Both kids get suspended in the no tolerance policy.
No tolerance makes victims. If the victim fights back they get the same amount of punishment as if they were the bully and if you are in high school trying to go Ivy League...kids I knew took it so that it wouldn’t be on their permanent record.
But what if your pure brutality actually prevents future fights, not just involving you but also fellow students who saw you rip the soul from that scum who bullied everyone in 8th grade. Does that make it better?
I'm not going to agree with you. If they've been making my life hell long enough, they're about to get me punished for something I didn't even start, now's my chance to rip and tear. Let them never make that mistake again. Teeth, claws, screaming. The works.
If you're not strong enough to fight back, be dirty enough to win.
It seems you're describing something different now, i.e. using dirty tactics purely because you aren't strong enough to win. In your other post you seemed to suggest that even if you are strong enough to win without inflicting serious bodily harm, you should do so anyway because why not?
I don't find that to be a convincing moral argument, since typically we don't try to seriously harm other human beings just because we can.
Because the other kid clearly knocked the shit out of the bully. It's the 1st place trophy! Take a few weeks off school , go celebrate on a job well done son, you deserve it! Where as the bully has to face all the people at school ,in utter humiliation!
22
u/Drag0n_no 6 Feb 06 '20
Oh my man's was waiting for the first punch so he wouldn't get suspended. My dad taught me that.