[Tsuwabuki]

Originally Posted by clintjm

I'm detecting a little BS here. 18-20 years ago and you can't remember such altercations? Your time line of school is posted on this board. Do you have blackouts every so often?

This is what I mean by being provocative just to be provocative. It's entirely uncalled for. I've never blacked out.

Apparently yours isn't.
"Decades" should be singular in this case.
No I might not remember the exact blow by blow, but I'd remember the outcome and that it existed.

Yes, my timeline is posted, which says I started school in the late eighties. That was over twenty years ago, as you point our yourself. So, that would mean, at least two decades, plural.

I don't believe your memory would be that good, given that you are not a doctor, and would not have been one as a child, you would not have known if you succeeded in breaking a nose, especially if you did not get punished for it. It may be that I broke the nose in elementary school, I was certainly attempting to. I have no recollection of if I was told that I did or not. I did draw blood. The bully ran away and I never saw him again. I have vague recollections that he either transferred or was kicked out of school, but even this, I admit, could be solely my imagination. Human memory is very frail. I don't believe you are an exception, unless you are one of the rare individuals with photographic memory.

Sure in the case you described here; but that isn't the advice you originally posted: Without a previous physical altercation, with only a perceived approach of threatening manner, take the first swing to prevent an altercation. This may have not been the message you were trying to convey but it came across that way. In addition you also conveyed that this is a working model to solve problems when you are , using your words "approached in a threatening manner".

This is an inaccurate summary. As a last resort and with just cause means there are other things you tried to do with this individual, and just cause means that you have a reason to believe you are in imminent danger. Violence is morally and ethically justified in this case, and is often legally justified as well.

I also take great pains to say that it is not an acceptable response to mere taunting. The threat has to be imminent and significant. By all means, talk yourself out of it, walk away if you can, especially if you can do it boldly, dismissing the bully as a waste of your time, but if that bully is known for seriously hurting people, or has a history with you, and moves towards you in a clearly threatening manner, yeah, you take him (or her, some female bullies are equally as violent) out in protection of your own well being. Again, morally, ethically, and legally justified.

In that case you just laid out you were NOT taking the first swing as he came at you before the nose incident.

Incorrect. He approached me in a threatening manner days or weeks after the incident described. I did not allow him to get close to me. I believed I was in imminent danger and had just cause to take the first swing. I was not about to wait around for him to corner me, cut off escape routes, and try to harm me again.

Fearing for you life is a different matter of course. Your OP on the matter was being approached in a threatening way or being touched negatively.

I was trying to avoid being course or uncouth. Quite bluntly, if you think you are about to have your ass kicked, you kick ass first. Too much can go wrong in an altercation that could lead to serious bodily harm to risk letting the bully do whatever he wants.

Those rules are in place for a reason. Giving such advice in an American school would get you fired; I imagine a Japanese school as well. I was pointing out the fact that you represent yourself as an educator in a position of authority in another place, such as JF, with such advice as you originally described in OP, is simply ill-advised.

And what experience do you have working in either of these systems? I choose to abide by many rules I disagree with. If my teachers had stood up for me the way I have stood up for my students in the rare instances I have seen bulllying occur, I may not have needed to defend myself in dire circumstances. The violent students would have been removed and their issues would have been dealt with.

That I even had to defend myself says more about a system that failed to protect me than it does about the morality of my behavior.

This is besides the point. When the system will not protect you, you have a right to protect yourself. I would say that to a student, using those exact words, and would not fear being fired for it. I would not tell them to punch someone in the nose. That's just how I protect myself. Mileage may vary.

I don't believe it does speak volumes. In my school and schools today, such violence was never tolerated, and who threw the first punch was the one that took the rap.

I'm very much glad I never went to, nor taught at, your schools. Defending yourself when you believe you are in imminent danger is a right. I would never be party to punishing someone who acted in self-defense. You wouldn't need to fire me; I'd quit.

Yes, but when you represent yourself as an educator in this forum, and not an individual, you open a whole different can of worms. The fact that you wouldn't teach this to your own kids, but defend and push it here, is really what speaks volumes.

*sigh* I should have known you'd find someway to use that against me, despite the fact that I only brought it up to head off the "You don't even have kids, so your views will change when you are a parent" criticism. I should have known there'd be some other response, regardless.

I said I don't know if I would, what I didn't say is that I think I would. I never said I wouldn't. You are putting words in my mouth again. I might well tell me own children that violence in self-defense is acceptable. Since I don't have children, I cannot say I definitely would. I merely think I would. I know what my feelings are on the matter are, and that's that I'd much rather my child get suspended for defending him or herself than have a child come home with an injury or worse.

I simply disagreed with your advice you gave as a rule of thumb with little details in your OP on the subject. Anything personal was the fact you tried to amplify your point by adding how many noses you broke and it working out. That I call BS on.

This is not accurate. You distorted my views, ignored parts of my own post you actually quoted, and chose to pursue inconsequential details in a way that would suggest that my views are not only something you disagree with, but caused by mental defect. If I am not mistaken, you have also repeatedly questioned, at least implicitly, my fitness to be an educator.

It is my belief, given your posting history, that you are, in fact, being intentionally contrarian, and I have a hard time deciphering what you truly believe, versus when you just want to disagree with me to be disagreeing with me.

Yes, we can agree to disagree on the matter of violence as a means of solving a problem a bully problem. Attempted murder, sure defend yourself, but I don't think this type of situation happens more than once by the time someone is in their late 20s unless they live in a very bad place in the world, or they invite the issue in some way.

Attempted murder implies intent. I would be speaking more to negligent homicide or manslaughter, if we want to get technical. I am not a lawyer, and I doubt very much you are either. Any physical altercation that has intent to harm and causes death is one or the other. Even if death itself is an accident.

Believing yourself to be in such an altercation with the capacity to turn deadly is justification for a use of force. Certainly in response to force, but even preemptively, depending on circumstances. I will not back down on this.

I have lived in both not nice areas and very nice, high income areas. This was in my timeline as well. Your views that possibly lethal situations cannot occur more than once is proven wrong simply by me existence. Unless you are going to further accuse me of deceit and falsehood.

I agree to disagree on my point violence solves nothing.

Great. Let's move on. We've said our piece.