<p>It used to be that bullies were thought to be insecure. That theory is now out of repute.</p>
<p>^^^So what drives their behavior? Sociopathy? Sadism? Narcissism? General meanness?</p>
<p>What is the current theory?</p>
<p>General meanness covers it pretty well, I think.</p>
<p>I think it is an excellent course of action. I agree with poetgrl: it seems increasingly clear that schools should concentrate on education and let the police deal with crimes such as assault. The bully was apparently guilty of repeated physical assault. Maybe now the little criminal and her parents will take it seriously. If she has “friends” who want to take her place in the bullying process, arrest them too. Eventually the criminals and their parents will get the idea: you can’t assault people with impunity. It’s a crime.</p>
<p>I find it refreshing that a private school would take this step, rather than following their usual procedure of kicking the can on down the road, either to another private school or to the public school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Even if this is true, this isn’t or should be the problem for the bullied victim(s) and his/her parents. This includes even bringing this up to them in conversation. </p>
<p>Sorry, that’s solely the problem of the bully, his/her parents, and school…and should stay that way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All of the above in some mixture depending on bully with a large dose of overentitlement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stalking is defined fairly narrowly and is completely different from the laws springing up to control verbal bullying. It is very difficult to define bullying narrowly. it is often vague by definition because it can be subjective.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why should the victim be the one who has to leave? Seems to me that removing the bully is more appropriate.</p>
<p>^^^^^^^^I agree, but for a long time, it seems that the above is how bullying has often been handled. It’s the victim that has to figure out a way to adapt to the situation.</p>
<p>If it was egregious enough to warrant police intervention the “bully” should have been expelled. The school administrative seems on surface appears weak.</p>
<p>I don’t have time to google the story to see all the details, but calling the police can be an adult act of “bullying” in and of itself.</p>
<p>^^^I disagree. Adults bully by setting up the bullied student for more of the same. Adults bully by telling the victim to develop a thicker skin, or insisting that the victim did something to provoke it or “had it coming.” Adults bully by not stepping up to the plate and being adults - they’re more concerned about being best buddies with the cool kids and having a “fun” classroom. Trust me, I’ve been there.</p>
<p>I would love to know what legal advice was received by the school.</p>
<p>The problem with just expelling is that bullying doesn’t necessarily end after the student leaves the school. Several of the suicide cases have involved students who left the school only to find that the behavior continued or increased. Having the police involved puts a stop to it everywhere. Having been through it with my daughter, that is a very, very good thing.</p>
<p>I find it weird that all the news reports are covering up the name of the school. Sure they’d like to keep their name out of it but so would every bank branch that gets robbed. And from the news reports it was the parents who had to initiate the call to the police, so the school isnt covered in glory here. </p>
<p>There dont seem to be many private middle schools in Stamford so this could only be a couple of places.</p>
<p>This article identifies the school as Trailblazers Academy.</p>
<p>[No</a> Easy Solutions In The Fight Against Bullying - Hartford Courant](<a href=“http://articles.courant.com/2013-10-03/community/hc-stamford-bullying-arrest-1003-20131002_1_school-bullying-bullying-case-state-education-records]No”>http://articles.courant.com/2013-10-03/community/hc-stamford-bullying-arrest-1003-20131002_1_school-bullying-bullying-case-state-education-records)</p>
<p>Schools and parents pawn off responsibility for poor behavior by involving police.</p>
<p>I wondered why they were hiding the name of the school, too. I thought a local might be able to identify it by the uniforms that were shown.</p>
<p>It’s not a private school, but rather a public charter school composed of 80% free-or-reduced lunch eligible students (Stamford, in contrast has 33% eligible).</p>
<p>Here’s the school’s anti-bullying policy:</p>
<p><a href=“http://trailblazersacademy.org/Index/Bullying_Procedures-TA.pdf[/url]”>http://trailblazersacademy.org/Index/Bullying_Procedures-TA.pdf</a></p>
<p>Bullying is harassment. It’s not different from adults. </p>
<p>You can’t interfere with a person’s ability to work either verbally or physically. We have a lot of laws around that, frankly. </p>
<p>Freedom of speech is not freedom of speech everywhere. If every time I walked down the hall at work I was harrassed verbally and physically, I could call the police. </p>
<p>Children deserve no less.</p>
<p>ETA. I actually think we should start to call these things by the same things we call them in the adult world: sexual harassment, harassment, assault, libel, defamation of character. Etcccc. Not a special “kid” word</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>People who commit crimes, including children who commit crimes, should be arrested.</p>
<p>It’s defining the crime that is the problem. That is the part that concerns me. Physical violence is an easier case, but are the police involved every time a kid pushes another? Probably not. What is the trigger? Is it the second time? Is it in combination with language? Can the language be something simply embarrassing? Is “your mother wears army boots” enough? Do we go by the reaction of the victim? Do we factor in whether the victim is being reasonable? Who decides what is reasonable? This is the problem with vagueness in the law. We shouldn’t like it.</p>
<p>Why is there vagueness in the law? At this point it is like the vagueness that used to surround stalking and domestic abuse laws. We still think the victim “should” be able to stop it. </p>
<p>We are starting to see the truth. </p>
<p>Hopefully the specificity in the law will catch up soon.</p>