Woah! Calm down and get grip on yourself!
This is NOTHING like the Martin case—not a bit,unless you noticed she’s black. But race has nothing to do with it.
So let me ask you, who shout that age has nothing to do with it, where do we draw the line if it’s not six. Five? Four? Three? A toddler? How about a baby? Those little boogers could crawl around and bite someone’s ankles!!!
Now about the demeanor of the cops. My point was the cops shouldn’t have been called, rather the parents.
I think the majority of FReepers would agree with me that the parents should be the ones to handle their children; not the government.
The parents can and should be held responsible for damages caused by their children as well.
Bottom line, I simply disagree with you—now don’t get outraged, last time I checked that was allowed—that age isn’t a factor.
Let’s just agree to disagree, but man, don’t shout me down, K?
In Principle I agree with you. However, 15 years of working in public schools has demonstrated that there are situations in which calling the parents of the child in question is as worthless as ____ on a boar hog. There have been a handful of occassions in which the only way to obtain a response from parents has been to have the Youth Service Police Officer be involved. In all cases I've been invovled with where we've had to call in the Youth Officer no arrest was made, and the parents (with only one exception) then become more involved in their child's behavior problems.
AGE IS NOT A FACTOR - there, I shouted it again. Did you get so caught up in the caps that you failed to notice what I said was a factor? The ability and intent to do harm.
And this is where - yes - the two cases are alike. People were making a big deal about Trayvon’s age, just like you are doing here. Trayvon’s age is immaterial to the facts - if he was the aggressor, his age doesn’t matter. If he was not the aggressor, his age still doesn’t matter.
In this case - if she was endangering property, herself and others, her age doesn’t matter. You have no clue what was going on, and since the mother was called repeatedly, without response, your whole rant about police and government holds no water. You have taken your position independent of any facts - no differently than the screaming mobs in the Trayvon case, or the current supporters of Obama.
Clue yourself in:
The girl was out of control
Mom did not answer the phone or respond to messages
Police were called
Police tried to calm the girl
She would not be calmed.
Police took her into custody.
You stupidly say the parents should handle it - but the parents were not available to handle it (Yet you still rant - parents, parents, parents), and as I said earlier, Mom wasn’t doing her job in the first place, so you expect her to do her job now? That is insane!
Back to the age thing - suppose you were killed by a 10 year old, would you be less dead than if you were killed by a 21 year old or a 1 year old?
Again - read carefully - what matters is ability and intent. The presumption is that the younger the child, the less able they are to inflict harm - but, as the story shows, a six year old is able to inflict injury, so she must be approached as a human being willing and able to inflict bodily harm —— NOT with the presumption that her age makes her harmless.
Suppose a 6 month old elephant was escaped, obviously agitated, and doing damage to property, headed to a playground where children were playing - would you rush out screaming that the elephant was only 6 months old, so nobody should call animal control or the cops?
The girl was out of control, her mom could not be contacted, the cops were called - what is your problem?
Finally - let me answer your question about where we draw the line. We draw the line where no damage is being done to other people or their property, and age, color, sex, or any of that other garbage have NOTHING to do with that line.