Criminalise Bullying

steddyeddy

Sertus wrote: »

One of the reasons Bullies bully, is because they can always get away with it.

Beating seven shades out of them is not even a solution anymore, as you'll then be charged with assault and then taken to the civil court by bully to claim compensation money.

Bullies have free reign in Ireland, especially in schools and workplaces. Most bystanders in Ireland are cowardly and turn a blind eye to them, and pretend its not bullying in order to make sure they are not targeted as well.

To be honest I think the reason that bullies get away with it is that people dont knock lumps out of them anymore. Teachers are powerless to do anything anymore. Young kid's lives have been ended over this. Action needs to be taken imediatly if someone is being bullied and I really dont have a problem with people being beaten to a pulp if it saves a life.

Wanderer2010

steddyeddy wrote: »

To be honest I think the reason that bullies get away with it is that people dont knock lumps out of them anymore. Teachers are powerless to do anything anymore. Young kid's lives have been ended over this. Action needs to be taken imediatly if someone is being bullied and I really dont have a problem with people being beaten to a pulp if it saves a life.

100% agree, we are far too soft on kids who bully these days, the teachers cant do a thing and the stupid mothers are precious and have their "poor Bill" under some stupid made-up condition like Attention Defecit Disorder (didnt exist until recent times when people had an excuse for everything, it was just called being a pr!ck in my day), so the cycle continues. I know adult bullying is more complex but for kids a few slaps to the head and a few digs would sort most of the scum out.

UCDVet

gozunda wrote: »

You deny that bullying actually happens then?

No, I'm not denying that bullying actually happens.

But I am skeptical of the extent to which it exists. Bullying has been getting a lot of media attention lately, but I haven't seen any measures that would suggest it's actually increasing (I found a report from the djei that claims it's increasing, but doesn't explain how it determined that, but it was written back in 05); in fact if you look at teen suicide rates, it would seem it's actually declining.

I'm also skeptical that additional laws would help. If you look at something like Brodie's Law in Australia (http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/home/crime/brodies+law/)

Why Do We Need Brodie's Law
The introduction of Brodie’s Law means that the criminal justice system is now able to appropriately respond to the most serious examples of bullying in our community.

But there were already laws that the perpetrates of her 'bullying' violated. It wasn't that it's legal to spit on someone, hold them down, and pour oil on them in Australia. I don't think the problem was a lack of legislation against that behavior.

And I'm very much against vague laws, as a mater of principal. A law that says what I can or can't do, that's fair enough. But a law that says I can't do something if it makes someone else feel a certain way? That's pretty hard for me to support the potential for abuse is huge.

Look at this website: http://www.lawstuff.org.au/act_law/topics/bullying/workplace-bullying

Workplace bullying can also include behaviour that is hurtful but is less obvious. For example:

Deliberately excluding you from normal workplace activities.
Setting timelines that are very difficult to achieve, or constantly changing deadlines.
Refusing to let you take leave even though you are entitled to it.

Seriously? People think this is a good idea?

leggo

The problem is that people's current suggestions to deal with bullying is to...bully the bully.

Recent quotes from here:

I know adult bullying is more complex but for kids a few slaps to the head and a few digs would sort most of the scum out.

I really dont have a problem with people being beaten to a pulp if it saves a life.

Really? Beating children to a pulp? Giving them the power to beat each other up?

When you consider that most bullying comes from people who were bullied to begin with, is that not exactly what's happening already?!? And people really think it's a viable solution?! The mind boggles...

Fantastic research from UCDVet which shows that additional legislation for bullying is a real non-goer. And yet anyone crying out for legislation can't seem to come up with any alternative research that suggests it would be a good idea.

expectationlost

even the uk police have had to rewrite their rules on social media abuse to lessen the chance they'll get involved because its taking up too much of their time

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

I assure you that I know what bullying is. Like I said, schools bring me in to help teach their students what it is and how we can stop it. I didn't just Wikipedia a definition and go on boards for a rant where I postured as if I was going to enact an unworkable campaign.

From your previous examples you made it quite clear that you did not know how bullying is defined. Fyi I did not just "wikipedia" a definition. The definition I gave is the Health and Safety Authorities own definition that is used in their employment guidelines. I am very surprised you are not aware of this. It is you opinion that this is unworkable - many other including the Minister of Justice believe otherwise

leggo wrote: »

Please don't deliberately take my words out of context again. To do so is just to be stubborn and detract from when you don't like your argument being questioned; so you put a different, malicious context on my words. The next time you do it, it'll be reported. I never said that bullying victims had poor social skills. Never. And shame on you for implying that I did, what a horrible thing to do.

Regarding words out of context claim by yourself - this is from your previous post

leggo wrote: »

How do you prove that someone is being excluded deliberately, and doesn't just have poor social skills in ingratiating themselves with others?

That is exactly what you said in response to those that are bullied and making a finding of bullying behavior. I took the meaning of this from the context of what was being discussed. You can threaten to report all you like but to me this interpretation was quite clear and the statement quite abhorrent imo.

leggo wrote: »

My question that you could not answer was how do you prove when someone is deliberately being excluded from a group? You can't, and for a bullying victim to take it through the courts could worsen their experience by having horrible things questioned about them (such as whether it was all in their head etc). It would likely be a traumatic experience for someone who has already been through that ordeal.

Yes this is possible to prove - bullying is where such behavior is deliberate, repeated and inappropriate - blaming a persons differences if any as the reason for encouraging or facilitating bullying behavior is looking at the wrong end of the microscope and attempts to excuse such bullying behavior.

It is not the person who is bullied behavior that is in question here -it is the bully. Do you honestly believe in that seeking redress what victims have already gone through would be worse than be provided with an opportunity to seek justice? Individuals can still make that decision - that is their right.

Giving evidence and cross examination happens every day in all the different courts across the country - I fail to see how you would deny victims of bullying such justice on the basis that they will have to give evidence. Yes this may be upsetting but individuals do it - they do it to seek redress and justice for themselves and others

leggo wrote: »

You're not thinking of these multiple scenarios because, unfortunately, it's you who doesn't see them coming because of your lack of understanding of what you're saying. And now you're just being stubborn and unable to admit that it's a bad idea.

You appear to be a great promoter of recurrent jibes regarding "lack of understanding" Are you claiming that because you were a bully - you somehow have the sole and unique insight into how a longterm victim of bullying actually feels? I have experience in this area and I believe passionately what I am saying And I do not agree with your Bully Centric approach whatsoever.

leggo wrote: »

The reason I'm bully-centric on the issue is the same reason the media is Adam Lanza-centric on the Newtown traged.

Glad you cleared that up anyway

leggo wrote: »

You see you spend paragraph after paragraph going on about how bullying makes people feel. The thing is, while it's relevant, we all know how it makes people feel. I know how it does...I was bullied. But that's like trying to drum up discussion about how do we stop mass murders in the US and talking about how murder makes people feel instead of gun control laws: we know murder devastates families. It goes without saying. It doesn't actually help anyone to talk about how the families and friends feel after a murder. It's like writing at length about how someone gets wet when they walk in rain: we get it.

You have ignored the victims of bullying feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness in the current situation and yet you yourself go on at length how the bully may feel aggrieved. That is clearly a case of being blind to the damage that bullying behavior can do and is continuing to doso in the face of no legal redress to stop such behavior.

leggo wrote: »

Whereas if you actually look into the head of the people that are behind these various tragedies, you may actually figure out a way to stop it happening again. See also: bullies.

Again - bullying like physical assault is always going to be with us - what we urgently need is a way for victims of this behavior to know that they can seek a means to stop such behavior and that those that do bully will face censure for their actions.

leggo wrote: »

Do you have children? Because these laws wouldn't make them 1% safer from bullies. They wouldn't make them 0.01% safer.

Hmm statistics - where did you pull that particlular one from? Bullying behaviour is endemic in this country both in schools, places of employment and elsewhere. It needs to be regarded with the same seriousness as actual assault - only then will there be something that can be done about this form of abuse that destroys lives both children and adults.

leggo wrote: »

Why? Because if you understood the nature of bullying, you'd understand that nobody behind it considers their actions as bullying when they're carrying them out. It's only afterwards when they're framed in a certain context that a bully may see it as the rest of the world does (and even then, they may still be in denial).

more of the deep understanding of the bully ( and I do acknowledge you claim you have been bullied too - but one does not excuse the other in my opinion) Those that bully deliberately, persistently and inappropriately are fully aware of their actions. The parent that beats their child may claim they were not fully aware of their actions or may even may be in denial - it does not mean they should not be held criminally responsible

leggo wrote: »

So what CAN we do? We can get to the bullies and stop it happening to begin with, instead of going your way and LETTING it happen, then just putting more people in over-crowded prisons (which, again, just won't happen).

As I said previously education may have its place here - however where bullying has been determined then the victim needs to know that there is such behavior will be stopped and the persecutor brought to justice.

leggo wrote: »

So for all of your posturing about how you want to help bully victims, continue along this path and you still won't have done so. You'll have just wasted your time. Bullying victims will go through the same pain, the laws will be ineffective because the nuances of them (which would need to be proven undeniably) cannot be proved in court, and everything will continue as beforehand.

I again will leave the snide remarks aside. Would you deny justice to those that are physically attacked or hurt? Their are no 'nuances' in bullying or its determination. The opportunity is out there for fair and equitable laws to be passed that will offer victims of bullying recourse to justice. Btw most judgments are not based on being "proven undeniably" but on the balance of probability.

leggo wrote: »

Now, if you do choose to reply, please ensure that you reply to the points ACTUALLY made and don't put some horrible, malicious words in my mouth again. That's a disgusting thing to do, given the gravity of the subject and the fact that I, like you, just want to help. Thank you.

I have shown how I interpreted your comments in context of what was being discused. I note that this is an area that you are being employed in and I will suggest that as an ex bully your interpretation and opinions of bullying are blindly skewed towards looking after those that bully.

I personally hope that the victims of bullying will have a sea change in this matter in the form of clear and expert legislation that makes proven bullying behaviour an offence against the person

I really dont believe disgusing this matter or the posting of jibes will help any further understanding with you is going to help tb. What I do see however is that the victims of bullying still have a long way to go before a real understanding of this issue will emerge.

steddyeddy

leggo wrote: »

Thbe problem is that people's current suggestions to deal with bullying is to...bully the bully.

Recent quotes from here:





Really? Beating children to a pulp? Giving them the power to beat each other up?

When you consider that most bullying comes from people who were bullied to begin with, is that not exactly what's happening already?!? And people really think it's a viable solution?! The mind boggles...

Fantastic research from UCDVet which shows that additional legislation for bullying is a real non-goer. And yet anyone crying out for legislation can't seem to come up with any alternative research that suggests it would be a good idea.

In my experience bullying stopped when I fought back. A beaten up bully is better than a dead bullying victim.in my view.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

To be honest I think the reason that bullies get away with it is that people dont knock lumps out of them anymore. Teachers are powerless to do anything anymore. Young kid's lives have been ended over this. Action needs to be taken imediatly if someone is being bullied and I really dont have a problem with people being beaten to a pulp if it saves a life.

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

100% agree, we are far too soft on kids who bully these days, the teachers cant do a thing and the stupid mothers are precious and have their "poor Bill" under some stupid made-up condition like Attention Defecit Disorder (didnt exist until recent times when people had an excuse for everything, it was just called being a pr!ck in my day), so the cycle continues. I know adult bullying is more complex but for kids a few slaps to the head and a few digs would sort most of the scum out.

:rolleyes:

You both talk about Bullying as if its this new phenomenon. Its been around probably since time began and if anything victims probably received no sympathy during that era from even their own parents if truth be told. If people took your outdated simplistic view then bullying would be far worse today, certainly not better. The era you describe is when a teacher or a priest could beat the sh*t out of a child and not be answerable to no one. You want that to return? You dont think thats bullying?

In order to combat bullying there needs to be consistent monitoring but the facts is the amount of fights that used take place on my old secondary school grounds that teachers were unaware of is just one alarming example of what goes on without people knowing or even being bothered enough to prevent long before it happens

steddyeddy

tipp_Gunner wrote: »

:rolleyes:

You both talk about Bullying as if its this new phenomenon. Its been around probably since time began and if anything victims probably received no sympathy during that era from even their own parents if truth be told. If people took your outdated simplistic view then bullying would be far worse today, certainly not better. The era you describe is when a teacher or a priest could beat the sh*t out of a child and not be answerable to no one. You want that to return? You dont think thats bullying?

In order to combat bullying there needs to be consistent monitoring but the facts is the amount of fights that used take place on my old secondary school grounds that teachers were unaware of is just one alarming example of what goes on without people knowing or even being bothered enough to prevent long before it happens

Im actually talking about the victim or victims friends or brother dealing with the bully if possible. I dont think an adult should beat a child.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

In my experience bullying stopped when I fought back. A beaten up bully is better than a dead bullying victim.in my view.

Bullying comes in many forms. Some bullies can psychologically manipulate the victim to make them feel like the wrong doer and its not just with adults. What if its a girl bullying a guy? You still think beat the sh*t out of her would solve the issue or perhaps the poor male victim should man up maybe thats more in line with your outdated view?

steddyeddy

tipp_Gunner wrote: »

Bullying comes in many forms. Some bullies can psychologically manipulate the victim to make them feel like the wrong doer and its not just with adults. What if its a girl bullying a guy? You still think beat the sh*t out of her would solve the issue or perhaps the poor male victim should man up maybe thats more in line with your outdated view?

I'm saying what worked for me.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Im actually talking about the victim or victims friends or brother dealing with the bully if possible. I dont think an adult should beat a child.

Still illogical tbh. What if the victim or his brother are powerless to stop it? Bullying takes place in so many forms that you cant put the answer to the problem down simply to 'giving a few digs back'.

When i say about Adults beating children what i can also mean was that this was the example set to children in times gone by that people can be coerced to do what you want them to by the use violence. If the adults send that message out then the children are bound to think it justifiable and perhaps they even go on to inflict it on their own children because they dont know any better. Then those children perhaps go on to inflict it in schoolyard. You see the cycle created?

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm saying what worked for me.

Fair enough in that scenario it worked but in the greater societal problem the battle is more psychological then physical.

I think in order to conquer bullying, as a society we need to get up of our arses and actually try and figure out what makes each person we deal with on a daily basis tick. We also need to be aware more importantly of what makes us tick on an individual level. That's the only and fairest way we can stop the rot in the future. Perhaps 'a good clip' might work but not in every scenario. The only way fully to know why one person bullies another is to get inside both their heads. Why is the bully being a bully and why is the victim feeling inclined to be a victim?

leggo

@gozunda:

Here you go again. You can't debate the argument at hand, so you invent an argument on my behalf and look to argue with that instead. I'm looking to deny bullying victims justice now, am I? You're erring on the side of libelous, at this stage.

There is no way to prove the distinction between, say, excluding someone and someone not ingratiating themselves into the group because...again...the nature of bullying is that these actions will be done so very subtly so they cannot be proven, unless you were to somehow read a bully's mind.

The REASON all of the effects that you quote are so powerful is because the bully is capable of making the bullied feel as if they are somehow responsible for their consequences. THIS is what devastates them. THIS is what depresses them. THIS is what causes suicides to happen.

The nuances in between are completely loose and open to interpretation. With physical assault, you punch someone and you've assaulted them. With bullying, you can do any number of actions to someone and have it affect them any number of ways, not all intentional (a bully often won't understand the effect their words have on someone else; they'll be too concerned with their own problems). I could say something to you, not intending to offend, and it wouldn't. But I could say the same thing to someone else and their life experience, tolerance and sensitivity could cause them great distress. If the bully didn't cause A, before saying B, are the effects completely down to the bully? How do you dish out that punishment? Do you punish neglectful parents who caused the child to be passive and short of self-esteem in the first place? Do you punish teachers for not having high enough powers of perception that they didn't realise when a student was left to sit on their own in class?

And if that distinction makes no sense to you, then you are simply not in a position to be commenting or lobbying for any proposals to solve the problem, since you don't have a deep enough understanding of the problems at hand. Your stubbornness and persistence only serves to stagnate any viable solution. That isn't intended as an insult, that's just fact; in the same sense that if you knew nothing about cars, you wouldn't be qualified to be a mechanic.

I am not looking to deny anyone justice. What I seek to do is stop bullying happening in the first instance and, when it does persist, educate bystanders and authorities about the nature of bullying that they can effectively do something about it.

Your plans would not work. They would not help anyone. And, if you do care about the problem moreso than your simply persisting with this debate, you will accept that and not distract anyone from getting behind a REALISTIC solution.

Sertus

steddyeddy wrote: »

To be honest I think the reason that bullies get away with it is that people dont knock lumps out of them anymore. Teachers are powerless to do anything anymore. Young kid's lives have been ended over this. Action needs to be taken imediatly if someone is being bullied and I really dont have a problem with people being beaten to a pulp if it saves a life.

steddyeddy wrote: »

In my experience bullying stopped when I fought back. A beaten up bully is better than a dead bullying victim.in my view.

Beating them into a pulp is only a possible solution if you get away with it, unfortunately, the shrewd ones (i.e. the one that are most dangerous) will take you to the civil court for doing so, and to the cleaners. Try beating a shrewd manipulating behind the scenes workplace bully to a pulp to teach them a lesson and see how that works out.

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

@gozunda:

Here you go again. You can't debate the argument at hand, so you invent an argument on my behalf and look to argue with that instead. I'm looking to deny bullying victims justice now, am I? You're erring on the side of libelous, at this stage.

No "here we do not go again"! I took what was said in context. I have given a current definition of bullying so that we can be clear what we are talking about.

There is no way to prove the distinction between, say, excluding someone and someone not ingratiating themselves into the group because...again...the nature of bullying is that these actions will be done so very subtly so they cannot be proven, unless you were to somehow read a bully's mind.

Like all offences - witnesses, evidence and testimony are all used to prove that an offence on the balance of probability has or has not been committed. There is no need to read a bullys mind - the courts will decide.

The REASON all of the effects that you quote are so powerful is because the bully is capable of making the bullied feel as if they are somehow responsible for their consequences. THIS is what devastates them. THIS is what depresses them. THIS is what causes suicides to happen.

No I completely disagree - and there are many case histories that will show this - those that are the victims of bullying bevahiour feel they have no other avenue of escape, they have no recourse to justice, they have no real means of stopping the bullying behaviour. That is where their helplessness and despair come from. That is why bullying must be made an offence against the person because that is exactly what it is

The nuances in between are completely loose and open to interpretation. With physical assault, you punch someone and you've assaulted them. With bullying, you can do any number of actions to someone and have it affect them any number of ways, not all intentional (a bully often won't understand the effect their words have on someone else; they'll be too concerned with their own problems). I could say something to you, not intending to offend, and it wouldn't. But I could say the same thing to someone else and their life experience, tolerance and sensitivity could cause them great distress. If the bully didn't cause A, before saying B, are the effects completely down to the bully? How do you dish out that punishment? Do you punish neglectful parents who caused the child to be passive and short of self-esteem in the first place? Do you punish teachers for not having high enough powers of perception that they didn't realise when a student was left to sit on their own in class?

Bullying behaviour has already been defined. It is that which is repeated, inapproproiate and deliberate. It is not 'nuances' as you refer to them. A once off saying something is not bullying as has been defined previously. If a person is stabbed in the street and they were on the street because they didn't have a place to live - are you going to claim that them being stabbed was because they didn't previously have a place to live? No - such precursers are specifically excluded in law - so they are immaterial to a person being the deliberate, repeated and inappropriate target of bullying. It is not up to us to determine the punishments - that will be up to the court, the severity of the crime and the impact on the victim. No one but the bully are responsible for their actions - seeking to deny that they do not know what they are doing is disingenuous at best.

And if that distinction makes no sense to you, then you are simply not in a position to be commenting or lobbying for any proposals to solve the problem, since you don't have a deep enough understanding of the problems at hand. Your stubbornness and persistence only serves to stagnate any viable solution. That isn't intended as an insult, that's just fact; in the same sense that if you knew nothing about cars, you wouldn't be qualified to be a mechanic.

There you go with that "Understanding" that is uniquely yours because you have been a bully. This somehow qualifies you to give the last word? That is not a valid argument no mater how you put it. Your self proclaimed expertise and denial of any other point of view is risible tbh.

I am not looking to deny anyone justice. What I seek to do is stop bullying happening in the first instance and, when it does persist, educate bystanders and authorities about the nature of bullying that they can effectively do something about it.

And what will happen to the victims of bullying whose lives are destroyed through deliberate, repeated and inappropriate bullying? Will we just let them out to dry and pretend they do not exist - well guess what that is what is happening at the moment. Education may have a roll to play - but it will not stop bullying happening.

Your plans would not work. They would not help anyone. And, if you do care about the problem moreso than your simply persisting with this debate, you will accept that and not distract anyone from getting behind a REALISTIC solution.

They are not just my ideas - this is under discussion at government level. I am obliged to take "your reality" and replace it one that will hopefully give the victims of bullying redress to prevent bullying from continuing and also to act as a deterent to those that choose to use it to destroy others lives

Scanlas The 2nd

Can someone define what bullying is?

gozunda

tipp_Gunner wrote: »

I think in order to conquer bullying, as a society we need to get up of our arses and actually try and figure out what makes each person we deal with on a daily basis tick. We also need to be aware more importantly of what makes us tick on an individual level. That's the only and fairest way we can stop the rot in the future. Perhaps 'a good clip' might work but not in every scenario. The only way fully to know why one person bullies another is to get inside both their heads. Why is the bully being a bully and why is the victim feeling inclined to be a victim?

Think about the following scenarios in this matter.

Why would a person physically injure another person in an unprovoked attack

Would that victim 'feel inclined' to be a victim of such a crime

Why would a person attempt to rape another

Would that victim attempt 'feel inclined to a victim' of such a crime

Why are the victims of bullying / psychlogical assault / abuse seen as being anymore responsible for the harm that is inflicted upon them than the victims of any other types of actual harm?

We need to make psychological abuse equatable to other similar offences against the person such as that of actual assault. Only then will bullies face the consequences of their actions

Scanlas The 2nd

gozunda wrote: »

Think about the following scenarios in this matter.

Why would a person physically another person in an unprovoked attack

Would that victim 'feel inclined' to be a victim of such a crime

Why would a person attempt to rape another

Would that victim attempt 'feel inclined to a victim' of such a crime

Why are the victims of bullying / psychlogical assault seen as being anymore responsible for the harm that is inflicted upon them than the victims of any other types of actual harm?

We need to make psychological abuse equatable to other similar offences against the person such as that of actual assault. Only then will bullies face the consequences of their actions

Define psychological abuse.

gozunda

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Define psychological abuse.

Pychological abuse is synonymous with the term bullying and is now considered to be a more definitive term to describe the behaviours exhibited by those that use 'bullying behaviour' towards others.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_abuse

If you don't like wiki as a source (it is the most concise one out there) - there are many more detailed academic papers on this available

leggo

So far, the only links you are providing is Wikipedia, though. Where are all these 'studies' you speak of? Where is your solid research and analysis as a basis for asserting that this is a good way of tackling the bullying problem? You can't provide anything that anyone here could with a 2-3 minute Google search...which leads me to believe that that's all the research you've put into it.

I don't believe I have a 'unique' understanding. Let me make this very clear: I believe that you Gozunda, specifically, don't understand the problem. Like I said, trying to assert yourself as an authority is like someone who doesn't drive trying to be a mechanic. It's laughable and you're embarrassing yourself with each Wiki source you cite.

There are thousands of people out there who do understand this problem. From schools to psychologists to those working in the government to those who've personally experienced it on both sides (not just read articles in the paper and heard second-hand stories).

The people that I deal and have dealt with throughout the course of my work on the matter agree: the punishment model we have is reaping no reward. Right now, schools generally suspend offenders. That doesn't stop them, even my own personal experience backs that up. Why do they struggle? Because it's nigh-on impossible to prove conclusively in many cases. Because they can't understand why this behaviour happens, because there's not the information out there. Not every case falls conveniently into the definition you've Googled, Gozunda. In fact, most don't. Hence, nuances. Bullying cases are each unique with regard to bully and bullied. It's not like assault in that you can prove it as soon as a scar is left. The scars here aren't visible.

So what everyone out there wants (including the bullying victims, especially the victims) is for it just to stop, or at least to have a chance to stop it. This way offers a chance at that. Yours offers more dead weight to a system that has already proved ineffective. And nothing on Wikipedia will tell you otherwise.

leggo

Sertus wrote: »

Beating them into a pulp is only a possible solution if you get away with it, unfortunately, the shrewd ones (i.e. the one that are most dangerous) will take you to the civil court for doing so, and to the cleaners. Try beating a shrewd manipulating behind the scenes workplace bully to a pulp to teach them a lesson and see how that works out.

This is happening, though. This is what bullying is!

The difference is that those bullied are made to feel so weak and vulnerable by their initial bully, that the victims tend to lash out on those they perceive as weaker than them. This gives them the sense of empowerment they were missing when picked on.

Your solution to bullying is only to continue the cycle of bullying. Well done.

Scanlas The 2nd

Like most things in life I believe bullying occurs because there is a reward to it. I think it makes bullies feel better to bully for a variety of possible reasons. One possible one is that it raises their social status amongst their peers to bully, another could be that they simply find it fun to annoy people.

Sertus

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Can someone define what bullying is?

From the The Health and Safety Authority Website

http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Topics/Bullying_at_Work/#WhatisBullying

"What is Bullying?

Bullying in the workplace has been described in various ways. The Health and Safety Authority’s definition is that it is:

"repeated inappropriate behaviour, direct or indirect, whether verbal, physical or otherwise, conducted by one or more persons against another or others, at the place of work and/or in the course of employment, which could reasonably be regarded as undermining the individual‘s right to dignity at work."

An isolated incident of the behaviour described in this definition may be an affront to dignity at work but as a once off incident is not considered to be bullying.

Detailed information is given in the Code of Practice for Employers and Employees on the Prevention and Resolution of Bullying at Work 2007"


Examples of behaviour that may constitute bullying are as follows:

Purposely undermining someone;
Targeting someone for special negative treatment;
Manipulation of an individual‘s reputation;
Social exclusion or isolation;
Intimidation;
Aggressive or obscene language;
Jokes that are obviously offensive to one individual by spoken word or email;
Intrusion by pestering, spying and stalking;
Unreasonable assignments to duties which are obviously unfavourable to one individual;
Repeated requests with impossible deadline or impossible tasks

Sertus

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Like most things in life I believe bullying occurs because there is a reward to it. I think it makes bullies feel better to bully for a variety of possible reasons. One possible one is that it raises their social status amongst their peers to bully, another could be that they simply find it fun to annoy people.

In the workplace, the purpose of bullying is to hide the incompetence of the bully.

Jealousy (of relationships and perceived exclusion therefrom) and envy (of talents, abilities, circumstances or possessions) are strong motivators of bullying.

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

So far, the only links you are providing is Wikipedia, though. Where are all these 'studies' you speak of? Where is your solid research and analysis as a basis for asserting that this is a good way of tackling the bullying problem? You can't provide anything that anyone here could with a 2-3 minute Google search...which leads me to believe that that's all the research you've put into it.

That link was for a poster in reply to a general query on what was psychological abuse - you got a problem with that?

I don't believe I have a 'unique' understanding. Let me make this very clear: I believe that you Gozunda, specifically, don't understand the problem. Like I said, trying to assert yourself as an authority is like someone who doesn't drive trying to be a mechanic. It's laughable and you're embarrassing yourself with each Wiki source you cite.

Yeah I get it - no one understand this problem except yourself and your unique insight because you were a bully. FYI there was one wiki ref to another poster - I referred you to the HSA whom you apparently had never heard off. You have used that rather daft mechanic analogy before - so you are saying you are the mechanic and no one else is - give it a break. Your opinions on bullying appear to be deeply flawed and insulting to those who have been victims of such abuse. At least try and understand that. Or do I detect more than just simple disagreement here.

There are thousands of people out there who do understand this problem. From schools to psychologists to those working in the government to those who've personally experienced it on both sides (not just read articles in the paper and heard second-hand stories).

thank you - I am we'll aware of such expertise in this area. Btw you have already given your cv and explained how you were a bully and were somehow wronged by this, are now employed to explain how you once bullied others. It does not make your opinions all encompassing. I have experience in this field, have talked with researchers and legal people and have direct experience With victims of bullying. But I have not been a self proclaimed bully so I presume you are therefore saying that I am not therefore qualified to make representations in these matters. This bizarre logic is so twisted - it is not even worth commenting on.

The people that I deal and have dealt with throughout the course of my work on the matter agree: the punishment model we have is reaping no reward. Right now, schools generally suspend offenders. That doesn't stop them, even my own personal experience backs that up. Why do they struggle? Because it's nigh-on impossible to prove conclusively in many cases. Because they can't understand why this behaviour happens, because there's not the information out there. Not every case falls conveniently into the definition you've Googled, Gozunda. In fact, most don't. Hence, nuances. Bullying cases are each unique with regard to bully and bullied. It's not like assault in that you can prove it as soon as a scar is left. The scars here aren't visible.

Btw I am interested in the victims of all types of bullying including in education, employment and other areas. There are you with your strange 'nuances' again. I have explained how these are immaterial to proving that psychological abuse has taken place. bullying is alrady provable in civil actions so the prodecures are already there. Ignore this if that is your wish. However If you are going to continue to go on and deny the victims of such abuse the right to justice then you clearly have no concern for those have been bullied. You also you show a lack of any real comprehension as to the nature if bullying with such reference to 'scars' - The scars of psychological abuse are all to obvious to those that work and live with the victims of such abuse. I realise you have no wish to listen to any other reasoning but your own - best of luck with that.

So what everyone out there wants (including the bullying victims, especially the victims) is for it just to stop, or at least to have a chance to stop it. This way offers a chance at that. Yours offers more dead weight to a system that has already proved ineffective. And nothing on Wikipedia will tell you otherwise.

It is the present system that has failed victims of psychological abuse. The advocated softly softly approach that ignores the damage done to those that are bullied. It is now time for this to stop

That's is why we need urgent legislation to prevent this behaviour and provide redress to those who have already been damaged by the lack of recognition this abuse has caused.

leggo

You seem to be getting increasingly agitated, to the point that you're suggesting that I'm somehow still a bully (HUH?!?).

The wheels have come off your argument with this paragraph anyway, where you say that the nuances of bullying are 'immaterial' and that the scars are 'obvious' to those around victims. I wonder if Erin Gallagher's parents would have said that the scars were obvious to them? Usually the only time those around bullying victims learn of it is when things are either too late or getting towards that stage.

gozunda wrote: »

There are you with your 'nuances' again. I have explained how these are immaterial to proving that psychological abuse has taken place. If you wish to continue to harp on - do and best of luck. But you show a lack of any comprehension as to the nature if bullying with such reference to scars. The scars of psychological abuse are all to obvious to those that work and live with the victims of such abuse

After this blip, I believe it's clear for all to see that you don't understand the subject well enough to be any kind of an authority on it. Not wanting to agitate you any further, as your personal attacks are increasing and this isn't the place for any petty attacks of that nature, I'll leave it there. I've made my point.

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

You seem to be getting increasingly agitated, to the point that you're suggesting that I'm somehow still a bully ..,
The wheels have come off your argument with this paragraph anyway, where you say that the nuances of bullying are 'immaterial' and that the scars are 'obvious' to those around victims. I wonder if Erin Gallagher's parents would have said that the scars were obvious to them? Usually the only time those around bullying victims learn of it is when things are either too late or getting towards that stage.
After this blip, I believe it's clear for all to see that you don't understand the subject well enough to be any kind of an authority on it. Not wanting to agitate you any further, as your personal attacks are increasing and this isn't the place for any petty attacks of that nature, I'll leave it there. I've made my point.

Again leaving your jibes and the snide comnents aside - how about just giving it a break. You evidently see bullying as a niusence at best. Imo You have shown little or no concern for the victims of bullying in your opinion but have decried at length about how bullies are badly treated. So yes I get what you are saying. I have avoided the trap of your snide attacks and dubious comments regarding mechanics, nuances and special 'understanding' because you have stated you were previoudly a bully. That's all lovely but it does not give you the authority to disregard all other possible direction.

At the end of the day what is important is that the legislation on these issues is already been looked at government level.

I would suggest that you leave your own experience as a bully aside and take some time to find out about some of the real experiences of those that have been suffered abuse at the hands of bullies and what they would like to change.

leggo

gozunda wrote: »

You evidently see bullying as a niusence at best. Imo You have shown little or no concern for the victims of bullying in your opinion but have decried at length about how bullies are badly treated.

Huh?! How does writing articles, doing interviews, helping with research and going to schools to do anti-bullying work all in my spare time suggest to you that I see all of this as a 'nuisance'?

It's insane how you would get everything you've just said from everything I've said. You don't seem to even understand my perspective, much less the subject on a broader scale. Had you read it, you would also understand that I am also a bullying victim, so also know exactly what goes through their minds. Again, not a subject that you can Wikipedia.

Let's leave it, yeah? You seem to be losing the plot a bit now.

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

This is happening, though. This is what bullying is!

The difference is that those bullied are made to feel so weak and vulnerable by their initial bully, that the victims tend to lash out on those they perceive as weaker than them. This gives them the sense of empowerment they were missing when picked on.

Just as the following victims lashed out ...


Phoebe Prince - January 2010

Kate Fitzgerald - Aug 2011

Erin Gallagher - October 2012
& her sister December 2012

Shane McEntee - Dec 2012

Such amateur psychology has no place here..

leggo

Please stop using people's suicides to try and score points in a message board discussion.

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

Huh?! ...

Let's leave it, yeah? You seem to be losing the plot a bit now.

As I said previously- Please desist with the snide observations - they do nothing tbh.

leggo wrote: »

Please stop using people's suicides to try and score points in a message board discussion.

What? You mean like this pervious post from you or is their one rule for you and a different one from every one else ?

leggo wrote: »

... I wonder if Erin Gallagher's parents would have said that the scars were obvious to them?

.

leggo

It's not snide. I'm telling you straight out: You are not qualified to give any kind of authoritative stance on this. That's not me saying I'm the only person who is qualified, or anything along those lines, before you twist that. It's that giving opinions then alluding to 'some studies' without actual proof stronger than Wikipedia doesn't help the problem. And I fear you persist down this unhelpful route out of stubbornness and an unwillingness to admit you're wrong.

I'll say it for a third time, let's leave it. You've made your point, I've made mine. Let's let other people make theirs.

monkeypants

syklops wrote: »

One of the messages the late TD got on his facebook went along the lines of "I'll murder you. You deserve to be murdered for your comments". Thats a death threat.

I thought that was already illegal. Not sure why we need another law for that.

If we make being nasty illegal, are we really going to let the courts decide the consequences? The same courts that jail a man for six years for garlic importation without VAT and give another guy four and a half months for sexual assault. I also doubt the state's ability to jail a woman except for the most heinous crime.

gozunda

leggo wrote: »

It's not snide. I'm telling you straight out: You are not qualified to give any kind of authoritative stance on this. That's not me saying I'm the only person who is qualified, or anything along those lines, before you twist that. It's that giving opinions then alluding to 'some studies' without actual proof stronger than Wikipedia doesn't help the problem. And I fear you persist down this unhelpful route out of stubbornness and an unwillingness to admit you're wrong.

I'll say it for a third time, let's leave it. You've made your point, I've made mine. Let's let other people make theirs.

You are telling me?
Yes your comments were snide imo.
So you are 'qualified' because you are an ex Bully?

You do keep going on about the link provided for another poster. What is your problem with another poster asking a valid question?. You also appear to be somewhat obsessed being "right' and anyone else outside your opinion spectrum is somehow 'wrong'. That alone shows the level of your own ' understanding'

But yes you are right about one thing at least any further dialogue is pointless -

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

Think about the following scenarios in this matter.

Why would a person physically injure another person in an unprovoked attack

Would that victim 'feel inclined' to be a victim of such a crime

Why would a person attempt to rape another

Would that victim attempt 'feel inclined to a victim' of such a crime

Why are the victims of bullying / psychlogical assault / abuse seen as being anymore responsible for the harm that is inflicted upon them than the victims of any other types of actual harm?

We need to make psychological abuse equatable to other similar offences against the person such as that of actual assault. Only then will bullies face the consequences of their actions

Yeah i get what you mean in fairness. The bully wants power and this could be because

1. They are vulnerable
2. They are insecure themselves
3. They get some sort of gratification preying on the other vulnerable and innocent

Fair enough we already know as much but we need to find out what is making them feel like that and discuss the issue and try to come to some sort of solution.

What I'm talking about is prevention instead of cure. Better monitoring in place and provide a platform to tackle the problems head on before they get out of hand.

gozunda

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah i get what you mean in fairness. The bully wants power and this could be because

1. They are vulnerable
2. They are insecure themselves
3. They get some sort of gratification preying on the other vulnerable and innocent

Fair enough we already know as much but we need to find out what is making them feel like that and discuss the issue and try to come to some sort of solution.

What I'm talking about is prevention instead of cure. Better monitoring in place and provide a platform to tackle the problems head on before they get out of hand.

I agree that where possible prevention is a good objective. Monitoring would be certainly a means to this.

Unfortunately human nature means that there will always those who choose to use Violence / abuse whether physical or otherwise towards others.

This then means dealing with bullying in a way that supports the victims of such abuse and at the same time will deal with the perpetrators.

I also believe that the current methodologies applied to bullying prevention unlike other offences against the person are not working in that there is presently no protection against the continuation of such behaviour or any redress for the victim.

gozunda

UCDVet wrote: »

No, I'm not denying that bullying actually happens.
But I am skeptical of the extent to which it exists. Bullying has been getting a lot of media attention lately, but I haven't seen any measures that would suggest it's actually increasing (I found a report from the djei that claims it's increasing, but doesn't explain how it determined that, but it was written back in 05); in fact if you look at teen suicide rates, it would seem it's actually declining.

I'm also skeptical that additional laws would help. If you look at something like Brodie's Law in Australia (http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/home/crime/brodies+law/)

Bullying does exist and in the main is largely unreported. - it is those that take their own lives that sadly make the headlines. What we are seeing are individuals now standing up and demanding that action be taken so that bullies should not get away with such abhorrent behaviour towards others. The issue is finally being discussed. This is for the good.

It is often unreported because it is bizarrely not seen as more than a niusence by many relevant sectors - this is to the benefit of those sectors in that it means they do not have to deal with the very real impact of bullying behaviour on victims lives. Some organisations believe that a softly softly approach will work and treat vicious bullies with kid gloves allowing to continue their behaviour largely without sanction or deterrent. There is also the percuniary angle involved in that no one wishes to actually take responsibility for the behaviour of such absusers on their watch.

But there were already laws that the perpetrates of her 'bullying' violated. It wasn't that it's legal to spit on someone, hold them down, and pour oil on them in Australia. I don't think the problem was a lack of legislation against that behavior.

The links you posted are very interesting - the first actually explains why the brodies law was necessary. The existing laws did not penalise the perpetrators of bullying behaviour that is psychological in nature. Where physical assault is illegal - I have never seen it suggested that a person who is attacked should not be able to bring a case against their attacker and seek redress. However the crime was not a single or isolated incident of spiting on someone etc but a sustained campaign of psychological abuse that resulted in this young woman taking her own life. Unfortunately in Ireland bullying behaviour does not fall under our current criminal law system and bullies act without any fear of prosecution.

And I'm very much against vague laws, as a mater of principal. A law that says what I can or can't do, that's fair enough. But a law that says I can't do something if it makes someone else feel a certain way? That's pretty hard for me to support the potential for abuse is huge.

Anti bullying laws will be as precise as they are enacted. There remains the burden of proof. Pyscholocal abuse is simply not just "making someone feels certain way" - it is the repeated, inappropriate and deliberate abuse of an individual that causes harm. Harm that can be attested through medical opinion. The only potential for abuse is that which we have at present - that allows those who abuse others deliberately get away without sanction.

Seriously? People think this is a good idea?

Yes I do think it is a good idea - seriously.

A number of decades ago it would have been unthinkable to prosecute members of religious organisations for the abuse they inflicted on children

We have now come to the same point with the psychological abuse of both adults and children that is going on unchecked and without sanction. It is time for this to Stop.

Brodies law is the state of Victoria finally taking note of this serious issue. It's about time we developed our own legislation to help the victims of bullying and to act as a deterrent to those that believe that this behaviour is unacceptable.

This is a poster from one of the links

http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/resources/32c40ac4-fd44-4f85-9c3c-c8e7cef12cda/brodieslawposter2.jpg

The sooner we legislate here - the better.

leggo

gozunda wrote: »

It is often unreported because it is bizarrely not seen as more than a niusence by many relevant sectors - this is to the benefit of those sectors in that it means they do not have to deal with the very real impact of bullying behaviour on victims lives. Some organisations believe that a softly softly approach will work and treat vicious bullies with kid gloves allowing to continue their behaviour largely without sanction or deterrent. There is also the percuniary angle involved in that no one wishes to actually take responsibility for the behaviour of such absusers on their watch.

I know I bowed out of this debate, but I genuinely thought gozunda would allow others to have an opinion too if I did so. The spreading of harmful misinformation under the guise of a people-pleasing narrative is annoying me though:

WHERE are your stats for ANY of your opinions gozunda?

I'm demanding you qualify yourself now with some relevant statistics that back up ANYTHING you're saying here?

I want you to back-up the following with FACT, not opinion or simply copying and pasting your list of 5 people who have committed suicide due to bullying (one of whom - that's 20% of your list - didn't live in Ireland so the law wouldn't apply to them). Listing their name without backing up how it would be helpful doesn't prove that these laws would've helped them. It's simply manipulating their deaths to suit your own agenda, which is callous in the extreme.

Please back-up with hard research and stats, immediately, or stop posting this unhelpful bile to suit your agenda. Remember, I want facts, not wishy-washy opinion trying to tug on people's heartstrings:

• That nobody wishes to take responsibility for bullying.
• That Brody's Law has been effective in tackling the problem.
• That there are a large amount of reported cases that don't currently fall within Irish laws, to justify switching current focus away from the problem.
• That the Irish law has the capacity to enact such laws effectively and that it wouldn't be a waste of time, i.e. that the law wouldn't always side with the accused on nuanced cases that are difficult to prove with the conclusiveness needed in criminal trials (this would account for the vast majority on non-physical cases, such is the well-documented, sneaky nature of bullying).
• And, finally, the big one: That a legislation/punishment model would be more pro-active in deterring bullying from happening to begin with than attempting to cut off the problem before it starts through a solid campaign of education.

I want psychological/academic case studies and verifiable statistics to back up your claims.

It's not easy, but that's why you can't change the world just sitting behind your keyboard. It takes work and, quite frankly, while you're entitled to an opinion your point blank refusal to let others have theirs, coupled with your inability to back up your claims, is now most unhelpful. It's offensive to people like myself who DO actually do positive work in the field and have to deal with the stress of unqualified people threatening to destroy any positive steps by coming up with 'solutions' that don't have any basis or actual understanding. They try and change the narrative because they deem themselves self-important enough to be able to solve the world's problems without any actual, hard work put in.

So I'm calling you out. Back up what you're saying or leave it be. If it's being discussed at government level, then what do you have to worry about anyway?

gozunda

Jeeez Lego - do you really have to make this Your personal war of attrition ?

I believe that I am allowed to reply to other posters - or you bizarrely attempting to use such tactics here? I was replying to another poster re Brodies law- what is your problem?

How about you actually take part in the debate? And not just insist you are 'right'

I apologise if I exhibited any sympathy for those that took their own lives - here or abroad (I did not discriminate) as a mark of respect to the lives lost to the scourge of bullying

You keep ranting on about me providing statistics - what are you on about? I don't see you providing any 'statistics' to back up anything you have said. How about you actually provide some psychological/academic case studies and verifiable statistics to back up your claims? Instead of maintaining everyone else is wrong and has no 'understanding'

You have clearly demonstrated and agreed you have a bully centric approach to your personal beliefs. I dont agree with that stance but Thats your belief so but do not use this to attempt to discredit others and to cast dispersions on the link between psychological abuse and suicide.

Tbh I find your ravings of your special 'understanding' as a self declared ex bully to be grossly offensive on the issue of bullying and the victims whose lives it destroys.

Yes as I said to you previously education has its place . but I believe that legislation will be enacted on this issue - and that is a good thing. Not to do so fundementally denies victims of bullying the right of redress and legal protection.

leggo

So you don't have stats to back up your claims, is what you're saying?

Sertus

Looks like this thread has been successfully trolled to death.

gozunda

Sertus wrote: »

Looks like this thread has been successfully trolled to death.

Ironic considering the issue under discussion...


To recap the current situation:

Under Irish Law bullying as a form of assault on the person remains largely outside prosecution.

Those that are bullied and suffer harm from the activities of bullies - online or actual remain powerless to stop or initiate legal action against the perpetrator(s) for the harm that has been inflicted upon them.

The end result is that many who are bullied feel they have no recourse to reporting and stopping such bullying and a proportion of these sadly go on to take their own lives.

In the wake of a number of recent high-profile teen suicides linked to online abuse, the Minister for Justice Alan Shatter said laws existed to punish those behind such harassment.
Mr Shatter has admitted that there were some problems in bringing successful prosecutions against bullies under present legislation, the Non-fatal Offences against the Person Act.
The difficulties involved proving that the harassment was persistent. Mr Shatter has asked the Law Reform Commission to look at the difficulties and make suggestions for improving the use of the current laws.

Source:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fallout-from-budget-and-cyber-abuse-troubled-late-minister-3334469.html

Bullying as defined by repeated, deliberate and inappropriate behaviour that has caused actual attested harm whether physical or psychological.

Bullying is not defined by any singular incident or behaviour and under current guidelines and must form a pattern of such behaviour

Like all offences the burden of proof will remain with the prosecution in any case brought to trial.

Whilst education may provide some suggested behaviour modification it remains that psychological assault like physical assault remains a significant threat to the lives and health of both adults and children.

A number of countries have already legislated and enacted anti bullying legislation that carry possible criminal convictions including
parts of the US and Australia.

There would appear to an element against the enactment of such legislation however it has been observed that such legislation will only seek to vindicate the rights of those who can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that they have suffered bullying / psychological assault. This legislation would also act as an deterrent against those who choose to use such behaviour against others.

Those that do not engage in bullying will not be in any way affected by such legislation in that psychological assault like physical assault would require the determination of the severity of the offence. Hence for example as the touching an individual on the arm is generally not considered physical assault - neither would a casual or once off gesture or conversation be considered bullying.

What remains is to provide for the right of individuals for redress against serious and harmful bullying behaviour. The tragic number of recent suicides that have occurred following a number of high profile cases has unfortunately highlighted the urgent need for individuals to be able to report and have such bullying stopped.
Under the current status quo this remains impossible to enforce.

ITS_A_BADGER

I really do hope they sort this out, but i dont think our goverment ministers understand social media and the internet and see it as a young persons gig. Therefore not giving a fcuk about what they do to solve the problem and sign some sort of law censoring the internet,opinions on the internet or monitoring internet users or something like that. that being said i do indeed hope they can make some decent solution to sort out bullying

leggo

You're saying the exact same thing as before, though. All you've added is the link to Alan Shatter saying he's discussing the possibility of legislation.

gozunda, for the record I don't have a personal problem with you or what you're trying to do. I'm sorry if it comes across that way, but this is a subject close to my heart so to see it mishandled or misunderstood like this by anyone naturally makes my blood boil.

The reality is, though, we get your side of the story. Everyone who has read the thread gets mine as well. But this is how debating works: if you make contentious points and state them as fact, eventually you will get asked to back them up. You're not doing so with any kind of hard, reputable and verifiable information. So until such a time as you do so, all you're stating is your opinion. You're entitled to it, of course, but you've stated it so much (as have I) that it doesn't need to be stated anymore unless you've anything significant to add.

I don't wish to deny anyone justice, as I've said already, just offer a solution that is helpful to potential bullying victims in the future. And to do so while it is a hot topic and the government may be forced to act (because you don't know when they will revisit the matter; so if they get it wrong - and this way IS the wrong way - we could be waiting a while to sing the same song and dance despite the info already being there. I don't want any more people to have to take unthinkable measures in the meantime because the government made a balls of another decision. The nature of bullying and denial that a bully goes through during it means the laws won't act as a deterrent for them and, thus, victims aren't protected. Both teens and adults could still turn to suicide in spite of these proposed laws. It's very simple).

Over the next while, I'll be working not to fight legislation specifically, but to make sure there's a proper understanding of how to treat the bullying issue effectively. I hope people recognise this and can get behind a solution that may not sound conventional, and IS radical, but simply hardening conventional solutions hasn't been and isn't working. Experts in the field that I've worked with (and who've worked in the field for much longer than I) recognise that this way is different but very possible.

Anyway, hopefully we can put this to bed. No hard feelings. Like I said, we both want the same things, just believe in different measures of achieving it.

gozunda

As stated It is a Recap. The link to Alan Shatter was posted in my very first post

This is an issue I feel passionate about - hence why I started the thread. I believe that no-one who contributes to the discussion in a positive manner no matter what their opinion in my view can be accused of either mishandling or misunderstanding anything.

As I said this issue is currently under discussion at government level - I am hopeful that this will further this issue and bring forward legislation similar to that enacted in other countries.

Edit: due to the sensitive nature of this subject and in respect of those who have been subjected to the horrific effects of bullying both past and present I would like to suggest that blatant attempts to disrail or continually disrupt the topic under discussion are not in any way useful. The forum is a big place...

leggo

Well this thread won't. I don't think the government has much time for boards somehow :pac:. But it's interesting for drumming up public discussion anyway.

franktheplank

Our libel laws should protect us from many forms of bullying.

The problem is it's hugely expensive to take a case and for those without vast reserves of money to pay for lawyers it's impossible as it's not covered by free legal aid.

In fact because a libel case is so expensive our system facilitates wealthy people bullying the poor.

gozunda

franktheplank wrote: »

Our libel laws should protect us from many forms of bullying.

The problem is it's hugely expensive to take a case and for those without vast reserves of money to pay for lawyers it's impossible as it's not covered by free legal aid.

In fact because a libel case is so expensive our system facilitates wealthy people bullying the poor.

I agree in a way

There are some laws but none that actually deal with bullying as a form of assault and an offence against the person.

Libel laws are quite specific and would not include most forms of bullying / psychological assault.

You are right about the current system being prohibitively expensive for the victims of bullying behaviour