Man shoots at noisy teenagers, killing one

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, toto wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:11:26 GMT, "jaybird" wrote:


"toto" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:14:21 -0500, "Steve Furbish"
wrote:

Values are taught, but what works in one instance
does not necessarily work for others

Values can only be taught by example.

You left out "by example, with consequences". Dad is an upstanding guy, but
if he messes up he gets in trouble too.

Made up consequences are unnecessary and insufficient.

Tell that to the juvenile courts!

See my positive parenting post.

I have seen them. Many are good but some are quixotic, lacking balance
and practicality of the real world!

Doan

Well, there is emancipation... Child leaving parent, just like wife leaving
husband. If you really want to go there.

--
Krista Young
Devoted wife, loving mother
~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Res esse videntur velut "filia sterilis virginis sculpta in
lapide." -Candrikriti
~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Liberty in Our Lifetime - www.freestateproject.org
"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, toto wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:09:58 GMT, "jaybird" wrote:

I just wouldn't rule out corporal as one of them.

It used to be that husbands could beat their wives.
They can't now.

Hopefully children can also be protected from this kind
of *disciplinary* action.

Love the logic; husbands/wives as parents/children! It used
to be that wives cannot leave their husbands. They can now.

Hopefully children can also "be protected"! Run-aways kids
no longer worry about cops coming after them.

Doan

True! However, the point is the false analogy. What next? You can have
no more than one child? ;-)

Doan

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Krista wrote:

Well, there is emancipation... Child leaving parent, just like wife leaving
husband. If you really want to go there.

--
Krista Young
Devoted wife, loving mother
~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Res esse videntur velut "filia sterilis virginis sculpta in
lapide." -Candrikriti
~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Liberty in Our Lifetime - www.freestateproject.org
"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, toto wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:09:58 GMT, "jaybird" wrote:

I just wouldn't rule out corporal as one of them.

It used to be that husbands could beat their wives.
They can't now.

Hopefully children can also be protected from this kind
of *disciplinary* action.

Love the logic; husbands/wives as parents/children! It used
to be that wives cannot leave their husbands. They can now.

Hopefully children can also "be protected"! Run-aways kids
no longer worry about cops coming after them.

Doan

"Nan" wrote in message
...

Being spanked with a belt by my dad wasn't excessive, nor was it
exclusive. There were groundings, etc. It was simply the method that
made me feel less than human.

We'd all prefer our own punishments and corrections to be more pleasant,
given the choice.

I have never thought of it as abuse. It was simply the easiest means
to an end, and the one that caused me the most emotional harm.

Surely you've learned by now that the world is a dangerous place and harms
exist in all shapes and forms? I didn't think we were talking about the
arbitrary use of force on a child?

Armchair psychology? Actually, you're not even close. Being hit by
my dad is the single thing that caused me to distrust him into my
adulthood.

I'm sure that your experience is not unique, but neither is it universal.

Steve

"Nan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 13:29:18 -0500, "Steve Furbish"
wrote:

Okay, so you sort of know the families. People have the amazing
ability to hide their true selves behind closed doors, not letting the
world see. The parents you decide are not using corporal punishment
within your site of vision could very well be the ones putting on
another coat at home and beating them, or verbally assaulting them.

This is kind of a change of pace for me. Usually cops are suspected and/or
accused of knowing too much about what goes on in people's private spaces.
Obviously the possibility exist that some pretty brutal people can put on a
spectacular facade and keep their little secrets hidden. But earlier you
accused me of being the jaded one. I tend to think the vast majority of
people are fairly close to what they present themselves to be. I know that
hidden cruelty is sometimes a reality, but it seems like you are much more
suspicious of general folk than I?

And for the record - technically there's no such thing as "verbal assault"
where I'm from and in my line of work. Assault is legally defined in my
state as unwanted touching.

Abusers do tend to hide their activities behind a facade.

I would agree. I would not, however, try to label every parent who believes
that there are instances where a spanking is appropriate as an abuser.

And while I don't agree with Steve's concept of "my way or the
highway", I also don't agree with "kids need corporal punishment or
they'll turn out bad", thinking either. Your hardline on this seems
to have a softer edge than jaybird's.

I don't even have a hardline. My children are grown. You could count the
number of times they ever needed spanking on one hand. I am involved in the
arrest of abusers all the time as part of my job.

Steve

"Nan" wrote in message
...

And spanking *is* hitting. Trying to
sugar coat it as anything less is dishonest.

I never claimed otherwise.

Even worse - they don't all
respond the same way to the same types of treatment. "Smack them around"
is
a guaranteed arrest for DV these days, but parental discipline is not
simply
a matter of smacking. We all know that.

Yes, a man that merely "shoved" his wife/girlfriend isn't as bad as
the one that "punched" her with a closed fist.

Why must you insist on trying to draw the parallel between parental
discipline and spousal abuse? They're not the same thing no matter how you
try to frame things. A husband, wife, girfriend, boyfriend, or whatever
doesn't have the duty, obligation nor right to teach and/or discipline their
significant other. A parent, however, does have that obligation to their
child. You're trying to redefine abuse so that it removes one of the options
that parents have when bringing up their children. Have you ever seen a
parent struggle with a totally out of control child? Structure and
uniformity are generally what's missing in those cases. A child understands
a quick spanking long before they're able to reason at an adult level. I'm
not talking about a beating and I'm not talking about using belts or sticks
to amplify the message. I'm talking about a simple spanking.

Or he "only" slapped
her, or pulled her hair, or hit her on the backside with a belt to
punish her. But by all means, the one that punched her or kicked her
in the gut is *more* of an abuser.

I'm going to ignore this area of your crusade because we're on the same side
of this issue and despite your suggestions to the contrary they are not one
in the same.

You are quite correct. True abuse begets further abuse. It's indeed
cyclic.
Yet just because some folks label all corporal punishment as abuse does
not
make it so.

I don't really label corporal punishment as abuse, but I do label it
as disrespectful and dishonest.

So, if I understand that claim correctly, you're saying that treating
someone with disrespect and being dishonest with them is NOT abuse? That's
an interesting POV.

However, having been spanked as a kid, I struggle quite a bit with not
resorting to my old program of spanking my own children. Sometimes my
first impulse is to want to spank. Wrong as I think that is. So, CP
is also cyclical.

Perhaps you simply realize that there are instances where it's an
appropriate parental tool and if used judiciously and sparingly it's quite
effective?

I'd love to tell you another anecdotal story about the tragic outcome of
one
such abuse situation that occurred in my own family, but I'm really not
at
liberty to go there. But inlaws and outlaws aside, you should realize
that
this whole avoid spanking at all cost thing is fairly modern history and
you
haven't begun to see the impact it'll have on rates of battered spouse
incidents.

Sorry, but battering isn't about whether or not someone was hit as a
child, but about one partner in a relationship (male or female) having
a need to control the other, and/or being unable to control their
angry impulses.

I'm fully aware of the part controlling behavior plays in domestic abuse.

To even hint that kids that are spanked may be less likely to abuse,
is a stretch beyond the wildest imagination, imo.

That's not what I said. Rather I suggested that kids who are properly
brought up will be the ones less likely to abuse. Properly brought up may or
may not include an occassional spanking if the situation dictated. The
valiant efforts of many well-meaning folks such as yourself have created an
atmosphere where parents avoid controlling their children's behavior for
fear of being prosecuted. You seem to be under the impression that respect
always begets respect? I've known many individuals who'd see any sign of
weakness as an opportunity.

By that logic, my 20 year old son, who got a swat on a diapered butt
less than half a dozen times in his life, is more likely to abuse his
wife or girlfriend than another kid that got spanked.

I hate to break it to you, but your son IS one of those who got spanked - at
least by the definitions I'm employing.

Truth be told, my son will never hurt a female. He has far too much
respect for them, and has no tolerance for men who do. He's more
likely to beat a man for beating a woman, which, unfortunately, would
land him in jail just as easily.

And rightly so, IMHO. My entire career has been an endless chain of sorting
out the messes that result from people resorting to violence to settle
differences. There are rules. I have to abide by them and so does your boy.

So you don't think not having a father in his life and his mother not
knowing how to care for him is abusive?? Of course it is. Abuse
doesn't have to be physical in order to manifest itself in that form,
in a child.

He was never hit - and THAT was your primary concern a few days ago when you
first responded to my participation in this thread.

Steve

"Nan" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 14:17:09 -0500, "Steve Furbish"
wrote:
If you haven't taught your child about some people's lack of
tolerance then you've turned them loose on a much more dangerous world
than
they might otherwise experience.

Steve

I agree that one must teach their children that there are loose
cannons and nutcases out there. But to write it off as the rager
reacting against some perceived disrespect is merely placing too much
blame on the victim.

I'm just relaying fact to you based on my personal experiences. It really
doesn't matter if the blame is really deserved or not. The results are the
same.

Do you also blame rape victims that dress "provocatively"?

That's a bit cliché, don't you think?

Steve

"Nan" wrote in message
...

I'm not disputing that there are nutjobs out there, unfortunate as
that is.
Too bad parents need to teach their kids to respect others out of
potential fear as opposed to just common courtesy.

In most families the parents teach the courtesy. The fear is learned with
the earliest social interactions with peers.

Uhm, of course I see the difference. Very early in this thread I
mentioned our own situation with rude, disrespectful teenagers living
directly behind us, insisting it's their "right" to listen to their
music as loud as they wish. It's obvious to me that their parents may
not have taught them to respect others. In fact, one poster jumped
all over me and insisted that I should buy them headphones so that I'm
not bothered by their music, while I'm in my own home.

WADR, I didn't even notice this thread until ALE was added to the headers. I
guess I missed the post you're referring to.

Steve

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:14:21 -0500, "Steve Furbish"
wrote:

Values are taught, but what works in one instance
does not necessarily work for others

Values can only be taught by example.

Perhaps a better word is "exposure"?

Steve

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 05:11:26 GMT, "jaybird" wrote:


"toto" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 12:14:21 -0500, "Steve Furbish"
wrote:

Values are taught, but what works in one instance
does not necessarily work for others

Values can only be taught by example.

You left out "by example, with consequences". Dad is an upstanding guy,
but
if he messes up he gets in trouble too.

Made up consequences are unnecessary and insufficient.

See my positive parenting post.

There's nothing "made up" about the reality of consequences and your
implying that there is tells me there's not much to be gained from reading
your OPINIONS on positive parenting.

Steve