Great scientists had to think outside the box. It is simple as that.
I am a genius. There is no doubt. I am intellectually superior to all of my so-called “classmates” and should be able to do my research quietly and without disturbance. The belief I should be required to attend a sixth-grade classroom with children simply for “social” reasons is misplaced.
There is no greater proof than the evolutionary throwback named Frank and his monkey followers, Artur and Sam. Unlike most of the others, Frank’s primitive animal instincts mean that he sees me as a threat to his dominance, hence, his aggressive behavior.
I should not be subject to childish bullying, with name-calling, repeated threats, and violent confrontations after school each day.
However, unlike the typical victim of such harassment, I was able to conduct a scientific analysis of Frank and his primitive thought processes and formulate an effective challenge in a language he was sure to understand.
I have detailed my research in the following unpublished report. The actions I took following my conclusions may seem unconventional but they will ensure that Frank’s targeted aggression will cease permanently.
I am one hundred percent sure.209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡhyOrW9I8hI
RESEARCH PAPER209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡOzu2MaYrs8
FROM THE PRIVATE FILES OF
DANIEL ANDREW SHEPHARD
AGE 11.8
THREAT ANALYSIS AND STRATEGY
209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡo3FKoTi9FX
I reached my conclusion based on a complete analysis of the situation and considering all other options.
Clearly, I am, by law, permitted to defend myself if physically attacked, though the degree of my defense (i.e., the method by which I defend myself) can be difficult to determine. Though I am a minor, as are my assailants, my specific options are unclear. I certainly would not wish to engage in any activity which would be considered illegal.
Likewise, there are additional limitations placed upon me within the confines of, and thus under the purview of, the educational institution I regularly attend. Defense within the boundaries of said institution, however, is not of primary concern, as my assailants are also aware of these limitations.
Indeed, the articulated threat implies assault outside of these boundaries, presumably upon publicly accessible rights-of-way (for example, sidewalks, parks, roadways), during a period of time during which my assailants and I could not be observed by those who might prevent such an assault or might summon assistance to prevent the activity.
Therefore, self-defense options had to be reviewed, and a determination was reached in a timely manner so that preparations may be made.
Three categories were considered:
1. Physical Self-defense, requiring violent action to match and exceed that of the physical attack to which I am subjected. This category may include the use of weapons and might result in serious legal consequences and potential incarceration.209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡCPvjJolcwx
2. Verbal Self-defense, requiring the offer of a peaceful settlement. For this category to prove effective, however, my assailants would need to express a willingness to consider a negotiated settlement and the patience to consider such an offer. Previous interactions, though non-violent, would suggest that this option is not tenable. 209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡhdplOVbquA
3. Unconventional Self-defense would, by necessity, require an unusual or uncommon approach to preservation that, while unusual and untested, may prove effective.
After concluding that the third category would be the most effective under these circumstances, I reviewed the characteristics and demonstrated behavior of the potential assailants.
The primary assailant, to whom I will refer as Frank F., is the dominant force in a contingent of three individuals. Frank shows Sam G. and Artur L. how they should behave in regard to me. For example, when Frank pushes me, they push me too. When Frank insults my clothes, hair, or falsely accuses me of poor personal hygiene, Sam and Artur will follow his example. They will also assist in spreading false rumors Frank creates with no basis in fact. These rumors suggest bad, immoral acts and become widely known by other students and cause reputational damage to the me, the subject individual.
Close observation of Frank revealed the following:
1. Frank is emotionally unstable, angry, and easily provoked when he imagines is imagines his dominance is being threatened. 209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡz4CUz1oYNx
2. Frank displays his displeasure verbally and with little concern or respect for anyone nearby.209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡaQcGrS4v2B
3. Frank’s repeated use of certain derogatory adjectives indicates his limited vocabulary and limited intelligence. His insults, primarily directed toward me, refer to physical anatomy, sexual orientation and/or my general appearance and are used without concern for accuracy.
My decision on corrective action was also reached after a careful review of personal considerations:
1. I am inexperienced in physical confrontation and, therefore, would be at a clear disadvantage.209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡ8We2UW20nZ
2. I am morally opposed to physical confrontation.209Please respect copyright.ＰＥＮＡＮＡhAa1Uoz1ej
3. As my current status means I cannot depend upon any allies for assistance, my solution must include motivation to prevent later acts of revenge or retaliation.
