Police handcuffing 5-year-old

c0rbin said:
Handcuffs are non-destructive and safe means for restraining a person--adult or child.
Click to expand...

But you don't use handcuffs for your children to restrain them, do you?
 
Meadmaker said:


Furthermore, I think I could go through the archives of this forum and find several threads devoted to incidents in which police action was directed at a situation which, twenty years ago, would have been treated as a school discipline problem, and could have been taken care of without evacuating a classroom, and without handcuffing a five year old.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they's just grab the kid, or maybe beat the crap out of her, or some other solution that presents a risk of harm. Who knows.




So should we vote Republican just because of this incident? I wouldn't say so. However, in my humble opinion, the Republicans are more likely to solve this particular problem than the Democrats.
Click to expand...
Solve how? Removing the right of access to the courts? I guess after that, and then a kid acts up like this and some yahoo badly injures the child, the parents get to pay all the medical bills and so on, while the yahoo moves on to the new victim... I'm sure eliminating lawsuits would have worked out just fine for the Catholic Church...

Hey, at least then a handfull of people won't have their sensibilities challenged by seeing pictures of a girl put in passive restraints... I guess that is a fair exchange...



Most Americans participating in this conversation do not believe that any specific individuals are responsible for the obviously ridiculous event that happened here.

Click to expand...
I'm American, and the only thing obviously ridiculous about the event IMO is some of the knee-jerk reaction due to the objection on symbolic grounds to the particular personel and equipment used...


Most of us believe that the problem is with the system. Well, if the problem is systemic, then we are each obligated to view how we might influence that system, and we should use that as one factor in how we vote. For my part, it makes me more likely to vote Republican, which is a big change in my voting habits.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. I'm sure the Republican Party is very concerned about the system beyond the fact that fear of lawsuit forces large businesses to spend money making products safer and so forth... Maybe they will solve the problem by establishing mandatory religious classes so kids will never misbehave again, like in the good old days when there was a decent $.05 cigar, and nobody ever sued anybody......

Personally, I like the fact that companies and schools have to fear lawsuits. It makes them take these situations seriously and develop sane policies, like not having teachers physically accost small children without proper training, or not building a compact car where the gas tank is placed so it will explode if you are rear-ended...
 
CFLarsen said:
But you don't use handcuffs for your children to restrain them, do you?
Click to expand...
Actually, I did handcuff one of my children once. They were only on the child for about 30 seconds.

Had a remarkable calming effect on them and caused absolutely no bodily harm.

Can't recall exactly how old they were at the time......probably about 7 or so.
 
Mr. Skinny said:
Actually, I did handcuff one of children once. They were only on the child for about 30 seconds.

Had a remarkable calming effect on them and caused absolutely no bodily harm.

Can't recall exactly how old they were at the time......probably about 7 or so.
Click to expand...

Why didn't you keep it up, if it was so efficient?
 
CFLarsen said:
Why didn't you keep it up, if it was so efficient?
Click to expand...
Never found it necessary after that. The threat was sufficient.

Plus, I hated carrying handcuffs around all the time. :)
 
CFLarsen said:
But you don't use handcuffs for your children to restrain them, do you?
Click to expand...

I've had to deal with really crazy kids before... I have a few nephews that would put the girl in the film to shame...

Generally, I just show them inane logical arguments like ones that state that anything that is not common practice is somehow physically harmful.

Usually that confuses them, and they calm down.
 
CFLarsen said:
Charming.
Click to expand...
I've also handcuffed dozens of other people ranging in age from 13 to 70. Don't recall a single injury from the handcuff on those people either.

IMO once the handcuffs are double-locked so that they can't be tightened any more, there is little risk of injury, unless it's done intentionally by the person wearing the cuffs.
 
CFLarsen said:
TO CHILDREN!!

TO CHILDREN!!

:hb:
Click to expand...
Ah. All caps. And a silly graphic to boot. Well, I'm convinced.

You still haven't provided any evidence of the harm of handcuffs TO CHILDREN!!! at all, or this particular child.

Your statement "Handcuffing a 5-year old girl is physical harm." has been backed up with absolutely nothing. No amount of all caps or silly graphics alters this fact.
 
CFLarsen said:
I did not claim to be an expert. My solution solved the problem, without violence or intervention from the police.

Maybe that's why some people don't like it.
Click to expand...

You were in a similar situation? Or can I just assume that your English is not 100% here. You see, you say "My solution solved the problem as if you were there. Your solution might have solved the problem for some children having a tantrum, but this girl was outta control and a danger to herself and others, never mind disruptive.

I am a parent of two children, 5 and 2 years old. You cannot reason with a hell-bent 5 year old.

Come on, admit it, you have only seen children from afar and have never really interacted with one, have you?
 
CFLarsen said:
Will you start reading what people actually post?

Kodiak said "any questions". That is demonstrably false.

It is highly disruptive that you keep misreading what people write. Please try to do better.
Click to expand...

Being right is SO much more important.

:nope:
 
CFLarsen said:
Handcuffing a 5-year old girl is physical harm. If it wasn't, why aren't handcuffs part of a normal upbringing?
Click to expand...

Anyone who is a parent knows that children are restrained against their will all the time. From Car seats to high-chairs. It is done for their own safety.

Why are you so against the safety of children? (:D )
 
CFLarsen said:
Quite right. But I don't see many cultures that use handcuffs as part of a normal upbringing.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has been around children and babies knows that some parents happily place their children in a barred cell (also known as a "crib") and dress them in swaddling and mittened pajamas so they don't scratch their faces with their finger nails.

THE HORROR! THE HORROR!
 
CFLarsen said:
They are bad for kids' upbringing.



Sure. It proves that your example is invalid. You have not used handcuffs on your kids when they were unruly.



It proves that you use invalid examples.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has been around children or babies for real (not just in the internet) knows that they are restrained for their own safety and often against their will all the time.

And that's just the normal ones!
 
Meadmaker said:
So should we vote Republican just because of this incident? I wouldn't say so. However, in my humble opinion, the Republicans are more likely to solve this particular problem than the Democrats.

Most Americans participating in this conversation do not believe that any specific individuals are responsible for the obviously ridiculous event that happened here. Most of us believe that the problem is with the system. Well, if the problem is systemic, then we are each obligated to view how we might influence that system, and we should use that as one factor in how we vote. For my part, it makes me more likely to vote Republican, which is a big change in my voting habits.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you were saying that last October, too, but you went and voted for Kerry anyway... :D

I read somewhere once that the Democrats are the mommy party and the Republicans are the daddy party. The Repubs demand personal responsibility and will punish you when you misbehave; they're also the "daddy" in that they're the party you vote for when your primary concern is national defense ("my daddy can beat up your daddy').

The Democrats are the party that clean and bandage your scraped knee when you fall down.
 
Joshua Korosi said:


I'm surprised to see some of the blatant arguments from emotion people are using here. I'm also surprised to see this situation, of police restraining somebody with a history of physical violence, so ridiculously compared to that of a child abuser who locks his victim up to keep him/her from escaping and getting to the police. Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Claus. Write this sentence down on a piece of paper and read it aloud.
 
6472_v.jpg



THE HORROR!!! :eek:


;)
 
CFLarsen said:
I see that there are no new points made, so I doubt we will get any further with this. There is one thing I would like to have discussed a bit more, though:

If handcuffs are so harmless and effective to control an unruly child, why have nobody used them for this purpose?
Click to expand...

Anyone who has raised or been around children and/or babies knows that they are routinely restrained against their will by straps, latches, locks, doors, bars, cages, zippers, gates, belts...the list goes on.

Before you unnecessarily state that hand-cuffs are not any of these things, the Police officers have hand-cuffs. They do not have, as you might have gathered from your self appointed position on high, baby bjorns, strollers, cribs, high-chairs, or play pens.

Extrodinary situations call for extrodinary measures.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom