Self Defense in Public Schools

[sgtmac_46]

If you're going to get suspended either way, then swing away. That's the problem with zero tolerance policies, there is no understanding of degrees. Believe me, if pushing a guy off of me is going to get me in the same amount of trouble as breaking his jaw, then i'm breaking his jaw. Why not, it's simple economics, AND i'll be less likely to have to do it again. If it costs the same, get the most for your punishment. Which isn't to say I think this is the way it should be, merely pointing out the logical consequences of having a one size fits all punishment.

 

[sgtmac_46]

...

 

[MJS]

I agree. If actually fighting ends up being your only option, then you might as well do it. I would however, attempt to do everything I could to defuse the situation first and fight as a last resort.

Mike

 

[Tony]

The main reason I never fought back against the bullies who made my life a living hell at secondary school was because i was more afraid of being punished by the teachers. I guess I have trouble with authority figures (i'm afraid of them!) Back in those days my Martial Arts experience was limited to all the books i had read and brief lessons from a friend of my sister.

I did get into many scraps at primary school without any fear, fighting with kids twice my size. But the consequence of being shouted at, given a detention or even suspended helped turn me into a emotional and physical punch bag! Looking back its better to gain a bad rep than be a coward for the rest of your life.

You hear of children taking their own lives because the bullies had completely destroyed their lives and made every day a living nightmare. But if these kids had found it in themselves to be strong and fight back they would still be alive because the schools often fail the victims of bullying.

Many a time I wished I could have banged some boy's head against a window or tried to arrange a way of fighting them after school off school premises but again i was too afraid and even now after receiving my brown sash i still don't know if i am good enough to fight back.

 

[47MartialMan]

When your school has a suspensions even if you don't fight back i think you should fight back. why? i'd rather not become the school joke and the teachers won't do anything unless they see the fight and if i just take a beating i've got suspended and bean beaten boy sounds like a pretty bad day. As for parents encouraging violence you could say my dad does cause he says if someone takes a swing at you make sure they don't get a chance to take another. My mom says the oposite never fight back get a teacher. well sometimes ppl don't like to admit it but once one person decided to start a fight there not gonna stop it and violence is now your only option. Now i probably should add that i agree and ppl should avoid fights when you can but sometimes when somebody decides they need an ego boost so there gonna beat on someone theres nothing you can do.

True, which is why self defense or any form of martial art should nit be allowed in the first place. What is to stop a bully, or another student, from learning it there, and abusing ithers with it?

 

[sgtmac_46]

The main reason I never fought back against the bullies who made my life a living hell at secondary school was because i was more afraid of being punished by the teachers. I guess I have trouble with authority figures (i'm afraid of them!) Back in those days my Martial Arts experience was limited to all the books i had read and brief lessons from a friend of my sister.

I did get into many scraps at primary school without any fear, fighting with kids twice my size. But the consequence of being shouted at, given a detention or even suspended helped turn me into a emotional and physical punch bag! Looking back its better to gain a bad rep than be a coward for the rest of your life.

You hear of children taking their own lives because the bullies had completely destroyed their lives and made every day a living nightmare. But if these kids had found it in themselves to be strong and fight back they would still be alive because the schools often fail the victims of bullying.

Many a time I wished I could have banged some boy's head against a window or tried to arrange a way of fighting them after school off school premises but again i was too afraid and even now after receiving my brown sash i still don't know if i am good enough to fight back.

That accounts for most of the reasons people don't fight back. Authority is mostly wasted on the already converted. Those who don't respect authority will do what they want anyway, until enough force is brought to bear to bring them in to line. The fact is, teaching kids that they have no right to defend themselves against others is an example of what Nietzche called "Slave Morality", wherein it is moral and good to be weak, but evil to be strong. According to those hocking the slave morality, it is far better to be resentful and hurt for the rest of your life, than actually express your anger directly to another person.

I don't buy it myself. I respond as I see fit, and move on. A lot less baggage that way. Of course I defend myself, I am my most valuable possession ("I" includes those closest to me). I have no problem being selfish, I don't feel it is my responsibility to sacrifice myself to avoid having to fight back against another person. I believe that if another person puts themselves in direct conflict with me, so much the worse for them. I believe it is IMMORAL to think that I need to take the abuse of others so that the world is a more peaceful place. Or that I must rely on a community to defend me. It doesn't always work that way.

 

[Gin-Gin]

That's why I thought it was good that everyone in our high school, class of 450 x 3 knew my kids were black belts, actually really good ones. Never once were they threatened. But they were teased, taunted, and talked about behind their backs. Words aren't anything but if it comes to physical danger, I told my kids to defend themselves. Better to be suspended than to be dead. But it is most important to avoid situations altogether. TW

I was in a fight in school only once (either 4th or 5th grade). My parents had always told me to never get into a fight unless the other person hit me first & I had to defend myself [which was reinforced on all those episodes of "Kung Fu" that I saw]. One day, after ignoring this guy's teasing remarks, he finally walked towards me & hit me on top of my head with his fist; I grabbed his arms & swung him around in a circle, & then let him go as gently as I could. [Keep in mind that I was not in MA at the time--my father wouldn't allow me to take it.] Even though the other kids told the teacher that the guy hit me first, she punished both of us & we each sat in on the floor in a corner of the room until our parents arrived. After I told my parents what happened, they said that I did the right thing by defending myself & that was the end of it.

So, I guess sometimes TV can be good for us! (as well as good parents, of course)

Anyway, I think it's a shame that martial arts aren't being taught in most public schools here in the states (kudos to Mr. Norris & his "Kickstart" program--too bad that his schools are only in "high risk" areas). I wish that MA classes were required (or at least optional) in all schools. I'm sure that there are political problems as well as lack of knowledge by non MA people who have their own assumptions, & liability issues, as well as how the MA instructors would be "qualified" compared to regular schoolteachers, but I honestly think that the structure & discipline (as well as the goals of achieving belts/stripes) are so needed by our youth; I know from personal experience that I would have handled a lot of things that happened in my life differently had I been exposed to that kind of education. Perhaps in more time & with more positive exposure, more schools will be open to the idea...

 

[47MartialMan]

Anyway, I think it's a shame that martial arts aren't being taught in most public schools here in the states (kudos to Mr. Norris & his "Kickstart" program--too bad that his schools are only in "high risk" areas). I wish that MA classes were required (or at least optional) in all schools. I'm sure that there are political problems as well as lack of knowledge by non MA people who have their own assumptions, & liability issues, as well as how the MA instructors would be "qualified" compared to regular schoolteachers, but I honestly think that the structure & discipline (as well as the goals of achieving belts/stripes) are so needed by our youth; I know from personal experience that I would have handled a lot of things that happened in my life differently had I been exposed to that kind of education. Perhaps in more time & with more positive exposure, more schools will be open to the idea...Well, I do train kids-outside of the school system, to those that cannot afford it. It is needed by the yuoth, but then the politics in school, per whom decides "what" art to be taught and "how" to teach it per mandates, will surface.

I wonder, how many schools, commercially, would actually go out and teach for the "sake" of teaching with "education" in mind and not monetary compensation?

 

[Suntail]

Okay, in school, I fight back. And I make it good. I'm not big (135 lbs and I'm 17 yrs), so if I back down I could be a long-time target. Look, I don't like getting punished, and I like hurting people (without a reason) less. But I like being made into a pulp the least.
I disagree with school taught self-defence though. It would be a good thing to know, but I don't think people can effectivly learn martial arts in school. My only experiance with it was a few lower level (I hope) Kung fu students tried to give a demo. I don't like people look like a fool either (I've gotten my fair share of it and it can hurt too) but these people were showoff-ish, and stuff. Theortically it could help, but I don't think it would be practical.

 

[47MartialMan]

Okay, in school, I fight back.

Sometimes one has to fight back, and times when one should not fight back. it depends on the situation

And I make it good.

Make it good? Fighting is good? not sure what do you mean by this.


Hi Suntail,

I'm not big (135 lbs and I'm 17 yrs), so if I back down I could be a long-time target.

Yes, sometimes a smaller target has to tkae a stand. But woe it will not solve anything but more ways and/or challenges fro more people to come at you. And this is not good for finally you will get hurt or someone you care about will get hurt in the "wake" of it.

Look, I don't like getting punished, and I like hurting people

Somewhat not mature. I can you like hurting people with the same disposition of not wanting to get hurt yourself? Perhaps I mis-interpret this?

I don't like people look like a fool either (I've gotten my fair share of it and it can hurt too) but these people were showoff-ish, and stuff.

Not sure what you mean by this also..

Theortically it could help, but I don't think it would be practical.

Could you explain this a little further, I am trying to understand...

 

[Suntail]

Okay, first things first I was really tired last night and my typing suffered from it. My thoughts didn't slow down for my fingers so I skipped words.

Sorry​

I ment I make it look good. I generally hate flashy things, but I can make it look like it was easy to win, so people don't want to fight me and hurrah that is good.

I have no idea how to quote people so I'm just going down the list. People were geting hurt (mostly me) before I took a stand, so I have taken a stand and haven't been in a serious fight I couldn't bluff my way out of in almost 3 years. I try to apologize to anyone I've fought with and so far I don't know anyone who has hold a grudge.

I'm fairly sure I said I like hurting people less (In otherwords dislike it more), if I didn't, blaim it on my poor typing.

Typing again (I'm proofreading everything at least twice from now on) I think I ment "making people look like fools" The demonstraters (in my gym class) were talking about their superior fighting skills due to their Kung Fu training (I can't be 100% certain but I'm pretty sure they were in Kung Fu) but they didn't seem to know anything really useful, just the "look at what I can do" stuff. So when I asked what they would do if they were fighting a grappler, I watched them be flabbergasted, and it all went down hill, for them, from there.

If MA classes were mandatory, I think, few people would get it. I think few would look it as something to practice on their own and they wouldn't value it all that much. It would be just another gym activity. I think that the choice should be theirs. It's just my opinion.

Sorry, I've got to learn to pick my words better.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

You only find peace because others stand ready to do violence on your behalf. The fact that you acknowledge that something bigger than the lions is required to reign the lions in is an acknowledgement of my point. It isn't "coping skills" but the threat of a larger stick that helps kids get through a school day without being attacked. That larger stick are adults willing to intervene. Without that threat of violence, those coping skills would mean nothing. However, every day we erode societies ability to control some of it's more violent elements.

Violence and it's implied threat is what keeps society from tearing itself apart. Don't kid yourself into thinking that it is your reasoning power that keeps you safe. It's only the threat of violence implied by someone else that keeps you safe. The fact that adults are willing to intervene is the only thing preventing what i've described from being necessary. The fact that you and those like you believe that communication skills are all that is required is nothing more than proof of the effectiveness of the systematic threat of violence that our society uses to enforce order.

My statements aren't meant so much as a suggestion on how a school kid should respond to violence, as it is a general discussion of the role of violence in the social order. I believe there is a great deal of naive wishful thinking involved in suggestions of non-violence in many cases. Labeling something "Ego" is a reductionist way of dealing with a much more complex evolutionary process. Also, simply saying "It's a school fight" is a bit reductionist as well. I've seen school fights that have resulted in hospitalization.

Unfortunately, there are kids out there who are more than willing to beat another child senseless, and those kids have parents who do nothing but play attorney for their child whenever that child faces consequences. I've seen several boys and girls during the course of my career who saw it as their right to beat anyone they want with impunity, and they always seem to dodge any real consequence for that. And yes, those same parents would sue another child for attacking their baby. They'll also sue a school for holding their child responsible for his actions. In this society everyone sues for everything. You can be perfectly right and be sued.

Of course I guess it is a good sign that society has evolved enough that most people think that non-violence is the key. Not everyone is that evolved, however, and thinking so is wishful thinking. I do know a thing or two about it. I've spent the last 10 years of my life studying violence and the evolutionary psychological underpinnings of violence. In that time i've concluded that much of what most people think they understand about violence and it's causes are not true.

Further, our "Legal system" is very poor at punishing and dealing with the truly violent. It's usually only after an extreme act of violence, long after numerous other violent incidents, many truly violent individuals are dealt with. Society is only as peaceful as it's defenders are effective at dealing with it's most violent elements. In places where law and order have nearly broken down, such as the inner city, violence is endemic.

Of course, this is probably a topic better reserved for a different topic, as the issue of schools and children aren't the core of my point, and they tend to bring an emotionality to this type of discussion not prevelent when discussing adults. It does bear noting, however, that perhaps teaching children that there is always a peaceful solution to problems is a double edged sword. On the one hand it does teach them how to solve minor inter personal problems without the use of violence, which is good. There is a certain falseness in the statement "Violence never solved anything" or "Violence isn't the solution".

As for bullies being the "best thing", that's never what I said. Bullies are usually cowards who predate on the weak. What I suggest is that it's ideal to be strong, powerful and assertive people. That's the ideal. If a bully feels that you are willing to do anything to avoid a confrontation with him, he wins. If he feels that there is a limit to how far he can push you, he'll usually leave you alone. It is important to teach children to respect others, but it is also important to teach them that they are not someone else's door mat. The "Ego" game may seem silly to those who think of themselves as enlightened, but it is also a key aspect in interpersonal human behavior. To dismiss it as childish is and refuse to deal with it for what it is, is a misunderstanding of it's larger role in human affairs.

Finally, as for your comment about Columbine,

"If I had a child who was rendered unconcious or was attacked with the level of violence which you describe, I would file both criminal charges and a civil lawsuit. I know that there is little that a child can do to warrant that type of reaction. This is similar to the Columbine incident where the kids took so much abuse that they struck back with everything they had. That's not the proper response to a situation like this."

it is based on the myth of Columbine. Harris and Klebold, contrary to popular myth, did not commit the crime they did because they were "picked on by the jocks". The fact is that they did not even seek out the jocks who allegedly tormented them. They fired their shots at individuals who had never engaged in any kind of ridicule of them. They knew where the "jocks" would be at that time of morning, and stayed far away from there, because their act was about power, not revenge. They were not wronged, they were not tormented, they were simply defective human beings. Further, they also weren't "children". They committed a cold and calculating act that showed adult sophistication and they did it for power, not revenge. It was the evil act of two sociopaths.

At any rate, using violence as a last resort is a good thing. Eliminating violence as an option at all isn't.

This is one of the finest posts I have read on MT. This weekend I saw three gang members taunting a pizza deliveryman. Why? Because they could.

Also, this idea of the Columbine killers as bullied is nonsense. I've seen video of them, and my gut reaction was that they were the bullies, not the bullied.

 

[bluemtn]

I've been raised to not be a victim, nor someone who starts fights. Growing up, I was a bit shy, and my family moved around a bit often; therefore, those made me a seemingly easy target. I have 2 older brothers with whom we used to always used to wrestle each other, they'd show me basic boxing tech's, and sometimes their friends would show them something I'd get shown somewhere along the way. So, that's where the "seemingly" is out-don't worry, I've got a point. When I was a new kid in the 5th grade class, a girl wanted to prove something. Unfortunately, she had MA training before (although from what I saw, poor), and she tried what she "learned". Finally, I had enough and threw a punch, and she spent the next day at the dentist. I also guess I was one of the rare cases that didn't get suspended, then again, I didn't have any formal training (at the time).

My point is self defense IS important for little kids, but not necessarily the physical aspect in the schools. Not every child knows when a proper time is to use what they've learned. It's up to a responsible adult to guide them. School systems (in my opinion) aren't always the best place. I'm sure that someone, like the girl I mentioned above, will be at the first class trying to bully everyone. For schools, I feel they should learn how to "verbally" handle themselves, and save the rest after school in a class (not as many grudges held there).

 

[CrankyDragon]

But they were teased, taunted, and talked about behind their backs.

Sounds like the same school everyone attends. They tease and taunt what there skeered of, or what they aspire to become but cant make it. Also, there imature bunch of turds. Either way, it happens.

Words aren't anything but if it comes to physical danger, I told my kids to defend themselves. Better to be suspended than to be dead. But it is most important to avoid situations altogether. TW

Exactly! My daughter is only in the 3rd grade and asked me about such things. I explained to her that Aikido is all about avoiding the conflict. Teases and words are nothing, but if your about to be assaulted, then defend yourself to where they understand through the universal language of pain, that there assault is not welcome, and please excuse yourself from further attempts or it will hurt much worse on the next attempt, and more than that on the next, etc.. Of course, I told her in simplier terms.

Only defend when defense is needed. Aikido is not an agressive MA, purely a defensive, use it that way. And helping others in need is acceptable too.

If my little girl put the serious "who-do" on someone in self defense, Id take her out shopping too, as someone else mentioned.

Kids will be kids, but I dont want anyone touching my daughter in an uninvited way. Shes only a 1st deg. white in junior, but by the time shes bigger and needs it the most/more, she should be more proficient!

Andrew

 

[eggg1994]

i have never gotten into a fight not once because im nutorious for avoiding a fight. i agree that the school's zero tolarance polices are harsh and i believe that bullying has gotten worse with all this technology and cyber bullying. i believe we should educate the bullies about how their behavior is destroying the minds of their victums. you know im really against bullying and i learned that violance solves nothing and what solves it is showing compassion to the bully. i don't believe that all bullies have suffered from low self esteem some are just abusive and some are jerks. last year in my biology class there was this guy named brandon johnson who i was parnered up with because we were doing a science projust and he said i was pathetic and i forgot about that and then one day this was on november 8th 2009 and brandon said to this one kid that he was an idiot and i told him to stop that and i told him that i guess your parents have never taought you any manners. then he cussed at me and i cussed at him and then i asked him what he did and he said he drank alcohol and told me if i told on him he was going to beat me up. then the subitute teacher told me to stop and i started hateing that brandon person but i never had to physicaly defend myself.

 

[xfighter88]

School's 0 tolerance for self defense policy seems a bit like gun control policy to me. The bullies will keep messing with you since you are a good kid and don't want to get in trouble. So chances are you won't fight back for a good long while.

Anti-gun laws are the same. Make the good citizens feel guilty for having a gun and the know how to use it. As a result they will tend to not have one and the murderers and rapists will have no fear using their's on you.

Gun control is being able to hit your target. :biggun:

 

[chinto]

ok our local schools have the same stupid zero tolerance policy's! They are basically zero thought or responsibility policy's really. If i had a child in any of the schools and my child was arrested and transported to juvenile hall as a suspect in custidy, ( normaly how they deal with any fight for both parties involved. ) I would be provably making several citizens arrests of the officers and staff for violation of civil rights, abuse of authority and other major felonys.

In the United States of America, the Supreme Court has ruled that the police have NO DUTY TO PROTECT ANY ONE! they work for the DA to collect evedance and investigate any crime already commited. then they work for the DA to assist in the prosicution of said crimes.

Self Defense was stated in all 5 rulings in the last 100 years to be your problem!!!

that is the law of the land. This teaching children and latter when they become adults of people to be victoms is reprehensible.

 

[Balrog]

ok our local schools have the same stupid zero tolerance policy's! They are basically zero thought or responsibility policy's really. If i had a child in any of the schools and my child was arrested and transported to juvenile hall as a suspect in custidy, ( normaly how they deal with any fight for both parties involved. ) I would be provably making several citizens arrests of the officers and staff for violation of civil rights, abuse of authority and other major felonys.

I don't know about the citizen's arrests, but the only way to stop the zero tolerance idiocy is to make it incredibly painful for the school administrators and the school board.

I tell my junior students to defend themselves. If they get in trouble for it, I go with the parents to the school. I tell the parents, in the presence of the principal, to accept nothing less than a clean slate for their kid. If the principal insists on suspension, I tell the parents to contact the District Attorney's office and file criminal charges against the principal as an accomplice to the assault on their child, and for criminal dereliction of duty by a public official. I also tell them to have their lawyer sue the principal for civil damages as well as suing the school board severally and jointly.

So far, I have had three principals who have "investigated further" and amazingly found that my student was not fighting, but was the victim of an assault. Even though in all three cases, the kids who started the fights wound up with bloody noses, sore stomachs and in one case, a sprained shoulder.

Do not go along with zero tolerance. Fight it at every possible opportunity.