No thats not cowardly but I wouldnt say you were bullied. What you said sounds way worse than being bullied or we simply dont share the same dfinition of bulling.

Fair enough.

As I said a few posts back, that doesn't preclude it from being bullying: it may be severe bullying, but it's still bullying. That's the thing, though: bullying can have severe consequences and often does. And actually it doesn't always need to be so overt in order to have catastrophic consequences, which is part of why it should be taken seriously.

Like I said, I dont see taht as bullying. I see that as something much worse. But we all have different views.

Well when I was in school if I got bullied, I took the violent way out. I fought the bullies so they would stop doing what they were doing. I'm not trying to sound tough either, I am being completely honest. I never lost against the bullies (mainly because I took karate and boxing classes growing up). In the result of violence, I gained respect and people learned not to mess with me.

I wouldn't ever consider myself to be the bully either, because the only time that I used violence was if someone was messing with me. I know violence is the worst way to take care of it, but I am glad to say it helped.

Stricter how? You ask me, a kid defending himself a bully should be viewed purely as an act of self defense, and thus, should be spared from a school coming down on them.

The laws does fail the victim and it takes time for people to take their laws into their own hands. Because sometimes the law won't do it. In my experience, it proved to be true. What peeves me the most is that you are only allowed to use a gun if you are being robbed.

What kind of a person is going to pull out a gun while they have a pistol pointed to their head? There is no way for self defense unless you are considering suicide by having the criminal shoot you. I always thought that if I was robbed, I would give all my money and wait until the person turns around and leaves. Then put a bullet in their back. Easier said than done, right? But it can be done. I've seen it.

Sad thing is, it count's as manslaughter because the criminal is no longer a threat. I may sound like an egotistical [censored] here, but if my life was being threatened and put under the authority of a low-life, I have the right to rectify and balance the scale by taking the enemy out and establishing a sense of order. It's through revenge, but nevertheless it would be the right thing to do. At least in my point of view.

So very well said.

Abuse encompasses both physical and mental aspects. And bullying is absolutely a form of abuse - sometimes mentally, physically, or both. Also, the gangs you used as an example put themselves in the line of fire. No one else made that decision for them, they know what being in a gang can mean and they accepted that. Someone who is bullied or jumped by a group of people doesn't make that decision, it's made for them. They did nothing to put themselves in that situation other then being alive and that's why they are victims. I don't consider gangs and those who are harmed for being associated with them as victims.

I meant stricter laws against the kids doing the bullying - not the victim. I also wasn't talking about in school, I meant laws where a child (or the child's family) who feels they are in danger or facing torment from another has the ability to take legal action against the offender. And I want that crap to be taken dead serious. No more "oh it's just a natural part of growing up, every kid deals with it! It's just kids being kids" garbage. There needs to be real protection for these kids. But I'd also like to see true ZERO tolerance for these offenses in schools too. They're stricter then they were when I was there, but there is still too much backing down because the parents of the lowlifes come in and rant and rave to the principle and those same kids are allowed back in just to appease their parents. The schools are more concerned with keeping up appearances then they are about the kids that attend there.

That sounds familiar. I understand that some of the more persistent bullies at my school way back when had parents or friends of the family on the local board of governors. In spite of it being a fairly strict school (especially by modern standards) it was weird to see the teachers almost fearful of these upstarts; they weren't the stereotypical thugs but girls from very middle-class families, and not only got away with intimidating other kids for years on end but even got to make demands such as the teachers re-marking exams to favour them, which was bizarre.

Needless to say, they were less successful in the real world, but in the confines of school, having the right connections (and I guess especially connections who had no integrity) gave them an inappropriate amount of influence.

Post limit.

The moderators are able to set posts invisible but we still see the total number of posts in the thread whilst members only see the total of visible posts. It seems that this has happened in this topic which is why it was closed with (for me) 203 posts. I am not going to reopen this now as it will just add to the confusion.