What About Bullying In Schools And The Typical Reaction To It?

Please start by reading


if you haven't already. It's been updated.

When Columbine happened, it had me wondering if the two murderers were "Manchurian Candidates", being it happened only two weeks before the NRA Convention here in Denver and really stepped hard on that event. In other words, were these two guys brainwashed - programmed and triggered by the left, to help advance their gun control agenda?

But then later, they told us that the Columbine murderers were victims of bullying in the school. Well, lots of kids get bullied in the schools, but how many of them turn into mass murderers because of it?

Yet I do wonder if the dots have been completely connected on that issue.

Here's a scenario. These things haven't been done by young women, and likely won't, so I'll use this example:

A young male is in high school. He's at his hormonal peak, filled with testosterone, likely more so than he ever will be again in his life. He gets bullied, and bullied badly. He reports this to the school principal, who is a liberal pacifist, and who tells him that if he even defends himself, it will be considered "violence", the school has a zero tolerance for "violence", and he will be in as much trouble as the bullies. 

This is a very typical reaction these days, as the Marxist pacifists have taken over the school systems for decades and are moral relativists, that is, they see all "violence" as being morally equivalent, offensive violence ( bullying ) in which force is essentially initiated against one student by one or more others, and defensive violence - the act of the bullying victim defending themselves against people who have initiated force against them. ( If they even know how to defend themselves.) When we were growing up, many of the boys in liberal families were taught "don't fight, you'll just get in trouble", again not differentiating between the initiation of force and defensive force.

"The necessary consequence of man's right to life is his right to self-defense. In a civilized society, force may be used only in retaliation & only against those who initiate its use.  All the reasons which make the initiation of physical force an evil, make the retaliatory use of physical force a moral imperative. If some 'pacifist' society renounced the retaliatory use of force, it would be left helplessly at the mercy of the 1st thug who decided to be immoral.  Such a society would achieve the opposite of its intention: instead of abolishing evil, it would encourage & reward it."  - Ayn Rand "The Nature of Government" ( 1961 )

So think about this. Male teenager, pumped with testosterone, and being bullied mercilessly. He reports it, and is told that if he dares to defend himself, he will be punished for it, possibly as much as the bullies, and possibly only by himself, if the bullies outnumber him and lie and say that he did it.

And it goes on and on, and he has to keep going to school and taking it.

What is that a recipe for?

Seething rage.

So it will be interesting to see if the Sandy Hook murderer was also someone who was mercilessly bullied, and told by the Marxist pacifist moral relativists in charge, that he had to just keep taking it, and it eventually developed such a seething rage in him, that he could do something this heinous.

I'm certainly not excusing his acts, merely suggesting that it might help to prevent future ones, if such policies are examined and changed.

It may not just be that the teachers need to be armed and trained against this sort of thing. There may be another component at work that could be a great deal of the contributing cause, and stopping the moral relativistic treatment of these kids might go a long way towards preventing events like this in the future.

Views: 499


You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!

Join Tea Party Nation

Comment by John C. Wilson on December 20, 2012 at 11:48pm

This is my 3rd response.  I still don't understand why Ms. Galt wrote this article focusing on bullying.  There is no evidence (yet) of that entering into the scene.  The kid has been out of high school for two and a half years, doing nothing, not working, not going to school.  And if he was ever bullied in his lifetime, it must have happened in primary school, that was the one he attacked. What was the motive, has he been burning up for the last couple of years, focusing on the time in kindergarten that he was humiliated when he peed his pants?  Maybe the kid was another Manchurian candidate like the guy at the movie theater in Colorado, another setup to give more strength to the gun confiscation thugs in the current administration?

Comment by Frank Chance Chenoweth on December 20, 2012 at 11:47am

But this shooting still works to the left's advantage: they want all guns banned . . . period . . . end of discussion.  To their way of thinking, the loss of 20 children is worth it.  (I am referring to the extreme, far-left whackos like George Soros & Co., not left-center Democrats and voters.)

  --Frank Nitty

Comment by Catherine on December 20, 2012 at 11:11am

The bullying balogna has gone on long enough.  The Sandy Hook shooter was actually angry at his mother for beginning a process to take over his rights through a conservatorship, so she could get him into a mental hospital.  In addition, he thought she liked the school more than she did him.  She was not poor.  So, regardless of his emotional difficulties, he was "angry," and I have seen a dramatic increase in people's level of anger.  It is just below the surface as people have been taught not to treat each other as they would like to be treated, but what's in it for me and how dare someone get something I don't have.  Groups are pitted against each other.  So, anger, rage, whatever is a cultural problem and will never be fixed by legislation!

Comment by Frank Chance Chenoweth on December 20, 2012 at 8:14am


     I had a similar experience.  When I was 12, there was a 16-year-old kid named Jeff Bartlett.;  My younger brother and I played after school with him and another kid in the neighborhood named James.  Jeff was from a troubled family, didn't do well in school, and I think dropped out of school around age 16 or 17. 

     He was a bullying type.  Always gave me a hard time in a half serious, half playing way.  I was a big kid for my age, and I took him on one day.  Being 16 (four years older), he basically whooped me, but I wouldn't back down (bloody nose and all!).  He respected that, told me as such, and never bothered me again after that. 

     When my son was little, there was a mean Oriental kid and a couple others who always picked on my son, who is, by nature, quiet and gentle.  They were brutal to my son.  One day, he must have had enough.  He was bigger than the other three, and he basically punched out all three and left them crying.  The school, of course, complained.  My son came home from school telling my wife what happened--and was afraid I would get mad at him when I got home from work.

     I was so proud of him!  I took him out to Toys 'R Us and let him pick out three new, expensive toys as a reward . . . !                      --Frank Nitty   

Comment by John C. Wilson on December 19, 2012 at 6:51pm

I'm not sure why Ms. Galt wrote the article to which we are responding, but I think that school shootings have little or nothing to do with bullying.  My earlier comment was about boys growing up duking out their hostilites, and I think it  is a good and normal thing.  If one is bullied, you have a choice about how to react. When I was in junior high, I was put down and picked on because I was a skinny nerd.  But instead of getting back at the big muscular football players, I wanted to be more like them, and to be popular and socially accepted.  I realized that I didn't have the physical size or ball handling skills needed for football and basketball, so when I got up to the high school I became a wrestler, a sport in which they have weight divisions.  By my senior year I was team captain and could out wrestle anyone, any size in the school though I only weighed 119 lbs.  I think my reaction to bullying was better than the students at Columbine who became the trench coat mafia.  There are other ways to beat bullying, like following the Einstein route.  At the high school I attended, members of the biology club got more scholarships than the football team. On graduation day, who is the winner, the bully or the super student?

Comment by dennispursellsr on December 19, 2012 at 4:41pm

Mr Chenoweth, You are 110 pct right i also believe that this is all attempted too get rid of the assult weapons. this crap was orchestrated, and if you think back rignt after the first election fast and furious happen and every 6-9 months later something always pops up with this president.They  the lib's want so bad too take all of all rights away. I say its getting close too start saddling up soon Maybe we could hold a rally.P S.You are right about Hillary Wife/dyke

Comment by Frank Chance Chenoweth on December 19, 2012 at 3:45pm

John is right.  I was never much of an athlete, but I always loved playing ball every chance I could.  We even played basketball while it was snowing!  And one of my fondest memories is hitting the game-winning shot in an intramural basketball game my senior year in high school--a jumper from the right baseline at the buzzer (on a pass from my best buddy then! 


And, going on 56 years of age in less than two months, I have never participated in a mass shooting at a mall or other public place . . . !                           --Frank Nitty

Comment by John C. Wilson on December 19, 2012 at 3:28pm

It's not due to bullying.  That's been around forever and it will always be around. It's the pacifists, like the article said. Boys used to fight all the time.  Boys are not allowed to fight anymore, it is no longer an accepted way to settle differences.  Instead society makes it a crime.  So tensions which could have been released within five minutes in the parking lot after school just build up and build up and build up until one of the kids goes and gets a gun and blows somebody away.  Even among animal cubs, play fighting is the way they grow up.  Then when they grow up they fight for real for dominance in the herd.  ....We used to have sports in the schools, a sort of organized play fighting.  Now fewer and fewer participate in sports, and the list of varsity sports supported by schools is shrinking rapidly with budget cuts.  Boys who participate in sports get in a lot less trouble than those who don't.  ...If the boys were in the gym or the athletic field or training room after school instead of hanging out on street corners or playing video games or sending text messages all day like the girls do, then there would be  no serious trouble at the schools.  The only real trouble would be from the parents.  Ask retired coaches and principals.  Parents have always caused trouble, for whatever reasons.

Comment by Frank Chance Chenoweth on December 19, 2012 at 2:52pm

And, don't forget, rich, fatty foods and carryouts kill too.  Let's ban McDonald's, Pizza Hut, Burger King, etc.  Follow Doomberg's lead on sugary drinks.              --Frank Nitty

Comment by Randall Woodman on December 19, 2012 at 2:45pm

I had a guy that bullied me in the 9th grade.  Between the summer of 9th and 10th grade I grew . . . a lot.  Early in the school year he tried that again and I bloodied his nose.  That was the end of the bullying.  (This was during band.)  Luckily I had a wise band instructor who knew what was going on and just said knock it off. 

Now that I'm a dad, I tell my kids, don't start a fight but be prepared to defend yourself if you are attacked.  If they are defending themselves I will fight for their right to do so.  If they are the aggressor, then they'll get what's coming to them.

Tea Party Nation is a social network

© 2016   Created by Judson Phillips.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service