Doing the same thing/s the bullies did to their victims as a punishment is a bad idea

First of all, it is odd that you would only use anecdotal evidence to support your claim, furthermore, the evidence you use show us more about the character's specific character flaws and circumstantial evidence then any real information as to why a "tit for tat" method of reprimand is wrong. To explore exactly why your argument is wrong, I will directly address and analyze both of your stories. But first, I would like to lay out some general points to clarify my position on this debate. -As we are considering the use of equal punishment dealt out by an authority figure (ie. the teacher) and NOT how this position on punishment is viewed by our society, we must accept that the use of said force against the child is legally condoned to focus fully on the potential advantages or disadvantages to the children involved in such a system. -I would also like to impose a limit on what is considered bullying. Stabbing someone or poking out their eye is NOT bullying, it is assault. Therefore, if such an attack that is not legally condoned is committed against another child, I am not suggesting that the bully be stabbed back, but rather that they are taken to the proper authorities. Acts that do fall under bullying include, but are not limited to: rough housing, name calling, throwing objects, taking lunch money, etc. Now, now last point before I start on your anecdotes: Where are your stories from? Are they from personal experience, can they be sourced or are they completely fictional in nature? --------- Story #1: In this story, a bully ("some guy") decided, seemingly on a whim to bully someone. To leave it at that is to ignore the psychology of the bully and to focus more upon his aggression as a derogatory thing. However, it is important to note that bullying is largely seen as the result of two forces upon a child: 1. The need to "empower" one's self and boost his own self esteem.(1) 2. An imbalance of social or physical power. To prevent further bullying, it is logical that a display of public humiliation through bullying towards the bully would show the child that physical violence toward his peers would result only in a similar reprimand. Classical conditioning suggests that pain and humiliation will cause the bully to discontinue bullying once it is associated with that stimulus. (2) Once this connection is established, it will become clear to the child that bullying is not an effective way to empower himself, thus teaching him a valuable lesson. Additionally, getting bullied in turn would show that the perceived social imbalance of power that prompted him to aggressive action versus his victim is not actually in his hands, rather in the hands of the teacher, where it should be. The issue of authority, as your story implies, does not end here. Although it is illogical that the bully would: "[get] into rage and started crashing and ruining everything he can." due to a fear of further punishment, it is likely that he would turn to his parents. Here, however, we run into a very grey area of the argument. Different parents with different ideas of how their child should be raised would have a multitude of responses ranging from outraged that action was being taken against their child to support of this technique. I think that for the sake of a focused and rational debate, we should focus more upon how children would react to this method of punishment and if it is effective rather than on the less predictable parenting ideas. This will further the debate on whether quid pro quo is effective and avoid a major tangent from the original question. Story #2 First of all, I would like to point out that in this story there is a death threat. Due to the way the anecdote was written it is unknown how serious this threat is, but if it is intended as an actual threat on her life, it goes way beyond bullying and into assault. There is a legal premise for such an act, and is beyond the scope of this argument. (for those who are interested in an example: see source 3). I would like to note that in this story you have mentioned that the teacher and student "argued and argued until the bell rang for home time." This seems like an unlikely manifestation of this principle because, as I have mentioned before, bullying is predicated on an imbalance of power. Therefore, if the teacher is bullying the student, it is much more likely to be in one direction only: from the teacher and to the student. Such an interaction would more clearly demonstrate to the class and to the bully what is the point of this kind of punishment. Furthermore, it is unlikely and inefficient for the teacher to "quickly [tell] the class what the bully had been up to every lunch time," at what sounded like the last minute of class. Instead, if this is going to be a tactic used by teachers, the point of the exercise would be made clear at the beginning of the humiliation as to maximize the impact and effectiveness of the punishment not only as a lesson to the bully but also as a deterrent for the entire class. As you have failed to mention what tactics you would suggest instead of such a method, I will leave my argument as such and wait for your reply. Thanks for taking the time to have this debate, and good luck! (1)http://www.scribd.com... (2)Bouton, M. E. (2007) Learning and Behavior: A Contemporary Synthesis, Sunderland, MA: Sinauer (3) http://www.wsoctv.com...