Another Bully gets dominated, share your own bully (owning) stories.

Recommended Videos

Dogstile

New member
Jan 17, 2009
5,093
0
0
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
 

PixelKing

Moderately confused.
Sep 4, 2009
1,733
0
0
A guy tried to kick my best friend down the street in a shopping cart so I beat the crap out of him. The street was really steep as well.
 

Dango

New member
Feb 11, 2010
21,066
0
0
PhiMed said:
So schools just accept violence if someone views it as justified? I don't agree with zero-tolerance rules, those do nothing to fix the problem, but leaving these things alone does even less. All schools have to do is educate their students. Morality can be taught and learned, and if schools placed moral lessons as high on their list of priorities as studying math and literature, society would be a much more peaceful place.
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
Lilani said:
Snipped all that, but excellent points were made. And while I would agree, there are times where it just becomes to much. And really, who hasnt be in that situation where they just got so upset that they couldnt control it. Not so much speaking towards that vid, but about bullying in a young age (early teens). Its hard to expect a kid whos going through puberty and change at that age to be in constant control of their emotions.

Besides, everyone has a breaking point.

<spoiler=Personal story that can be skipped since its rather counterproductive to the points made against fighting back>Mine probably bordered on criminal when I was older, but I had two stories of fighting back, once for me, and once for someone I liked and cared about.

The first time was for another, a girl who was my best friend and then later my gf. It was third grade, so I was about... 8 or 9, maybe ten. I forget exactly, and its too tedious to count backwards from highschool. It was school picture day, and the girl (amy) wanted to look nice, so her mom sent her in this nice decorative skirt thing. One of the fifth graders (should have been in sixth grade, but he got held back), who no one really liked, and, well, there's no better way of saying it but he was pretty much trash, and you could already tell then. His father was, his mother was, it was just a bad family, we all know of one of those kind. Anyway, he had knocked her over and was trying to tear her skirt (either to upset her or look up it, I dont know), when I saw it. The guy and I had a history, and I normally shrugged it off, or took some lumps for it cause I decided it was rather pointless to fight back. So I saw what he was doing to Amy, and with that, combined with Amy crying, and the history between us, I just lost it and I guess whited out with anger. I just rememberwhen it all came back to being aware, the white tile was red, his head was broken and he was beaten, and I had the principal (who was a rather large guy, since he was some kinda ex-seal or something) was holding me down and telling me that this was enough.
... As far as I know, they still never changed the tiles, just washed them down, though you could always see the stained pink if you looked close enough.

The other time was for myself, and really just myself, cause I was sick of taking this kid's shit. I was in ninth grade at the time, and it was something that had been going on since fourth grade (so about five years). It was the usual things, name calling which progressed to knocking stuff out of my hands which progessed to stealing/vandalizing my locker, to eventually him just beating up on me, and I took it all in stride, just shrugging it off or replacing the stuff in my locker (it was mostly homework, though he took my old gameboy advanced once, and that sorta ticked me off) or cleaning my locker. Then he finally just said that I was gay, and he had seen me always hanging out with one of the gay kids in the school (which I did, he was my friend, there was nothing sexual behind it) and how I was taking it in my ass and all this stuff, and I just said whatever. Then he said he was going to take it up with my gay friend (John), and I said to leave John alone, there's not point, because John was always looked down upon, and he was alone since the other four gay kids hooked up with each other just to have someone. He told me to make him... and I did. I beat him, and I beat him hard. Fractured two ribs, broke his shoulder, arm and wrist, bruised his knee on both bones that make the joint, and made him pick up five of his teeth.

Got ten weeks ICE (In School Exposition/Suspension) and a disciplinary note on my record for that.
 

ProtoChimp

New member
Feb 8, 2010
2,236
0
0
Dude tackled me to the ground and started punching me in the face for no reason one, didn't even know him. He tried it again the next day so I tried to protect myself, and when I did his shoulder and neck went directly into my knee and he writhed on the ground in pain. Accidental ownage FTW.
 

ProtoChimp

New member
Feb 8, 2010
2,236
0
0
StarStruckStrumpets said:
That was wrong. Just wrong.

I sided with Casey Haynes, because he fucked the guy's shit up then left him alone. That guy was an animal. He wouldn't stop laying in to him until the guy was literally curling up to try and shield his face. The speed he was punching him at too...that was actually kind of sick. Not that I agree with the "bully", but the violence displayed by the other guy was too great.

That said, I really don't think that was a bullying situation at all. Just one prick got too cocky, and the other one flipped out. Having being bullied and responding to bullying with violence myself, I can understand the satisfaction, but I also know what I'm like in a fight. I'm like that guy, I don't stop until I'm exhausted, which is why I do my best to avoid confrontations with anyone. You can hear the guy roaring at his "bully" while he's on the floor. If it were just the two of them, I doubt he would have stopped at all.

That's just my two cents...
Yeah, I see what you're getting at. I remember when I was younger and I was being bullied, my dad wasn't around so my brother taught me how to fight. Thing was, my brother was still young, brash and angry because life kept fucking our family over and so he told me not to stop until I "see blood", and he wasn't joking or referencing something he genuinly meant and told me straight up "You beat them until they start bleeding".
 

Findlebob

New member
Mar 24, 2011
331
0
0
[/quote]
I've had enough of this shit. Just what is so right about beating the shit out of someone and causing possibly permanent brain injuries just for revenge? I was bullied in school, but I grew up and got over it. Stooping down to their level proves nothing, and using violence to "teach them a lesson" just makes the victims of the bullying look like unstable, antisocial maniacs that might bring AK47s into school next week.

And really, in this video you can't even tell who's supposed to be the bully. In the end, they both acted aggressively. That just makes this video about two boys not being able to handle conflicts properly.

There was another thread a couple of days ago that cited this very video. Someone later in the thread posted a news story from Argentina, about some boys who brought guns into school and shot and killed a couple of "bullies," while injuring a few bystanders as well. Do you think that's great too? Do you think that is justice being served? Do you really think those boys deserved to die that day, for mistakes they made before they're even functioning adults? Do you think their mothers deserved to be told they'll never see their children again?

And what if that happened to that boy in that video? What if that beating caused a brain bleed, or caused an aneurysm to rupture? What if he was permanently disabled? Does he deserve to be punished that severely for his mistakes? He's, what, 15? 16 at best? He probably doesn't even know how to drive yet. He still has a lot yet to learn, and so does that kid who beat him up.

I'm sick of this encouraging violence towards bullies. You know how we should solve bullying? Stop tolerating it. Stop standing by and recording it if someone's getting beat up or verbally abused. If you want the youth to rise up and do something about it, have them rise up and defend each other with their words, not their fists. Violence only begets violence.

Columbine was also an instance of kids who were mistreated by their peers, or at least felt as much, and retaliated using violence. Is that really what you think we need? Really?[/quote]

My bullies beat me without any thought of injury they caused. So are you sayying i shouldnt have fought back and continue to let them risk causing me brain bleeds, been disabled, aneurysm and ruptures. You can talk all you want about right and wrong, people like bullies only understand violence. Once i broke the lead bullies nose i was never bullied again.
 

Findlebob

New member
Mar 24, 2011
331
0
0
People who say that violence doesnt solve anything are wrong. I was beaten by my bullies aand they didnt care about injury they caused me. My school wouldnt help so i had to look out for myself. But once i broke the leaders nose i was never bullied again. People that devolved as need to bully only understand violence. Feel free to call me judgemental.
 

Dango

New member
Feb 11, 2010
21,066
0
0
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
So we go with human instinct because we're unwilling to change? I don't believe violence is entirely bad, I just believe only those with intentions to keep peace, who are qualified to be violent should be violent. In other words: The weak live in peace, and the strong fight to protect that piece. If I get jumped by a group of by a group of guys, I'd only beat them if I was strong, if I was weak it doesn't matter whether I'd fight back or not, I'm still going to get hurt. If the strong fulfill their roles as peace keepers, then there'd be no chance of getting jumped in the first place.
 

Mr Fatherland

New member
Nov 10, 2008
1,035
0
0
Dango said:
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
So we go with human instinct because we're unwilling to change? I don't believe violence is entirely bad, I just believe only those with intentions to keep peace, who are qualified to be violent should be violent. In other words: The weak live in peace, and the strong fight to protect that piece. If I get jumped by a group of by a group of guys, I'd only beat them if I was strong, if I was weak it doesn't matter whether I'd fight back or not, I'm still going to get hurt. If the strong fulfill their roles as peace keepers, then there'd be no chance of getting jumped in the first place.
Unfortunately for you, the strong tend to be quite unintelligent and use their strength to prey on the weak. It's much easier for a strong, simian bully to beat someone up than to get a job and buy it.
 

Beat14

New member
Jun 27, 2010
417
0
0
Well, it's not the best way things could have worked out, but most things can work out better in some way.

I'm glad it happened that way, the amount of disgust I would feel if the apparent bully had beat that kid up would be so much more. So yes I'm happy it worked out that way.
 

Dango

New member
Feb 11, 2010
21,066
0
0
Mr Fatherland said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
So we go with human instinct because we're unwilling to change? I don't believe violence is entirely bad, I just believe only those with intentions to keep peace, who are qualified to be violent should be violent. In other words: The weak live in peace, and the strong fight to protect that piece. If I get jumped by a group of by a group of guys, I'd only beat them if I was strong, if I was weak it doesn't matter whether I'd fight back or not, I'm still going to get hurt. If the strong fulfill their roles as peace keepers, then there'd be no chance of getting jumped in the first place.
Unfortunately for you, the strong tend to be quite unintelligent and use their strength to prey on the weak. It's much easier for a strong, simian bully to beat someone up than to get a job and buy it.
As I said before, this could be fixed by just educating people, seriously schools need a much bigger focus on moral education.

...and buy what, exactly?
 

Dogstile

New member
Jan 17, 2009
5,093
0
0
Dango said:
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
So we go with human instinct because we're unwilling to change? I don't believe violence is entirely bad, I just believe only those with intentions to keep peace, who are qualified to be violent should be violent. In other words: The weak live in peace, and the strong fight to protect that piece. If I get jumped by a group of by a group of guys, I'd only beat them if I was strong, if I was weak it doesn't matter whether I'd fight back or not, I'm still going to get hurt. If the strong fulfill their roles as peace keepers, then there'd be no chance of getting jumped in the first place.
Its not exactly logical to expect someone to be there to save you everywhere you go. Every time I was jumped it was always in an empty place. Quiet streets, parks, etc. It doesn't matter if you're weak or strong, fighting back always deters them.
 

Mr Fatherland

New member
Nov 10, 2008
1,035
0
0
Dango said:
Mr Fatherland said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
So we go with human instinct because we're unwilling to change? I don't believe violence is entirely bad, I just believe only those with intentions to keep peace, who are qualified to be violent should be violent. In other words: The weak live in peace, and the strong fight to protect that piece. If I get jumped by a group of by a group of guys, I'd only beat them if I was strong, if I was weak it doesn't matter whether I'd fight back or not, I'm still going to get hurt. If the strong fulfill their roles as peace keepers, then there'd be no chance of getting jumped in the first place.
Unfortunately for you, the strong tend to be quite unintelligent and use their strength to prey on the weak. It's much easier for a strong, simian bully to beat someone up than to get a job and buy it.
As I said before, this could be fixed by just educating people, seriously schools need a much bigger focus on moral education.

...and buy what, exactly?

It was just an example. It's easier for a bully to beat someone up than to work for the thing they're beating you up for.
 

BrownGaijin

New member
Jan 31, 2009
895
0
0
I think Casey handled it better. He showed restraint after proving his point. In this case the bigger guy had the opportunity to walk away from it, but he chose not to.

Or could this be better explained through interpretive dance?

 

Dango

New member
Feb 11, 2010
21,066
0
0
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
Dango said:
dogstile said:
I'm sorry, but I just can't understand thinking violence is acceptable just because you view certain ideals and actions as justice.
Think of it this way. Men, for as long as we can remember, have been hunters, fighters, soldiers, brawlers, etc.

I think violence is acceptable because its what we're good at, and it solves problems quickly. Just because society has suddenly gotten to the point of "violence is bad!" doesn't mean we're going to go against our basic instincts.

Still got an issue with defending yourself? By all means, enjoy your views. However, one day, if you get jumped, mugged, etc and permanently disfigured by the experience, I have no doubt in my mind that you would have wished you fought back.
So we go with human instinct because we're unwilling to change? I don't believe violence is entirely bad, I just believe only those with intentions to keep peace, who are qualified to be violent should be violent. In other words: The weak live in peace, and the strong fight to protect that piece. If I get jumped by a group of by a group of guys, I'd only beat them if I was strong, if I was weak it doesn't matter whether I'd fight back or not, I'm still going to get hurt. If the strong fulfill their roles as peace keepers, then there'd be no chance of getting jumped in the first place.
Its not exactly logical to expect someone to be there to save you everywhere you go. Every time I was jumped it was always in an empty place. Quiet streets, parks, etc. It doesn't matter if you're weak or strong, fighting back always deters them.
I don't expect people to save me everywhere I go, but I don't expect people to jump me everywhere I go either, as I avoid places the kinds of places where I might easily get in a fight. (I apologize for speaking in generalizations like "the strong" and "the weak" by the way, it sounds kind of ridiculous) The strong go where things are dangerous, where people get mugged or beaten, and when they do get jumped, they can help get rid of the people who jumped them, so the weak can continue to live in peace.

I could be right, you could be right. Society could move on to a point where violence is no longer needed, or violence could become essential for normal living. In short: The future holds answers that we do not.
 

Zarmi

New member
Jul 16, 2010
227
0
0
Oh I enjoyed that video. The sweet, sweet taste of revenge. I personally hope he was injured, as that's what he deserves.
 

Chrono180

New member
Dec 8, 2007
545
0
0
Lilani said:
I've had enough of this shit. Just what is so right about beating the shit out of someone and causing possibly permanent brain injuries just for revenge? I was bullied in school, but I grew up and got over it. Stooping down to their level proves nothing, and using violence to "teach them a lesson" just makes the victims of the bullying look like unstable, antisocial maniacs that might bring AK47s into school next week.

And really, in this video you can't even tell who's supposed to be the bully. In the end, they both acted aggressively. That just makes this video about two boys not being able to handle conflicts properly.

There was another thread a couple of days ago that cited this very video. Someone later in the thread posted a news story from Argentina, about some boys who brought guns into school and shot and killed a couple of "bullies," while injuring a few bystanders as well. Do you think that's great too? Do you think that is justice being served? Do you really think those boys deserved to die that day, for mistakes they made before they're even functioning adults? Do you think their mothers deserved to be told they'll never see their children again?

And what if that happened to that boy in that video? What if that beating caused a brain bleed, or caused an aneurysm to rupture? What if he was permanently disabled? Does he deserve to be punished that severely for his mistakes? He's, what, 15? 16 at best? He probably doesn't even know how to drive yet. He still has a lot yet to learn, and so does that kid who beat him up.

I'm sick of this encouraging violence towards bullies. You know how we should solve bullying? Stop tolerating it. Stop standing by and recording it if someone's getting beat up or verbally abused. If you want the youth to rise up and do something about it, have them rise up and defend each other with their words, not their fists. Violence only begets violence.

Columbine was also an instance of kids who were mistreated by their peers, or at least felt as much, and retaliated using violence. Is that really what you think we need? Really?
Actually, yes, yes I do. Ideally in a better world bullies would be sent to juvie or be forced into community service, but sadly in the US minors are only a step above property and the police and teachers dont give a flying rats ass about bullies.

I am sick and tires of people advocating "peaceful solutions" or whatever the term is nowadays when it ALMOST NEVER WORKS! I have yet to see a single case where a bully is "talked down" if the teachers or police or other authority figures aren't involved. If you really think "violence only begets violence" what would you say to the American colonist who rebelled against British oppression? Should we have just "endured" the Intolerable acts and taxes on everything from tea to metal? Sometimes violence IS the best solution.

And yes, the bullies may deserve permanent injury or death. Making an innocent's life a living hell is just as bad if not worse than killing them. Not only that, but it is quite possible that being bullied can cause the victim to acquire mental disorders such as PTSD or schizophrenia that DON'T GO AWAY! If someone is threatening you with a knife, you should have the option of defending yourself lethally. By the same card if someone is constant beating you up, you should be allowed to lay the smack down. If a bully gets disabled permanently when karma comes back to bite him in the ass, he'll get no sympathy from me.

And about your last point, have you ever considered that if the teachers and police actually took action against bullies the victims wouldn't feel the need to lash out? Most school shooters basically are of the viewpoint that it is "them against everyone" which is usually not far from the truth. NOBODY helped them.
 

PhiMed

New member
Nov 26, 2008
1,483
0
0
Dango said:
PhiMed said:
So schools just accept violence if someone views it as justified? I don't agree with zero-tolerance rules, those do nothing to fix the problem, but leaving these things alone does even less. All schools have to do is educate their students. Morality can be taught and learned, and if schools placed moral lessons as high on their list of priorities as studying math and literature, society would be a much more peaceful place.
No, I'm saying that if one person is clearly fighting back against an aggressor, the aggressor should be punished and the defender should not be punished at all.

Additionally, penalties for fighting among children should be scaled WAY back. Any system that expels, permanently, an honor student with no previous disciplinary history just because he fought back against a known bully is not just flawed. It's broken.

Also, families should teach morality. I don't want the state determining what is and is not moral and teaching it in an institutionalized form. What you're proposing crosses the line from education to indoctrination.