Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Responsible Parenting: Dad turns in own kids for bullying.

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    I don't think their records should be wiped, at the age of 15 and 17 they knew well what they were doing.
    There is a bit of debate there to be sure - but the general idea is that when a teen is just that, a teen, because of lack of more serious life experiences (so far), their slightly (or might be to some degree) impaired as to FULLY understand the consequences of their actions.
    Now UP TO 18 it can definitely be claimed that there is a bit of leeway as to how much a teen might understand what they are doing fully - but at 18 and after, its generally accepted that they do indeed (or should have more so) a definite idea of right/wrong and the ability to stop themselves mentally etc, from crossing the legal line involved.

    Again, any younger and there might be a bit of leeway as to doubt of fully understanding and comprehension - so it was generally assessed and accepted that 18 was/is the most viable point where it can be said without lesser doubt, that one should be able finally to be totally accountable for ones actions.

    There are exceptions to the closing/wiping of records of course - as in the case of capital crimes and other very high rated crimes.
    However in general its thought that for lesser crimes for teens, some at least deserve a final chance/opportunity before 18 to reset themselves on the path of straight and narrow, and onto a decent adulthood. They are getting a very important second chance.
    ...Its then up to them so as if they blow it or not. If they do when they are over 18, the consequences WILL stay with them for the rest of their lives.


  • Options
    #63
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Ev84 wrote: »
    I know what you are saying Einhard but they will not have a permanent record after this. I've done a few things in my youth that were illegal, Got caught for them (damn cctv!) and driven to the garda barracks by my dad (after a phone call from the gardai), he then sat on the same side as the garda who was giving out s**t to me and as I was in the wrong, with proof, he would not say a single word to defend me.

    He used to be joining in on the garda's side to tell me I can't be doing these things. FOR MY OWN GOOD. I've gotten warnings, followed by cautions followed by more serious cautions and not once did he ever back up for me as I was always in the wrong with proof. I hated him for it at the time but I understand it all now and I respect him for it. I learned from it.

    If there was ever a shred of doubt in his mind that I didn't do anything he would be the first to back me up 100% but there was always proof. When you're in the wrong, you're in the wrong and he showed me that I wouldn't be getting his support at all. This was hard for me to take in at the time.

    So a couple of years passed and when I reached 18 I had no record, no court cases pending and a completely clean slate. Had he supported me when I was in the wrong who knows what way I would have turned out? I will do the same for my son if or when he breaks the law...

    This is a good post. The only reason I had reservations was because of the impact a record would have on the kids' future. It would have made it very difficult for them to ever make something of themselves, to change and evolve as people. I mean, had you gained a record for your sins, then you would have had a much more difficult path in life. That was my point. You're testiment to the fact that the youngster does not necessarily determine the adult. Yet, had the views of some posters here prevailed, you would have been stuck with a criminal record, and have to struggle through life with that burden. I don;t see how that would have helped anyone to be honest.

    However, as biggins pointed out, the basis for my original point was flawed.:o


  • Options
    #64
    u_c_thesecond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭u_c_thesecond


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    I can understand why people say it would be his fault but... come on. Kids are people. Just because I have it rammed into me that X is bad, doesn't mean I'll listen to my parents



    I agree

    My dad telling me when i was 8 not to leave the estate didnt stop me

    At 12 telling me to be home by 9 didnt stop me

    At 14 telling me not to hang around with boys didnt stop me

    At 16 telling me not to date didnt stop me

    But when he told me not to touch drink and i did- he walloped me from here to timbucktoo and i never forgot that!

    Telling a child/teen not to do something wont work weather you know or dont know they are doing it

    The harsh punishments the best. I used to hate my dad for all the rules- but as a grown up i will impose the exact same ones on my kids because i know now he was only worried about me.

    And this dad is the same and i dont blame him, knowing your child is hurting another person phiscally and emotionally must make a parent sick, and these are the people who will grow up to beat their partners, so nipping it in the bud now is the right way to be


  • Options
    #65
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Biggins wrote: »
    There is a bit of debate there to be sure - but the general idea is that when a teen is just that, a teen, because of lack of more serious life experiences (so far), their slightly (or might be to some degree) impaired as to FULLY understand the consequences of their actions.
    Now UP TO 18 it can definitely be claimed that there is a bit of leeway as to how much a teen might understand what they are doing fully - but at 18 and after, its generally accepted that they do indeed (or should have more so) a definite idea of right/wrong and the ability to stop themselves mentally etc, from crossing the legal line involved.

    Again, any younger and there might be a bit of leeway as to doubt of fully understanding and comprehension - so it was generally assessed and accepted that 18 was/is the most viable point where it can be said without lesser doubt, that one should be able finally to be totally accountable for ones actions.

    There are exceptions to the closing/wiping of records of course - as in the case of capital crimes and other very high rated crimes.
    However in general its though that for lesser crimes for teens, some at least deserve a final chance/opportunity before 18 to reset themselves on the path of straight and narrow, and onto a decent adulthood. They are getting a very important second chance.
    ...Its then up to them so as if they blow it or not. If they do when they are over 18, the consequences WILL stay with them for the rest of their lives.

    I understand it but I would have labled what they did as a vicious attack that should follow them around for life. But like you say it's a debate and opinions do differ. I suppose at the end of the day they will hopefully learn some kind of lesson and be decent human beings.


  • Options
    #66
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    ...I suppose at the end of the day they will hopefully learn some kind of lesson and be decent human beings.
    100% agree.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    u_c_thesecond wrote: »
    I agree

    My dad telling me when i was 8 not to leave the estate didnt stop me

    At 12 telling me to be home by 9 didnt stop me

    At 14 telling me not to hang around with boys didnt stop me

    At 16 telling me not to date didnt stop me

    But when he told me not to touch drink and i did- he walloped me from here to timbucktoo and i never forgot that!

    Telling a child/teen not to do something wont work weather you know or dont know they are doing it

    The harsh punishments the best. I used to hate my dad for all the rules- but as a grown up i will impose the exact same ones on my kids because i know now he was only worried about me.

    And this dad is the same and i dont blame him, knowing your child is hurting another person phiscally and emotionally must make a parent sick, and these are the people who will grow up to beat their partners, so nipping it in the bud now is the right way to be

    I dunno about that, TBH. But that's a whole other topic. :P

    I suppose it's up to the child really to devolp as a teenager. Some of us hung around with the wrong crowd, others were shut ins and had high values placed on themselves by ourselves. Those who think it's their father's fault really need to wake up.


  • Options
    #68
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    Sure... it's moot. :rolleyes:

    Eh it is moot. Do you know what the word means?
    It isn't different at all. Ming isn't above the law, neither are the two kids. If I turn in Ming and the father turns in the kids does that make me better than him?

    Jesus Christ, the two points are completely different. I don't think the kids should be immune from prosecution- just that the father shouldn't have potentially initiated charges. In much the same way, I don't think Ming should be immune from prosecution, but I wouldn't go out and press charges against him, or initiate a prosecution. It's really not that difficult to comprehend the distinction.


  • Options
    #69
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    Eh it is moot. Do you know what the word means?



    Jesus Christ, the two points are completely different. I don't think the kids should be immune from prosecution- just that the father shouldn't have potentially initiated charges. In much the same way, I don't think Ming should be immune from prosecution, but I wouldn't go out and press charges against him, or initiate a prosecution. It's really not that difficult to comprehend the distinction.

    It really isn't moot at all. But sure, we'll say it is so you can be happy. :)

    Look, if your'e going to say that then who is it up to to inform the law of a criminal activity? Surely it's the duty of every citizen to report a crime? If not, we would need a much bigger police force.
    You seem to think that you wouldn't initiate a prosecution against Ming. But... in the case of the two kids, I'd imagine you think it's up to the victim or his guardians to press charges, yes?


  • Options
    #70
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    u_c_thesecond wrote: »

    And this dad is the same and i dont blame him, knowing your child is hurting another person phiscally and emotionally must make a parent sick, and these are the people who will grow up to beat their partners, so nipping it in the bud now is the right way to be

    But it's ok for a parent to physically hurt their kids? I don't think such violence towards kids is ever justified, regardless of the circumstances.


  • Options
    #71
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    But it's ok for a parent to physically hurt their kids? I don't think such violence towards kids is ever justified, regardless of the circumstances.

    Um... she didn't say that at all.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Ev84
    Registered Users Posts: 479 ✭✭Ev84


    Biggins wrote: »
    There is a bit of debate there to be sure - but the general idea is that when a teen is just that, a teen, because of lack of more serious life experiences (so far), their slightly (or might be to some degree) impaired as to FULLY understand the consequences of their actions.
    Now UP TO 18 it can definitely be claimed that there is a bit of leeway as to how much a teen might understand what they are doing fully - but at 18 and after, its generally accepted that they do indeed (or should have more so) a definite idea of right/wrong and the ability to stop themselves mentally etc, from crossing the legal line involved.

    Again, any younger and there might be a bit of leeway as to doubt of fully understanding and comprehension - so it was generally assessed and accepted that 18 was/is the most viable point where it can be said without lesser doubt, that one should be able finally to be totally accountable for ones actions.

    There are exceptions to the closing/wiping of records of course - as in the case of capital crimes and other very high rated crimes.
    However in general its thought that for lesser crimes for teens, some at least deserve a final chance/opportunity before 18 to reset themselves on the path of straight and narrow, and onto a decent adulthood. They are getting a very important second chance.
    ...Its then up to them so as if they blow it or not. If they do when they are over 18, the consequences WILL stay with them for the rest of their lives.

    All great points Biggins and true to life. I think another factor of it is the growth of a conscience. Me, I didn't have one as a kid. Me and a friend went into a church one day and stole some change from the collection box :o I didn't care at all... All I was thinking was "oh man we can get a lot of 5p whoppa bars with all this money" (coppers). In my teens I robbed a lot of stuff out of a car scrapyard for money too... I just didn't give a f**k... At all...

    Then one day out of no-where comes this thing called a conscience? What's happening I thought, What is this strange feeling? It was guilt, guilt for all the things iv'e done over the years which I used to shrug off and say "I don't give a f**k"...

    My point is, If we are permanently marked for the rest of our lives from a time when we didn't care, I think we would not be given a chance to change.


  • Options
    #73
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    It really isn't moot at all. But sure, we'll say it is so you can be happy. :)

    Eh, it is. I made a point about something, and biggins pointed out that the premise for my argument was fundamentally unsound. Therefore my point is moot. It's not about keeping me happy, more about
    Look, if your'e going to say that then who is it up to to inform the law of a criminal activity? Surely it's the duty of every citizen to report a crime? If not, we would need a much bigger police force.

    Well I've never reported Ming, and neither have you, so you know the answer to your own question.
    But... in the case of the two kids, I'd imagine you think it's up to the victim or his guardians to press charges, yes?

    If they wished. And I'd be entirely supportive of that. Unlike you, I don't think anyone should presume to be above the law.

    Anyway, this is getting way OT.


  • Options
    #74
    PrincessLola
    Registered Users Posts: 851 ✭✭✭PrincessLola


    Dear god, they picked on him for wearing glasses? and what pussy 17 year old beats up a 13 year old?
    That dad is awesome tho, props to him.


  • Options
    #75
    u_c_thesecond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭u_c_thesecond


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    I dunno about that, TBH. But that's a whole other topic. :P

    I suppose it's up to the child really to devolp as a teenager. Some of us hung around with the wrong crowd, others were shut ins and had high values placed on themselves by ourselves. Those who think it's their father's fault really need to wake up.


    i find this part arguable because i know a woman who is totally 100% to blame for her childs behaviour because he flems in her face and its all "oh sweetie dont do that"

    Then again there are some kids who are too harshly disciplined and just break out!

    Then again teens have their own minds and at 17 and 15 they should have known better


  • Options
    #76
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    Eh, it is. I made a point about something, and biggins pointed out that the premise for my argument was fundamentally unsound. Therefore my point is moot. It's not about keeping me happy, more about



    Well I've never reported Ming, and neither have you, so you know the answer to your own question.



    If they wished. And I'd be entirely supportive of that. Unlike you, I don't think anyone should presume to be above the law.

    Anyway, this is getting way OT.

    I never said anyone should be above the law? Stop pulling out lies and claiming it's true. :)

    Look, I want to know exactly why you wouldn't report Ming and why you don't think the father should have reported the kids.

    The only thing I can even become to think of is that you believe it should have been up to the kid/parents of the kid (the victim) to report the two kids. If that's wrong (and it's just my understanding from your vague posting) then can you please explain what it is?


  • Options
    #77
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    Um... she didn't say that at all.
    But when he told me not to touch drink and i did- he walloped me from here to timbucktoo and i never forgot that!

    The harsh punishments the best. I used to hate my dad for all the rules- but as a grown up i will impose the exact same ones on my kids because i know now he was only worried about me.

    Perhaps I'm reading too much into those lines.


  • Options
    #78
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    u_c_thesecond wrote: »
    [/B]

    i find this part arguable because i know a woman who is totally 100% to blame for her childs behaviour because he flems in her face and its all "oh sweetie dont do that"

    Then again there are some kids who are too harshly disciplined and just break out!

    Then again teens have their own minds and at 17 and 15 they should have known better

    Oh no, I just meant in this case. I understand certain parents adore their ickle angel and he would never hurt anyone! Because he's mammy's ickle angel.

    If it was the father's fault in this case, I sincerly doubt he'd have brought them to the police station was my point.


  • Options
    #79
    Adrian009
    Closed Accounts Posts: 419 ✭✭Adrian009


    Overheal wrote: »
    They won't talk to him in a couple years

    He does'nt want to talk to them now, never mind then~!


  • Options
    #80
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    Perhaps I'm reading too much into those lines.

    I think she just meant that at times, harsher punishments are a necessity if they child won't behave.


  • Options
    #81
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    I never said anyone should be above the law? Stop pulling out lies and claiming it's true. :)

    Your whole point on the other thread was that Ming should not be prosecuted, and that the FF guy was wrong for seeking to do so!! How is that not declaring someone above the law??

    Actually, don;t answer or this thread will get locked too!:D
    Look, I want to know exactly why you wouldn't report Ming and why you don't think the father should have reported the kids.

    Because I don't think Ming is harming anyone.
    The only thing I can even become to think of is that you believe it should have been up to the kid/parents of the kid (the victim) to report the two kids. If that's wrong (and it's just my understanding from your vague posting) then can you please explain what it is?

    I've changed my position on what happened, because I know more about the situation regarding criminal records. You yourself stated that you hoped these kids would grow into responsible adults. My point is that, had they records, this would have been more difficult.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    u_c_thesecond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭u_c_thesecond


    Einhard wrote: »
    But it's ok for a parent to physically hurt their kids? I don't think such violence towards kids is ever justified, regardless of the circumstances.

    did i say that? where in my post did i say it was ok for a parent to physically hurt their kids?

    he brought his kids to the police and took away their cars and ponies. So how is that physical punishment? If you are referring to my father walloping me years ago then i am glad he did it shook me up and stopped me in my tracks. Besides that was years ago and that was the way it was then


  • Options
    #83
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    Your whole point on the other thread was that Ming should not be prosecuted, and that the FF guy was wrong for seeking to do so!! How is that not declaring someone above the law??

    Actually, don;t answer or this thread will get locked too!:D



    Because I don't think Ming is harming anyone.



    I've changed my position on what happened, because I know more about the situation regarding criminal records. You yourself stated that you hoped these kids would grow into responsible adults. My point is that, had they records, this would have been more difficult.

    Never mind, it was a small mistake on the quoted part. :)


  • Options
    #84
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    u_c_thesecond wrote: »
    did i say that? where in my post did i say it was ok for a parent to physically hurt their kids?

    he brought his kids to the police and took away their cars and ponies. So how is that physical punishment? If you are referring to my father walloping me years ago then i am glad he did it shook me up and stopped me in my tracks. Besides that was years ago and that was the way it was then

    You stated that your dad beat you to Timbuktu, and that you
    will impose the exact same ones on my kids because i know now he was only worried about me.
    Because the harsh punishments are best.

    Perhaps I'm reading too much into them, but they are your words.


  • Options
    #85
    u_c_thesecond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭u_c_thesecond


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    Oh no, I just meant in this case. I understand certain parents adore their ickle angel and he would never hurt anyone! Because he's mammy's ickle angel.

    If it was the father's fault in this case, I sincerly doubt he'd have brought them to the police station was my point.

    oh right. ya guess so its not like he let them get away with everything and all of a sudden he changed his mind

    apoligies


  • Options
    #86
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    I was in favour of him being nicked. Good day, you troll. :)

    Ooops sorry. Thought you were arguing against it. So you were on my side!

    Not sure how that mistake makes me a troll though, or invalidates my argument.:confused:


  • Options
    #87
    u_c_thesecond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭u_c_thesecond


    Einhard wrote: »
    Perhaps I'm reading too much into those lines.

    so i mentioned he walloped me once and all of a sudden im going to beat my kids???

    jesus christ. I was referring to the above points where i wasnt allowed outside the estate/ hang around with boys/ stay out after 9 parts. To me they were harsh. Sorry if you misread but when i was young if i didnt obey them i was grounded for a week , and to me it was harsh

    And ill be doing the same for my kids!


  • Options
    #88
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    Ooops sorry. Thought you were arguing against it. So you were on my side!

    Not sure how that mistake makes me a troll though, or invalidates my argument.:confused:

    Ah, I'll edit my post then. :)

    I thought you were just spouting it out to discredit me which would have made you a troll (due to it not being what I said and you making it out to have what I said).

    My point is that you think these kids should have charges pressed against them by the victim/parents of said victim, right?

    You also think Ming shouldn't have charges against him because he isn't harming anyone?


  • Options
    #89
    u_c_thesecond
    Registered Users Posts: 1,052 ✭✭✭u_c_thesecond


    Einhard wrote: »
    You stated that your dad beat you to Timbuktu, and that you Because the harsh punishments are best.

    Perhaps I'm reading too much into them, but they are your words.

    like iv already said i didnt say "my dad beat me so ill beat my kids" so yes you are reading way too much into it.

    I was referring to the above rules that i didnt follow in my OP ,

    i said i was punished for them, i said he beat me to Timbuktu for one of them (Drinking) not all of them(staying out, talking to boys etc) , and beat is a harsh way of putting it, i got a few slaps with a wodden spoon but that to me was a wallopin, and others born in the 70s/80s prob got the same. My dad was a dispicinarian and we all grew up respectful because of it, and theres nothing wrong with that!


  • Options
    #90
    Einhard
    Registered Users Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    Chaotic_Forces wrote: »
    My point is that you think these kids should have charges pressed against them by the victim/parents of said victim, right?

    Well, I think anyone who can press charges has a right to do so, and that, should they be pressed, then the law should be upheld.

    I did think though, that he was potentially putting a major obstacle in the way of his kids, and making it more difficult from them to reform themselves. Now that I know that the records are wiped, I think he made the correct decision.

    You also think Ming shouldn't have charges against him because he isn't harming anyone?

    No, that's the reason I didn't. Look, it's not the physical smoking that I object too; it's more the idea that somebody can just ignore a law becase they disagree with it. In fairness, I don't think Ming actually holds that position himself. Anyway, way OT...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Chaotic_Forces
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,659 ✭✭✭Chaotic_Forces


    Einhard wrote: »
    Well, I think anyone who can press charges has a right to do so, and that, should they be pressed, then the law should be upheld.

    I did think though, that he was potentially putting a major obstacle in the way of his kids, and making it more difficult from them to reform themselves. Now that I know that the records are wiped, I think he made the correct decision.




    No, that's the reason I didn't. Look, it's not the physical smoking that I object too; it's more the idea that somebody can just ignore a law becase they disagree with it. In fairness, I don't think Ming actually holds that position himself. Anyway, way OT...

    I'm just slightly confused.
    As far as I understand what your point is: you think they kids should have been punished, so long as they would not have criminal records, yes? But you think Ming is just trying to be above the law and would be happy to have him charged, just like you owuld any other criminal?


Advertisement