Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Green, whilst I can understand the basis of your suggestion that parents should be held responsible, there are many cases where this would be completely inappropriate.
And, honestly, where parents really are responsible for the illicit or immoral behaviours of their children, it's usually because they simply know no better themselves, i.e. didn't ever have any good modelling in their own young lives.
Definition of minor is a bit arbitrary. I think above 16 a person should be considered as an adult in the court of law.
In the case of James and faced with two ten year old murderers...is there any right way of dealing with it? If you could make the parents partially responsible, how would that have made the situation any better?
You are only as good as your environment and the one you choose to create.
Good story 2020Thanks green - some memories there
changing topic a bit ...
I was listening to the ABC this morning, and they were talking about bicycles requiring CTP (compulsory third party) insurance.
So I thought to myself - that's all very well for adults who use shared paths as if they own em ... and in the end they are supposed to give way to pedestrians ( as they go past as 40kph)
but surely you wouldn't impose that on a kid learning how to ride a bike in a suburban side street..
PS Lol, I remember teaching one of my boys to ride a bike - age about 4 or 5 I guess ... big oval with a single tree over to one side, about the size of a small Xmas tree. Anyway sure as heck, he ran into the tree (because he was watching it lol) -
I said "Thought I told you not to look at the tree"
He answered indignantly (with a heap of scratches) ... "It wasn't me daddy, JESUS made me do it."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?