Mom lets 5-year-old drive

[Peikko 1,575]

Ah, MTV the proof that the world is going to the dogs. Excellent point.

As for corporal punishment, it's not going to do anything to change the X% of parents who act in an irresponsible manner towards their children.

You were very unclear as to who would recieve the corporal punishment, and as this was an acceptable way to bring up children (and punish them in schools) during the early part of the 20th century, it's not a huge leap to imagine that was where you were heading with your corporal punishment idea.

While exposing children to excessivly violent tv/video games 'may' contribute to a higher degree of violent activity in these children, this is by no means conclusive proof that the majority of parents today are bringing up mini hooligans, or that the majority of parents are irresponsible.

So far you have produced some anecdotal articles to illustrate your theory, but no actual verifiable statistical evidence.

Edited September 3, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Heracles 417]

Ah, MTV the proof that the world is going to the dogs. Excellent point.

As for corporal punishment, it's not going to do anything to change the X% of parents who act in an irresponsible manner towards their children.

You were very unclear as to who would recieve the corporal punishment, and as this was an acceptable way to bring up children (and punish them in schools) during the early part of the 20th century, it's not a huge leap to get to that might be where heading with you application of corporal punishment.

I don't see the word proof. But a good example of different programing from now to then.

The corporal punishment was not about this particular crime but more for heinous crimes.

Well what do you have to say about cases where teachers are now being bullied, by students, and cannot do a dam thing about it. Need I bother post examples of it?? Maybe you can go talk to these kids and try reason with them. At least kids x years ago would respect and fear the principal. Now kids know they have more rights than the principal does; therefore walk all over them. It was interesting to see a report on dateline, I believe, where a growing number of small stores are not allowing kids to enter because they feel parents no longer control their kids. Therefore the kids run amok in the store. and how business has boomed since implementing such measures..

So far you have produced some anecdotal articles to illustrate your theory, but no actual verifiable statistical evidence.

And what have you produced to back up your point??

[Peikko 1,575]

Ah, the old 'you proove your point before I prove mine' argument. Talk about red herrings. You come out with this sweeping statement that 'parenting' is significantly worse than it was in the what, 50's? This is based on a series of random articles, not even, from what I can tell, personal experience.

When challenged on this point, you have basically said, believe what I say because I can produce X articles that prove my point, rather than go on personal experience (what I see day to day which is mostly kids behaving like kids and being parented responsibly). If you could point me to a study which conclusively points to there being a downward trend in society then go ahead. If not, then please don't expect me to be swayed by media hyperbole.

Edited September 3, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Peikko 1,575]

There aren't too many media stories that scream out the headlines 'kids are brought up better today than twenty years ago'...but then that doesn't make much of a story does it? I am not going to be able to find stories about well behaved children and excellent parenting. That doesn't mean that it's not the norm or that things aren't at least as good as, if not better than they were 20 years ago.

[Peikko 1,575]

I haven't come across any stores where kids are banned. Where are they? How widespread is this practice? Are they in economically poor areas where crime is known to be higher for all sorts of reasons that are associated with poverty and where therefore, no amount of corporal punishment is going to some how 'fix' everything?

Edited September 3, 2007 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What an excellent argument for the re-introduction of that very successful strategy, corporal punishment. I am sure once all kids are beaten to a pulp by strong, masculine father figures, the kids will see sense and tow the line and there will be no further incidents of irresponsible parenting.

Yes we have tried appeasement, harsh sentencing, lenient sentencing, get out of jail for free like your Lohans and all of these have failed.

PS Where did you see a proposal of beating up kids?

You're the one who brought up the Jamie Bulger murderers in close relation to your advocating corporal punishment. Not a huge leap to see the implication being made there...

No I brought that up in general. Referring to the pathetic court system in the UK.

How do you think the court should have handled this 'unique' crime?

Seemed pretty clear to me where you were going with that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I haven't come across any stores where kids are banned. Where are they? How widespread is this practice? Are they in economically poor areas where crime is known to be higher for all sorts of reasons that are associated with poverty and where therefore, no amount of corporal punishment is going to some how 'fix' everything?

I've only ever seen this done at local (typically family owned) corner stores. Usually to prevent shoplifting. Hardly an epidemic.

Contrary to what Boo-Yah! seems to believe, the sky is not falling just because the media likes to focus on idiotic people.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Jamie Bulger was murdered in 1993. Doesn't that mean that his killers, as children of the eighties, would have been able to watch... the Cosby Show, Growing Pains, and Mary Poppins? By the logic in this thread, Cosby murdered those children!

By logic anywhere else, it was a horrific crime caused by any number of things, including abuse and neglect, but probably not the movie Hostel.

I am quite certain one could dig up headlines from the 1960s about negligent parents letting their kids run wild. You might even be able to find evidence of it in the 1930s and 1890s. (You know, when they started eugenics projects for all of those negligent parents.)

Wait! The mom in the article..... a child of the eighties! Cosby, you cur!

You have no proof she was raised watching that stuff. I find most people I went to high school with who are in trouble had a very poor upbringing and where allowed to do and watch whatever they pleased. Whereas the kids who had good honest parents now have successful careers.

PS have any of you watched MTV lately. Does the stuff on it look like the same stuff kids where exposed to in the 50's???

Mate - you're like 30 years old. How do you know so much about what people watched and were exposed to in the 50's and 60's? What is your basis for experience on how much better things were back then?

You might be shocked to learn that yes - they had pornography back then too...

[KarenCee 3]

Stuff that was once common sense seems to be forgotten in 2007. Our schools need to get back to the basics. They need to start reteaching people how to behave like normal human beings and actually think before they act. I understand people where given the freedom of choice but I do not believe they meant for it to be used as it now is as a get out of jail free card; irrespective of how your decisions negatively affect and impact others..

Imagine how many people could have been killed.. I am not a fan of capital punishment as it does not work since the criminal is not around to feel the consequences of their actions but am a huge fan of reintroducing corporal punishment. If people want to start acting like its the dark ages we need to start treating them, fire with fire, like its the dark ages. It is clear that the current form of appeasement or harsh sentencing simply does not work.

Then I challenge you to tell that to the Department of Education. It's the DOE that tells us what to teach and how to teach it. It's not like we have a choice here. There are many of us older teachers who would prefer it to be the way it used to be many years ago.

What ever happened to being a responsible parent

That went out when DFACS stepped in.

[Sheriff Uling 3]

That kid probably drives a lot better than most of these freakin Californians...

[Heracles 417]

Ah, the old 'you proove your point before I prove mine' argument. Talk about red herrings. You come out with this sweeping statement that 'parenting' is significantly worse than it was in the what, 50's? This is based on a series of random articles, not even, from what I can tell, personal experience.

When challenged on this point, you have basically said, believe what I say because I can produce X articles that prove my point, rather than go on personal experience (what I see day to day which is mostly kids behaving like kids and being parented responsibly). If you could point me to a study which conclusively points to there being a downward trend in society then go ahead. If not, then please don't expect me to be swayed by media hyperbole.

Much like this hey. Apparnetly this stuff happened all the time in the 50's. Or was it not reported again??

http://www.examiner.com/a-916279~Teen_accu...edgehammer.html

A teenager was charged on Tuesday with killing and raping his sister and beating his niece with a sledgehammer in a crime the sheriff called one of the most brutal he's ever seen.

Walter Smith Jr., 16, was charged with the first-degree murder and rape of his 22-year-old sister, Betsy Mary Smith, and aggravated assault against his two year-old niece, Andrea Costello.

Edited September 5, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[Peikko 1,575]

How does yet another article change anything? Stump up some statistics or shut up. Media hyperbole doesn't win any arguments with me.

[Heracles 417]

How does yet another article change anything? Stump up some statistics or shut up. Media hyperbole doesn't win any arguments with me.

It is called reality, whether you accept it or not. These incidents are not made up by the 'media'..

[Peikko 1,575]

Again, because you don't seem to get it, this stuff didn't happen all the time in the 50's, nor does it happen all the time today. Quoting selective articles isn't an argument, it's a random series of anecdotes which you seem to think proves something. It doesn't.

I never presumed they were made up, I am asserting that these incidents don't constitute evidence of a 'trend' or an 'epidemic'.

[Heracles 417]

Again, because you don't seem to get it, this stuff didn't happen all the time in the 50's, nor does it happen all the time today. Quoting selective articles isn't an argument, it's a random series of anecdotes which you seem to think proves something. It doesn't.

I never presumed they were made up, I am asserting that these incidents don't constitute evidence of a 'trend' or an 'epidemic'.

The first article I quoted which stated that media violence affects kids was from: Matthews, V. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, May/June 2005; vol 29: pp 287-292. News release, Indiana University School of Medicine. Is this an anecdote as well?

Maybe you can enlighten me on what you consider concrete then..

I found another of what you would call an anecdote article.

Hundreds of studies of the effects of TV violence on children and teenagers have found that children may:

* become "immune" or numb to the horror of violence

* gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems

* imitate the violence they observe on television; and

* identify with certain characters, victims and/or victimizers

http://aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_familie...and_tv_violence

PS It is from The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

Edited September 5, 2007 by Boo-Yah!