Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Bully Gets In Trouble With School 290

The Miami Dade school district is moving to pressure Rockstar games over its upcoming game Bully. From the Next Generation article: "Last Thursday, a board committee unanimously approved the resolution. A full board vote is expected this Wednesday. Rockstar issued a written statement to the Herald, which said, 'We all have different opinions about art and entertainment, but everyone agrees that real-life school violence is a serious issue which lacks easy answers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bully Gets In Trouble With School

Comments Filter:
  • First amendment... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Pig Hogger ( 10379 )
    What will it take to make sure the First Amendment is no longer trampled here and there???? Here, the school district is acting like a bully...
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:38PM (#14916632)
      What will it take to make sure the First Amendment is no longer trampled here and there???? Here, the school district is acting like a bully...

      So you want to take away the first amendment rights of the school board and members of the community instead? They aren't trying to prevent Rockstar from making titles, they are just exercising their rights as Americans and consumers to deal with something that they don't deem appropriate.

      This reminds me of a Dilbert cartoon when Dilbert accuses Dogbert of being insensitive. Dogbert replies "you are obviously insensitive to my insensitivity".
      • by MindStalker ( 22827 ) <mindstalker@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:45PM (#14916698) Journal
        Had this been the PTA group or some group sure, but the School Board is still an government entity and defiantly is allowed to make rules concerning appropriate content within its school. But it acting as a lobbying group and attempting to push local retailers to censor items is WAY beyond the terms in which a government entity should go.
        • by rblancarte ( 213492 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:39PM (#14917272) Homepage
          They are not trying to push people around. They are pointing out that this product promotes actions that they feel are detrimental to their school and students. I think that by drafting this resolution, they are doing their due diligence to aid their students.

          People want to call it censorship and such. But what about Rockstar? Are they not being irresponsible to some extent making games like this? Sure it is just a game, but considering the fire they have come under for their GTA games and such, maybe they should think twice about things like this.

          Still, we are talking about their games, and I am sure they are happy about this. All the talk will move games off the shelves and Rockstar will make money. What do they care?

          • by LionKimbro ( 200000 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:52PM (#14917401) Homepage
            Infinging on rights is not due diligence.

            Whether or not Rockstar is irresponsible, that's one of those things you're supposed to talk about, and work in the social sphere to shame, and to influence.

            But not in the legal sphere.

            The argument: "Sure it is just a game, but considering the fire they have come under for their GTA games and such, maybe they should think twice about things like this." ...is basically a call for vigilante justice by way of legal harassment.
            • by Columcille ( 88542 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @05:12PM (#14919143) Homepage
              I fail to see the legal aspect of this. I do see citizens banding together to voice strong concern and opposition to problems they see. This is how a democracy works. Citizens have the right to express their views and yes, they even have the right to organize boycotts. It amazes me how people who shout, "You are removing their rights!" are essentially saying people shouldn't have the right to decide where money goes. A community decides they don't want violent games promoted within their community so they pressure local businesses to avoid the violent games. Local businesses, recognizing it makes good economic sense to avoid the games, do so. In these cases businesses continue to have the right to sell such games, but through the free exercise of democracy they have realized that they will do better if they do not carry the games.

              But let's have a quick lesson in rights. Rights do not give you permission to do what you wish, and to hell with everyone else! Rights are given equally to everyone and one person's rights do not supercede someone else's rights. We work in balance as a free society. Many of our laws reflect the balancing of rights. Speed limits exist to protect everyone, slowing down those who would claim that it is their right to go as fast as they wish. Many drug laws, while recognizing the harm drugs can do an individual, often pay more emphasis to the effect drugs have on community. Your rights do not mean you can do anything you want without regard for its effect on society. From that basis, I'm among those who would not oppose actual legislation to limit the amount of violence in games, movies, and yes even music. No rational thinker has any doubt that there is a causative link between media violence (those of you who will quickly shout out about correlation and causation can see which category I place you in). A society fixated on fantasy violence will become a society enacting more and more violence. There are many factors at work that are completely sabotaging our society, violence in media is just one aspect. It is not the only problem that should be addressed, but it is a problem and it does need to be addressed.

              People might cry out to allow any human action, defending their cries with some appeal to human rights. Their actions accomplish the opposite. Rights are about community, not simply about an individual. It's a perspective that says, "Everyone in our nation has these rights" rather than "each person has these rights". It's a subtle difference, I admit, but the former perspective works to balance rights so that rights actually mean something, and the latter simply creates anarchy when ultimately there will be just one dictator rising above them all, asserting his own right to domination.
            • by susano_otter ( 123650 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @05:33PM (#14919312) Homepage

              This isn't a legal challenge to the game at all.

              It is, in fact a social challenge.

              The school board has resolved (hence the "Resolution") to communicate their misgivings about the game. They've resolved to communicate their misgivings to the manufacturer, to their local retailers, and to the citizens of their community.

              They are, in fact, doing exactly what you say they should do: mount a social opposition to the game. They're making their case. The community can consider their case (and Rockstar's if it chooses to make one; and the retailers' if they choose to make one), and either reject the school board's arguments or support them.

              This is exactly the kind of non-government-censorship process we all want to see take place in our communities. Not only that, but it's entirely appropriate for a government agency such as a school board, charged with the welfare of the community's students, to voice its concerns to the community and attempt to influence the community to address those concerns.
          • I think that by drafting this resolution, they are doing their due diligence to aid their students.

            Instead of addressing the very real problem of actual bullies? Funny, I think that bullying existed before this game, so what would removing the game do? NOTHING!

            People want to call it censorship and such.

            You have a government body trying to remove content they don't like. Yup, thats censorship.

            But what about Rockstar? Are they not being irresponsible to some extent making games like this?

            No, they are not.
          • People want to call it censorship and such. But what about Rockstar? Are they not being irresponsible to some extent making games like this?

            Rockstar is being just as irresponsible as Mark Twain, Roy Rogers, Elvis Presley, Gary Gygax, Richard Pryor, Madonna, John Carmack, Jerry Bruckheimer, and everyone else who has wantonly corrupted the minds of innocent children throughout history, according to the lobbyists of the era.

          • by Armchair Dissident ( 557503 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @05:21PM (#14919198) Homepage
            They are not trying to push people around. They are pointing out that this product promotes actions that they feel are detrimental to their school and students.

            They appear to be trying to push Rockstar around. Are they "promoting" bullying? I don't know. And for that matter - unless you're on Rockstar's staff - neither do you. Does GTA "promote" car-jacking? Does Burnout "promote" deliberately causing pile-ups? Does Moto-GP or Gran Turismo "promote" driving at ludicrous speeds on public highways? Well, I guess it depends upon what you mean by "promote".

            I think that by drafting this resolution, they are doing their due diligence to aid their students.

            Perhaps. Perhaps not. But in doing so they're attempting to prevent people who are within the "target audience" - who are not young school chidren - from being able to get a copy of the game. Their reach is too broad.

            People want to call it censorship and such. But what about Rockstar? Are they not being irresponsible to some extent making games like this?

            No. No, and again: No. Jet Set Willy - if you ever read the instructions - is about a man sneaking into his estranged wife's house to burgal it to retrieve what Willy believed was his property. Was Mathew Smith irresponsible for releasing this on an unspecting public? "Elite" permitted - and encouraged - the player to plunder traders using piracy as a means of effecting material gain. Same question. And again with Adventure: there was no requirement to calculate the tax burden, or to declare one's findings with a tax authority. These games were clearly a tutorial on tax-evasion, robery and burgulary for future generations. Except, of course, that they weren't.

            Sure it is just a game, but considering the fire they have come under for their GTA games and such, maybe they should think twice about things like this.


            GTA was a phenomenon. It is a fantastic series. It's compulsive, it's enjoyable, it's bloody. It's great! Your statement impliess that Rockstar should never consider making another GTA game, or that Rockstar is guilty of the accusations levelled against it - but why? I love the game. I don't rob, pimp, deal in drugs, use prostitutes, or kill prostitutes to get my money back. I don't get my kicks out of doing any of these things in real life, but find it incredibly amusing to do in the game.

            I also find it extraordinarialy funny to try to do an inverted turn under the golden gate bridge in a number of flight simulators - usually resulting in my plowing the plane into said bridge. I also used to find it amusing to drive a car the wrong way around the track in Indionapolis 500. Or to make a living as a pirate in Elite.

            But I'm not a pimp. I'm not a murderer. I don't find the idea of smacking into an entourage of Indi-500 cars particularly appealing. I don't want to make a living stealing from shops, homes or ships.

            Games do not make murderers. They don't make pimps. Game companies make games. They make the interactive versions of videos. If parents can't grasp the fact that their children are buying the computer game equivelant of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, that is the fault of the parent - not the game manufacturer.

            I don't want see a future in 10 or 20 years time where the only game I can play is "PacMan" (a muderous game where the players character uses an obvious advatage - the PacPills - to murder the other four artificial persons and confine them the oblivion - albeit temporarialy). I don't want this future because I'm not 6-years old. I don't want 6-year old entertainmant. I'm 31. I want 31-year old entertainment. It's not my fault if other people can't see the difference.

    • by tbone1 ( 309237 )
      What will it take to make sure the First Amendment is no longer trampled here and there????
      In the words of H.L. Mencken, the only good bureaucrat is one with a gun to his head, because when it's in his hand, it's goodbye bill of rights.

      Besides, it's a school board. Do you know the kind of people who want to be on school boards?

    • by Nymz ( 905908 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:25PM (#14917128) Journal
      The purpose of blaming Rockstar is to direct attention away from themselves, and it's working. If it wasn't Rockstar, they would be blaming Bush, or Harry Potter, or anything else but themselves for how they are taking our tax dollars and failing our children.
      • If it wasn't Rockstar, they would be blaming Bush, or Harry Potter, or anything else but themselves for how they are taking our tax dollars and failing our children.

        The problem is, they aren't blaming Harry Potter or Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events.

        Who would have thought that there was any life left in the English boarding school novel? Or that ASOUE would draw children into a universe as dark and uncertain as anything in Dickens?

      • Blame is a very old thing, that works pretty good. It shifts the focus of attention, just like the parent said.

        I'm not a bible thumper by any stretch of the imagination, its just that I know the bible better than any other religious text (I grew up in a "Christian" environment, whatever that means).

        The Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden story is excellent. Its very much worth a read, and much of what it says is still true to this day. Take a look at: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/gen/3.html#1 2 [skepticsan...dbible.com]

        Where Ad
    • They are allowed to advocate against the game - it is their First Amendment right to do so. You may not agree with their opinion, but it is their opinion. A majority of their members voted to advocate (officially) against the game...let them advocate. They can urge stores and parents all the want...some will listen, some will not. If Rockstar games wants to, they can throw a counter campaign.
    • What does this have to do with the First Amendment? The First Amendment prohibited Congress from infringing on speech. It has nothing to do with a local school board. I know we have misinterpreted the crap out of it in the courts (especially the commerce clause).
  • by ShyGuy91284 ( 701108 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:32PM (#14916561)
    Anything that could cause future slashdot readers to get bullied more can't be a good thing.......
  • by DarkNemesis618 ( 908703 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:36PM (#14916616) Homepage
    So instead of fighting the bully problem within their own school district, they're fighting a video game company?
  • Simple question. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Turn-X Alphonse ( 789240 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:38PM (#14916633) Journal
    Is it a good game? If it is then the content really shouldn't matter, if it isn't then all this hype is going to sell it even better.

    A lot of slashdotters were probably bullied (I was) and although it may bring up some bad memories, we don't play GTA because we're secretly drug dealers, or black guys riding a bike through the street as we shoot people. We play them because they're fun, which is what games should be about.

    People never complained Mario is full of drug refrences (You can't deny it, please don't try), or that killing aliens in Contra is too violent for children. Back when games were mostly aimed at kids (or geeks with an Amiga), we never heard any of this shit.. Makes me really wonder.

    I'd love to meet these people complaining and go "Jump off a bridge" so they could tell me "no" and I could reply with "Well if I can't influence you in person how the hell are games ment to convince me when I have full control of them?
  • Easy answers? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rob T Firefly ( 844560 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:39PM (#14916639) Homepage Journal
    'We all have different opinions about art and entertainment, but everyone agrees that real-life school violence is a serious issue which lacks easy answers.'

    So is war, but that hasn't stopped people from playing games based on war for at least thousands of years.

    Chess, anyone?
  • AAARRRGGGHHH! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mac Degger ( 576336 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:42PM (#14916670) Journal
    Again with the 'Rockstar Bully game will create bullies' meme.

    For fucks sake; it is a game where you play a kid being bullied. If people play the game, they will understand what it's like to be bullied. If anything, that will reduce the number of bullies (and might even convert bullies who play the game and see what the're doing).

    If I where Rockstar, I'd elevate the profile of that game by sueing legislators for defamation/slander/incorrect reporting/lying.

    I'm just still amazed that newspapers and politicians can get away with not just distorting the truth but actively lying about something.
    • by WidescreenFreak ( 830043 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:59PM (#14916856) Homepage Journal
      They're RIGHT! Violence in video games does translate to violence in real life!

      Why, just yesterday I flew a Cobra attack helicopter in real life against MEC foes! Not only did BF2 cause me to learn how to fly Cobra attack helicopters, it also helped me to learn racism against Middle Easterns and Chinese! Damned foreigners keep trying to take my fu*king base! Die, die, DIE!!

      My hatred for minotaurs and other such creatures has SOARED because of so many times playing NeverWinter Nights. My +2 Longsword (nothing to do with Viagara, thank you) should be in in a few days, and if it's not I'll slash the delivery person with it when it finally arrives. If he's Chinese or Middle Eastern, he's really in trouble.

      Of course, my absolute hatred for Nazis was at its peak during the days of Castle Wolfenstein. I want to kill all of them because of that game. In fact, my flight to Brazil leaves in a few days. I found out that some survivors are hiding down there and my Wolfenstein-induced blood rage is starting to take over. Grrrrr....

      And you don't know how many people died in my neighborhood with a crowbar after I played HL and HL2.

      So, I'm quite certain that when I play Bully I'll want to go to the local high school and just beat the sh*t out of the kids until there's nothing but a pasty, red film on the basketball court. And, hey, with violent video games as my scapegoat, I'll get off with a warning while the Bully developers go to jail!

      No, that's not my right eyelid twinging. It's your imagination. { wiping drool off of chin }

      Disclaimer: To Jack Thompson and the DHS, this is what's called "sarcasm". Look it up.
  • Publicity (Score:3, Interesting)

    by szembek ( 948327 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:45PM (#14916692) Homepage
    Rockstar couldn't buy publicity like this. What do they care if some school district has a problem with it? The "uproar" is small in comparison to the benefits they will reap from this publicity. The types of people that were going to buy the game are still going to, and in addition now more and more people are hearing about it and potentially will also buy it.
  • by OmgTEHMATRICKS ( 836103 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @12:46PM (#14916709) Journal
    What people fail to realize is that you're not a bully in the game. Here's the game synopsis:

    As a troublesome schoolboy, you'll laugh and cringe as you stand up to bullies, get picked on by teachers, play pranks on malicious kids, win or lose the girl, and ultimately learn to navigate the obstacles of the fictitious reform school, Bullworth Academy.

    And since when was this "real-life school violence?" Last I checked, this was a video game.
  • What is the deal (Score:3, Insightful)

    by panic911 ( 224370 ) * on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:02PM (#14916889) Homepage
    Who cares? I mean.. come on. When are people going to realize that games are just that.. games.. not real life. Who cares if you beat the crap out of some nerd on a video game. Unless that video game is controlling some robot on the other side of the earth that is really beating the crap out of some kid, it's harmless!
  • I found the following thread about bullying on an anime forum.

    http://boards.jp.nyud.net:8090/forums/archive/inde x.php/t-9182 [nyud.net]

    Included there was the following poll:

    What's your solution for school bullying?
    Having school laws against bullying - 8 (25.00%)
    Forgiving (by law) those who get even (just fists, no weapons) at bullies - 7 (21.88%)
    Having a special school court on fights and bullying - 5 (15.63%)
    things are OK the way they are - 12 (37.50%)

    I think the problem with bullying is that it's not "critical eno

    • So, if you accuse someone of bullying, nothing can be done because bullying's not against the school's laws.

      It is against the state's or country's Criminal Code [justice.gc.ca].

      In a business workplace, store, bank, or public city streets, the perpitrator will get taken and punished. For some strange reason, schools are somehow the magical exception where kids have a carte blanche to commit crimes - to a degree where a "normal" adult would be imprisioned for six consecutive life sentences (without even having to resort t

  • Here's an idea (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RyoShin ( 610051 ) <tukaro AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:06PM (#14916924) Homepage Journal
    How about, before going all out on a game that enacts it, you take care of the real fucking bullies that abound in your schools? Perhaps if you, ya know, punished them for their bullying, the intensity of such would decrease.

    Instead, almost every teacher or other school faculty (except the cliche cool janitor) who sees bullying just turns a blind eye as long as someone's tooth isn't knocked out. Maybe if we actually did something about it, we wouldn't have to worry as much about games like this, or people shooting up schools. I can't say I condone Rockstar's game, but there are more immediate (and local) ways to stem this than to try and pressure them.

    Yes, I was bullied in school. Thankfully, I didn't get the worst that could happen, but it was still enough to seriously drive me to a point of doing some shooting of my own. The problem is that the bullies turn out to be jocks, or the son of the mayor, and the principal is afraid of punishing them, because heaven forbid our football team lose another game, but it's a-okay that people fail remedial math.

    Our schools are messed up because people have the wrong priorities. They push social achievement (sports, arts, etc.) and defer money to that over intellectual achievement. Not that schools sports or band is a bad thing- but when it's taking away from the real purpose of a school, which is education, then they become a problem.

    rant rant rant
  • I personally... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by MaestroSartori ( 146297 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:10PM (#14916973) Homepage
    ...don't think bullying is any worse than carjacking, random street violence, sex with prostitutes, beheading police officers, gang warfare or any of the other stuff that went on in any of the GTA games. That aside, we've had films and comics and tv shows about children inflicting various levels of violence on each other for years - everything from Dennis the Menace, through Lord of the Flies, to Stand By Me. Or take your pick of any film with some jocks-vs-nerds bullying, for that matter.

    I got bullied. I don't see how this game has anything to do with that.
  • Not an original game (Score:3, Informative)

    by Tragedy4u ( 690579 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:12PM (#14916986)
    Anyone remember Skool Daze on the c64? http://www.mobygames.com/game/c64/skool-daze [mobygames.com] The objective, to steal back your awful school paper from the headmaster's office. Common activities include: Beating up fellow classmates, fighting with the school bully, shooting anyone you like with your slingshot and hoping someone else gets blamed, skipping classes, writing obscenities on the blackboard and more. Why are the school's piping up now? This type of game has been done before, granted with not as much exposure until now.
  • ... Hollywood continued to churn out pure trash.

    My saying is, Own the Media (tv), Own the World
  • by MikeRT ( 947531 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @01:57PM (#14917462)
    1) How about respecting the right of self-defense of victims of bullying. How about congradulating the victim for beating the hell out of the bully when the bully picks a fight and brings violence instead of the school rather than suspending the victim. Strangely, feminists who scream OMG HE'S BLAMING THE VICTIM!!! whenever someone suggests that a rape victim partially instigated her rape by dressing like a whore in a very bad section of town while drunk at 2AM, are eerily silent about this which is the ultimate "blame the victim" card. Yes, little johnny or susy was violently assaulted by a bully, but the pushed the bully back so that makes them bad too. That's how the schools see it. You get repeatedly punched and kicked in the face, but if you touch the aggressor, you're now suspended for fighting. Fascism, brought to you by America's "education system."

    2) Expel the violent and disruptive students.

    3) Enforce the rules fairly, even if the parents are insanely rich or part of one of those untouchable, Always Noble Protected Classes Whose Shit Never Stinks Especially In Front of An Oppressor Class(tm).

    4) Finally, and I know this will be the most controversial one, how you about show no love to the wannabe thugs who attack the black and hispanic kids who actually want to learn. If the thugs want to keep it real, they can do that on someone else's dime, on the street where they won't harass the minorities who want to be something other than street trash.
    • by swb ( 14022 )
      In 7th grade I got a week's detention for punching a kid who had hit me all the way down the hall; I finally figured at the end of the hall I was at the end of my rope and hitting was the only option I had, but the principal gave us both the same amount of detention. I didn't get it then and I don't get it now.

      I think we're in the state we're in for a whole bunch of reasons. I think integration has made it extremely difficult to expell students since school administrators always face the race card, and si
    • You assume that schools obey the normal rules and traditions of general society. They don't.

      Schools most closely resemble a military camp. Indeed, the earliest schools were modeled in this way. The pupils are subjected to a rather brutal reigime in an effort to maintain discipline.

      However, unlike the army, where there is an aim to this dicipline, i.e. training to follow orders in combat, in schools the dicipline is in effect an end in itself, as a means of maintaining control. Thus schools may be liken to t
    • Your four steps are focussed on physical violence. To really deal with all bullying, any strategy has to include:

      1. Stop ignoring non-physical violence. I was bullied all through junior high and into high school, but none of it was ever physical. I think if it had been, I would have been a lot better equipped to get some help. I was taught from a very young age that physical violence is not okay and that you should find an adult if someone hurts you, but no one ever really taught me what to do when someone
  • by MaWeiTao ( 908546 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @02:19PM (#14917698)
    Regardless of what descriptions claim, this game so far looks like GTA set in a school. It could be argued that the main character in San Andreas technically wasn't a bad guy, except that almost immediately he ends up committing some serious crimes. The few screenshots available show a kid who looks like a troublemaker and a group of kids beating the crap out of each other. Given Rockstar's consistency in developing violent games I would expect more of the same here.

    I do think that these people are over-reacting. There's plenty of crap out there outside of games. This attention games are getting is pretty much a ploy by politicians to win votes. Parents dont seem to want the responsibility of raising their own kids anymore. If they're concerned about this game, don't let them play it. Don't expect the government to raise your kids for you.

    On the other hand, I can't help but think Rockstar is simply looking to get a rise out of people. They're using controversey to sell their games. They certainly aren't creating art here, they just seem to be obsessed with excessive violence. So now they're developing a game which hits closer to home for many people and will be certain to grab plenty of attention.

    There were plenty of games with questionable subject matter back in the early days of gaming. However, there's a big difference today. Those old games had crappy, blocky graphics and relatively simplistic gameplay. Games today look fairly realistic, and they provide gameplay that is a reasonable facsimile of real life. It's all polygons and textures, but the experience has a stronger impact than pixelated sprites.

    At some point we're going to have games that look absolutely real and when we reach that point we're going to see some serious debates regarding what is permissible. Are we going to allow games where you can tear people to pieces and experience it in all its graphic detail? When will everyone agree that enough is enough? Certainly developers have to be responsible to some extent for the content they produce.

    For the most part, such subject may not necessarily drive anyone to reproduce what they've seen. However, it certainly does desensitize people. It makes them indifferent to atrocities. That, I believe, is a greater danger than a bunch of kids suddenly turning into bullies or being inspired to run around carjacking.
  • by Kohath ( 38547 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @02:35PM (#14917832)
    School violence doesn't lack easy answers. The answers are very easy, they're just not good for the powers at the school.

    If funds for the teachers union were tied to eliminating school violence, there would be no school violence. Those funds are what schools are about, and it's the only thing about them that matters.

    If education were about the students rather than payroll, it would be very different than what happens at schools these days.
    • humorous, do you think teachers are paid well?

      Got news for you, it is about the students but guess what? The system only works as well as the people involved. The kid is acting up in school? The teachers or the counselors needs to bring the parents in, keep everyone actively involved.

      There will always be school violence, kids do it, at the youngest of ages they don't even realize they're doing it. You ever seen a 2 year old pull ont he hair of another kid? It just happens. As kids get older things obviou

      • humorous, do you think teachers are paid well?

        All things considered, I think they're paid adequately.

        I also think the more this question is brought up, the more clearly it illustrates that schools are primarily about payroll.

        you will invariably alienate people from the system

        That's OK. If you want to solve the violence problem, why worry about the "alienation with the system" problem instead?

        Would you rather cast our some rich kid who will just soak money from daddy or expel some low income kid that will b
  • everyone agrees that real-life school violence is a serious issue which lacks easy answers.

    Its easy enough: Just make school administrators liable for damages resulting from school bullying including psychological damage.

    Science Daily reports [sciencedaily.com] that: "In addition to triggering a depression-like social withdrawal syndrome, repeated defeat by dominant animals leaves a mouse with an enduring "molecular scar" in its brain that could help to explain why depression is so difficult to cure".

  • by Caspian ( 99221 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @03:49PM (#14918469)
    ...in the real world, bullies NEVER gets in trouble with schools.
  • Why should the Miami-Dade school board feel that it is so special that it believes that it can censor video games? Come on, this should not have been a news item.
  • How about paying attention to the problem? I only have my own school experiences to base this off of, but I can't imagine that mine were unique. Administrators and teachers seemed to go out of their way to ignore obvious harassment.

    Luckily, this never resulted in anything Columbine-like in nature happening at my school. However I have no doubt at all that should that have happened, they would claim to have never saw it coming.
  • Disappointed. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shambalagoon ( 714768 ) on Tuesday March 14, 2006 @04:25PM (#14918758) Homepage
    I was excited when I read the title of this story and thought it was about a school taking a stand against bullying. Sadly, it's about a school taking a stand against a game about bullying.

    I'd be more impressed by the former.

"The C Programming Language -- A language which combines the flexibility of assembly language with the power of assembly language."