Topic: hahahhAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Anonymous A started this discussion 15 years ago #2,933
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later[^] [v] #53,925
Not funny.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 33 seconds later, 4 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,926
totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 9 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,928
I'm glad he crushed that little bastard.
hamfist !!PRJFHZ7kb joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 12 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,930
haha I saw that before
shoulda elbow-dropped that mess
shoulda elbow-dropped that mess
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,931
Fantastic!
(Edited 9 seconds later.)
totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW replied with this 15 years ago, 22 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,952
The Owl !yshAAUvyds joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 46 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,953
totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW replied with this 15 years ago, 40 seconds later, 47 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,954
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 50 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,961
@previous (totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW)
So while fat boy gets 3 days to play vidya, thin kid is going to be crutching around for a month. Seems a fair trade to me.
So while fat boy gets 3 days to play vidya, thin kid is going to be crutching around for a month. Seems a fair trade to me.
totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,964
@previous (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
He could have broken his nose. He was being a bully and taping it, the victim should not be punished.
He could have broken his nose. He was being a bully and taping it, the victim should not be punished.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,967
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 17 seconds later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,970
The Owl !yshAAUvyds double-posted this 15 years ago, 18 seconds later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,971
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 21 seconds later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,973
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 56 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,975
@53,971 (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
Your original reply to toto made it sound like you were sympathising with the thin kid, so I continued reading it like that. I assumed that @53,961 (The Owl !yshAAUvyds) was sarcasm.
Your original reply to toto made it sound like you were sympathising with the thin kid, so I continued reading it like that. I assumed that @53,961 (The Owl !yshAAUvyds) was sarcasm.
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #53,980
I am sympathising with thin kid. Fatty took it too far.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #53,985
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 46 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #53,987
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #53,990
@previous (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
Naw, Lettuce is right. I don't think the fat kid should have even gotten suspended, but I agree that a suspension is still worth it, but all the bullies should have been suspended also, despite the broken ankle. Fuck those punks.
It's also bullshit that he might be facing criminal charges. I hope the judge takes one look at the video and basically tell the bully that he had it coming, case dismissed.
Naw, Lettuce is right. I don't think the fat kid should have even gotten suspended, but I agree that a suspension is still worth it, but all the bullies should have been suspended also, despite the broken ankle. Fuck those punks.
It's also bullshit that he might be facing criminal charges. I hope the judge takes one look at the video and basically tell the bully that he had it coming, case dismissed.
(Edited 3 minutes later.)
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #53,997
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
They should all have gotten suspended. There's 'defending yourself' and then there's 'Spaz attack utilising retard strength'. It's not like a normal punch wouldn't have scared Slim away.
They should all have gotten suspended. There's 'defending yourself' and then there's 'Spaz attack utilising retard strength'. It's not like a normal punch wouldn't have scared Slim away.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #54,002
@previous (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
It's still aggravated assault. I agree they should all be suspended, but if you're bullied every day of your life, you're going to snap eventually, and he had every right to defend himself, so fuck the little twerp. Also, I feel like the teachers and administrators are bullies here too. They had to know what was going on, and chose to do nothing, until the kid getting bullied defends himself, and then they rush in to do their jobs. How nice of them.
It's still aggravated assault. I agree they should all be suspended, but if you're bullied every day of your life, you're going to snap eventually, and he had every right to defend himself, so fuck the little twerp. Also, I feel like the teachers and administrators are bullies here too. They had to know what was going on, and chose to do nothing, until the kid getting bullied defends himself, and then they rush in to do their jobs. How nice of them.
Triptych !!DP4/G/5A6 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #54,003
Bully got suspended for 23 days, fat kid got suspended for 3 days.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #54,006
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #54,014
@54,002 (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> if you're bullied every day of your life, you're going to snap eventually
That's no excuse for anything at all. The Columbine kids 'snapped eventually'.
> he had every right to defend himself, so fuck the little twerp.
see:
> There's 'defending yourself' and then there's 'Spaz attack utilising retard strength'.
Fighting is most likely against the school's rules anyway.
> They had to know what was going on
Guesswork.
> if you're bullied every day of your life, you're going to snap eventually
That's no excuse for anything at all. The Columbine kids 'snapped eventually'.
> he had every right to defend himself, so fuck the little twerp.
see:
> There's 'defending yourself' and then there's 'Spaz attack utilising retard strength'.
Fighting is most likely against the school's rules anyway.
> They had to know what was going on
Guesswork.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #54,025
Shtick detected.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 28 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #54,052
@54,003 (Triptych !!DP4/G/5A6)
Ohh, good. I had previously read it as the other way around, and I was very disappoint.
Ohh, good. I had previously read it as the other way around, and I was very disappoint.
Leland !BBbudGf3kM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,232
I want to buy fatty a beer... And get him a tattoo.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 43 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,262
Removed again? Oh well, someone on /v/ uploaded it to Mediafire.
www.mediafire.com/?92o2rj7hfdh21ai
And that fat kid's got his own ED page now.
www.mediafire.com/?92o2rj7hfdh21ai
And that fat kid's got his own ED page now.
totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW replied with this 15 years ago, 20 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,276
Anonymous L replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,278
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 42 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,279
@OP
I was going to post yesterday when I saw the original on Facebook. Damn. :(
I was going to post yesterday when I saw the original on Facebook. Damn. :(
Anonymous M double-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,281
@53,987 (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
Sure - he took it too far. But when you get very angry like that, you don't/can't usually stop to work out what's "too far". It was self-defence anyway.
Sure - he took it too far. But when you get very angry like that, you don't/can't usually stop to work out what's "too far". It was self-defence anyway.
Anonymous M triple-posted this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,283
@53,953 (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
No he didn't. The school gave a press release saying "[it was] a grazed knee".
No he didn't. The school gave a press release saying "[it was] a grazed knee".
psychopath !PSYCHOhc32 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 5 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,284
Is may drastic but keeps bully from happen.
totoforhire !!pNz4kjfeW replied with this 15 years ago, 15 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,285
Anonymous M replied with this 15 years ago, 24 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,287
@54,284 (psychopath !PSYCHOhc32)
> Is may drastic but keeps bully from happen.
> Is may drastic
> keeps bully from happen
The fuck?
> Is may drastic but keeps bully from happen.
> Is may drastic
> keeps bully from happen
The fuck?
Anonymous L replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,296
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 12 seconds later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,297
@54,281 (M)
> But when you get very angry like that, you don't/can't usually stop to work out what's "too far".
You still have to face consequences for your actions.
> It was self-defence anyway.
It was excessive self defence. The fat boy used potentially lethal force. Fatass is ridiculously lucky that the thin kid only has a smashed up leg.
> But when you get very angry like that, you don't/can't usually stop to work out what's "too far".
You still have to face consequences for your actions.
> It was self-defence anyway.
It was excessive self defence. The fat boy used potentially lethal force. Fatass is ridiculously lucky that the thin kid only has a smashed up leg.
Anonymous M replied with this 15 years ago, 20 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,310
@previous (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
> You still have to face consequences for your actions.
Just like the law on self-defence; if you go over-the-top in defending yourself, you can say you didn't have time to work out what was 'reasonable force', and that you acted on the spur of the moment. The same applies here.
> It was excessive self defence.
When adrenaline kicks in your responsibility for your actions diminishes.
> The fat boy used potentially lethal force.
Lethal force?! Hahahahaha! I'm sure landing on your leg (resulting in... wait for it... a... GRAZED KNEE!111111one!11!) can be lethal. :')
> Fatass is ridiculously lucky that the thin kid only has a smashed up leg.
Unlucky. Also, the skinny kid only he has a crazed knee (see comment of schools spokewomen in earlier link). That small kid was a bully - no matter his size, he got what he deserved. I hope this serves as a warning to other kids.
> You still have to face consequences for your actions.
Just like the law on self-defence; if you go over-the-top in defending yourself, you can say you didn't have time to work out what was 'reasonable force', and that you acted on the spur of the moment. The same applies here.
> It was excessive self defence.
When adrenaline kicks in your responsibility for your actions diminishes.
> The fat boy used potentially lethal force.
Lethal force?! Hahahahaha! I'm sure landing on your leg (resulting in... wait for it... a... GRAZED KNEE!111111one!11!) can be lethal. :')
> Fatass is ridiculously lucky that the thin kid only has a smashed up leg.
Unlucky. Also, the skinny kid only he has a crazed knee (see comment of schools spokewomen in earlier link). That small kid was a bully - no matter his size, he got what he deserved. I hope this serves as a warning to other kids.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous L replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,312
Anonymous M replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,320
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 18 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,338
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,340
@54,310 (M)
> Just like the law on self-defence; if you go over-the-top in defending yourself, you can say you didn't have time to work out what was 'reasonable force', and that you acted on the spur of the moment. The same applies here.
Except there is video evidence which proves that it wasn't a 'spur-of-the-moment' action.
> When adrenaline kicks in your responsibility for your actions diminishes.
No.
> Lethal force?! Hahahahaha! I'm sure landing on your leg (resulting in... wait for it... a... GRAZED KNEE!111111one!11!) can be lethal. :')
don't stuff words down my throat. I said 'potentially lethal'. This was a powerful bodyslam onto concrete. Had the boy landed strangely, he could have had a snapped neck, cracked skull, etc.
> Unlucky.
No. He should be thanking his stars he's not up on a manslaughter charge right now.
> That small kid was a bully - no matter his size, he got what he deserved.
Nevertheless, the big one still assaulted him. Despite what your revenge of the nerd-esque fantasy world wants you to believe, peopel don't get away with that. It's obvious the fat one was in njo real danger - not only is he much larger than the instigator, but a teacher was literally 3 feet away and in the process of intervening.
> Just like the law on self-defence; if you go over-the-top in defending yourself, you can say you didn't have time to work out what was 'reasonable force', and that you acted on the spur of the moment. The same applies here.
Except there is video evidence which proves that it wasn't a 'spur-of-the-moment' action.
> When adrenaline kicks in your responsibility for your actions diminishes.
No.
> Lethal force?! Hahahahaha! I'm sure landing on your leg (resulting in... wait for it... a... GRAZED KNEE!111111one!11!) can be lethal. :')
don't stuff words down my throat. I said 'potentially lethal'. This was a powerful bodyslam onto concrete. Had the boy landed strangely, he could have had a snapped neck, cracked skull, etc.
> Unlucky.
No. He should be thanking his stars he's not up on a manslaughter charge right now.
> That small kid was a bully - no matter his size, he got what he deserved.
Nevertheless, the big one still assaulted him. Despite what your revenge of the nerd-esque fantasy world wants you to believe, peopel don't get away with that. It's obvious the fat one was in njo real danger - not only is he much larger than the instigator, but a teacher was literally 3 feet away and in the process of intervening.
Leland !BBbudGf3kM joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,342
@previous (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
I see a skinny person worried about some fatass like me slamming them violently onto a concrete surface. You know the best way to avoid that? Don't bully fatty.
I see a skinny person worried about some fatass like me slamming them violently onto a concrete surface. You know the best way to avoid that? Don't bully fatty.
Anonymous M replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,344
@54,340 (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
> Except there is video evidence which proves that it wasn't a 'spur-of-the-moment' action.
... ... ...
> No.
Yes.
> don't stuff words down my throat. I said 'potentially lethal'.
He landed on his legs. If I patted you on the back it's 'potentially lethal'; you might fall and land on your neck! :-|
> No. He should be thanking his stars he's not up on a manslaughter charge right now.
Like I said, he was acting in self-defence - if he was in court (like I said earlier) he could defend himself legally by claiming he didn't have time to work out what the law requires of him in the particular circumstances he was in. People have got away with murder through that very defence.
> Nevertheless, the big one still assaulted him. Despite what your revenge of the nerd-esque fantasy world wants you to believe, peopel don't get away with that. It's obvious the fat one was in njo real danger - not only is he much larger than the instigator, but a teacher was literally 3 feet away and in the process of intervening.
It was self-defense. If he thought he or any one around him was in any imminent danger (nobody has to have hit or fought him yet) he could claim self-defence. Most likely successfully. The smaller kid hit him in the face, which as you'd say, is 'potentially lethal'. :D
> Except there is video evidence which proves that it wasn't a 'spur-of-the-moment' action.
... ... ...
> No.
Yes.
> don't stuff words down my throat. I said 'potentially lethal'.
He landed on his legs. If I patted you on the back it's 'potentially lethal'; you might fall and land on your neck! :-|
> No. He should be thanking his stars he's not up on a manslaughter charge right now.
Like I said, he was acting in self-defence - if he was in court (like I said earlier) he could defend himself legally by claiming he didn't have time to work out what the law requires of him in the particular circumstances he was in. People have got away with murder through that very defence.
> Nevertheless, the big one still assaulted him. Despite what your revenge of the nerd-esque fantasy world wants you to believe, peopel don't get away with that. It's obvious the fat one was in njo real danger - not only is he much larger than the instigator, but a teacher was literally 3 feet away and in the process of intervening.
It was self-defense. If he thought he or any one around him was in any imminent danger (nobody has to have hit or fought him yet) he could claim self-defence. Most likely successfully. The smaller kid hit him in the face, which as you'd say, is 'potentially lethal'. :D
Anonymous M double-posted this 15 years ago, 38 seconds later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,345
The Owl !yshAAUvyds replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,351
@54,344 (M)
> > Except there is video evidence which proves that it wasn't a 'spur-of-the-moment' action.
> ... ... ...
From the first punch to the bodyslam is a period of 18 seconds. During 16 of those seconds, the two children are standing facing each other.
> > No.
> Yes.
Do you have a NSW court case to back that up?
> > don't stuff words down my throat. I said 'potentially lethal'.
> He landed on his legs. If I patted you on the back it's 'potentially lethal'; you might fall and land on your neck! :-|
Patting me back isn't 'potentially lethal' at all. That's a laughable strawman, I'm not even going to bother.
> > No. He should be thanking his stars he's not up on a manslaughter charge right now.
> Like I said, he was acting in self-defence - if he was in court (like I said earlier) he could defend himself legally by claiming he didn't have time to work out what the law requires of him in the particular circumstances he was in. People have got away with murder through that very defence.
See above - video evidence showing that not only was there was ample time to simply walk away - there was a teacher 3 feet away being very very noticeable.
> > Nevertheless, the big one still assaulted him. Despite what your revenge of the nerd-esque fantasy world wants you to believe, peopel don't get away with that. It's obvious the fat one was in njo real danger - not only is he much larger than the instigator, but a teacher was literally 3 feet away and in the process of intervening.
> It was self-defense. If he thought he or any one around him was in any imminent danger (nobody has to have hit or fought him yet) he could claim self-defence. Most likely successfully. The smaller kid hit him in the face, which as you'd say, is 'potentially lethal'. :D
It was excessive self-defence. But this is really beside the point. Fighting is more than likely against school rules, so he should have been suspended and it is right that he was. Nice avoidance of the 'there is a teacher who is walking towards the child' issue, btw.
> > Except there is video evidence which proves that it wasn't a 'spur-of-the-moment' action.
> ... ... ...
From the first punch to the bodyslam is a period of 18 seconds. During 16 of those seconds, the two children are standing facing each other.
> > No.
> Yes.
Do you have a NSW court case to back that up?
> > don't stuff words down my throat. I said 'potentially lethal'.
> He landed on his legs. If I patted you on the back it's 'potentially lethal'; you might fall and land on your neck! :-|
Patting me back isn't 'potentially lethal' at all. That's a laughable strawman, I'm not even going to bother.
> > No. He should be thanking his stars he's not up on a manslaughter charge right now.
> Like I said, he was acting in self-defence - if he was in court (like I said earlier) he could defend himself legally by claiming he didn't have time to work out what the law requires of him in the particular circumstances he was in. People have got away with murder through that very defence.
See above - video evidence showing that not only was there was ample time to simply walk away - there was a teacher 3 feet away being very very noticeable.
> > Nevertheless, the big one still assaulted him. Despite what your revenge of the nerd-esque fantasy world wants you to believe, peopel don't get away with that. It's obvious the fat one was in njo real danger - not only is he much larger than the instigator, but a teacher was literally 3 feet away and in the process of intervening.
> It was self-defense. If he thought he or any one around him was in any imminent danger (nobody has to have hit or fought him yet) he could claim self-defence. Most likely successfully. The smaller kid hit him in the face, which as you'd say, is 'potentially lethal'. :D
It was excessive self-defence. But this is really beside the point. Fighting is more than likely against school rules, so he should have been suspended and it is right that he was. Nice avoidance of the 'there is a teacher who is walking towards the child' issue, btw.
(Edited 47 seconds later.)
Anonymous M replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #54,367
@previous (The Owl !yshAAUvyds)
He was being provoked; provocation is enough cause to defend yourself. He was excessive in the way he defended himself; he could easily of pushed him away or just smacked him, but once adrenaline kicks in (16 seconds or 1 minute; it doesn't matter) you behave differently to how you would if you were thinking clearly. He should be excused, perhaps taught how to diffuse a situation without being violent or aggressive. Legally, he would almost definitely be excused - his actions were justifiable under the circumstances.
> Nice avoidance of the 'there is a teacher who is walking towards the child' issue, btw.
This "teacher" doesn't intervene, so her presence is more or less irrelevant.
He was being provoked; provocation is enough cause to defend yourself. He was excessive in the way he defended himself; he could easily of pushed him away or just smacked him, but once adrenaline kicks in (16 seconds or 1 minute; it doesn't matter) you behave differently to how you would if you were thinking clearly. He should be excused, perhaps taught how to diffuse a situation without being violent or aggressive. Legally, he would almost definitely be excused - his actions were justifiable under the circumstances.
> Nice avoidance of the 'there is a teacher who is walking towards the child' issue, btw.
This "teacher" doesn't intervene, so her presence is more or less irrelevant.