Police handcuffing 5-year-old

[gnome]

Once a child has started hitting people and breaking things, I don't see how handcuffs are inappropriate--unless someone can show how it's harmful for a child to be handcuffed.

I've quite the opposite opinion on excessive police tasering, especially of children. There, at least, there is evidence of harm.

Sure, maybe something could have been done instead... but I don't see a reason for outrage when the child wasn't harmed.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Too bad kids don't come with an "off" switch.

 

[CFLarsen]

My understanding is she was out of control, physically violent and wouldn't obey the adults. I am not clear why you would refer to this as nothing.

Is this a job for the police? Should we call the police every time a kid throws a tantrum? I'm sure every criminal would love that!

The police are there to fight crime. Is it a crime for a child to throw a tantrum? Don't you think that's going over the top here?

She was cuffed to control her flailing arms. Is it your position that a child who won't stop hitting and will not listen to commands to stop from adults should simply be allowed to continue the behavior?

Had you taken the time to read the article, you would have discovered that she was calm when the police arrived.

I think cuffing the girl was a very appropriate, and safety oriented (for both her and others). I don't see any alternative for a violent person who won't calm down.

She was calm when the police arrived. Do you still think it was appropriate to handcuff her?

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Assault, destruction of other people's property. Disturbing the peace, perhaps. Even resisting arrest.

I agree it would be foolish to prosecute the crimes committed by a five-year-old, but that doesn't mean they aren't crimes.

in some jurisdictions these actions are crimes only if intent can be proven. In Jebland is that not the case? And tell me, how can this child be considered resisting arrest?


the only "crime" is that she is black and her skin resembles the skincolour of terrorists. America is in fear of its own citizens of all ages. Did she intend to be black? If Jebland justice can prove her intent to want to be and stay black, perhaps they will have a case. The high terror alerts have got people so worked up they see enemies everywhere.


To me its about reasonableness. I question the reasonableness of arresting pregnant chocolate eating scientists that are black, and I question the reasonableness of hand-cuffing 12 year old french fry eaters, tasering kinterkarteners, and handcuffing young kids that are ornary and are being defiant. I doubt that all other avenues were exhausted in all these cases.

 

[Checkmite]

Q. What's the difference between handcuffing a small child and holding the child's arms to keep him/her from flailing about?

A. Nothing, except now one of the officers has two free hands.

The handcuffs aren't like being tasered. They're just there to keep the kid from swinging her arms all over the place. What's the big deal?

 

[Mycroft]

Is this a job for the police? Should we call the police every time a kid throws a tantrum? I'm sure every criminal would love that!

The police are there to fight crime. Is it a crime for a child to throw a tantrum? Don't you think that's going over the top here?

I think we all agree there might have been a better course of action and a preferable result, but nobody here is saying we should call the police every time a child throws a tantrum.

The question that you've been avoiding for 137 posts now is how the girl was harmed by being placed in handcuffs. Are you ever going to address this?

 

[CFLarsen]

she was black

a skin tone very similiar in colour to the terrorists that attacked the WTC and Pentagon.

I really, really hope you are joking. Not that I think you are being funny...

 

[TragicMonkey]

in some jurisdictions these actions are crimes only if intent can be proven. In Jebland is that not the case? And tell me, how can this child be considered resisting arrest?

Unless she was having a seizure, how can striking someone be unintentional? And I thought resisting arrest might be a possibility, since apparently she kicked and fought back when they cuffed her.

Please recall that I said it would be very foolish to prosecute for any of that in this case. I was just objecting to Claus's sweeping "there were no crimes" statement.

the only "crime" is that she is black and her skin resembles the skincolour of terrorists. America is in fear of its own citizens of all ages. Did she intend to be black? If Jebland justice can prove her intent to want to be and stay black, perhaps they will have a case. The high terror alerts have got people so worked up they see enemies everywhere.

I was under the impression that it was Arabs and Middle Easterners who were coming in for some racism as a result of 9/11, not African-Americans. Or perhaps the cops are too racist to know the difference?

To me its about reasonableness. I question the reasonableness of arresting pregnant chocolate eating scientists that are black, and I question the reasonableness of hand-cuffing 12 year old french fry eaters, tasering kinterkarteners, and handcuffing young kids that are ornary and are being defiant. I doubt that all other avenues were exhausted in all these cases.

Okay, the pregnant chocolate-eating black scientist...where does she figure into this story? And the 12 year old? The girl in this case wasn't tasered, she was handcuffed. If you're talking about other cases besides the one currently being discussed, it would be nice to provide some background and maybe some links, rather than suddenly introduce new characters.

 

[CFLarsen]

I think we all agree there might have been a better course of action and a preferable result, but nobody here is saying we should call the police every time a child throws a tantrum.

Really? Then why was the police called here?

The question that you've been avoiding for 137 posts now is how the girl was harmed by being placed in handcuffs. Are you ever going to address this?

I have. If you don't want to accept it, I can't do any more.

 

[CFLarsen]

I was just objecting to Claus's sweeping "there were no crimes" statement.

But if there were crimes, why wasn't she prosecuted?

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by CFLarsen
Really? Then why was the police called here?

Are you really claiming you can't make a distinction between "I'm not outraged by this one event, could you please explain why you are?" and "I think the police should be called in to handle every child who throws a tantrum."

Those two position seem very different to me. Can't you tell the difference?

Originally posted by CFLarsen
I have. If you don't want to accept it, I can't do any more.

I've read through three pages on this nonsense and the only thing I've seen is somethig vague about the child feeling she's being labeled as a "bad person."

I dunno, maybe I missed it. If I did, would it be too much to ask for you to restate your position? Why do you think this is exceptionally outrageous? How was this child harmed?

 

[CFLarsen]

I dunno, maybe I missed it. If I did, would it be too much to ask for you to restate your position? Why do you think this is exceptionally outrageous? How was this child harmed?

Page 3. Find "Stating the bleedin' obvious."

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

I really, really hope you are joking. Not that I think you are being funny...

well, I was being sarcastic,

but it did get me considering all the cases of police and adults in general reacting so over-the-top to many minor things in such unreasonbale ways. It occured to me perhaps prejudice and fear are behind the arrests of individuals engaging in behaviours that are dealt with in unreasonable irrational ways.
Americans' fears are aroused in the current High terror allert atmosphere and the slightest offense appears to result in so many cases of irrational responses. Intolerance of minor "deviant" behaviours like eating chocolate or throwing a tantrum are accassionally resulting unreasobale responses.


Coincidently the "perps" in these cases were black or hispanic, I do wonder if prejudice is playing apart in the response to these "deviant" behaviours.

 

[RandFan]

You can give any reason you want for handcuffing your child. It won't make any difference.

Well this isn't logical. You are saying that a reasonable action won't make a difference.

Authorities Rescue Fontana Girl Chained To Table

Try to handcuff your child and see what happens.

Do you even read what I write. I said, if I or my neighbor handcuffed my child I would think that would raise a red flag since that is not something that parents would do. But you are being dishonest here because she WASN'T just handcuffed, was she?

Authorities say they've rescued a 6-year-old Fontana girl who was chained to a steel table for 18 hours.

THAT IS ABUSE. The girl in the video was NOT handcuffed for 18 hours. Come on, be honest.

 

[Orwell]

Police review policy after Tasers used on kids

And now a 5 year old (5 year old girl!) gets handcuffed. Man, it must have been a pretty scary 5 year old!

None of this strikes you guys as being excessive? Not even a little bit?

Even if the girl wasn't harmed, it seems like severe overkill to me.

 

[RandFan]

Is this a job for the police? Should we call the police every time a kid throws a tantrum? I'm sure every criminal would love that!

Straw man. You know better. This was a extreme circumstance and you know it. Stop lying.

The police are there to fight crime. Is it a crime for a child to throw a tantrum? Don't you think that's going over the top here?

The police are also there to protect order. When I was a counselor I was told to call police in the event a child could not be calmed down. This is SOP for many institutions.

Had you taken the time to read the article, you would have discovered that she was calm when the police arrived.

She was calm when the police arrived. Do you still think it was appropriate to handcuff her?

I don't know. I have said that perhaps it was wrong. I wasn't there.

 

[RandFan]

But if there were crimes, why wasn't she prosecuted?

Police exist to protect order. The fact that police were called is NOT proof that someone thought that there was a crime. You are being illogical.

The girl was breaking things and hitting. That is a crime BTW. People are arrested all of the time without charges being filed.

 

[RandFan]

Page 3. Find "Stating the bleedin' obvious."

That proves NOTHING. It has been rebutted. There was nothing about handcuffs. You have not established that the act of handcuffing is abuse. Your making a non sequitur.

 

[RandFan]

Police review policy after Tasers used on kids

Not even comparable.

And now a 5 year old (5 year old girl!) gets handcuffed. Man, it must have been a pretty scary 5 year old!

That is called specious reasoning. It was upsetting. Sending a child to his or her room for the first time can be pretty scary.

None of this strikes you guys as being excessive? Not even a little bit?

Sure, most of us agree. We have said as much. That is not our point. Why the outrage?

Even if the girl wasn't harmed, it seems like severe overkill to me.

Sure, but absense of harm why the outrage?

 

[CFLarsen]

Well this isn't logical. You are saying that a reasonable action won't make a difference.

You are calling handcuffing a child a "reasonable action"? Are you out of your f****ng mind?? How can you possibly condone that kind of behavior?

Do you even read what I write. I said, if I or my neighbor handcuffed my child I would think that would raise a red flag since that is not something that parents would do. But you are being dishonest here because she WASN'T just handcuffed, was she?

I am discussing the child in the OP. Are you?

THAT IS ABUSE. The girl in the video was NOT handcuffed for 18 hours. Come on, be honest.

I am striving to be honest. I simply cannot comprehend that you could possibly condone that a 5-year old was handcuffed, simply because she threw a tantrum.

How can you be so hostile to children?