the grownups are talking honey, please go outside and play in traffic.
(don't post crap like that in this room)
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
the grownups are talking honey, please go outside and play in traffic.
That little punk was the bully? Suddenly, I get the feeling that nothing of high value was lost... but that's just my apathy. *flame shield up*Lmfaooo and then I see one video of the bully and don't feel sorry for him at all suddenly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoXeMcCF3QA
Lol, you're talking to the wrong ******! I grew up in the pasty white, disgustingly conservative southern oregon. I just would never STAB someone. I think that's why I don't get it. That isn't how I handled being bullied.I've been in situations during high school where after being provoked repeatedly I just snapped and hit back/gotten into fights, not thinking, barely aware of what I'm doing until afterwards. The fact that you can't relate to this, leads me to think that you've never been bullied, so it's not surprising that you can't see it from his point of view.
Did you miss the part where it said that the boy tried to avoid the bully? The article said that, before the stabbing, the kid clearly demonstrated that he did not want to confront the bully. You seem to think that his first reaction was to pull a knife on the other kid.Lol, you're talking to the wrong ******! I grew up in the pasty white, disgustingly conservative southern oregon. I just would never STAB someone. I think that's why I don't get it. That isn't how I handled being bullied.
Forget stabbed, you can be shot and not realise it.Yeah I've known people that have been stabbed and pretty much all of them say they thought they'd just been punched. The adrenaline also might have covered it up for the bully even more, so I highly doubt he would've noticed it straight away.
![]()
They are still a person after that, you know.No but a person is a person until you get something to judge them off.
Yeah cause he definitely couldn't have not ride the bus, nor call the cops a long time ago, nor get his parents to file a restraining order, nor get counselling.he did everything he could to avoid the situation that the bullies forced upon him.
This. Ideally you don't want anyone to die, but people have to be able to defend themselves. Blows to the back of the head can be potentially lethal or life altering, considering he had his whole gang joining in too the use of force is understandable. Did any of you even read about this or did you just see the opportunity to be self righteous and immediately lunged at it?Bullying, being teenagers, riding a bus are all irrelevant details.
The law says if you are attacked, you have the right to meet force with force. He did that.
The amount of people who thinks that's the point makes me sad.So, children are now allowed to murder their bullies, without reprecussion?
The amount of blind bias from people who can empathise with the killer is frightening.
Lets go through the list and point out how dumb they are.Yeah cause he definitely couldn't have not ride the bus, nor call the cops a long time ago, nor get his parents to file a restraining order, nor get counselling.
It's scary how helpless we high schoolers are; also, I didn't know being glad a bully was killed meant that you're a better person than they were.
Not even just why, but how as well.4. Counciling
Why the hell are you saying the kid who is being bullied should get counselling? He's not the one with behavioural problems. He's not the one who can't interact with people without using violence and threats. Saying the bullied party should get counceling is like saying that police should handcuff themselves when they arrest someone. It's a stupid idea.
The problem isn't that he defended himself with force, it's that he stabbed him twelve times, which goes past the point of defence.This. Ideally you don't want anyone to die, but people have to be able to defend themselves. Blows to the back of the head can be potentially lethal or life altering, considering he had his whole gang joining in too the use of force is understandable. Did any of you even read about this or did you just see the opportunity to be self righteous and immediately lunged at it?
Enlighten me.The amount of people who thinks that's the point makes me sad.
You don't know this. We've had several people in this thread testify that people don't know that they have been stabbed until they see the damage afterwards. For all we know, Dylan continued attacking Jorge after he had been stabbed. It's reasonable to presume that in Dylan's state of mind that he thought Jorge had engaged in a fist fight and he was responding in kind. This means that rather than backing off after being stabbed, Dylan would have continued being aggressive. Since Jorge was legally allowed to use as much force to eliminate the threat; in the above scenario, this means lethal force. We don't know what actually happened because the news articles are lacking in facts, but it would depend on what actually happened to determine whether this amount of force was justified or not. Given the details, it can't be determined, but it certainly does not boil down to the number of wounds on the attacker.Dre. said:I think he was entitled to act in self-defence, but stabbing someone 12 times, especially considering that the bully would have been incapacitated after a couple of stabs goes beyond self defence.
Hey guys, killing isn't wrong cause a piece of paper said so.Bullying, being teenagers, riding a bus are all irrelevant details.
The law says if you are attacked, you have the right to meet force with force. He did that.
I admit I should've explained this one.Not even just why, but how as well.
How would that help him? Would the bully suddenly stop because the victim's getting psychiatric help?
This guy gets it...Read my post above.
People here seem to think that you either have to think that he shouldn've acted in self-defence at all, or that stabbing someone 12 times constitutes self-defence, as if they're the only two options.
I think he was entitled to act in self-defence, but stabbing someone 12 times, especially considering that the bully would have been incapacitated after a couple of stabs goes beyond self defence.
People who say 'he was entitled to act in self-defence' are ignoring the fact he stabbed him twelve times, as if that's not that different to stabbing someone two or three times.
Walking away from a fight shows self control. And I'm sorry, but every animal can be nice, but if you keep pushing, tormenting, abusing it, it will snap, it will become uncontrollably aggressive. Seen the kids poking, prodding, chasing the cat, which then lashes out, scratching them? Or maybe a dog instead, throwing things, yelling, grabbing it's tail, then it bites them.@Pluvia. I'm too lazy to eat those post up.
That Xbox thing helps my point. Maybe there was self-defense but there wasn't any self-control.
The problem is, you can't quantify something like incapacitation relative to the number of stabs, or the number of times someone was shot.The problem isn't that he defended himself with force, it's that he stabbed him twelve times, which goes past the point of defence.
I could understand if he just stabbed him a couple of times, at that point the bully would have been incapacitated. But the fact that he continued to stab him after he was compromised is what I think he should be punished for.
Nobody's saying that killing is okay (at least, I hope not). What they are saying is that, in this specific case, it was justified based on the circumstances.Hey guys, killing isn't wrong cause a piece of paper said so.