Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth

indeed... criminals and professional victims

what i dislike is the "zero tolerance" mentality they espouse. in my schools, which were plagued with gang violence, you basically would get suspended for being in a fight, regardless of who started it/threw the first punch/etc

the result was that basically you got punished if you defended yourself. the
only acceptable courses of action were to a) flee and tell a teacher b) flee and keep it to yourself c) take the beating and tell a teacher d) take the beating and keep it to yourself

if fleeing wasn't an option? too bad. take the beating. the rationale behind this nonsense is basically that the school's lawyers can't come up with a pragmatic way to condone any sort of violence, even self-defense.

tbh you learned pretty quick that being completely non-violent isn't a real option if you want to maintain any sort of reasonable amount of dignity and self-respect. my ideology is that you shouldn't go out of your way to start a fight, but if someone makes it clear they are going to fight you whether you want to fight or not, then you shouldn't even wait for them to throw the first punch. your chances of winning the fight decrease dramatically by doing so, especially if you are not as strong or well-versed in fighting as the aggressor, which is typically the more likely scenario.