[CanadaCraig]

Hi Jack!!

I hope you're having a dandy day.

I will respond to everything you said in bold font!!

1) In order to bring criminal charges against some of the kids who bully people you would have to lower the age of criminal responsibility which I do not really think should happen. It's where it is for a reason.

But when something isn't working - which is painfully obvious when it comes to the issue of bullying - YOU CHANGE IT. Laws are changed all the time. And new laws are created. And besides - a new type of law could be created that would be specifically tailored to those kids and teenagers who have taken it upon themselves [For whatever reason] to ABUSE their peers. This IS abuse we're talking about. Let's never forget that. A 10 year old who is abusive will quite likely become a 20 year old who is abusive IF he or she is not 'scared straight'. [So to speak] That said - it would be my hope that for the overwhelming majority of bullies - simply having to make an appearance before a ['Kiddie Court'] judge would have a tremendous effect on their behavior. It would - for most of them - let it be known that they have indeed reached that 'line in the sand' and will NOW be held accountable for how they treat others. This judge would order counseling - and not just for the abuser - but for his parents or guardian. By doing that - any abuse the bully has had to endure [That most likely lead to his or her abusing others] would - hopefully - come to light - and THEN perhaps - some healing for the BULLY [And his or her family] can begin. I would have the bully appear before the judge again one month later to report on how things are progressing. Kids are often very skilled with it comes to manipulating others. They know how the 'game' is played and they know how to tug at 'dear old moms' heart strings, etc. This is WHY I strongly believe that both parents AND teachers have to be bound by LAW to deal with a bully. We have literally decades of proof as to the ineffectiveness of placing the burden of responsibility for bullies on the shoulder of parents and teachers. Obviously - it's not working.

2) How would you show the mens rea (aka intent) of the crime. I think it would be fair to say that bully's should only be held accountable if they aim to cause the kid to kill themselves otherwise you have a strict liability offense which are always rather contraversial. Similarly some bullies do not think that what they are doing is actually bullying (I will come back to this later) and I would hazard that very few bullies actually intend to cause such damage to their victims. Also would the thin skull rule be taken into account for this or not? Sometimes it takes a lot to cause someone to kill themselves and sometimes it just takes a word in the wrong place. Should we treat both cases equally?

I understand what you're saying. But a bullies 'intent' IS to harm. A bullies 'intent' is to control and cause fear. And as far as that is concerned - they ARE aware of the 'cause and effect' of their actions. They KNOW that what they are doing is causing harm. If it wasn't causing harm - they would very quickly lose interest in being a bully. But let me make something clear. A person who says a one time nasty comment is NOT a bully. People often say things in the spur of the moment - things that ought not to be said. A bully is not like that. A bully goes out of his or her way to cause harm. Their abuse is PLANNED. But what IF the consequence of a bullies abuse leads to their victim committing suicide? I'm not absolutely sure - but it could be argued - could it not - that THAT is just the risk a bully takes? Kids are not nearly as stupid [i.e. 'innocent'] as society would like to think. A 13 year old in 2009 is FAR more aware of the possibilities for 'awful things' happening [Think 'Columbine', etc.] than a 13 year old was back in the 1970's. [In MY 'day' - in other words] Just read many of the messages posted hear at TH for proof of that. I never even thought of some of the things that many 13 year olds here at TH are talking about and worrying about when I was 13. [Or 14 or whatever] And besides - when did, 'I didn't know', become an excuse? And when it comes to KNOWING - THIS is where teachers come into it. To make SURE that every child is aware - from grade one on up - it should be taught that the society those kids live in WILL respond to abuse very seriously. It must be made clear that the school they go to - in fact - EVERY SCHOOL - has a zero tolerance for bullying. Kids also need to know that - sometimes - when a kid is bullied - he or she can be SO hurt that they end up causing themselves great harm. And if that happens - anyone who has bullied them WILL be held accountable. [In some way]

3) What would be the punishment when convicted of "bullying"? Jail? No that would be too harsh. Juvenile Delinquency Centre? Still too harsh I think as you're basically removing the kid from his family + Juvie rather makes kids worse in my experience. A fine? That wouldn't make sense as the parents of the bully would have to pay it rather than the bully him/herself which means he/she basically escapes punishment. Frankly denying them the right to a driver's licence is both petty and really really arbitrary.

I agree. Both jail and 'Juvie' would be counterproductive. And fines would only hurt the bullies parents. Which makes me wonder WHY would you consider the idea of denying a bully the right to get a driver's license as a 'petty and really really arbitrary' idea. It would have a DIRECT impact on THEIR life - would it not? Think about it for second. You're trying to influence a 15 year old male bully. He is a few months away from getting his 'learner's permit'. You don't think the threat of NOT being allowed to get that permit would influence his behavior?

4) Making it a crime would place an extra burden on the state, I don't think this should be so. If this became a subject for the law to become involved in it would make more sense to place it in tort law rather than criminal law. Firstly this avoids criminalising children for a stupid childhood mistake which I highly disagree with as a criminal record severely limits your job opportunities. Secondly this also takes the burden off the state and minimises the chances of all the frivolous claims which would take place if it was enacted under the criminal system.

I can't help but think that SUICIDE [also] severally limits your job opportunities. That said - IF a child/teenager has proven him or herself to have moved beyond their abusive 'ways' - then they would have earned the right to be go into adulthood with a clean slate. There would be no reason for a criminal record to follow them into adulthood. You have to open up your mind, Jack. Think outside of the box. And stop being so overly concerned with how ADULTS might be inconvenienced. When it comes to a CHILD being ABUSED - to hell with what ADULTS might have to go through in order to appropriately deal with that. A child's safety trumps any possible adult inconvenience.

5) Also, I would say that better teacher training is necessary first before resorting to such drastic measures.

Teacher training is very important. And I fully support that idea. But that's what 'they' have been saying since I was a kid. [Way back in the 1970's] Obviously MORE has to be done. And as I see it - ABUSE is a 'drastic measure'. And it is worthy of a 'drastic solution'. Kids - right this minute - are being ABUSED while 'society' [once again] TALKS about it. Victims are tired of TALK. Children desperately need to SEE that ADULTS care more about THEM than they care about themselves AND their abusers. Society has a DUTY to take care of its kids. [Whether it wants to or not]

6) I also think that requiring the teachers to notify the police everytime a kid claims they are being bullied is ridiculous. That wastes police time when any school can, with the right teacher training, deal with it internally. It also will lead to a certain amount of bureaucracy as even when the teacher knows that a kid is over-reacting and shouting "bullying" when it's not really they will be required to get the police involved. Also, just talking to the bully can end things; as I said earlier some bullies have no clue that what they are doing is bullying and getting the police involved is just far too heavy handed. The police should be used as a last resort not a first resort.

Here you go again. Let's not inconvenience an ADULT. I suppose - as an adult - I should be flattered. But I'm not. For I see that attitude as part of the problem. Again I say - 'think outside of the box'. Calling the police could mean - and should mean [As far as I am concerned] that a dedicated police officer [Who's JOB it is to deal with bully issues] shows up at the school. But I DO agree - IF it's possible for the school to resolve a one time 'bully incidence' - GREAT. But history tells me [My own history - among countless others] that schools have a HORRIBLE record when it comes to resolving ANY bully problem. That's WHY I strongly believe that schools [Teachers, etc.] must be pushed aside in favour of involving an outside, independent party [i.e. 'the police'] when it comes to an accusation of abuse.

7) Bullies are victims too. The reasons they bully often stem from many many problems in their personal life. Now while I am not defending the fact that they bully people I don't see why we need to traumatise them by ending them through the very scary legal system. Remember, they're kids too and generally just a product of their environment.

That's true. More often than not - bullies themselves have a history of some form of abuse. And in MY plan - they would finally get the help they so desperately need. But try to keep in mind that a 'reason' is not an 'excuse'. And society has to stop confusing the two. People - EVEN KIDS - must be held accountable for what they do.

8) From what I have noticed from these sorts of cases is that victims very rarely kill themselves for one reason there are generally various reasons on top of the bullying. How would you prove causality? If the kid kills themselves due to previous depression, poor home life, girlfriend dumping them AND bullying then how do you determine which caused his death and how is it fair to place all the blame on the bully?

Given such a case - it would be difficult - for sure. But I would argue [Perhaps not successfully] that 4 does not wipe out 1. In other words - the bully would still be accountable for his or her ABUSE of the victim - even IF there were other [possible] contributing factors. The bully doesn't become a 'bit player' because he wasn't the only one on stage.

9) To a degree it IS just "kids will be kids". It's human nature to dislike people who are different to you, it's tribal, kids will always pick out other kids who are different to them and shun them for those differences. This is because they haven't adequately been taught that differences are not a bad thing. Hence why teacher training and lessons which promote tolerance are what are needed rather than police intervention.

Education is VERY important. Kids need to be taught the importance of tolerance and acceptance, etc. They need to KNOW that it's OK for other kids - and indeed - other people [Of all ages] to be different than they are. To not only LOOK different - but to have different ideas and thoughts and beliefs and so on. Just as it is OK for THEM to be different than someone else. But abuse crosses the line. I'm merely suggesting that - given the historically shameful way that society has responded to the desperate cries for help from the most vulnerable among us - it's time to stand UP for the victims of abuse - even IF that means we must step on a few of the abusers toes.

GREAT BIG HUG
Craig!!

PS I trust you're no longer feeling ignored!!