War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment? (Read 5623 times)

Heavies

War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« on: November 22, 2013, 02:52:20 PM »
Curious what you all think about this new 'War on bullying' is really about?

 Seems like every day a new story is pushed about this or that person was 'bullied' and someone should be punished.   Then you hear that conservatives 'bully' the legislative process, while all the while the liberal scumbags seem to have the most hateful, spiteful, racist, and bigoted rhetoric imaginable,  yet no 'bulling' accusations from any MSM.

Disgusts me to no end. 

This feels like to me, IMHO, like the radicals on the left are setting this up to curb 1st Amendment rights, especially the veiws of the conservative principled constitutionalist.
Tin foil hat time? I think as soon as they are successful with their abolition of the Second Amendment, the First Amendment will be quick to follow...

Just throwing that out there to chew on a bit..

stangzilla

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2013, 04:22:48 PM »
one word,
Incognito.   LOL

its funny that a 320 pound lineman can be bullied by another 320 pound lineman
dude, you guys older than 12 years old?

this bullying phenomenon is a bunch of BS to me
you only get bullied if you allow it to happen.

and the websites and charities for anti cyber bullying is bs
you know how you stop cyber bullying?
turn off your computer.

jaynick

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2013, 04:46:38 PM »
“My initial reaction was, You’ve got to be kidding me. What? Pro football bullying? We’re playing the toughest sport, most violent, not to mention you’re men, some older than others, so it’s not like a little 12-year-old on the playground,” Favre said. “I’m not defending or condoning, all I’m saying is my initial reaction was, ‘A grown man who’s 320 pounds is getting bullied?’” -brett favre  :thumbsup:

stangzilla

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2013, 05:06:48 PM »
you can be an accesory to murder, kill someone while drunk driving, assault your wife, not too bad in the NFL
just pay a small fine, come back next week like it was nothing.

but if you bully someone, whoa, watch out!
now you're on the headlines, and the hot topic on sports center


NBA:
you can punch someone in the balls, run up behind them and forearm them in the back of the head, come in for a dunk and knee them in the face
and thats ok, thats a no call
but say "homo" in an interview, and that'll cost you $75k

Darmok and Jalad @Tanagra

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2013, 08:51:10 PM »
Political Correctness

IS

Thought Control.


The first step is to condition people through punishment and "sensitivity" training.  Very shortly after, people will be policing their own speech to avoid causing someone else a "feeling."

Once thoughts and ideas can no longer be expressed for fear of punishment or causing emotional injury, it's just a matter of labeling all undesirable thoughts as politically incorrect, racist, or bullying.

Instant thought control!!
"... the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
--Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Heavies

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2013, 10:05:42 PM »
Exactly.  Cry me a fucken river. I have been bullied, and I have bullied. I have never been so 'hurt' that I need some kind of assistance from the gov.

This is the wussifiaction of the nation.

ImKu

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2013, 10:52:40 PM »
Exactly.  Cry me a fucken river. I have been bullied, and I have bullied. I have never been so 'hurt' that I need some kind of assistance from the gov.

This is the wussifiaction of the nation.

I understand that the mentality of most men is to get over it and stop being a pussy.  With that said, just because we can take that approach ourselves does not mean that everyone has that ability to cope with "bullying" whether it be physically or mentally.  Don't get me wrong, some of the cases that I hear on the news seem pretty lame(like online bullying), but without being there I find it hard to judge things sometimes.  I will share a personal example of "bullying"  as my youngest brother is diagnosed with aspergers disease.  This is way way before it became known that the autism spectrum is found in 1 in every 88 kids.  He was on the severe side of the autism spectrum and among other quirks was unable to process anger, sadness, and other emotions, the way most of us can.  Long story short, was bullied to the point that he thought everyone hated him.  This started at somewhat a young age.  This went on for years, until just recently.  He would talk to himself for hours, hitting himself, hating himself, and no amount of compassion from our family would help.  Believe me when I say that I showed no restraint when I was so lucky to come upon a group physically bullying my brother.  I am by no way saying that there is a need for gov. assistance, but I will NOT say that there is NOT a problem.  I do not offer a solution, but hopefully maybe just a little insight as to how "bullying" does effects some.  :shaka:
The mind acts like an enemy for those who do not control it.
- Bhagavad Gita

Darmok and Jalad @Tanagra

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2013, 11:40:50 PM »
I understand that the mentality of most men is to get over it and stop being a pussy.  With that said, just because we can take that approach ourselves does not mean that everyone has that ability to cope with "bullying" whether it be physically or mentally.  Don't get me wrong, some of the cases that I hear on the news seem pretty lame(like online bullying), but without being there I find it hard to judge things sometimes.  I will share a personal example of "bullying"  as my youngest brother is diagnosed with aspergers disease.  This is way way before it became known that the autism spectrum is found in 1 in every 88 kids.  He was on the severe side of the autism spectrum and among other quirks was unable to process anger, sadness, and other emotions, the way most of us can.  Long story short, was bullied to the point that he thought everyone hated him.  This started at somewhat a young age.  This went on for years, until just recently.  He would talk to himself for hours, hitting himself, hating himself, and no amount of compassion from our family would help.  Believe me when I say that I showed no restraint when I was so lucky to come upon a group physically bullying my brother.  I am by no way saying that there is a need for gov. assistance, but I will NOT say that there is NOT a problem.  I do not offer a solution, but hopefully maybe just a little insight as to how "bullying" does effects some.  :shaka:

This illustrates that everyone has different levels of tolerance for negativity. 

At what level does it cross the line to bullying? 

I contend that line doesn't exist except as perceived by the recipient, as everyone has varying degrees of tolerance. 

That being the case, you can't hold a person responsible for inadvertently angering another with a mildly sarcastic joke..  The average person would likely take the comment as intended, whereas someone more sensitive, politically correct, or like your relative might take is as an attack or nasty insult.

Unless we all walk on eggshells to avoid causing a "feeling", then I suggest we all grow a skin, not take ourselves and others so seriously, and repeat this incantation nightly in front of the mirror: 

"sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me!"

Quote
Poor is the man whose pleasures depend on the permission of another.
"... the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
--Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Heavies

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #8 on: November 23, 2013, 02:42:26 AM »
I understand that the mentality of most men is to get over it and stop being a pussy.  With that said, just because we can take that approach ourselves does not mean that everyone has that ability to cope with "bullying" whether it be physically or mentally.  Don't get me wrong, some of the cases that I hear on the news seem pretty lame(like online bullying), but without being there I find it hard to judge things sometimes.  I will share a personal example of "bullying"  as my youngest brother is diagnosed with aspergers disease.  This is way way before it became known that the autism spectrum is found in 1 in every 88 kids.  He was on the severe side of the autism spectrum and among other quirks was unable to process anger, sadness, and other emotions, the way most of us can.  Long story short, was bullied to the point that he thought everyone hated him.  This started at somewhat a young age.  This went on for years, until just recently.  He would talk to himself for hours, hitting himself, hating himself, and no amount of compassion from our family would help.  Believe me when I say that I showed no restraint when I was so lucky to come upon a group physically bullying my brother.  I am by no way saying that there is a need for gov. assistance, but I will NOT say that there is NOT a problem.  I do not offer a solution, but hopefully maybe just a little insight as to how "bullying" does effects some.  :shaka:


I do agree with you that there is a problem.  The problem is that if the gov thinks it can regulate and legislate its way to a 'bully free' society it is either very very naive or just utterly imbecilic.  This is why I postulate an ulterior motive...   

IMHO, The real problem is that parents don't teach their kids basic ethical behavior, to respect people, and common courtesy.  Gov has amplified the situation by removing God from every public aspect of every ones life.  Hasn't anyone noticed how the social situation has gotten worse at the slow but steady chipping away at public religious beliefs, icons, and tradition.

Kingkeoni

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2013, 03:15:50 AM »
Conflict, "bullying" and being "bullied" are all part of life.

The United States  is so full of politically correct pussies that its downright sad.

People create labels for something, demonize it, spend millions of dollars campaigning against it, create drugs to "regulate" it, then pass laws against it.

What a flocken joke.

It's sad that 99% of the sheep in the world live their sheltered lives this way.

Your number one Option for Personal Security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.

Someday someone may kill you with your own gun, but they should have to beat you to death with it because it is empty.

ImKu

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #10 on: November 23, 2013, 11:50:48 AM »
This illustrates that everyone has different levels of tolerance for negativity. 

At what level does it cross the line to bullying?

I contend that line doesn't exist except as perceived by the recipient, as everyone has varying degrees of tolerance.

I contend that if you just so happen to find 5 guys physically lock one guy in a gym locker and begin pissing on him... that you will be watching that line being crossed, unless your degree of tolerance is fucked. 

That being the case, you can't hold a person responsible for inadvertently angering another with a mildly sarcastic joke..  The average person would likely take the comment as intended, whereas someone more sensitive, politically correct, or like your relative might take is as an attack or nasty insult.

Maybe we are addressing different levels of "bullying" as what I was alluding to, is physical not a "nasty insult" that may or may not hurt someones feelings.  I am not talking about being politically correct or "mildly sarcastic jokes" but the physical side of bullying.
The mind acts like an enemy for those who do not control it.
- Bhagavad Gita

Darmok and Jalad @Tanagra

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #11 on: November 23, 2013, 12:06:52 PM »
This illustrates that everyone has different levels of tolerance for negativity. 

At what level does it cross the line to bullying?

I contend that line doesn't exist except as perceived by the recipient, as everyone has varying degrees of tolerance.

I contend that if you just so happen to find 5 guys physically lock one guy in a gym locker and begin pissing on him... that you will be watching that line being crossed, unless your degree of tolerance is fucked. 

That being the case, you can't hold a person responsible for inadvertently angering another with a mildly sarcastic joke..  The average person would likely take the comment as intended, whereas someone more sensitive, politically correct, or like your relative might take is as an attack or nasty insult.

Maybe we are addressing different levels of "bullying" as what I was alluding to, is physical not a "nasty insult" that may or may not hurt someones feelings.  I am not talking about being politically correct or "mildly sarcastic jokes" but the physical side of bullying.

The examples you cited used to be the definition of bullying:  a bigger, meaner kid physically picking on others.

Today, bullying is not just physical.  Cyber-bullies, text bullies, and other non-physical bullies are the focus of authorities.  Physical bullying is basically assault, and therefore doesn't need to be defined as bullying.  it's wrong and normally illegal, and there are already remedies and protections when bullies cross that line.  If my child were ever locked in a school locker and urinated on, you can bet the law and the school board would be involved.  Not because my child was bullied, but because it crossed the line from harassment to assault.
"... the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
--Justice Louis D. Brandeis

ImKu

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #12 on: November 23, 2013, 12:16:04 PM »
The examples you cited used to be the definition of bullying:  a bigger, meaner kid physically picking on others.

Today, bullying is not just physical.  Cyber-bullies, text bullies, and other non-physical bullies are the focus of authorities.  Physical bullying is basically assault, and therefore doesn't need to be defined as bullying.  it's wrong and normally illegal, and there are already remedies and protections when bullies cross that line.  If my child were ever locked in a school locker and urinated on, you can bet the law and the school board would be involved.  Not because my child was bullied, but because it crossed the line from harassment to assault.

Interesting.  I guess I am behind the times somehow, or just ignorant to the changes that have taken place.  Guess I should have read up on these different types of bullying prior to putting my .02...  I somewhat remember a forum thread awhile back along the same topic of cyber-bullying...  I thought it was a joke  :oops:
The mind acts like an enemy for those who do not control it.
- Bhagavad Gita

Darmok and Jalad @Tanagra

Re: War on 'bullying', or a war on the first amendment?
« Reply #13 on: November 23, 2013, 12:24:31 PM »
Interesting.  I guess I am behind the times somehow, or just ignorant to the changes that have taken place.  Guess I should have read up on these different types of bullying prior to putting my .02...  I somewhat remember a forum thread awhile back along the same topic of cyber-bullying...  I thought it was a joke  :oops:

With more and more use of social network technologies, and fewer in-real-life relationships, things have shifted.  More kids, teens especially, turn to electronic communication to socialize.  It's no wonder many put great importance on their online friendships and image.  To have that attacked for all their friends to see (and propagate) can be just as bad, or worse than, a punch in the nose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberbullying

Quote
Examples of what constitutes cyberbullying include communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior intended to harm another. Cyberbullying has been defined by The National Crime Prevention Council: “When the Internet, cell phones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person."
"... the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men."
--Justice Louis D. Brandeis