Huh ?

krabby5

steveinaz wrote: »

We HAVE the world we live in today, because we have allowed politicians and policy create a "hands off" society. You punch your neighbor in the chops for dropping an "F" bomb in front of a woman, and your jailed for assault. In the 60's, the cop (if even called) would have said, "maybe you should watch your mouth?" and walked away.

I FIRMLY believe everybody should get their a$$ kicked once in their lives. Kids today aren't afraid of ANYBODY. Because they know, no matter what they do or say to somebody else, there probably won't be any consequences.

steveinaz

I could use a good ****-kickin, for sure. LOL

krabby5

steveinaz wrote: »

I could use a good ****-kickin, for sure. LOL

Too many people talking instead of listening..talking like their teeth don't fit.

Whenever I started mouthing off to someone when i was young, somebody usually shut it for me. It taught me respect.

And I'm not exactly a right-wing conservative.

nooshinjohn

cfrizz wrote: »

Times change fellas, there are simply too many weirdos out there running around looking to snatch up kids to be letting an 8 year old boy walk home from that distance. He was lucky he wasn't picked up by one of those and it had a happy ending. They could have found him in a ditch dead instead. It HAS happened, that is a high price to pay for supposedly "teaching him a lesson!"

I actually believe there might be less wierdos today that when we were kids. Today, thanks to the 24/7 news cycle, an Amber alert in Boston is run as breaking news in Los Angeles, even though the suspect is on his or her way across town. This over-saturation of events causes us to feel as though bad things are happening in the house next door and make everyone feel less secure. I have watched CNN turn a high sped chase in Delaware in to Breaking News here in L.A.

I am not trying to say child abduction does not happen and is not a problem, rather that statistics on most crimes that get instant coverage by the ratings-chasers in the media are down and not up. We should be feeling safer and not less so. This boy on his walk home was in more danger from the traffic on the road hitting him than he was from being snatched up.

mrbigbluelight

F1nut wrote: »

Living in fear isn't living.

BINGO. BANGO. BONGO. EXACTLY.

I've said it before, but just to say it again: I respect Ms. Cfrizz quite a bit (even though she normally makes a number of us look bad with her common sense, manners, and etiquette).
However, in this case, I strongly disagree with her viewpoint that a number of us are "living in the past" and have a need to "recognize what is going on in today's society".

It would be my opinion that we do recognize what today's "society" is like. And we reject a large portion of it. If, instead, we choose to honor what was valuable in the past, ie, manners, respect, and honor, then we aren't "living in the past". No, rather, we choose to carry forward what was valuable in the past and apply it in the present.
It works. It takes some work. But it works.

Cfrizz wrote:

Just how well could an 8 year old boy fight off a full grown adult to get away? Who knows how isolated this route home was.[\Quote]

There are several things that can prevent a "snatch and grab". What we taught our kids from a young age is:
1. Don't let a stranger get close.
2. If someone tries the "Your parents have been in a terrible accident, they want me to take you to the hospital !" ploy, they have to know the secret password. If they don't know it, do the following:
3. RUN. RUN. RUN. RUN. RUN. RUN. RUN. RUN.
Either home, or to a trusted neighbors house, or to a store, whatever is nearest. But RUN.
4. If you are physically caught, then fight mad dog, nasty dirty. The manners and respect you've been taught are out the window. Eyes for a starter, then other strategic points. Do the best/worst you can. If that fails, then do the following:
5. Die in the parking lot.

I say "parking lot" because that's what the local modus operandi involved years ago, shopping center/mall parking lots.
Different location, the same thing applies,
But better to die in a parking lot then to have to find your body weeks later along the river bottom after unspeakable things have been done.

"Die in the parking lot !? Oh, you must hate your children or not really care for them !".
No, that's not the case. I just refuse to force them into a dungeon mentality, into a the-only-way-to-keep-them-safe is to keep them locked up.
That, in my opinion, is recognizing what society is today, and recognizing what society COULD be.
I choose what I would like society to be. I decline to adopt a "Oh, well, what can I do. I'm powerless to affect change."

I used to live in the northern section of our local major berg. Over the years, the neighborhood changed, drastically, for the worse. All I can say, and it is just anecdotal, is that this philosophy worked for myself and my family. Down at the trench warfare level. And it involved a refusal to be a victim.

It's been said, "It was lucky the 8-year old boy was picked up by a friendly citizen !".
I'd disagree.
The 8-year old boy should NEVER have gotten into the "friendly citizen's" car. NEVER.
It would seem to me that the boy was either never taught this lesson, or was taught and he refused to learn.

1 mile on a road home. 1 MILE.
I believe that no one knows the entire story but, barring this kid being autistic or having a mental/physical handicap, he should have been capable of walking that minor distance.
If he became "lost" (?), and a "friendly citizen" pulled over and asked him if anything was wrong, he should have been taught to say, "I'm lost, call the police". And waited for the police to show up.
But NEVER means NEVER, and NEVER get into a stranger's car. PERIOD. NO EXCEPTIONS TO THAT RULE. EVER.

But that's just my opinion.

But one positive thing is that now that the government has stepped in, this young lad will have the benefit of being co-raised by the Division of Family Services. I imagine that will be very progressive and work to the benefit of all involved,.

scubalab

Wow, what a whirlwind of opinions in this thread! I've read all of the posts and there are several opinions that jump out. There are those with the opinion that things were so much better 'when I was a kid' (meant, I turned out OK because this was the way I was raised). There are others who obviously don't have young children and are stubborn in their set opinion/mindset. To all of you expressing opinions, I say that is fine, and you are entitled to those.

To clarify my philosophy on raising a child safely, there absolutely needs to be common sense. I never said we need to raise children in a bubble, but if there is any way to remove or reduce SERIOUS danger, than you can be DAMN sure I will do that! PERIOD! But that certainly doesn't mean that I'm not going to let them live their life. I'm sorry, but letting an 8-year old walk a mile alone lacked proper judgment. Not saying the parent deserved the consequences, but it shouldn't have happened.

As an example, to me, safe (with common sense) is letting the child ride the bike WITH a helmet. Overprotective is not letting him/her ride the bike at all. Careless is putting your child on the bike without a helmet. Safe (with common sense) is putting the family in the car, BUCKLING them up, and going for that drive or vacation. Overprotective is not letting the family ride in the car at all. Careless is driving down the road, Brittany Spears style, unbuckled with your child on your lap. See a trend here?

In this case, if separate reports are true, this was careless - there were too many opportunities for avoidable SERIOUS danger here. Safe (with common sense) would have been to punish the child another way (make him 'think about it' while cleaning up the yard for an hour when he got home). There are several things in this case that are wrong. First is the lack of information (seemingly done intentionally) to sway the readers' opinions to favor the father. Second (if it is true that the child was 8, was on a busy road, and was picked up by a stranger who then called the police), there was horribly poor judgment on the father's part. Third, if the separate reports are false, and it was, say, on a route with safe walking paths, and the father didn't abandon the child where he could get lost, then the punishment certainly would not fit the crime.

Let's say this had the worst imaginable outcome, and something happened to that child (struck and killed by a car, abducted and murdered, etc.). Would we still be siding with the father? I think not. We would ALL be saying the tragedy was avoidable.

I blame it all on the media...

exalted512

I'm still in my 20s and I wish that my parents would have had me walk a mile for punishment.
-Cody

mlong

Child and family services came after my wife for washing our daughters mouth out with soap for lying.