RE: Lower the voting age to 10

RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Gauge -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 3:16:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rosanegra quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver 1. Harsh penalties only create harder criminals. 2. Locking someone up is more expensive than education and rehabilitation. Juvenile offenders exist because adult society has failed. If adults got their own house in order there wouldn't be so many juvenile offenders. If anyone needs punishing it is the adults that have failed the juveniles. The problem with punishing the adults is that their hands have already been tied. Thanks to bleeding hearts, disciplinary actions of children by their parent is now often criminal. If you are going to punish the adult, at least give them back the right to bend the little brat over their knee and spank their ass. Honestly, when I was a child, a parent would not hesitate to smack a rugrat on the ass for throwning a temper tantrum in a grocery store. Perhaps this is why my generation was not inclined to gun down fellow students out of annoyance. These days we are told that instead of punishing them, we should reward positive behavior. So if little Timmy goes to school 3 days in a row, we are supposed to buy him a new Nintendo game. Excuse me, but bullshit! The little monster is SUPPOSED to go to school! We don't get rewarded for what we are SUPPOSED to do. We don't get pulled over by a police officer and get handed a $20 for obeying the speed limit, but we damned sure get fined for breaking it. The problem is that parents don't discipline their children. They just spank/beat them. They don't explain why something is bad, they just provide negative reinforcement. Who here has heard a parent answer with, "Because I said so." when a child asks why they shouldn't or should do something. Why don't we give our children real answers? I personally was raised in a very abusive environment. The fact that I didn't end up a criminal surprises me. There is a certain point at which a line must be drawn between punishment and and abuse. There is a place in which we can teach our children how to behave without instilling in them the idea that violence is how you teach people. I would argue that kids shooting other kids is because they think that is how you show someone they are wrong - by hurting them. I would argue that a solution to truancy in school is to make school more effective. As someone who fought for every inch of actual "education" I got in school, I can tell you that the current system we have is not working. Why should we force our children to endure a system that is inadequate? Why the hell shouldn't we reward them for putting up with it? As for your example of punishment of speeding on the roads... You made my point very well for me. People get fined for speeding. They do it anyway, because the consequences are acceptable in return for the payoff. Do you think people would speed anymore if there was a possibility of them being pulled over and handed a $20 bill for going the speed limit? Hmmmmmmm.... we may be onto something here... The current system isn't working. Time to think of new solutions. Something that I have been saying for years is that a generation of undisciplined children is raising a generation of undisciplined children. The irony of the "feel good" system is that children do not really respond to it. As a child, if I didn't like what was on the dinner table I had a choice... I could either eat it or go hungry, so I learned to eat things even if I was not fond of them. My parents would NEVER have thought to make something different just for me. A small example but I am rushed for time at the moment. It is simple enough to discipline a child, the fact is that it would seem that it worked for centuries and now all of a sudden because we are supposed to be all warm and fuzzy things are getting out of control. I will be back later to add more.

Lorgrom -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 3:25:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Lorgrom quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver If anyone needs punishing it is the adults that have failed the juveniles. Close, if anyone needs to be punished it is the society that hinders the parents ability to punish the children. Which by the way is whats happening. Society is paying for decades of the corner time BS. Corner time did nothing for anyone I know who is not an adult. If the child in question was getting in trouble and only got the corner time/time out/soft approach. Most of them have continued along that path. The kids whos parents did spank them. Did hold the child accountible for their actions. Have grown up to be productive members of scoiety. Of course most parents anymore grew up in households where they themselves were only subjected to the time out mentality. So how did they learn how to tell when a stern grounding would do the trick vs a one time slap on the butt? Yes you still need to guard against abuse. But the USA as gone way to far. A parent fears slapping a child across the butt. Becouse the kids say things like "if you hit me I will tell my teacher/friends parents/police". That is where the real failure is. Give the power back to the parents. Teach the parents when grounding is approperate and when a spanking is in order. Rather then the goverment agencies, whos people are always looking (and many times make) for the abuser (even though the defination of abuse has gotten more and more encumpasing). There is a lot of logic to the statement. A child should fear and respect their parents. A parents job is not to be the childs friend. But rather a protector and teacher. Lorgrom: It is not against the law to spank your children in the U.S, It is against the law to beat your children and the courts have shown that they understand the difference. As an example I used to live next door to some people and the day the 15 year old told his mom he was going to report her for spanking him she put him in the car and took him to the police station and took him inside and told him to report her to the sergent behind the desk. The sergent listened to the young man and when he got to the part about why..."all I did was take the car out for a spin" ... the sergent explained what GTA (grand theft auto) ment and said he would be willing to take the mothers complaint against the child for GTA but that spanking did not rise to conditions for child abuse so he was not going to allow the mother to be charged. That was the last time the child was ever spanked or needed to be spanked. This happened in Costa Mesa California in the mid 80s thompson Really then tell that to the six parents of kids I went to school with. When they publicaly gave their kids a smack across the ass for acting up in a restaurant. All of them were brough up on charges of child abuse. The only reason they were not put in jail. Was due to the fact they all agreeded to take anger control classes as well as child rearing classes. All six kids who are now adults. All have long police records. All but one can be found five to six nights each week drinking themselves silly at the bar. And finaly three of them were put in jail for domestic battery. Ya really sounds like the law knows the diffrence between punishing your kids for misbehaving and abuse.

domiguy -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 3:26:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife Hmmm, 10 year olds in the military would mean smaller targets. I see a certain logic here. Only thing written here that makes sense....also smaller caskets...could pile a shit load of 'em on a plane...save fuel. Brilliant! out. D.G. p.s. Jesus please protect me from your followers.

MsPoetress -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 3:35:16 PM)
quote: All six kids who are now adults. All have long police records. All but one can be found five to six nights each week drinking themselves silly at the bar. And finaly three of them were put in jail for domestic battery. You blame all that on spanking? ~poe

Lorgrom -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 3:44:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MsPoetress quote: All six kids who are now adults. All have long police records. All but one can be found five to six nights each week drinking themselves silly at the bar. And finaly three of them were put in jail for domestic battery. You blame all that on spanking? ~poe Nope I blame it on the parents not being able to implent disapline due to fear of the law.

aSlavesLife -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 3:54:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife Hmmm, 10 year olds in the military would mean smaller targets. I see a certain logic here. Only thing written here that makes sense....also smaller caskets...could pile a shit load of 'em on a plane...save fuel. Brilliant! out. D.G. p.s. Jesus please protect me from your followers. Not to mention smaller parachutes, tents, and tanks. Just think of how much money we would save in parachute fabric alone! Money that could be used to help Nigerian subs!

caitlyn -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 4:05:14 PM)
Using physical violence, only teaches children to be violent. I could come up with an alternate 'solution' ... people that can't out smart a child, such that they have to resort to violence, are perhaps too stupid to have children. [;)] In keeping with the constant search for fact-based argument ... can you provide any data at all, that suggests that children that were spanked, ended up being more productive members of society? Or, perhaps this is just another one of those "back in the good ol' days", notions. [:D]

aSlavesLife -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 4:30:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Using physical violence, only teaches children to be violent. I could come up with an alternate 'solution' ... people that can't out smart a child, such that they have to resort to violence, are perhaps too stupid to have children. [;)] In keeping with the constant search for fact-based argument ... can you provide any data at all, that suggests that children that were spanked, ended up being more productive members of society? Or, perhaps this is just another one of those "back in the good ol' days", notions. [:D] Sure, we can do fact based. Lets look at violent crime ( in this case murder ) statistics in civilized countries that allow for corporal punishment of children. Japan, Greece, Hong Kong, the U.K., Canada, Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, France, Norway, and Finland ALL have lower violent crime rates than America. The U.S. is 24th on the list, and all 33 countries below it on the list have lower violent crime rates than we do, and all allow corporal punishment of children. I left the underdeveloped nations off of the list, as well as the ones that have weakened governments which would reflect political reasons for increased violence. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita

thompsonx -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 5:52:16 PM)
Lorgrom: I was not there. I did not see what happened. You were therefore you must be right? When I was a child my fathers position was that when you put your hands on someone it proves that you are not smart enough to talk to them. I have been to prison ...let me see ....oh never. OMG where did I go wrong. thompson

caitlyn -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 5:53:13 PM)
Well, I don't really see that as anything other than more conjecture. When you bring other countries into the mix, you raise the possibility that any number of factors might contribute.

farglebargle -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 5:58:54 PM)
It is a violent world, and children, 'bless em, seem to understand that on an intrinsic level. "Never start a fight. ALWAYS FINISH a fight."

mnottertail -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 6:01:50 PM)
I used to listen to their mothers bitch constantly about what a hard ass I was, and I have made several posts on how my ass was whipped in my youth......... it starts with dad; can I have a barbie--- fuck you!!!!!! cause that's how them people will do you splurge and indulge the kind, the wise, the seekers and stomp on everyone elses toes that is how it works in the real world--- But most importantly, don't start shit about santa claus and the easter bunny cause there aint one, and here we all are--------------

thompsonx -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 6:02:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Using physical violence, only teaches children to be violent. I could come up with an alternate 'solution' ... people that can't out smart a child, such that they have to resort to violence, are perhaps too stupid to have children. [;)] In keeping with the constant search for fact-based argument ... can you provide any data at all, that suggests that children that were spanked, ended up being more productive members of society? Or, perhaps this is just another one of those "back in the good ol' days", notions. [:D] Sure, we can do fact based. Lets look at violent crime ( in this case murder ) statistics in civilized countries that allow for corporal punishment of children. Japan, Greece, Hong Kong, the U.K., Canada, Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, France, Norway, and Finland ALL have lower violent crime rates than America. The U.S. is 24th on the list, and all 33 countries below it on the list have lower violent crime rates than we do, and all allow corporal punishment of children. I left the underdeveloped nations off of the list, as well as the ones that have weakened governments which would reflect political reasons for increased violence. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita aSlavesLife: I am not sure just how you draw the conclusion that beating your children reduces the murder rate. Are there no other factors involved in the murder rate than whether or not they are allowed to beat their children? Somehow I would have thought that there might have been other factors involved. Maybe economic maybe social. Are you sure it is only because they are allowed to beat their children? thompson

humiliationsissy -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 6:40:37 PM)
I can't believe i am trying to have an intellectual "conversation" with people who are anything but intellectuals (thompsonx and wulfie). Now i usually don't give history lessons in the middle of evening, but since school has been canceled for tomorrow, what the heck. The origins of disenfranchisement of felons actually dates back thousands of years ago to the time of ancient Rome and Greece, where people who were convicted a crimes that we might see as felonies today lost many of their rights in society, including their right to own property. If you want to try and some how bring it the question of the Constitutionality of disenfranchisement, I am afraid that the Supreme Court, in several decisions has upheld the right of states to do this very thing, as long as the disenfranchisement did not specifically target one particular racial population. The purpose of disenfranchisement is simple: to attempt to dissuade people from commiting serious crimes. Since voting is the single most powerful weapon the American citizen has and its most powerful voice, taking it away from someone who as already shown themselves to be a very irresponsible person is only a logical move, many would argue. If someone cannot be trusted to live peacefully within our society and obey our laws, why should that person have a say in what our laws are? Giving a powerful weapon to an irresponsible person is in and of itself, a very dumb move, therefore disenfranchisement is a way to attempt to deter people from commiting crimes. Your exaggeration of the issue only proves your ignorance thompsonx, as you don't actually examine the issue, only react to it with emotion. Things such as letters to editor and speaking in public are indeed a public thing that cannot be touched, as they can only have an indirect effect on things such as elections. Now no matter how dumb people are, we cannot silence them, that is what is so wonderful about our Constitution (and good for people like you and Wulfchyld). But when someone commits a crime, and shows beyond a reasonable doubt that they are indeed irresponible and they do not show a respect and concern for the society in which they live in, then a punishment must be served, pure and simple. And as far as your stupid comment about "should we be able to deport them", which purely shows your ignorance and lack of intellect, no of course not. We have to set up a system that deters crimes from ever being commited. Now there will always be scum in this country, just like there will always will be dumbasses like you, so there have to be effective measures in place that try to not only punish the crimes that are commited, but also attempt to deter them from every happening. If are punishments are light and insignificant, then are crime as will never decrease. It is only when the punishments put fear into the criminals that the crimes will happen with less frequency. Here is a great example of what i mean, and its a personal example: An old friend of mine, who was married and already had twin girls, was killed by a drunk driver not too long ago. Now for the rest of their lives, those little girls will never know their father, his wife will never have her husband and I will never see my friend again. The drunk driver of that car was 19 years old and had already been arrested 3 times in his life, including B&E, assault and drug possession. He walked out of the wreck with only minor injuries and was sentenced to 10 years. Now what if one of those other times he was arrested, back when he was a minor, he would have actually been punished like an adult, like someone who should have been held responsible for their actions? Maybe he would have still been in jail or maybe, at the very least, he might have thought about the consequences of breaking the law before he climbed into that car and those little girls would have still had their daddy. When you go soft on crime and you don't send a message, this is exactly the type of situations that occur: Offenders who repeat over and over again because all they ever get is a slap on the write because people like Wulfie like to be soft on crime. And as far as Wulfie's comment on "i think you humiliated him into leaving" I could never be humiliated by a couple of morons who the intellectual level of many of my 7th graders (not meant to insult my students though). It's just that i actually have a life outside of a chatroom, and i like to be active in my community and make a difference in children's lives by actually doing something, as opposed to posting messages on a message board. Talk is very cheap and easy to come by Wulfie, action is the hard part.

Sinergy -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 6:45:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wulfchyld If they are going to charge young children as adults they should make them adults. Lower the voting, drinking, smoking, blah blah blah to age 10. Hate to say it, Wulfchyld, but if the voting age was 10 we would never have seen Monkeyboy be elected. I know too many 10 year olds that are far more intelligent and informed about current affairs than 50yo Republicans. Just me, could be wrong. Sinergy

Wulfchyld -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 7:06:03 PM)
Man o man. Here we go. If you would bother to go back and read your posts you would see what I am getting at. However, I think you lack the mental acumen to see the point. You sir, are truly a legend in your own mind. You come her preaching intellectualism and in the same breathe spout of nonsensical name calling over a clearly sarcastic post, which is pointing out the inequities of American politics. As an educator I would hope that you above all people would appreciate a system of justice that seeks to secure the future of American youth. It is clear that you do not and are very ready and eager to right less fortunate misguided youth off as a disposable generation. With the weight of your posts in mind I fail to see how you can happily point out the sacrifices you have made for inner city youth, when in fact it is so clear you care so little for them. Now you know nothing of me and are still quick to judge me as being lacking. For the record I spend more money a year feeding children, providing transportation, and purchasing athletic equipment for children who would never have such an opportunity, than you make in a year. Do you see me jumping up and beating my chest over what a great guy I am because of the great and wonderful sacrifices I have made for those kids? No you don’t because they are not sacrifices to me. They are children (period). Now you eagerly jumped into this discussion with vehemence in mind and have handed out insult after insult to posters here. My first post to you was an opportunity for you to reevaluate the manner in which you were posting. Instead you took the rope and hung yourself. What you failed to realize is that in this medium you are judge by your words, and thus far your word have condemned you. You lack self-restraint and are clearly presenting yourself as a martyr to your “life”. I sincerely doubt you will find what you are looking for here after such a display. Those posts stay with you, and I have yet to meet a Dom/me that is looking for an out of control sub with a martyr complex. What's next? You burn this profile, learn from this ass chewing, and get some control over yourself. Good day Loki

WyrdRich -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/6/2007 9:09:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle It is a violent world, and children, 'bless em, seem to understand that on an intrinsic level. "Never start a fight. ALWAYS FINISH a fight." ROFLMFAO!!!!! Fargle, you have just, officially, taken the cake.

calamitysandra -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/7/2007 1:57:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aSlavesLife quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Using physical violence, only teaches children to be violent. I could come up with an alternate 'solution' ... people that can't out smart a child, such that they have to resort to violence, are perhaps too stupid to have children. [;)] In keeping with the constant search for fact-based argument ... can you provide any data at all, that suggests that children that were spanked, ended up being more productive members of society? Or, perhaps this is just another one of those "back in the good ol' days", notions. [:D] Sure, we can do fact based. Lets look at violent crime ( in this case murder ) statistics in civilized countries that allow for corporal punishment of children. Japan, Greece, Hong Kong, the U.K., Canada, Italy, Spain, Germany, Australia, France, Norway, and Finland ALL have lower violent crime rates than America. The U.S. is 24th on the list, and all 33 countries below it on the list have lower violent crime rates than we do, and all allow corporal punishment of children. I left the underdeveloped nations off of the list, as well as the ones that have weakened governments which would reflect political reasons for increased violence. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita I hate to burst you bubble, but corporeal punishment is banned in Germany. Along with grounding your kid for a significant amount of time (more than about a day). I am absolutly with Caitlyn on this one. Violence is not a parenting method, or a way to instill discipline, it is just that, violence, with a the consequences for society and the little human that violence brings in the baggage. My children are disciplined when they behave in a way that is not acceptable. They know, and adhere (mostly, they are still kids) to the rules. There was never an instance when I was not able to guide them along without resorting to violence. If you feel you can not do that, get parenting training. Hitting a child is parental bancruptcy.

LadyEllen -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/7/2007 2:24:24 AM)
Disenfranchisement of felons? As I understand it, under our Human Rights Act (which in the main is a good thing), even murderers serving indeterminate life terms get to vote here. Crazy; these people are and remain forever immune from the effects of their votes after all (unless we elect a party that thinks extermination of prisoners is a good idea). I rather like the idea that someone brought up several pages ago, that no one automatically gets to do anything at a certain age, but rather must demonstrate that they are worthy citizens by way of contribution. Some people at age 40 are not capable of discernment, responsibility and the like, whilst others at age 10 are. But then, that depends on who's running the system for approval doesnt it? Dependent on what they think demonstrates discernment and responsibility and what makes a contribution. That could become very scary, very quickly. Want to vote, marry, have children and own property? - do five years in Iraq and all this could be yours citizen, (well, whats left of you anyway). E

sleazy -> RE: Lower the voting age to 10 (2/7/2007 9:25:54 AM)
'Twas me you refer to LadyE, yes I admit the system is very open. If it were my world you refer to when sending someone to Iraq for a 5 year tour of duty, well I guess that would qualify them to have a hand in deciding how and when the armed forces are used for other than strictly local (ie my borders) self-defence. Broadly similar to the concept of federal service outlined by R H Heinlien, but brought down to smaller issues than the national vote. Basicially the more important the desicion you want a hand in, the more you should prove you are up to the responsibilty vote for town council, demonstrate an interest in the town (other than by pure taxation). Want a voice in national affairs, do something for the nation as a whole, want to drive; then learn the mess a car can make of a life, want a kidney; be on the donor list yourself. Whilst it will not remove selfishness, it should certainly go some way to countering it

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875