just with a group of friends helping him. Not that there is much you can do without a weapon and once you pull out a weapon you raise the stakes and all bets are off and you are again faced with defending yourself against everyone with him.

Admittedly there isn't much you can do against 7 or 8 assailants. At least without a real weapon like a gun and even that might not be enough. It's easy to forget how shitty life can be when you're a kid.

Where I lived if you were considered "tough" you would mostly be left alone by the bullies. The way to be seen as tough was to get into actual one-on-one fights and prove that you can win.

Re:This

[Stan92057]

Our prisons are full to the max with bullys so your fact of life has consequences.I will agree that the felony is a stupid outrageous charge since kids are the meanest people on our planet but punishment? hell ya and i can think of some really good ones. I had kids, so i got experience in creative punishment. I also told my kids never back down from a bully and never throw the first punch and you will never get into trouble at home.

Re:This

[jythie]

To expand, for instance, how I ended up dealing with my bullies was I 'nothinged' them. No reaction, no response, no acknowledgement, they stopped existing for me. They ramped it up for a while, but quickly found less and less benefit in harassing me. However this worked because of the specific people involved.

Re:This

[Stan92057]

Well i would say cut the internet cord for the kids sake. I stood up for myself in school but im male girls can be very vicious i am against the felony charge btw.

Re:This

[tompaulco]

You have a promising future career as a school administrator. Finally someone who understands that the rights of the bully need to be upheld while the people who are bullied need to be punished and ridiculed.
You know, it would also probably be best if we lock up all the law abiding people and have the criminals roam free.

Re:This

[mcgrew]

People who are prone to the real suicide are much more quiet about it than some drama queens who are shouting "I'm going to kill myself!" several times a day.

That's a dangerous misconception. Often, but not always, a person may show certain symptoms or behaviors before a suicide attempt, including:... "Talking about death or suicide, or even saying that they want to hurt themselves".

Always take suicide attempts and threats seriously. About one-third of people who try to commit suicide will try again within 1 year. About 10% of people who threaten or try to commit suicide will eventually kill themselves.

The person needs mental health care right away. Do not dismiss the person as just trying to get attention.

Re: This

[Seumas]

Yeah, my initial reaction was to be aghast that we've sunk to the point where being a meanie was a felony. It's terrible that this poor girl felt she had no option but to kill herself and the other girls are hideous human beings that deserve to shunned and ostracized by society -- but those things are best left up to society as a whole and not the criminal system. As much as all of these stories anger us, we have to remember that being "really really mad at how shitty someone is" is not enough justification to just dump over principals and common sense.

Additionally, if leaving a shitty comment on Facebook is "felony stalking", then what was it when that girl got my address from whois and showed up at my door, one night? What about that mental guy, years ago, who registered my name as a domain and started posting vile shit (even using my own whois information for his whois on it)? At some point, we have to just accept that many human beings are worthless heaps of shit and that when you are exposed to some one or two billion of them at once (the internet), you will inevitably run into them?

What's the resolution, in this case? The students at the school should shun her. The teachers should stop coddling her and accepting her behavior at school (teachers and school administrations are notoriously permissive of verbal and even physical harassment of students by other students, even right in front of their faces). Other parents should forbid their children from playing with her. Most importantly, her own parents should yank the internet and cell phone and everything else away from her and ground her for six or twelve months. You know, be parents.

Re:This

[triffid_98]

People blame the parents, right?
I used to blame parents for that kind of shit until I became a parent.
...and now I blame someone else


-RIP Greg Giraldo

Re: This

[tompaulco]

You have empathy for a girl who caused another girl's suicide and then gloated about it online? What a sick bastard you are.

Re: This

[Seumas]

Quit being hyperbolic. Slashdot has grown up and realized that getting retribution against a hideous person for hideous things isn't itself justification of shrugging off our principals and rights. Children should not be subjected to harassment at school and staff should enforce the policies instead of looking the other way *AND* people should retain the right to all forms of free speech. Suggesting that, because people aren't saying "yeah, throw the bitch in prison for the rest of her life for being a meany-head!" that they're in favor of just letting kids in school be shoved into lockers or incessantly harassed is absurd and disingenuous.

If we can accept that free speech allows Westboro to be a bunch of cunts in public (and we can find ways to deal with it like protesting against them when they show up or having massive hoards of bikers separate them from funerals), then I think we can accept that someone can be shitty on Facebook when they're a teenager and if you don't like it, block them, ignore them, ground them from the internet, address the behavior at school, address the behavior between parents, and so on.

Unfortunately, the common reaction is all too often "oh my god, a little kid! SHUT EVERYTHING DOWN! Put everyone in jail who doesn't have something nice to say!".

Re:This

[Ravaldy]

I understand what you went through. I dealt with it differently and it's because my parents though me how to deal with bullies and made themselves available to me if I needed help. In this particular case I first blame the girls who did the bullying, second the parents of the victim who weren't there to support her and third the parents of the girls bullying because clearly those girls didn't understand the impact of bullying other kids.

In today's society there is so much advertisement and various other coverages on this topic that the girls had NO excuse to continue the excessive bullying.

I believe that our schools and government are properly educating children and parent on this topic. I would never consider blocking access to technology to children because it's important for them to be hands on as early as possible (My daughter browses youtube since she's 4). To consider regulating ANYTHING over one incident is extreme to say the least. IMHO we need to focus efforts on regulating firearms before the Internet.

Re:This

[dfenstrate]

In theory this sounds very sensible, but it would cost more to tailor curriculum to individual student needs rather than the usual uniform lesson platform and standard droning delivery method (which reaches a minority of students).

You don't need to be that specific- in my high school, we had three different levels for most topics- Gen Ed, College Prep, and Honors. It seemed to be a reasonable seperation of students into relatable groups.

Re: This

[omnichad]

but those things are best left up to society as a whole and not the criminal system.

Society as a whole established a criminal system to handle it more efficiently. Anarchy isn't popular with society.

Additionally, if leaving a shitty comment on Facebook is "felony stalking", then what was it when that girl got my address from whois and showed up at my door, one night?

An annoying isolated incident. Not even non-felony stalking The felony comes from it leading to a death (the "aggravated" modifier).

What about that mental guy, years ago, who registered my name as a domain and started posting vile shit (even using my own whois information for his whois on it)?
Certainly slander. Most likely harassment. Those laws have been around a long time.

At some point, we have to just accept that many human beings are worthless heaps of shit and that when you are exposed to some one or two billion of them at once (the internet), you will inevitably run into them?

The law seems to accept that there's so many of them that you likely know one personally. And there's structure in place for things like restraining orders.

What's the resolution, in this case? .... her own parents should yank the internet and cell phone and everything else away from her and ground her for six or twelve months. You know, be parents.

And what if she was an adult? Apparently her parents should punish her but everybody should tolerate it if she's an adult? Again with the anarchy.

Re:This

[cusco]

Northern Michigan in the 1970s there was no sense of 'dishonorable', just win or lose, and nothing done on their side was ever considered 'cheating'. There were two sets of brothers in my school with their attendant cousins and other hangers-on who made my life a living hell. Worst beatings I ever got in grade school were the days that I fought back and the next several days in a row.

Re:This

[0111 1110]

For some problems violence is the only solution. The only way to 'resist' bullying is with violence. I chose not to go down that path, but sometimes I regret it. Sometimes I think it would have been better for me if I had met bullying head on with a weapon in my hand. Being a bully's victim changes you somehow. It is more difficult to respect yourself when you chose to submit and obey instead of fighting. I believe it had a deep effect on my psychology. If I could go back and do it again I think I would opt for using a weapon to even the odds and striking back at the bully. Trying to badly injury him without killing him and then facing the consequences.

Re:This

[jeff4747]

Well from what I understand the way to deal with bullies is to actually fight them.

You're wrong.

In all sorts of little fairy tales, fighting the bully makes the bully immediately run away, and things are all wonderful from that point on.

In reality, the bully goes and gets a few friends, and the real beating begins.

Re:This

[riondluz]

Strength has never been about the beating you can dish out as much as the beating you can take.

When you can take whatever gets dished out the bully gets tired and goes away, giving you time to plot your revenge:)

Re:This

[RazorSharp]

There's are simple solutions to all the problems you mention: Don't use Facebook or G+ or any other social networking site. Go to your cell phone provider and tell them you don't want to receive anonymous text messages because of the problem -- harassing text messages can also be dealt with by the police (but more importantly, they can be ignored). If someone sets up a website with the express purpose of defaming you or harassing you then all you have to do is shoot an e-mail to the company that hosts it. They won't want to deal with that liability.

Or you could just whine about the emotional vulnerability of THE CHILDREN! and tell them they're all unique and special like a snowflake and no one has the right to say anything that might shatter their ever so fragile self esteem. Go last place trophies! And let's charge children with felonies if they dare be mean to one another! Yeah, that's an awesome solution.

Re: This

[NoImNotNineVolt]

You obviously have children.

Please take my advice: don't.

Re: This

[Seumas]

Yes. If she were an adult saying shitty things, people would have to just tolerate it. I'm not sure what part of free speech is so complicated, here.

I can tell you that you are a piece of shit and should kill yourself, because the world would be better without you all I want, but I am not responsible for you choosing to do so. As shitty as it would make me to say those things -- and to then say I didn't give a flying fuck that you killed yourself after you did it -- I did not force you to harm yourself anymore than my words could force you to commit vandalism or larceny. We live in a society where you have the right to unrestricted speech. Even the most vile of it. We also live in a society where individuals are responsible for the actions they take.

Just because you are a shitty person doesn't mean you are a criminal or that you are criminally responsible for someone doing something to themselves. However, society around you could still feel that you are hideous and shun you as a result.

You need to get control of your emotions and apply sense to this situation. It's natural to react to all of these stories with "oh my god, that's fucking heartbreaking! -- STRING UP THE PERSON WHO SAID MEAN THINGS!", but it isn't right. It doesn't change what happened and it doesn't change the fact that this stupid little girl didn't put a gun to the other girl's head or a knife to her throat or push her off a building. Further, children are physically harassed constantly in school. Probably more of them are than are not. And they do not harm themselves. So to suggest that *words* should be responsible for someone harming themselves is ridiculous. These are fringe incidents and while the atmosphere of verbal abuse (which should not be tolerated in school) probably made things worse, they did not manifest themselves into corporeal form and murder this girl.

Ultimately, she is responsible for her choice and it is fucked up that nobody really stepped in to do something about it, while it was happening. Notice a pattern, here? This is what happened with the last story about this. And the one before that. In every instance, parents and teachers and administrators and friends were aware of problems. Maybe even took very minor steps to address them. However, somehow the kids were still always online, constantly plugged in, and using social networking, and seeing those mean things that supposedly forced themselves to end their lives. Great, you changed schools for your kid. Great, you homeschooled them. Why didn't you put a stop to their Facebook use, if that was the direct avenue these mean things were being said through?! A little sense, here, people.

Otherwise, if we go about your rationalization, the victims of Columbine are responsible for being killed. After all, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were supposed bullied in school and people said horrible things to them. Therefore, the bullies in school are responsible for the shooting rampage that ensued, right? Or do we just pick and choose when words magically take form and force others to take actions and when they don't?

But, hey, if you want to start stomping all over free speech to the point that your little nephew is going to have a criminal record for telling someone at school how much they stink and how much they suck and let some little kid become the scapegoat for the suicide of another little kid so that the school system, parents, and other adults and authorities that should have put their foot down and *FUCKING DONE SOMETHING ABOUT THIS SHIT WHEN IT WAS HAPPENING* can continue on with their lives changing nothing and feeling that "justice was done" on the back of a dumb little girl, then so be it.

Personally, I'd rather we acknowledge that words are words. They are not actions. They do not force anyone to do anything, even if they plant seeds or compel thoughts about things. I'd rather teachers stop looking the other way at physical and verbal harassment in an environment where people are supposed to be safely educated. I'd rather pare

Re:This

[danomac]

From experience -

I was bullied (both verbally and physically) in high school. It wasn't until grade 10 that I snapped and fought off two bullies that jumped me while the person I was with ran off in fear. The bullying stopped for me the very next day.

It had taken two years of bullying for me to get to that point. I never felt the need to take my own life, but I still remember the bullies' names today, about 20 years later.

This is not a solution for everyone - but for me, it did work. From that day until I graduated, all of the bullies left me alone.

(I should mention that was the first AND last fight I've ever been in in my life.)

Re:This

[cayenne8]

For the financially privileged set it frequently feels like success. They're not at the top of the social pyramid because they're nice people.

Err...that's a bit of a broad statement.

I've known plenty of people that were/are wealthy, popular...top of the "social pyramid" as you said, that are perfectly nice and great folks to be around.

There's assholes on all strata of society....but I find so far, that in most of my contacts with the different strata in society, folks are generally nice and good people.

And, I don't tolerate nor associate with assholes no matter who they are...I drop them from my circle of friends quickly.

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

Or how about we take her out to the desert and stone her? You know, like they do in some of those countries.

I don't think that would be a good idea. My suggestion- which wasn't intended as a judicial punishment, and didn't claim to be- was nevertheless what I felt would be the most appropriate thing to happen to the sociopathic bullying excuse for a human being.

Your idea, on the other hand, sounds like the barbaric treatment given to adulterers in backward religious countries... oh *wait*! I see... tee hee, you're clever. You weren't really advocating that, you were just trying to insinuate in a weaselish manner that you thought my views were equally barbaric, without actually making your case.

Re:This

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

The biggest problem with bullying today is this attitude that children need to be insulated from it rather than stand up against it. What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'? If we're going to blame anyone I blame this girl's parents for raising her to be so emotionally weak that she would rather die than stand up for herself.

You are exactly right! Like many of us here, I was bullied relentlessly for most of my school life. Teachers were useless, and my parrents "Just stay away from those bad boys.", was just as useless. The bullying stopped when I got pissed off enough and sent one of my bullies to the hospital, in front of the entire school, after an assembly. (A good choice as it turned out.) Fortunately for me, when it was just words I got the 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me' speech, and I listened.

I had this moron of a vice principal who believed it takes two to fight, and would send both people out on "garbage duty" together, unsupervised. I am sure you can guess what happened as soon as we were out of sight. So I admit I have some strong feelings about this topic.

Back on topic. If the parents had produced a strong resilient child, she would still be alive.
To any parents reading this, your job is to teach you child the skills to survive, not to protect them from everything. Because one day you won't be around to protect them.

Re: This

[omnichad]

We live in a society where you have the right to unrestricted speech. Even the most vile of it.

Not true. Slander is illegal.

But that's not the issue. The fact that the girls used words is not the defining factor in making this harassment or stalking. It's not even about the words they chose. Saying it's about free speech is just a strawman.

Re:This

[girlintraining]

Since you're both basically yelling "You're wrong!" at each other and neither one of you has been blessed with an abundance of facts on this topic, I shall dispense some now;

First, let's start with the definition. Sociopathy is a constellation of behaviors, not any one behavior, and you need to exhibit varying degrees of the majority of them for this to be true. Amongst others, these behaviors are: "failing to conform to society's rules, deceitfulness, impulsiveness, reckless endangerment of self or others, and a lack of remorse." The diagnosis is not made before the age of 15. Source: DSM-IV.

While there is a genetic component, it has been demonstrated that abused and neglected children exhibit significantly higher levels of antisocial personality disorder (APD, known to laymen as 'sociopaths'). Source. Research suggests that sociopathy is more a case of 'nurture' than 'nature' -- significant disruptions to hormonal balance, depression, and emotional trauma have all been identified in a significant portion of the clinical population -- too much to dismiss as coincidence.

In adolescents in particular, the failures often orbit around poor parenting and lack of school engagement. In other words, while the parents are primarily responsible, these children are very often also let down by a community and/or school simply unwilling to pick up the slack, as it were.

It is no surprise that teenagers are particularily suseptible to the development of sociopathy; it's been shown that sociopathy's neurological 'core' is the prefrontal cortex. We can actually put people who are sociopathic in an MRI and chart structural changes in the brain in areas relating to judgment, impulsiveness, aggressiveness and decision-making. It is thought that seratonin is the primary neurochemical. This is the same neurotransmitter targetted by anti-depressants. This part of the brain is undergoing rapid change in the adolescent brain, and as such presents a narrow window of opportunity to correct behavioral problems such as sociopathy... or to cause them. Regardless, once the person is an adult, these behavior changes solidify and become largely permanent -- APD is usually a lifelong diagnosis.

--
Now armed with some suitable facts;

... but that's absolutely nothing like this.

Actually, it's exactly like this. Teenagers are moody because their brains are being rewired while they're using them. Imagine trying to patch the kernel of a system while it's being used. In a computer, this usually results in the system crashing or "unexpected behavior". Unsurprisingly... teenagers exhibit similar randomness as neural pathways are rewired. This is a well-known process called Synaptic pruning and it happens at two points in a person's life: At birth until age 2, and again during puberty. Pruning is widely thought to represent learning.

The fact that she made comments like that even *after* the girl died (due to their bullying) indicates pure sociopathy.

I'm afraid that diagnosis cannot be made. You're operating under a large number of assumptions: Firstly, that everyone reacts to death the same way. Secondly, that the prior existing relationship between those people is immaterial in this reaction. Thirdly, that guilt, remorse, etc., are even bona-fide emotions and not simply social constructs. All three of those assumptions are false. If Obama were to be shot and killed tomorrow, many people would be celebrating his death. That doesn't make those people sociopaths. It makes them a great many other things with less than wonderful connotations, but sociopathy isn't on that list. These girls didn't like this other girl; It's not exactly out of profile that her death would not be taken hard.

And regarding guilt, remorse, etc., these are in fact socially-constructed. Guilt can only come from a person who identifies an action which violated their own s

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

Genocide doesn't mean race. That's just one thing it could mean.

Well, fair enough; per the US Holocaust Memorial Museum:

It is a very specific term, referring to violent crimes committed against groups with the intent to destroy the existence of the group.

Although, in fairness, geno comes from the Greek for "race" or "tribe."

You want to go back to sterilizing sociopaths and add to that forcing abortions?

Uh, how does pointing out the difference between genocide and eugenics equate to support of either philosophy? To normally-brained people, anyway.

Re:This

[e3m4n]

this used to be the solution that worked well for millennia. Now the anti-violence zero-tolerance groups have squashed school fights to such a degree that this other problem is now unchecked. I would rather my child get suspended and send another kid home with a broken nose or limb than internalize the problem over and over until they snap, either internally (suicide) or externally (columbine).

Re:This

[omnichad]

Uh, how does pointing out the difference between genocide and eugenics equate to support of either philosophy? To normally-brained people, anyway.

Teehee. Forgot you weren't OP.

Re: This

[e3m4n]

i would have empathized with her, but according to the article it was their complete apathy and bragging that they drove her to suicide, as if it was some achievement, that brought everything to light. Had it been a complete wakup call for them that they indirectly caused someone's death (defined as 'probable cause' for criminal charges) and they were now going through their own depression, I think you probably would be reading a different story with different comments in the threads.

Re:This

[goose-incarnated]

this "bullying" epidemic

It's only an epidemic because the media portrays it that way. People being mean to other people is just a fact of life. It's nothing new, and I'd argue it was a lot worse in the past than it is today. The only difference is that today stories like this go national rather than remain confined to a local news station. Then the various news outlets beat the dead horse until a new salacious scandal can take its place.

The biggest problem with bullying today is this attitude that children need to be insulated from it rather than stand up against it.

No, the biggest problem with bullying these days is that we are not allowed to hit the bully, which is why the bully gets away with it. Another big problem is that people like yourself feel it's no big deal. Luckily, if your kid bullies mine and I break your nose over it I only have to pay a small fine. More and more parents are starting to realise that it is better to simply go over to the house of the bully and break their parents nose.

What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'? If we're going to blame anyone I blame this girl's parents for raising her to be so emotionally weak that she would rather die than stand up for herself.

Who know who doesn't get bullied? Kids with backbones. Because it's no fun to bully kids who stand up for themselves.

Nope; the kids who get bullied are the ones who cannot stand up for themselves because the bully is some lumbering twat who's older and/or part of a group. You just look stupid (you probably are) when you say that a single small child is supposed to successfully defend against 25 giants. Did you even make it to high school?

(Yes, I'm calling you names, but you aren't allowed to call me names back; follow your own advice and simply stop being so emotionally weak that mere names get to you, you idiot).

Re:This

[Prune]

Mod parent down:

>you can't teach empathy

I call bullshit. For example, http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/05/20/0956797612469537.short and http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2333803

There are several dozen other studies you can find that show emapthy can be taught in cooperating subjects. Note, especially, that in the second link, it was the affective part of empathy that was increased rather than the cognitive aspect of empathy--the very thing that the doubters presume cannot be influenced (affective part of empathy is usually associated with antisocials/narcissists/etc., whereas cognitive empathy is more affected in autism spectrum disorders and such).

Even in psychopaths, empathy can be increased (as measured directly by imaging of brain activation, rather than relying on self-reporting from unreliable subjects): http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/content/136/8/2550.full?sid=a0dd82b4-a4aa-4af8-a9d2-e3d1ad6d2e97

>Two year olds are sociopaths. Fourteen year olds shouldn't be- they can sometimes be stereotypically *insensitive* due to their brains still developing

More bullshit. The prefrontal cortex doesn't complete development until early 20s and in adults its dysfunction is closely associated with antisocial behavior. There was a study some years ago that showed most children and adolescents, compared to normal adults, have significant impairment in recognizing facial expressions of fear (confusing it with things like surprise or disgust)--just like psychopaths, and that was also linked to incomplete prefrontal cortex development.

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

Uh, how does pointing out the difference between genocide and eugenics equate to support of either philosophy? To normally-brained people, anyway.

Teehee. Forgot you weren't OP.

Well, considering that OP suggested all children are sociopaths... sterilizing them would solve the overpopulation issue in a hurry...

Re: This

[Prune]

I've become convinced that places like 4chan breed sociopathy (conclusion from my own experience and that I've shared with others) by promulgating desensitization, a sense of being free from consequences due to (pseudo-)anonymity, and placing a user in an environment where schadenfreude is considered a virtue.

Re: This

[Prune]

I meant that others have shared with me, not the converse. So much for proof-reading...

Re:This

[Prune]

He's surely trolling.

Re:This

[stdarg]

Not sure what point this borderline smartassery is trying to make. Is there any evidence that the dead girl behaved in a way that would have justified their behaviour towards her?

I was trying to show you that the "harsh justice" approach taken with young teenage and preteen girls sounds crazy, just like the anonymous coward pointed out to you and which you disputed. Obviously it didn't work since you followed up with "Perhaps the dead girl really *did* do something that warranted that behaviour..."

make her come across as utterly worthless, sociopathic vermin that deserves everything she was happy to dole out to others

You really sound crazy calling young girls "useless vermin." I don't think you understand society. I suspect you have absolutely no clue why there's a separate juvenile justice system for instance and why it's a big deal when a minor is tried as an adult.

Re:This

[omnichad]

OK. I meant the one that you called OP way upthread. This is getting complicated.

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

OK. I meant the one that you called OP way upthread.

Oh, yea, sure, now it's my fault neither of us is paying attention!

This is getting complicated.

The best kind of -licated!

You would think at least one of us would have the good sense to knock it off by this point... However, my parents didn't raise a sociopathic quitter.

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

Regardless of whether the parents are to blame

No. You cannot simply dismiss the role of the primary caregiver like that.

I should have been clearer there; I'm saying that the parents might or might not share responsibility for what their children became, but it doesn't excuse their offspring. A significant number of sociopathic individuals who went on to commit terrible crimes had horrendous upbringings. Does that absolve them from responsibility for their own actions? No.

I'm sorry, but advocating a sociopathic solution to sociopathy earns you zero points in my book.

That's okay; I certainly wasn't competing for them(!)

As for that old "just as bad as them" chestnut that you imply by calling it a "sociopathic solution"- well, I have to disagree. There are lots of punishments that would be terrible if applied to someone who had done nothing to deserve them (e.g. prison- being held against one's will for an extended period of time is A Very Bad Thing, surely?)

Was I suggesting that courts should actually be able to award a punishment like that? No. Do I think that's what she *deserves*? Yes.

This is evidence of a deep-seated need for vengance on your part, which in turn comes from personal insecurities about yourself. Likely, the source of this is bullying in your own past and a projection of those negative feelings onto these children.

You made some interesting points- even if I didn't agree with them all- but you lost it here when you start delivering pat psychological diagnoses on the basis of an Internet post.

There is only one appropriate outcome here

What one deems "appropriate" is a matter of opinion.

Doing the best we can to rehabilitate the survivors

"Survivors" is an... *interesting* choice of word. It implies a level of equality between those involved that seems somewhat strange and inappropriate here- rather like referring to the mugger of someone who dies in the process as a "survivor" of that mugging(!)

Then again, this may reflect your empathy with the perpetrators when you comment that...

it's just as likely, if not moreso, that they are also victims

You'll forgive me if my utter lack of sympathy for the 14-year-old "survivor" kicked in long ago.

Re: This

[Anonymous Coward]

And for others, they fpouyght, lost, got blamed for being a troublemaker and were worse off than before.

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

I was trying to show you that the "harsh justice" approach taken with young teenage and preteen girls sounds crazy

Ah, I see- clearly you didn't make your point very well, then.

Obviously it didn't work since you followed up with "Perhaps the dead girl really *did* do something that warranted that behaviour..."

That was a reflection of what *you'd* apparently said- I didn't think that was very likely myself, on the contrary I thought it was pretty implausible, hence "I really doubt it".

Re: This

[mrchaotica]

The real issue here is the combination of online and in-person attacks.

If the issue is in-person bullying, just go home and maybe tomorrow they'll have forgotten about it (or change schools and start over with a new position in the pecking order).

If the issue is online bullying, just block the bully and you don't have to care anymore.

But if the issue is bullying in-person and online, then just going home or changing schools doesn't help because the online posts live on and remind everyone (or inform the bullies at the new school). And blocking the bully online doesn't help, because you can't block him from telling third parties to bully you.

Re:This

[girlintraining]

Do I think that's what she *deserves*? Yes.

Pretty sociopathic to suggest someone should be killed over words.

You made some interesting points- even if I didn't agree with them all- but you lost it here when you start delivering pat psychological diagnoses on the basis of an Internet post.

That's not a denial that you have some mental health issues that need to be addressed.

What one deems "appropriate" is a matter of opinion.

The girls you think death is appropriate for rationalized their behavior similarly.

Then again, this may reflect your empathy with the perpetrators when you comment that...

More likely it reflects my humanity; There are always better uses for a person than dying for the beliefs of another.

You'll forgive me if my utter lack of sympathy for the 14-year-old "survivor" kicked in long ago.

I'm sorry, I can't do that Dave.

Re:This

[omnichad]

You would think at least one of us would have the good sense to knock it off by this point... However, my parents didn't raise a sociopathic quitter.

We're both cyberstalkers now. It's just down to whichever one of us can commit suicide first and ruin the other's life....well and our own.

Re:This

[dargaud]

You're wrong. When you fight back a bully, they will pick an easier target next time and leave you alone from now on. I wish I had understood that before I was 16. From then on it was the end of being bullied. And a broken skull for the bully. Fuck him and his friends.

Re:This

[Dogtanian]

Pretty sociopathic to suggest someone should be killed over words.

Where did I suggest she should be killed? I suggested she should kill herself.

That's not a denial that you have some mental health issues that need to be addressed.

I'd assumed that you were making that "diagnosis" in good (if misguided) faith, rather than using it as an excuse for a veiled attack. My mistake.

Re:This

[CanHasDIY]

Well played, sir.

Re:This

[d18c7db]

They also bullied her offline. Perhaps we can take your suggestion to the next logical step and regulate life. Everyone goes to prison at birth and they only get out when they've demonstrated a certain level of maturity?

Re:This

[judoguy]

When I was a kid, you didn't even have to win. You just had to make the bullying not enough fun to keep doing, at least physically. Just knowing that they could beat someone up, but would get hurt some themselves, usually made it not worth the trouble.

Re:This

[sjames]

Only to an extent. Most have a conscience and an awareness of others as equals most of the time. They tend to have lapses where they just don't think about that though. It's more an impulsiveness and a thoughtlessness than proper sociopathy.

Others seem more truly sociopathic. Evidence suggests a percentage of that group may grow out of it and others not.

It is on the parents to provide the sort of guidance necessary to the category their child is in. But if the parents fail to manage that, someone has to deal with it.I don't prefer that police get involved in every transgression (as seems to be the trend) but this is a fairly extreme case.

Re:This

[sjames]

The school's zero tolerance policies will gladly beat down any kid who stands up for himself. Schools need to get re-acquainted with the concept of sore provocation.

Re:This

[jklovanc]

The truth is that kids have their own little privately-run societies in school (on a social plane) that the adults are quite powerless to have any real control over. And by granting them access to the internet, they wield a weapon that can be used to cause great harm to one another on that plane.

Adults do not have control but they do have a lot of influence.

There is the rub. The parents were informed of the bullying long before the suicide occurred and did nothing. they did not restrict their child's access to the internet in any way; internet motoring or taking away a cell phone. Had the bullies been grounded for a couple of months with no internet access except for school work I bet it would have stopped quite quickly. Perhaps some education on the consequences of bullying and the possibility of being responsible fore someone's death. Maybe having mandatory Bully Education classes much like mandatory driver's ed classes for traffic violations. It is not a perfect solution but it is much better than parents throwing up their hands and saying "we have no power".

Re:This

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet, they still left their psychotic little snowflake alone enough to run a muck on fucking FaceBook with no adult supervision. Some attention.

Re:This

[sjames]

I'll bet not one adult out there would actually follow the school approved procedure for dealing with the crap bullies shovel out. tell the boss? Please. Call the cops? Suuuuuure. Punch his face? probably.

I don't mean saying a few mean things, I mean active slander, tripping in the hall, hiding personal items and laughing when you try to find them.

Of course, most adults don't actually do things like that because they know they could end up getting hurt badly that way.

But for some reason adults expect 12 year olds to be big about those things and punish them if they aren't.

Re:This

[sjames]

We used to have no need for the workaround. We had concepts like sore provocation and fighting words to guide us. We also knew the difference between self expression and using words as weapons devoid of actual expression. For example, the classic yelling fire in a crowded movie house. It remains OK to yell movie in a crowded fire house, but you might be told to leave.

Re:This

[hurfy]

Its seems that the parents of the girl who tragically leapt to her death could have sought counciling or maybe they did for their daughter, I don't know, but may have been able to contact school's admin or move her to another school or something to prevent this sad, sad death.

They did change schools but it persisted online.
Apparently Facebook and stuff is now mandatory for kids as both suspect and victim seemed to continue. I guess i don't get how that works. You can't prevent someone from posting on your Facebook page?

Re:This

[judoguy]

If you don't think that failure is directly related to her parents choices then you are a fucking dolt.

You must not have children. I raised two great kids and have friends that raised kids I consider to be fucked up and you know what? We all did our best.

We're all hard working, happy, no horrible home lives, stable marriages, loved our kids and spent time with them. My kids are happy and fun to be around and my friends kid is in prison and will be for years.

It ain't all just "nurture" folks. I almost feel my kids turned out all right in spite of my parenting and my friends did absolutely everything they could.

People are affected by their parents but are also individuals who make choices, sometimes bad ones their parents would literally die to prevent if they could.

Re:This

[phrackthat]

I blame the grandparents for raising the parents so poorly that they raised the daughter poorly.

OK, can we just cut to the chase and blame God - if he/she/it hadn't done such a poor job on raising Adam and Eve, this shit would have never happened!

Re:This

[volmtech]

My youngest son was a psychopath. As a three year old he would grab a small frog in his fist, crush it and say "When I squeeze him, he squeaks." We had to teach him that frogs were living things and shouldn't be killed just to hear a squeak. It's called empathy. These girls think no more for other humans than my three year old thought of that frog.

Re:This

[RespekMyAthorati]

All morals and ethics come from society. So what?

If these bullies think it is amusing to crack jokes about the fact that they bullied another girl to death,
then something in their minds is deeply wrong.

Some kind of intervention is needed, or they (or others like them) will do it again. And that would be a shame.

Re:This

[RespekMyAthorati]

Bullies are always cowards, and as such, attack their victims in gangs. How do you "stand up" to an entire gang?
Also, the people most vulnerable to bullying are frequently handicapped in some way.

Re:This

[volmtech]

Your eyesight is that poor? Thirty desks is 6 deep five wide. The farthest student is only 20 ft away. I graduated high school in 1970, no one got away with anything. Small rural town, all white.

Re:This

[volmtech]

Lucky you. I was 12, my attacker 16, any fight and I would have ended up unconscious, again. My dad went to the bully's home and let the parents know that his son was not to be touched again. That guy never even came back to school.

Re:This

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

My father tried that.
He was unsuccessful.

Re:This

[volmtech]

There is hope. A student in a local school (Florida) was bullied on the school bus and threatened retaliation. The police were involved and found the student defending himself did not violate the school zero tolerance policy.

Re:This

[kaatochacha]

Every time I hear this argument, a little piece of the logical side of my brain dies.

Re: This

[sjames]

If you keep following him around day after day saying that constantly, it might rise to the level of a felony. Particularly if you can plainly see that it is causing serious emotional distress.

Now, take your own advice.

Re:This

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

Can we all finally agree that it's wrong to have the government punish the innocent?

Yeah.

Re:This

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

Gun control is evil.

Re:This

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

I wouldn't be against that.

Re:This

[I'm New Around Here]

Obviously, you had to teach him "No disassemble!"

Re:This

[WOOFYGOOFY]

No, he is saying that frontal lobe development is not complete at this age- a well known biological fact that has nothing to do with retardation.

As far as the folk concept of "age of reason" goes- citation please that this has any substantive scientific meaning.

Re:This

[Sabriel]

It depends a lot on the staff and the community. I was also bullied at school. With rare exception the teachers did not help, because (at least) one of them was actively encouraging the bullying going on, and the others either did not want to know and/or were themselves being intimidated by the bad staff (that last part I didn't understand until I was in my teens - when you're a little kid, adults are gods, and how can gods be intimidated by anyone?).

When I started having literal nightmares of getting killed at the school, I moved to a different school. Same city, totally different atmosphere. Main reason? The teachers _cared_. The principal _cared_. Not just passive sympathy, they had both a working moral compass and a backbone. They paid attention to what we were doing in class and out of it. They made sure there were adults "walking the beat" during playtime, not just standing in one spot or hidden in a staffroom. Nobody's little angel got to throw pencils - or rocks - with impunity.

It wasn't perfect, I don't know of any school that is, but the kids _knew_ the adults _cared_. It made an incredible difference.

Re:This

[Sabriel]

It's not a myth, it's just not a given. Some are cowards. Some are sociopaths. But since the victims are not trained in psychology, the odds of them making the correct assessment? Yeah.

Re:This

[Qwade79]

What ever happened to 'sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'?

Oblig xkcd: http://xkcd.com/1216/

Re:This

[Sabriel]

It's not just the anti-violence zero-tolerance groups. It's also the bureaucracy. You need teachers who care about the kids, both in and out of the classroom. And even then they need to have the _time_ to care - instead of having it eaten up by administrative crap that should have dedicated clerks handling it. That seems to be one of the biggest complaints I have from my teaching friends: dealing with the increasing bureaucracy.

Re:This

[volmtech]

I guess my dad was tougher than your dad. (Sorry, couldn't resist) Fortunately, that was the first, and last time I was ever bullied.

Re:This

[Raenex]

I've never teased anyone in my life.

I bet your never told a lie in your life, either.

Re:This

[volmtech]

Funny you should say that. He was home from college over the weekend and had a pile of old motherboards and was pulling the cpus looking for something he could use. He builds systems for his disadvantaged friends and just finished a new mid range game system for himself with a heavily modded lighted case. He's a nature lover now, the frogs are safe.

Re:This

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

I guess dad was tougher than your dad.

Does he take contracts? If so how much does he charge?

Re:This

[ultranova]

There's are simple solutions to all the problems you mention: Don't use Facebook or G+ or any other social networking site.

And while you're at it, stay out of the streets too, rather than whine they should be safe. Because clearly, if one gets mugged, it's their own damn fault for daring to assume they have a right to walk unmolested. And heaven forbid the culprit should be brought to justice.

It's always the victim's fault for being a potential target. Never the perpetrators.

And let's charge children with felonies if they dare be mean to one another!

Well, if the parents fail to socialize their kids and teach them what is or isn't acceptable behaviour, that doesn't exactly leave many alternatives, now does it?

Re:This

[Jade_Wayfarer]

Yes, maybe it was a poor choice of words on my part - of course you have to take threats to commit suicide (or homicide) at least somewhat seriously and not dismiss them outright. But my point was that often the opposite happens - there are no obvious signs of real treat of suicide until it suddenly happens. It takes special training or personal experience (not of the pleasant kind) to notice some subtle hints of this and take action in time. And in this case parents even took some measures to protect their child - only it was not enough. And that, for me, is the saddest part of this whole story.

Re:This

[L4t3r4lu5]

I say swap the education and defense budgets.

Re:This

[LordLucless]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess the cop wasn't prosecuted for murder/manslaughter. Did he even lose his job?

Re:This

[petman]

Parents, drill this into your children's heads: "Killing yourself, for whatever reason, is STUPID"

Re:This

[stealth_finger]

Apparenty, the cop though attempted suicide came with the dealth penalty.

Either way it's win-win. Suicidal ends up dead, cop gets to shoot someone.

Re:This

[stealth_finger]

I would also add that we need smaller classrooms. It's easy to get distracted when the teacher has to give a generic lecture for 30+ kids. When I was in high school we'd play euchre in most classes and the teachers wouldn't even know. Some kids would chew dip, some kids would sleep. It just wasn't possible for the teachers to ensure that everyone was doing something constructive or paying attention. Class size is one of the most important distinctions between a crappy school and a good one, and unfortunately reducing class size costs a lot.

Now-a-days as long as you do it quietly, you could probably murder someone in most classes.

Re:This

[operagost]

The bullying stopped when I got pissed off enough and sent one of my bullies to the hospital, in front of the entire school, after an assembly. (A good choice as it turned out.

Epic WIN. So I assume they expelled you after that, and welcomed the bully back to school with open arms after he healed up?

Re:This

[operagost]

Your brain chooses how to respond to hurtful words, while a beating is mostly about physics.

Re:This

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

Epic WIN. So I assume they expelled you after that, and welcomed the bully back to school with open arms after he healed up?

Strangely, no. This was 30+ years ago so things might be different now. But there was a teacher (My Gym teacher.) who grabbed me from behind, and I broke a couple of his ribs. I heard later that the school wanted this incident kept quiet. Something about how he grabbed me was against their rules.
You have to realize that my "plan" was not to put my tormentor in the hospital, I was intent on killing him with my bare hands. I still don't know why I didn't kill him.

Over all it worked out well for me. It was the last time I got into a fight at school, did wonders for my self-confidence, and taught me to stand up for myself. On a few occasions I was even able to stand up for someone else.

Re:This

[rally2xs]

You are dead on here. Bullies understand pain. This is _the_ way to handle it.

Re:This

[werepants]

Honestly, the internet provides potentially more subtle opportunities for targeted bullying to occur, but there's one big positive to internet bullying: there's an indisputable record of exactly how horrid these kids are being, and the right parties can be held responsible.

Childhood is terrifying - you don't have the control, choice, autonomy, or credibility to remove yourself from really awful situations like this. I don't think that the internet changes things substantially. I'm sure that a huge portion of teen suicides from way before the internet could still be attributed on some level to bullying. The difference is, now we can prove it and hold the assholes accountable.

Re: This

[SecurityTheatre]

Seriously, I asked a question. Where do you draw the line?

Because this is the fundamental question. Obvious, you can ALWAYS cite the extreme case and hold it up as "see look".

But you KNOW how laws distort over time.

We know shooting folks is bad, so is stabbing. But remember how 7 year olds are being suspended for making gun shapes with their fingers while playing tag (and how tag is banned at some schools), and 6 year olds are suspended for bringing a plastic knife to school to spread their cream cheese, and you will realize how quickly well intentioned things that reasonable people support, become gross and corrupted once they are in place.

The idea that saying something mean to someone falls into the same category as physically harming them is challenging. I'm not saying it can't be illegal, but it's EXTREMELY challenging and to deny that is asinine.

I'm so tired of people taking queries about the edge cases and asking the question (which YOU JUST ASKED) of "why do you think kids should be encouraged to harass people?" Which I clearly didn't imply. But nice straw man.

Re:This

[volmtech]

That was 50 years ago. He was a tough as nails farmer. He had to retire two years ago at 81. He's just a big softy now. I took after my mother, no toughness :(

Re: This

[mdielmann]

It's no straw man. Part of the definition of bullying usually involves persistent behaviour in the part of the bully - random acts of violence tend to be a different problem. Bullies often have their preferred targets. Therefore, many bullies engage in stalking and harassment, both of which have persistent behaviour as part of their definition. So yes, I think that bullies should be dealt with. I also think that dealing with bullies should include expulsion as a last resort. The bullies have a problem, just as those bullied do. Explaining they are wrong and teaching them appropriate behaviour solves a lot more problems than just suspending or expelling them.

Re:This

[Ol Olsoc]

I agree with the frontal lobe thing. I remember being bullied in Junior High. Some of my worst years in life were spent there. I don't like going back there because it brings back bad memories. I feel bad for kids going through the same thing because I'm sure technology has made the experience much worse today than it was back in my day.

Well yes, to a point. I myself was bullied too. But we all react differently. In my case, I decided that I had enough, and the next person that tried bullying me, paid pretty dearly. Yes, I got in some trouble at school for it, but after one or two more incidents, the bullying stopped.

There are more things going on here. Many people are bullied at some time in their lives, yet they don't kill themselves. You didn't, I didn't - even if we had apparently different approaches to the problem.

The children who have decided that the approach to bullying is to commit suicide probably had a whole lot more problems than just the bullying.

Which is why I'm pretty lukewarm to the whole idea of trying to regulate the whole thing. The best response to the internet bully is to just go some place else, something not possible in a neighborhood or school, where bullying can take on some crazy aspects requireing a child to move to another school. Facebook and twitter are not legal requirements, despite what many think.

And where are the lower limits of cyberbullying? If a couple breaks up on line, with say one telling the other they hate them, and the other one then commits suicide, was the "I hate you" person cyberbullying the now dead one? What if one calls another an asshole?

Some times I think that as a society, we have become almost completely reactionary, expecting every problem or tragedy to be resolved by some one going to jail, or even better, being executed. After all, isn't it a little shocking these days to read about an auto accident, where the end of the story was "Police say no charges were filed"?

But that is where we are. I will not be at all surprised to hear a story about how a romance broke up online, the poor woman (face it - we're a sexist society, and a male would be looked at a a dork for offing himself) killed herself - Police have arrested the man for felony cyberbullying. Being that sexist society, it will be even worse for him if she was really pretty.

Re:This

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

When the physical/emotional assault is serious enough, however, the perpetrator should be punished.

Only if you don't believe in freedom of speech.

Re:This

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

In all sorts of little fairy tales

As well as in all sorts of real scenarios that really happened. Sure, it doesn't always work out that way, but to say it's a fairy tale is simply false.

Re: This

[cheekyjohnson]

I feel it's very much about free speech, and no newspeak-esque nonsense about how the harassment wasn't speech will make me believe otherwise.

Re: This

[omnichad]

I didn't say the harassment wasn't speech. I said the harassment didn't have to be. And that speech being involved doesn't automatically make it a speech issue. That you think an argument with nuance is somehow a twisting of words means you're already not willing to think hard enough to "get it."

Re: This

[cheekyjohnson]

I said the harassment didn't have to be.

Well, I agree with that.

And that speech being involved doesn't automatically make it a speech issue.

I suppose the mere fact that speech was involved doesn't necessarily mean it's a free speech issue; it depends on what they're after these people for.

But we're discussing this case, and I very much believe it's an issue of free speech.

That you think an argument with nuance is somehow a twisting of words means you're already not willing to think hard enough to "get it."

"get it"? What, intent? If so, intent is utterly irrelevant to me in cases such as these.

Re: This

[omnichad]

I don't think it's an issue of being censored. Everything the girls said was protected speech. Once or twice. But when you turn that into a repetitive action and use it for emotional abuse on a daily basis, why is that still a speech issue? It's not like it's about censoring their words - they've said it all before and nobody prevented them from saying it once. They just wouldn't stop. That's what makes it harassment and it didn't have to be speech. It could have been calling her phone and hanging up all day long - there's another example of something speechlike that doesn't need free speech protection.

Re: This

[cheekyjohnson]

I don't think it's an issue of being censored.

Censored? No. The problem is that the government is trying to punish them.

But when you turn that into a repetitive action and use it for emotional abuse on a daily basis, why is that still a speech issue?

Because, at that point, you're punishing them for saying certain things more than you'd like.

It could have been calling her phone and hanging up all day long

It could have been any number of things, but as far as I know, it wasn't. What matters to me is what actually happened.

Re: This

[omnichad]

It could have been any number of things, but as far as I know, it wasn't. What matters to me is what actually happened.

As far as you know it wasn't. What if it was? What do you think qualifies legally as harassment/stalking? Because you can't just use speech as your method of harassment/stalking to earn a get out of jail free card.

Re: This

[cheekyjohnson]

What do you think qualifies legally as harassment/stalking?

If the law disagrees with me, then I believe it is morally wrong.

Because you can't just use speech as your method of harassment/stalking to earn a get out of jail free card.

That might be the case, and if it is, then I disagree with the law.

Re: This

[omnichad]

So you're saying that you don't believe that harassment/stalking should exist as crimes in any form?

Re: This

[cheekyjohnson]

I feel stalking laws are silly. If you know of any harassment laws that deal with things other than mere speech, then I may take that into consideration.

Re: This

[omnichad]

Stalking laws are silly? Really? What are criminal laws for except to have protection from other people? Or are you against criminal law too?

Re: This

[cheekyjohnson]

Stalking laws are silly?

In cases like this, I definitely think so.

Yeah, right ...

[gstoddart]

But he reserved his harshest words for the girl's parents for failing to monitor her behavior, after she had been questioned by the police, and for allowing her to keep her cellphone.

Most parents can't or don't monitor what their kids do on the internet, and most parents are under the belief their child is a little angel who would never do something like this (or consider it to be 'normal' childhood stuff).

I suspect most parents do not have the kind of control over their kids this sheriff thinks, and likely aren't that interested anyway.

From what I've seen, most parents are either clueless or turn a blind eye to the fact that their kids are rotten little bastards.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[darrellg1]

Most parents expect others to parent their kids.

FTFY

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Lumpy]

"Most parents can't or don't monitor what their kids do on the internet, BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO LAZY"

FTFY

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Most parents are a-holes, an apple does not fall far from the tree.
99% of people are mother fuckers anyway, so yeah.

Moving on.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[PolygamousRanchKid]

their kids are rotten little bastards

Or, possibly, the parents are big rotten little bastards.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[skovnymfe]

Don't have the kind of control? You mean they can't cancel the phone subscription? You mean they can't lock the kid in a room and take away the phone? You mean they can't beat the kid senseless? What?

Re:Yeah, right ...

[bignetbuy]

That's no damned excuse. This kind of behavior by children is unacceptable. If the parents neglect their duties then law enforcement has to step in. So now my tax dollars are paying for your neglectful parents. :(

Re:Yeah, right ...

[gstoddart]

Don't have the kind of control? You mean they can't cancel the phone subscription? You mean they can't lock the kid in a room and take away the phone? You mean they can't beat the kid senseless? What?

Well, no, they can't beat the kid senseless. Mommy and Daddy would have a nice visit from the cops if they did it, and the kids bloody well know that.

Ever seen a parent negotiating with their child to try to get them to do something? One gets the distinct impression that a lot of kids wield a lot more power than their parents do, and the parents try very hard to beg, plead, or bribe their kids into doing something.

I've seen a lot of parents who apparently can't control their 5 year old -- by the time those kids are teenagers I suspect those same parents have very little ability to control them.

So, no, I'm not entirely convinced that the parents wield nearly as much authority as you believe.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Gravitron 5000]

... and then get offended when anyone else tries to.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Care to qualify your "most parents" assertions? Or are you just making shit up like everybody else?

There are at least a billion parents in the world, so I'm going to need more than a "from what you've seen" before I let such a ridiculous, self-serving generalization stand unchallenged.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Any parent who 'negotiates' anything with their child is a dead loss.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[CowTipperGore]

But that's still a failure on the part of the so-called parent. If you can't outwit a 5 year old, you have no business trying to raise one.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, if you propose a way to following them closely on the Internet, I bet half of slashdot would scream for their privacy. If you don't, the other half will bitch that the parents weren't paying enough attention.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Anonymous Coward]

From what I've seen, most parents are either clueless or turn a blind eye to the fact that their kids are rotten little bastards.

That may be your perception but I've seen numerous instances where it's just a refusal to accept the reality that their kid is a jerk. One of my friends growing up had another kid pull a knife on him, and a whole bunch of kids saw it. It happened at a bus stop and was premeditated (knife was hidden in a bush), so it involved the school. Parent's response? "That doesn't sound like our little angel". Same kid, as an adult, tried to steal a cop car parked in front of a cops house, made the front of local news, picture plastered all over our media. Yea, little angel.

We also have a friend with a daughter about our kids age (weeks apart), this daughter routinely bites, kicks, punches and just plain takes whatever she wants from the other kids. Last time I saw it, the mom didn't even address the behavior. Often it's a very sedate "don't do that" and nothing more. Her rationale for her daughter? "She's a tomboy". Bullshit, tomboys dig, climb, make up and/or play sports, and it's hard to make such a label for a toddler. This kid is a bully, pure and simple.

Of course there's a ton of other examples, and i'm sure there are some parents that are just plain blind, terrible parents. I've just seen more ignorance and apathy than disregard.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[BonThomme]

I think you really mean "negotiates from weakness". Negotiating with your kids actually teaches them a great deal.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Curunir_wolf]

From what I've seen, most parents are either clueless or turn a blind eye to the fact that their kids are rotten little bastards.

Exactly, and that's the situation here. The parents were quoted on GMA this morning as claiming that there is no way their kid said that, and their Facebook account must have "been hacked". Total denial.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[TheCRAIGGERS]

Haha, I threatened to call the cops / child protection services on my Dad once. He simply said "Go ahead. I'll beat the shit out of you until they get here."

Guess who won that standoff.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Ogive17]

Maybe religion has it right..

"Billy, if you do not eat your vegetables God will strike you with a bolt of lightning and you will spend an eternity rotting in Hell."

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect you've never even observed most parents, in fact I doubt you've observed even one parent within a sufficiently objective setting to draw any kind of conclusion.

What parents realize that non-parents don't is that children are not play-doh ready to be molded into any shape you please, they are independent people with independent personalities that have nothing to do with they way you'd like them to behave. And your job isn't to mould them anyway, it's to support them. It's non-parents who are clueless about the situation in-the-large, but BOY do they love to make comments from a position of utter ignorance.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[nblender]

I have put lots of effort into monitoring my son's internet usage... I started with a socks5 proxy and a crowdsourced whitelist/blacklist.. He figured out how to bypass proxy settings. I've tried legislation... I've even set up my cisco switch to duplicate packets from his network port (and the wifi basestation) to a packet capture host filtering on his traffic... By the time he was 10 years old; he had learned how to disable dhcp and give himself a static address. He'd learned how to disable the proxy. He'd broken in to the neighbors wifi access point to bypass my network completely. He's not trying to do anything nefarious (that I know of); he's just a problem solver... If the firewall is a problem, he'll solve it. He's 12 now. If we take away his computers, ipad, ipod, cellphone, etc... He finds them in the middle of the night... We've reverted to education about the dangers and pitfalls. Ultimately, it's better to teach your child to make smart choices than to micromanage and microlegislate them... I'm not saying my son is smarter than I am, I'm saying he will find a way to get around whatever obstacles I put up... Every child is unique. I have friends with kids who happily stay within the constraints of 'parental controls' settings. My son got past those when he was 8.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[CanHasDIY]

Or maybe it's because if they micromanage their child's life it will cause resentment and their child will never trust them.

Right, as there's no middle ground between absentee and helicopter parenting.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[LordLimecat]

So, no, I'm not entirely convinced that the parents wield nearly as much authority as you believe.

Then they lack a backbone.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[swb]

I'd be more than a little worried. If he does that with the computer, what the hell will he do with the car??

If he's finding his stuff when you have taken it away, how do you punish that? If it was my son I would be inclined to take them away on a more long-term basis, up to just getting rid of them or making sure they were totally inaccessible (like leaving them at a friend's house or another place).

The issue isn't his technical ability, it's his absolute lack of deference to parental authority.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[ak3ldama]

Kid having a tantrum in the store because you won't buy Fruit Sugar Pops cereal? Take the kid home and spank him, then leave him home with mommy or daddy, and do that EVERY TIME he misbehaves at the store. He will learn quickly not to do it.

Buy the little brats a container of oatmeal like it is 1932, or 2013, and teach them some real life lessons. Better yet take the time to make your own granola, show them how to do it and clean up afterwards. If they won't help, then - of course - just feed them the oatmeal while you eat the delicious granola.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Arker]

"That is because the parent is more interested in being their kids friend than their kids parent."

Do you suppose that might have something to do with the fact that laws have been changed around the world that make it a criminal act to discipline a child physically?

Not going to deny that idiot parents might use that abusively, but good parents who used a strap of leather or a birch sapling on the rare occasion when you got completely out of line were the regular thing when I was a kid - now these people would be jailed and their children put in foster care.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[SecurityTheatre]

Great point. +1 Parenting

Re:Yeah, right ...

[RazorSharp]

I think that monitoring what your child does online qualifies as helicopter parenting. I can understand some type of filter system (proxy or software, like what schools have) that will block out porn and extremist hate sites, but on social sites like Facebook or G+ it's difficult to meddle without being overbearing. Especially for preteens. But I don't even know how one goes about that on smartphones. I'm sure there's probably something.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[jeff4747]

You aren't putting up terribly high barriers. For example:

If we take away his computers, ipad, ipod, cellphone, etc... He finds them in the middle of the night

This is easily solved.

Option 1: Take the devices to work. Leave them there.

Option 2: Get a framing hammer. Forcefully apply it to his favorite device. Repeat as necessary.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[betterprimate]

Why does your kid have a computer, ipad, ipod, and cellphone? More specifically, why do you continue to let him have them after he's repeatedly rebelled against you? Have you tried selling all of them and disconnecting the internet from your house, then reintroducing them when he's learned to behave?

Parenting is only affective when you're consistent.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[camperdave]

A lot of people are raising 5 year olds because they couldn't control themselves 5 years and nine months earlier.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[CanHasDIY]

I think that monitoring what your child does online qualifies as helicopter parenting

I think there's a middle ground; going all NSA on them and logging every single thing they do? Yea, helicopter parent to a T.

Sitting with them as they go through the comments on their facebook page? Hell, that's just being attentive, and if there ends up being something there your kid doesn't want you to see, then it was worth the effort.

I can understand some type of filter system (proxy or software, like what schools have) that will block out porn and extremist hate sites, but on social sites like Facebook or G+ it's difficult to meddle without being overbearing.

Funny, I have pretty much the opposite philosophy (except when it comes to porn); the 'extremist hate sites' are something a kid would be willing to talk to a parent about, and gives parents good opportunities to bond with their children while educating them on some of the stupid this world has to offer; A child is less likely to take Al Queda's website seriously than they are the things their classmates say to them online. By blocking some sites and refusing to monitor their social media, you're doing more harm than good, IMO.

Especially for preteens

Which brings me to my next point: you're their parent, not their buddy. Sometimes you have to be the 'bad guy' for their own protection, because being kids they lack the cognitive abilities to protect themselves. They might say they hate you for it now, but in 20 years they'll be thanking you for taking an interest in their future.

But I don't even know how one goes about that on smartphones. I'm sure there's probably something.

You mean, outside not buying them one in the first place? Yea, probably.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Prune]

Because their parents were also rotten bastards, ad infinitum, ad ubsurdum.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[nitehawk214]

I'd be more than a little worried. If he does that with the computer, what the hell will he do with the car??

Perfectly tune it and keep it in working order... then wreck it on a joyride.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[mrchaotica]

Quit treating what is supposed to be a lesson on respecting authority as a game of hide-and-seek, you dumbass!

Re:Yeah, right ...

[jklovanc]

You are playing his game. For example, you say he finds his toys if you take them away. Put them in a locked container. If he breaks in, make him pay for the replacement and do it again. Try grounding him. If he want to go somewhere or lay with someone say no and tell him why.

Ultimately, it's better to teach your child to make smart choices than to micromanage and microlegislate them...

True but there is a balance between the two. It is hard to teach consequences when a child has no empathy.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[sjames]

Part of what ticked the sheriff off is that the parents didn't confiscate the 14 year old's cellphone AFTER she was taken in for questioning. Surely the parents noticed their daughter in handcuffs loaded into a police car. Perhaps it occurred to them to ask why. Clearly they didn't care that much.

Usually the handcuffs and cop cars and stuff are enough to break the spell.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[sjames]

I wasn't allowed to have a phone in my room when I was growing up, so I tapped in to the phone loop with a pair of headphones and pulse dialed.

Perfect control of kids is impossible. Especially when too perfect control can be as harmful as not enough.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[bibliophage]

Hah! My mother's reply was, "Do you think they can get to you before I can?"

Re:Yeah, right ...

[TheCRAIGGERS]

You may think it a joke, but it wasn't to me at the time.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[TheCRAIGGERS]

Oh? So threats of violence no longer work on the weak? I'm sure many people will be thrilled by that news.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Lumpy]

" But I don't even know how one goes about that on smartphones. I'm sure there's probably something."

Forced VPN back to home in the settings and use the home firewall for filtering. Works great if you have a phone that lets you lock the settings so the kids cant change it back.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Lumpy]

" If we take away his computers, ipad, ipod, cellphone, etc... He finds them in the middle of the night.."

you need a better safe, and if he figures out how to crack the safe, then you need to send him to a better school for the gifted so he becomes disgustingly rich using his talents.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Lumpy]

Or better yet, has some scruples and completely crash wallstreet erasing all ownership data and bring back some semblence of sanity to the world.

Re:Yeah, right ...

[Lumpy]

Exactly, want to really teach him? give him a box of old computer parts and say, "you want a tablet? build it"

Editors, please.

[ThisIsSaei2561]

From TFA: "Both were charged with aggravated stalking." Not sure why this was omitted from the summary, and only the vague "third-degree felony charges" term used. Combined with the somewhat misleading title, implying that it was only facebook comments that got these girls in trouble, it's disappointing link-baiting.

Re:Editors, please.

[Anonymous Coward]

[0] Yes, from the perspective of the police, "cyber-bullying" is considered Aggravated Stalking (this is the charge).
[1] Aggravated Stalking is a Forcible Felony in Florida.
  - Florida is a Stand Your Ground state.
[3] Stand Your Ground states that you may use deadly force if you believe it will prevent someone from committing a Forcible Felony.

Have A Nice Day.

[0] http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2013/784.048 section (1)(d)
[1] http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2013/776.08
[2] http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2013/776.012

And what is up with the captchas? Captcha: gunshot

Re:Editors, please.

[ThisIsSaei2561]

Simplified to a silly level for the joke; "Don't post that Facebook update, or I'll shoot!"

Re:Editors, please.

[Whorhay]

I wonder if the parents tried or even knew that they could apply for a restraining order against the bullies. Florida actually has state laws that allow for restraining orders for Stalking that is broadly defined in such a way that it would have definitely been applicable in this case.

http://www.womenslaw.org/laws_state_type.php?id=15038&state_code=FL

Re:Editors, please.

[rahvin112]

Personally I don't really like the stalking charge. I'd like to see community shunning like what happened to the bitch in texas that did something similar. The community backlash against the behavior cost the parents their jobs and they were forced to move. This lesson would have never been realized if criminal charges like this stalking charge went forward and generated no real punishment.

See the community backlash generally doesn't happen if a criminal case is attempted. I personally think that community backlash IS the appropriate response. The parents of the kids responsible bear as much guilt as the kids and punishing the entire family through shunning is far more effective of a punishment than some silly criminal charge that won't even result in real punishment.

Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is slashdot - we believe in libertarian ideals. This is the government prying into our personal lives and harassing these girls over words they posted in their private facebook accounts.
Right?
Right?!?

Or does that expectation of privacy only apply to your porn collection or your deep seated desire to make it onto one of the prepper TV shows?

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

Right?
Right?!?

Given that it was posted on Facebook, I'm not sure about it being "personal," but this story certainly involves government thugs.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[barlevg]

I'm probably in the minority of slashdotters, but I have no problem with the government spying on my communications and seeing what porn I watch--the only problem I have is with how this information is used. Even then, if the government ever came to me and said, "Do this, or we tell the world about your [redacted] fetish," I'd respond, "Go ahead. And I'll tell the world about how you tried to blackmail me." Guess who'd be in more trouble?


And yes, I do get off on looking at those blacked-out lines on partially de-classified documents. My horrible secret is now known.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[nedlohs]

Sure, if the police got the facebook post via an illegal search. If it was a public confession of a crime or a private confession was reported to the police by one the people it was told to, then no.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

but I have no problem with the government spying on my communications and seeing what porn I watch

Then you're ignorant about the importance of privacy.

the only problem I have is with how this information is used.

Given the sorts of governments we've seen throughout history, it would be foolish to believe that the information would not be abused.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[SJHillman]

You have a redaction fetish? The FOIA must be like mail-order porn to you.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Salgak1]

Indeed, why the criminal charges at all ? Now, I can see CIVIL charges, suing the girls and their parents, but criminality ? Yes, the speech WAS offensive, but unless I'm mistaken the First Amendment was still the law of the land. . .

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[BanHammor]

Facebook comments are not private. Felonies also exist, although I'm bothered they didn't search for any other evidence.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[barlevg]

Dude.

And yes, I do get off on looking at those blacked-out lines on partially de-classified documents. My horrible secret is now known.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you have libertarian ideals. You'll probably not read this because I am posting AC, but I do not have libertarian ideals.

Posting as an AC? Are you suggesting that Slashdot isn't tolerant of non-orthodox points of view? Say it isn't so...

(from one AC to another)

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Jade_Wayfarer]

Your cellmates would be really interested in your stories. And you would have plenty of time to tell them, being in prison for the possession of child pornography. Maybe somebody there would even believe that "it was planted".

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[barlevg]

First off, if I legitimately have child pornography on my computer, I deserve to be sent to prison. Secondly, law enforcement would need to obtain some sort of warrant and show probably cause to in order to go rifling through my files. Hard to explain to a judge, "My buddies at NSA told me to look for the kiddie porn they planted on this guy's machine." Third, and finally, if someone in law enforcement wants to frame me for a crime, they can do it just as well without the vast intelligent gathering network of the NSA behind them.

Note, I'm not naive enough to think that there's no easy way around Point Two, but Point Three still trumps it.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[0111 1110]

This is slashdot - we believe in libertarian ideals.

Are kidding? Slashdot had an unusually large percentage of Libertarians back when I joined when there were only half a million members. Now that there are more than 3 million it's just mainstream politics here. Some mixture of Democrats, Republicans, and Greens. If anything I'd say the Green Party is unusually dominant now in terms of non-mainstream politics, but I'd say the vast majority of Slashdotters are Democrats.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[bfandreas]

I'm probably in the minority of slashdotters, but I have no problem with the government spying on my communications and seeing what porn I watch--the only problem I have is with how this information is used. Even then, if the government ever came to me and said, "Do this, or we tell the world about your [redacted] fetish," I'd respond, "Go ahead. And I'll tell the world about how you tried to blackmail me." Guess who'd be in more trouble? And yes, I do get off on looking at those blacked-out lines on partially de-classified documents. My horrible secret is now known.

The problem is that you CAN'T ever trust a system no matter how benevolent to always do the right thing. Human nature will always be the weakest link. I can fully understand how NSA geeks could sink so low as to use the gathered data for personal interests.

But there's private stuff(like your giraffe porn fetish) and public stuff. And Facebook is indeed very public. Much more public than an open street. Also Facebook is much more permanent. If you are an asshole on the internet the Wayback Machine will come back to haunt you. And you can't unpost anything that gets potentially replicated thousandfold.

That being said, there is stuff which you publish and there's stuff you keep to yourself. If you publish foolishly then that's not a privacy concern. If you transmit encrypted giraffe porn to your stash(btw, how do you keep a giraffe concealed beneath your bed) then that's very private.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Jade_Wayfarer]

Well, there is still such thing as "parallel construction" (if I remember the term correctly), and it is much easier to present a solid case against you if said agency already have all details about your personal life in the first place - less work needed to invent something up. Government efficiency at its best, ain't it?

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[barlevg]

Yeah, except I have far greater faith in government inefficiency than I have fear in its malevolence.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

Dude.

And yes, I do get off on looking at those blacked-out lines on partially de-classified documents. My horrible secret is now known.

Dat Japanese cartoon porn, yeah!

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

I believe you'll find that the first amendment only says the government won't censor you. You can however still be criminally charged for what you say.

The first amendment guarantees freedom of speech, which is the freedom to not have government thugs harass you for your speech. You do not understand the first amendment; it lists no exceptions. Really. Read it

For example, you can be arrested for inciting a riot, which usually comes from speech.

Another example of the government violating the constitution and/or freedom of speech. Just like free speech zones, protest permits, the NSA surveillance, the TSA, border searches, and a host of other nonsense.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

Slashdot had an unusually large percentage of Libertarians back when I joined

Those types seem more tolerable than these oversensitive obsoletes.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[RazorSharp]

I don't think I've heard anyone even mention the Green Party since Nader was relevant in 2000. Maybe in 2004.

Just from observation, I would guess that Slashdot is approximately 1/3 libertarian, 1/3 socialist, and 1/3 'mainstream' (Republican/Democrat). I'd agree that the vast majority of American Slashdotters probably voted Democrat in the last election, but that's probably more a reflection of the Tea Party influence on the Republican party than the voters being more liberal. Intelligent fiscal conservatives don't really have a viable party right now with the way the Tea Party is shaping the Republican party.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[the eric conspiracy]

There are no absolute rights. The concept is moronic. The fact is that the enumerated rights conflict in many ways, and much of jurisprudence is based on resolving these conflicts. And a lot of the resolution lies in common law that predates the Constitution.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[Artifakt]

I've noticed another such contradiction in so much of Libertarian doctrine. If Government really always entails the legitimizing of some uses of force by their being in response to others initiating force, and should stay out of all other areas where someone has not initiated force, then what about taxation to pay for those 'legitimate' aims? So long as there's some chance, any chance, not enough people will voluntarily pay to fund courts, police, and military defense, government may have to initiate force against those who don't 'voluntarily' pay for their share. But that means there's at least one purpose that is legitimate to the government, that doesn't involve a response to pre-existing force, and that's raising the money to pay for it.
Now that's the extreme libertarian (small "l") position, and it's easy to call it a straw man, but let's look at a more nuanced and expanded version of libertarianism as a real philosophy. It doesn't help if the typical libertarian model adds fraud, threatening or other such things to crimes of direct force, taxation itself is outside of those categories as well. You can also substitute some plan where the costs of government are so low that "voluntary payments are always going to be enough" and there's no force needed for taxation, but the accounting and tracking funds, auditing where they go, making sure waste stays low, and such is still outside of the group of things libertarians claim are legitimate functions of government. Fund raising and fund management areas are supposed to be 'outside' of the systems they manage - If these functions aren't 'outside', then most of use would say the regulatory department has been "captured" by the police or military departments, and that's not, again to most of us, a good thing. I doubt it's seen as a good thing under libertarian philosophies either.
If it's legitimate for government to implement even just one department - we'll call it a "department of fund-raising and management" so as not to take sides on whether taxation by compulsion must be allowed, but still a department outside of the libertarian law enforcement and military group, why is it necessarily illegitimate for the government to implement any others? Why, for example, can't governments take 'promoting the general wellfare' as their legitimizing mandate for a dept. of transportation, even if that dept. is not about using force in response to force? The dept. of fund raising and management isn''t about that either.
If Libertarianism holds that fund raising has to be by voluntary means so as not to give a department, outside the force-response departments, power it should not have, why can't government implement other departments that also have no power to respond to force? What's fundamentally wrong under a libertarian position with the government doing any program that doesn't involve response to force, on a purely voluntarily funded basis? If military and police functions can be completely funded on a voluntary basis, why can't people choose voluntarily to fund something like an educational system or, for that matter, a space program?
Libertarians seem to take the position that people will always be willing to pay enough to voluntarily fund the police/military budget needed, but won't ever voluntarily pay for other things. That seems spurious. What happens if court fees just happen to raise more money than the libertarian government needs for its police and military departments? Do they have to give those fees back? What philosophical point in libertarian thinking holds that the government can't keep voluntarily donated revenues and put them to some non-forcible use, but must refund them? Isn't the free market about charging what the customer will see as a price they are willing to pay for the service? Why should our hypothetical government be the only entity that must be compelled to charge less than t

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[0111 1110]

I legitimately have child pornography on my computer, I deserve to be sent to prison.

---barlevg

You've got cojones. That's for sure.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[0111 1110]

Just from observation, I would guess that Slashdot is approximately 1/3 libertarian, 1/3 socialist, and 1/3 'mainstream' (Republican/Democrat).

2001 called and wants its slashdot demographics back. They claim it's theirs and if you don't return it you're going to be asked to drink bleach and die.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[TigerTime]

You obviously don't really understand libertarianism. The government should stay out of people's personal lives. Yes. But what you fail to understand is that your liberties quickly deteriorate when they encroach on other people's liberties. Harassment isn't a PERSONAL right. That's just stupid to even think that anyone's political belief would be OK with harassment.

And secondly, they weren't arrested for the Facebook posts specifically. They were already building a case based off of their harassment while the other girl was alive. This was simply more evidence that they were a liability to society because the Facebook post showed an obvious lack of remorse for being indirectly responsible for a suicide.

I'm not surprised you posted this as anonymous. Just a ridiculous post.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[barlevg]

This would be quite clever if you hadn't ripped off the AC who posted half an hour before you...

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[SecurityTheatre]

Are you threatening yourself? :-D

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[SleazyRidr]

In the case of legitimate child pornography, the computer has ways of shutting the whole thing down.

Before you mod me down consider the difficulty in determining between "legitimate" child pornography and something a random website sends to your pc trying to incriminate you.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[mrchaotica]

You're conflating "libertarian ideals" with the Libertarian Party. They're not the same thing.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

There are no absolute rights.

There would be if we made it so, which is what I'm clearly advocating for at least one right. Do you not understand the different between someone saying that something ought to be so and someone saying that something is so?

The fact is that the enumerated rights conflict in many ways

And since the first amendment listed no exceptions, our path should be clear. Fact is, the constitution did not give the government the power to harass people for their speech.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[stealth_finger]

I believe you'll find that the first amendment only says the government won't censor you. You can however still be criminally charged for what you say.

The first amendment guarantees freedom of speech, which is the freedom to not have government thugs harass you for your speech. You do not understand the first amendment; it lists no exceptions. Really. Read it

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I'm pretty sure that says congress won't censor you, not that there can be no repercussions for what you say.

Re:Why all this governmental intrusion?

[stealth_finger]

That's utterly preposterous and defeats most of the purpose of the first amendment. Using that logic, the government can come and punish you for saying something it doesn't like so long as they don't "censor" you. No, the purpose (what it should do and what it says) of the first amendment is to prevent government thugs from harassing people for their speech. Period.

It doesn't say that though. All interpretation aside it says congress shall pass no law etc etc. What that means and it's application to today's world is up for debate, and that's all that seems to be done. The founding fathers meant this or they could never have envisioned that. I'm not American so I don't really give a shit but it says shall pass no law, not send no thugs.

Nothing is more evil than.....

[Lumpy]

....a Early teen girl.

And yes this is 100% fact, I raised my daughter though the hell that is Midddle school and high school, Satan himself is a nice guy compared to teenage girls and the heartless crap they do to others.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[sabbede]

I recall how my geeky little self was treated by the girls in Junior High. Statan would have been preferable.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[halltk1983]

It doesn't end when they become adults. It's just as common in offices and social situations. They just try to hide it better from guys.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct. You are always much better off with a nearly all-male workplace.

Mixed works well, but *only* if management is either an exceptional male, or a good female (no, a good male doesn't cut it, he won't be good enough to notice what is happening). Nothing else can keep the ladies from destroying everything over multiple simultaneous shadow power plays. Give them two years, and you end up with a team of dangerous individuals of mediocre technical performance.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[Lumpy]

My wife agrees with this. She can not stand working with women. In fact every successful Woman CEO or executive I have known hate working with other women.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[jitterman]

My oldest son, who's only in 5th grade, already sees the girls tearing each other down. One has already transferred after one year due to the other girls being cruel to her (apparently she was somewhat sloppy and had some unsanitary habits). Sad that in order to feel confident, these young girls seem to need to feel superior, and in order to do that, a victim MUST exist as a useful example of what is inferior.

Not to say the boys don't bully too (and my son WAS guilty of such, and we put a stop to that shit right away by having him apologize in front of the entire class; he's also been on the receiving end), but the girls seem to push it to whatever limit they can.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[Prune]

How did she turned out in the end? If it was a success, why do you think it was?

I remember some studies that showed that peers have far more influence on their children than their parents do, yet I find it difficult to accept that is inevitable--such a thing would only promote even less attention to proper rearing.

Re:Nothing is more evil than.....

[hurfy]

LOL, a neighbor once descibed hell to me since she happened to work there..... DSHS office filled with 45 women.

Re:Slashdot comment bullying to begin in

[barlevg]

This comment is stupid! You should kill yourself.

And I blame my parents

[Anonymous Coward]

for not mounting up 100% surveillance. I mean, they should have installed videocams in the children's room and everywhere.

Why did they fail in doing this?

That's why I'm a wrecked existence.

NOT.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Lithdren]

Yes, lets rant about how prissy the 12 year old girl was for taking her own life. Because we all know 12 year olds (girl or boy) are capable of handling things like an adult should, in your perfect world.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Anonymous Coward]

"Now for a side rant. Suicide is a pussy way out. No one should commit suicide over the actions of another but if they feel compelled to give that other person that much power, they should take them out in the process. It would likely make the world a better place as a result of their cowardice."

Let's hope this is the dumbest thing I see on the internet today

Re:And I blame my parents

[Joce640k]

Why did they fail in doing this?

RTFS!

They knew their kids were doing it and let them continue.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Cryacin]

I have to say, I was subjected to some of the most vicious onslaughts by my peers going through school. Luckily, my parents granted me with the mental fortitude and tools to survive. Not everyone can impart these skills to their children. It is not necessarily the parents fault, and certainly not the child's.

However, I struggle with the concept that bullying someone amounts to a felony. We have some very skewed laws when bullying someone is equivalent to armed robbery, and deserves 5 years in Jail. (Florida)

It is wrong, but it trivialises harder crimes.

Re:And I blame my parents

[jitterman]

Your first paragraph is spot on. The third, sadly, displays your unsuitability for parenthood and incredible lack of sympathy/empathy for adolescents and those suffering from mental health problems. Please, make the world a better place by learning how to be somewhat compassionate.

Re:And I blame my parents

[StrangeBrew]

Either you were a special child or you've forgotten how much your world has expanded since then. Whether you're talking about a 5 year old who has an absolute 'the world hates me' meltdown because he got buttered toast (like he asked for) instead of nutella (like he now wanted) or the teenager whose world is crumbling because a friend is moving away, they haven't experienced enough of life to understand how ridiculously small their problem is. This isn't even touching with those kids who do have serious problems such as being sexually abused or physically assaulted on a daily basis, with no knowledge of how else to escape their problems other than suicide... something being suggested to them by their tormentor, or accomplices, constantly. Try showing some empathy, and try teaching it to your kids.

Re:And I blame my parents

[BobMcD]

If you're proud of your little comment here, you should probably get tested for ASD.

Let me break this down for you...

His comment (while crass and hyperbole) was, essentially 'do not kill yourself'. It had a point.

Your comment was merely meant to offend and had no merit whatsoever.

Re:And I blame my parents

[kaizendojo]

Absolutely the same story here (and there are probably a lot more on /. than would care to admit to it). I was bullied mercilessly, beat up, tormented on a daily basis. Honestly can say it was worse than what was described. The only two reasons I never went through with taking my own life at that age was: 1. It's a cowards way out that rewards the tormentors and punishes the ones that love you and that kept me going. 2. My Parents did their best to support me and convince me that the sociology of Jr High School was meaningless in the grand scheme of things and supported my efforts to find my voice (which I did in High School, first as a writer for the school newspaper and then as the lead singer in a rock band. Kids will ALWAYS be vicious bastards acting out like Lord of the Flies, and there is no amount of explanation that can satisfy you at that age. I was lucky enough that my Parents (who recently passed) were as involved as they were. I'm also lucky they lived long enough to see me become a successful business owner who sees many of my old bullies at the Gas Station or the Wal-Mart. You can't change these kids behavior institutionally or in a jail. You need to start at home injecting a moral code and respect for others.

Re:And I blame my parents

[IndustrialComplex]

It is wrong, but it trivialises harder crimes.

Not if the punishment is commensurate with the harm caused. With regard to armed robbery, as long as that was the only offense, the impact of the crime is of relatively short duration. It is theft of property under threat of violence. Assuming you can get over being threatened with violence, it's just theft of property, and the impact of the loss of that property (assuming total loss) to an individual is really a minor impact in the overall lifetime of the individual. Bullying can be threats of violence against an individual (like armed robbery), except it also often involves continued harassement, literal violence, and an implication that the threats/violence/harassement will continue, day after day, with no real way out.

Think of a kid who goes to school, maybe it is only once a week he is cornered and detained, physically attacked, perhaps robbed, and harassed. He lives in in a state of perpetual paranoia and emotional pain because he knows that it IS going to happen again, because it has happened many times before. Contrast that to someone mugging you on the street for your wallet. Frightening, maybe costly if you had much cash, and that moment might bother you for years to come.

I've survived an attempted kidnapping (age 11), and I've also been bullied (Ages 7-13). With regard to the kidnapping attempt, I can remember that the guy had curly hair, and the general gist of his conversation, I remember curling up in fear after he fled. But that's about it, I never really worried that he might be back or that I'd be kidnapped again. Yet for the bullying, I can remember every single person who was involved, their actions, their names, their faces. I'll withold their names, but I remember the one who would secretly punch me whenever the teacher turned away. I remember the one who would attack me in the stairwells. I remember the one who threatened to cut me for defending myself from another bully (his cousin). I remember the general taunter in my 7th grade Literature class. I remember the one who would punch me in the back during 6th grade science class. I remember the group who would gather during recess and select a person for 'Random Beatdowns' which were a staple in my school until they finally broke a kid's arm. There are more, but I think the point is made. One of the more vile ones died young, another is incarcerated for murder, none really amounted to much, but I still remember them, and I remember the absolute fear that I had in going to school because it was a place where there was no safety, and no means to defend yourself. Fight back, and you get punished, and the gang mentality kicks in and the bullying increases. (If you think fighting back is an option, you never went to an inner-city school, the only way out there is to 'gang' up, which of course, isn't really a good option).

The point is, here I am, 30 years later, and I can remember the fear, anxiety, fake sickness to avoid school, poor performance, and all of the other aspects of the bullying. But the kidnapping? It's a minor footnote in my memory, a story I tell from time to time when it suits the conversation. But if 30 years later I can pick up the newspaper and glance at an obituary and remember that he was the same guy that made my life hell for several years, I think it helps illustrate that the impacts from bullying are lasting because unlike something like being robbed, bullying isn't a one-off event and can persist for years.

Re:And I blame my parents

[DexterIsADog]

If you're proud of your little comment here, you should probably get tested for ASD.

I work with autistic children, and yours is the most ignorant comment I've seen in weeks. You say that GP's "comment was merely meant to offend and had no merit whatsoever"? Pot, meet kettle.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Opportunist]

You are lucky. You probably did never feel like there is no escape but suicide.

Do you know what it is like to be bullied at school? Think of it as being mobbed at your work place without the opportunity to quit. You HAVE to go there. Every single day of your life. You have to go there, knowing for a fact that you will be bullied, maybe beaten up, without anyone or anything stopping your tormentor in any way. Unless you happen to have parents that somehow help you (which pretty much is limited to them teaching you to fight back dirty and teaching you how to avoid teachers to notice it, because everything else is at best a joke... and good luck having parents that teach you THAT), you will not have anyone fighting on your side. The school is the very LAST entity that had any kind of interest in helping you. Worse, you fighting back is against their interest. As long as the bully has you as a punching bag and you keep your mouth shut, the school is happy because there's no problem for them. Do not expect a school to help you in any way. Expect them, though, to punish YOU if you dare to fight back, because then they have a real problem at their hands, because that can easily escalate to a point where external entities will notice something.

So imagine you're in that spot. Unable to quit. Unable to avoid it. Fighting back means being punished, first by the school and, depending on your parents, by them as well (because you're not the "good son" anymore they so love to present around, you're the "bad guy" that got expelled from school now, ya know?). And looking forward to graduating you notice that it's about as far away as you getting into school, which is pretty much a lifetime for you as a kid of 12. To put it into perspective for you, think of it being chained to your work place until retirement, with mobbing and beatings every day.

Maybe this gives you a moment of an idea what it could be like, and why some kids view suicide as their only escape. It has nothing to do with being a pussy. It's simply that it is the only way out left to them.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Anonymous Coward]

ah, someone taking their cool aid daily. It takes a tough person to end their life. I am sick and tired of you pussies say coward in a hypocritical way, do you even know the definition of cowardness?

Re:And I blame my parents

[BobMcD]

I actually HAVE an autistic child, and I can tell you, we are the weird ones.

Most people with the condition have no idea why the rest of the world is wrong.

But whatever, keep on with your superiority.

Re:And I blame my parents

[0111 1110]

It takes courage to commit suicide. As someone who has contemplated it many times I know all too well how much. It isn't easy to place the barrel of a gun against your forehead and pull that trigger. It goes against every animal instinct.

Only a truly courageous person with an iron will and determination to leave this world is capable of it. It is not a cowards end. I see it as a noble end. The Japanese and their culture got a great many things right, and the nobility of suicide is one of them. Saying that it is the pussy way out is quite offensive in itself.

Re:And I blame my parents

[peter303]

> It takes courage to commit suicide. Utter Bull. Cowards way out of lifes issues,

Re:And I blame my parents

[nospam007]

"Yes, lets rant about how prissy the 12 year old girl was for taking her own life. Because we all know 12 year olds (girl or boy) are capable of handling things like an adult should, in your perfect world."

I thought 12 year olds weren't allowed on FB, I'd sue FB, they have more money.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Eunuchswear]

Let's hope this is the dumbest thing I see on the internet today

Turn off your computer now!

(At least stop reading slashdot).

Re:And I blame my parents

[BobMcD]

Thank you for the clarification. That's a much better response to his statement, and I do see your point.

But again, I think his effort was more meant to discourage than to offend. But that could just be how I read it.

Re:And I blame my parents

[SecurityTheatre]

Lets rant about how culpable the 12 year old bully was for bullying other students. Because we all know 12 year old bullies (girl or boy) are capable of handing things like an adult should, in your perfect world.

For comparison.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Albanach]

You really think she killed herself because she thought people would think better of her, and that mourning a dead daughter/friend encourages suicide?

Personally I can only begin to imagine what her grieving parents are going through. The posts above show that bullying doesn't have a short-term impact for many of its victims. Often they remember it for the rest of their lives. Some will go through years of counseling. Others will never reach their potential as a result.

I don't for a second believe this girl took her life because she had some long-term plan as to how people would look at her. I strongly suspect that in a moment of despair she sought an escape.

Re:And I blame my parents

[SecurityTheatre]

I work with computers and I disagree, but I'm not gonna call you names :-)

Re:And I blame my parents

[cusco]

The thing is, bullying is NOT unacceptable for a certain subset of parents. I remember the father of one kid giving his little monster advice on how to beat up my friend, while forcibly holding me back from interfering. Parents of popular and/or rich kids frequently ignored mistreatment of the kids of their 'social inferiors', all the way through high school. I doubt things have changed that much for the better since then.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Anonymous Coward]

Might want to revisit your ideas on free speech.

Freedom of speech is the political right to communicate one's opinions and ideas using one's body and property to anyone who is willing to receive them. The term freedom of expression is sometimes used synonymously, but includes any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, as with libel, slander, obscenity, sedition (including, for example inciting ethnic hatred), copyright violation, revelation of information that is classified or otherwise.

The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".

Re:And I blame my parents

[stdarg]

1. It's a cowards way out that rewards the tormentors

I was just thinking about that. With it being more and more common to "bust" bullies and actually send them to jail, that dynamic might change. Committing suicide may become a true act of revenge against the bully, which will of course encourage people to commit suicide.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Eivind Eklund]

Now for a side rant. Suicide is a pussy way out.

That's a common meme for people that don't know the psychology of suicide. Suicide generally takes a fair bit of strength of character. The problem is not being "a pussy" or "taking a pussy way out" - it's an unfortunate evaluation, often from wrong premises. A common one is that a bunch of psychological or life situation issues are permanent/long term, while they are usually possible to change. Another is overestimating how much the person is a burden to other people in their lives, and wanting to lighten their load.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Elldallan]

No amount of sympathy will bring her back, but morning her and punishing her tormentors is giving her exactly what she wanted when she killed herself. Don't encourage this behaviour, it's just a type murder that the courts can't punish.

Punishing the victim is never the solution, preventing and punishing the tormentors is.
Society putting more pressure and more abuse on the victim is not going to work and is a generally horrible solution.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

When a speeding driver weaves around traffic in a congested area to avoid an accident that would have been because of their inability to stop, we don't ignore their wreckless behavior because they got lucky.

Lets not idolize suicide or the person who kills themself and make it more attractive to others having hard timed in life. Sure, you could say the world is better off without them, but that would be a bit uncouth. There are always options other thrn your oen death.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Stan92057]

They need and will get punishment. That,s how society works. Are the Girls felons? no not at all. Is what they did punishable hell ya. Since you don't beleave the girls deserve punishment, how do YOU fix this problem? Im betting you were a bully or a teacher who looked the other way.I'm betting you don't have kids either. only someone devoid of children talk like you.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

So you actually think it is more tough to escape your problems by suicide then to confront them as the very thing that would make you contemplate it. I think you are wrong but will not object to your lead by example.

Re:And I blame my parents

[dgatwood]

Only a truly courageous person with an iron will and determination to leave this world is capable of it. It is not a cowards end. I see it as a noble end. The Japanese and their culture got a great many things right, and the nobility of suicide is one of them.

Suicide is not the courageous way out—quite the opposite, really. Suicide typically requires courage for only a moment, after which it's too late to change your mind. Actually dealing with your problems takes more courage, potentially for years at a time.

Re:And I blame my parents

[donscarletti]

I never suggested that there was any form of long term or rational plan here. I don't for a second believe this is possible. But even a desperate and irrational mind is subject to social concerns and particularly a mind that feels tortured by social humiliation, as this girl was, would be drawn to vindication and empathy above even their own life.

I don't think mourning changes anything, but empathising and exonerating do. If we start saying that her suicide was a natural response to her circumstances, then people will contemplate the option more and more. Suicide rates spiking in response to well publicised reports of suicide is a well studied phenomenon, called the Werther Effect. Awareness of suicide in itself leads to measurable increases in attempted and completed suicides, the more heartfelt and sympathetic the coverage, the larger the effect.

I simply do not think the escape scenario fits. Rarely does anyone who feels ridiculed and humiliated think that if they were somewhere else, things would be better. Those who feel exclusion, being contempted and mocked tend to believe that others mock and contempt them behind their back also and that others will contempt them also. Those who don't care about what others think about them while they're not there do not tend to be those who are easily made despondent by such things in the first place, so I think running away was probably not a prominent thought in this girl's mind at all, vindication was.

So yes, I stick with what I say, though possibly not my original phrasing. The WHO largely does too, with its media guidelines for prevention of suicide trends.

Re:And I blame my parents

[donscarletti]

Ever raped someone or been raped? I haven't.

I would not believe a single person who said they have never been bullied or bullied someone else. Furthermore, I would be sceptical if someone told me they have only been a victim or an oppressor and never the other.

So therein lays the distinction.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

What you describe to me sounds like poor parenting but the fact of the matter is thr kid could run away. They will be caught and they will be talking to people who will give more then lip service and if it happens several times, chances are the kid will be moved to a different home and likely school. The problem could be solved without ever killing yourself. Chances are, you would get mental health along the way too.

Now, i did get some bullying for a short period of time in school. My then pastor asked another kid to help. All it took was being able to hang out with him a couple times and it all stopped. So you are probably corect that i don't know what it is like. He didn'T even intervein on my behalf that i know of. There are ways of dealing with this other then suicide period. And that is without getting into thr entire fighting back scenarios.

Re:And I blame my parents

[0111 1110]

It may take courage for only a moment, but during that moment it takes far more courage than anything else most people will ever do. People who think ending ones life is easy have never tried it. It is anything but easy. If I hadn't been such a coward I would have killed myself by the age of 13, but it is very, very difficult to do. I have a friend who has been dying to kill himself for years, but he just doesn't have the iron will and steel courage necessary.

Obviously this 12 year old girl did have that courage. I can only admire such people. They are braver than I am. I can only hope that I will one day have the courage to end my life. It's easy to say that you are planning to kill yourself but actually doing it is something else entirely. I think most of us are too wimpy to actually go through with it.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Dcnjoe60]

No amount of sympathy will bring her back, but morning her and punishing her tormentors is giving her exactly what she wanted when she killed herself. Don't encourage this behaviour, it's just a type murder that the courts can't punish.

While I understand what you are trying to say, that has got to be one of the most insensitive statements I have ever read on slashdot. Obviously, the girl was distraught and tormented enough that she saw suicide as the only way out of her pain. Obviously, it wasn't a rational decision from our perspective, but from one who works with suicide prevention, I can tell you that at the time a person is contemplating it, it makes perfect sense and all they are looking for is to make the pain stop any way they can.

Bullys and other abusers depend on the rest of us ignoring the victims. We need to do just the opposite.

Re:And I blame my parents

[XcepticZP]

Yes, let's all suggest that someone kills themself because someone on the internet disagress with them. Lovely idea, Mr. Binary.

You sir, are disgusting.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Stan92057]

Comon coward use you /. name. Yes the parents failed. no 24/7 web cam Surveillance unnecessary. taking away the cell phone,deletion of the FB profile and writing 100 pages i will not bully and some forced community service with the elderly. Stop being a stupid coward.

Re:And I blame my parents

[dosilegecko]

I don't have kids yet but I was bullied in grades 7-8 (98-99) when I moved to a new town. My parents never condoned violence but they did not want me to be a punching bag and hated that I was getting bullied. I am not sure if it is the "right" way to help, but my father basically said "stand up for yourself, if you get suspended, I'll take you out to lunch". I think that was the green light... Anyways, kind of randomly in 8th grade art class (a frequent bullying time for me and one of my friends), I wound up and threw a huge punch at the lead bully's nose and completely connected. He never saw it coming either, it was when he was looking down at something. It knocked him out and broke his nose. Who cares if it was dirty, it showed him that I was not a benign punching bag and probably even more dangerously to his bullying mindset: I wasn't predictable anymore. We both got suspended and my parents weren't happy but they were proud that I stood up for myself. It felt really good to ruin that shitbags day, that's for sure. After that his whole group kept their distance and never physically bullied me. There were some verbal instances but it was laughable. I will probably offer the same advice to any children I have as it seemed to work out well for me. It is weird though, out of that group, one is in jail or dead, another is a townie with a beer gut and is balding (we're 27), I almost laugh when I see him, and the others I lost track of. But I still remember the feeling and would probably not give any of them the time of day still.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Opportunist]

Whether you do it yourself or have the cops do it 'cause you off the idiots that made you snap in the first place isn't that much a difference.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Stan92057]

I 100% agree, the felony is a stupid and brainless charge. That said punishment should be harse for the girls and the parents and the teacher who turned a blind eye. And The teacher knows who the bullys are they know who the weak ones are send them to the principle get the parents involved.

Re:And I blame my parents

[IndustrialComplex]

This isn't about the speech being offensive or not, it is about people not having the capability to retreat from the speech.

The best example I can give as to why this is not an attack on free speech is this:

Situation 1: A person on a soapbox with a megaphone in the town square.
Situation 2: A person on a soapbox with a megaphone following you to school, at your locker, in your classroom, in the hallway, at recess, on the bus.

At what point do you propose that speech transitions into a felony akin to armed robbery? How do you make that distinction?...

In a manner similar to how we deal with most other forms of harassment. If the person asks you to stop, or reports your behavior as harassing, and you do not stop, that makes it a situation where you have to make an explicit attempt to violate the request that you stop. It takes an active step on the harrasser's end after they have been notified that their behavior is unwelcome.

If bullying-leads-to-suicide is a crime that justifies 5 years, does bullying-without-suicide justifies 1.5 years? I think not.

I don't see why we shouldn't consider lighter sentences for situations which result in less harm inflicted.

If you get drunk and push someone and they fall and break their arm, that's battery.
If you get drunk and push someone and they fall and break their neck, that's manslaughter.

In both cases, the act was the same but the harm of that act was different. If you bully someone, and they commit suicide, and someone else bullies another person to the same extent, but that person doesn't commit suicide, perhaps instead of worrying that that other person got 'lucky' maybe you should reconsider engaging in reckless behavior. It is reckless, because you can't know the possible repercussions before hand. But again, punishment commensurate with harm is not a byproduct of an unjust system just because the same action can cause variable amounts of harm.

Re:And I blame my parents

[zzsmirkzz]

WILL NOT stand by and allow someone to be punished for speaking something that I find offensive. I don't care if it offends you, it's not your right to avoid offense.

There is another distinction that you are missing. When it comes to bullying, the speech isn't necessarily "offensive", it isn't said with the intent to "offend" the victim. It is "harmful", it is said with the intent to cause "harm" to the victim. As with most legal cases, intent is important. If it can be proven a bully engaged in speech with the intent to cause harm then that bully could be prosecuted, not for his speech, but for his intent. If it the harm can also be proven, as in this case the suicide of the victim, then the charges/sentencing can be increased. They may have only intended to harm the victim however the death of the victim was the result, they are now liable (or partially liable) for contributing to that death.

Now, in case you are talking specifically about the offensive facebook post, then you must also look at it another way. The facebook post amounts to a confession, a confession of intentionally causing harm to the victim (bullying) as well as the acknowledgement that it led to the victim's suicide/death. Furthermore, it is a confession of no remorse for the effect that was caused by the bully. Even if she has no intent for her speech to lead to an acutal suicide, when she was faced with the fact that it did, she was not remorseful of her actions. Given these facts, she should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and given no leniency in sentencing.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Gavrielkay]

I know suicide has been glorified by a few cultures over the ages. I have to disagree. I had a fried who committed suicide a while back, he was 34 years old and caught up in an affair with a married woman. He took the easy way out rather than buck up and sort himself out. I feel for kids who really just don't have the life experience to put their bullying into perspective. But there's no way that I admire their "bravery" in any way. I have sympathy for those who don't have a support network (or are too caught up in their troubles to know that they DO have one) and give in to the despair. My friend had about 200 people show up for his memorial. It's only sad when someone gives up on finding happiness, not admirable.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Stan92057]

Bullying, Its not protected by the Constitution of the United States. Citation of cases of Bullying protected by winning cases by the Supreme Court. in other words prove it.

"I WILL NOT stand by and allow someone to be punished for speaking something that I find offensive. I don't care if it offends you, it's not your right to avoid offense."

And you are not going to do nothing.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Myfyr]

While I understand that it's bad, I also have a VERY VERY hard time condoning the punishment of essentially free speech.

I WILL NOT stand by and allow someone to be punished for speaking something that I find offensive. I don't care if it offends you, it's not your right to avoid offense.

Surely, you understand this important distinction, as the prosecution of protected speech has so many social negatives.

There is a difference between speech which is offensive (which should be free), and speech which is harmful (which should not).

You can reasonably respond to "He made fun of my religion" with "Ignore him".

You cannot do the same with a prolonged campaign of bullying. The human psyche is not able to deal with that without some form of emotional damage, especially not at that age (although some figure out how to protect themselves with "safer" forms of emotional damage). Real harm can be done, and this should not be permitted.

It's worth pointing out that attempted murder is prosecuted with about 30% of the severity of murder.

If bullying-leads-to-suicide is a crime that justifies 5 years, does bullying-without-suicide justifies 1.5 years?

I think not.

I would say that those terms are somewhat reasonable, assuming the intent was to cause suicide, and keeping in mind we shouldn't be talking prison given the age of the offender. If death was not the intent, then the analogy is more toward manslaughter vs. something which is probably not a criminal offense (some form of negligence?).

I agree that 5 years would be too severe for bullying causing death but without intent.

Re:And I blame my parents

[NoImNotNineVolt]

I'm of the opinion that a death is a terrible thing to waste.

There's so many great things that could be done, that ought to be done, but will ultimately go undone for only one reason: fear of death.

So many crimes go unpunished that vigilante justice would shore up. That doesn't happen though, because it's a suicide mission. In today's society, you can't well expect to murder a high profile target and get away with it. It may be possible, but it's a long shot. It's simply too risky for any sane person to even attempt. Of course, we could talk about whether vigilante justice is compatible with sanity, but let's assume it is for the purpose of this discussion.

That's why I'm upset by the wasted suicides we hear about every day. These people, caught up in the misery of their own lives, kill themselves in an ultimately selfish act. They fail to consider the impact of their choice on those who care about them. But they also fail to consider that they're wasting a truly rare opportunity. A person with nothing left to lose is a most frightening force, and so often it gets squandered on nothing. Nothing at all.

Imagine if all of these suicidal people could be harnessed as a force for good. If we taught people that suicide could instead be a noble, selfless act. That in taking one's own life, one could also make the world a better place for those of us left behind. Imagine if this girl had, prior to her demise, went and killed someone deserving of death. Now imagine that on average every 14 seconds (that's how many suicides there are in the US alone), some suicidal person takes some living scum with them on their journey to death. The impact would be immediate and tangible.

Of course, this could be generalized to support any ideology. Upset about the increasing disparity in wealth distribution? Go kill a billionaire. Unhappy with organized religion? Go kill some mouthpiece of God. Political concerns? Take out an elected official you disagree with. If you're already set on killing yourself, these otherwise-impossible courses of action seem viable. Now it's not just a potential force for good, it's a potential force for anything.

I'm amazed that this doesn't happen more often, frankly. How myopic must suicidal persons be that this is so rare? To me, this is indicative of total self-centeredness being nearly universal among those who actually commit suicide. It seems self-evident that these people are not capable of stopping to think about the impact of their actions on anyone but themselves. It's too bad, really. They're squandering something that most of us will never enjoy.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Dracolytch]

And yet, in many armed robberies, nobody dies.

Re:And I blame my parents

[cayenne8]

Yeah...I have a hard time seeing felony charges for "being mean".....

These girls were horrible, but they didn't kill the other girl, she killed herself.

Re:And I blame my parents

[hypergreatthing]

Then you were taught wrong.

Fighting back is the only way bullies will respect you and leave you alone. There's a fine line between being bullied and bullying back and it's easy to pick on others because you're being picked on. It takes a stronger person to know when they should defend themselves and willing to put themselves at risk of harm or punishment for standing up for themselves. That being said, the environment at schools all over are ripe with opportunities to bully and harm others with no one intervening which is sort of close to real life. But then again kids are not adults and should not be left alone. They should be monitored and bullying should be addressed as well as appropriate ways for the bullyee to deal with it.

Re:And I blame my parents

[e3m4n]

I have to agree... to attempt to suppress bullying though policy does not resolve the issues and it doesn't prepare someone for more subtle bullying people can face when they become an adult. I think the biggest problem is they cracked down on fighting so severely its allowed bullying to grow out of control. Previously the check-and-balance to bullying was that you might get the shit beat out of you when you push someone too far. That teaches the victim to stand up for himself, it teachers the aggressor that you cant just go around and mistreat people and expect zero consequences. So now a child that bullied people their whole life pushes someone so far that they snap so severely that they shoot the bully or worse.. thats more or less columbine in a nutshell.

Re:And I blame my parents

[e3m4n]

agreed, people tend to assign adult thinking processes to a child... we arent fully cognitive until we reach 25 and even then some still arent. I agree completely with seeking an escape from what may have felt like total despair. I only wish she had enrolled in some martial arts classes and kicked the shit out of those picking on her... worse case scenario she gets labeled 'violent' for a few years until she 'outgrows' it. In the meantime people will back the hell off.

Re:And I blame my parents

[e3m4n]

12 year olds are not mature adults. they do not reason the same as we do. I know its been a long time since some of us were 12, some more than others; but accurately predicting the consequences of ones actions is not something they do very well. I have a 10yr old daughter and I am constantly amazed and some of the things she does as if she has no foresight at all.. then I realize; she doesn't. This situation and many like it are evolving because we are already trying to force adult situations and adult responsibilities on non-adults. 25yrs ago kids would solve this on the playground and it would get chalked up to 'kids being kids' and 'establishing a pecking order'. Now there is suspension and explusion for something humans have been doing for over 10k years. In this vacuum an even more sadistic and tormenting behavior has evolved in its place.

Re:And I blame my parents

[e3m4n]

perhaps not courageous, but I agree it goes against every animal instinct. There are some cases, possibly many arguably, that someone who succeeds in suicide didnt do it by overcoming this interlock. Its that this interlock simply wasnt there at the time they succeeded. Perhaps dispair, or medication. Seriously, you could take a hand full of sleeping pills and then go lap swimming in a pool. Theres a pretty good chance you wont be able to back out of that one, the medication wont let the interlock work.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Penguinisto]

A small exercise: Consider what your conclusion would be if you changed the words from "being mean" to "harrassment."

Re:And I blame my parents

[DexterIsADog]

If the topic were computers (which it isn't), and if I had posted something breathtakingly ignorant (which I have not), then you should feel free to call me ignorant - I don't think that counts as "calling names".

In this case, a foolish comment was posted about a topic on which I am extremely well informed, and I called out the author.

I see no point to your comment except to tweak, so bravo, sir, bravo.

Re:And I blame my parents

[DexterIsADog]

If you actually do have a child who is on the spectrum, that just makes your flip and ignorant comment even worse.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Rick Zeman]

It is wrong, but it trivialises harder crimes.

Not if the punishment is commensurate with the harm caused. With regard to armed robbery, as long as that was the only offense, the impact of the crime is of relatively short duration. It is theft of property under threat of violence. Assuming you can get over being threatened with violence, it's just theft of property, and the impact of the loss of that property (assuming total loss) to an individual is really a minor impact in the overall lifetime of the individual. Bullying can be threats of violence against an individual (like armed robbery), except it also often involves continued harassement, literal violence, and an implication that the threats/violence/harassement will continue, day after day, with no real way out.

Think of a kid who goes to school, maybe it is only once a week he is cornered and detained, physically attacked, perhaps robbed, and harassed. .

Those are battery, and robbery. Distinct crimes under the criminal code that are already punishable, not just something a nebulous and undefined as "bullying."

Re:And I blame my parents

[BobMcD]

Whatever helps you sleep at night, champ.

This topic isn't just my day job, so I may know a thing or two about it.

But whether or not you think I do, coping with my son's condition and the way ignorant people treat him has gifted me with a very, very thick skin.

Re:And I blame my parents

[painandgreed]

However, I struggle with the concept that bullying someone amounts to a felony.

Well, bullying somebody doesn't count as a felony. However, bullying somebody even after being talked to by the police about it till they commit suicide and then gloating about it openly appears to be. I suspect that like other harassment, once you are told to stop, especially by the police, it stops being bullying and becomes stalking and harassment.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Anonymous Coward]

1. It's a cowards way out that rewards the tormentors and punishes the ones that love you and that kept me going.

I almost agree with your points, but right here I will state you are badly wrong. Surviving bullies requires you manage to keep together through a horrifically bad experience. Suicide is the easier (for the bullied!) way out, punishes the wrong people and hurts the wrong people, but they are far from being cowards. I find it highly tragic that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold did what they did, but I can readily understand why they might have done so. I'm glad my family gave me just enough of an outlet for me to hold together, but had they been slightly less supportive I might have made the papers in a somewhat similar way before Columbine.

Re:And I blame my parents

[cayenne8]

A small exercise: Consider what your conclusion would be if you changed the words from "being mean" to "harrassment."

No difference really...

When you're a child/kid under age of majority, it is "being mean". It shouldn't have any legal ramifications unless an adult, which is what I'm guessing you're trying to do with using a 'legal" term like harrassment.

Kids are kids, they've always done this, I went through it too as a child in one state I lived in. I dealt with it....and actually over came it before we moved to another state for my Dad's job.

But it strengthened me, AND I never bullied or tormented others since I knew what it felt like...it made me a more empathetic person towards others in some ways.

But, it is a part of childhood. Hell, we're already making criminals out of children with them using their fingers to pretend its a gun and saying *bang* *bang*....this zero tolerance shit is out of hand with kids.

Let kids be kids...and MAKE parents be parents again.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Dcnjoe60]

Yeah...I have a hard time seeing felony charges for "being mean".....

These girls were horrible, but they didn't kill the other girl, she killed herself.

Abuse is abuse, whether physical, emotional or psychological. Of the three, the scars of physical abuse are the easiest to heal. It wasn't too long ago that women were sent back to their abusive husbands because there weren't physical signs of the abuse. Usually, they stayed until they were killed by their abuser or their own hand or they killed their abuser, in which case they usually went to jail.

These cases are far worse than somebody "being mean." Bullying in these cases are an act of violence and until people get that, violence against weaker individuals will continue.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Dcnjoe60]

I have to say, I was subjected to some of the most vicious onslaughts by my peers going through school. Luckily, my parents granted me with the mental fortitude and tools to survive. Not everyone can impart these skills to their children. It is not necessarily the parents fault, and certainly not the child's.

However, I struggle with the concept that bullying someone amounts to a felony. We have some very skewed laws when bullying someone is equivalent to armed robbery, and deserves 5 years in Jail. (Florida)

It is wrong, but it trivialises harder crimes.

Interestingly, the military and police uses many of these bullying techniques to extract information. It is really a form of psychological torture to get the person to break. So, are you really defending the right of these girls, or any group of bullies, to prey on weaker kids and psychologically torture them to the point that they break (in this case committing suicide)? How would that not be a felony? Most people would agree that if they physically beat the girl senseless it would be, so why is not not when they are emotionally beat senseless?

Re:And I blame my parents

[someSnarkyBastard]

The kid could run away? Really? Your solution for bullying is to have the kid strike out on their own into an even more hostile environment that will happily eat them alive? (And keep in mind the victim here is an adolescent girl...nope, no risk of even worse things happening to her once she's out of the house, no sir!)

Please tell me you do not have children of your own. I don't think I could come up with a worse solution if I had tried.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Opie812]

"Luckily, my parents granted me with the mental fortitude and tools to survive"

How did they do this? I have a toddler and want to prepare him for this kind of stuff. Any insight would be appreciated. When I was a kid, I was never bullied, nor a bully. I saw it going on, but didn't do anything to stop it.

Re:And I blame my parents

[dgatwood]

It may take courage for only a moment, but during that moment it takes far more courage than anything else most people will ever do.

Only if you assume that the person in question was, in fact, in full possession of his/her faculties at the time. I don't think that's necessarily a safe assumption. When a person is emotionally distraught, his or her ability to think clearly is compromised—often severely so. IIRC, folks who attempt suicide often say that they thought through things coolly and rationally, which implies that perhaps the normal risk aversion mechanism is probably not functioning correctly, hence not courage, but also not cowardice. In fact, from what I've read, I would probably describe it more as a complete lack of feeling anything.

That said, although I've experienced bullying, I've never experienced thoughts of suicide, so my perspective is somewhat limited. What I do know is that it gets better. Sometimes it takes years, but the bullying and pain usually stops on its own, assuming that the emotional pain isn't caused by a chemical imbalance, in which case it often requires very careful adjustment of medication before it stops.

I can only hope that I will one day have the courage to end my life.

If you're even half seriously contemplating suicide, get help. A state of depression is no way to live your life every day—not just because you might hurt yourself, but also because it sucks to be miserable.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sjames]

What's your home address? I'll bring the megaphone.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

Listen, tons of teens run away every year just to force an issue. They aren't out on the streets, they are hiding at a friends house or something. As i said, they need to get caught. For most of us, this is obvious from what i wrote.

But lets play your game a bit. Is it better for a suicidal teen to be dead or exposed to the streets for a while? Because that is what was said, instead of killing themselves, they could run away.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sjames]

And give the kids a way out of the situation. Don't keep chucking them back in the lion's den day after day until they lose hope.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

Isn't killing yourself the same as ignoring the situation? How is killing yourself going to mske anytjing better?

I mean seriously, you kill yourself and your bully moves on to harrass another person. You have not helped anyone and possibly dragged someone else in. If you are going to let someone else have enough power over yourself that you would end your life, take the bully to the grave with you. Or better yet, deal with it in a way that causes nobody to die.

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

The free speech is somewhat limited here due to the fact that most of the bullying hoes on in school where the government compels the child to attend under penalty of law.

Think of it this way. Imagine the government forcing you to go to a town meeting and allows preachers to claim you are going to hell becausr you are an atheist.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Sabriel]

Suicide is a pussy way out.

Ever _really_ contemplated killing yourself? Held the knife against your skin, stood on the ledge, faced the oncoming train, or eyed the muzzle, whilst bleakly weighing the pros and cons? Well, don't do it, accidents happen. But if you're a healthy individual with properly functional brain chemistry and a modicum of nurturing, even _reaching_ that point is a fight against instinct. Whether evolved or designed, we're built to live and propagate. Consciously overriding all the programming that wants you to live? It takes _effort_.

By and large, we can't suicide unless we're messed up inside. For example, the usual trick with conditioning a young suicide bomber involves convincing them they won't actually die - that they'll "wake up" in paradise. You use a reward scenario to help trick their brain into equating a perfectly normal living activity - sleep - with something no healthy, rational organism wishes to do - die.

In suicide by bully, it's even more twisted. Instead of a promised reward for dying, it's a guaranteed punishment for living. If a kid is at all religious, then the groundwork for the sleep/death substitution is likely already there, since most kids have an abundance of willingness to believe anything a respected adult tells them (for example, remembering that their parents told them that grandpa had gone to heaven, he's at peace now, etc). Kids don't do long-term strategies very well. They tend to see only the "now" - alive, being hurt, or dead, at peace (like grandpa!).

A kid committing suicide is _not_ about cowardice or bravery. It's about being so bloody messed up that they can't see the bigger picture.

And you can do the same with an adult, it just takes more effort, since their coping mechanisms and critical thinking skills are (usually) well-developed. Hell, the military does a lesser form of it all the time. It's called "boot camp", and it's all about conditioning people to obey potentially suicidal orders instead of their normal instincts.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Penguinisto]

which is what I'm guessing you're trying to do with using a 'legal" term like harrassment.

Why the scare quotes? Harassment has a very specific legal definition, punishment, and course of action (note that this is for my home state. Other states may vary.)

Re:And I blame my parents

[sumdumass]

I guess puusy way out is an artifact of a previous time when calling someone s puss was actually a challange to do better or more. Today, iy probably does not carry as strong of a point as it used to.

My comment was intended to challenge someone thinking of suicide to work a little harder at finding another way to deal with those problems.

Now as for your premise about self preservation. I understand your point but think it might be even more complicated than you already pointed out. I have been sky diving, i used to repell regularly. I have road bulls (almost qualified for the PBR series). I regularly ride motorcycles without a helmet and rode a dirt bike when i was younger. I don't say this to brag that i'm uber elite, but to illistrate that some people go against that grain of self preservation and effectivly stand on thr edge of a building. I don't think it takes as much effort as you think.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Joe Tie.]

The problem is depression. The reason a lot of people kill themselves after starting to take antidepressants is that it gives them just enough motivation to accomplish it. And that's pretty much the nature of depression. The reason what you're talking about is so uncommon is that when people kill themselves due to depression they're suffering from an extreme lack of motivation and concern for the world around them. It's a process of essentially just dying inside. Just moving around becomes a trial, let alone coming up with or caring about an extreme assassination plot.

Re:And I blame my parents

[ergean]

I don't want to be inconsiderate... but I really don't get it how could people be bullied and not respond to it.

I was a kid with glasses - think bottle bottoms lens - kind of skinny. Moved from the country to the city - in the first week I've been called every variation of names a kid could think to say to hurt me. My response was to ignore them all and do the best I could in class. When the next level came - cornered and punched in halls I changed my attitude and went from ignoring to retaliation. The first one didn't even think I could hit him, but I did. For every punch I got I gave 2 in return. All the bulling stopped that day. I've been beaten but I had them bleeding. The gang mentality didn't work because I was the one that would smile no matter what they did. And I was put in the same bench with a kid with issues, helped him with his grades and he helped me with the other kids. The kid was an outsider too.

In high school I was too big to even bother... still the nerd, but working on the farm had it's perks.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Sabriel]

Trouble is, many people seriously contemplating suicide already aren't thinking straight. They may read "I think people who commit suicide are pussies" and jump straight to "I'm a pussy, I'm a loser, the world would be better off without me".

Yeah, that's broken. But that's suicidal thinking in a nutshell: messed up. It's a hellish place to be, when not only can you not trust the brain you're using to think with, you might not even realise you shouldn't be trusting it (and realising this can be depressing in itself).

Re self-preservation versus risk-taking. You're right, it is even more complicated. But while risk-taking is an instinct that can run counter to self-preservation, in a healthy person the goal is still _improving_ your life, not ending it. Sure, you might have occasionally thought, "I could get seriously injured or killed doing this", but I'm going to guess that if you ever thought, "hey, I _will_ be seriously injured or killed doing this, it _is_ immediate suicide to keep going," then your risk-taking drive most likely evaporated and your self-preservation drive kicked into high gear (unless some other instinct was involved, like rescuing an endangered child).

While the final act of suicide can seem impulsive, reaching that point - grinding down self-preservation to the point where it no longer gets in the way - is rarely a short journey. You mention you've gone sky diving: if you were about to jump and the person behind you yelled that your chute pack was torn, would you still leap out of that perfectly good airplane? For a person contemplating suicide, the thought process won't be, "oh crap, I could've died" - instead, it could well be, "Can I pretend I didn't hear them?"

Re:And I blame my parents

[Stuarticus]

Did you have to walk fifteen miles to school in the snow as well?

Re:And I blame my parents

[Elldallan]

Yes, mandatory(by law) expulsion for the bullies would be a good start, force them to switch schools every year instead.
Give the bullies one chance to stop, bring in their parents and inform them what will happen if their child doesn't stop abusing/harassing others. If that doesn't put an end to it, expel them.

Re:And I blame my parents

[Elldallan]

You are correct that some parents accept it but there should be zero tolerance, and the schools should be legally bound to take action and have a plan to detect and deal with bullying. Parents like that should be sent to jail and have their kids taken by social services and sent to a hopefully better home that can teach them acceptable behaviour.

Re:And I blame my parents

[SecurityTheatre]

LOL.

I'm having fun watching the moderation on this one.

There are a number of +1 insightful and +1 interesting, followed by -1 Overrated and -1 Troll.

I think it's been moderated around 30 times now. It's like a tug of war.

I do remind anyone who stumbles upon this in the future, that -1 Disagree is not a rating. :-)

Re:And I blame my parents

[pankakekid]

As long as the bully has you as a punching bag and you keep your mouth shut, the school is happy because there's no problem for them. Do not expect a school to help you in any way. Expect them, though, to punish YOU if you dare to fight back, because then they have a real problem at their hands, because that can easily escalate to a point where external entities will notice something.

I have 7 and 10-year old sons. I have told them, on no uncertain terms, that just as bullying will never be tolerated, they have the right to defend themselves and will receive my full and energetic support, should they ever be put in that position.

Judge me if you will, but I've also advised them that while school rules are important and should be followed, but in the case of bullying, school repercussions should not be their primary concern. The stakes are too high - I was bullied and I know.

Fortunately, my guys are confident and socially adept, which I believe has helped them avoid problems thus far.

Re:And I blame my parents

[NoImNotNineVolt]

That's the beauty of it; if the perpetrator's life need not be preserved, it can be as simple as shanking a high profile target right in public, with something as innocuous as a sturdy pen!

If you think about it (and please don't, not too much at least), we're all so incredibly vulnerable, with such strong faith in humanity. The guy standing behind you in line at the grocery store could kill you before you even saw it coming. The guy driving down the [undivided] highway opposite you could veer into oncoming traffic, killing you in a split second.

Of course, these things don't happen because most of us value our own lives, and the consequences of perpetrating any of these actions are significant. I'd like to think that people are inherently good, and that that's what keeps them from indiscriminate victimization of others, but the Stanford prison experiment casts some doubt on that.

These suicidal people, if only they could get over themselves for just a few moments, for just long enough to contemplate actions like these, are much like the subjects of that study, but acting in the real world instead of an academic research project.

Perhaps that's why there seems to be an increase in these senseless mass killings of late (although I don't know if there's actually been any increase... has anyone seen any nice mass killings / year charts?). Perhaps these antidepressants that you mention can give people just enough motivation to kill themselves, and perhaps they can give people just enough motivation to take some others with them.

Re:And I blame my parents

[IndustrialComplex]

Those are distinct crimes, but it's the chronic nature of them which makes them much more harmful than they would be if done individually.

Re:And I blame my parents

[IndustrialComplex]

Then you were taught wrong.

Fighting back is the only way bullies will respect you and leave you alone.

Taught? No, I had first hand experience with 'fighting back'. I received detention at school for fighting back 152 times (trust me, there was a lawsuit by my parents, the quantity was checked) by the time I reached fifth grade. I didn't initiate a single fight. Let me tell you what would happen in middle school:

You get cornered in the hallway. You get 3-4 guys on you, and good luck fighting back then. So one day you have had enough and fight back, and guess what, you win the fight. In Hollywood, this is the cathartic point of the film and the bullied kid becomes the hero, the bully is dumped by his GF, and we are treated to a follow-up montage of how the kid went on to cure cancer and the bully became a prison guard and got shivved. Here is what happens to real people: The bully that lost gets his older cousin who is 19 and in 11th grade to catch the 12 year old at the playground. He and 4 of his friends (however many they can fit into the car) jump out and proceed to beat the crap out of the 12 year old until they have decided he learned his lesson.

I really don't think people understand how neglectful the adults in a school can be.

Re:And I blame my parents

[IndustrialComplex]

I don't want to be inconsiderate... but I really don't get it how could people be bullied and not respond to it.

I did respond to it. It's just that fighting back doesn't really work. I responded elsewhere that I was repeatedly disciplined by the school for daring to fight back, and other times I picked the wrong bully to stand up to who had gang-member cousins who would go out of their way to really hurt you. I'm talking about near hospitalization hurt you. Kind of like the whole 'snitches get stitches' insanity we have today. Cross one of our 'cuz' and get hurt.

This too shall pass.

[BlacKSacrificE]

I feel this is a behavioral bump in the road that may disappear as my generation becomes the parental generation.

I am 30 years old. I remember a pre-WWW world (I deliberately say WWW to differentiate from chats, BBS etc, which was largely inaccessible to all but the greasiest of geeks). I have grown with the technology, and know its potential and pitfalls. My parents however have no idea of either. They got all my hand-me-down computers, they appreciated my efforts to educate them. Because I was around fro the pre WWW, analogies were easy. I knew how the postal system worked, I could easily analogise POP mail etc. But they do not know the full potential. They look up their recipes, history of [subject] info, and IMDB pages, harass and embarrass me on fakebook, but they never really matured with the technology, and never had to suffer the pitfalls. It was just suddenly there, and they shat bricks, because it was like nothing they had ever seen, and they didn't understand the dynamics. They adapted, but never understood.

I feel as my generation become the parents and out kids hit those preteen/teen years (maybe 10-15 years), the problems will go away, because we will be capable of not only being able to give good advice on troll evasion and shaming, but we will also be in a far better position to adequately monitor, and mentor, about what actually happens on the internet. We know what to look for, we know how to find it, and we know how to deal with it. Not all of my generation are savvy enough to do it, but a greater percentage of us are, as compared to the current crop of 40-50 year old who had this thrust on them by their kids demanding internet connections and fondletoys to use on them.

I feel for that girl, and her parents who were blindsided by and lost a child to a technology they had to scramble to understand. I feel for the parents of the aggressors for not knowing just how serious the shit their kids were doing. I hope and feel that my generation will be more capable than them.

Re:This too shall pass.

[Jade_Wayfarer]

A lot of good points to think about, thanks.

Re:This too shall pass.

[bfandreas]

I feel this is a behavioral bump in the road that may disappear as my generation becomes the parental generation. I am 30 years old. I remember a pre-WWW world (I deliberately say WWW to differentiate from chats, BBS etc, which was largely inaccessible to all but the greasiest of geeks). I have grown with the technology, and know its potential and pitfalls. My parents however have no idea of either. They got all my hand-me-down computers, they appreciated my efforts to educate them. Because I was around fro the pre WWW, analogies were easy. I knew how the postal system worked, I could easily analogise POP mail etc. But they do not know the full potential. They look up their recipes, history of [subject] info, and IMDB pages, harass and embarrass me on fakebook, but they never really matured with the technology, and never had to suffer the pitfalls. It was just suddenly there, and they shat bricks, because it was like nothing they had ever seen, and they didn't understand the dynamics. They adapted, but never understood. I feel as my generation become the parents and out kids hit those preteen/teen years (maybe 10-15 years), the problems will go away, because we will be capable of not only being able to give good advice on troll evasion and shaming, but we will also be in a far better position to adequately monitor, and mentor, about what actually happens on the internet. We know what to look for, we know how to find it, and we know how to deal with it. Not all of my generation are savvy enough to do it, but a greater percentage of us are, as compared to the current crop of 40-50 year old who had this thrust on them by their kids demanding internet connections and fondletoys to use on them. I feel for that girl, and her parents who were blindsided by and lost a child to a technology they had to scramble to understand. I feel for the parents of the aggressors for not knowing just how serious the shit their kids were doing. I hope and feel that my generation will be more capable than them.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but you will never be able to fully control what teenagers do. You may be savvy enough to tutor them but good luck to you to get them to heed the advice.

Also you should bear in mind that teenager suicides never have been as uncommon as one would wish. Bullying also has never been uncommon. But now we have public records of it whereas previously it mostly were transient words uttered face-to-face. And the press eats stuff like this up because it is a real tear-jerker.

The WWW took off in the early 90ies. The current crop aged 40-50 was in its 20ies back then. And I can tell you we weren't ignorant back then. In fact we were the first to use this stuff. And do believe me, you'll be 40 sooner than you think you will be.

The problem here is that society and culture haven't moved as fast as technology did. Back then we somewhat managed to enforce something we called "netiquette" until the floodgates opened. While we at least had a concept of what was acceptable we didn't follow it because it was the right thing to do but because we were browbeaten by those who had seniority. We should have followed it because on the other side of the screen was a breathing, feeling human being. Which is easy to forget when all you see is words and not facial expression and body language(or a fist accelerating towards your face). That teenaged girl would never have stood in front of her school and yelled at everybody that she bullied her to her suicide. There's a reason why flamewars happen so easily on the net and yet arguments as vicious as those flame wars are not as common.

Re:This too shall pass.

[omnichad]

I feel this is a behavioral bump in the road that may disappear as my generation becomes the parental generation.

And I think that it's the same as things have always been except thanks to Facebook we know why the suicide happened. Before Facebook, these were mysteries to the parents and families - but there's suddenly a digital trail.

She was getting it just as much offline, too.

Re:This too shall pass.

[BlacKSacrificE]

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but you will never be able to fully control what teenagers do. You may be savvy enough to tutor them but good luck to you to get them to heed the advice.

It's not about trying to control behavior, that's a sure fire way to alienate your child. It's about preparing them for the realities of the ugly side of human behavior before they get caught deer-in-headlights style by it when it comes at them full force. As many have said on this topic, kids are cottonballed by their over protective parents, then loose their shit when they hit reality. It's about teaching coping skills as opposed to enforcing limits on social media access etc.

The problem here is that society and culture haven't moved as fast as technology did.

This is the point I was somewhat erratically driving towards. So to counter this lag, again, preparation is the key. You don't send a soldier into battle without teaching them what to expect from the enemy. Teaching kids how to identify the enemy will always be the problem, they trust too much, but that's just another challenge in parenthood I guess.

And I think that it's the same as things have always been except thanks to Facebook we know why the suicide happened. Before Facebook, these were mysteries to the parents and families - but there's suddenly a digital trail.

A valid point I had not even considered. Much the same as the perception of a more violent society due to increased media coverage. Interesting.

Re:This too shall pass.

[mcgrew]

I feel this is a behavioral bump in the road that may disappear as my generation becomes the parental generation.

Of course you do, you're only 30. What you don't know is that every generation since 1880 has had the same problem. Nobody had a clue what telephony would lead to. Nor the automobile (F.L. Allen had a bit to say about that in his 1931 book Only Yesterday), movies, comic books, TV (OMFG Elvis), VCRs, now the internet and cell phones. I have no more idea what will come up in 20 years that will confound parents' abilities to raise their kids than than someone freaking out over Elvis' gyrations had any idea that some day everyone would have a camera and a phone in their pocket.

Yeah, you get the internet. You won't get what's next. Nobody will (and the youngsters take to new things like fish to water, a geezer like you has to work at it).

Re:This too shall pass.

[LordLucless]

I feel this is a behavioral bump in the road

That's where you're wrong. This isn't a phenomenon limited to this particular generation. The problem is bullying; that the medium now happens to be electronic makes no difference whatsoever. Like many other people here, I was bullied at school, before the internet became a thing. Read some memoirs of people who went through school years ago - same thing.

The only difference now is that electronic communications are logged, so that after the fact, people can go trawl through the evidence to find what happened. The internet is exposing the pre-existing condition of bullying, not causing it.

I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody?!?

[__aasehi2499]

Transference of blame anybody?

Re:Slashdot comment bullying to begin in

[__aasehi2499]

It's more subtle here in the abuse of the moderation system.

Re:Rebecca's parents.

[BlacKSacrificE]

Perhaps you should read the article.

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

Religion has nothing to do with anything. You either act, or don't. Her parents did what they thought was best. Sadly it didn't pay off.

Re:Teachers

[voss]

Forget social media. If this child was persistently bullied at school and a teacher saw it and didn't report it that teacher could be fired
and arrested. Teachers and school staff have a legal duty to report abuse and illegal harassment of students.

Make an example

[benjfowler]

Hope they make an example out of the little slag. And her useless parents too.

Re:Sticks and stones

[Anonymous Coward]

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will hurt forever.

Fixed.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[__aasehi2499]

Yeah, you missed the point entirely. And there was no logic used by you in that masterful leap.

Re:Teachers~Bullying

[rmdingler]

Right... because teaching/babysitting the fruit of the loins of cretins isn't enough responsibility, whilst still attempting to make an academic difference in the lives of the few(er and fewer) exceptional students. Teachers and schools need to play a role in the development of a future citizen, but as many /.ers are aware, childish bullying is (and always has been) ubiquitous on and off the school yard. IMHO, I believe there's something at a genetic level that spurs the one-upmanship.

Good

[ErichTheRed]

I'm noticing a lot of "waah, little baby can't handle a little teasing" posts. This is /. -- who wasn't mercilessly picked on in junior high/high school??

I'm a new parent of two kids and am not looking forward to helping them navigate the new Facebook bullying world. One of them is a girl too, so I'm sure it's going to be worse for her. I think the bad thing about it is that those of us who really got a lot of abuse in school would be able to go home and tune it out. With cell phones, Facebook and all that stuff, you can't ever escape.

One thing I do see a lot of lately is a backlash against PC and just being nice to people. Not being an ass isn't PC, it's just being a good human. Parents should teach their children this, but unfortunately no one is giving out parenting licenses (yet.) I think that would be a big help in solving the behavior problems of kids -- reining in their idiot parents. (And no, I'm no super genius parent, but watching typical 7 year olds having a screaming match with their parents complete with creative expletives makes me wonder whether I'm doing something right.

Re:Good

[DerekLyons]

I'm noticing a lot of "waah, little baby can't handle a little teasing" posts. This is /. -- who wasn't mercilessly picked on in junior high/high school??

This is /., who collectively have the average empathy of an Ebola virus particle.

Re:Good

[Prune]

>One thing I do see a lot of lately is a backlash against PC and just being nice to people. Not being an ass isn't PC

Then why lump them together in your first sentence? I don't think you needed to mention that there's a backlash against PC, as it's a red herring in this discussion.

In any case, good luck with getting them through any potential bullying.

Why

[wisnoskij]

Should the parents of taken away her cell phone, and started spying on their daughter, just because she was questioned by police?

Re:Why

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

They have no such job. The mere fact that she was questioned by police means little.

Re:Why

[CanHasDIY]

They should anyway IMO; back when I was a kid parents kept a better eye on what their kids were doing, probably at least in part because they (the parents) were held legally culpable for the actions of their minor children.

Maybe we need to get back to that social philosophy.

Re:Why

[wisnoskij]

OK, but were they so intrusive that they filtered everything you said to your friends to make sure none of it was incriminating?
Simply being involved and watchful of their kid would only of told them that the kid was on FB chatting with her fiends, I for one have always been able to have private discussions with my friends.

Re:Why

[Gibgezr]

More or less, yes. They should have at least started "spying" enough to figure out what she was up to, and then taken away her phone/inet so she couldn't continue to bully anyone with them.
It's not that they have to assume she is guilty just because the police came and accused her, but they need to take responsibility and start their own investigation and find out what's what.

Re:Why

[CanHasDIY]

In fairness, I grew up prior to the internet age; we didn't have facebook or cell phones, so most-if-not-all communication was face-to-face. In my experience, most people (short of outright sociopaths) tend to self-filter the things they say to a person's face, moreso than they do when sitting behind a screen stroking their e-cocks. I remember some nasty name calling, but nothing to the extent of what these kids say online today ("Drink bleach and kill yourself?" Really? Where the fuck does a 12 year old get such notions, anyway? Let alone the poor moral fiber needed to say such a thing to another person).

So no, there was no in-depth monitoring of social media, because social media didn't exist back then. Then again, neither did the high teen suicide rate we see these days... correlation, perhaps?

Re:Why

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

It shouldn't. Authority figures often suspect just about anyone, are corrupt, and/or simply overreact.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[wisnoskij]

Well at least it looks like they are only going after them for stalking, and not for murder or not caring that she died on a FB post.
Unfortunately, the death is sure to increase the sentence.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[wisnoskij]

So let me get this straight. The idea of being responsible for your own actions, regardless of outside stimuli, lead you to claim that this means drunk driver are not responsible for the people they kill?

Re:Rebecca's parents.

[turp182]

Churches have many benefits such as counseling and food banks. I volunteered at a food bank for several years before my twins arrived (I was the interviewer, having to hear people's problems first hand, I prayed with many of them when they needed the solace).

My twins attend a church related preschool (little to no religion related stuff, I can handle a bit of Noah's ark, and they did get blessed - but not converted...).

Churches are the social manifestation of religion, and many function externally in a non-denominational way (internally, not such much). One of the coolest things I've seen was a 1920's silent movie with a live church organ score (at a church of course, the one where I was volunteering).

Of course I'm referring to the moderate Christian churches, the "hey! want to go to church and hang out with people" ones as compared to the "obey!!!!" types.

I'd prefer the churches didn't have the religion, but such is life. The death of almost all fraternal organizations leaves little choice in terms of "general" social organizations outside of church (Modern Woodmen for example, a farm related organization I witnessed as a child).

the meaning of the word bully

[0111 1110]

Seems like the meaning of the word 'bully' has changed since I was a kid. I was bullied for real. Meaning I was beaten up, as in like physically punched and put in headlocks etc if I didn't obey every order of the bully and not disrespect him at all. Of course I was also teased. For having a big nose. For being fat. For being ugly. Etc. When did 'bully' become a synonym for 'tease'?

I see a need to distinguish between physically beating someone into submission and just taunting or teasing them. We had two different words for a reason. Sticks and stones and actually breaking your bones is different from just calling someone names or saying bad things about them or to them. And yes I think physical violence is worse. Much worse. Physical violence vs. someone saying mean things to you? No comparison.

Sorry, but I don't feel sorry for people who get teased. They're just words. Yes, people told me I had a big nose. Well guess what? I did have a fucking big nose! Saying that I do should not be some sort of crime.

And telling me to kill myself should not be a crime either. What happened to freedom of speech? I guess people only want nice speech to be free. You people are just slaves at heart longing for a master to obey and seriously don't deserve *any* freedom.

To those of you who want teasing to be a felony do yourself and everyone else a favor and go kill yourself. Please. You really will be doing everyone else on the planet a favor. It really is for the best. Trust me on this. I would suggest drowning maybe or hypothermia. Possibly an overdose of some opiate so you can die with a smile. Surely you must see that this really is for the best?

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[RattFink]

Seems like the meaning of the word 'bully' has changed since I was a kid. I was bullied for real. Meaning I was beaten up, as in like physically punched and put in headlocks etc if I didn't obey every order of the bully and not disrespect him at all. Of course I was also teased. For having a big nose. For being fat. For being ugly. Etc. When did 'bully' become a synonym for 'tease'?

It's always been this way. Guys typically bully though force or threats of force. Girls tend to bully though harassment and social ostracization. It's been that way as long as I've been alive and for the most part still that way today.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[omnichad]

Says the person who was never emotionally abused or built a mental wall to prevent it. Maybe it's because "she's a girl" or maybe it's because she has a different brain structure.

Are you stalking some poor girl and that's why you can't stand for that to be a crime? Stalking/harassment have a reason to be a crime. Or maybe you just have Stockholm Syndrome.

These girls words followed the suicidal girl EVERYWHERE she went. Even going home didn't get her away.

But it's only a felony because it resulted in a death. The aggravated portion of the charge is what makes it a felony.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[0111 1110]

Girls tend to bully though harassment and social ostracization.

At least where I grew up we didn't call this bullying. We called it teasing or just being a bitch. Now that teasing is considered the equivalent of physical violence it is treated more seriously, but teasing is not the same as bullying. Getting someone to obey you via physical violence, even torture, is just not the same kind of thing at all as saying mean things to someone. It just isn't.

One of the many differences between sticks and stones and words is that words don't cause any physical harm, any physical damage. In fact they don't have to cause any damage at all if you just ignore them. You can't ignore someone hitting you in the head with a rock or beating you in the face with a stick.

It is true that teasing someone can lead to their suicide, but not hiring someone for a job or rejecting someone or breaking up with someone can also lead to suicides. Even getting a poor grade on an exam can lead to suicide.

Those two girls are not responsible for that other girls death. Yes they contributed to it in the same way that a pretty girl rejecting an ugly guy can lead to his suicide, but they are not directly responsible for her death and cannot be held responsible for it. No one forced that girl to jump. It was a decision she made for herself and I suspect that the teasing was only one factor in that decision.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[0111 1110]

Says the person who was never emotionally abused or built a mental wall to prevent it.

Says the person who was never physically abused or built a physical wall to prevent it. Teasing is a mean thing to do, but it is not in the same category as physically injuring somone. Words can just be ignored. Being physically injured cannot be. Sticks and stones can break your bones. It's pretty hard to do that with words.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[davel52]

These girls are frightened for the rest of their lifes. Maybe they think now before they act in such a way. Psycholigocal treatment is often more dangerous for those little souls than physical damage.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[omnichad]

What makes you so sure?

And you know what happens when someone physically injures someone in the real world? They get arrested for it. The rules are just poorly applied in school. Maybe verbal/emotional abuse aren't in the same category. I didn't say they were - I said that some forms should still be crimes.

Why do you so badly want legal free reign to stalk/harass people?

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[0111 1110]

I believe in freedom of speech and obviously you don't. What I want is the freedom to speak. To express myself. Without being locked in a cage for it. I know that you also believe in freedom of speech, but only speech that you happen to like. Only speech that you approve of.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[omnichad]

What I want is the freedom to speak. To express myself.

Unless you express yourself with physical violence, though, right? You don't even agree with your own tenet unless you think that freedom of speech only applies to verbal speech. Maybe some people want freedom from people like you. And why shouldn't they have the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" At least that's the founding ideology in the country I live in.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[RattFink]

At least where I grew up we didn't call this bullying. We called it teasing or just being a bitch. Now that teasing is considered the equivalent of physical violence it is treated more seriously, but teasing is not the same as bullying. Getting someone to obey you via physical violence, even torture, is just not the same kind of thing at all as saying mean things to someone. It just isn't.

There is a world of difference between teasing or being a bitch and harassment. Throwing the occasional insult is not harassment (at least in the legal sense of the word). Harassment can be far more damaging and harder to repair then physical violence. A black eye will heal in a week or so, a month. If someone decides to convince everyone that you like to fondle little boys the damage can follow you for the rest of your life regardless of the validity.

One of the many differences between sticks and stones and words is that words don't cause any physical harm, any physical damage. In fact they don't have to cause any damage at all if you just ignore them. You can't ignore someone hitting you in the head with a rock or beating you in the face with a stick.

It depends on the severity of the harassment or violence. While you would have a hard time ignoring someone using a stick or a rock on your head, you can ignore someone pushing or shoving you. And while you could ignore someone insulting you it's very hard to ignore when someone convinces everyone you know that you like to fondle little boys.

Those two girls are not responsible for that other girls death. Yes they contributed to it in the same way that a pretty girl rejecting an ugly guy can lead to his suicide, but they are not directly responsible for her death and cannot be held responsible for it. No one forced that girl to jump. It was a decision she made for herself and I suspect that the teasing was only one factor in that decision.

No one is being charged for her murder. The teens are being charged for what they did, aggravated stalking something that goes far and above throwing a view insults at the victim.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[phorm]

Stupid shit such as "big nose" is a step aware from consistent and perpetual attacks, exclusion, isolation, and other mental tactics. I've been on both ends of it and - you know what - unless you're actually getting broken bones - which is less common and more often *will* lead to police involvement - the physical stuff heals. In fact, it's sometimes easier to deal with because the quick solution is usually to deal back some physical pain.

Bullying these days covers a lot of ground.
There's teasing: bugging somebody because he/she came to school in mismatched socks, or had a funny haircut, or whatever.
Then there's harassment: a more systematic attack. Usually on multiple fronts, and bullies are actively seeking out the victim
Then there's tormenting: It often involves both physical and mental attacks, is consistent, constant, and tends to revolve around a central attacker but spread among many. Again the "bullies" (attackers) will seek out the victim until he/she feels trapped with nowhere to go. Exclusion completes this.

So in the end scenario, it's not just somebody calling you "big nose." It's having multiple persons attacking every feature possible. It's feeling self-conscious every day that you're going to come up with another fault, resulting in a plummeting self-image. It's feeling afraid of when the next attack is coming, and not having any peers to connect or take refuge with. It's losing any friends you have because they're afraid of harassment by association (often they will being to harass you themselves to dissolve any connections). It's a *serious* f'ing issue, and way beyond just a little teasing. Counsel to suicide is usually and end-state to this, where the victim feels that's the only way out. In the charges for this case, it's not just *teasing*, it's pretty much stalking and seems rather firmly in the third category. Telling somebody "go jump off a bridge" by itself isn't a felony, but criminal harassment is.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[del_diablo]

You are right. Being a bitch, once takes up to a level, is worse. Bullying once taken to a high level by buys, also include being a bitch. Girls usually skip that step, but not everybody takes it up to the level where they cripple people.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[addie]

I'm going to go ahead and assume that you're a man, because physical violence is generally the way that boys "tease" each other. Girls are entirely different, and your suggestion that word calling is harmless discounts the real pain that so many of them go through.

That distinction aside, I just can't agree that a punch in the face hurts more than being completely socially ostracized. Being unable to participate at all in any of the fun things that go on in your social circles, because you're seen as strange and different? There's teasing, and then there's having your social world dismantled. Also, let's not forget that this online world didn't exist when many of us were kids, and it's far, far less forgiving than the playground.

The feeling of having no friends at 12 years old feels like the end of the world. I also got punched and shoved around a bunch of times. I also got called gay, and nerd, and all the things that a lot of slashdotters will understand. I quickly got over the physical blows, but the feeling of being an outsider persisted for a very, very long time.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[0111 1110]

And why shouldn't they have the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?"

Those are negative rights. The right to be left alone from people who would take your life, lock you in a cage or physically force you to do or not do certain things, and seize your property. Notice that it says you have the right to pursue happiness. You don't have the right to force others to make you happy. You don't have the right to prevent me from telling you to kill yourself, which is of course something I would highly recommend. It is much nicer on the other side. Oops. Did I just break the speech laws again?

Unless you express yourself with physical violence, though, right?

My freedom to express myself through physical violence ends where your right not to be physically hurt by others begins. There is no contradiction there. All real rights are negative rights. We both have the right to be left alone to do what we wish. That includes the right to say mean things to you so long as I don't force you to listen.

You don't even agree with your own tenet unless you think that freedom of speech only applies to verbal speech.

Freedom of speech applies to all forms of communication. That is what speech is. A form of communication. Using the term 'expression' is probably not such a good idea because it can also refer to emotions. A person has the natural right to communicate with anyone who cares to listen so long as the speaker is not interfering with anyone else's rights. And I do believe that as a natural right we all are free to communicate anything. Without limit. I believe that is also what the founders of this country intended.

To say that punching someone in the face is a form of communication is quite a stretch. It isn't really a form of communication and even if it were it would violate the rights of the other person not to be physically harmed.

Maybe some people want freedom from people like you.

The right to elminate another person would be a violation of that other person's right to exist. As a right that would be nonsensical.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[CanHasDIY]

I believe in freedom of speech and obviously you don't.

Sounds more like freedom of hyperbole to me.

Does SWATting, the practice of calling in false reports to encourage SWAT teams to kick in random people's doors qualify as freedom of speech in your dictionary? What about libelous speech and slander? Incitement of violence against others?

Is freedom of speech a black/white issue to you? Or can you bring yourself to acknowledge that there might be a few shades of grey in there?

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[omnichad]

A bruise heals. If I don't do any permanent damage, why should it matter? Is it because of emotional trauma? Let's follow your own logic path here.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[0111 1110]

Determining physical harm is easy. Determining emotional harm is not. How does one know what will or will not hurt another person? You cannot get inside their head to determing what the "emotional damage" is.

I could imagine some kind of benevolent dictator like Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew passing a law against insults or teasing or saying mean things to people. In a way it would seem to make a better society. A happier society. I've lived in some countries that have nicer people who don't seem to insult or tease each other as much and I far prefer life there for that reason. I cannot even begin to imagine how I would be different as a person if I had grown up in a country where most people are nice to each other. It would be great. I just don't think it is practical and would just lead to most people being in jail.

The freedom to communicate ideas without worrying about the Thought Police listening to everything we say vs. people having their feelings hurt when people say mean things to them. For me the freedom to communicate trumps the right of people not to get their feelings hurt. I just wouldn't want to live in such a world. Things like this always start with such good intentions. You could say "Well just don't insult or tease people. Just don't be mean. Once people start going to jail for it people will learn to be nicer to each other." The problem is I think it would result in a society where people are afraid to speak to each other for fear of accidentally saying something the listener finds offensive and going to jail or getting fined.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[Xyrus]

"THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!"

By your reasoning, there's no such thing as psychological torture or injury, and that physical injuries are the only things that ever really affect you. You want a counter example? Go talk to someone who has PTSD, or go talk to someone who was abused as a child. The psychological injuries last for a long time.

There's teasing, then there is bullying. It's obvious you that you don't know the difference. Teasing is occasional or situational. Everyone gets teased about something at some point. So and so has a big nose. So and so has silly glasses. But that isn't bullying.

Bullying is persistent and relentless physical and/or psychological harm over extended periods of time. Bullying is more like being tortured on a daily basis. Getting beat up everyday. Everyone telling you aren't worth shit. Getting pushed down or tripped every time you walk down a hallway. Someone stealing your pants after gym, or pissing/shitting on them. Having kids hold you down while they write "I'm a loser" on your forehead in permanent marker. All this while knowing if you tell anyone it will only get worse.

That's more like bullying. And that will affect you, regardless of how psychologically tough you think you are. The physical harm? Shit, that's nothing. That heals quickly. The psychological harm? That lasts for years to decades.

It has nothing to do with being thin skinned. If every day there is a group of your peers essentially stalking you making threats and/or denigrating you, it affects you both physically and mentally. This is well documented, and cursory search reveals many studies on the subject. In fact, your attitude expressed in your post is usually one of the side effects of being bullied when younger (lack of empathy/sociopathy).

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[omnichad]

The freedom to communicate ideas without worrying about the Thought Police listening to everything we say vs. people having their feelings hurt when people say mean things to them. For me the freedom to communicate trumps the right of people not to get their feelings hurt

We distinguish between that and harassment/stalking. Especially based on intent. Saying mean things is protected speech. But these girls weren't using words to express themselves. They were doing it to harm people. And they did it to an extreme. This isn't some slippery slope. It's clear cut. You seem to be saying we can't draw any lines in the sand because it could be abused, but these two things are so far removed from each other you can't even call what these girls did "speech."

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[NoImNotNineVolt]

Are you suggesting that GP is a hermaphrodite?

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[riondluz]

"Those two girls are not responsible for that other girls death."

Flat Fact:
If those 2 girls did not exist then the other girl would still be alive.

(told self i wouldn't go here:)
Most kids are thoughtless, so are most adults.

Peer and social pressures notwithstanding,
they act w/out thinking, w/out seeing consequences. They are lead by their impulses fears and avoidance ) and are most dangerous in groups.

It is this unconscious mode of existance that enables them to indulge in, and rationalize, those self-centered behaviors that society@large has to unfuck.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[BitwiseX]

bully verb : to frighten, hurt, or threaten (a smaller or weaker person) : to act like a bully toward (someone) : to cause (someone) to do something by making threats or insults or by using force

I applaud you for being able shrug off the verbal abuse, but I'm also curious how you felt during those moments. Honestly, did the verbal abuse (whether or not combined with physical) just not bother you at all? OR did you shrug it off after the fact as time passed and you got older? Be honest with yourself. If as a kid you were indeed able to just let the verbal abuse go without even feeling a knot in your stomach, then were indeed a strong kid, and I commend you!

I was rarely physically bullied in school, it was all verbal. Man, there was sometimes I was trying for a black eye, just so there would be EVIDENCE. That's what's truly horrible about the verbal abuse. It can go unnoticed for YEARS. I didn't have a smartphone were I could show an abusive text back then to "authorities". I'm not going to debate you on whether physical violence is "worse". It just doesn't fucking matter. No child should have to suffer mentally or physically at the hands of another child. The word "teasing" trivializes what we are talking about here, and your case aside, it can be very damaging.

Freedom of Speech. Why do people want to read that as "Freedom to be a dick"? Freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to harass. Would you call one of your coworkers fat and ugly everyday and not expect to be reprimanded in some form?

At any rate, Freedom of Speech is only allowed in First Amendment Areas, which are probably all closed because of the shut down ;-)

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[riondluz]

More than once now you've tried to establish that physical trumps mental; that being beaten up is more serious than mental anquish.

You also seem to think that acceptable teasing, like that among friends, is the same as incessant harrassment coming from all sides at all times.

Problem with your position is that limbs heal, bruises go away, The mental trauma of harrassment-induced stress usuallly means saying good-bye to having a good night's rest even after escaping one's tormentors.

Stop trying to defend such a undefensible position; it just puts the tell on you.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

They were doing it to harm people.

Irrelevant, even if true.

And they did it to an extreme.

Subjective.

This isn't some slippery slope.

Perhaps it is, or perhaps it isn't; that's irrelevant. Arresting people for their speech and such should leave a sick taste in your mouth unless you're a government bootlicker.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[omnichad]

It didn't have to be speech. Making it about free speech is just a strawman argument. It's not about their words being censored - they can say whatever they want (aside from the legal definition of slander). The actions they took were harassment and stalking. The fact that they used words only explains what tool they used - not their end goal.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

It didn't have to be speech. Making it about free speech is just a strawman argument.

No, it's not. This is about speech.

The actions they took were harassment

In this case, speech. Practicing newspeak, are we?

and stalking.

Stalking in what way? Did they physically follow her to the ends of the Earth, or are you going to spew forth some nonsense? I hope not.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[cheekyjohnson]

If those 2 girls did not exist then the other girl would still be alive.

And if this girl didn't commit suicide, she would still be alive.

Re:the meaning of the word bully

[cheekyjohnson]

Problem with your position is that limbs heal, bruises go away, The mental trauma of harrassment-induced stress usuallly means saying good-bye to having a good night's rest even after escaping one's tormentors.

Not always. And this seems to imply that physically harming someone won't also harm them mentally; that, as far as I'm concerned, is often false.

In my opinion, mental trauma is simply too variable and subjective, and freedom of speech trumps safety.

it just puts the tell on you.

That makes no sense to me.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[RattFink]

They were arrested for stalking and harassing her. Something they could have been arrested for if she was still alive. I really don't know how anyone could think that harassment of anyone let alone someone who clearly made clear efforts to remove themselves from their influence is somehow acceptable.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[BlacKSacrificE]

No, I interpreted his subject/comment as "Wait. I can be arrested for my actions causing death of someone else?", which lead me to post my hypothetical. Of course drunk drivers are responsible for their casualties, as the trolls are responsible for Rebeccas death. His comment was ambiguous in my eyes, but I'm not sure how you managed to pull that meaning out of my comment. Would have been nice if he clarified his point, but meh.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[AlphaWoIf_HK]

If someone says something that you don't like, get government thugs to harass them.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[wisnoskij]

But only Rebecca caused her own death, these other kids were not just particularly nice to her when she was alive.
Are we going to blame the barista who got her order wrong, the thief who stole $20 dollars out of her purse, the washer-machine that ruined her favourite dress, or the boy who broke up with her (theoretical occurrences).

Not a right

[techstar25]

Use of the internet is NOT a basic human right, no matter how much Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg want us to think it is. It's a privilege and should be revoked as such.

Re:Not a right

[SecurityTheatre]

It is a fundamental component of modern social life, and in the future, I suspect it will be THE fundamental component of social life.

In a few years, it would be roughly akin to preventing someone from visiting the courthouse, public square and the market. Sometimes this is known as "arrest".

Re:Burden of proof?

[omnichad]

Subpoena Facebook for the IP address it was submitted from to link it to a subscriber address. Check her alibi for the same time period.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[BlacKSacrificE]

Ahh, I see what you're saying, and concur to a degree.

However your examples of bad times don't happen all day, every day, and don't follow you home. They are just people fucking up, as people tend to do. Granted a child is not as aware of the consequences of their actions as a drunk driver should be, but to imply they should be surprised when the shit they dropped on the victim is rubbed back in their faces is also a bit of a stretch.

Re:Kids will be kids...

[PPH]

the fact that the other child killed herself will haunt them for the rest of their lives.

Or perhaps not. Its possible that these two (and in fact all bullies) are sociopaths. This fact is what should haunt them for the rest of their lives. I'm all for giving some kids who get caught with weed or grab a hand full of candy bars a break on their criminal records. But things like bullying that have a basis in some psychological defect, no.

Aaron Swartz

[Errol backfiring]

A company is way more evil. Why are a few teenagers arrested while companies go free? Has everyone forgotten about Aaron Swartz already?

Re:Aaron Swartz

[CanHasDIY]

A company is way more evil. Why are a few teenagers arrested while companies go free?

Because "a few teenagers" lack the resources required to own politicians.

Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Catbeller]

Arresting? Putting a 12 year old in FUCKING PRISON? Have you all lost your goddamned minds??? You have, haven't you?

Re:Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Nidi62]

Well, her actions did contribute to putting another 12 year old in a box in the ground. So yeah, no problem with it. Although I think her parents should be locked up right alongside her. Their failings contributed to this as much as the girls' did.

Re:Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Hoi Polloi]

She belongs in a center where she would be forced to attend therapy. Maybe there is still hope for her though I assume she is picking up her attitudes from her parents. The sooner she is separated from them the better probably.

Re:Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Mike Frett]

In all fairness, from personal experience, when one comes out of Prison after a lengthy time period; one is a better criminal. It's a school for Criminals. I believe if she were forced into a good Mental Institution for several years, there is a very good chance that she could be a productive member of society. If Prison is the path chosen, you can expect even worse behavior when she is released.

Re:Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Nidi62]

In all fairness, from personal experience, when one comes out of Prison after a lengthy time period; one is a better criminal. It's a school for Criminals. I believe if she were forced into a good Mental Institution for several years, there is a very good chance that she could be a productive member of society. If Prison is the path chosen, you can expect even worse behavior when she is released.

In all honesty, I believe the sole purpose of prison is to punish, not to rehabilitate. 12 and 14 year olds should know that driving someone to suicide (and remember the 12 year old were at one time best friends) just because that girl previously dated a boy the 14 year old is dating is wrong and immoral. I think if anything they should be institutionalized only after they are released from prison. It's just like how you would treat a child that misbehaves in any other way, just scaled up to match the action: punish, then explain why they were punished and why what they did was wrong. And again, I think the parents bear just as much guilt as the girls do, as they failed to properly teach the girls what is acceptable behavior and just how important certain things really are.

Re:Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Lohrno]

Yeah, she deserves to go to prison for teasing another kid. "You smell funny!" 10 YEARS PRISON!

Re:Jesus fucking christ on a stick

[Nidi62]

"you smell funny" is a little different than repeatedly telling someone, at all hours of the day and night through multiple mediums "go kill yourself", especially for something so trivial as a middle school boyfriend that you break up with in a month. I would think a rational person would be able to recognize that distinction.

Re:Teachers

[Kohath]

How about we stop locking up innocent kids together with the people who hurt them in government schools? When someone is nasty to me, I avoid them. When someone is nasty to a kid at school, how does the kid escape? How can a kid be absolutely sure his bullying problem will be solved?

Re:Sticks and stones

[BitZtream]

It's an old saying used to make pretend that bullying isn't a real thing and that the victim has the power to stop things.

Uhm, no. Its a saying thats supposed to get a point across, but apparently you utterly failed to grasp it.

The point is that ... THEY ARE JUST WORDS. Any 'pain' you feel is self induced and CAN be turned off with a simple change in thought patterns. That change is what the saying is meant to do.

Kids die from lots of things, but this one killed herself. Her bullies didn't put a gun to her head and pull the trigger. They didn't cut her wrists. As far as anything shows, they were just teenage girls being teenage girls, except in this case, they picked on a girl who had bigger issues and couldn't deal with it.

If it wasn't the bullying at school, it would have been the professor in collage that sent her over the edge, or her first job or something else. If school bullying causes you to commit suicide, you weren't long for this world anyway. She took HER OWN life, you can't blame anyone else for that.

Re:Sticks and stones

[Artifakt]

I agree that bul;lying is very real and the old adage about sticks and stones is a lie, but I have to say that the number of kids who have committed or attempted suicide after being bullied to death is exactly zero.

Re:good!

[omnichad]

and they still use deprecated SMS shorthand.

No wonder the other girl killed herself if that's how their messages looked like.

Sociopaths don't know shame or remorse.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[omnichad]

Not murder, but it's still a felony of aggravated stalking because the girl died.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[omnichad]

I bet there's a lot of stalked ex-girlfriends out there that wish you would just shut up. It's certainly beyond simple repetitive behavior.

All of the feels (To This Day)

[Wain13001]

It seems it might be worthwhile to watch this today, I can't just read this conversation and series of posts without having an emotional reaction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8SdkAgsoM4

Re:All of the feels (To This Day)

[metallurge]

Thanks for sharing this. I'd upmod you if I had points.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

Still words. There's a strong line between verbal and physical. I won't let you cross it. But do let me know what I can type here that will cause you to jump off of a silo. I'd like to know, because names will never hurt me.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[omnichad]

Your own particular resilience has no bearing on this issue.

Re:Kids will be kids...

[omnichad]

haunt them for the rest of their lives

"Yes IK I bullied REBECCA nd she killed herself but IDGAF." Don't know why the summary cut off the last part of the quote. You can assume they are just coping, but that shouldn't excuse or forgive anything.

Facebook Comment cut short

[omnichad]

Of all places, Slashdot cut short the girl's Facebook post:

Yes IK I bullied REBECCA nd she killed herself but IDGAF.

Not that it makes a huge difference in meaning, but it's a little harsher than implied.

Pretense

[b4upoo]

We have a basic conflict with our schools and our thought processes. The nonsense doctrine is put forward that we must include all young people and we must not have any of them lost to the school system. So what does a teacher or school official do when confronted by the fact that there are kids that are mean, unreasonable, and with savage desires and actions? Dare we to toss the punk out on his or her ear? That would force us to admit that the system is not for everyone. We wait a bit until we start tossing kids out of the educational system by things like the price of college etc..
                  The second point is that we are so anti violence that kids can not defend against bullies very well or in some cases the victims have an almost robotic programming that will not allow them to deal with a bully. Frankly the best way to deal with a bully is to beat them down so badly that they will quake in fear over the thought of ever offending you again. If they are stronger use tactics, weapons, or several strong friends to kick them half to death. On a junior high campus the message spreads really quickly that bullies get hurt bad in ways for which the suffering will tend to last them for decades.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[CanHasDIY]

Um, no; it's like yelling fire in a crowded theater - while the yeller, personally, might not have trampled anyone, their action caused the panic that led to people being trampled, and therefore yes, the person who yelled fire is legally culpable for those deaths.

You cannot legally harass, debase, and intimidate a person into killing themselves. This is not some new rule, it's an idea that's been around for quite some time (albeit not equally applied).

Re:Sticks and stones

[CanHasDIY]

It's an old saying used to make pretend that bullying isn't a real thing and that the victim has the power to stop things.

Uhm, no. Its a saying thats supposed to get a point across, but apparently you utterly failed to grasp it.

The point is that ... THEY ARE JUST WORDS. Any 'pain' you feel is self induced and CAN be turned off with a simple change in thought patterns. That change is what the saying is meant to do.

Kids die from lots of things, but this one killed herself. Her bullies didn't put a gun to her head and pull the trigger. They didn't cut her wrists. As far as anything shows, they were just teenage girls being teenage girls, except in this case, they picked on a girl who had bigger issues and couldn't deal with it.

If it wasn't the bullying at school, it would have been the professor in collage that sent her over the edge, or her first job or something else. If school bullying causes you to commit suicide, you weren't long for this world anyway. She took HER OWN life, you can't blame anyone else for that.

So... if I came into your workplace and convinced all your co-workers that you were a pedophile, it would be your duty to not get upset about it, and to live with everyone you interact with on a daily basis treating you like shit because they believe you to be a filthy child-fucker?

Normally I agree with the whole "you are the gatekeeper of your own emotions" philosophy, but even I recognize that there is a point of delineation between things people say that you can let roll off you and things people say that can completely fuck up your life.

Why was this upvoted? Feelings win over brain.

[mha]

Science has long proven that what parent.parent said is true. Children's brain develop. That is why - except for maybe in parts of the US and the Internet public - children are not charged as adults in court. You can easily Google some interesting lectures etc. on this topic. Not that common sense wouldn't have told our grandparents - today everything needs a "scientific study" unless it already serves our worst, lowest instincts, in which case any stupid comment is accepted as true.

Re:Why was this upvoted? Feelings win over brain.

[ahabswhale]

Um...no. Children are not sociopaths. I don't know where people get this bullshit from.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

At issue is only this: why is such resilience particular to me? It never used to be. I wasn't the only one who grew up with the common advice.

So if you've found yourself unable to handle the verbal comments of strangers, colleagues, friends, and family, well, again I ask: what can I say to manipulate you into deleting your slashdot account and never coming back?

Re:Burden of proof?

[CanHasDIY]

They should have had a warrant issued for her personal internet devices as well; the call logs and internet history would likely have provided all the evidence they need.

2013 and people are as terrible as ever

[rbanzai]

People defend bullies and call a 12 year old suicide a "coward." It disgusts but does not surprise me:

1. ... that people want bullying to be considered protected speech.
2. ... that the bullied are expected to physically beat down their tormentors or else they must deserve what they get.
3. ...that some poor child that is so desperate that they kill themselves is branded a coward.

Human society will always raise up the violent and support their efforts to eliminate the weaker members as if we're all animals and need to cull impure genes from our species. We are no more advanced than we were 2,000 years ago, just a loose collection of intelligent, slavering beasts in business suits and yoga pants.

Re:2013 and people are as terrible as ever

[Seumas]

Nobody is saying that bullying should be considered protected speech. People are saying speech should be protected speech. YOU are the one trying to change what bullying means to "any time someone is a poopy-head to you and makes you sad about stuffs".

If someone is physically threatening or harming you, then fuck yes that should be addressed and parents and schools should put a god damn stop to it. But they don't -- instead, they let it go on right in front of their eyes and ignore it, until something happens outside of school and then instead of accepting responsibility for negligence, they decide they want to stick a pre-teen girl in prison for inciting the actions.

Going down the road of "if you say something mean or even hideous and someone later does something bad to themselves, you are culpable for their actions with your WORDS" is a really fucking dangerous road to tread.

Unfortunately, too many people can't seem to fucking grasp that this girl could be a shitty person who said shitty things (unless we're missing more to the story) and that what the other girl did to herself was horrible and heartbreaking AND that there might not be someone you can directly snag by the neck and force to "pay for it".

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[CanHasDIY]

We've come a long way from sticks and stones; I wonder in which direction. Since when is it illegal to tell someone that you hate them, repeatedly even?

Since doing so meant following them around either on or offline, incitement of violence, threats, etc.

Obviously you did not RTFA, else you would be aware that there's more to this situation than a couple girls telling another one they hate her.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

We're going to stop short of threats of physical violence, since those are in-themselves illegal for other reasons.

And so I ask again: what would cause you to intentionally choose to kill yourself? What could anyone say to you, no matter how many times, from whatever proximity?

We're not talking about convincing someone to do something they aren't happy about. We're talking about convincing someone to kill themselves. There are, perhaps, a handful of reasons to kill yourself. None of them applied here.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[omnichad]

So let's talk about physical violence, then. Even broken bones can heal with relative success. Bruises definitely can. So why is that different? Is it because of an emotional trauma that's linked to it? If so, is there another route to get that emotional trauma?

Re:Inducing Suicide

[gnasher719]

The two main reasons that someone would contemplate suicide is to get attention and to punish someone who injured them.

What a piece of crap. The three main reasons are mental illness like depression which makes their life too painful to live, mental illnesses that stop them from experiencing life as it is and makes their life seem too painful to live, or f***ing bastards and bitches like the one this article is about who make someone's life too painful to live.

Taking a kitchen knife and stabbing the bitch would have worked wonderfully to get attention and punish the person who injured her.

Re:Coddled kids are the problem.

[0111 1110]

These kids don't even know what it's really like to be bullied. Not only was I beaten up every day in elementary school, I had an older brother who liked to test out his fists on me as well.

Yeah. In my case it was my older stepbrother who used to hit me and physically intimidate me into obeying him. Man, I still hate him for it to this day and needless to say we maintained no contact with each other whatsoever when we were older. He was a natural born bully and quite cruel. I'm surprised he didn't become a cop. Well some people grow out of that. The rest get jobs in law enforcement.

And as for insults, I developed a way to deal with it -- I laughed; in fact, I still laugh at pain, I still laugh at insults, and I cut off the insulter usually by insulting myself first so the other guy has no ammo.

Yup. Me too. There's no reason to take other people's opinions so seriously. When people tell me I'm ugly for instance I just agree with them. They don't seem to get that. I am ugly. I know it. It's just a fact. Did they think I didn't realize it? How can you hurt someone by just telling them something they already know? Or just by reciting a list of unpleasant facts?

I make it clear to the bully that I'm tougher than they are; and they soon give up.

How? If someone is older than you and bigger and stronger than you how do you make that clear? The only way I know to even the odds is with a weapon, but using a weapon tends to have serious consequences. Of course there are martial arts, but that takes years to get good enough at and as a child you don't necessarily have the choice to study them and besides many of the moves in martial arts are intended to kill so that may be just as bad as using a weapon.

Can we stop using the word bullying already for...

[Lohrno]

Can we stop using the word bullying for teasing, verbal abuse, etc. already? Bullying implies physical abuse on a regular basis. This is harassment at most unless I've read all this wrong and there was some physical abuse. My god it blows my mind that the POLICE are being called in because on kid is teasing another... I really don't mean to make light of the tragedy of this poor girl's suicide, but that's not a failure of the harassers. Harassing others, being harassed is part of growing up and if we don't stop this nonsense we're going to end up with a generation of people who are so fragile they won't be able to deal with the hard problems. This tragedy cannot be blamed on them, the blame lies with the school and/or the parents' inability to deal with the situation.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

It's not emotional trauma that's the issue. It's loss of the use of that bone until it heals. Same with bruises. Small bruises that don't affect the use of your body aren't an issue -- you can bump into someone on the street. Bruises that result in significant pain are an issue.

I can't overcome a broken bone until it heals. I'm not involved in breaking the bone. You broke my bone. I had nothing to do with it.

Bullying -- verbal bullying -- requires me to be a part of it in order for it to have any effect. You can say whatever you like, if I don't hear it, it doesn't affect me. Similarly, if I hear it but don't listen to it, it has zero effect. Similarly again, if I listen to it but ascribe zero value to it, it has zero effect.

The only way for your words to hurt me is for me to value your words. Since you aren't my mother, and you aren't my friend, nothing that you say can hurt me.

It's that simple.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[omnichad]

So if 100 people followed you all day long giving you small bruises when you least expected it, is that still cool with you? What if they were standing on all sides of you following you around everywhere you go? Where is your limit?

Re:Kids will be kids...

[flimflammer]

There was even a "<3" at the very end.

They sound like sociopaths to me. Not a kid coping with what happened.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

Small bruises that never accumulate into anything that restricts me? On all sides of me without restricting my movements or substantially blocking my view?

They do that now. It goes by many names. You've just described public transit, hockey games, music concerts, baseball games, football games, lacross games, office buildings, busses, the shopping district, every worthwhile restaurant, and movie theatres. Okay, maybe not lacross games.

My limit is when it restricts me from doing something. 200 bruises a day very much would. 10 bruises a day very much does not. We can adjust those numbers for the enderly if you like. But the metric remains the same.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[CanHasDIY]

We're going to stop short of threats of physical violence, since those are in-themselves illegal for other reasons.

Why? The offenders in this case told the victim to "Go drink bleach and kill yourself." Sounds pretty damn threatening to me.

nd so I ask again: what would cause you to intentionally choose to kill yourself? What could anyone say to you, no matter how many times, from whatever proximity?

You're assuming that a 12-year-old girl has the same intellectual and emotional maturity as a 30-year-old man, which they patently do not.

Re:WRONG

[Dogtanian]

What is appalling about people like you, 'Dogtanian', is that you are cowardly enough to beat up on children for behaviour you PRAISE in adults.

Hmm. I really don't recall saying of those things I allegedly endorse. I must have been very, *very* drunk at the time.

Or maybe you just felt free to shovel great masses of alleged opinions into my mouth because I'm a proxy for America.

America almost universally praises its genocidal butchers in UNIFORM as heroes [..] When this happens, people like 'Dogtanian' applauds the system

Sorry, I thought I was applauding the Rolling Stones tribute band that was playing that night, but I inadvertantly faced the wrong way and applauded the Republican convention.

that not only allows so many men and women to get away with the worst forms of Crimes against Humanity unpunished, but encourages them to rejoice in their crimes forever afterwards. [..] cowards like Dogtanian attack them and label them with the moral deficiencies they themselves have. [..] The USA is almost unique on the planet in having a "blame the child" mentality. The USA is one of the tiny number of countries on the planet that executes children and disabled people. The USA is almost unique in REFUSING to sign UN conventions giving children RIGHTS. The USA is unique amongst nations of the West in allowing children to be subject to BDSM rape at school disguised as corporal punishment. The USA is almost unique in allowing parents to kidnap their 17-year-old daughters, and force them into extremely abusive facilities where they can be stripped and examined against their will, forced into nappies, monitored as they use the toilet, with no justification other than this is what the parents desire (you think I exaggerate- go Google 'Hephzibah House', a facility still running today where ALL these things happened).

Sorry; when I signed that petition, I was assured it was just something about providing mittens for kittens. I knew it looked a bit long. Also, I'm afraid that I was very, very drunk.

But seriously... glad to have been a nice little whipping boy / strawman to let you get that rant out of your system.

If you actually want my opinion, I'm just as disgusted by much of that stuff as you are. (Much as it pains me to "agree" with you). I just happen to have a low tolerance for sociopathic bullies that push people into killing themselves- picky, I know- and something of a desire to see them get back exactly what they dished out.

You're the purest example of someone who- faced with another person who says something they don't entirely agree with- feels free to ascribe any and all opinions held by *all* his/her enemies to that person, regardless of the evidence, and do so in the most sanctimonious, self-righteous manner. I've come across several on Slashdot, but you're certainly the worst.

People like 'Dogtanian' show why America is so sick.

Know what's actually funny? After that anti-American rant, I have to tell you... I'm not actually American. Never even been there.

I think at this point, I'm entitled to say... you utter fuckwit. :-P

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

If that's sounds threatening, you don't understand the meaning of the word. The threat would have been "I'm going to make you drink bleach and die."

The reason that death-threats are themselves illegal is because the only way to defend against such a threat is to act proactively, which means escalating the violence. Anyone who believes your threat is forced to attack you to save themselves. It's an immediately life-threatening scenario for them. So you've effectively put out a hit on yourself.

In this case, there was no threat made with regard to the bleach. Just a request made of someone who could simply refuse it.

I'm assuming that a 12-year-old girl has been taught that her peers aren't able to control her actions. I certainly had no trouble understanding that concept.

But more importantly here, I'm assuming that the "offenders" in this case understood exactly that, and should not be punished for it. Perhaps ironically, it would seem that the "victim" here confused them by making it seem as though they did have such power, when in actual fact, it was this "victim" that chose to take the action. No one forced her to jump.

Unless they did. Unless the pushed her off the silo. Unless they pushed her up the ladder -- which I'll accept as the penultimate push.

Look at what you're saying. If such peers can force someone to kill themselves, then they can certainly force her to take drugs, drink, smoke, starve, steal, fight, kill, and cheat. So are you now going to blame the "offenders" for everything anyone ever does? I was just following orders, from everybody, always, for everything.

Walk away?

[Rolpa]

As someone who was tortured throughout my primary and secondary education, I understand that the situation can feel nigh intolerable. But my question is this: why didn't she just tune them out? If my understanding of the situation is correct, it appears that the entirety of the abuse was occurring online. So why didn't she just block/unfriend them, as virtually every form of social media allows you to do? I may have been treated like shit at school, but I didn't interact with anyone I didn't want to online - my home was my haven. I certainly didn't friend my tormentors on Facebook...

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[CanHasDIY]

OK, so you don't understand psychological abuse. That's fair, you probably haven't been subjected to much of it in your life.

Those of us that have understand what sort of impact being told that you're shit and should end your own life, by pretty much everyone you meet, day in and day out, especially at such an influential age, can have on a person. Some of us were lucky - we survived our attempts on our own lives and were then able to see the damage and thus, do what we could to mitigate and repair it. Some people, like the girl who jumped from the tower, weren't so lucky.

Seriously, man, if you can't see the sociopathy in the one girl telling the entire fucking world "I'm glad I contributed to her suicide..." I just don't know, perhaps you would benefit from some counseling yourself.

P.S. in case you didn't know, enticement to commit a violent act, even against oneself, is illegal in most places in the US; you can't stand at the bottom of the tower yelling "Jump! Jump!" any more than you can yell "fire!" in a crowded theater. Ever wonder why Charles Manson is in prison? He never killed anyone with his own hands. Neither did Hitler.

Do you seriously think Charles Manson and Hitler are/were innocent men? Because that's basically what you're saying here.

Here's what I think...

[erp_consultant]

Bullying is a huge problem in society. Facebook - where just about every kid has an account and uses it every day - only makes it worse. The insults don't go away when the school bell rings.

It seems to me that there are three parties involved here: the school, the parents and the kids. Each of them need to be accountable. If the bullying takes place on school grounds then the parents of the victim should notify the school - in writing. If the school knowingly allows it to continue then the teacher and/or principal should be held accountable. Up to and including getting fired.

The parents of the child that is doing the bullying is also responsible to curb the behavior. Your kid is harassing my kid and you damn well better do something about it and pronto. Don't know what to do? Tough. That's your problem, not mine. If it happens again you'll be speaking to the police and/or my attorney.

Finally, the bullying kid has to understand that this kind of behavior is unacceptable. Just because you are attending a public school does not give you the right to terrorize my kid - or anyone else's kid for that matter. If it continues then the parents of the victim should have the ability to push for the expulsion of the bully from the public school system.

Now these might seem like extreme measures but the vast majority of kids are in school to learn. Bullying is just another form of assault - plain and simple. No child should have to put up with that.

Re:Here's what I think...

[Lohrno]

<quote>Bullying is a huge problem in society.</quote>

Hunger is a huge problem in society.  Disease, lack of sufficient health care, people dying in wars, substance abuse, domestic violence, crime are huge problems in society.  Bullying is on par with these?

Re:Here's what I think...

[erp_consultant]

Those are your words not mine. I'm not trying to suggest that bullying is on par with those things. Clearly, they are much bigger problems. If enormous is greater than huge then I would put those items in the enormous problems bucket.

Re:Sticks and stones

[RazorSharp]

Ding ding ding! We have a winner. It's sad that whenever the bullying topic gets brought up on Slashdot it brings all the crybabies out of the woodwork. I mean, I get that on a site full of nerds, many were bullying in high school, but it's just pathetic how many still haven't gotten over it.

People who think insults can be harmful have never really grown up.

I think the most important lesson a person can learn in life is that they don't matter. Their emotions don't matter. The only thing about a person that matters is what they do with their life. If you choose to take your own life, especially before you've actually done anything, you really don't matter. This life is precious shit makes me sick. People just think life is precious because they don't want to die.

Re:Rebecca's parents.

[Prune]

It's the parents of the perpetrators of the bullying that are most at fault here.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

Or I've resisted much of it. You might try fighting back once in a while. And yeah, I live the kind of life that has everyone around me telling me to change, every day. Grow a pair. You lock your front door from intruders. Lock your mind the same way. I've run away from many such influences. I've fought many more.

Regarding Hitler -- I don't know who Charles Manson is -- hiring someone (and paying them) to kill someone puts you in the accountability seat. It always has.

Being proud that you could convince someone to do something extreme is a valid point of pride. It doesn't really matter what the act is. If someone gives you that kind of power over their life, you can be proud of that. It basically means that they gave you more control over their life than you have over yours. That's impressive. See it that way.

You ought to be able to resist someone telling you to kill yourself. It really isn't difficult to NOT kill yourself. If you failed at killing yourself, well then you suck at something that is quite easy to do. So if you actually intended to kill yourself, and you simply missed, then you really aren't very co-ordinated.

Like I said before, there's never been any good reason to kill yourself. I can see some cultures choose to except a small handful of very specific scenarios. Even those don't include some random person telling you to do so.

So here's a complicated scenario for you. I don't believe there's any reason to kill yourself. I'm upset that you tried, because it expresses your devaluing of life in general, and by extension my life. I'm even more upset that you failed in your attempt, because it supports others' opinions that suicide should be illegal and I believe your life is your own, to do with whatever you please. In each case, the reasons behind your actions make zero difference. I'm very-much results-driven.

Sticks and stones...

[DarthVain]

So I am going to get a lot of flame for my subject, but lets put things into perspective here.

Lots of blame to go around. Not to generalize either, but it makes me wonder if there wasn't other things going on as well. I mean I hate to say this but this likely happens all the time (girls being stupid bitches) but not everyone decides to kill themselves. Hell there are even a bunch of movies out there like "Mean Girls" etc... which basically are exactly that.

It seems a lot of things fall under "Bullying", many of which I would not classify as such. The two cases I know in Canada which had similar results I would call more a "crime" than "bullying". I think some of this is the police's unwillingness to go after kids or parents due to kids behavior. In one there was alleged rape and the other kiddie porn extortion. Police were called in both instances and the results were nothing. Parents did what they could, removal from school, mental care, however ultimately I think it was the hopelessness of the situation than was the cause of the eventual unfortunate result. They had already gone to the authorities, they had already tried escape/relocation. What was left? Isn't there a law for harassment? Pretty sure there is. The parents might think twice about continuing to allow their daughter the use of a cell phone when they are charged with a criminal offence because of it. I bet cell phone privileges would go real quick, and if she found another way, the rest of any privilege would follow.

I am a bit inclined to believe some of the more right wing crazies on here promoting violence in return, abit as a last resort. You have exhausted your legal alternatives, but you are somewhat justified in yourself protection (say with a measured response). Likely face repercussions, however perhaps tempered once the details come out. The axiom I like to use, is be nice to people, you don't know how everyone will react. Pull that stuff with the wrong person and you may regret it.

Anyway from the details that were given, simply name calling and harassment on its own I would hope would not cause such an end. I know I had a bully (bullies actually), problem when I was a kid. As mentioned by several, girls tend to be verbal while guys physical. As a guy I got in a fight pretty much every single day for several years. Dad's advice was to punch them in the nose if they refused to leave you alone. Other sage advice from an upper class man was to more less suck it up, after finding me despondent on the ground after a beating. While both sound at face value rather harsh, the advice isn't all that wrong. Bullies are cowards, like groups, and tend not to enjoy half as much what they dish out. They also feed on your misery and submission, so don't give them any. Eventually they will tire of it, find someone easier, or grow out of it hopefully. Mine did.

Not to condone violence, and my experience is different of course, however as mentioned sometimes your eventual consequences may be tempered. I put one of my larger attackers in the hospital once, and he was out of school for several days. I didn't get suspended or expelled, but got a stern talking to by a teacher. They knew it was going on, did not or could not do anything, so were a bit understanding of the eventual results I think. Also bullies (physical anyway) tend to want an unfair fight, either buy picking someone much smaller, or by using groups, so if you are forced to defend yourself, don't think you are somehow obligated to fight "fair" yourself.

Anyway what a terrible situation. On one hand it makes me wonder how horrible the one girls parents are, then again it also makes me glad I don't have any children either. I feel for the other parents. It sounds like they tried to do all the right things. I know as a kid I didn't have to deal with cell phone videos, or Facebook, or internet etc... Hell I was out of university when it came out, know I wished I had it while I was in to keep in touch with friends. Though as I recall at the time, there used to be an a

No escape in today's world

[Morpeth]

To me, the biggest (and worst) difference for this girl over what most of us went through is social media. I, like many others here posted, had a totally shitty middle school experience -- I'll spare the details, but let's just say it was a nightmare. Anyway, when school ended at 3 or so, I could go at least go home, and for a little while anyway, there was a reprieve -- maybe just enough for me to regain enough strength to face school again the next day. And then there was the weekend, 2 days without having to deal with it.

With the advent of texting, FB, twitter, instagram, etc -- there is no escaping. I could see this kind of thing being a 24 - 7 assault of sorts, no rests, no breaks. That's a helluva lot for a 12 year old to handle. And even if your child isn't on any social media, 'they' are still talking and teasing her/him, and will still get back to them eventually.

Kids can be brutally, mercilessly mean at that age, not having (or not perceiving) a way out of it would be a living hell for some.

But what did the parents truly know, and when?

[almechist]

But he reserved his harshest words for the girl's parents for failing to monitor her behavior, after she had been questioned by the police, and for allowing her to keep her cellphone.

Most parents can't or don't monitor what their kids do on the internet, and most parents are under the belief their child is a little angel who would never do something like this (or consider it to be 'normal' childhood stuff).

I suspect most parents do not have the kind of control over their kids this sheriff thinks, and likely aren't that interested anyway.

From what I've seen, most parents are either clueless or turn a blind eye to the fact that their kids are rotten little bastards.

Interestingly enough, the parents of the 14 year old are claiming that they did indeed monitor on a daily basis everything their daughter did on FB. They are claiming they never saw any bullying or even so much as swearing in any of the girl's posts. They are also claiming that because they never saw anything remotely like what the girl is accused of posting, their daughter's FB account must have been hacked. All this despite the many admissions by classmates of the victim that intense bullying had indeed occurred, and that this girl was the ringleader.

It's difficult to say for sure exactly what the truth is in all this, but it sounds like the parents are either in deep denial about what their daughter did, or they are going dangerously way out on a limb in an attempt to try and protect her from the legal consequences of her actions. One explanation is that the girl was smart enough to keep two FB accounts, one for the parents to see and one for all the other stuff. I suppose a hacked account is not entirely impossible, but it sounds pretty unlikely to me. But who knows? Stay tuned, this story may get even more complicated as more facts emerge.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[CanHasDIY]

You're still operating under the assumption that a 12 year old girl is as mentally and emotionally mature as a 30 year old man - yea, I know how to deal with stupid assholes at this point in my life, thanks Captain Obvious. Thing is, this isn't about me, nor is it about you - it's about mentally and emotionally undeveloped children.

Not sure what I could say to get that through your head, that I haven't said already.

I don't know who Charles Manson is

And, obviously, can't be bothered to learn. If you could, you'd realize that enticing others into violent acts very much is illegal in the USA.

I suggest you spend less time focusing on your undeserved sense of moral and mental superiority, and a little more learning just what it means to be human; specifically, the difference between a fully developed adult male, and a developing adolescent female child.

Oh, and maybe take the 10 fucking seconds required to Google "Charles Manson." I mean, if you won't even take it upon yourself to become educated about a very, very, exceedingly well-known part of recent American history, I have absolutely no reason to assume any of the statements you have made or continue to make are based on anything so much as reflecting reality.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

You're not reading. I was 12. I was mature enough to not kill myself. I was mature enough to ignore the many out there who wanted me to. And that was in the age when bullying was permitted. Perhaps the issue here is that there isn't enough bullying early on. By the time she's 12, she hasn't had enough experience. Perhaps she'd been coddled from birth. Perhaps she simply wasn't independent enough.

Um, it's not undeserved. It's very much deserved. See, I lived, I never tried to die, and I never failed at killing myself. That actually does make me morally and mentally superior to someone who didn't live, died, or failed at trying. See, that's what success is. Learn the word. It means "coming after". As in 2 succeeds 1.

You need to sit back and sit down, and define what it would mean to suck -- as a 12 year old. If your definition of failure as a human doesn't include intentionally killing yourself of your own free will, well then sure, maybe being human in your world includes being that feeble. But for those of us who've been competing since age 5, working since age 9, starting a business at age 14, the concept of being such a delicate flower isn't an acceptable trait for a human.

It's not a part of being human. It's a failure to being human. See the difference?

I have zero interest in researching some singular historical scenario. Proper research covers a wide range of cases. No singular one should affect your perspectives. If it did, then you failed at learning. That too is simple. I have no need to learn American History. I don't live in your country. When you learn my history, maybe then I'll think about learning yours. Self-centred much?

So I'll end this the same way as I started it. Go kill yourself, if that's what you want to do. This try, try not to fail. And stop making it acceptable for others to try to kill themselves. Because that's exactly what you're doing. You're taking the credit and blame and responsibility and often accountability out of their hands.

That's immoral.

So yes, that's just one more way in which I am superior to you. I give credit where credit is due.

Re:Kids will be kids...

[jklovanc]

The parents of the child who killed herself should have been monitoring their own kids internet access, should not have allowed the facebook account to begin with.
Should not have allowed the kid to have a cell phone,

So your solution is to cut the victim off from all social contact to protect them from a couple of bullies. That cure could just as well have caused the same outcome.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[someSnarkyBastard]

Are we going to blame the barista who got her order wrong, the thief who stole $20 dollars out of her purse, the washer-machine that ruined her favourite dress, or the boy who broke up with her (theoretical occurrences).

No, no, no, and no. I'll refute point by point:

The barista - without further information it is most reasonable to conclude that the barista did not have malicious intent, mistakes happen

The thief - obviously the thief has malicious intent in that they stole money but not intent to kill her as you made no mention of attempted homicide, they were after the money, not the girl

the washing machine - non-sentient appliances cannot be blamed for anything as they lack intent

the ex-boyfriend - unless he also joined in harassing her then no, again, lack of malicious intent

Now compare that to two girls repeatedly harassing, intimidating, and generally being little shits over an extended period of time with clearly demonstrated malicious intent ("Go drink bleach and die")

One of these things is not like the others...

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[wisnoskij]

But the bullies did not want the kill her any more than the thief did, they were after making them selves feel superior, not her actual death.

Oh get off it.

[dfenstrate]

I'm pulling that from my own personal experiences, my observations, and a great deal of reading over the years. Do you want a bibliography for a slashdot comment? Perhaps some footnotes? Don't be pedantic. If you disagree, say so and why. That cute little stick figure holding up a sign that says 'citation needed' got old a while ago.

Re:Oh get off it.

[Raenex]

The only way you're going to prevent kids from picking on other kids is to never give them any free time to socialize. That includes bus stops, before the bell rings, lunch, and after school. Kids are little monsters. It has nothing to do with the education system.

Animal model

[Animats]

They're definitely a pain. As a horse owner, I see too much of this, because the typical "horse age" is 12-16. (A joke in the horse business is that around 16 they discover boys and lose interest in horses, then around 35 they realize men are jerks and come back to horses.) So I get to see too much early teen angst.

Horse kids seem to get over it with less trouble. They're used to remaining calm around big, excitable animals. This keeps the drama level down.

One day, one of the high-school-aged teenagers at the Stanford barn came in after school and announced in frustration "I just don't understand teenage boys". I said "Go watch the rooster for fifteen minutes and you'll get it". The barn's rooster made a lot of noise, ran around a lot, tried to hump the hens, and accomplished very little. A rooster is testosterone with a peanut-sized brain. She watched, and said "Now I get it."

Re:WRONG

[I'm New Around Here]

That is the best comment so far. Doesn't pull any punches, but doesn't try to sneak any in below the belt.

That roundhouse at the end, "I'm not actually American. Never even been there.", followed by the uppercut of "you utter fuckwit.", with the celebratory :-P .
Exquisite perfection.

I don't care what country you are from, or even what your politics are, I commend you sir.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[metallurge]

The only way for your words to hurt me is for me to value your words. Since you aren't my mother, and you aren't my friend, nothing that you say can hurt me.

Two problems here with your line of thought. First, people who are capable of completely devaluing others' words (and, by extension, therefore, other people themselves) might just be tending towards sociopathy. This isn't normal behavior, and I'm not sure I'd much like a society where it was, or where it was encouraged to be.

Second, there is the matter of reputation. Even if the recipient of those words is able to emotionally brush them off in their direct impact (or appear to, so as to give a useful impression), the reaction of the rest of society to those words can be rather serious.

Damn shame

[SeanBlader]

She was a cute young lady, it's a pity that she didn't have any friends or mentors to help her through, or help her make that shit stop.

Re:I can now get arrested for NOT killing somebody

[__aasehi2499]

Self-murder has already punished the perpetrator. The other girls didn't push her off the top of that building. The blame lies with the murderer, not the loudmouth psychos who were nowhere around here when she jumped. She was being homeschooled when this happended, after she had moved to a different school. She also failed to simply block communications with these people on FB and Twitter. She threw herself into their sphere of influence and then quit on life when it got hard.

Re:We've come a long way from sticks and stones

[holophrastic]

All that's fine. It doesn't preclude someone from doing it. Sociopathy is an important, if not vital part of society.

Its No Wonder

[rally2xs]

The modern approach to bullying seems to be far too passive. I saw the recent movie (within the last year), a documentary about bullying, and absolutely no one was helping those kids, not the teachers, not the parents, not the cops.

The cure for bullying is to beat the F out of the bully. The adults involved were all dedicated to non-violence. F that! A bully is beating on you, you grab whatever it takes to win, if not present fight, then the next one. Bullies understand pain, pretty much everybody does. The mere threat of a good beating is often enough, and if you "acquire" something heavy or long, they often get disinterested. That's the way to handle bullies. And, OBTW, unplug the frappin' computer and neutralize the cyberbullying.

Re:Kids will be kids...

[rally2xs]

Talk? How about a good course in Karate? That't the ticket to bullying, you make it painful, the bully finds someone different.

Social Mobility In The United States Is A Total My

[NewYork]

Social Mobility In The United States Is A Total Myth.
http://www.businessinsider.com/social-mobility-is-a-myth-in-the-us-2013-3

Schools

[NewYork]

I think Govt should periodically send doctors and psychologists to schools to assess the physical and psychological growth of students.

Parents of the bullied child should be arrested

[Ruralhack]

We're born above all human language. If a parent abc'devolves their child: ARREST THEM.

America is incredibly shallow on: bullying

[mladams]

Almost every time something like this happens, the commentary is inevitably shallow. People want to pretend that if only parents acted better, or if the schools paid more attention, or if we held people responsible for their actions... All of it is hogwash! The US has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world and we still manage to have bullies. The problem is we keep asking the wrong questions. We don't ask why our kids bully each other. We don't ask what we as the "adults" are doing to not only allows but encourages this sort of behavior. We look for simple answers and somewhere to lay the blame and direct our outrage. The truth is if you examine our culture, it glorifies bullying. Our reality TV shows barely fall short of bully worship. Our politicians put their know it all mugs on TV and bully each other, or people who disagree with them. We worship the notion that we should get what we want, that we shouldn't have to negotiating with those who disagree, that even if our point of view is in the minority, we need not question it. We are addicted to self righteousness and inflicting our point of view on others, even when it means that thousands or hundreds of thousands will be out of work, or that people will go hungry. We express indignant and righteous opinions about people and groups and classes of people, whom we don't know and never will, be they the ultra rich, or the poor and impoverished. They are lazy or morally bankrupt or selfish. We are cruel to each other and then we have the audacity to turn around and be indignant when our kids treat each other with the same indifference and lack of compassion or empathy. Guess what America, they learned it from the older generation, and until we collectively grow up and learn to conduct ourselves in a respectful and caring manner, our kids will never do so. Further more, we'll have no position from which to expect that from them, except the position of hypocrisy.

WTF?

[mha]

Why are you putting words into my writing that are not there? Do you have too much spare time? Is your need to argue so great that you have to go and invent stuff?

this is wrong

[xXXxkatyaxXXx]

I think that if the parents knew this was going on then they should also be a part of the charge . however if they didnt know then i think it is the kids fault , there are some very nasty little brats out there who have very sweet parents vise versa - the fact that the school wasn't doing much about this either is kind of a concern knowing that there were at least 15 girls total involved in the bullying over all . not all of them who were participating in this act got charged, only the two main ones. this is so messed up on so many levels , any kid who says , "drink bleach and die " to another needs help , or needs to be sent away to a group hone or lock down as discipline until they understand why they are saying what they are and where its coming from.