New Jersey Enacts Tough Antibullying Law: Should Other States Follow Suit?
SodaHead Living
2011/09/08 11:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
93 votes
|
|
65% | |||
|
51 votes
|
|
35% | |||
Sept. 1 was a bad day to be a bully in New Jersey.
On that date last week, the state enacted a strict new antibullying law, which is said to be the toughest in the nation, Time reports.
The Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights was a reaction to the death of Tyler Clementi, an 18-year-old freshman at Rutgers University who committed suicide last September after his roommate allegedly took a video of his romantic encounter with a man and streamed it on the Internet.
The state responded by indicting Clementi's roommate on hate-crime charges -- and drafting a law requiring public schools to adopt antibullying policies.
According to Time, 47 states already have antibullying statutes (New Jersey had a weaker law in place previously), but the new law goes a step beyond, forcing schools to conduct extensive training of staff and students; appoint safety teams made up of parents, teachers and staff; and launch an investigation of every allegation of bullying within one day.
In other words, the state is pretty much implementing a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to bullies. While this may be great for the kid who's getting picked on, critics say the law places too many demands on teachers, is too costly and will lead to a flood of lawsuits. Do you think other states should follow suit with similar legislation?
On that date last week, the state enacted a strict new antibullying law, which is said to be the toughest in the nation, Time reports.
The Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights was a reaction to the death of Tyler Clementi, an 18-year-old freshman at Rutgers University who committed suicide last September after his roommate allegedly took a video of his romantic encounter with a man and streamed it on the Internet.
The state responded by indicting Clementi's roommate on hate-crime charges -- and drafting a law requiring public schools to adopt antibullying policies.
According to Time, 47 states already have antibullying statutes (New Jersey had a weaker law in place previously), but the new law goes a step beyond, forcing schools to conduct extensive training of staff and students; appoint safety teams made up of parents, teachers and staff; and launch an investigation of every allegation of bullying within one day.
In other words, the state is pretty much implementing a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to bullies. While this may be great for the kid who's getting picked on, critics say the law places too many demands on teachers, is too costly and will lead to a flood of lawsuits. Do you think other states should follow suit with similar legislation?
To my points:
NO is not exactly the right answer nor is YES. To me, this is another version of Hate speech which can be used against anyone based upon an ideology. For example, I believe homosexuality is a sin and would preach such. To some, that is considered hate speech. What it really is, is a belief based upon several factors: God's Word, Natural Laws, Logic, Historical Reference, and universal morality. Now, those who disagree with those tenets of my truth can use the law of hate speech as an indictment against my right granted to me by the First Amendment.
Now. filming a sex act and showing that on the internet is not, in my opinion, bullying. It's an invasion of privacy and (here is where it gets really interesting) defamation of Character.
So let's look at that last charge: If it is indeed Defamation, then that alone should be enough to condemn the unnatural act of homosexuality. At least, there is logical argument for this premise wouldn't yo...
To my points:
NO is not exactly the right answer nor is YES. To me, this is another version of Hate speech which can be used against anyone based upon an ideology. For example, I believe homosexuality is a sin and would preach such. To some, that is considered hate speech. What it really is, is a belief based upon several factors: God's Word, Natural Laws, Logic, Historical Reference, and universal morality. Now, those who disagree with those tenets of my truth can use the law of hate speech as an indictment against my right granted to me by the First Amendment.
Now. filming a sex act and showing that on the internet is not, in my opinion, bullying. It's an invasion of privacy and (here is where it gets really interesting) defamation of Character.
So let's look at that last charge: If it is indeed Defamation, then that alone should be enough to condemn the unnatural act of homosexuality. At least, there is logical argument for this premise wouldn't you agree?
Secondly, if the man kills himself because others now know of his unnatural act, why? If homosexuality is natural, then why would the man kill himself? Was it due to embarrassment? Shame? Utter despair? Would one kill himself for being white? Italian? Would this poor man kill himself if he was filmed having sex with a woman?
I am not unsympathetic nor sad to and for this young man. That is not the point here.
So I agree that the guy who filmed the sex act should be charged with what I stated above. Bullying? Ok. If you could make that case, what should a bully's sentence be?
Now, I don't know about you, but some kids tried to bully me through varying stages of my childhood. It was then that I learned to stand and fight back. Those were valuable lessons especially for the bully. it also made me grow into a man who could stand up for himself. Now, what if I had an advocate whether I wanted one or not? What lessons would the bully really learn and what would I have learned? That someone is always going to be there to protect me?
What I did and what others did in my school, was protect the weak. On several occasions, I replaced the bullied and stood up for him. Others did the same. This might be something that could be taught in schools since we seem to believe that parenting is the schools job today. So, be a parent. Teach the kids how to stand up for themselves and for others. If they cannot, well, then those kids are in for a lot of hard lessons in this life. And, standing does not necessarily mean to engage physically. And let's face it, some kids just can't fight. Some should not fight. But there is no greater lesson learned than knocking a bully on his ass or breaking his nose. Works wonders for his future disposition. And the nose breaker gets to enjoy a pretty good rep for a while and further ensures his safety. At least, that's the way it used to be. Can't say i know what motivates kids today or what lessons stick. Maybe you can enlighten me.
But, violence is not always the answer. I understand. I wish no one would ever fight or that violence was eradicated from the world. I long and strive for peace. Always did. Sometimes, peace is simply illusive.
So if all else fails for the abused, then indeed, he/she should have some solid recourse from authorities. But if this law is really a disguise for gay protection, then I'm against it. Just as I am against hurting a homosexual, so am I against condoning his behavior. A little shame might go a long way in changing a life.
Now, finally, we have the issue of kids killing themselves. Third highest cause of death today amongst teens. This is a deep issue and will not be covered in its entirety here. But I offer to you a supposition, a theory if you will:
1. Evolution teaches the futility of life. Does it not? If there is no God, then there is no purpose ultimately but to breed and die. Hopelessness.
2. Fatherless homes. Since the late 60s, the nuclear family has been disappearing at an alarming rate. Funny, a study by Stanford University, I believe, concluded that it was basically a mystery why the family has fallen apart. lol. Really? how about pondering the following:
1. Again, evolution.
2. Removing God.
3. Rampant sex. Divorce
4. Fallen morals.
5. Welfare.
6. Feminist movement. (Militant).
7. Abortions.
Anyway, just some thoughts. If you reply, don't name call. I won't answer. If you disagree, establish some logical reasons why. I'll respond. But again, not about the validity of the gay lifestyle.
Eventually it's going to pop, and the person who's going to pop it is a very pissed off bully. You're making it worse. A way to deal with something like this isn't embarrassing the kid by calling their teacher or having a security guard back them up. It makes them feel like crap if you haven't noticed. It makes them feel weak, and they will choose one of few options...
1: Suicide
2: Violence towards bullies (They will ultimately become the bully)
3: Pulling into yourself until you're a shell of a person.
4: Putting on a tough face and pulling through.
Sucks don't it? Well that's how it works. I'm not gonna pretend to have all the answers. But find another solution that won't endanger the kids you're trying to help.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.latimes.com/news/l...
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=44009
Lawrence King was a middle school student who was shot by a classmate, Brandon, because Brandon felt that Lawrence was coming onto him. There were a lot of issues with Lawrence's school and parents, and a lot of victim blaming.
SB 777 was passed to avoid further heteronormativity in schools and create a safer, more inclusive environment for learning on California K-12 campuses.
Don't get me wrong, I totally think that Lawrence King's case was one of common sense -- of course you don't shoot another student, no matter how much hate you express toward them. And of course schools should be more inclusive of all backgrounds and living situations; you shouldn't have to tell anyone that! Unfortunately, SB 777 isn't being actively implemented in schools even though it passed four years ago, and there are still people who think that Lawrence King provoked his perpetrator to shoot him.
These people are the reason why we have to pass and enforce laws that prevent bullying and emphasize a safe environment for learning.
I attended public school in New Jersey and it was a complete waste of my time.
They also did absolutely nothing to prevent or punish bullying.
What happens when people stop standing up for themselves? The government does it for them?
In some situations it would be better for people to stand up for themselves, or they will never have the courage to do so, especially if someone does it for them.
But these laws aren't active in a lot of California schools because people don't know about them. For the students that do hear about them, these laws become resources and references when they're trying to influence change on campus. FYI, so much for standing up for myself -- the new standard is that if you fight back (in any way, including physical and verbal), you're in just as much trouble as the kid who bullied you. And no, self-defense is not a valid excuse.
I know if I could I'd go back and say screw the rules that kept me trapped in a catch 22 and beat the crap out of that bastard.