Actually, cyber bullying was already here. Whatever happened to the good old days where the bullies just made everyone’s life miserable on the playground?
Area schools and parent-teacher organizations are meeting to discuss the growing trend of cyber bullying where children and teens use computers, hand-held devices, cell phones and blackberries to harass torture and embarrass their peers.
Apparently the problem is so epidemic that PW County Schools plan to include cyber bullying in the Code of Behavior. Regular bullying is already a point of emphasis. In the past few years, schools have become increasingly sensitive to the harmful affects of bullying. Deputy Superintendent Rae Darlington has been a champion of the anti-bullying programs that already exist in the county.
According to the News and Messenger:
The suggested changes to the Code of Behavior, which the School Board reviews and updates annually, would expand the definition of bullying to say that “cyber bullying, the intentional and/or repeated harm of others through the use of computers, cell phones, and other electronic or technological devices, is strictly forbidden.”
Clarice Torian, Director of Student Services for Prince William County Schools recently told the school board:
“The suggested additions to the code of behavior would apply to student behavior in school, and outside of school if the behavior impacts the school environment.”
News and Messenger also reports:
According to a study by criminology professors Sameer Hinduja and Justin Patchin, who started the Web site http://www.cyberbullying.us, 9.4 percent of middle schoolers reported being recent victims of cyberbullying and 17.3 percent reported being victims at some point in their lives.
The study also said that 8.2 percent of middle schoolers reported being recent cyber bullies themselves and 17.6 percent reported being cyber bullies at some point in their lives.
According to the study, some examples of cyber bullying are sending harassing e-mails or instant messages, posting insulting or slanderous things on online bulletin boards or social networking sites.
Does this behavior stop at adolescence? Is this something kids outgrow or is it something we continue to see way into adulthood? Certainly those of us who have traveled about the blogosphere are quite familiar with bullying. Additionally, those of us who have dealt with political issues are certainly familiar with some of the bully tactics that are used in against the ‘enemy.’
What is adult cyber bullying? Would those who bully do so on the playground or is the anonymity of a computer what brings out this disturbing behavior? How does it manifest itself in the blogosphere? The chat rooms? Emails?
Over the weekend, let’s take a look at examples of cyber bullying as it relates to blogging and politics. I am sure many of us have a story to tell.
Actually, this quote from the article kind of answers the question: “The suggested changes to the Code of Behavior, which the School Board reviews and updates annually…”
If they update the behavior code, then yes, it would apply to all PWC schools.
I emailed the Middle School Super to get clarification.
OK, thanks Pinko. Does seem like if they update the code, it applies to all PWC schools. Sounded thought that Gainesville Middle school (I guess) made some change above and beyond the policy. Maybe just the update didn’t make it to the website – briefly skimming that policy on the link you sent seemed to have a date of 2005 on it – did not have time to read the whole thing though.
Posting as Pinko, I am sorry to hear about your painful experience. I understand how long it can take not only psychologically but medically to get through something like this. Medication changes do not take effect immediately and it may take a long time to adjust them appropriately. Even when medication has stabilized, metabolic and other changes can warrant more adjustments. I hope you have good, consistent care now that you are with a different doctor.
This has been an informative rather emotional thread. I would like to congratulate you all for participating. Bullying and its effects are not easy things to talk (or in this case write) about.
Pinko, I admire your courage all the more. You are a survivor not a victim. There are a lot of people in your situation who never come forward and carry the secret as if they are the one who should be ashamed. No, it is the one who engages in a cowardly act of violence who should be ashamed. Survivors with such courage are a blessing to society.
Elena, your story is also illuminating. Along with Gainseville Resident, this entire thread has been a catharsis as well as an example of how painful experiences can make us stronger, more courageous, and more capable of reaching understanding, and giving back to your community.
Thanks, Witness. I don’t see myself as a victim, either, if for no other reason than there are so many people suffering so much more. Besides, I am blessed to have a family to take care of, and that has held me together.
Elena, you inspire me. You’ve turned painful experiences into something else–something worth doing. There are positives that come from all this. We just can’t always see them right away.
It sounds like Gainesville Middle is highlighting the problem and incorporating cyber-bullying into their program. However, at the same time, the county is probably updating its Code of Behavior to contain more specific language forbidding cyber-bullying.
Apparently cyber-bullying is growing exponentially. We also have to include kids recording smackdowns and group beatings on their cell phones, then posting the events on youtube. Why are kids surprised when they get expelled for gang jumping a single student getting off a school bus?
OK Moon-howler – what you say makes sense about what Gainesville Middle might be doing in addition to what is already in county school code. As you say, that is probably getting updated too. Wonder if maybe they don’t keep it up-to-date on website, as it seemed to be dated June 2005.
Does seem like it is really a growing problem – again technology enabling something bad, and it is getting easier and easier to do and more pervasive as everyone is connected 24×7 through things like Facebook and so on. What a mess! That stuff with kids posting criminal activity on youtube is some really sick stuff. And how stupid can you be anyway – commit a crime and post video of yourself doing so! First one I remember was some stupid kids somewhere going around shooting at people with BB guns, and filming the whole thing including themselves and putting it up on youtube. They must have been surprised when police came knocking at their doors a few days later! What a bunch of dummies!
Cyber-bullying has no weight other than solicitation for social sympathy, outrage and expression of social disgust, an outlet for social cynicism or expression of social insecurity, quite often used when it can be “interpretable” in the eyes of the beholder as a psychological self-victimization weapon for people who lack power to obtain power over others by refusing to stand up for themselves, by soliciting guilt, by soliciting sympathy or by passively intimidating others withpassive agressive behavior, by accusing them of wrongs they may not have done in the strict letter of the law, IF THE ACTIONS DO NOT FOLLOW THE FOLLOWING LEGAL DEFINION OF LAW-BREAKING.
“Young people should be aware that some forms of online bullying are considered criminal acts. Under the Criminal Code of Canada, it is a crime to communicate repeatedly with someone if your communication causes them to fear for their own safety or the safety of others.”
You must inform the person of this fear for their own safety for it to be a crime and file a police report. A judge must then allow the accused a fair hearing to determine who is telling the truth and who is lying.
“It’s also a crime to publish a “defamatory libel” – writing something that is designed to insult a person or likely to injure a person’s reputation by exposing him or her to hatred, contempt or ridicule.”
How many on this blog have hurt the reputation of Corey Stuart, or Greg Letique by false accusations designed to injure a person’s reputation?, or in the cast of Posting as Pinko, by people who said things about her that were designed to injure her commercial or public employment reputation?. These may be persecuted by filing a police report and bring libel hearings before the judge. It is up to the judge to determine who was damaged by what was said and who will deserve financial compensation for public or political libel.
If it is not public or political Libel, by the letter of the law, then it is FREE political speech, which is usually the ruling on cases brought to court as a result of things said on open forum blogs.
“A cyber bully may also be violating the Canadian Human Rights Act, if he or she spreads hate or discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status or disability.”
How many people on BOTH sides of the debate on this blog have made racist comments, prejudiced, priviliged or discrimminated against “individuals” based on race, national or ethnic origin, color, religion (YES Gospel Greg hate speech), age, sex (Women hater AND man hater speech), sexual orientation, marital status (hate speech directed at a bloggers spouse), family status or disability.
Note that weight, and intelligence are not included on this list of discrimmination because business can discrimminate against weight, and intellect and likely always will be able to.
To be “bullying” technically you must also past the legal test of “assault”.
Assault is a crime of violence against another person. In some jurisdictions, including Australia and New Zealand, assault refers to an act that causes another to apprehend immediate and personal violence, while in other jurisdictions, such as the United States, assault may refer only to the threat of violence caused by an immediate show of force.[1][2] On the other hand, in Canada, assault can be simply just touching another without their consent.
Assault is often defined to include not only violence, but any physical contact with another person without their consent. In common law jurisdictions, including England and Wales and the United States, battery is the crime that represents the unlawful physical contact, though this distinction does not exist in all jurisdictions. Exceptions exist to cover unsolicited physical contact which amount to normal social behavior known as de minimis harm.
In most jurisdictions, the intention to cause grievous bodily harm (or its equivalent) may amount to the mental requirement to prefer a charge of murder in circumstances where the harm inflicted upon the victim proves fatal.[3]
At common law criminal assault was an attempted battery. The elements of battery are (1) a volitional act[4] (2) done for the purpose of causing an harmful or offensive contact with another person or under circumstances that make such contact substantially certain to occur and (3) which causes such contact.[5] Thus throwing a rock at someone for the purpose of hitting him is a battery if the rock in fact strikes the person and is an assault if the rock misses. The fact that the person may have been unaware that the rock was thrown at him is irrelevant under this definition of assault. Some jurisdictions have incorporated the definition of civil assault into the definition of the crime making it a criminal assault to intentionally place another person in “fear” of a harmful or offensive contact. “Fear” means merely apprehension – awareness rather than any emotional state. Therefore, if you see the rock in flight and realize that you are in danger of being hit then the element of “fear” has been met even if the prospect of being hit by a rock does not frighten you.
Everything ELSE that does not PASS THIS STRICT legal test is “FREE SPEECH on an open and public forum.
There are many “beliefs” and desires to oppress the general public with personal views (religious or socialist or other wise) out there, but the LAW is the only correct interpretation of what constitutes bullying.
I would love to entertain comments later, but I am tired and only have time for one quote to but a balanced view to the above discussion.
I too feel sorry for anyone who feels they have been bullied, but you must also understand what technically is “bullying” according to the law is ASSAULT, and ASSAULT is very different than what is just someones personal greivance with another person.
Michael, your references to Canadian law are interesting.
And as you imply, it’s damn hard to prove libel because in order to substantiate the claim, you have to show concrete damage such as loss of money or job or something of that order.
Proving psychological damage is also pretty difficult unless the victim has a disability or some other trait that would cause him/her to be more easily injured. But even then, usually unless there is physical evidence correlating with the psychological (for example, panic attacks or something like that), the law probably wouldn’t step in with more than a “Hey you! Knock it off!”
If a blogger or anyone else truly feels threatened, s/he should report it to the police as a safety measure and save all communications in case they are needed.
In school, the stakes are different because if, for example, there is a kid who is afraid to show up to class, the school must take action or they can be held liable. And of course, cyber-bullying can lead to physical bullying–I’d be interested to see some stats on that. Schools don’t necessarily need to prove assault to suspend or even expel a student. A few threats will usually do.
The slippery part is proving intimidation in school. It can happen for sure, and I am also sure there have been enough cases of cyber-bullying for the school to have shown a need for the policy. I guess that’s the criteria they will use when considering a full-blown county policy. It will be interesting to see.
I’m off to bed too. G’night!
Michael, ‘bullying’ is generally defined in sociological and psychological terms.
Trying bullying someone at work and watch how long you have a job. Bully someone at school. See how long you are enrolled as a student.
Odd that you should come to the defense of Corey Stewart. It sounds to me like you have some principle interest here. Verrrry interesting. I don’t recall anyone ever criticizing Corey here other than over political differences. Funny you are trying to make it personal. Why is that?
I’m fairly certain no one is able to penetrate Corey Stewart’s ego deep enough to cause him psychological harm. And since his political network and pockets are deep, there is little chance a blog or blogger would even come close to libel/slander. Besides, what would he or anyone else get from suing? Most of us aren’t what you would call economically viable targets, even if he or anyone else COULD prove libel/slander.
Politicians are harder pressed than the average person to prove damages because unless you start saying things like “He slept with my mother!” then their political actions are fair game–that includes poking fun and mocking, however offensive that kind of behaviour may seem to some. The more likely scenario would be an official suing a large media corporation, which undoubtedly has good lawyers working for them anyway.
I also doubt anyone knows enough about any of the key players’ personal lives to make it personal. I know I don’t (and wouldn’t want to). Key players = Stewart, Stirrup, GL, Duecaster, HSM radicals, FAIR lobbyists, etc.
Conversely, HSM seems to know a lot about OUR personal lives. They are good at delving into, say, where people work (i.e. Marie and others…I don’t count since it doesn’t take a genius to figure out the places I work…and yes, I said “places”). HSM has also looked up and posted things like addresses, marital records, license plate numbers and other information that has nothing to do with the immigration debate and/or how it affects the community.
So if we really wanted to go down that road…which frankly I don’t…bloggers could come together and make a real legal stink over this whole ridiculous mess brought to us courtesy of FAIR, HSM and our BOCS.
If Stewart would stop talking about it, we might have a chance to let it die down, but since he is representing PWC and the rest of the BOCS by bragging about crime stats with little meaning, there’s little chance of this happening. One could argue Stewart is media-bullying.
“Michael”,
As usual…..HUH? Having worked in the school system, we never equated verbal bullying to assualt, it was simply unacceptable behavior that was used to intimidate other students, and often, that mean behavior, correlated with problems at home. Bullies usually suffer from low self esteem.
As far as Corey et al go, I am very confident that we directed our disdain for their ill concieved policies, a policy that generated from an organization, FAIR, that is listed as an extremist group by ADL. The Anti Defamation League is an organization recognized world wide and one that has a training program for law enforcement that has participation nationally.
I, along with Alanna, and many others, have always advocated that there is a credible discussion to be had regarding immigration, national safety, and economics, however, we have urged the immmediate end of scapegoating and villification of one culture, Latino’s. It’s that simple, really. You continue to miss that point.
All I’ll say is some on here called Corey racist many times. I do not believe he is so, he is just your average politician trying to take advantage of what he perceived as a hot button issue, and slanting things to make his point. That is not racism. I thought those who called him racists were really reaching. Corey is just no better or worse than any politician, they all skew facts, lie, etc. to make their point. Has anyone met an honest politician? I haven’t.
I agree with you Gainesville, I think it was opportunistic of Corey, all political. However, I was troubled, during the summary of the citizen satisfaction survery, when Corey asked if “Spanish speakers were asked about their legal status”. Why would you ask only Spanish speakers?
OK, fair enough Elena. But I still see that as political opportunism, just saying what he thought people (his supporters) wanted him to hear. I just think there was too much of “racist Corey this”, “racist Corey that” by some posters on this blog at times. Got kind of tiring to read and really does anyone believe he is truly racist? Well I guess some posters on here do so probably shouldn’t even bother to ask the question as I already have my answer, in regards to what I read here in the past.
To me, if you support racism and you are in a position of power, you are racist by default.
Look, if I promote drug abuse but manage to hide or deny my own use, aren’t I still a drug user?
The first version of the resolution promoted racism in that it encouraged racial profiling.
The resolution was taken from a racist group–FAIR.
There’s no excuse for that in my book…never mind Stewart’s slip-ups referring to Spanish speakers. And how about bragging about all those ESOL kids supposedly gone? Is that not racism?
I have blogged extensively about racism, so I won’t bore you to death with it, but for the reasons I mentioned above, I believe Stewart is racist….as well as another lying politician.
GR, I agree. Most politicians lie and are opportunists. I have a poor opinion of politicians. I do not have a poor opinion of leaders. Real leaders don’t let extremist and hate groups run their county.
I still don’t agree Stewart is racist, but we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. All politicians are liars, in my opinion, there isn’t an honest one in the bunch. So calling Corey a liar is not a big deal.
And the word racism or racist is overused here at times. I know I read posts here where anyone who supported the resolution was a racist. Let’s get real.
@Gainesville Resident
I know what you mean, GR. MH hates it when I use “racism” as well. She thinks it’s used too much so it doesn’t mean anything anymore. She’s right, but I can’t come up with a better word. Bigotry? Discrimination?
Pinko – either of those words, especially bigotry, have the same connotation. Bigotry is essentially a synonym for racism. Discrimination, i think not either.
I just think it is stretching it to say Stewart is racist. Just the way some posters on here made statements to the effect that anyone who supports the resolution is racist, or must have ideas planted in their head by Greg, or any of a number of other equally silly and untrue statements.
Anyway, I’ll continue to disagree on the above.
Agree to disagree….that’s fair. What we think or do not think of him doesn’t effect Stewart one bit anyway. 🙂
Racism is racial or ethnic prejudice (thought) in action. If one is actively promoting or using racial/ethnic prejudice to their advantage, I would have to say you could make a fair case for that qualifying as racism.
I can’t be sure what someone thinks unless they tell me, but words and actions are a different story. If your words or actions indicate a belief that a certain cultural group should be treated with greater suspicion or should leave the area….what does that say about you?
Just curious…what does qualify as actual racism if people here are using the term too freely?
Here’s some interesting research – there is a link between being bullied and psychotic behavior later in life (like the story MH told) along with other stats about bullying
http://www.child-psych.org/2009/05/bully-victims-at-risk-for-psychotic-symptoms.html
Interesting article You Wish. I am quite sure bullying can lead to different effects on different victims obviously, and things can sometimes go very bad, as we’ve seen at VA Tech and some other school shootings, and of course perhaps in adult life I’m sure there has been cases too. Hopefully, those cases are few and far between. No doubt though, bullying leaves lifelong scars, and some people handle it better or differently than others.
The article says frequency of bullying was a major predictor of increased chances of problems later on. In my case bullying was daily and sometimes more than one time a day. Also roughly 30 or 40% of it I’d say was physical, rest was just verbal. While for me the problems manifested in extreme shyness and still to this day at the oddest times I’ll clam up in social situations and also I don’t like crowded malls (reminds me of hallways at school where 75% of bullying occurred), I’m glad my problems weren’t more extreme. Obviously there are other factors at play, but I can see the article’s point in some ways as to frequency of bullying, physicality of it, spreading rumors (didn’t happen to me), and social exclusion (I had a few friends and really the bad guys weren’t ones who I’d wanted to be friends with anyway) – can make one susceptical to extreme psychiatric problems later in life. Obviously VA Tech shooter was an example of psychotic behavior. Anyway, good article, thanks for posting.
@DiversityGal
DG, I had fun with the “what is racism?” question on my blog. You can bore yourself by going here: http://luxuriouschoices.blogspot.com/2009/04/reverse-discrimination.html
I do believe if public officials support racist groups and racist policy, then they are racist.
Think about it like this. If you support Obama’s policy on abortion, are you not, then, someone who believes abortion isn’t necessarily “wrong”?
@GainesvilleResident
Gainesville Resident, more often than not, you will see comordbid conditions in seriously mentally ill patients. This means there is more than one illness going on at once. Cho most likely had many comorbid illnesses.
There is no doubt in my mind that Cho had a psychological drive towards violence which was exacerbated by his being bullied. External events combined with neurological imbalances make mental illness far worse–never mind that Cho was not under treatment.
As you know from your own experiences, though, bullying can cause emotional trauma. But that doesn’t mean you will necessarily become violent.
OK Anesthesia – yes I’m sure Cho had more than one psychological issue. And it does indeed seem more than plausible to me that external events can exacerbate these underlying psychological issues in someone who already has them or is prone to those things. But yes, while in many cases it causes emotional trauma, it does not make most of us into mass murderers. Bullying is so prevalent, that there is such a large sample size of victims, unfortunately thre are bound to be these outlier cases where there are extreme reactions unfortunately. To me it is a simple numbers game, probability tells us that there are bound to be extreme cases/reactions, and Cho was definitely one of those, as were some other notorious school shootings and probably other incidents not in the schools, and even by adults.
I’m sure plenty of medical/behavorial papers and research has been done, or will be done on this.
Here’s a general article on Cho’s mental state which shows comorbid conditions.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/26/AR2007082601410.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Here’s an interesting article on cyber bullying that includes a family ganging up on a middle school girl on FaceBook.
http://www.fedsmith.com/article/1780/
From the article if you don’t have time to read it:
–You may have read the very recent – and profoundly disturbing – headline about a Missouri woman who was found guilty of misdemeanor crimes in a “MySpace” cyber-bullying case linked to a 13-year-old girl’s suicide. According to prosecutors, the woman conspired with her young daughter and a business associate to create a fictitious profile of a 16-year-old boy on MySpace to harass Megan Meier, apparently in an effort to humiliate Megan for saying mean things about her daughter.
The “boy” sent flirtatious messages to Megan, but then abruptly changed to a very harsh tone, telling her “The world would be a better place without you.” After receiving that message, Megan hanged herself with a belt in her bedroom closet. According to prosecutors, the woman knew that Megan suffered from depression and was emotionally fragile.–
An excellent point, but there is a difference because opinions on abortion are acceptable on both sides of the issue, while racism has been pretty well rejected by mainstream America. Also, I believe there is a difference thinking that racism is not necessarily wrong and being a racist.
Racist organizations like the KKK have been growing and organizing on the immigration issue this whole decade, and there are hate groups/lobbying firms that have meddled in Prince William County government policy, even written policy the Immigration Resolution for us.
But that does not in itself mean the policy was racist. It means only that there were likely racist intentions for SOME for the people who supported it it. If you are an elected official who did not realize this until after the fact, it is unfair to be called racist unless you knew ahead of time. They did change the policy almost immediately after the hate group connections were revealed, and at the time when they first voted for the policy, they mistakenly believed that people actually wanted it due to their unfamiliarity with how automated faxes and national email databases work.
So in sum, I think it is harsh language to go after the Board as an institution as being racist, and it not productive to refer to the policy as racist. The best way to reverse a policy is to show that it is counterproductive, or, in our case, that it will lead to racial profiling lawsuits and damage our local economy. Neither of these things directly say the word “racism” but they were ultimately a lot more effective.
Witness, I agree that some members of the BOCS probably didn’t understand the ramifications of the first immigration resolution or the origins of the emails–though why they would ignore thousands of people protesting outside their chambers is beyond me. Shouldn’t that have given a clue that there was something inherently wrong with the resolution?
But even after it was discovered the original resolution would encourage racial profiling, there were people on the BOCS who didn’t want the resolution changed (to say nothing of the HSM crowd who wanted it to stay the same as well). There are people who still brag about the resolution like it has done miracles for this county. This attitude marks something more than a big, bad “ooops.”
As far as the abortion debate, there are people who believe abortion is absolutely immoral and should never be allowed. In the same way there are people who believe a policy that at best exacerbates racism should never be allowed.
Unlike anti-abortion folks, though, racists will rarely admit what they are trying to achieve. They will never say, “Yes, I’m a racist and I’m proud of it.” They will, instead, try to justify their behavior and call it something like…oh, I don’t know…free speech?
“Neither of these things directly say the word “racism” but they were ultimately a lot more effective.”
But Witness, there IS racism involved when a policy encourages racial profiling! Whether it’s harsh or not, it has to be said, IMHO. Call it what it is.
I seriously doubt the validity of the concepts that the original resolution encouraged racial profiling. When you read it, it “required” officers to treat all people the same ragardless of race, and ask them if stopped about illegal immigration status. How can manditorily asking “everyone” their legal status if they do not have a driver’s license or other proof of legality be “racial profiling?”.
The resolution in its current state still allows officers to inquire into illegal status if they believe it is warrented by the behaviors of the individual. This is not racial profiling either.
Many of you say things you believe are true, because you’ve said them so many times and “believe” they are true when they are not. That is because of your lack of “ethics” and “knowledge” and your own racial prejudices to support “illegal” immigrants.
The whole “racist” thing is getting old quick. And several individuals have tried to, politely, show that it is not productive in moving forward in PWC and healing the rift. Why some people continue to bang that drum is beyond me, especially when those same people (Pinko and ShellyB come to mind)are the ones crying about the bad name the county has. When you continually bash away at a group of individuals who were trying to do what they felt was the right thing at the time, you are just rubbing salt in the wound.
Please, enough already. Can we move on from the damn “Your racist, he’s racist, that’s racist” and move forward? Can we stop spinning our wheels?
Courtland Milloy wrote about anonymous cyber nastiness in his column today in the Post Metro section. Title: “Online Readers Should Tone Down the Invective”. First paragraph: “Who are you people? You get invited to make comments about my work on the Washington Post website, and you turn my online message post into a dart board. You swagger into cyberspace under assumed names and start hurling invectives like drunks in a barroom brawl.”
And please show how it encouraged racial profiling. According to the stats on this very blog, the arrest rate wasn’t as high as was thought. So was it truly racial profiling? Is it profiling to ask someone for identification when they are pulled over? And don’t give me the “the police were told to pull over individuals who are Hispanic” line. Unless you can directly show where those orders were given, give up the ghost.
We’re not just spinning our wheels with this crap, we’re spinning our wheels in the damn mud and continuing to tarnish the county.
Michael, you are trying but still having trouble with some, many and other modifiers. Too much broad-brushing. Since when do one or 2 people make up this blog?
Happy, someone asked how we define racism. That’s how the discussion started.
The current policy says all those arrested are brought into jail and checked for immigration status. This is fair across the board.
The original resolution left too much leeway for profiling. We had Hispanic people getting pulled over because they had broken tail lights. We’ve had actual Hispanic citizens pulled over and hassled because they were Hispanic. There are documented cases of that sort of thing–go to an immigration lawyer and just ask. But if you don’t believe me, believe this: we had actual citizens of all ethnic groups asking, “What on Earth constitutes probable cause?” The language and process was simply too slippery, never mind where that language came from (a group endorsed by FAIR). Hispanics became easier targets, and any cops (god forbid) who had a grudge against Hispanics could do what they wanted because they were protected by the resolution.
To boot, we didn’t and still don’t have cameras to protect anyone–residents and police alike.
You don’t have to say, “Pull over Hispanics” for any of this to happen. Do you think the rash of profiling of African Americans at one time was part of an official policy? Racism is never stated, as I said before. No one admits to being racist.
Race is an issue here. Sorry if you don’t like it, but since someone asked, I’m going to address it. We still have racist people pushing their agendas, and until people like Corey Stewart stop supporting these people, I and others probably will have to keep beating that drum.
If they want racial harmony, then they need to create it, not thwart it. My discussing it can’t possibly have more effect than Corey Stewart has on this county and our national (and international) reputation. He’s the BOCS Chair. I am merely a concerned citizen with a big mouth but no political or social clout. Who of us has the most power to turn this thing around? Who has created the reputation? Do you think I could have done that all on my own?
No matter how much I talk, there is no way I could do damage to a county that is still sanctioning racism. They’ve done enough damage on their own and they don’t stop.
Tell Stewart and Stirrup to break up with HSM and company and maybe people like me will shut up. Until then….
Um, last time I checked ANYONE can be pulled over in VA for a broken tail light. It’s a $75 ticket. I guess only US citizens have to obey the law, huh?
I’ll believe you when you start actually stating facts instead of pulling them out of your behind. Although your past history has shown that you are good at make up stories and then when you are caught lying, you quickly twist in the wind and say “That’s not what I said!!”
If you’ve talked to immigrantion lawyers, you should be able to quote the complaints filed against the police department. They should be public record if there have been documented complaints against the police force, correct? If it was SUCH a huge problem, wouldn’t there have been an investigation done by someone at a federal level?
Probable cause? Let’s see – speeding, weaving in and out of traffic, not obeying stop signs/lights, wreckless driving – should I go on?
I just feel really sorry that everywhere you go, you see racism. Numerous people on this blog have tried to explain their side and you call them racist. It’s sad, really. You are the only one who bangs this drum about racism. THE ONLY ONE. And you are the only one that continues to make race an issue. For a rich white SAHM, I’m not so sure that your intentions are a pure as you claim them to be.
I soo… agree with Happy Harry.
I was the one who asked the question about what qualifies as “real” racism if some think that people here are using it to freely. I wanted to have an open and honest discussion about it. I appreciate Posting as Pinko trying to address her opinion on my question. What do you all think real racism is, Happy Harry and Michael?
It seems to me, and I may be very wrong, like you are disturbed when anyone mentions the term at any time. I just think it would clarify things to see what your definition of real racism is.
In any case, I don’t think Posting as Pinko is the only one interested in the topic of racism, or who thinks that it exists. It is a very loaded term, but one that shouldn’t be avoided altogether; it sometimes merits discussion.
that should read “too freely”
Back to the original thread…cyber bullying is no different from “bullying”, is no different from “assault”.
When I was a kid, when another kid came up to you and threatened to harm you if you did not give him or her your lunch money, THAT WAS A BULLY, and BY LAW because immiediate harm was threatened THAT WAS ASSSAULT. (yes I once had a young girl older than I was threaten me to take my money, who pushed me down a hill and broke my collerbone when I said no.)
If you do not threaten harm to another individual, that IS NOT Bullying, and it is NOT ASSAULT.
It is simply FREE speech you find offensive, or free specch you don’t like because someone called you a name, or said something untruthful about you that you did not like to other people.
In this world of turning passive-aggressive covert character assassination into punishable LAW that passive aggressives can use to punish people they don’t like, or because they said something they don’t like, or because someone’s feelings got hurt, or some psychological nut case decided to hang herself,
Then we have no boundary for measuring the harm done by Assault, being distinctly done by the perceived harm done by self-victimizing people who imagine “Bullying” or Cyber-bullying” because they want power and sympathy for their own insecurity.
And YES there are cases where young men from Ivy League schools were FALSELY accused of RAPE, because the person didn’t like what they said about her to others at the party. How do you protect these people from pople who are only to willing to make up stories and LIE?
You MAKE ONLY ACTIONS punishable under the law, starting with the concept of Assault (threatening to immediately harm another, with a threat that can be reasonably carried out). Then there is this “diminis” thing, squishy, very squishy… and easy to lie about…
The end effect of the trend of making passive agressive punishment end up being a tool you can use to target and punish people who say things you don’t like as “bullying”, will be that no-one ever says anything for fear of being punished under the law, and people who you target as “groups” you hate, such as “women who hate men”, will only result in ALL MEN STAYING AS FAR AS POSSIBLE AWAY FROM ALL WOMEN of the ethnic, racial, gender, religious or “social class” that advoates for protection for their “class” based on what they think people said, or worse what they think the “group” always says.
Diversity Gal I have told everyone on this blog so many times what “real” racism is. BY LAW, it is any privilige, prejudice or discrimmination that gives one identified racial, gender, religious, ethnic group LEGAL political, or legal social advantage over another, or power over another racial, gender, religious, or ethnic group whether a defined minority OR majority, the power to oppress that group USING A DIFFERENT SET OF LAWS that are not applied the same to “ALL” INDIVIDUALS. THIS is very different than free speech, because it has to VIOLATE LAW to be considered by our legal system as “real” racism.
Good God, can’t you all just look at an old thread or something? The problem with ‘racism’ is: It really exists. However, if it turns up under every rock, then when you have real issues with racism, no one even notices because we have all been so desensitized.
I feel like we are beating a dead horse. I know people who won’t even come on this blog because they claim that is all they read about. Frankly, they are bored.
I apologize for being blunt, but geeez. If you all want, email me. I will put up a thread on racism, but only on the condition that you all keep it on that thread.
I want you to put up a thread that shows how much damage “illegal” immigration causes. I’m not bored with that even if others are because other than the financial state of our nation that is the only major issue harming my family’s general welfare in my community. And because it continues to harm my family in my community by making my community more and more impoverished, with more and more standard of living decay, it is the only issue on this blog other than the support given to “illegals” by others who are trying to call removing illegal aliens from our country “racism”, that I keep pointing out “real” racism (To Pinko or Shellyb or others who have it wrong) and to make comments to advocate against those who associate themselves with “racial, gender, ethnic, or religious” groups and want some special financial benefit for that, by changing our laws and our constitution to favor “minority class” rule. THAT. I get upset about too because it directly affects the “individual” rights of my family, and because these “new age” laws do not protect my family from those seeking special advantage and privilige by “minority group” advocacy to change the law (8A, protected class,etc) in their favor, benefitting only their “group” and giving them minority group political POWER. This is Aparthied, this is Jim Crow, all over again and I will not let it happen or undermine the protection of majority needs and “individual” rights protected under a social construct called DEMOCRACY.
So if you don’t want to hear it, ban free speech from your blog, or “cyber-bully” people into never saying the truth about what upsets them about political advocacy on this blog, especially when it is so one sided.