Fw: FIGHTING: A Self Defense Justification
Good stuff. Here’s some of my take. I’ve got lots more, but….
Zero Tolerance vs. Zero Victimization
Zero Tolerance as interpreted in many schools (and through the eyes of adults) means
“You don’t get to hurt anyone, because we don’t allow it.”
Through the eyes of a CHILD, ZeroTolerance means
“I am going to get in trouble especially if I defend myself!”
So…Is it ok that the school has a policy that punishes the bullied child with equal
punishment that is given to the bully?
The radKids program states it this way:
In radKIDS we believe that these Zero Tolerance policies are unjust and contributory to the bullying
pandemic we are experiencing today. In fact, in many cases these policies can and do violate a
child’s right to defend themselves which is supported by law in all 50 states.
The United Stated Secretary of Education Mr. Arne Duncan declared that:
“Zero Tolerance policies in regards to Bullying behaviors have failed and do not work.”
If one child chooses to bully another, the only thing that should be considered is,
“Did this student intend to engage in behavior that is defined as bullying?”
If the answer is yes, then punishment is applied due to the choice made by the bully to
try to hurt or intimidate another child.
Then, they need to be taught the appropriate physical defenses to protect themselves.
(enter Don and Bob!)
I just wanted to forward this ongoing messaging dealing with zero tolerance and kids fighting back in schools. Scroll down to the bottom and work your way up to my opinion at the top. If you have anything you would like to add, send it to me and I will forward it to our ALICE instructors.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Renzi
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: FIGHTING: A Self Defense Justification
I think that all recent posts dealing with fighting back and zero tolerance are excellent. As a rectly retired teacher, ALICE instructor, and self defense instructor, there are many questions that would raised by school boards and administration for installing a new school policy that might encourage one to fight back.
One question that would surely be raised is what if the attcked student fought back and crippled or killed the other student? The school would be blamed for allowing or encouraging one to fight back.
Kids need to be taught and trained, just as we train adults, that fighting is a last resort to be used only when major bodily harmed could be done to them, or in the case of a woman, a potential rape. Kids want to fight and defend themselves if they are called a name and verbally bullied. Where do you draw the line as to when one should be allowed to fight back and when not. District use the zero tolerance policy as a way to cover themselves.
I'm not condoning kids not to defend themselves, I encourage the exact opposite. I would encourage school districts to institute self defense sessions within their physical education curriculum and show them HOW to fight and defend themselves. I would encourage parents to have their kids trained outside of school also in some type of martial art. The Gracie's have a tremendous program geared to kids dealing with bullies.
There isn't any right or wrong or best policy that will pertain to all students. I guess the simplest way to say it is to teach someone to fight and hope they will use it only at the proper time only.
As Zero Tolerance policies tend to influence school districts decision making, I came to find that administrators in the last few years are now taking a closer look at who was the aggressor. My own district is more concerned now in the bottom line of daily attendants and money lost for suspending students.
In years past when an officer from our department determined the fight was a result of a battery the Vice Principal would suspend both kids based on Zero Tolerance, but not now and I would hope that school districts would start getting back to common sense decisions as we move away from outdated policies.
Sent from me to you
On Oct 21, 2013, at 12:30 PM, "Lt. Gary Kong" <citycop49@...> wrote:
Here us ab excerpt from my general School Safety presentation. I've tried to attach it as a Powerpoint file as well as a PDF file.
Free to use by any ALICE instructor.
I am very interested how schools react to your advice. There are times in my district when the school punishes kids for fighting and I find out that one was defending themselves yet still gets school punishment. The school refers it to me for charges and I tell them it is self defense on one of them and the parent is of course upset because their son/daughter gets suspended. I understand and stress to kids the fine line between self defense and "some one starting it and I am going to finish it" mentality. Still when I have a true self defense situation I do not feel the kid needs to be punished yet they do. What have you seen with other schools.
When I consult with schools and we get to fighting and bullying, I advocate a self defense exemption for fighting. Strict parameters and guidelines, but if a student is cornered and attacked he should not be punished for fighting. To punish a kid who has already been harassed, bullied, attacked, etc. is unfair. He's a victim.
--- greg.hennecke@... wrote:
From: "Greg Hennecke" <greg.hennecke@...>
Subject: RE: School bullying
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 22:19:41 -0400
AMEN!!! Get rid of the zero tolerance policies and let the kids throw a few punches now…..VS throwing bullets later!!!
Yes, yes, YES! Kids that can fight back will be much more likely to stop the bullying and as an added bonus, gain self confidence.