>> > Now I'm confused - what are we talking about? >> >> > Your statements were not specific to that situation but >> > to all kids. I was addressing only the latter. >> >> > If we're talking about just that kid then I agree >> > - I would have expected the educators to handle >> > the situation alone. >> >> > But you were saying all five-year olds in all cases - >> > that's just not true. >> >> But I did make the exception of situations involving >> weapons. And I stand by my position of "all five-year >> olds in all cases" when no weapons are involved.
> Then you really can't use THIS instance to defend that > stance. What weapon was involved? I don't remember reading about any... >> nothing anybody can do about it. For a number of years I >> was convinced >> that Huxley was right, and then we started the "War On >> Terrorism" and >> now I'm convinced they were both right. > You're right - it is a big stretch to bring that up here. > ;^) It is rather the way things go tho unfortunately... I'm sure when US lawmakers mandated public schooling in the earlier part of the country's history that none of them had any idea it would contribute ultimately to a culture of dissociative / misanthropic metrosexualism (along with other community/family-eroding phenomena). That didn't prevent it from contributing. >> > As much as I feel for you I simply don't see how this >> > relates? >> >> People's first response to violence being to call the >> police. It's how I ended up spending the night in jail >> for defending myself, and likely colors my impression >> of people who are in my opinion quick to resort to >> calling them. In spite of not being a criminal in any >> way (truth is in most cases I'm too honest for my own >> good), I've never had a pleasant experience that >> involved a police officer. As a result I'm >> not very likely to think of them as "pals". > I simply don't see _calling_ the police as the source of > the problem as you do. In your case it definitely seemed > to be the police reaction to the situation, not the fact > that they were called in the first place. > This falls into the very tricky area of appropriate > response. This is debated (and will probably be debated > forever) in all cases of domestic violence. > There's no simple answer. It's not likely that he would have killed me -- which is what my ex claimed was her fear at the time. The law in DFW (and in a lot of places or so I've heard) is that when a 9-11 call is made for domestic violence the police are required to arrest _anyone_ who has inflicted _any_ injury... So... there I was with a face full of blood and a broken tooth... so they arrested my brother-in-law... They arrested me because when they asked him if he'd been injured he made a big deal about this near microscopic 1" gash on his forearm that was a result of him pushing his arm into my mouth. Although I do consider him irretrievably stupid he does have the bare minimum of cognitive capacity which would allow him to cool off and walk away before I died. Although there's likely not much (if anything) I could have done about him hammering away at my face, it would have ended very shortly and with much less frustration had the police not been called. The only thing the phone call really changed is that it dragged the whole event out for another 18 hours with us hanging out in cuffs and concrete cells. Police reaction wasn't really an issue -- they were legally _required_ to "react" the way they did. >> >> So yes, personal responsibility is a real issue for >> >> me. >> >> > Sorry - but I call bullshit. Taking a class, getting >> > help and knowing your limitations are the height of >> > personal responsibility. Allowing yourself to be >> > overcome, plodding forward when you don't know what >> > you're doing and living in lazy ignorance are all a >> > shirking of personal responsibility. >> >> In a situation in which outside help is warranted or >> necessary I >> agree. We apparently disagree about what constitutes that >> need, and/or >> whether or not it is responsible to resort to outside >> forces >> (particularly police) when it's not. >> >> Which isn't all that unusual. My opinions about things >> tend to be >> fairly afield of the mainstream anyway. >> >> When the hurricanes were hitting Florida last year, the >> cops were >> getting people off the beaches. They wouldn't allow >> surfers to go out >> in the water because of the storms coming, which seems >> reasonable >> enough to most folks. The police' reason for keeping them >> off the >> beach was so they wouldn't risk their lives out looking >> for them... to >> which my response was BS -- everybody knows a storm is >> coming, >> everybody knows what the risks are -- if some surfer >> wants to piss >> their life away, the cops shouldn't risk their own safety >> for them. >> It's not the cop's responsibility to save them from >> themselves - they > This is whole 'nother kettle of fish. It draws strands > from the euthanasia debates, helmet laws and risky > behavior ordinances against hobbies like base jumping. > The simple fact is tho' that it IS the cops > responsibility. We may wish it weren't (I agree with > you there) but in today's society it is. > Had people died on that cops beat he would have been > blamed, pure and simple. > But still - this doesn't have anything to do at all with > whether or not all adults should be able to handle all > five-year olds alone. No it doesn't... it was just another example of my (strong) opinions being far afield of the mainstream, particularly with regard to personal responsibility. Other previous comments about my own history (which might not have been directly applicable) were intended largely to illustrate my reasons for having these sorts of (knee-jerk) opinions. s. isaac dealey 954.522.6080 new epoch : isn't it time for a change? add features without fixtures with the onTap open source framework http://www.fusiontap.com http://www.sys-con.com/author/?id=4806 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:155183 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
