School fights

[masterintraining]

there was this almost fight situation at my school today between these to kids. now i am not going to get into the story becasue it is not realivent to my topic. but i have gotten in a good amoutn of school fights ( all in middle school and elimentary so far none in HS but im only a sophmore)

and i was always wondering why in streetfight scenario if there is no police around, or help to get then u ar entitled to defend urself. but in school if there is no teacher around to helpu in that situation then even if defend urself u both get in trouble. What do they expect u to do, just sit there & take it, then wobble ur battered & bruised body down to a teacher and tell ,them. how do they know that u are not going to be in such bad physical shape after that, that ur going to be able to do that, or not be missing ur teeth, punctured lung, broken bones etc. kids today are much more violent then they used to be and will try and jump people, going to tell a teacher like u could in pre-school if "lil jonny hit ur arm"is not always an option, can anybody who has the same feelings as i do please respond, especially any teachers here who have expierence with this, or know what i am talking about.

[Zapatista]

The main reason that I can see that you're allowed to defend yourself in the streets and not in school is the fact that in the streets there is a chance of death if you don't fight back. In school there isn't that chance (or at least shouldn't be) and most fights don't last as long as a street fight because in school there should be authority figures all around that will break up a fight because (at least where I went to high school) people gather around the fight and chant "Fight", so teachers (or other school employees) can find and break up the fight. If you're in the streets and you get into a fight in an alley, there isn't always somebody that's going to see you so you have to fight for your life.

[Master Raiden]

While it's true that there is a significantly reduced chance of death in school, that is no guarentee of anything. Besides, if they don't kill you they can still break your legs, which could impede your ability to walk indefinately. If someone hits you, from a legal perspective you're perfectly within your rights to hit them back. That doesn't mean that the school won't take action. But all the school can do legally is with-hold services or order a detention. If you win, you could be held responsible for medical bills. But if they swing first, they would likely not be granted. Bottom line, being sued $2,000 dollars for his medical fines is much better than having $2000 in your own medical bills.

I go by the policy "If they swing first, I get the last swing." So far I've never had to enforce "the policy".

[Empty_Hand]

With all do respect, if you think schools are not as dangerous as the so called "streets" you might want to think again. One only needs to scan news headlines or have a son/daughter in school to realize that. Many of today's "schools" are as much if not more of a killing field than a dangerous dark alley in the "street".

The fact is in a dangerous situation, one can really only count on his/herself. If one expects the calvary to come rushing in to save them they may end up not only disappointed but injured or even dead.

[ps1]

Master Raiden makes good points. It's important to seperate legal issues (which you face on the street) from the private issues (which is what a school's rules are). The two things are perfectly seperate. As Raiden also said, defending yourself from personal harm using an appropriate amount of force is allowed in nearly every state.

Schools, however, are charged with a very important and unmatched duty. That is, they are to keep an environment that is safe and appropriate for learning. If only the person who swung first got in trouble, there would be more fights. Here's the usual scenario:

Person A says something dirogatory to person B.

Person B has a few choices: 1) He can retort with a comment of his own that may cause person A to start a fight. OR 2) He can ignore it and pocket his pride.

Let's assume the rules are as you want them to be. Then Person B has no reason to fear encouraging the situation because he won't get in trouble if Person A hits him.

As the rules are now, Person B may be more likely to just walk away because he gets in trouble too if a fight occurs.

Fights in school are always distracting. By the end of the day everyone knows what happened and usually has picked a side as to who was right and who was wrong. That is not condusive to a good learning environment.

I remember that when I was in school I didn't like the rule either. But it really is for the best and keeps violence in school rates lower.

[Rick_72]

I'll tell you the same thing I've told my 10 year old son. If your put into a situation, that you cannot talk you way out of, and you have to fight, you fight to win. Plain and simple. I'd much rather my son come home on a trumped up school suspension (trumped up because if he was defending himself, its not fair that he should be suspended), then come home beat up with possible life changing injuries.

Do you continue pounding someone after you've won the fight? No, of course not, but that doesn't mean that you don't incapacitate someone that started a physical altrication with you.

Any parent that doesn't allow their children to defend themself when there's no other course of action is a moron in my opinion. What's the point of sending my children to martial arts class's if they can't use them in their defense?

[Rick_72]

Schools, however, are charged with a very important and unmatched duty. That is, they are to keep an environment that is safe and appropriate for learning. If only the person who swung first got in trouble, there would be more fights. Here's the usual scenario:

Person A says something dirogatory to person B.

Person B has a few choices: 1) He can retort with a comment of his own that may cause person A to start a fight. OR 2) He can ignore it and pocket his pride.

Let's assume the rules are as you want them to be. Then Person B has no reason to fear encouraging the situation because he won't get in trouble if Person A hits him.

As the rules are now, Person B may be more likely to just walk away because he gets in trouble too if a fight occurs.

Fights in school are always distracting. By the end of the day everyone knows what happened and usually has picked a side as to who was right and who was wrong. That is not condusive to a good learning environment.

I remember that when I was in school I didn't like the rule either. But it really is for the best and keeps violence in school rates lower.

That's a cop out. Pride means nothing when it comes to injuring someone. I'm a very proud person, but I'd much rather swallow my pride and walk away knowing that I could roll someone up if I wanted to, than to beat someone down that was just egging me on.

[bushido_man96]

ps1 makes some very good points. In school, getting into fights is going to get both parties reprimanded. In my opinion, that is ok. It keeps the balance. Also, if one has a history of bulliness, then the school administrators will know that, and act accordingly. If my child can explain what happened and why, and then I can determine if they were at fault or not, I will punish accordingly. If the school still punishes, then fine; I can't argue their policies. However, if I feel my child was in the right, I will let the school know, and I will let my child know how I feel.

Personally, looking back now, I would not worry about getting into trouble or not; I would worry about not getting beat up.

[cathal]

I belive the rule came about due to one school being sued by parents. I can't find the newspaper article but esentially the person who started the fight managed to convince the school that he didn't. So the kid that was beat up was suspended rather than the kid who started the fight.

The parents sued the school because they didn't investigate well enough and there you go, a legal precedent was set that parents can sue if the school suspends the wrong student. To save their money they suspend both students.

[shotokanbeginner]

I think ps1, while having some good points in his speech, had some flaws as well, that isn't always the case these days, or at least not in my school. No one has to say anything but can still be a target of someone's violence.