The SW Kid Case

[TK-8252]

I meant that in the issue of arguing in your seemingly pro bullying argument. "Builds character" is what you are apparently stating. That people must be subjected to constant ridicule, etc in order to become better human beings.

 

I'm not pro-bullying... I am, however, against frivolous lawsuits.

 

When I was younger in school I was bullied, picked on, etc. often, but I handled it, learned from my experiences with bullies, and now I'm cool and have lots of friends. I guess you could say being bullied built on my character.

 

People need to learn not to take things so damn personally. If someone calls you a name, why should you care? Either shrug it off, laugh with them, or lift some weights and knock the kid out.

 

That simply does not happen. Bullying possesses drastic psychological effects upon a child's life and directly influences the type of person that he will be.

 

Agreed. And that can be good or bad, which is my next point...

 

What of those who cannot handle bullying? How are you going to teach them to "man up" to bullies? I'm not quite sure that all kids are able to shake off a bully, otherwise bullying wouldn't be such a problem.

 

They need to learn to deal with it. If you don't learn to deal with bullies, you will NEVER survive in real life. You can't sue the drill sergeant because he's making fun of you. You can't sue your boss because he pissed you off. Bullies are a small step into a larger world. Either learn how to deal with them or you are doomed.

 

It may be a fault on his part, but it's no less of a fault for those who distributed it. If I taped something idiotic and my friends got hold of it, I wouldn't mind. But millions of people? That's a whole other story.

 

Again, it was someone else's tape. If you take someone's tape, it doesn't make it yours because you recorded yourself on it. It's still the first guy's tape... and he can do whatever the hell he wants with it. Private property rights, man!

 

You want to tell me that we shouldn't do things that are "stupid" for fear that we might be ridiculed worldwide?

 

Don't tape yourself doing it.

 

There's nothing honestly stupid about him taping himself doing moves, except for the fact that he sucks and he's uncoordinated. But that's no reason to subject him to ridicule.

 

He does look pretty stupid doing it.

 

But he willingly posts his idiocy for the world to see.

 

SWK willingly taped himself doing something embarassing and stupid, using someone else's tape. I see no difference, other than that you have sympathy for SWK (which is fine, there's nothing wrong with having sympathy, it's the lawsuit that's wrong).

 

Should he sue the people who ridicule him? No, he shouldn't, and he couldn't, because of freedom of speech.

 

But kids are just using their freedom of speech to ridicule SWK... they can ridicule Jack Thompson with freedom of speech but not SWK?

 

But freedom of speech is not the question at hand. The right to privacy is the question at hand. Why does it matter if it's someone else's tape? They haven't claimed it in months, and it is evidence of the kid's stupidity. He should possess the right to keep that quiet.

 

Not really... if it were his tape, yes you'd be absolutely right, but it's not his tape. He did not have the right to use it or have any say over what happened to it... but the kid who owned it had the right to distribute it.

 

it's common sense not to do something stupid like post something that could get you sued for a ****load of money. Maybe they deserve to be punished.

 

There's a lot of stuff that could get you sued... you shouldn't not do things that you have the right to do out of fear of a frivolous lawsuit being brought against you. You shouldn't, however, do things that are stupid and embarassing, because there are consequences to doing such a thing. There shouldn't be a legal consequence for using your own tape that you own and have every right to distribute.

 

Here's how I think SWK could redeem himself:

 

He should start working out. Working out is good, after all. You're strong, live longer and healthier. Plus you get to beat the living **** out of people. If SWK went and beat the crap out of the kids instead of suing their families, that would be much better. Then if they wanted to sue SWK for beating up the kids, I'd be against THAT lawsuit as well.

 

But ah, that's just my cynical, vigilante view on life.

 

 

--------------------------------

 

Anyway Mike, I enjoy debating you regardless (it's a shame we're not pitted against eachother on other topics ).

[Mike Windu]

Likewise Mike.

 

So... if you should fear your privacy for doing something stupid... in private... but you shouldn't fear releasing said stupidity for the world to see? Excuse me if I fail to see that logic.

 

The difference between Jack Thompson and The SWK lies in their idiocy. These two are idiots for two different reasons. I feel that there is a separation between those two. It's hard to describe, I might think up the correct wording later.

 

They need to learn to deal with it. If you don't learn to deal with bullies, you will NEVER survive in real life. You can't sue the drill sergeant because he's making fun of you. You can't sue your boss because he pissed you off. Bullies are a small step into a larger world. Either learn how to deal with them or you are doomed.

 

Truth. They need to learn to deal with it. But it doesn't justify distributing his idiocy for the world to see. Sure, the guy had the right, but say I had the right to shoot someone for threatening me. I don't feel legislation alone may justify actions. Legislation + moral righteousness = win.

 

People need to learn not to take things so damn personally. If someone calls you a name, why should you care? Either shrug it off, laugh with them, or lift some weights and knock the kid out.

 

It gets to a point where it becomes entirely frustrating. Shrugging off 10 people is fine. But 10 million? How do you sleep at night knowing that some random kid in Colorado is laughing at your uncoordinated, sloppy movements?

 

(Course, I'd probably be laughing. All the way to the bank.)

 

Sure, it's a frivolous lawsuit. But that is the way the Constitution crumbles.

[TK-8252]

So... if you should fear your privacy for doing something stupid... in private... but you shouldn't fear releasing said stupidity for the world to see? Excuse me if I fail to see that logic.

 

It may have been in private but he taped himself doing it, so the fact that it was in privacy is null and void.

 

The difference between Jack Thompson and The SWK lies in their idiocy. These two are idiots for two different reasons. I feel that there is a separation between those two. It's hard to describe, I might think up the correct wording later.

 

Well, I get your point. Jack Thompson does his stuff for attention; SWK didn't want it to go public I'd assume. But the principle is similar: they both willingly preserved their stupidity and are ridiculed for it.

 

But 10 million? How do you sleep at night knowing that some random kid in Colorado is laughing at your uncoordinated, sloppy movements?

 

Maybe he knows how Paris Hilton feels.

 

 

oooooooooh

[edlib]

It seems that you have the same attitude as the people who slip and fall on their ass, then sue the place because they see the chance to grab some cash. You KNOW the lawsuit is frivolous... but you'd want some cash anyway.

Well, that seems to me that might be a different, if related, issue: "Are frivolous lawsuits bad/ destroying the country?"

 

My answer: Yes... in most cases, they probably are.

 

But they aren't illegal, at least at the moment. However, changing that would take a major overhaul to the system. It's really something that should be done at some point.

Until the system is changed, though, people are going to take advantage of it. If not this kid, then someone else. Don't like it? Then work to get it changed.

 

In this specific case this kid, his parents, and their lawyer decided to work the system to their favor. I can't fault them for that... that's within their rights to do. I suspect I might do the same thing if offered the opportunity, depending on how badly I felt I was wronged.

 

I have no idea how bad this kid's life became after that tape went viral... you seem to think it's something that most people could and should just shrug off. Seems to me he's the only one that can answer that. At that level you are dealing with his emotions, and emotions aren't rational and simple to quantify.

I can honestly tell you that if I was offered the chance to enact some revenge (financially if nothing else,) against some of the folks who gave me crap the whole time I was going to school at the very time it was happening, I'm pretty sure I would have taken it without a moment's hesitation... everything else be damned.

 

Sure, it might be his own fault in a way, by taping himself... but the other kids should also have known it was going to hurt somebody by releasing it... so they're just as equally at fault as him. Just because they found that tape didn't mean they had to make it public. I don't see either side as having the moral high ground in this case. The SWK might have been acting like an idiot... but I can't see how anyone can think the other kids were being anything less than needlessly cruel.

 

If anything, I feel the other parents shouldn't have caved and settled, but instead let it go to trial if they had wanted to make a stand. I suspect that such a trial would have put their own kids in a much less than flattering light, though.

[toms]

I hate frivolous lawsuits, and i hate the fact our TV channels are filled with adverts trying to get everyone to sue everyone else for anything.. its ending up like america and it means no one is willing to offer the cool thngs they used to, because they can't afford to be sued if some idiot hurts themselves while using them.

 

I don't rate this as a frivolous lawsuit. I think the kid had every right to sue, and the parents had every right to fight it in court if they thought it was unfounded, but they decided to settle.

[TK-8252]

Just because they found that tape didn't mean they had to make it public. I don't see either side as having the moral high ground in this case.

 

He didn't have to make it public, but he had the right to if he so wished. It's his tape and SWK willingly and knowingly taped himself with it. No, neither side has the moral high ground. But the fact is, there's nothing in the law that says you can't release a tape on the internet just because it contains material that would embarass someone who was stupid enough to tape himself in the first place.

 

I don't rate this as a frivolous lawsuit. I think the kid had every right to sue, and the parents had every right to fight it in court if they thought it was unfounded, but they decided to settle.

 

Of course it's frivolous. The kid who posted his own tape on the internet didn't do anything against the law or damaging. And yet he's being sued because people are making fun of SWK.

 

There is no basis for a lawsuit. All it is is that SWK, as edlib says, wants to get revenge. It may not be illegal, but he deserves ridicule for joining the ranks of those who clog the justice system with frivolous lawsuits.

 

I mean, what does SWK get out of getting some cash? People are going to keep making fun of him. He'd still have the "mental scarring" or whatever they want to claim he's got. He'd just have some cash that he did not earn and nor does he deserve.

[edlib]

He'd just have some cash that he did not earn and nor does he deserve.

Yup. Sometimes that's enough. Like I said earlier: if given the choice of being ridiculed by strangers; or being ridiculed by strangers, but now with with money... why wouldn't I grab the money? It doesn't really change the situation at all... but it's better than going through all that and being broke.

 

It's an attempt to hurt his tormentors back a bit, financially (since you can't really do it physically,) and trying to make some kind of a point... but in the end, that's pretty much it.

 

And yet, so what? Just one more frivolous lawsuit adrift in a sea of millions of them. If it hadn't been SW-related I'm sure none of us would have even heard about it, or paid any attention to it even if we had.

 

No offense... but you seem to be taking this all awfully personally. It's not like it's money coming out of your pocket,.. is it? I can't see where the price of anything is going to go up over this because the store you shop at was sued. This was a private suit between a couple of private parties. It really doesn't concern anybody but them.

[TK-8252]

Yup. Sometimes that's enough. Like I said earlier: if given the choice of being ridiculed by strangers; or being ridiculed by strangers, but now with with money... why wouldn't I grab the money? It doesn't really change the situation at all... but it's better than going through all that and being broke.

 

But wouldn't he have clearly been the better person had he not relied on a lawsuit to make him feel good about himself? Perhaps had he worked out, lost some weight, chilled out, grew up, got some common sense and learned to deal with bullies, then we would be admiring him rather than looking down on him?

 

Suing because you're greedy and don't even need the money, IMO, makes you worthy of ridicule.

 

And yet, so what? Just one more frivolous lawsuit adrift in a sea of millions of them. If it hadn't been SW-related I'm sure none of us would have even heard about it, or paid any attention to it even if we had.

 

True. But it is SW-related and I thought it would be a good debate topic. Seems the Senate is slowing down a bit...

 

No offense... but you seem to be taking this all awfully personally. It's not like it's money coming out of your pocket,.. is it? I can't see where the price of anything is going to go up over this because the store you shop at was sued. This was a private suit between a couple of private parties. It really doesn't concern anybody but them.

 

Well, both you and I argue for things that don't effect us either, like gay rights... why should this be different?

[edlib]

But wouldn't he have clearly been the better person had he not relied on a lawsuit to make him feel good about himself? Perhaps had he worked out, lost some weight, chilled out, grew up, got some common sense and learned to deal with bullies, then we would be admiring him rather than looking down on him?

The theory that 'living well is the best revenge?'

P'haps... but it's nowhere near as visceral and immediate. Emotions are tricky things. This felt better to him and his folks, at least in the moment.

 

But is anyone ever really going to admire him, ever? No matter what else he does, he will ALWAYS be the "Star Wars Kid". He's going to have to live with that all the way through college... when he gets his first job... 50 years from now, people our age will still remember him for that. That film clip will circulate on the web forever...

 

Maybe a few people will be able to get past it and treat him fairly, eventually... but there's a lot of ignoramuses out there who will always take the chance to remind him of that at every possible opportunity.

 

Well, both you and I argue for things that don't effect us either, like gay rights... why should this be different?

True enough...

[Mike Windu]

Well, both you and I argue for things that don't effect us either, like gay rights... why should this be different?

 

Gay rights actually does affect you in some way... however indirect it may be. Economic, sociopolitcal, etc. It affects all Americans. Legalization of gay marriage in 1 stage = legalization in all. Thus, it affects you (if you live in America, at least.) It might reduce tax cuts for married couples, etc.

 

TK, you seem to be bent up on laws and only laws. I think this is a case where morals come into play as well as legislation... screwing with someone's emotions might not be illegal, but it's immoral. Since nobody's becoming Jesus anytime soon, there's no forgiveness from either side, thus you arrive at the lawsuit.

 

I don't know that we can debate anything else about this case. Everything's been done to death. :|

[TK-8252]

TK, you seem to be bent up on laws and only laws. I think this is a case where morals come into play as well as legislation... screwing with someone's emotions might not be illegal, but it's immoral. Since nobody's becoming Jesus anytime soon, there's no forgiveness from either side, thus you arrive at the lawsuit.

 

Well, it is a lawsuit not a... moralsuit...

 

Or something.

 

Anyway, I guess this thread can rest, unless someone else wants to jump in here...

[Det. Bart Lasiter]

Well, it is a lawsuit not a... moralsuit...

 

Or something.

 

Anyway, I guess this thread can rest, unless someone else wants to jump in here...

TK-8252 for the win

[Mike Windu]

Well, it is a lawsuit not a... moralsuit...

 

Or something.

 

Anyway, I guess this thread can rest, unless someone else wants to jump in here...

 

But the law alone isn't always right, is what I meant.

[TK-8252]

But the law alone isn't always right, is what I meant.

 

Agreed. But in this case I think it's right, but that's where we disagree...

 

It would have been interesting to see this taken to court though.

[edlib]

Agreed...

 

I'm still wondering what each side's arguments would have been.

 

I can only imagine that the other kids would have been smeared royally... painted in the worst possible light imaginable... and that's why their parents decided to settle out of court. I suspect it would have gotten pretty nasty.

[Joe©]

Bullies that press 350 eh? I dunno maybe its just me, but those bullies sound really badass.

 

Arnold schwarzenegger called me a name and then knocked me down!

 

But for real I know a kid that picks on me just cause he is HUGE, mostly he just tells me he bets he could break my back over his knee and I am like "I'm sure you could, I'm going to go stand over here now"

 

There are ways of dealing with bullies, if they try to beat you up just make a scene, call them a colorful name and kick them in the shins I don't care.

 

Back to the SWK, they weren't really bullying him though, they just took their tapes home and found that someone have been stupid enough to film himself doing all his jedi crap.

[edlib]

*Shrug*

 

That's what I'd really like to find out... what the SWK's lawyer had on these other kids to make them want to back down.

 

My understanding is that there's a e-mail/ IM/ EBB posting trail that some of these kids left behind them that was none too kind.

 

But either way, I was curious to see whether the case was going to be argued on personal privacy issues in the broadband age, or on deliberate malice that lead to suffering issues. Or a little of both. And what way the defense was going to take it.

 

But now I guess none of us will ever know, and are merely left to speculate.