A few years ago I wrote An Ode to Bullies, explaining how bullies are an important part of our growth. A butterfly must struggle to exit the cocoon, if it is to fly.
In the City of Carson, California, the feel-good crowd is seeking to criminalize bullying, making it a misdemeanor to cause any Carson residents from kindergarten through age 25 to “feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed or molested” without necessarily requiring a threat of physical harm. The ordinance would also cover cyber-bullying, as well as granting discretion to police and other law enforcement officials regarding filing lesser charges against any alleged bullies.
Carson Mayor Jim Dear, a former school teacher, said regarding the proposed ordinance, “If you are caught a second time actually bullying someone, then there’s gonna be more counseling, maybe anger management, a third time is gonna be a misdemeanor. And you, your parents or guardians are going to have to go to court.”
Supporters of the ordinance claim about 28 percent of students in grades 6-12 are bullied. The supporters also claim 60 percent of boys who bullied others in middle school were convicted of at least one crime as an adult, compared to 23 percent of boys who did not bully.
According to the proposal, various forms of cyber-bullying include “hurtful, rude and mean text messages”, “spreading rumors or lies about others by email or social networks”, and “creating websites, videos, or social medial (sic) profiles that embarrass, humiliate or make fun of others”.
It also identifies chronically ill, disabled, gifted, overweight, and “sexual minority” children as particularly vulnerable to bullying, which can take place not only in schoolyards and locker rooms, but “on buses and on streets and sidewalks” and “in front of computers in homes and libraries.”
So, if you are accused of bullying in Carson, if this ordinance becomes the law of the city, you will be slapped with a misdemeanor. But layers of punishment can be added if the bully is accused of being motivated by their hate for the "victim" because they are homosexual, or a member of a particular ethnicity or nationality, or if they question the legality of the person's immigration status.
Supporters of the ordinance claim about 28 percent of students in grades 6-12 are bullied. The supporters also claim 60 percent of boys who bullied others in middle school were convicted of at least one crime as an adult, compared to 23 percent of boys who did not bully.
According to the proposal, various forms of cyber-bullying include “hurtful, rude and mean text messages”, “spreading rumors or lies about others by email or social networks”, and “creating websites, videos, or social medial (sic) profiles that embarrass, humiliate or make fun of others”.
It also identifies chronically ill, disabled, gifted, overweight, and “sexual minority” children as particularly vulnerable to bullying, which can take place not only in schoolyards and locker rooms, but “on buses and on streets and sidewalks” and “in front of computers in homes and libraries.”
Who makes the definitions regarding what is considered bullying, and how can it be proven? Will this bullying ordinance be operated in a manner similar to how Child Protective Services works, where all there has to be is an accusation and somebody's life is turned upside down?
Can bullying become violent? Yes. Is there times when it is carried too far? Absolutely. But to criminalize "bullying" based on definitions decided upon with political ideology mixed into it with the hopes of protecting liberal left protected groups, and to leap upon someone as a bully through a mere accusation or disagreement they have with someone (or even being a typical schoolyard bully), and using something like Common Core style date gathering to then latch that accusation to them for the rest of their life with possibly even a criminal penalty attached, is insane.
The bullying ordinance falls into the hate-crime category, delving into applying penalties for what a person "thinks," or "believes." Thoughtcrime. Quite Orwellian of Carson, don't you think?
So, if you are accused of bullying in Carson, if this ordinance becomes the law of the city, you will be slapped with a misdemeanor. But layers of punishment can be added if the bully is accused of being motivated by their hate for the "victim" because they are homosexual, or a member of a particular ethnicity or nationality, or if they question the legality of the person's immigration status.
We have laws, with punishment, for murder and assault, and there is no evidence that authorities ignore crimes against liberal left protected groups. But these anti-bullying laws are leading to a day when even disagreeing with certain groups, like homosexuality, will be criminalized.
Yes, I realize at this point the Carson ordinance proposal does not include hate-crime tiers, but isn't that the next logical progression for such laws? And when that happens, does that not undermine the concept of equal justice under the law for all. Shouldn't criminal punishment be dished out based on facts of what happened, rather than thoughts?
Ultimately, these kinds of laws do two things. They undermine the development of our children, and they work to compromise our precious freedom of speech. These kinds of laws are a way to silence opposition, even if it means doing so through false accusations. The anti-bullying laws are a tactic of intimidation, not persuasion, using fear to force society into compliance with their definitions.
The Bullying ordinance is directly related to hate crime legislation and political correctness. Speech Codes like you see at universities, and public schools, where they go after you for the slightest slur or insult.
Of course, these fly in the face of the whole idea behind freedom of speech as provided by the United States Constitution. Hate crimes laws, “anti-harassment” and anti-bullying policies based on sexual orientation, are just a way to use the force of law to force compliance in society, to elevate certain groups and individuals over others, to squash anyone who is considered “offensive” by even one person.
The ultimate goal is to legitimize questionable social behavior.
But what if the questionable offensive speech or action is against a group not protected by the liberal left? Will they receive the same treatment?
But what if the questionable offensive speech or action is against a group not protected by the liberal left? Will they receive the same treatment?
If a crime is committed, should the penalty be greater because the "victim" was gay, or because the person was a member of a protected group? Should crime against Muslims receive greater scrutiny and penalty than crimes against Christians? Why would one crime receive one punishment, but another receive a totally different treatment because it was considered "hateful"?
How are we to identify behaviors like homosexuality, and then act accordingly? Should shared laws protect all Americans, rather than specifically addressing behaviors, or the perception of these behaviors.
The goal is to silence the opposition through intimidation, to criminalize objection to the liberal left's protected groups. Anti-bullying laws are simply among the early steps toward this goal. And in the long run, these laws target people, separating us into groups, with the intention of setting us against each other.
The left needs the groups attacking each other, they need unrest, they need division, to have an excuse to implement their oppressive policies that are meant to silence their opposition, and criminalize disagreement.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Proposed Carson Ordinance Would Criminalize Bullying - CBS Los Angeles
No comments:
Post a Comment