-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
A 6 year-old sex offender: where reason ends before the law
- Thread starter User 40136
- Start date
this story is similar to the one where they wouldnt let a 3 year old on a plane because he shared the name with a potential terrorist.
similarity: both stories are retarded
similarity: both stories are retarded
I would sign it!
I'm not religious by any stretch of the imagination and this sort of thing pisses me off just as much as it does the Diocese. What the carolers did was pretty rude but I still feel like applauding the initiative.
The nutjobs in the first place were those that couldn't bear having the tree in sight and pressured the governor's entourage to change its name, short of managing to have it removed completely. Adding to this those that believe, in a effort of equality, that it is only fair for the majority to bend over and accept the compromise that is slashing through their harmless decades/centuries old traditions to accomodate some nearly virtual ideological minority that is marginalised even amongst its ethnic ranks.
But oops, this isn't what this thread is about, is it.
you can never be too careful.
This is absolutely insane. Just shows how f'd up some politicians are. Honestly, the kid was playing. Its like taking down a kids lemonade stand cuz he doesn't have a vendors license.
This is entirely the parents' fault.
This is entirely the parents' fault.
How is this entirely the parents fault if a vast majority of kids play doctor. This is nobodies fault. It's just one parent being way to stupid and overreacting to something like playing doctor.
And so if the child develops PTSD (either of them) then what?
There is no simple solution to this, if I had it my way, the boy would have some sort of 'child-parole' type of situation, where some sort of child development psychologist makes sure he is normal every once in a while (think 30 minute appointments, low key). Then for the girl, whatever medical costs are associated with this should be payed for by the parents of the boy.
The law here has failed because instead of justice being done in any sense, we have two victims instead of one, the boy is very much a victim as is the girl here. I didn't actually read the article, but the problem here is that while the letter of the law has been followed, its spirit has been broken.
There is no simple solution to this, if I had it my way, the boy would have some sort of 'child-parole' type of situation, where some sort of child development psychologist makes sure he is normal every once in a while (think 30 minute appointments, low key). Then for the girl, whatever medical costs are associated with this should be payed for by the parents of the boy.
The law here has failed because instead of justice being done in any sense, we have two victims instead of one, the boy is very much a victim as is the girl here. I didn't actually read the article, but the problem here is that while the letter of the law has been followed, its spirit has been broken.
I agree almost fully with myzo.
I'm not sure if I agree with the idea of child parole with psychologists, but he obviously needs to be told this stuff is really inappropriate, and wrong to do to someone without their consent (he is probably too young to fully comprehend it but it should be kept in mind for the future).
Either way he will probably need to see a counsellor or something now anyway because this has basically traumatised him as I understand it.
I'm not sure if I agree with the idea of child parole with psychologists, but he obviously needs to be told this stuff is really inappropriate, and wrong to do to someone without their consent (he is probably too young to fully comprehend it but it should be kept in mind for the future).
Either way he will probably need to see a counsellor or something now anyway because this has basically traumatised him as I understand it.
The worst part of this whole thing is that there's not very much media attention to it. Seriously I just checked. There are plenty of forums with this story but I haven't seen any news about it from the media. Corrupt aren't they. Just cause the parent putting up the charges against this kid is a big figure in politics. It sickens me. This whole thing sickens me.
Slam dunk. This could not happen (in Australia, at least, but I'm pretty sure the USA is the same) because you cannot be found guilty of a crime if you are under 10 years old. Doli incapax.
I thought this thread was going to be about a rapist raping a 6yr old kid, but seriously. What....the...Fuzz. He's 6 fn years old, and is now set to failure. This is just plain stupidity. And how did this slip media attention. This is pretty damn sad.
How the fuck is the girl a victim, they were playing doctor... it's a consensual "you show me yours I'll show you mine" scenario...
To Myzo.
This is actually a common situation among children this age. Its not any sort of sexual perversion. Rather, its a sense of curiosity. I highly doubt that the girl was in any way mentally damaged by this situation. I know many children who have done similar things and have come out just fine.
As for the boy, a six year old who doesn't understand the idea of "private parts" and other such concepts should not even have to be tested for sexual perversion.
This case is a blown up farce.
This is actually a common situation among children this age. Its not any sort of sexual perversion. Rather, its a sense of curiosity. I highly doubt that the girl was in any way mentally damaged by this situation. I know many children who have done similar things and have come out just fine.
As for the boy, a six year old who doesn't understand the idea of "private parts" and other such concepts should not even have to be tested for sexual perversion.
This case is a blown up farce.
I know you're being mostly facetious, but the fact of the matter is a person cannot legally give their consent to sexual acts if they're under the statutory age, which differs in each state (hence "statutory rape").
But it's painfully obvious that children this young cannot form the intent to commit a sexual act, this whole stole is patently ludicrous.
I just want to clarify once again that butt doctor is a normal thing for kids their age (honest to god it is documented). They are just starting to become aware of their little gonads and to them they are just toys that they can play with. He didn't need any help until this helicopter mom messed his life up. That mom should be put behind bars.
It's also the boy's parents' fault for using anal thermometers for too long but whatever - that's forgivable.
I'm aware, though I certainly never played anything like that. But it is inappropriate.
regardless of whether or not the children have any idea of the implications of their actions, the mother completely overreacted in how to deal with this situation. the law need not be involved WHATsoever - if anything, the mother, both mothers of the son and daughter should have taken the opportunity to flex their own parenting skills, and explain to their children what they were doing, and why it was indeed inappropriate, however harmless. Resorting to the law to change the outcome of a child's actions is completely laughable. That mother should be totally embarrassed that she can't raise her child without paying a lawyer to tell another parent that they need to raise/discipline their child better, whatever.
and yes, if either of the parents, or any parents in general have a problem with their children playing 'doctor' together, they can discipline them at will. even though children are as innocent as can be when they're young, there is also nothing wrong with deterring them from developing 'harmless habits' now that can take on very different connotations when they're older. That is probably what fueled the mother to go to the law immediately, but she's just an idiot for not dealing with it herself before it became a real problem.
and yes, if either of the parents, or any parents in general have a problem with their children playing 'doctor' together, they can discipline them at will. even though children are as innocent as can be when they're young, there is also nothing wrong with deterring them from developing 'harmless habits' now that can take on very different connotations when they're older. That is probably what fueled the mother to go to the law immediately, but she's just an idiot for not dealing with it herself before it became a real problem.
-reads the article-
-packs bags, takes the next rocket to Mars-
This is just... ridiculous. In all sense of the word. What should the boy have gotten? "No D, don't do that!" and a time out. What he did get is... a criminal record, immense trauma, and his life is ruined. Because he played doctor. They don't know what they're doing is wrong, and its not like he's in his 20's and he's mentally incapable. Is it inappropriate? Yes. Did they have any idea? No. Assault is an intentional crime, and its pretty damn obvious D had no intention to actually harm her.
Jacob Sollum should be disbarred for taking this case, and the mother should be reported to Child Protective Services for even attempting to do this to a little kid.
-packs bags, takes the next rocket to Mars-
This is just... ridiculous. In all sense of the word. What should the boy have gotten? "No D, don't do that!" and a time out. What he did get is... a criminal record, immense trauma, and his life is ruined. Because he played doctor. They don't know what they're doing is wrong, and its not like he's in his 20's and he's mentally incapable. Is it inappropriate? Yes. Did they have any idea? No. Assault is an intentional crime, and its pretty damn obvious D had no intention to actually harm her.
Jacob Sollum should be disbarred for taking this case, and the mother should be reported to Child Protective Services for even attempting to do this to a little kid.
...You're using that loophole? That was there because no one in their right mind would press charges on a 6 year old?the article said:
Well, this is great for him. Just graduated from college, goes for a job, and gets instantly rejected because he played doctor when he was six. Thanks American legal system!the same article said:
am i the only person in the world who thinks 'inappropriate' is the most retarded word in the english language?
That's an inappropriate comment to make in a mental retardation neutral forum :3
Similar threads
