Father Torches Car in Protest Over Child Support

Anchorage Daily News ^ | October 18, 2002 | Tataboline Brant

[RogerFGay]

CHILD SUPPORT: Officials say suspect had threatened staff before.

Two floors of the 19-story Atwood Building were evacuated Thursday morning after a man parked his blue Mercedes near the building's entrance, doused the car with gasoline and set it ablaze.

[Conservative til I die]

The guy sounds like a kook, and it's disappointing yet typical that the Freepers support it. Just like they supported those nuts up in Washington or some place who starved and beat their kids and pull guns on CPS because they seem like conservatives. Scary bunch of people here.

[PLMerite]

I seem to collect unusually-named girlfriends. If that's really her picture, I'd be happy to add her to the list.

Can't blame a person for whatever weird name their parents gave 'em.

[sinkspur]

What we can reasonably assume is that Jed Magby has been denied effective due process, that the state is acting outside its legitimate interest and powers by enforcing the order, and that there have been horrific personal consequences for Jed Magby.

Or, we can also reasonably assume that Jed Magby is a selfish bastard who would rather torch his car like a hoodlum than take care of his obligations to children he fathered.

You grind your axe so regularly by defending the most bizarre behavior of borderline lunatics that I'm guessing your ex cleaned you out real good.

I'd be embarrassed to be whimpering like a baby as often as you. Any sympathy or understanding I used to try to muster for you has long since turned into disgust at the constant whining.

[RogerFGay]

OK, I've read 12 posts so far and it seems like everyone of them is anti child support. One "genius" even mannaged to drop Himmler's name. Sad.

Serves those bitches right for getting pregnant. Let them support the kids themselves. Right?

I think you either have a problem with reading comprehension, or you're faking it to lay some propaganda on us. I haven't noted a single poster who is against supporting his own children or against parents supporting their own children generally.

[Nick Danger]

Judging from the picture, that "Mercedes" is about twenty years old.

[BuddhaBoy]

I'm sorry about your daughter's ordeal.

However, that doesnt remove the fact that she picked him. Men and women both need to make better choices BEFORE children come into the mix. 8 years? That is a long time to be with a wife-beater.

I still say men are crazy to get married at all these days.

[Conservative til I die]

A man unmarried and childless like myself, can only empathize with those men being taken to the cleaners by a spouse, and I advise every man I meet AGAINST marriage, until the laws change.

My girlfriend had a kid by an abusive scumbag who ran out on her and currently has dropped out of society for fear of the government coming to collect the $10,000 or so that he never paid in child support to the kid. She has to live week to week all because the bastard won't even contribute a few hundred dollars a month to his own flesh and blood.

But in your world I guess the bitch had it coming to her and the father is a true Patrick Henry for the 21st century.

I really do start to wonder if the Democrats have been right about conservatives all along as anti-woman, anti-children, and anti-government to the point of insanity.

[RogerFGay]

Or, we can also reasonably assume that Jed Magby is a selfish bastard who would rather torch his car like a hoodlum than take care of his obligations to children he fathered.

No, you can't reasonably assume that. You just made it up. I don't know Jed Magby, but I do know that due process does not exist in child support cases, that courts uniformly act beyond their legitimate interests and powers in setting child support orders arbitrarily high and in their enforcement practices. Therefore, it is reasonble to assume that it happened in this case. You know nothing about Jed Magby, and it is not reasonable for you to assume anything about him personally.

[Red Jones]

yeah, having nice marriages and families are the bedrock of a healthy society. And when government tells the female population that they can at their desire have the man thrown out of the house and that afterwards she can take a monthly payment from him for 15 or 20 years, then a lot of women, admittedly foul women, take the government up on its offer. Today one third of american women who get married throw the husband out before the children even reach age 10, then they estrange the dad from the kids, then they take money from the husband to support themselves. They turn the man of the family into a slave in essence. You are saying that we should be happy about this state, that putting up with this means building strong families. That is kind of crazy. The current status quo which we are railing against will destroy the family.

Many men no longer see the family option as a good option as a result of this. But the marriage institution will get stronger if marriages can work. With this built-in incentive for destruction that government provides is corroding the institution.

The birth rate is low. Men are fleeing from marriage as you'd expect. Women are not happy about it either. A higher and higher percentage of the men and the women are increasingly viewing the opposite sex as just sex tools. If the marriage option is discouraged, then what do you expect? You can't build up our society and make our people happy by beating men over the head.

A person's rights should be respected even after they get married. If the woman wants out of the marriage, then fine, the government should let her out of the marriage. They should not then also take money from the man to support her, especially for 10-15 years. The wife should not be rewarded with both custodyof kids and husband's money. This practice causes divorces and destroys the family as an institution. Are children or our society at large really better off by doing that? I don't think so.

[Conservative til I die]

Yah but dude, we're conservatives, so we're supposed to all be against child support, which apparently is now a conservative platform. Oh, and I think we're supposed to think it wrong if CPS stops a parent from say, pistol-whipping their kid or putting out Marlboro's on them for not taking out the trash, because we have to have an extreme kneejerk reaction to every liberal action. Thus there would be no line to be drawn on abuse either.

[BuddhaBoy]

My girlfriend had a kid by an abusive scumbag

You answered your question in your first sentence.

Why would someone with any sense have a child with such a loser? It takes two to tango, friend. I hope your girlfriend has more on the ball these days with you, then she did back then. Women decide when or if sex is going to occur, and who it will occur with. If she got down and dirty with a bum, she is 50% responsible for what happens afterwards.

[rolling_stone]

I agree that his act was stupid, kinda like rioting and burning cars in your own neighborhood when you are angry with people outside the neighborhood.

Certainly not a rational act IMO, but the devil is in the details, and I would like to know more before I lock him up and throw away the keys...I have seen both men and women abused by the system, but when a man chains himself to a tree then later sets fire to his own car, he obviously feels strongly about his problem. Unfortunately these days, Justice is many times only a case of which side has the better lawyer...not what is right or wrong. Would his anger be better received if he was not the father of the children he is ordered to pay child support for? I hope there is a follow up to this story or someone can get the real story from court records or his attorney...

[cornelis]

Fortunately he's a human being

And humans have become adept at caging them. You must be familiar with the most dangerous game?

[Conservative til I die]

Reduction??? In child support?? They don't give a sh!t whether you have a job or not.. All they want is the money.. When I went to court for child support on my second child the judge said it did not matter if I was paying support for another child or not. I still had to pay the same no matter what..

Wait, I thought we were all "boostrap" conservatives. You know, if you lose your job, it's "FU, collect soda cans from the trash and recycle them until you can find a job." I wasn't aware that supporting children stopped when your income changed.

[BuddhaBoy]

I completely agree with what you wrote.

[RogerFGay]

Yah but dude, we're conservatives, so we're supposed to all be against child support, which apparently is now a conservative platform. Oh, and I think we're supposed to think it wrong if CPS stops a parent from say, pistol-whipping their kid or putting out Marlboro's on them for not taking out the trash, because we have to have an extreme kneejerk reaction to every liberal action. Thus there would be no line to be drawn on abuse either.

What is your beef? Obviously it's personal.

[Conservative til I die]

Here, let me give the Freeper response to your points.

BTW..I know there are men who get a raw end of the deal in some child support instances.

"Inconceivable. The man is always right because liberals are eeeeeeeeevil."

But there are many, many men (particularly here in Ireland) who are getting away with blue murder.

"Good for them. Liberals are eeeeeeeeeeeeevil." For example, I have one friend who finally got the courage to throw her husband out after he had beaten her to a pulp in front of his three daughters.

"When I was a kid, my father shot me in the face with a bazooka every night and put his Marlboros out on my chest. And I turned out alright! Quit whining ya liberal!"

(For years before that she was a 'woman who walked into doors')

"Ah, she deserved it for not exercising her 2nd Amendment rights and blowing him away. Probably a big liberal!"

She now has to pay him half the value of their home, because he says he has no where to live since she kicked him out.

"Well, she's a woman and probably a liberal so she deserves it."

He has offered to pay her in court €50 a week (which is an insult) in child support for his three girls.

"Arrr, let her try supporting them for awhile. Tell the kids to go get a damn job. It's just a liberal plot to destroy fatherhood! Down with liberals. This father is a moder-day Thomas Jefferson fighting tyranny."

His wife works, earning just over the minimum wage,

Arrr, the minimum wage is a liberal plot to make us all Marxists. She should earn pennies."

and relies on her family to help her financially, so she can get him out of her life.

"He pays the support, it's half his house, he should be able to come and go as he pleases."

That's why I have little sympathy for men who torch Mercedes instead of embracing their responsibilities to their children.

"Hey, good for him, he owns a Mercedes. It ain't his problem the kids and his wife are greedy socialists. Let them go work in a coalmine or something and pull themselves up by the bootstraps."

/end Freeper

[dighton]

Can't blame a person for whatever weird name their parents gave 'em.

I quite agree. It's something for mom and dad to think about: "Should we really paint a target on our child?"

[Conservative til I die]

Yeah but it all must be some liberal plot, sink. Start marching in lockstep and know your role. Deadbeat fatherhood is apparently a new conservative platform from the pro-marriage/family party.

[sinkspur]

You know nothing about Jed Magby, and it is not reasonable for you to assume anything about him personally.

I know that a man who torches his own car in somebody else's parking lot, then kicks out a window in a patrol car is a man who has no business being around children.

The story doesn't say why Magby's marriage didn't work out, but I can sure guess.

A violent guy like this had his two little girls on a paternal visit call his ex last year in Dallas, then shot them both in the head while momma listened.

He's now on death row. It won't surprise me in the least if Magby gets a state address in the future either.