Bullying incident shows pervasive school bias against self-defense
David Codrea April 19, 2012 Gun Rights Examiner
“9-year-old suspended after he says he stood up to a bully,” a Fox 31 Denver report informs us
Third-grader Nathan Pemberton “was kicked out of school Tuesday after he says he stood up to a bully who was beating him up.”
“One kid kicked me in the back, then punched me in the face. Then I punched him in the face, and then I got in trouble,” he says.”
The school has a “no tolerance” policy that results in an automatic suspension, regardless of who started a fight. In other words, children are required by law to attend—under legal truancy penalties if they don’t comply—and then forbidden to defend themselves from other inmates.
“District 11 schools employ many anti-bullying teaching techniques,” spokesperson Devra Ashby said in a public statement, “and none of these methods include violence or retaliation.”
One wonders, were someone physically violating Ms. Ashby, if she’d insist that she, too, would deserve punishment for fighting back.
Still, some agree with the policy.
“Kids will hopefully learn that violence is not the answer,” viewer “Liz” tweeted between cud regurgitations, lowing approval for the decision to impose "equal punishments" on aggressors and defenders.
There are those of us who would argue the answer all depends on the question, and sometimes, the only thing to do is fight back with all means at your disposal. Still, it does give insight into an anti-defense mindset that is being drilled into young minds from the earliest age the state can get its indoctrinating clutches on them.
Which may explain why, by the time they grow into college-age young adults, not only are students mandated to be helpless against berserkers, many of them are overtly hostile to the suggestion that they should fight back like free men and women in the prime of their lives, and instead insist the safest course is for those lives to be forfeit.
Except there’s been a strong recent counter to the Nobility of Victimhood lobby, with a statement made Monday, the fifth anniversary of the Virgina Tech massacre, by Holly Adams, mother of shooting victim Leslie Sherman:
I ask a simple question: Would the other parents of victims be forever thankful if a professor or student was allowed to carry a firearm and could have stopped Seung-Hui Cho before their loved one was injured or killed? I would be. I also suspect that the tragedy may not have occurred at all if Cho knew that either faculty members or students were permitted to carry their own weapons on campus.
It’s a simple question for which the Colin Goddards and Devra Ashbys of the world have no answer. We're supposed to just take it and then, assuming we haven't bled out, go find an adult.
Bullying incident shows pervasive school bias against self-defense - National gun rights | Examiner.com examiner.com |
