Posted on 10/18/2006 11:55:28 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
The recent spate of horrifying and highly publicized attacks in schools has once again brought attention to a longstanding problem. Unfortunately none of the “solutions” being suggested touch on one of the real core issues of the matter. The inalienable human right to self-defense and the just and righteous use of violence in exercising that right - even for children.
For decades the teacher unions, national PTA, and a variety of other educational/behavioral “experts” have actively worked to instill the notion into our children, and the public at large that, “violence never solves anything.” They have instituted “Zero Tolerance” policies for violence in schools, which mandate suspension or expulsion for anyone participating in any violent behavior such as fighting.
On the surface the policies seem reasonable but they fall apart under even the most casual, honest scrutiny.
If your child is attacked by the school bully, the likely result, along with cuts and bruises is suspension or expulsion from school for the bully and your child. If your child physically resists the bully’s attack in any way, that is fighting, and the penalty for fighting is automatic suspension or expulsion for both participants. If another student sees the attack and physically intervenes on your child’s behalf, then that child will face the same consequences.
To make matters worse, most of the time, the bully doesn’t like or care about school and perceives suspension or expulsion as more reward than punishment. Their victims on the other hand might take their education seriously. The missed days and blemishes on their records are matters of real concern.
Worse yet, if the bully has enough history of behavioral problems, the little darling is likely to have been “diagnosed,” or labeled, as having a developmental disability which means their behavior will result in “treatment” rather than punishment,. While your child and the “Good Samaritan” are summarily thrown out of school, the administration, fearing lawsuits under the Americans with Disabilities Act, is likely to send the bully off to “special” class to receive credit for eating cookies and goofing off.
Meanwhile, a school system in Texas has received a $98,000.00 federal grant to train teachers and students to resist would-be mass murderers and hostage takers by throwing books and other school supplies at the assailant to cause disruption and distraction which might allow the students to escape. Hmm, the school has a “Zero Tolerance” policy toward violence and weapons and they’re teaching students how to improvise weapons to violently resist an attacker – under approved circumstances. Am I the only one who sees a contradiction here?
The only reason teachers and children would need to be taught to defend themselves is that they had been previously taught not to defend themselves. The message that “violence never solves anything” which has been firmly engrained into the collective psyche and is drummed into our children on a daily basis, is a lie.
Disarmament, whether physical or psychological, whether in the macrocosm of nations or the microcosm of a playground, does not deter predators – it encourages them and creates a safe working environment for them.
Bullies don’t stop bullying because there is a rule against it, or because their victims refuse to fight back. Bullies stop bullying when it hurts - them. When unprovoked violence is met immediately with an equal or superior level of violent response, the violence stops. When the authorities meet out just punishment to the instigator (that the bully recognizes as punishment) and concern and praise for the victim and any “Good Samaritan” involved, the right lessons are learned by all.
Certainly there is, and should be, concern about a violent confrontation escalating and there must be intervention strategies. But when a person – child or adult – is attacked, they have an inalienable right, and obligation, to defend themselves – not only to reduce injury to themselves, but to deliver an immediate message to the attacker that the behavior they have chosen is painful and should be avoided.
Punishing children for being victims of attack while rewarding the attacker sends exactly the wrong message.
Violence in and of itself is not bad. Brutality – willful violence against innocents - is the purest evil. Stopping brutality is a justifiable use of defensive violence. Granted, defensive violence is not always the preferred or only response, but it must be recognized as a righteous and often necessary response.
Any policy which does not allow for, and encourage, both an institutional and an individual defensive response to physical attack is, at a minimum, allowing and emboldening malevolent violent behavior and often actually invites and encourages it.
The instruction my father gave me as a child still holds true: “Never start a fight, but when someone else starts it, you’d better finish it.”
The Deadly Lie of Pacifism: How physical and psychological disarmament encourages violence
See also: Pacifism: The Ultimate Immorality (This is SENSATIONAL!!!)
Those who go unarmed in Paradise must be sure that's where they are. Jeff Cooper
How true!
Weakness only invites Aggression.
The pacifism taught in schools doesn't work.
Our children were home schooled. My youngest entered public school at middle-school, wherein the school bully figured that he was an opportune target and gut-punched him. My son decked him and broke his jaw (I don't condone the jaw-breaking, but if you pick a fight, we taught him to finish it!) The school expelled them both. It did stop the bullying. However, it feels like Wild-Wild-West. Afterwards, everyone wanted to challenge him to see if they could best him. Where is the happy medium?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.