NC House passes anti-bullying bill

[nclib]

(a)        As used in this Article, "bullying or harassing behavior" is any pattern of gestures or written, electronic, or verbal communications, or any physical act or any threatening communication, that takes place on school property, at any school‑sponsored function, or on a school bus, and that:

(1)        Places a student or school employee in actual and reasonable fear of harm to his or her person or damage to his or her property; or

(2)        Creates or is certain to create a hostile environment by substantially interfering with or impairing a student's educational performance, opportunities, or benefits. For purposes of this section, "hostile environment" means that the victim subjectively views the conduct as bullying or harassing behavior and the conduct is objectively severe or pervasive enough that a reasonable person would agree that it is bullying or harassing behavior.

Bullying or harassing behavior includes, but is not limited to, acts reasonably perceived as being motivated by any actual or perceived differentiating characteristic, such as race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, socioeconomic status, academic status, gender identity or expression, physical appearance, sexual orientation, or mental, physical, developmental, or sensory disability, or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics.

(b)        No student or school employee shall be subjected to bullying or harassing behavior by school employees or students.

(c)        No person shall engage in any act of reprisal or retaliation against a victim, witness, or a person with reliable information about an act of bullying or harassing behavior.

(d)        A school employee, student, or volunteer who has witnessed or has reliable information that a student or school employee has been subject to any act of bullying or harassing behavior shall report the incident to the appropriate school official.

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2009/Bills/House/HTML/H548v0.html

-------

While I am relieved that this bill has passed, I am disappointed that the vote was so close and only one Republican supported it. Regardless of ideology, no civilized society should tolerate bullying. Children have a right to have an education free from bullying.

The same people who claim this is "government intervention" tend to be quite comfortable with brainwashing children on less necessary matters (pledge of allegiance, dress codes, anti-cursing, etc.)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Aye(R). Now if only they would crackdown on gangs as well.

[Mechaman]

Aye (Third party), children have no right to act like assholes.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Nay (third)

Take out that paragraph at the end of (a) that suggests that bullying only takes place because of real or perceived distinctions in group identity and I'd be for it.  Anything that might make motive a distinction in whether an action is a crime, or how harshly it will be penalized is to be avoided.

That paragraph was also likely the reason for the lack of Republican support, since it usually Democrats who support making a distinction in how harshly crime is punished based whether the criminal was in part motivated by the group identity of the victim.

[Frodo]

Aye (Democrat) -I was bullied all through middle school, so quite naturally I would support anything that could help those going through what I did. 

[A18]

What remedies and penalties are specified? That's kind of important.

Unless this is purely ceremonial, I'd probably vote no. It would be perfectly proper to prohibit abusive physical contact and threats thereof (subject to a self-defense exception), though surely bans on that kind of bullying are already universal policy. But this vague "hostile environment" standard is just asking for trouble. Also, (c)—unless controlled by some other part of the bill—is badly-drafted.

Worst of all, this bill—going purely on the language you quote—would seem to cover private schools as well as government ones.

[Magic 8-Ball]

How is this different from what is already in place?  Nclib and the bill's wording make it sound like North Carolina's schools are currently a free-for-all, and that can't be true...right?

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

aye (dem)
My spanish teacher does that to students.

[Vepres]

Aye (Other)

It seemed to only define bullying and that it must be reported, not that there should be certain punishments. Seems reasonable enough.

[AkSaber]

Children have a right to have an education free from bullying.

Exactly what I believe.

[Verily]

Nay (third)

Take out that paragraph at the end of (a) that suggests that bullying only takes place because of real or perceived distinctions in group identity and I'd be for it.  Anything that might make motive a distinction in whether an action is a crime, or how harshly it will be penalized is to be avoided.

That paragraph was also likely the reason for the lack of Republican support, since it usually Democrats who support making a distinction in how harshly crime is punished based whether the criminal was in part motivated by the group identity of the victim.

"Includes, but is not limited to..."

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Nay.

Too much feel good bullsh**t.

Everything will be bullying, like everything is now a "hate crime".

Throw a spitball at someone - bullying.   Bump em in the hall by accident - bullying.   Calling him a dickhead - bullying.

Let kids settle things themselves like they have for generations...

[Countess Anya of the North Parish]

Nay.

Too much feel good bullsh**t.

Everything will be bullying, like everything is now a "hate crime".

Throw a spitball at someone - bullying.   Bump em in the hall by accident - bullying.   Calling him a dickhead - bullying.

Let kids settle things themselves like they have for generations...

keep in mind that kids are quiet dumb. If they get bullied. they most likely won't go tell. They will probably go suck it up. Simply because of peer pressure.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Nay (third)

Take out that paragraph at the end of (a) that suggests that bullying only takes place because of real or perceived distinctions in group identity and I'd be for it.  Anything that might make motive a distinction in whether an action is a crime, or how harshly it will be penalized is to be avoided.

That paragraph was also likely the reason for the lack of Republican support, since it usually Democrats who support making a distinction in how harshly crime is punished based whether the criminal was in part motivated by the group identity of the victim.

"Includes, but is not limited to..."

"suggests"

Still, if all that paragraph is supposed to be is a list of examples, couldn't they have managed to come up with at least one example that doesn't include group identification as the reason behind the victim being bullied?

Besides, why do they need a paragraph discussing motivations in the first place? This is supposed to be a law, not a psychological counseling manual.

[Verily]

Nay (third)

Take out that paragraph at the end of (a) that suggests that bullying only takes place because of real or perceived distinctions in group identity and I'd be for it.  Anything that might make motive a distinction in whether an action is a crime, or how harshly it will be penalized is to be avoided.

That paragraph was also likely the reason for the lack of Republican support, since it usually Democrats who support making a distinction in how harshly crime is punished based whether the criminal was in part motivated by the group identity of the victim.

"Includes, but is not limited to..."

"suggests"

Still, if all that paragraph is supposed to be is a list of examples, couldn't they have managed to come up with at least one example that doesn't include group identification as the reason behind the victim being bullied?

Besides, why do they need a paragraph discussing motivations in the first place? This is supposed to be a law, not a psychological counseling manual.

I don't see what harm having it there does, either. It may be useless fluff, in which case you're free to vote against it when added to the bill as an amendment (as it probably was), but it certainly shouldn't have any bearing on your vote overall.

[Coburn In 2012]

no R

We are becomeing a country of pussys and sissies. 


Victim of this, victim of that, Id like to grab your inner child and kick its little ass...


GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Holmes]

You're right.

And when kids find a power cord in their house, tie it around their neck and hang themselves with it, only to be discovered by their mom when she calls him for dinner, all because no one did anything at all to prevent bullying, they really just need to get over it.

[Franzl]

You're right.

And when kids find a power cord in their house, tie it around their neck and hang themselves with it, only to be discovered by their mom when she calls him for dinner, all because no one did anything at all to prevent bullying, they really just need to get over it.

Yes, those damn modern liberal pussies.

[phk]

Present.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Nay

As someone who has been screwed over by anti-bullying laws and "progressive discipline" I wholeheartedly oppose this.  It may seem nice, but it means that school officials are not allowed to use judgement for fear of being sued

[Holmes]

What? Are you saying school officials should be able to judge children?

[minionofmidas]

(d)        A school employee, student, or volunteer who has witnessed or has reliable information that a student or school employee has been subject to any act of bullying or harassing behavior shall report the incident to the appropriate school official.

And that's the end of it?

So in other words, what this bill does is make it possible to sue people who don't report? Or what?

[DownWithTheLeft]

What? Are you saying school officials should be able to judge children?

I'm saying that if an incident is not worth punishment but moronic guidelines say it warrants a suspension, it should not be a suspension.

[Coburn In 2012]

Nay

As someone who has been screwed over by anti-bullying laws and "progressive discipline" I wholeheartedly oppose this.  It may seem nice, but it means that school officials are not allowed to use judgement for fear of being sued

exactly.  I got accused of being a bully in hs a lot and you know what it amounted to?  Some kid couldn't take a little teasing or felt we all had to walk on egg shells because he was "different". 

most of the time though we took care of matters after schools behind the bleechers and some one got the crap kicked out of him and learned his lesson.  That was actually a much better way of handling things than the current pc nonsense that rules our government schools.

[Sensei]

Nay (D)



I was a bully, I am a bully, and I shall be a bully forever.