• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The bullies win again[W710; 739]

Uhhh...I did that. I did that the last time you asked.

Sorry, I found it.

'What is the does bullying cover that harassment and stalking doesn't?'

What is the does?

Okay.

I assume you meant 'What does....'

I believe that bullying is not illegal, whereas harassment and stalking are.


Now my question;

What if a father (who is a cop) rapes his 8 year old child every day for 4 years. Finally, the child takes her own life because she cannot see any other way to stop him from raping her.

Now is he morally responsible at all for her suicide?

Yes or no?
 
Well, true. Every crime is also a tort -- but what parent wants money as opposed to a prison sentence when some evil adult has driven their kid into the ground?

i agree with you completely. I was just trying to express that a bully CAN legally be held responsible for a suicide without being labled a "murderer"........... from a civil-law perspective that is.
 
Last edited:
A bully is not responsible for a suicide. That would be murder. Since we're calling the the person a "bully" and not a "murderer", this means even you already agree that a bully is not responsible for a suicide.

Do I think the "bully" should be considered a "murderer"? No. Do I think the bully deserves some punishment yes. Granted, one must prove that the bully's actions were the cause of one's suicide.

But, when someone is able to demean someone, and emotionally or physically degrade someone to the point that they would choose suicide over life, I believe the person who does the bullying is at some fault.
 
A bully is not responsible for a suicide. That would be murder. Since we're calling the the person a "bully" and not a "murderer", this means even you already agree that a bully is not responsible for a suicide.

Correct. It was her choice

Btw the more, I read about her, the more she's turning out to be a skank
 
Btw the more, I read about her, the more she's turning out to be a skank

I heard you were accused of contributing "substance" to a debate once? I must have heard wrong. :shrug:
 
i agree with you completely. I was just trying to express that a bully CAN legally be held responsible for a suicide without being labled a "murderer" from a civil-law perspective.

Almost all the time, this is true. When I was in law school, 100 years ago, some states would not allow an intentional infliction of emotional distress case to proceed without some offensive physical contact between the parties -- there might could still be one or two states that still bar such suits.

But as they say, the law expands to meet the development of our sense of justice and making the evil adult live under a bridge the rest of their lives for the intentional, life-threatening campaign of terror they waged against a child that led to that child's death is certainly better than no justice at all.
 
Correct. It was her choice

Btw the more, I read about her, the more she's turning out to be a skank

It was not a choice, as the child saw no alternative.

And calling this child a "skank" is so offensive to common human decency as to make me never want to read another word you write.
 
Sorry, I found it.

'What is the does bullying cover that harassment and stalking doesn't?'

What is the does?

Okay.

I assume you meant 'What does....'

I believe that bullying is not illegal, whereas harassment and stalking are.

But..what's the difference. You didn't answer the question at all! What would bullying cover that those other definitions wouldn't?

My answer to your question is a simple no; no need to have any dramatic tension over it. I hope you still answer mine, though: what would an anti-bullying law cover that isn't already covered?
 
..........

Fluffy we got problem with the statistics here, the CDC which are the only statistics I that consider reliable from your selection there, is calling their child sucide rate from the ages 10-24. I am having a hard time trying to find the break down of these statistics. I can say with certainty from what little I have read that a majority of your 4400 are going to be male from 19-22. So until we can get a breakdown on that statistic from reliable source CDC is fine or a scientific journel, I am gona have to question the validity of that number. Further any surveys of high school students is most likely to be crap. Because I had to do them when I was in high school and I lied my ass off. As did all my friends. We made it a game to screw with the researchers. We got pretty darn sophisticated about it too. I ought to tell you about my little money counterfitting and laundering sceme I and couple of buddies had. ( We were counterfiting a teachers script. I'll post a thread later.)
 
But..what's the difference. You didn't answer the question at all! What would bullying cover that those other definitions wouldn't?

My answer to your question is a simple no; no need to have any dramatic tension over it. I hope you still answer mine, though: what would an anti-bullying law cover that isn't already covered?

Are you serious?

I would have to know every single definition of all three words and then be able to compare them all and find the discrepancies.

I answered your (badly phrased) question.

You don't like the answer - tough.


As for your answer...noted.

You are exactly as I thought you are.

But at least you answered it - more then some others were prepared to do.

But as Kirk once said 'I...have had enough of...you.' (not that I want to kick you into a sea of lava, btw).


Have a nice life.
 
Last edited:
I'm a little upset and will be taking a break from posting to this thread.

In fact, I think I'm done, and if we discuss this again, it might be best if we did so with a new Op.

My best to everyone who wants to do right by our children, especially to anyone who is a parent of a child now -- you are not alone. Your community and your nation cares about your family, and many good people have been working hard to try and make your kids safer.

Peace out, peeps.

:peace
 
My answer to your question is a simple no; no need to have any dramatic tension over it. I hope you still answer mine, though: what would an anti-bullying law cover that isn't already covered?

Something between general harassment and homicide.
 
Fluffy we got problem with the statistics here, the CDC which are the only statistics I that consider reliable from your selection there, is calling their child sucide rate from the ages 10-24. I am having a hard time trying to find the break down of these statistics. I can say with certainty from what little I have read that a majority of your 4400 are going to be male from 19-22. So until we can get a breakdown on that statistic from reliable source CDC is fine or a scientific journel, I am gona have to question the validity of that number. Further any surveys of high school students is most likely to be crap. Because I had to do them when I was in high school and I lied my ass off. As did all my friends. We made it a game to screw with the researchers. We got pretty darn sophisticated about it too. I ought to tell you about my little money counterfitting and laundering sceme I and couple of buddies had. ( We were counterfiting a teachers script. I'll post a thread later.)

Come on now......I could never imagine you involved in such a scheme. :lol:
 
It was not a choice, as the child saw no alternative.

And calling this child a "skank" is so offensive to common human decency as to make me never want to read another word you write.

Truths hurts. :)

****ing with girl's bf, drugs, multiple sex partners, flashing her boobs on camera aka selling herself

Kinda qualifies her as an unstable skank or at the least its skankish behavior.
 
Are you serious?

I would have to know every single definition of all three words and then be able to compare them all and find the discrepancies.

Well...yeah. That would be something to know before engaging in such a debate.

I answered your (badly phrased) question.

You don't like the answer - tough.

:lol: :lol:

As for your answer...noted.

You are exactly as I thought you are.


Have a nice life.

Okay, thanks dude. You too.
 
I'm a little upset and will be taking a break from posting to this thread.

In fact, I think I'm done, and if we discuss this again, it might be best if we did so with a new Op.

My best to everyone who wants to do right by our children, especially to anyone who is a parent of a child now -- you are not alone. Your community and your nation cares about your family, and many good people have been working hard to try and make your kids safer.

Peace out, peeps.

:peace

I think I'll join you. The apparent lack of compassion and cold-heartedness of some posters here in regards to a REAL little girl who needlessly took her own life is a bit overwhelming. I still hold out hope that most people are basically good, but I'm starting to wonder. :(
 
I'm a little upset and will be taking a break from posting to this thread.

In fact, I think I'm done, and if we discuss this again, it might be best if we did so with a new Op.

My best to everyone who wants to do right by our children, especially to anyone who is a parent of a child now -- you are not alone. Your community and your nation cares about your family, and many good people have been working hard to try and make your kids safer.

Peace out, peeps.

:peace


I think that is wise.

I find dealing with people with that much anger/unhappiness inside drains the 'life force' out of me.

People like that are just trying to bring everyone down to their level.

They are (rather desperately) trying to dehumanize this girl.

It makes it easier for them to dehumanize women in general.

'It's her fault', 'she's a skank', etc..

Normally, I just put people like that on my ignore list.

But tonight I felt like having some fun.

Now, I am done and I will go back to ignoring them.


Night.
 
I think I'll join you. The apparent lack of compassion and cold-heartedness of some posters here in regards to a REAL little girl who needlessly took her own life is a bit overwhelming. I still hold out hope that most people are basically good, but I'm starting to wonder. :(

I agree.

It is genuinely sad to see how easily people can completely dehumanize another human being.


Night.
 
I'm sorry, Pirate. Fluffy has some I can give you now; my daughter did her thesis on cyberbullying between children, and may have more. I'm not sure she tracked incidents of adults bullying kids.

Lemme give you that link:


Bullying and Suicide - Bullying Statistics

Thanks Pinky I just looked at it, the CDC figure is crap right now because the figure is from 10-24. That pumps the numbers (way 2/3 at least) up because most suicides are commited by males between 19-22. I got find the breakdowns by age so we can get an accurate assesment of what EXACTLY we are dealing with. I have a feeling these people commiting suicide have underlying mental problems that have not been diagnosed. I need the numbers to see if that bears out. Bullying simply exaserbates an EXISTING problem.
 
Come on now......I could never imagine you involved in such a scheme. :lol:

Just dont tell the class valedictorian, I understand she still wants my head if finds out I did it. I graduated in 92.
 
Manslaughter?

That or we come up with an appropriate legal definition that's an in between. Because it isn't just harassment, and it isn't just stalking.

Emotionally damaging someone to the point that they have zero self worth is sickening.
 
Back
Top Bottom