Helping Students Deal With Bullying

[Gerry Seymour]

I would be careful about focusing too much on the leader for dealing with a group attack. A pack of equals will make it almost impossible to identify a leader if one exists at all. Groups like this are highly functional and dangerous. They also tend to have a goal that isn't dependent on a leader.

And that's proably the difference between a gang and a group (my terms). A group will have a leader - they're bullying because the leader is bullying. A gang has a mutual purpose, and may be harder to find a leader in.

 

[Tez3]

And what do you back this claim up with? Strategies in the martial arts that deal with group attacks often focus on taking out the leader.

Only a couple do that I know of, dealing with multiple attackers, who all attack at the same time, is more often taught. Do you actually think that they will stand around and let you take one of them out, perhaps then they will all come at you one by one as they do in the films?

I have done a lot of riot training, even had to use it but we don't focus on the 'leader' there's snatch squads for that, obviously you won't have that luxury so focussing on the 'leaders', once you know who they are is something you are unlikely to be able to do.

Quite a few years ago two soldiers in Northern Ireland were beaten to death by a mob, nothing helped. BBC - History - Troubles - Army corporals killed at IRA funeral

 

[JowGaWolf]

Only a couple do that I know of, dealing with multiple attackers, who all attack at the same time, is more often taught. Do you actually think that they will stand around and let you take one of them out, perhaps then they will all come at you one by one as they do in the films?

I have done a lot of riot training, even had to use it but we don't focus on the 'leader' there's snatch squads for that, obviously you won't have that luxury so focussing on the 'leaders', once you know who they are is something you are unlikely to be able to do.

Quite a few years ago two soldiers in Northern Ireland were beaten to death by a mob, nothing helped. BBC - History - Troubles - Army corporals killed at IRA funeral

A mob would be the worst. I would rather face a gang than a mob. A mob runs off collective emotions anger, revenge, cruelty, rightousness, anarchy, and any other emotion that you can find. Throw all of that into a bag of fire ants, killer bees, and bullet ants, then shake the bag up and stick your hand in it. That's what a mob will be like.

 

[MA_Student]

And what do you back this claim up with? Strategies in the martial arts that deal with group attacks often focus on taking out the leader.

So what? Doesn't mean they work

 

[Tez3]

A mob would be the worst. I would rather face a gang than a mob. A mob runs off collective emotions anger, revenge, cruelty, rightousness, anarchy, and any other emotion that you can find. Throw all of that into a bag of fire ants, killer bees, and bullet ants, then shake the bag up and stick your hand in it. That's what a mob will be like.

The strange thing was that the ones we had the most bother with were the peace protestors!

You may have heard of the Greenham Common peace camps, they were camped outside the RAF base that the USAF used to keep their Cruise missiles. They said they were peaceful but really weren't, they'd try to cut the fence and 'invade' the camp, they cut off with bold cutters one policeman's finger when he tried to stop them. They would rush the police and when you tried to stop them would actually fight back, they'd kick, bite, scratch, scream rape and go for your eyes. Nasty dealing with them because they'd film you but not them! To this day they are thought of as heroines for peace!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Only a couple do that I know of, dealing with multiple attackers, who all attack at the same time, is more often taught. Do you actually think that they will stand around and let you take one of them out, perhaps then they will all come at you one by one as they do in the films?

I have done a lot of riot training, even had to use it but we don't focus on the 'leader' there's snatch squads for that, obviously you won't have that luxury so focussing on the 'leaders', once you know who they are is something you are unlikely to be able to do.

Quite a few years ago two soldiers in Northern Ireland were beaten to death by a mob, nothing helped. BBC - History - Troubles - Army corporals killed at IRA funeral

The idea of focusing on the leader is usually more about what to do when you're sure you can't get away, but they haven't attacked yet.

 

[Tez3]

The idea of focusing on the leader is usually more about what to do when you're sure you can't get away, but they haven't attacked yet.

I know.

 

[PhotonGuy]

I would be careful about focusing too much on the leader for dealing with a group attack. A pack of equals will make it almost impossible to identify a leader if one exists at all. Groups like this are highly functional and dangerous. They also tend to have a goal that isn't dependent on a leader.

Even with groups that don't have an official leader there is always somebody who is most dominant. Whenever theres two or more people one person is always going to be the dominant one. The position might switch, the person who is most dominant at one time might not be most dominant at another time but there is always somebody who is more or less in charge even if they're just slightly in charge.

 

[Tez3]

Even with groups that don't have an official leader there is always somebody who is most dominant. Whenever theres two or more people one person is always going to be the dominant one. The position might switch, the person who is most dominant at one time might not be most dominant at another time but there is always somebody who is more or less in charge even if they're just slightly in charge.

Are you going to take the time though to stand there and work out who you think is in charge? I don't think you can 'slightly in charge' anymore than you can be slightly pregnant or slightly dead. While group dynamics are interesting it's not something you should be thinking about when you are facing a potential mob/gang about to beat you up.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Even with groups that don't have an official leader there is always somebody who is most dominant. Whenever theres two or more people one person is always going to be the dominant one. The position might switch, the person who is most dominant at one time might not be most dominant at another time but there is always somebody who is more or less in charge even if they're just slightly in charge.

I'd really like to know how you expect to determine who this person is while the whole group is kicking your ***.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Even with groups that don't have an official leader there is always somebody who is most dominant. Whenever theres two or more people one person is always going to be the dominant one. The position might switch, the person who is most dominant at one time might not be most dominant at another time but there is always somebody who is more or less in charge even if they're just slightly in charge.

No one controls a mob which is why police, military, and government doesn't like them. A mob is one step below anarchy. They may have people that hype the mob up but they aren't the leader. In terms of gangs the leader of the gang may not even be present.

 

[drop bear]

And what do you back this claim up with? Strategies in the martial arts that deal with group attacks often focus on taking out the leader.

Yeah just ko the leader. If you can hand out ko,s like that bullies wouldn't be a problem anyway.

 

[drop bear]

Even with groups that don't have an official leader there is always somebody who is most dominant. Whenever theres two or more people one person is always going to be the dominant one. The position might switch, the person who is most dominant at one time might not be most dominant at another time but there is always somebody who is more or less in charge even if they're just slightly in charge.

Look at a fight on a sports field.

 

[Tez3]

No one controls a mob which is why police, military, and government doesn't like them. A mob is one step below anarchy. They may have people that hype the mob up but they aren't the leader. In terms of gangs the leader of the gang may not even be present.

What controls a mob is the herd mentality, people feel stronger and less inhibited in a mob, they literally can get carried away. Non violent people can become very violent, commit sexual assault and rape, riot and loot in a mob whereas individually they would never dream of doing such things. Mob Mentality: The Brain Suppresses Personal Moral Code When In Groups

I can't remember what film was being made but there was a mob/riot scene in it, the extras had been briefed and shown what they were to do but as the filming went on it became clear to the director that his mob of extras weren't acting anymore and had actually started rioting for the real, the violence got real. They had a heck of a job stopping it, they also had a nasty scare at the example they saw of a mob mentality taking over. There was little to actually incite such behaviour but the feeling of being a 'herd' being strong in a group was stronger than most people realised and it took them over.

 

[JR 137]

Somehow we’ve gone from a few kids bullying a single kid and some (including me) said to take out the leader/main bully to adult gang attacks and riots.

Targeting the main instigator can and has worked in an instance with kids. An adolescents and up, not so much.

The ones who are saying take out the leader are probably and hopefully referring to the initial intent of the thread and no what to do if you find yourself surrounded by 10 Crips or in the middle of a We Want Hillary riot. It shouldn’t need to be said, but there’s a bit of a difference.

 

[Tez3]

or in the middle of a We Want Hillary riot.

Political post.

 

[JR 137]

Political post.

Aren’t most riots over political issues? Excluding sports and prison riots.

 

[Tez3]

Aren’t most riots over political issues? Excluding sports and prison riots.

Not my point, I mean specifically mentioning one politician in that way is a political post.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Political post.

Not really. He didn't say he wanted Hillary.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Not my point, I mean specifically mentioning one politician in that way is a political post.

No, if I happen to mention that Donald Trump exists, that's not inherently political. It only becomes political if I take a stance in favor of or opposing that politician or their actions/views.