Kid Becomes "Little Zangief" in Response to Bullying

[Gindil]

Doesn't the law say that if you get attacked by someone your allowed to do anything for self defense?

No. You are allowed to employ equal and opposite force only; if someone punches you, punching them back ONLY to stop them is okay. Beating them, well after the point whereby they have stopped hitting you, is assault. If someone hits you with a bat, you can't shoot them. If someone kicks you in the shin, you can't throw them to the ground. If someone punches you in the stomach, you sure as fuck can't near kill them by slamming them into the ground.

It is called 'stopping the threat'. You are not allowed to attack someone because they attacked you. All one is legally entitled to is defending themselves and others from immediate danger.

Hmmm... Casey is there, there's 4 guys around him.

Advantages - Larger size, powerful build

Disadvantages - speed, reach

----------------------------------

Richard

Advantages - "Nimble" and quick, 3 other people watching his back, camera for humiliation of Casey

Disadvantages - small size, just got into that high school/college
-----------------------------------

For all intents and purposes, Casey stopped the exact threat on him. He did it in one move without punching anyone. Richard made the mistake of ducking and punching Casey twice. Interviewing Casey, he said they'd tormented him for two weeks prior. He didn't hit him while he was down, he didn't look to make him bloody. He looked to stop the punches.

I don't know where people get this idea that it's disproportionate, but that has to be the most ridiculous thing about the argument presented.

Further, you hit back and you have two other kids jumping in to contend with. The situation says that Casey stops Richard from hitting him. If Richard wanted to go a little more after his first body slam, he can do it again. That stops a lot more than a few punches.

 

[Danpascooch]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

He should've yelled for a teacher, while holding a kid that is smaller than him, and have a bunch of the smaller kids friends around him.

Yeah, that'll work out well.

It would have worked out fine, the same video that we all saw would have cleared his name.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I'll ignore for a second that you seem to think holding the kid down would have resulted in a bigger punishment than dropping him on his head (which makes absolutely no sense), wouldn't the teacher have wondered why he yelled "teacher" while holding a kid down? Most people who start a fight don't yell for a teacher so she can bear witness to them doing something wrong, and he sure as HELL wouldn't have been suspended for it.

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please.

 

[Danpascooch]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

 

[Ranooth]

This happened to me when i was in year 9! Although i dropped the dickhead fully on his head.

Wish i had filmed now :/

 

[Danish rage]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

I take you´re word for it Doctor

 

[4173]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

Because the worst consequences of bullying are not hurt feelings.

And you may be right about what holding him down would prove but it may also prove to the bully he needs to bring a few friends and a baseball bat. Bullies are generally not the type that take insults well.

 

[Danpascooch]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

I take you´re word for it Doctor

It's common sense that being dropped on your head can kill you because of how temperamental the neck is, so many kids are disabled or killed on trampolines every year because of much the same thing (landing on their head) and Pile-drivers aren't even attempted in wrestling much anymore because they are so dangerous.

It's common sense, but hell, if you want to confer with someone with MD be my guess, they'll probably laugh their ass off when you ask "is it safe to drop someone on their head?"

 

[gphjr14]

"Naked force has resolved more issues throughout history than any other factor."

I was bullied in school. It stopped when I cought the instigator alone one day and beat him.
That WORKED. Talking did NOT.

So maybe I am biased because of my personal experience, but that is how I see it. Casey was right to fight back.

While sometimes direct force is necessary when talking isn't an option, it should be your first course of action. Societies that only value force over reasoning and dialog usually end up like the various territories in Africa where people kill each other, hold power for a while and eventually end up like their predecessors, dead.

I stabbed a kid in middle school (with a fork) because he kept messing with me and that was only after several attempts to get him to leave me alone. I just can't get behind the idea that violence is the only way to resolve an issue as seemed to be the case in the novel and movie Starship Troopers. Such a philosophy only seems to create temporary peace and only sets the stage for even more conflict later on.

 

[Danpascooch]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

Because the worst consequences of bullying are not hurt feelings.

And you may be right about what holding him down would prove but it may also prove to the bully he needs to bring a few friends and a baseball bat. Bullies are generally not the type that take insults well.

Sure that could have happened, but bringing half a dozen friends and a baseball bat would still be plenty effective even with the piledriver.

You're throwing out a farfetched hypothetical scenario in defense of an action that could have easily killed this child, and action that doesn't even prevent that same hypothetical scenario no less.

Casey is being lauded as a hero for almost committing manslaughter, but the braver thing would have been to hold him and call a teacher, that would have made him actually deserve all this praise, if you have the strength to do it, almost killing a bully is easy, the hard part, the part that makes you a responsible and respectable person, is showing responsibility and restraint.

 

[Baneat]

Wish I knew what a piledriver when I was 10 8(

In Scotland all I knew was the classic headbutt and kick in the balls.

Are those moves pulled off at the same time? Because that would look amazing

I'm trying to imagine it but all I come up with is something that looks like it should be an iPod silhouette

 

[4173]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

Because the worst consequences of bullying are not hurt feelings.

And you may be right about what holding him down would prove but it may also prove to the bully he needs to bring a few friends and a baseball bat. Bullies are generally not the type that take insults well.

Sure that could have happened, but bringing half a dozen friends and a baseball bat would still be plenty effective even with the piledriver.

You're throwing out a farfetched hypothetical scenario in defense of an action that could have easily killed this child, and action that doesn't even prevent that same hypothetical scenario no less.

Casey is being lauded as a hero for almost committing manslaughter, but the braver thing would have been to hold him and call a teacher, that would have made him actually deserve all this praise, if you have the strength to do it, almost killing a bully is easy, the hard part, the part that makes you a responsible and respectable person, is showing responsibility and restraint.

Yes, it is still possible for the gang attack, but it changes the nature of the conflict. Kids that may be fine with bullying may shy away from literal assault and battery.

Yes, Casey could have killed the kid. But bullying kills kids too, full stop. Why are you so you concerned about worst case consequences for the bully, but not the victim? Everyone is talking about hypothetical cases here.

 

[Danpascooch]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

Because the worst consequences of bullying are not hurt feelings.

And you may be right about what holding him down would prove but it may also prove to the bully he needs to bring a few friends and a baseball bat. Bullies are generally not the type that take insults well.

Sure that could have happened, but bringing half a dozen friends and a baseball bat would still be plenty effective even with the piledriver.

You're throwing out a farfetched hypothetical scenario in defense of an action that could have easily killed this child, and action that doesn't even prevent that same hypothetical scenario no less.

Casey is being lauded as a hero for almost committing manslaughter, but the braver thing would have been to hold him and call a teacher, that would have made him actually deserve all this praise, if you have the strength to do it, almost killing a bully is easy, the hard part, the part that makes you a responsible and respectable person, is showing responsibility and restraint.

Yes, it is still possible for the gang attack, but it changes the nature of the conflict. Kids that may be fine with bullying may shy away from literal assault and battery.

Yes, Casey could have killed the kid. But bullying kills kids too, full stop. Why are you so you concerned about worst case consequences for the bully, but not the victim? Everyone is talking about hypothetical cases here.

Because one is hypothetical in the respect that no steps have been taken and no evidence has been shown that it will ever occur in the future.

And the other is an action that already happened and could have easily resulted in death had the head landed like, 1 inch shifted in the wrong direction.

Any guy I pass on the street could hypothetically some day kill me with a baseball bat, that doesn't mean I'm justified to drop them on their head because of some very unlikely hypothetical scenario in which they one day kill me.

 

[Gindil]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

I take you´re word for it Doctor

It's common sense that being dropped on your head can kill you because of how temperamental the neck is, so many kids are disabled or killed on trampolines every year because of much the same thing (landing on their head) and Pile-drivers aren't even attempted in wrestling much anymore because they are so dangerous.

It's common sense, but hell, if you want to confer with someone with MD be my guess, they'll probably laugh their ass off when you ask "is it safe to drop someone on their head?"

You missed the sarcasm. Let's also forget you're going into a hypothetical yourself.

The bully tormented him nonstop for two weeks. Casey went to stop the bully. He did it with a piledriver given his larger size. It did two things:

1) It acted as a deterrent from anyone else getting involved in the scenario.

2) It proved that even though Casey is outnumbered, he WILL hurt people that cross him.

What you're describing is one kid that doesn't have backup. There's 4 other people in the scenario. When the punches start flying, guess who would have been the first to try to hold down Casey? The tall guy who tried to come to his aid in the last few seconds. If anything, I was told to target one person and beat the everloving snot out of him so that the other boys in the group give pause to think it could happen to him.

That's exactly what's going to happen with Lil Zangief's 30 seconds of fame.

 

[Danpascooch]

So we're celebrating and praising a kid for pile-driving a smaller kid into the ground?

No. We are praising self-defense. Notice that after a bully got thrown on the ground, that kid just walked away, while he could beat him up some more. I respect him for that.

Still, he could have killed the kid if he had dropped him on his head. Responding to a violent person with more violence is natural, but it's not necessary. If Casey didn't retaliate and the video made it onto the internet, then the bully would have no doubt been expelled and his friends suspended.

you were never bullied were you?
if you were you would know that this does NOT stop till you make them. the system in place doesnt work these kids would probily have said he started it and the teachers would have beleaved them due to the fact there are more of them.

Alright no, this is not alright.

We all want to stand up to bullies, and a good punch to the face would have been great, but this could have literally killed the guy if he landed just a little bit differently.

It is sheer luck this didn't become a story about a murder, so no, it's not alright, I sympathize with the kid, and I do think he should have retaliated, but we shouldn't be praising him for using force that could have easily been lethal.

i aggree that this could have gone bad but if he had killed the prick (and yes he is a prick) it would have been manslauter in self defense. Now if this would of happened it would of been tragic that a kid who was bullied killed someone when he didnt mean to but to be fair had it happened it was his own fault and while tragic would have been fully suported by my slef and most people i know.

So bullying means you deserve to get murdered? You'd support murder in response to bullying? Seriously?

I get that capital punishment is a hot debate recently, but capital punishment for schoolyard bullying isn't a debate that anyone is having.

I think you need to get your priorities straight, do you want to live in a world where someone is justified to murder a school bully?

Use the terminology correctly. For it to be murder, there has to be intent to kill. What this would be (if the little bastard had croaked it) is manslaughter. Killed by accident, with no intent to do so, combined with it being self-defense. Manslaughter, and low level manslaughter at that. It may seem to be nit picking, but the different crimes exist because the differences are bloody important.

Casey got hit, several times. Casey defended himself, using appropriate force levels (non-lethal force versus non-lethal force, and yes, an unarmed body slam is considered non-lethal force). If the kid had gotten killed or badly hurt, that would have been too bad, but I'd have had to consider it a self inflicted injury. As it is, he's relatively unhurt, and maybe Casey will have fewer bullies to worry about in the future. I sure wouldn't want to mess with the guy.

You realize that self defense requires appropriate levels of force right? That is, only enough to remove the threat of harm to yourself.

Casey clearly removed the harm to himself when he grabbed the kid, the kid could no longer hit him, after removing the threat, Casey then proceeded to lift him and basically drop him on his head.

Much like you can't shoot someone in the face 5 times for slapping you, this was nowhere near "appropriate force levels"

What do YOU suggest he should've done after he grabbed the little shit, then? Put him down nicely?

Yelled at the top of his lungs for a teacher.

Yes I know it doesn't sound as exciting as "Slam the fucker onto the ground head-fucking-first" but we live in the real world, dropping someone on their head is a great way to be sent to jail for murder.

And what would that achieve, exactly? Casey would be told to man up and the bully would get a slap on the wrist (if anything at all, remember it would be Casey's word against everyone else's) As far as the bully is concerned, nothing of consequence would happen. While a bodyslam may have been a bit over the top, I can't really fault him for taking the matter into his own hands.

The video would have shown that the kid instigated the fight, the bully got suspended remember? Why do you think he got suspended? Because he punched Casey? Or because he got dropped on his head? Think it through logically, he wasn't suspended because of how Casey retaliated, that makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER, he got suspended because of his part in the fight.

Clearly you think executing a maneuver that could have killed the kid is a better idea? What the fuck is wrong with everyone!? A kid could have died here, and all anyone cares about is the fact that he got back at a bully and it looked cool. For god's sake I thought the people on this site were intelligent, but it looks like all it takes for them to lose all sense of reality is a video of someone fulfilling Escapist users' collective repressed desire to get back at bullies while looking cool.

Let's review alright?

What is more important:

1.) Getting back at a bully

2.) Not committing manslaughter

(pro tip: This is a really easy question)

I know it's a very cool video, but think logically please. Even if they didn't get ahold of the video, Casey would have at least avoided his suspension (after all, who gets suspended for holding someone down and calling a teacher?) The teacher would have clearly known he didn't start it, because no bully starts a fight and then calls a teacher so he/she can catch him the act.

As for what it would achieve? Same thing as the piledriver did really. The piledriver got the bully to realize "fuck, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me" and holding him down would have made him realize "fuck, I tried to punch this kid and he grabbed me and held me still like I was a 5 year old, I can't mess with this kid, he's much stronger than me"

Both achieve much the same result, but one removes the risk of manslaughter and the suspension. Seriously, why doesn't anyone think the fact that this guy could have died is a big deal? What the hell is wrong with everyone!?

Look, if it helps I think the video was really cool, and I think Casey should have punched that asshole in the face, I just don't think he should have almost killed him.

I take you´re word for it Doctor

It's common sense that being dropped on your head can kill you because of how temperamental the neck is, so many kids are disabled or killed on trampolines every year because of much the same thing (landing on their head) and Pile-drivers aren't even attempted in wrestling much anymore because they are so dangerous.

It's common sense, but hell, if you want to confer with someone with MD be my guess, they'll probably laugh their ass off when you ask "is it safe to drop someone on their head?"

You missed the sarcasm. Let's also forget you're going into a hypothetical yourself.

The bully tormented him nonstop for two weeks. Casey went to stop the bully. He did it with a piledriver given his larger size. It did two things:

1) It acted as a deterrent from anyone else getting involved in the scenario.

2) It proved that even though Casey is outnumbered, he WILL hurt people that cross him.

What you're describing is one kid that doesn't have backup. There's 4 other people in the scenario. When the punches start flying, guess who would have been the first to try to hold down Casey? The tall guy who tried to come to his aid in the last few seconds. If anything, I was told to target one person and beat the everloving snot out of him so that the other boys in the group give pause to think it could happen to him.

That's exactly what's going to happen with Lil Zangief's 30 seconds of fame.

They were standing in a hallway in the middle of a school day, assuming the teachers aren't fucking plants who have to actually grow themselves to where they want to go, if he shouted he could have had an adult there in like 5 seconds or less, he chose not to though, he chose to put a kid into a situation that could have likely ended in paralysis or death.

 

[Yokai]

Good for the kid. I respect him and think he was fully in the right.

As for all you people who are condemning him for performing a potentially fatal maneuver on his attacker, I'm curious what you would do in the same situation. If someone's just punched you twice in the head and once in the stomach, you don't carefully stop and consider the moral and legal ramifications of the situation. You do everything you can to prevent another attack. It's instinct. Casey ended the fight in the quickest way he knew how and walked away. It wasn't excessive force.

Had he held the kid and yelled for a teacher, as many of you are suggesting, I'm guessing either the bully would have gotten free and continued beating on him, and his friends might have joined in too, or a teacher would have showed up, seen a bigger kid with a smaller kid in a headlock, and Casey would have been blamed for everything while his attacker got off scot-free. Besides, it sounds like he'd been bullied before, so it's likely the school didn't give a shit either way.

You can argue over semantics and hypothetical outcomes all you want, but at the end of the day, what happened here was that a long-suffering victim stood up for himself and showed his abusers he's sick of being fucked with. It's something everyone should aspire to, honestly, even if you don't have to piledrive anyone to make your point.

 

[Christopher Koulouris]

Which begs the question, why was this young boy allowed to be subjected to such abuse for so long? Where were his parents in all of this? Didn?t they know,care, wonder, notice the tears in Casey?s locker room metaphorically speaking? What about school administrators? School teachers? Why didn?t they intervene? Where they also taking the piss out of the boy too? And why did his friends ditch him? What type of society do we live in when the most violated members of society are left to fend for themselves? Can we even wonder how it didn?t miraculously come to Casey one day walking into class like others have with a shotgun?

http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2011/03/tormented-aussie-bully-victim-casey-haynes-reveals-hed-been-considering-suicide/

 

[4173]

Yes, it is still possible for the gang attack, but it changes the nature of the conflict. Kids that may be fine with bullying may shy away from literal assault and battery.

Yes, Casey could have killed the kid. But bullying kills kids too, full stop. Why are you so you concerned about worst case consequences for the bully, but not the victim? Everyone is talking about hypothetical cases here.

Because one is hypothetical in the respect that no steps have been taken and no evidence has been shown that it will ever occur in the future.

And the other is an action that already happened and could have easily resulted in death had the head landed like, 1 inch shifted in the wrong direction.

Any guy I pass on the street could hypothetically some day kill me with a baseball bat, that doesn't mean I'm justified to drop them on their head because of some very unlikely hypothetical scenario in which they one day kill me.

A kid has been bullied. That right there is steps that have been taken and evidence it could occur in the future.

In fact, since the bullying predates Casey's attack some of those actions had already happened and could have resulted in the death of a kid or kids.

No, you can't drop a random passerby, even if he is carrying a bat. But if he is swinging that bat at you, absolutely you can drop him.

Would it have been better if his physical response was something a bit less life threatening? Yes, it would have. If the bully had died it certainly would have been tragic, but I don't think there is strong evidence that Casey acted with malice. This isn't a case of shooting a fleeing robber in the back. I think you're holding him to too high a standard, if they were both adults your case would be much stronger.