The Desert Colossus

Does anybody know the answer to this question?

Ive been asking this and discussing this for weeks with friends and on Myspace but no one seems to know the answer. :-\

I believe the technical term is bullying, but I guess it can be interpreted as child abuse.

Commodore's not going to be happy about the lack of a comedy option.

Anyways, it is in the literal sense, child abuse.  I'm sure that this issue isn't as black and white as I want to see it though.  There are probably some gray areas in there.

Not according to this (http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.cfm).

Quote from: El Presidente Gamefreak on November 16, 2007, 04:12:01 PM
Commodore's not going to be happy about the lack of a comedy option.

You're damn skippy, son.

(http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p55/Commodore_Axilon/Forum%20Crap/armscrossed.gif)

Child + Abuse = Child Abuse?

I wouldn't consider it child abuse, persay, but I wouldn't say it's a problem that doesn't need some sort of help. /: Because bullying can severely effect people mentally. I mean, sure, there's the physical aspect of it, but there's also the "you're lowly" part; it causes inferiority complexes, and most likely depression and/or suicide.

After all, children are impressionable/gullible and it can screw them up for life. But it's not as bad as abuse by a parent/guardian, because that's being beaten by someone who is supposed to love you, and I think that's more... traumatizing.

no, because child abuse is an adult abusing a child

Tell me where it is defined as so, and I'll take your word on it.

Ahem:

Quote from: Commodore Sororitas on November 16, 2007, 04:17:49 PM
Not according to this (http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.cfm).

Right.  I acknowledge that.  I'm just looking at this from a literal point of view.

Idealogically, yes, you're probably right.

Quote from: Commodore Sororitas on November 16, 2007, 05:55:17 PM
Ahem:

Quote from: Commodore Sororitas on November 16, 2007, 04:17:49 PM
Not according to this (http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.cfm).

that also backs up my point

I thankith thee good sir commodore

I think if a child is bullying another child, it's not "child abuse", but rather "abuse".

In that same argument, if three dogs fight one another, it's usually for "alpha" or "top dog".  So, in that sense, it's not animal abuse, but "nature".

The above to me doesn't include animal fighting. cough*Michael Vick*cough

Not in the least in my oppinion would you call it child abuse. I find children more like animals, they fight for reasons like a feeling of power,dominance, or to win it with the ladies, or guys. But i think an adult is different, they know better, they have at least 18 years of knoledge. Not to mention how much stronger than a child they are.

Quote from: Zetsu no Akatsuki on November 16, 2007, 07:50:57 PM
Not in the least in my oppinion would you call it child abuse. I find children more like animals, they fight for reasons like a feeling of power,dominance, or to win it with the ladies, or guys. But i think an adult is different, they know better, they have at least 18 years of knoledge. Not to mention how much stronger than a child they are.

;D Yay points for me for mentioning animals.  ;D

Well, hmm...normally, when I think of child abuse, I think of an adult abusing a child, but I guess as long as the victim is a child, then it would be child abuse. Whether or not the abuser is adult or child. Although, I don't think many would call it child abuse in that case, more like bullying. (As HNS said) But I guess, it technically would be child abuse. So yes, in a way.

But technically the child who is being hit is being abused so do the math.

Child+abuse=child abuse  or does it? :-\

This is very confusing but technically the child is being abused therefore would it not be child abuse?

From a legal standpoint, if a child hits another child, it isn't child abuse. *points to link Commodore provided*  But child plus abuse can equal child abuse.  It all depends on if you're trying to go to court with it.

Were not really talking in legal terms here were talking in a more of a technical sense.

If you want to play semantics, then I suppose you could argue that it's child abuse if anyone abuses a child, but how is the definition used by the people with whom this stuff actually matters not "technical" enough?

Well it defines it as any harm done by a caretaker or guardian, etc.

This is the legal point of view,  technically the child is being abused thus making it child abuse would it not?

As a former lawyer ;)....I could probably say that it would be a long shot to take a child to court because the two kids got in a fight.  However, if a child sustained such injuries as a broken limb, or some kind of injury like that, then I believe that the parents could take the kid to court.

Theres no need to bring kids to court thats just a little strange.  But could it technically be child abuse if a child abuses another child?

Do you realize you've asked that exact same question, like, four times now?

Quote from: BaconWarrior on November 18, 2007, 01:51:40 PM
Theres no need to bring kids to court thats just a little strange.  But could it technically be child abuse if a child abuses another child?

Maybe not the child, per se.  But the parents definitely.

Quote Chief Wiggum:

"Yeah right.  No court in this country's going to convict a baby.  Maybe Texas though."

CURSE THE CODING OF THIS SITE FOR MAKING GOING BACK AND FORWARD ACCIDENTALLY, CAUSE ONE TO LOSE WHAT ONE WAS TYPING!!

Anyway...

Child abuse is harm that is inflicted on a child either through action or inaction on an adult's part. The adult or teenager that's been put to care for the kids is the one responsible for what happens to the kids. If one child bullies another child, it is up to the authority figure to stop the fighting. The other kid cannot be put to 100% blame as the authority figure should take charge at all times with what's going on in front of them.

Quote from: Commodore Sororitas on November 18, 2007, 02:06:20 PM
Do you realize you've asked that exact same question, like, four times now?

Whoah your right! ;D

If a child hits another child and injures them that's assault

Yes it is.  But the child is still being abused so therefore it would technically be child abuse.


Do the math:  The CHILD is being ABUSED

CHILD+ABUSE=child abuse!!!!!    technically that is.

This is so confusing. :-X

the mastery of HTML amazes me

But child abuse as stated in the books is when a parent hurts or neglects a child

now do THIS equation (credits to Stephen Colbert)

Man + woman/wo + atee =! marraige

Quote from: Dr. Shinon on November 18, 2007, 04:34:23 PM
the mastery of HTML amazes me

But child abuse as stated in the books is when a parent hurts or neglects a child

now do THIS equation (credits to Stephen Colbert)

Man + woman/wo + atee =! marraige

For the HTML, I was in a hurry.  Oh and nice job quoting Stephen Colbert, HE IS AWESOME!!!!!

But thats besides the point,  Could it be considered child abuse from a technical standpoint rather than legal or whats on record?

(http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l267/Hi-n0_Selj1n/Forum%20pics/mc10868.jpg)

Do I have to answer his question again?

Im not even sure if I have an answer,  I think that there may be no specific answer that is not in legal terms.

That is why you must rely on your own reasoning. (Of course, asking others what they think doesn't hurt, either.) See, it all depends on how you look at it. Are you a literal thinker, metaphorical thinker, or both?

Your right.

Quote from: BaconWarrior on November 18, 2007, 04:44:45 PM

Quote from: Dr. Shinon on November 18, 2007, 04:34:23 PM
the mastery of HTML amazes me

But child abuse as stated in the books is when a parent hurts or neglects a child

now do THIS equation (credits to Stephen Colbert)

Man + woman/wo + atee =! marraige

For the HTML, I was in a hurry.  Oh and nice job quoting Stephen Colbert, HE IS AWESOME!!!!!

But thats besides the point,  Could it be considered child abuse from a technical standpoint rather than legal or whats on record?

You just keep going back to the point where YOU think about what child abuse is, rather than thinking about what it actually means. You do this without giving any real argument (other than Child's fighting = child abuse), which to be frank, is a pretty weak argument.

The term 'child abuse' implies possession, that someone is abusing their own child or a child that they are in charge of.

'Technical' does NOT mean literal. It means that it's being viewed from an applied point, that is, real world situations. You're not thinking about the implied possessive aspect that the phrase 'child abuse' gives.

I am not trying to make an argument, I am taking neither side.

Im just seeing what other people think.  Like Magmarfire said:  You must rely on your own reasoning.

It is simply your opinion.

One defends his opinion with arguments...  that's why people go about in debates, trying to prove the other wrong.

Oh well... I guess there's nothing else to really say about this...

I guess not.