Bullies could get up to 10 years - in Australia

[CanadaCraig]

Hi Everyone!!

I hope you're having a dandy day.

A bully - in Australia - may find him or herself behind bars [The prison kind - not the 'what can I get you' kind] for up to 10 years.

Click on THIS to read the story.

I say.......

This is wonderful news. But we have to be careful. We don't want to become hypocrites. This must never be about revenge. It always has to be about justice. And there's a difference. And the difference is HATE. Bullies are hateful and mean. We must NEVER allow ourselves to become like them. No matter what. Otherwise we lose our right to think of ourselves as 'better than'.

What do YOU say?!

GREAT BIG HUG
Craig!!

[FlyingTrue]

If this type of law existed in the US my childhood would have been so much better. In addition to the bullying I faced at public school, I was cyberbullied and harassed maliciously by adults across the country whom I didn't even know, for years. I can still name some of those people. If they knew they could be charged criminally then they probably wouldn't have done what they did.

[Jack]

As far as I read it this doesn't apply to children in schools and only for the workplace. At least, I hope that is correct as I would have serious doubts about using it for dealing with school bullying as it would seem ridiculously heavy handed. It would not serve the interests of society to place school children into jail for bullying.

As for using in workplace contexts, well, I'm undecided and really I'd need to be able to see the actual drafting of the law in order to make an informed judgement on this law. However, while I know next to nothing of Australian law, it seems unlikely that they don't already have legal protections against harrasment in the workplace which would work just as well and are less heavy handed than 10 years in jail. Jail is generally understood to be used as a last resort (especially with those under 20) after community service, probation, fines and other methods and it annoys me that society is increasingly jumping to jail as a first option. To me this just seems like another piece of rubbish knee-jerk legislation (you can tell because they've called it Brodie's Law. I challenge you to find me a single piece of well thought out legislation named after a dead person. Megan's Law and Sarah's law, for example, are terrible pieces of legislation) which needs to be scrapped or at least delayed while it is thought about in more detail.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

This is wonderful news. But we have to be careful. We don't want to become hypocrites. This must never be about revenge. It always has to be about justice. And there's a difference. And the difference is HATE. Bullies are hateful and mean. We must NEVER allow ourselves to become like them. No matter what. Otherwise we lose our right to think of ourselves as 'better than'.

I think it's absolutely ridiculous and outright stupid. People keep advocating for harsher punishments but has anyone stopped and looked around for a second? Sure, some may get deterred but harsher punishments impact the imprisoned bully such that they'll probably become more and more aggressive so it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. 10 year sentence for cyber-bullying? School-yard bullying? I don't support bullying however, I do support punishments that don't favour tossing people into prison immediately for these types of acts. Someone bullies another kid in high-school and the bully gets 10 years. That may be wonderful for the victim, which is all people seem to be focused on but what about the bully? 10 years is gone and it's not surprising when they commit more crimes or have their education set back.

It's absolute nonsense, the fear of crimes are rising continuously and it gets supported by such actions implying the rates are rising. People then favour these sentences even more with the view society cannot control the crimes rates when in fact, rates are decreasing in general. Bullying rates are also decreasing yet its fear is on the rise. http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-20...=2547-1_3-0-20 View the paper in the link for raw data.

Sorry to say it but you failed, you're just like them by such a trigger-happy sentence. You put bullies as being "extreme" or outcasts from society and I'd think people would want to have a civil society but this isn't civil, it's far from it. Essentially, people are happy that those who hurt how they feel are sentenced to 10 years in jail. I view jail and prison as being a last-resort but it's eliminated now so it does seem to be more about revenge, hatred and akin to public executions. YAY! The guy who made me feel so shitty for months is now punished for 10 years! I was under the impression justice involves proportionality. It's clear as mud on a white shirt that the sentence is likely to increase and what will people (i.e. you and others) do? You'll cheer, imagine that, civil society that's cheering when someone is sentenced for bullying.

I have no doubts once the person is released from jail, they're still going to be hated by people such as yourself and all others who support this sentence. They've "paid their debt" but I see no possible way for them ever being treated equally. Once they're released, they'll be hated and that is in part why your idea fails. Let's be real, if someone bullied you and got sentenced for 10 years, once they're out, are you going to be nice to them regardless of how they act toward you? No. By "you" I'm referring to society as a whole because it's been happened for years, once people are released, they're still looked down upon for whatever their crime was. This is just going to increase that for bullying as a crime.

What will happen what the ex-bully gets bullied? I have a hard time believing they'll be given the same amount of sympathy, which leads to them not being taken seriously. This all revolves around hatred, revenge, etc... . Perhaps Australia is different in this respect from North America although given this new law and prior history, I doubt it.

[CanadaCraig]

Originally Posted by WOW!USaidSomethingSmart!

I think it's absolutely ridiculous and outright stupid. People keep advocating for harsher punishments but has anyone stopped and looked around for a second? Sure, some may get deterred but harsher punishments impact the imprisoned bully such that they'll probably become more and more aggressive so it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. 10 year sentence for cyber-bullying? School-yard bullying? I don't support bullying however, I do support punishments that don't favour tossing people into prison immediately for these types of acts. Someone bullies another kid in high-school and the bully gets 10 years. That may be wonderful for the victim, which is all people seem to be focused on but what about the bully? 10 years is gone and it's not surprising when they commit more crimes or have their education set back.

It's absolute nonsense, the fear of crimes are rising continuously and it gets supported by such actions implying the rates are rising. People then favour these sentences even more with the view society cannot control the crimes rates when in fact, rates are decreasing in general. Bullying rates are also decreasing yet its fear is on the rise. http://news.cnet.com/8301-19518_3-20...=2547-1_3-0-20 View the paper in the link for raw data.

Sorry to say it but you failed, you're just like them by such a trigger-happy sentence. You put bullies as being "extreme" or outcasts from society and I'd think people would want to have a civil society but this isn't civil, it's far from it. Essentially, people are happy that those who hurt how they feel are sentenced to 10 years in jail. I view jail and prison as being a last-resort but it's eliminated now so it does seem to be more about revenge, hatred and akin to public executions. YAY! The guy who made me feel so shitty for months is now punished for 10 years! I was under the impression justice involves proportionality. It's clear as mud on a white shirt that the sentence is likely to increase and what will people (i.e. you and others) do? You'll cheer, imagine that, civil society that's cheering when someone is sentenced for bullying.

I have no doubts once the person is released from jail, they're still going to be hated by people such as yourself and all others who support this sentence. They've "paid their debt" but I see no possible way for them ever being treated equally. Once they're released, they'll be hated and that is in part why your idea fails. Let's be real, if someone bullied you and got sentenced for 10 years, once they're out, are you going to be nice to them regardless of how they act toward you? No. By "you" I'm referring to society as a whole because it's been happened for years, once people are released, they're still looked down upon for whatever their crime was. This is just going to increase that for bullying as a crime.

What will happen what the ex-bully gets bullied? I have a hard time believing they'll be given the same amount of sympathy, which leads to them not being taken seriously. This all revolves around hatred, revenge, etc... . Perhaps Australia is different in this respect from North America although given this new law and prior history, I doubt it.

Hello,

The subject line says, "Bullies COULD get UP TO 10 years....." It does NOT say, "ALL bullies WILL be sent to prison for 10 years."

You have a point to make - you made it. And it's a good point. But what you DON'T do is suggest an alternative response. And THAT is so typical. So we are left with either what HAS been suggested - or [As you seem to be suggesting] DO NOTHING. People are sick and tired of the DO NOTHING option. And because they ARE so tired - they respond positively to an action BEING taken - even IF that action might be somewhat extreme.

As far as I am concerned - the victim matters MORE than the perpetrator.

That said...

IF you have a alternative option - one that does NOT suggest that we [As a society] treat the 'bully' as 'the victim' - here's you chance to be be heard.

GBH - Craig

[Rainbow Dash]

I agree with Craig, the victim matters a lot more than the bully. I remember watching a programme where a girl was getting bullied in a school in Britain. The bullies finally got expelled but they were getting a lot more support than the victim. This is ridiculous.

Hopefully some people will stop bullying other people at the risk they will get arrested.

[BDF]

I ain't got time now to read absolutely everything. I hate bullying. I myself might have overstepped the line maybe a few times so some things I've done could maybe be interpreted as bullying. It's not necessarily intentional, it might be getting too caried away with teasing someone over something stupid as school. But I don't remember ever "teasing" someone whom I barely know... it was usually a thing between friends... in my opinion kind of irrelevant. That kind of stuff happens that every now and then someone takes something a bit too far unintentionally 'cos they got carried away in the moment of it. That can't be treated with 10 years jail sentence lol.

So... how about the chronic serious bullies, that corner you in the toilet and put a cigarette to your neck (I've heard real stories like it). 10 years in prison? I'm not sure... it's serious yes but perhaps first they should be given the chance to see what they've done is wrong and why it is wrong. Counseling I think it's called. If this repeatedly fails then yea 10 years might be the right thing... but what strikes me is that spending 10 years in prison you might come outa the other end even worse given that you'l be spending 10 years in similar company as yourself.

If there's repeated bullying... it's not the victim who should have to change schools... it's the bully who should be forced to. Almost whatever the circumstances really. Most times the victim changes schools as a result. That's not right. Everyone needs to be treated fairly... even the bully, but victim leaving school instead of the bully is wrong.

[Jack]

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

Hello,

The subject line says, "Bullies COULD get UP TO 10 years....." It does NOT say, "ALL bullies WILL be sent to prison for 10 years."

You have a point to make - you made it. And it's a good point. But what you DON'T do is suggest an alternative response. And THAT is so typical. So we are left with either what HAS been suggested - or [As you seem to be suggesting] DO NOTHING. People are sick and tired of the DO NOTHING option. And because they ARE so tired - they respond positively to an action BEING taken - even IF that action might be somewhat extreme.

As far as I am concerned - the victim matters MORE than the perpetrator.

That said...

IF you have a alternative option - one that does NOT suggest that we [As a society] treat the 'bully' as 'the victim' - here's you chance to be be heard.

GBH - Craig

Well, Craig. There are plenty of other options available other than jail, within my post I mention Community Sentence options including prohibited activity requirements, activity requirements etc, fines, mediation between the vitcim and the bully and many other different (and more effective) methods. These methods have proved effective when dealing with other types of young offenders so I so no reason why this would not work for bullying.

As I said, in law jail is regarded as a last resort. You should not even consider it unless all other options have been tried. This is not necessary simply for the bully's good but for the good of society. Jail can have an incredibly criminalising effect, especially for impressionable younger offenders so I do not believe shoving them in there will be in societies best interests as they could very well simply graduate to more serious crime especially when there are other more effective methods which have yet to be tried.

Also, it'd be quite difficult to create a Mens Rea requirement for this as many bullies do not realise that what they are doing is in fact bullying. For example I was both bullied and then a slight bully at school and I did not think that what I was doing at the time was bullying although with hindsight it probably was. Had I been placed in jail for that, even for a month or a week my life would be spectacularly messed up as my chosen career does not take kindly to previous convictions.

Also, to ignore the motivations behind crime is to craft ineffective responses to crime. You complain that the bully is seen as the victim, well that's often because they ARE just as much a victim as the person they are bullying. Not in the same way but in just a serious a way. Of course, I do not advocate a do nothing approach. I'm not sure anybody who has suggested that people understand that bullys often do so due to domestic abuse at home etc has said "Oh well, then let them get away with it". Instead punishment should be tailored towards solving the reasons for bullying, helping them understand why it was wrong and cutting reoffence rates rather than a flat "lock them up" approach.

Not to mention that there ARE already levels of protection for people in the workplace already in place so it's not like there has perviously been no protection.

Again, I'd like to point out that this legislation seems aimed at bullying in the workplace and not the school yeard. It would be absolutely TERRIBLE if this law was to apply to school children older than ten.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

The subject line says, "Bullies COULD get UP TO 10 years....." It does

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

NOT say, "ALL bullies WILL be sent to prison for 10 years."

So? The fact remains that such a law is being favoured to be implemented.

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

You have a point to make - you made it. And it's a good point. But what you DON'T do is suggest an alternative response. And THAT is so typical. So we are left with either what HAS been suggested - or [As you seem to be suggesting] DO NOTHING. People are sick and tired of the DO NOTHING option. And because they ARE so tired - they respond positively to an action BEING taken - even IF that action might be somewhat extreme.

First thing is define bullying because different people have different ideas of what it is. Although this isn't objective, looking on TH, you have different ideas of what bullying is, as some mention it as being the very first time while others say it's repeated. There has to be a universal definition given.

What are talking about with "do nothing"? That option isn't ever used by anyone so I'm not understanding where you're coming up with it. Assuming you have the capacity to reason and engage in complex thinking, you'd know there's a difference between not saying an alternative and say to do nothing. I didn't say an alternative because in your initial post, it was more relevant to address the issues you raised, which did not require me speculating on alternatives. Let's test your reading comprehension for the rest of this post.

The alternative is this: punishment but in a different form. Instead of having the bullies locked up in prison, do something similar to what Italy does for youth offenders, they give them numerous chances and each chance has its own punishment but none of them involve entering jails or prisons. A practical one I think would be a mandatory pre-defined length of psychotherapy where the bully still has all the freedoms like others do. Alternatively, have them spend time at school with a few hours out for freedom but instead of coming home, then return to a facility with mandatory psychotherapy and have the victim(s) come in to talk with the bully. The talking isn't meant to be degrading the bully, rather it's meant to be a chance for the bully to explain why they did what they did and for the victim to express how they felt. The facility would have other bullies in it so they would have to be less aggressive otherwise, like prisons, there's a chance they'll get the shit kicked out of them. Only difference is this doesn't show up on their criminal nor background check records. If while in the facility they commit a crime, particularly a violent one, they'll be charged criminally for that. The people working in the facility would be social workers, psychologists, etc... but also have some security. These security people would play more of a background role and the facility wouldn't be very restrictive, so kids could go to other kid's rooms. All are monitored with cameras. Security would only intervene when there's a fight in the progress or about to start and would simply act as a mediator. If the security people get attacked, then they would be authorized to use adequate proportional force to defend themselves and others, the kid would immediately be detained and put into a room by themselves. After a short time, they'd talk with social workers and psychologists to work out what happened.

This alternative doesn't necessarily treat bullies as victims only, it treats them as victims of prior abuse but also as perpretrators because it's ridiculous to ignore what they did to get into such facilities. Considering them in part as victims, as much as you dislike it Craig, is needed to understand why they bully so appropriate treatment can be given. Suppose they weren't bullied or harmed but still bully, that puts them in a separate category from those who bully because the family they're in bullies them so the way to not get bullied in the family is to be very aggressive, hence bullying. If you want to treat the issue, you have to know the cause. Although all bullies are mean as you say it, not all do it intentionally, there are gradients and different reasons. If you don't bother to look into them, you're less likely to get them to abandon their bullying ways.

This facility is meant mostly for bullies who engage in physical violent acts, not so much for cyber-bullies although if they are very oppostional and confrontational without violence, they get put into such facilities. Perhaps they could be separated from those who engage in primarily physical violence although that's something to think about.

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

As far as I am concerned - the victim matters MORE than the perpetrator.

Problem with this line of thinking is if you don't attend to the bully, they'll keep bullying. If you toss them in prison and they come out more violent, don't be shocked about it. They deserve treatment just as fair as the victim, otherwise they'll keep bullying. I wonder, do you have this same attitude toward all crimes, where you believe the victim matters more all the time? If so, why? If not, why is bullying an exception to your "reasoning"? As you said in the response, the fact I mentioned no alternative means, according to you, no alternative is there. If you're able to reason, you'll know this means, according to that same idea, you have no reasoning because I've yet to see you actually state an explanation in this thread. So as far as I'm concerned, you have no reasoning because none is shown.

I do hope however that through your years of being on this planet, you do have enough experience and ability to reason. It'd be quite sad if you don't and if your reasons are flimsy. I hope you prove me wrong and show you do have some capacity to reason in this topic (I have no concern over your abilities to reason in other topics as they're irrelevant and you likely share the same view on me).

If you know some of Canadian history, people with mental illnesses were simply tossed into asylums without consideration for what they had, merely based on the fact they deviated from society's expected behaviours. Was there any beneficial result from this? Nope. Punishing those who violate the law requires knowing what they did and why they did it. Constantly saying their motive was their mean personality is nonsense, it shows not only a lack of consideration for our fellow man but also extreme ignorance by chanting for incarceration.

How do you think people figure out somewhat effective treatments? Do you think they wave a wand or do you think they abandon your silly view and actually do give a damn why the perpretator does what they do. If you want to keep your silly view, keep it, ignorance is bliss but don't begin whining about the treatments since you're not involved in even thinking over the motivations, you cant begin addressing the treatments.

Originally Posted by BDF

Originally Posted by BDF

If there's repeated bullying... it's not the victim who should have to change schools... it's the bully who should be forced to. Almost whatever the circumstances really. Most times the victim changes schools as a result. That's not right. Everyone needs to be treated fairly... even the bully, but victim leaving school instead of the bully is wrong.

If the bully does something so horrible and repeatedly, usually they leave the school via expulsion. However changing schools may be just spreading the issue around if they're not given counseling or some of the alternatives I suggested. If the cause of the bully's aggressiveness is due to the family state, changing schools probably does nothing. If the bully isn't kicked out or arrested, they should stay because regardless of how they behave, they're at school for social interactions and academic learning.

[Nostalgia]

sounds like a good plan to me, it might work as a incentive to stop bullies, as for bullies in school theres always the option of juvi or boot camp. hopefully the thought of 'if i bully someone here, i will get sent to jail' might help make the bullies think twice, as i've found with bullies and gangs the one thing they really fear are the police.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by lilmisschatterbox

sounds like a good plan to me, it might work as a incentive to stop bullies, as for bullies in school theres always the option of juvi or boot camp. hopefully the thought of 'if i bully someone here, i will get sent to jail' might help make the bullies think twice, as i've found with bullies and gangs the one thing they really fear are the police.

Many probably do but others aren't deterred by the police if they've been in jails or prisons, or have exposure to people from such places. However, bullies may not start up as intentionally bullying someone, as the example given by BDF. If they're sent to "juvi", there's a higher chance not only will they be re-incarcerated but they won't be as deterred, so increasing sentence length has no impact on their views. For gangs, some of them intentionally use very young children with the knowledge that they will be imprisoned and after release, if they're still with the gang, they move up in the rankings quite a bit, so for some gangs, it's viewed almost as beneficial.

I think the bigger problem though is just this over-reaction. If someone, such as BDF, began bullying but without the intention or knowledge they were, getting them locked up for 10 years doesn't do them any good because they weren't a great threat at all, yet this policy makes it seem like they are huge threats on the rise. As shown in the link I put in my response to Craig, the rate of bullying already is decreasing but the fear of bullying is increasing.

[CanadaCraig]

And I quote.....

"Assuming you have the capacity to reason and engage in complex thinking..."

"Let's test your reading comprehension for the rest of this post...."

"I do hope however that through your years of being on this planet, you do have enough experience and ability to reason. It'd be quite sad if you don't and if your reasons are flimsy. I hope you prove me wrong and show you do have some capacity to reason in this topic"

"Do you think they wave a wand or do you think they abandon your silly view and actually do give a damn why the perpretator does what they do. If you want to keep your silly view, keep it, ignorance is bliss but don't begin whining about the treatments since you're not involved in even thinking over the motivations, you cant begin addressing the treatments."

Once again - you make some good points.

But you're rude and arrogant.

I would never treat YOU so disrespectfully.

So this conversation ends.

[Nostalgia]

Originally Posted by WOW!USaidSomethingSmart!

Many probably do but others aren't deterred by the police if they've been in jails or prisons, or have exposure to people from such places. However, bullies may not start up as intentionally bullying someone, as the example given by BDF. If they're sent to "juvi", there's a higher chance not only will they be re-incarcerated but they won't be as deterred, so increasing sentence length has no impact on their views. For gangs, some of them intentionally use very young children with the knowledge that they will be imprisoned and after release, if they're still with the gang, they move up in the rankings quite a bit, so for some gangs, it's viewed almost as beneficial.

I think the bigger problem though is just this over-reaction. If someone, such as BDF, began bullying but without the intention or knowledge they were, getting them locked up for 10 years doesn't do them any good because they weren't a great threat at all, yet this policy makes it seem like they are huge threats on the rise. As shown in the link I put in my response to Craig, the rate of bullying already is decreasing but the fear of bullying is increasing.

i did put as 'i've found' meaning with the gang that bullied me as soon is told them to leave me alone or i would call the police they have since left me alone, i still ssee them in the streets and stuff but they know to leave me alone. so with some it does in fact deter them.

[CanadaCraig]

Hi Jack!!

I hope you're having a great day.

You said, "You should not even consider [Sending someone to jail] unless all other options have been tried."

I couldn't agree more. But I DO think it's important that the law recognizes the seriousness of bullying. By putting 'jail time' on the list of possible consequences - it does just that. So I say once again, I think it's wonderful news.

That said.... the other 'options' you suggested [Except for fines] all sound reasonable to me and would be [As they have often been proven TO be] effective. Of course - it takes TIME and MONEY and PEOPLE to do all of those things. And that's one of the biggest stumbling blocks to doing the 'right thing'. But perhaps the biggest stumbling block are people themselves. It's human to want to keep our distance from victims. [Out of fear that if 'we' get too close to a 'target' - 'we' might become one too] And this is true for teachers as it is for anyone else. And THAT is probably the biggest problem. This is why I have often suggested [At TH and elsewhere] that schools must have someone who deals specifically with bullying and abuse issues. A 'someone' who is NOT a teacher. Someone who is in a position to be detached enough emotionally to be able to 'see' each situation for what it IS.

It's wonderful to want to help the bully. And I fully support that idea. Nothing I have EVER said [In this message thread or elsewhere] contradicts that. But we must ALWAYS consider the needs of the VICTIM FIRST! It must be made clear that victims matter more. That the abused is MORE important than the abuser. Now think about this for a second. You yourself acknowledge that many bullies are actually victims TOO. And I agree. Would it not - therefore - lesson the probability of a victim becoming a bully IF society focused more of its attention ON victims in the first place? For example - IF society was more pro-actively in the face [So to speak] of an abusive 'father' [In defense of his son] would that possibly keep the 'baton of abuse' [As I call it] from being passed down from one generation to the next? From one person to the next? I think so.

GBH - Craig!!

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by CanadaCraig

And I quote.....

"Assuming you have the capacity to reason and engage in complex thinking..."

"Let's test your reading comprehension for the rest of this post...."

"I do hope however that through your years of being on this planet, you do have enough experience and ability to reason. It'd be quite sad if you don't and if your reasons are flimsy. I hope you prove me wrong and show you do have some capacity to reason in this topic"

"Do you think they wave a wand or do you think they abandon your silly view and actually do give a damn why the perpretator does what they do. If you want to keep your silly view, keep it, ignorance is bliss but don't begin whining about the treatments since you're not involved in even thinking over the motivations, you cant begin addressing the treatments."

Once again - you make some good points.

But you're rude and arrogant.

I would never treat YOU so disrespectfully.

So this conversation ends.

I won't deny any of that, I'm a rude arrogant somewhat narrow-minded asshole, however, I apologize for my statements. Would you respond to the previous post I made because you acknowledged there were good points in there but there probably are things in there to argue against. I'm not asking you forgive me, that's completely up to you and isn't something I beg for to anyone but I hope you take my apology with sincerity and choose to respond to the previous post.

Originally Posted by lilmisschatterbox

i did put as 'i've found' meaning with the gang that bullied me as soon is told them to leave me alone or i would call the police they have since left me alone, i still ssee them in the streets and stuff but they know to leave me alone. so with some it does in fact deter them.

Very true, with some it does deter. Perhaps most it does deter, I'm not sure on the numbers but I definitely agree it does deter some.

[Kkatyy]

Saying things like jail for 10 years could make bullies lay off pickin on people. I know people who have killed them self cuz of bullies. SO bullying can get pretty serious. Although that is a little extreme. There are both good & bad sides to this.

[OMFG!You'reActuallySmart!]

Originally Posted by Kkatyy

Saying things like jail for 10 years could make bullies lay off pickin on people. I know people who have killed them self cuz of bullies. SO bullying can get pretty serious. Although that is a little extreme. There are both good & bad sides to this.

Saying people killed themselves because of bullying I find is a weak argument for supporting this. Many are bullied, not all kill themselves, in fact most don't so clearly bullying isn't causing suicide. Those who commit suicide do it on their own and although bullying may be a motivating factor, these people also are unwilling or don't see any other options. Bullying increases the risk of one committing suicide but saying it's the cause means the victim had nothing to do with it, which of course not only makes no sense, it's also diverting all the blame away.

[BDF]

Gang related violence predominantely is not bullying, not by my definition. I'm not talking about petty grouped up schoolkids in the playground picking on someone, I'm talking about proper street gangs. It's not bullying when a group of 10 just outright attack someone they don't know even, and the victim doesn't know them either. In fact... within a gang, members are more likely to bully each other than people "outside" their gang. They hardly give a shit at all about people outside their gang... it's all about status within their own gang.

It will also be about status within their neighbourhood, so when it comes to personal issues between two gangs... yes, there'l be what you could call bullying involved again to some extent. But lots of times if there's hostility between two local gangs, a lot of their members won't even know or remember why or how it started. That makes whatever bullying might be going on rather more impersonal.

To me part of the definition of bullying is repeated attempts at making someone miserable. A one-off attack in the street therefore is not bullying. Organised crime such as selling drugs may or not involve bullying... it's more about business in this context, and it's ruthless. If they are owed money they'l send death threats, break your windows etc. Another thing by which I define bullying is that bullying is usually unprovoked (unless you regard wearing glasses as a provocation). So again in the context of organised crime, where it can be seen that the provocation is not paying up to the gang what you owe them... I don't see their response as bullying as such. I'm not supporting any of this, it's all bad and illegal, but that's my outlook on it. Why would you owe a criminal gang money in the first place anyway?

Bullying is a very wide topic... I dono where it's boundaries are. I guess if there were to be proper prison sentences for bullying, the shaping of how it would work would probably be left to case law.

I assume this idea of 10 year prison sentence is to be applied to school kids... like 18 and under. I mean, beyond school it just gets too complicated to put your finger on it... bullying should just be treated as regular crime then.

I only brought all this up because I read someone else mention it somewhere here.

[BDF]

Perhaps it's worth also bringing up bullying against teachers. Yes... it happens a lot:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20110407/...u-45dbed5.html

How should that be treated? I think just as severely. Depends on what exactly has been done. Repeated physical assault should land them in prison. Intimidation = expulsion. Acting stupid making jokes of teachers in the class = detention + sent home for the day, although they'd probably like that... so if it happens too many times also expulsion.