--------------Hook----------The problem is that cyberbullying is an act that must be stopped, but there is no need to place limits on students' online speech. If you are not familiar with the word cyberbullying, it is when an individual is tormented, threatened, harassed, humiliated, embarrassed, or otherwise targeted by another individual using the Internet and interactive and digital technologies. But once again I emphasize that schools should not limit the number of students who speak online. Schools must protect students' First Amendment rights, but also maintain the learning environment and safety at school. The three main reasons why the school should not limit students' online conversation are: there is not a large percentage of people affected, there is no cause. Approximately 75% (3 out of 4) of all girls have never been victims of cyberbullying. Approximately 83% (5 out of 6) of all males have never been victims of cyberbullying. If only 25.1% of girls say they are victims of cyberbullying and only 16.6% of all boys say they are victims of cyberbullying, what is the point of limiting the word to students? The percentages represent just a quarter of the overall percentage. Approximately 75% (3 out of 4) of all girls have never been victims of cyberbullying. Approximately 83% (5 out of 6) of all males have never been victims of cyberbullying. This evidence helps explain why schools should not limit students' online speech because most students are not affected by cyberbullying, with no reason for new reinforcements on the In Exhibit D the court sided with the students, but the students must serve ten days, but the ten days of suspension will not appear in their records. It must pose a threat, there was no threat so they sided with the students. In document C, the school suspended the student, but this was because the student caused a threat against the targeted student, SN If the student did not target SN and if the students named and harmed her directly, there probably would have been no suspension. JS created a MySpace profile ("the Profile") mocking his middle school principal, James McGonigle. The profile did not name the principal or his school, but included a photo of him and contained vulgar and offensive language. JS did not name the principal or the school, he did not directly target the principal even though a photo of the principal was on the page. This evidence helps explain why schools should not limit students' online speech because doing so does not cause substantial disruption. One reason schools should not limit students' free speech online is violations of constitutional rights. We question reports of growing threats to online students. The number of young people using digital technologies is increasing rapidly, online problems are also expected to increase. simply due to increased use. Bullying also has a long history. Bullying occurred for