or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Hey,it's legal to beat your kids in Delaware!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hey,it's legal to beat your kids in Delaware!

post #1 of 33
Thread Starter 
Today I was stopped at a traffic light and saw a woman hit her daughter in the face hard enough that her head jerked back like Kennedy being shot.The woman was flipping out and screaming at her.The girl was about 16 or 17 and was driving when her mother hit her,then her mother ordered her to get out of the car and switch seats with her.Then the mother kept threatening the girl and ,the girl was basically cowering,I could tell that she was used to being treated that way,there were tears running down her entire face,it was terrible.So I went to the police station to report the incident and the first thing they told me was that it was legal for parents to hit their children,finally,after I pestered them for a while they took down a report,I gave them the license plate number and everything,but from their attitudes I'm sure they did nothing.How can it be legal to do something to a defenseless girl that would be illegal to do to an adult?
post #2 of 33
Welcome to the real world.
post #3 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by Rick1138:
<strong>Today I was stopped at a traffic light and saw a woman hit her daughter in the face hard enough that her head jerked back like Kennedy being shot.The woman was flipping out and screaming at her.The girl was about 16 or 17 and was driving when her mother hit her,then her mother ordered her to get out of the car and switch seats with her.Then the mother kept threatening the girl and ,the girl was basically cowering,I could tell that she was used to being treated that way,there were tears running down her entire face,it was terrible.So I went to the police station to report the incident and the first thing they told me was that it was legal for parents to hit their children,finally,after I pestered them for a while they took down a report,I gave them the license plate number and everything,but from their attitudes I'm sure they did nothing.How can it be legal to do something to a defenseless girl that would be illegal to do to an adult?</strong><hr></blockquote>


Are you or have you ever been the parent of a teenager?
Nov 98 - Earliest Registered User on record
Jan 02 - Earliest iPad prediction
Reply
Nov 98 - Earliest Registered User on record
Jan 02 - Earliest iPad prediction
Reply
post #4 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by JRC:
<strong>


Are you or have you ever been the parent of a teenager?</strong><hr></blockquote>

That justifies nothing. A spanking or two when they are young is ok when they don't understand other forms of communication. Beating the crap out of a teenager is wrong.
post #5 of 33
I am scared of whatever parent has ever hit their kid in the face, especially a daughter. That is probably the most idiotic forms of punishment around.

"Welcome to the real world."



What a crock of shit. If I came to your place and beat the unholy hell out of you you'd chalk it up to that 'ole dog-eat-dog world we live in?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #6 of 33
Don't expect most people to be able to understand or distinguish between punishment and abuse. They think they're being a disciplinarian when in fact they are losing their own self-control, thus defeating the purpose of their punishment by being a bad example.
post #7 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>

That justifies nothing. A spanking or two when they are young is ok when they don't understand other forms of communication. Beating the crap out of a teenager is wrong.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree. :eek:
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #8 of 33
It's also illegal to teach anything other than Creationism in Kansas.

This world sucks.
Microsoft knows what's best for you, so keep quiet, open your wallet, and be a team player.
Reply
Microsoft knows what's best for you, so keep quiet, open your wallet, and be a team player.
Reply
post #9 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by crawlingparanoia:
<strong>It's also illegal to teach anything other than Creationism in Kansas.

This world sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Mills Lane says: Church, State. You guys gotta separate. Church, go back to your corner.
post #10 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by crawlingparanoia:
<strong>It's also illegal to teach anything other than Creationism in Kansas.

This world sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

If you think it sucks, do something about it. That is, don't move to Kansas. As for child abuse, yes, it's not good, but it's not exactly easy to stop.

On a slightly un-PC note, sometimes I feel like certain teenagers I know need a good, sound beating in some way or another. The major consideration is that by that stage, a physical beating doesn't tend to "do anything."

In this case, I think a smack across the face may have been appropriate in some respects. It seems that this girl got a bit more than a smack across the face, though. In my experience, teenage girls have a tendency to endanger everyone else on the road, and any device to remove the ego when behind the wheel is good enough for me.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #11 of 33
I have often thought of a few people that could use a good beating...

But it would be pointless, they wouldnt learn anything from it... only that might makes right.

Parents who hit there children only pass on a cycle of violence/fear to the grand children, etc.

------------------------------------

© FERRO 2001-2002
post #12 of 33
Thread Starter 
The girl in question was being completely passive,that's how children who are used to being abused act,it's really sad.What I witnessed was far over the punishment/abuse line.It was also a family that appeared on the outside to be so "nice",a nice car,a nice home,all the kds in private school where they are on the honor roll,but all so empty and phony.I'm sure everyone would be shocked if the girl ends up hooked on drugs or tries to kill hersef.
post #13 of 33
As a libertarian I think the mother has more right on her children than the government.
post #14 of 33
Thread Starter 
What about the rights of the girl? Do you think that parents own their children? Only in a sick society does someone have the "right" to do what I witnessed.
post #15 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by soulcrusher:
<strong>As a libertarian I think the mother has more right on her children than the government.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Libertarians also don't believe in the use of offensive force.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #16 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by FERRO:
<strong>I have often thought of a few people that could use a good beating...

But it would be pointless, they wouldnt learn anything from it... only that might makes right.

Parents who hit there children only pass on a cycle of violence/fear to the grand children, etc.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Read my post again. A beating doesn't have to be physical. What they need is a defeated morale, when embarking on the beginning stages of driving.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #17 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by Splinemodel:
<strong>

Read my post again. A beating doesn't have to be physical. What they need is a defeated morale, when embarking on the beginning stages of driving.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not a defeated morale, a deflated ego...
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #18 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by NoahJ:
<strong>

Not a defeated morale, a deflated ego...</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yes. verbal diarreah. That's exactly what I meant to say.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #19 of 33
I think that all forms of physical abuse are wrong. No one should ever be allowed to harm anyone else, in any civil situation. If two people are at a passing where they can't civilly speak their respective points, then they should somehow separate themselves, and wait until they can. In a car, special care should be taken. The more experienced driver should prbobably take the wheel, and the two parties should continue the discussion then, or when they get home. I imagine if my Mom hit me that it would only make me angry with her, and distance our relationship. Being fed up is not an excuse for hurting someone.

oh, and by the way, abortion is murder.
post #20 of 33
[quote]As a libertarian I think the mother has more right on her children than the government.<hr></blockquote>

A 16/17 year old isn't a child. #1.
People have an inherent right to NOT have the shit beaten out of them.

No offense to you personally, but I don't think most libertarians are actually that.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #21 of 33
I've seen spankings on the butt where it was deserved. But after a certain age i think spankings and physical abuse is uncalled for. Not only does it humilliate but it causes resentment that reflects all through life.
post #22 of 33
Rick, you can report them for Child abuse. I'm not sure about R.I., but in KY if someone were to witness that, you can report them to Crimes against Children or some other place.

Anyone under the age of 18 is considered a child, sorry.

I am very much against any kind of abuse...no matter what you call it. Sure, spankings are one thing, but that's as far as it should go. The parents that hit a child in the face should be locked up at the minimum and definately have the child taken away from them only to reunite after some counseling.
post #23 of 33
Since none of us actually saw this 'beating' take place we don't really know if it was abuse, well deserved abuse (but still abuse) or the over-reaction of an overly sensitive observer.

If we're talking about the more general issue of spanking, well, some do and some don't. Some children need it and others don't; some teens need it too. As with many other things, this issue is always going to be accompanied by much ranting from advocates of either side, and little (if any) honest thinking. Rationalizing, yes, we're very good at that, but seldom do you find a community actually 'thinking' about something.

To start, we ought to think about the blanket assumption that violence is bad. That is not entirely accurate. Much of the context around violence produces what can be termed 'bad' and appreciated by any reasonable person as the 'immoral', 'wrong', 'evil', 'senseless', 'destructive'. However, closer interrogations of violence also invoke ideas such as 'protection' 'honor' 'strength' 'resistance' 'justice' -- within the same people that claim it is always 'bad'. Look at the rhetoric of war.

If there are good things about violence, or acceptable dosages, wouldn't it be better to get them at home?
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #24 of 33
Where we live children as young as 5 spit at passers by, shower them with a torrent of abuse, smash windows, burgle houses in braod daylight. One girl (about 12 or so) who has been a nightmare recently had to be restrained with CS Spray by police when they tried to arrest her just hours out of walking free from another court appearance. A lad from the nxt town has just been let off prison again becuase he is underage having stolen an estimated 150 cars. A boy in my road (aged 15) beat a 90 year old lady almost to death in her own home for 30p (.3 GBPounds). he was told not to be so naughty and then let off becuase nothing can be done becuase of his age. A social worker order was placed on him - 2 months later the social services took him on holiday to a theme park. last month a group of 8 or more youths under 18 chased and raped a 12 year old girl in a car park - they will not be punished.
I am the only coloured member of staff where I work and continually put up with the most vile racist abuse on a daily basis. My employer's response? You'll have to put up with it - we can't do a thing to these kids.
Why?
Because when asked these kids will tell you that adults can't lay a finger on them so they can do what the f*ck they like.

I was a teenager not very long agao - and from a poor ethinic minority family. I never behaved in this way. Mind you if I did my father would probably have put me in hospital. . .
Greatly Insane
Reply
Greatly Insane
Reply
post #25 of 33
Spooky:
That's frightening.

Are you guys allowed to carry any weapons at all in merry old England?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #26 of 33
Its actually illegal to carry any weapon in the UK. In fact, anything that can be construed as a weapon is also banned so you can be stopped by police for carrying a screwdriver without a good reason. Kids routinely carry all manner of weapons becuase they know they can't be touched. Just last month I had a student who came to college with a snooker ball in a sock "just in case". A guy from a nearby town last week saw three boys vandalising a parked car and tried as a good citizen to stop them. They gave him a load of abuse and a passer by then berated him for antagonising the kids!
There have recent cases of people in the middle of town being shot in the head by young kids just for their mobile phones!

Its madness.
Greatly Insane
Reply
Greatly Insane
Reply
post #27 of 33
Thread Starter 
I talked to a friend in family court about this and there's nothing they can do unless there are obvoius marks of serious injury,i.e. like a broken cheekbone or something on that level,basically it is legal to beat your kids.The worst possible thing this girl could have been doing was mouthing off to her mother,and possibly not even that.She was a really shy,passive girl,not the type to carry knives or vandalize cars.
post #28 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>

A 16/17 year old isn't a child. #1.
People have an inherent right to NOT have the shit beaten out of them.

No offense to you personally, but I don't think most libertarians are actually that.</strong><hr></blockquote>

As a libertarian I think that the parents are the ones who should decide when their children are old enough to take care of their own. Before this it is their responsability, not the government's.
post #29 of 33
I believe that violence is only a reasonable way to deal with problems after all other avenues have been exhasuted.
Now, we don't know the story of this woman and her daughter, so I can't say whether it was right for the mother to strike.

I gotta disagree with another statement made in this thread : not ALL teenage girls are dangerous on the road. I have been driven by one, ONE, 17-year old girl who was actually dangerous, but perhaps a dozen dangerous boys.
The insurance companies are onto something : young males are most dangerous, then old females, then young females.
post #30 of 33
By far, teenage boys are more of a vehicular menace than teenage girls.

I come back to the question of whether violence is really wrong. It seems that both socially and intimately certain 'violent' acts are formative/foundational/neccessary? Of course this is probably a far too abstracted consideration of 'violence' but nonetheless we generally seem a little hypocritical in our stand on violence -- we denounce it everywhere, yet use it everywhere.
IBL!
Reply
IBL!
Reply
post #31 of 33
I don't understand this "as a libertarian" stuff. The way you use it suggests that we should know exactly what you mean when you say it, and what the content of your beliefs are, but it doesn't do any of that.
Libertarianism as a normative principle around which a discussion is based is generally unhelpful (even moreso than "democrat" or "republican") because it is not self-defining. Who defines which rights are intrinsic to people, eh? Well, you do of course (at least most libertarians I've met like to define their own rights - the only role for the government is as "nightwatchman".) Even if you try to rely on some natural rights theory, or rights vested in a document you still define your rights for yourself (life, liberty, property - well, I'm pretty sure property isn't limited to real property, but how big is that class and what does it contain?). You can look in the bible, the constitution, wherever you want, there is no comprehensive list of rights anywhere, only vague "areas" of liberty. W/o government to define the content of those rights, we're left w/ self-serving personal whim (which of course is rational, but not necessarily beneficial in a society of people each w/ different goals). So, my rights are limited by your conception of your rights, and yours are limited by my personal conception of my rights. A dialogue b/w these two people would be fruitless b/c there's really no meta-principle that bridges the two conceptions. That's why we HAVE a government - in order to provide content to these areas of liberty - and importantly, a government based on the consent of the governed. Libertarian principles are important in a free society, but they cannot be the entire basis of that society.

Too make a bland assertion that "I have more rights to do with my child what I choose than does the government" cannot be termed truly libertarian, as John Stuart Mill would have used it, b/c it is completely insensitive to the rights of another person, herself being possessed of rights, and it is also unhelpful - its almost a non-sequitur. True libertarianism is sorely concerned w/ protecting not only your personal rights, but also the rights of others. Children are not chattle. No right is absolute, not even in a libertarian conception. Furthermore, of course you have more rights than the government - the government has no right to custody of your child w/o legal process, for example, but that says nothing about your rights vis-a-vis beating your child. Lastly, the view of libertarianism most frequently encountered, that of individual rights only, is way too cramped. There is room in classical libertarian thought for societal rights - as opposed to a government vs. the individual concept.

As I always suggest to people who claim to be libertarian, you should read "On Liberty" by John Stuart Mill b/4 you adopt the moniker "Libertarian." Also, you might want to pick up and read anything of the Critical Legal Studies movement's treatment of libertarianism. It might open your eyes as to the usefulness of that philosphy in a working society.
As an aside, I find most people who call themselves libertarian are really western Republicans. That's not pejorative, just an observation.
Thoth
You can fly?!?
No. Jump good.
Reply
You can fly?!?
No. Jump good.
Reply
post #32 of 33
Thread Starter 
[quote]

Children are not chattle.

<hr></blockquote>

Exactly.And I'm not part of the government.What I witnessed was an assault,it wasn't just someone slapping an uppity teenager,it was bad enough that if it had continued I would have jumped out of my car to pull the woman off her daughter.
post #33 of 33
[quote]Originally posted by soulcrusher:
<strong>

As a libertarian I think that the parents are the ones who should decide when their children are old enough to take care of their own. Before this it is their responsability, not the government's.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You give a bad name to libertarians everywhere. That's not what libertarianism is all about. It's about the government having a limited role in a few key areas *INCLUDING* protection of its citizens. That *INCLUDES* stopping whacked out parents that beat their children. To hell with you.

[ 04-30-2002: Message edited by: Exercise in Frivolity ]</p>
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Hey,it's legal to beat your kids in Delaware!