|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 29, 2010 20:27:56 GMT
lest we forget one of the most important things that was done right, when things were as they should be, EVERYONE was home, and sat down at the kitchen table for dinner. there wasn't any "i'm going here" or "i'm going there". EVERYONE was at the dinner table where they belonged actually the dads possibly weren't as the kids had to be all scrubbed and ready for bed by the time he got in (from work or the pub) I used to run wild and free in our local parks and what are now called "green spaces", fishing for newts and sticklebacks, running risks that would make my parental head freeze, making dens in old air raid shelters, getting perved by the local man-with-sweets etc I went back to one of my old haunts a decade or two later and the only kids around were either in managed teams playing a sport or walking nicely with their parents. We lost a lot when we decided not to risk the kids safety by letting them run free. But lets not forget that there were indeed risks. I got away from a perve with a camera when he led me off to the local stream, but I didn't get away from the old grocer with the foul breath and the vile lips. I was so glad when he died. sorry about that. there have always been the pervs, even back when the majority of people were decent. they weren't as prevalent, but they were there. now, we have even more of them to go along with the majority of people not being decent. kid learn from having things happen to them. it is truly sad when a boy gets to be ten or so and has never had a scraped knee. it's abhorrent in fact.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 29, 2010 21:53:24 GMT
there have always been the dirty old men..fact of life...but you dont learn how to avoid em by not knowing they exist
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 11:30:44 GMT
there have always been the dirty old men..fact of life...but you dont learn how to avoid em by not knowing they exist and that's the thing. the pc imbeciles CAUSE the problems with their stupidity of teaching kids that nothing bad exists, and can't happen to them
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2010 11:57:41 GMT
there have always been the dirty old men..fact of life...but you dont learn how to avoid em by not knowing they exist There was a wilderness playground not far from where I lived; an exciting place with bushes and rough ground and trees to climb. My brother was furious when the council levelled it off, cleared the trees away and turned it into a "proper" recreation ground. Typical, he said; the council sees children playing there and does it up to make it safe, and no-one wants to play there any more. Many years later we found out this was all done because of a child molester who lurked in the bushes. We were never told about it, and were allowed to walk past it on our own; in fact, I'm not sure our parents ever knew. I was a scared kid as it was, terrified of other chidren (though not of adults), and the knowledge might have prevented me from exploring outside the house altogether.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 30, 2010 12:02:22 GMT
so this man lurked in the bushes...WHY wasnt he removed instead of punishing the children
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 30, 2010 13:07:05 GMT
there have always been the dirty old men..fact of life...but you dont learn how to avoid em by not knowing they exist and that's the thing. the pc imbeciles CAUSE the problems with their stupidity of teaching kids that nothing bad exists, and can't happen to them I don't understand that remark. The new thinking is limited freedom for children BECAUSE there are so many bad things around. In fact, all this emphasis on safety and parental monitoring that we are bemoaning is allegedly a result of over-stating the risks.
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 30, 2010 13:11:33 GMT
so this man lurked in the bushes...WHY wasnt he removed instead of punishing the children My guess is that the bushes were removed as a safeguard against any lurking by anyone. Perhaps even at the request of concerned parents? There's some common sense in removing such bushes. If you've ever been at a PTA General Meeting you'll have met those concerned parents. They are always extremely concerned, about everything, and always very vocal. I usually tried to sit in the back row and swap marbles with other naughty parents.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 30, 2010 13:15:43 GMT
there always were bad things around...but you dont protect children by shieldng them...you protect children by making them aware and teaching them how to deal with situations over staing the risks is silly...teaching them how to deal with and avoid risk taking is much better than locking them in a room with games and computers yet no room to grow and expand their socialising children have always been at risk from predatory adults and other children...they learn nothing in isolation
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 30, 2010 13:17:33 GMT
so this man lurked in the bushes...WHY wasnt he removed instead of punishing the children My guess is that the bushes were removed as a safeguard against any lurking by anyone. Perhaps even at the request of concerned parents? There's some common sense in removing such bushes. ah..the easy option ....remove the fun not the lurker
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 30, 2010 13:21:46 GMT
My guess is that the bushes were removed as a safeguard against any lurking by anyone. Perhaps even at the request of concerned parents? There's some common sense in removing such bushes. ah..the easy option ....remove the fun not the lurker The easy option....? Perhaps just the sensible one if the place was being used by pervs, that's all. Just a suggestion.
|
|
|
Post by jade on Mar 30, 2010 13:24:27 GMT
The Child was absolutely bombarded with "stranger danger" stuff at school - mind you she is a contemporary of James Bulger, so it was all very fraught at the time.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 30, 2010 13:24:56 GMT
the semsible option was when all parks had park keepers....how ever this was a play ground but if a perv was lurking to the extent the powers that be were aware of this...then watch and take out the perv.....
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Mar 30, 2010 13:26:19 GMT
The Child was absolutely bombarded with "stranger danger" stuff at school - mind you she is a contemporary of James Bulger, so it was all very fraught at the time. bit silly when most children are harmed by a family memeber or friend but i understand under the circumstances
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 15:50:05 GMT
and that's the thing. the pc imbeciles CAUSE the problems with their stupidity of teaching kids that nothing bad exists, and can't happen to them I don't understand that remark. The new thinking is limited freedom for children BECAUSE there are so many bad things around. In fact, all this emphasis on safety and parental monitoring that we are bemoaning is allegedly a result of over-stating the risks. i was being all inclusive. obviously, you're right in that it is the over stating the risks that is a problem. part of the lunacy is not allowing kids to be kids. as i said, it is insane for a boy to reach ten years old without having a scraped knee because he wasn't allowed to play. hell, i'd had about fifteen stitches in various places by the time i was ten. that's what being a kid is all about. i was also including the stupidity of such as not keeping score in sports so the losers don't have hurt feelings, which deludes the kid into thinking that everyone always gets to be exactly equal, regardless of how much effort they put into an endeavor. and other such imbecillic bits of insanity so adored by the pc lunatics
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 15:53:21 GMT
there always were bad things around...but you dont protect children by shieldng them...you protect children by making them aware and teaching them how to deal with situations over staing the risks is silly...teaching them how to deal with and avoid risk taking is much better than locking them in a room with games and computers yet no room to grow and expand their socialising children have always been at risk from predatory adults and other children...they learn nothing in isolation exactly. you are a trillion percent right. you should get ten points for posting the absolute reality
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 15:54:46 GMT
ah..the easy option ....remove the fun not the lurker The easy option....? Perhaps just the sensible one if the place was being used by pervs, that's all. Just a suggestion. all they have to do is the ONLY intelligent thing and get rid of the pervs
|
|
|
Post by trubble on Mar 30, 2010 19:59:21 GMT
You know, if there is a dark laneway that repeatedly seems to get used by some sort of undesirables thus removing the right and freedom of everyone else to walk safely and happily through it... only some sort of idealistic extremist would rage against the closure of the laneway, right? Just get rid of the problem.
Sure! Get rid of the undesirables too, of course!
But if you don't deal with the laneway then you will have to remove the next undesirables that take their place, and the next ones....
You think he was only the perv who did or was ever going to use those bushes?
I doubt it.
Disclaimer: Obviously this is a hypothetical argument as I can only speculate. So I'm only looking for a hypothetical concession that there may have been a valid reason for removing the bushes.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 20:44:14 GMT
You know, if there is a dark laneway that repeatedly seems to get used by some sort of undesirables thus removing the right and freedom of everyone else to walk safely and happily through it... only some sort of idealistic extremist would rage against the closure of the laneway, right? Just get rid of the problem. Sure! Get rid of the undesirables too, of course! But if you don't deal with the laneway then you will have to remove the next undesirables that take their place, and the next ones.... You think he was only the perv who did or was ever going to use those bushes? I doubt it. Disclaimer: Obviously this is a hypothetical argument as I can only speculate. So I'm only looking for a hypothetical concession that there may have been a valid reason for removing the bushes. can't do that. a perv can't legally be in a park, or anywhere else children habituate. even standing out in plain sight is a crime. if it were enforced, and everyone caught going to prison forever, even perverts would shy away from the place
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2010 20:48:38 GMT
You know, if there is a dark laneway that repeatedly seems to get used by some sort of undesirables thus removing the right and freedom of everyone else to walk safely and happily through it... only some sort of idealistic extremist would rage against the closure of the laneway, right? Just get rid of the problem. Sure! Get rid of the undesirables too, of course! But if you don't deal with the laneway then you will have to remove the next undesirables that take their place, and the next ones.... You think he was only the perv who did or was ever going to use those bushes? I doubt it. Disclaimer: Obviously this is a hypothetical argument as I can only speculate. So I'm only looking for a hypothetical concession that there may have been a valid reason for removing the bushes. Ummm... as part of my job I used to go to court to get alleyways gated because the police said they encouraged crime. As a card carrying member of the Ramblers Association I would pray that some idealistic extremist would rage against the closure. Alas, I never got any opposition to cave in against. But I'm sure some mums with kids or dog walkers were using those lanes and enjoying them, at least in daylight hours.
|
|
|
Post by jade on Mar 31, 2010 7:14:28 GMT
can't do that. a perv can't legally be in a park, or anywhere else children habituate. even standing out in plain sight is a crime. if it were enforced, and everyone caught going to prison forever, even perverts would shy away from the place You cannot arrest a bloke just for lurking in a bush. He might turn out to be a botanist. Or taking a cutting for his garden Or counting slugs Or any of a thousand other things you do in or near bushes. The only ones you can make life difficult for are those that have form, those that have been caught, tried, sentenced and with conditions to their freedom. And plenty of pervs hung out in parks where there were wardens - a warden cant be looking at that bit of the park every minute.
|
|