|
Post by Cuzo Minister of Wingmen on Feb 15, 2015 13:10:31 GMT
I've been thinking of having a debating topic for a while where I will post a topic let it run for a day or two then post the next topic it's a good chance to get to know each others stance on things.
WOULD YOU HOLD STUDENTS LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR BULLYING IF IT RESULTED IN THE VICTIM'S DEATH
Here is the first point.
Bullying can inflict serious psychological harm on its victims, especially in the case of young people. It leads to low self-esteem, depression, and for some kids it leads to suicide. Bullied children are almost 6 times more likely to think about or attempt suicide. This has been termed bullycide and the law should recognize it. Many forms of behavior that result in the death of another person are criminal, from murder to negligence. It is the duty of the law to brand such behavior as unacceptable, deter future incidents, punish the perpetrators, and offer comfort to victims: in this case, the families of those who lost their life to bullying.
|
|
boony001
Alliance Member
(Minister of Defense) (Swag Lord)
PewPEw
Posts: 548
|
Post by boony001 on Feb 15, 2015 15:46:33 GMT
Depends on the severity of the bullying. Teasing someone about something, even in a cruel way, shouldn't be prosecuted. Harassment should. Where do we draw the line? IDK, I aint a lawyer
|
|
|
Post by ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)Kimmy( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) on Feb 15, 2015 18:31:33 GMT
And group bullying. That's the biggest cause for suicide or death in teens, maybe on par with depression.
But, as for jailing them, I say no. I think that if someone dies because of you, verbally or physically, and they are underage, the offender should get community service. Depending on how harsh the bullying was, the more harsh the offense; And they will be doing their hours with full grown adults too, just to scare them from not doing it again.
Well, unless the kid killed someone. Then they can rot in prison for all I care.
|
|
|
Post by Angry Andy on Feb 15, 2015 19:14:24 GMT
Yes I think that the bullying of the child to another child is only a partial and indirect factor chasing the death of the victim. Because they did not outright kill the victim themselves, they do not deserve hefty sentences. I would agree that a long community service sentence and/or a large fine would be suitable to the child, but nothing like prison at a young age because it will ruin the person's chance to be a very productive member of society economically on average for the rest of their life. The last thing I believe we need right now are more highschool dropouts, or as I put it "welfare mongerers".
(I do have a bias in this debate because I am a fan of kids enduring bullying like they used to without turning to things like killing themselves, and I believe children in general these days are emotionally weaker then they were in the past. Either way, I do believe bullying is of course not optimum, but this idea of trying to eradicate bullying and in general put cushions over our kids and shield them from reality I do not think will help anyone in the long run.)
|
|
Finium
Alliance Member
Posts: 22
|
Post by Finium on Feb 15, 2015 20:34:50 GMT
Interesting question and one that is indicative of a much, much larger question. Namely, is the speaker responsible for the impact that (s)he has on the audience? This is of course, a question that has been debated for quite some time and while I do not know the correct answer, I know that answer that we MUST choose for our own safety. The answer is no, we cannot hold children accountable for the suicide of another. However, we are faced then with a far more troubling question, if it is not the fault of the bully, then whose fault is it? Why can we not just blame the bully? First of all, that would require that we ignore the hallowed right to speak, even if that means speaking ill of another. If we outlawed bullying, the our political process would completely collapse, any time one politician speaks ill of another, he's off to prison for harassment. That is why we cannot blame the bully, but there is a far better reason why we should not blame the bully; there is someone else at fault. Honestly, it must be someones's fault because the suicide rate is so high! (See Figure 1.) So, who could be at fault? What has changed since 2000 that has made us more likely to kill ourselves? Depression! Or at least, probably depression, it is difficult to say because there is a lack of data on depression, even though it easy to find out how many people kill themselves, it is extremely difficult to say how many are depressed largely because no one bothered to research depression until more recent times. Does bullying cause depression? this little piggy says no. I personally believe that people are no longer able to take criticism, there is a lack of constructive criticism from parents and teachers that teaches children at a very young age that they are already perfect. Instead of realizing their flaws and accepting them as part of themselves, children are taught to ignore their flaws. This what I would call Participation Trophy Syndrome and so would Michael Sigman, Editor at the Huffington Post as he reports "some public schools refuse to allow anyone to get a grade below "C," so no student will ever fail!" What does that mean? It means that children cannot cope with any form of criticism and have never been told that they have flaws. So when they are made fun of by the local doofus, they have no mechanism to cope. Voila! A recipe for depression. FIGURE 1. SUICIDE RATES 1980 - 2011 Sigman, Michael. "When Everyone Gets a Trophy, No One Wins." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com. Web. 15 Feb. 2015.
|
|
TsarNicholasII
Administrator
Head of State (The Bacon-Meister) (The Hundreds King)
Posts: 1,431
|
Post by TsarNicholasII on Feb 15, 2015 20:53:14 GMT
... off subject ... (removed to conserve space) ... Finium, I believe that if you totalled every word you ever typed on this forum, it would not amount to what you just typed.
|
|
|
Post by Cuzo Minister of Wingmen on Feb 15, 2015 21:09:00 GMT
If during a fight on a train platform, I shove someone and that person falls on the tracks and is killed by a train I will be guilty of manslaughter whether I intended to kill the person or not, because the harm caused by my actions is so great. The same applies to bullying. Bullies try to hurt their victims through their actions, either physically or psychologically. Whether the bully intended for the victim to die or not, is irrelevant. The bully’s actions were responsible for the victim taking their own life.
|
|
|
Post by Angry Andy on Feb 15, 2015 22:52:36 GMT
Interesting question and one that is indicative of a much, much larger question. Namely, is the speaker responsible for the impact that (s)he has on the audience? This is of course, a question that has been debated for quite some time and while I do not know the correct answer, I know that answer that we MUST choose for our own safety. The answer is no, we cannot hold children accountable for the suicide of another. However, we are faced then with a far more troubling question, if it is not the fault of the bully, then whose fault is it? Why can we not just blame the bully? First of all, that would require that we ignore the hallowed right to speak, even if that means speaking ill of another. If we outlawed bullying, the our political process would completely collapse, any time one politician speaks ill of another, he's off to prison for harassment. That is why we cannot blame the bully, but there is a far better reason why we should not blame the bully; there is someone else at fault. Honestly, it must be someones's fault because the suicide rate is so high! (See Figure 1.) So, who could be at fault? What has changed since 2000 that has made us more likely to kill ourselves? Depression! Or at least, probably depression, it is difficult to say because there is a lack of data on depression, even though it easy to find out how many people kill themselves, it is extremely difficult to say how many are depressed largely because no one bothered to research depression until more recent times. Does bullying cause depression? this little piggy says no. I personally believe that people are no longer able to take criticism, there is a lack of constructive criticism from parents and teachers that teaches children at a very young age that they are already perfect. Instead of realizing their flaws and accepting them as part of themselves, children are taught to ignore their flaws. This what I would call Participation Trophy Syndrome and so would Michael Sigman, Editor at the Huffington Post as he reports "some public schools refuse to allow anyone to get a grade below "C," so no student will ever fail!" What does that mean? It means that children cannot cope with any form of criticism and have never been told that they have flaws. So when they are made fun of by the local doofus, they have no mechanism to cope. Voila! A recipe for depression. FIGURE 1. SUICIDE RATES 1980 - 2011 Sigman, Michael. "When Everyone Gets a Trophy, No One Wins." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com. Web. 15 Feb. 2015.
Even though that last part was somewhat off topic I couldn't agree more
|
|
|
Post by Cuzo Minister of Wingmen on Feb 16, 2015 23:03:44 GMT
I feel this topic is now dead so I will post a new topic and point for it.
WOULD YOU BAN SMOKING?
Tobacco is one of the most widely-used recreational drugs in the world; mainly in the form of cigarettes, but also in cigars and pipes, and in combination with cannabis and marijuana in 'joints'. Although most countries put age restrictions on its use, over a billion adults smoke tobacco legally every day, and supplying this demand is big business. As well as having serious health consequences for smokers themselves, the pollution of other people's atmospheres with cigarette smoke also makes this an environmental issue.
|
|
|
Debating
Feb 17, 2015 0:06:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by Angry Andy on Feb 17, 2015 0:06:14 GMT
I support this industry because I believe that it is a powerful cog in the economy and without it we would see a significant drop in our economy. I look at it through a Moneymaker's eye, and despite the health problems it can cause, it is quite productive economically.
|
|
boony001
Alliance Member
(Minister of Defense) (Swag Lord)
PewPEw
Posts: 548
|
Post by boony001 on Feb 17, 2015 0:11:32 GMT
No, and ill go a step further and decriminalize all drugs.
|
|
TsarNicholasII
Administrator
Head of State (The Bacon-Meister) (The Hundreds King)
Posts: 1,431
|
Post by TsarNicholasII on Feb 17, 2015 0:41:34 GMT
Decriminalize all drugs is actually what I would do. If you think about it hard enough, perhaps you will see what I am talking about. It is very logical. The drug trade is illegal. It is only illegal, because the drugs involved are illegal. It hurts the economy as money flows into untaxed hands and foreign regions ( "Capital Outflow"), a good portion of which is never circulated back. The global drug trade generated roughly $321,600,000 in just one year. The drug trade also involves the sex trade. As people are kidnapped then forcibly addicted to drugs, thus hinders health not only through drug use in recreational terms. Legalizing the possession of all drugs reduces many adverse effects of drug use in regions. Portugal did this a decade ago, and has seen success in taming its old drug problem.
|
|
Jarl Matt
Government Official: Cabinet
Growth Guru
I may be a drunk, but so was Churchill. I will fight you on the everything. D:
Posts: 1,396
|
Post by Jarl Matt on Feb 17, 2015 9:31:04 GMT
As an ex smoker I agree with the above. Decriminalize everything and tax it all. Can use hench increase in income to push sensible drug use campaigns and what not. Much better. And anyway, some drugs do no harm anyways, other than making you lazy and want to eat pizza ;D
|
|
|
Debating
Feb 17, 2015 12:30:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by Angry Andy on Feb 17, 2015 12:30:23 GMT
I've never smoked, worried about academic performance.
Also unlike many kids these days, I value the law and rules and hate being rebellious.
|
|
|
Post by ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)Kimmy( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) on Feb 17, 2015 15:51:14 GMT
As an ex smoker I agree with the above. Decriminalize everything and tax it all. Can use hench increase in income to push sensible drug use campaigns and what not. Much better. And anyway, some drugs do no harm anyways, other than making you lazy and want to eat pizza ;D And it helps with population control. I wanna see equal or more deaths than births until there's only 2-4 billion people left
|
|