No, Im not suggesting that. You are literally putting words in my mouth by editing my statement as well as implying im saying things that I am not. So it really does not matter what I say, you've already made up your mind on this matter, which is your prerogative, and your choosing to ignore what ive said when it conflicts with your assertion of the situation or twisting my words around when they dont conform with your ideology.senordesol said:Key phrases there. His entire 'plan' hinged on someone else attempting to beat the crap out of him. That it was very likely just means that his preparation was well-informed.viranimus said:in his defense... as a minor take the responsibility of your own defense into your own hands, because that is exactly what he did.
He DID NOT manipulate the bully into getting off the bus before his stop. He DID NOT manipulate the bully into chasing him. He DID NOT manipulate the bully into beating him. These were choices his attacker (also a key word) made. These are criminal acts that could very easily result in grievous injury or even death.
Unless you are suggesting that the bully somehow has a right and expectation to beat his victims in the street, there was no reason for anyone to get hurt other than self defense. On the other hand, EVERYONE (minor or not) has the RIGHT and EXPECTATION to be able to defend themselves against life threatening injuries or grievous bodily harm when threatened. Should he have told a teacher/parents? Perhaps, and I've not heard evidence that he didn't. But schools are notoriously slow and ineffective in dealing with bullies; and 'ratting someone out' can easily lead to retaliation. So you can bemoan his process and methods, but he did what he had EVERY LEGAL AND MORAL RIGHT to do. He sought no conflict, avoided altercation, and when no avenue of escape was available, ENDED the confrontation.
So I really see no point to continue. There are dozens of questions left unanswered here. Enough to at least consider the possibility that this was in fact premeditated. Just because one individual sees a path that premeditated murder would take does not mean that is the only way it can occur.
So I am going to end with three questions.
Who did he tell? Considering this had been an ongoing harassment for over a year, had he told family, faculty, or authorities something would have been done long before it got to the point of killing another human being. There is simply no way the parents, public school system or police would allow this to go on for over a year had they known and effective measures CAN be put into place to put an immediate stop to it.
How long had he been carrying the weapon to school, because at the the very least it is known that the altercation occurred at the end of the school day. That means he was carrying a weapon with him in a place he knew he was not supposed to have a weapon for right around 6-8 hours and surely he did not simply risk carrying a weapon into school without thinking on the impact of if he was caught with it. Was that the first time he carried it? Cause that definitely implies premeditation considering this had gone on for over a year. The longer he was carrying the weapon simply means the more time he was pro actively considering that weapons usage thus increasing the level of premeditation? Why did he also tell two kids about having the weapon before the altercation began? Surely he did not mention it just to brag about having a weapon in school.
If his intention for carrying the weapon to school was not to kill, then what was the purpose to carry the weapon for defense? Much as was suggested, actions taken against the bullies would equal retaliation and most likely escalation. If he simply brandished the knife as an idle threat the bully would likely back off, but it would also mean an escalation of the violence because the next time the bully would be equally prepared So what would be the point?. If he actually used it in a purely defensive capacity, that would have most likely resulted in injury, which would have stopped the bully that time but would have to be explained and it would take the blame off the bully and put that blame squarely on him for attacking an unarmed student with a deadly weapon regardless of his motivations.
Unless these three questions can be fully answered and explained then there is absolutely no way that the possibility that this was in fact a premeditated action can be ignored. However it IS being ignored. It is was ignored by the prosecution who saw this case as an already lost battle and phoned it in. It was ignored by the judge who did not address these matters and instead chose to cite legal justifications that are not applicable to minors knowing it would cause public outcry. It is ignored by the public because the public sees this as "justice" being done thanks in part because of the insane level of bullying PSAs, the "love and tolerate the shit out of you" culture, and the simple fact that there are invariably more people who have at one point been bullied in their life than those who either had not or were the bully.
Also please do not misunderstand me. In no way shape or form were the actions of the bully forgivable. I am NOT implying such. At the same time I know two wrongs never make a right, and I think that is what has been consistently overlooked here.
So my involvement with this thread is done. I know that some will want to misread me, ignore my statements, or try to spin my statements to mean something they clearly dont. I know this. I expect this. I am unconcerned. I have worked in police and public service fields long enough to understand how laws work, and I have been a student of human psychology long enough to clearly see that this kid had malicious intent when he brought a weapon to school, bragged about it to other kids and then when finally cornered and surrounded used it not defensively, but in offensive retaliation. So you may be entitled to disagree, but that disagreement does not diminish the fact that my points do legitimately point out that the possibility of premeditation does in fact exist. So I will no longer continue to waste my time writing responses on this matter or anyone elses time to read it.
EDIT:
I am referring to the generation this kid was a part of. The generation of kids who never saw a single day of school that did not exist in a post columbine structure. And yes, the school systems have RADICALLY changed over the last 15 years as it relates to bullying and school violence. A fact I learned personally when I started interacting with my former step children's school system and the rapid adoption of Zero tolerance policies, locking students on campus, more intensive psychological profiling and a myriad of other overzealous reactions put into place to keep things like this from happening because of the steady increase of school related violence that kept spiraling upward through the 1980s and 90s.Nielas said:I am not sure which generation you are referring to but it for me it has always been made explicit that going to the authorities will do nothing to help you against bullies and it will only cause you to be beat up more. Maybe in the last decade things have radically changed in the school systems.