French bus driver slaps teenager for disrespect

ForestFire · 21-09-2018 8:32pm

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Of course its hypothetical as the poster you referred to has not kicked anyone to death that we are aware of. He said what he would do if it were his child that was assualted. Take your outrage up with him.

Your good at this.

When someone calls you up on a point YOU make, you deflect and change the argument.

You said no one was baying for blood, and accused me of hyperbole.

When I first explained it was a saying and not literal, but still I showed you there actually was, you claim its only hypothetical, and then I should take it up with him.

Well I already have if you'd like to read back over the thread.

And thus I will leave it there.

Danzy · 21-09-2018 8:42pm

The fellow is lucky to be alive, because he jumped put in front of a bus.

You'd nearly think he was hit with a baseball bat by some of the comments here.

Hitman3000 · 21-09-2018 8:46pm

ForestFire wrote:

When someone calls you up on a point YOU make, you deflect and change the argument.

What point? You have an issue with something another poster has said take it up with them I'm not their keeper.
Also perspective is much like opinion everyone takes a different view or stance on a situation. My perspective on the actions of the driver is different than yours. I see an adult assualt IMG a child you see in the words of some here a 'scroute' being taught a lesson.

Sand · 21-09-2018 9:56pm

The bus driver did nothing wrong. A kid got a slap, and a valuable lesson with it. That kid will grow up to be a better person because he got that slap. Error. Consequence. Personal Growth. Don't be surprised if that kid in 10 years time comes back to thank the bus driver for setting him straight.

CountingR · 22-09-2018 12:10am

Hi Manic - thanks for that, some interesting points there.

I guess the one I struggle with is the idea of there being any sort of grey area on something like this. My concern would be:

- So let’s say that we have a law there that gives parents the right to use ‘reasonable chastisement’ as a defense (which in essence means - as you’ve pointed out - that spanking could be effectively legal, but anything further would theoretically not be)
- Now, 2 children’s experience of spanking could be completely different. Parent A could use spanking in a very measured way, which is a calmly administered form of discipline. However Parent B could use spanking in an aggressive way, in that they lose self-control and lash out at a child. They could also use it on a regular basis. Now I may not agree with spanking full stop but clearly I’d be more inclined to agree with Parent A’s method than Parent B’s.
- However, for me, the issue here is that once you’ve created a grey area, then there will be lots of different shades of grey in there. Some may be acceptable (Parent A), some certainly won’t (Parent

. However once you’ve effectively sanctioned parents to operate in that grey area - and given people the freedom to determine where that line is - then invariably there will be some people (and likely not an insignificant number) that will overstep the mark on a regular basis.
- So then, just taking a step back and looking at it from a societal point of view, you could be inadvertently greenlighting that more aggressive, abusive shade of grey. It’s not the intention but it is in likely to be the end result. Because, in reality, if your law is structured to allow ‘reasonable chastisement’, then you’re setting the bar for a prosecution much higher
- So yes, there are a lot of Person A’s out there, but there are also a lot of Person B’s. And to be honest I’d be willing to take away Person A’s right to slap a child, in order to protect Person B’s kids from an actual abusive situation.
- So that’s why I say I think it needs to be black and white. It’s not necessarily for the person (like you) who uses very measured, infrequent discipline for a particular reason (though I may not be in favour of that, it’s hardly going to be life-altering!), it’s more for that other category, because if you sanction one type you open the door to others.
- Granted, the ‘Person B’s’ might still do what they do regardless of the law, but I think - societally - we have to be on the side of those kids, and we have to structure our laws in a way that protects them as much as possible.

I know people are really flippant about this subject - sure it’s just a slap - but there are kids involved here, and people’s lives can be altered by long-term, low scale abuse. Personally, even as an adult, I can’t imagine having a figure in my life who slapped me once a week, once a month etc... to teach me a lesson.

Anyway, appreciate the reply, I think helps to frame it in a different way also.

CountingR · 22-09-2018 12:15am

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes. I have an obligation and responsibility for the safety and discipline of my child. My child has no obligation or responsibility to not be kept safe or disciplined.

As above Manic!

mattser · 22-09-2018 12:41am

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Of course its hypothetical as the poster you referred to has not kicked anyone to death that we are aware of. He said what he would do if it were his child that was assualted. Take your outrage up with him.

Assualted ??. For someone who presents as an authority on the subject, is it too much to ask that you get your spelling in order ?

Star Bingo · 22-09-2018 12:50am

It was your classic clatter wasn’t it. Kid must have been out of order

Manic Moran · 22-09-2018 4:41am

CountingR wrote: »

Hi Manic - thanks for that, some interesting points there.

I guess the one I struggle with is the idea of there being any sort of grey area on something like this. My concern would be:

- So let’s say that we have a law there that gives parents the right to use ‘reasonable chastisement’ as a defense (which in essence means - as you’ve pointed out - that spanking could be effectively legal, but anything further would theoretically not be)
- Now, 2 children’s experience of spanking could be completely different. Parent A could use spanking in a very measured way, which is a calmly administered form of discipline. However Parent B could use spanking in an aggressive way, in that they lose self-control and lash out at a child. They could also use it on a regular basis. Now I may not agree with spanking full stop but clearly I’d be more inclined to agree with Parent A’s method than Parent B’s.
- However, for me, the issue here is that once you’ve created a grey area, then there will be lots of different shades of grey in there. Some may be acceptable (Parent A), some certainly won’t (Parent . However once you’ve effectively sanctioned parents to operate in that grey area - and given people the freedom to determine where that line is - then invariably there will be some people (and likely not an insignificant number) that will overstep the mark on a regular basis.
- So then, just taking a step back and looking at it from a societal point of view, you could be inadvertently greenlighting that more aggressive, abusive shade of grey. It’s not the intention but it is in likely to be the end result. Because, in reality, if your law is structured to allow ‘reasonable chastisement’, then you’re setting the bar for a prosecution much higher
- So yes, there are a lot of Person A’s out there, but there are also a lot of Person B’s. And to be honest I’d be willing to take away Person A’s right to slap a child, in order to protect Person B’s kids from an actual abusive situation.
- So that’s why I say I think it needs to be black and white. It’s not necessarily for the person (like you) who uses very measured, infrequent discipline for a particular reason (though I may not be in favour of that, it’s hardly going to be life-altering!), it’s more for that other category, because if you sanction one type you open the door to others.
- Granted, the ‘Person B’s’ might still do what they do regardless of the law, but I think - societally - we have to be on the side of those kids, and we have to structure our laws in a way that protects them as much as possible.

I know people are really flippant about this subject - sure it’s just a slap - but there are kids involved here, and people’s lives can be altered by long-term, low scale abuse. Personally, even as an adult, I can’t imagine having a figure in my life who slapped me once a week, once a month etc... to teach me a lesson.

Anyway, appreciate the reply, I think helps to frame it in a different way also.

I understand your argument, but I suspect it's a little idealistic for a couple of reasons.

1) The sorts of parents who are going to be abusive aren't, I submit, the sorts of parents who are going to care much about whether or not the law says they can use physical punishment. Unless they leave physical evidence, which is the same standard in California, good luck getting a conviction to enforce it.

2) The desire to restrict the reasonable in order to protect others is hardly unique, and can be seen in all sorts of things from gun control to food restrictions (Just because I may know how to cut Fugu without poisoning myself, should it be permitted to be sold in Tesco's?). However, I submit that behaviour cannot be so easily regulated as can commodities. Take the most extreme case: It is not illegal in Ireland to kill someone. It is illegal to murder someone (well, duh, by definition). The difference between legal and illegal can be a matter of third party opinion (eg, a claim of killing in self defense). Dropping down a level, what may be excessive force to one Garda may not be to another. We certainly don't prohibit Gardai from using force in all circumstances, what we do is sanction Gardai who, in the view of third parties, overstepped the bounds of acceptable behaviour. How is this different?

3) In terms of child disciplining, you are always going to have a moving target and there is always going to be some level of discretion required, even if not a hand is laid on them. Let's assume a total and complete prohibition on slapping is enacted, as is the case in Sweden. If a bold child is told to stand in the corner, is it abuse? What if they're told to stand in a corner wearing a "dunce" cap? What if they're told to stand outside on the street corner wearing a "dunce cap" and a sign stating their malfeasance? And so on. There will be a point, not a black and white point, but a point nevertheless where a discipline technique subjectively turns into abuse, just as traumatic psychologically as physical abuse is. "Go to your room, don't come down for an hour". "Go to your room without your supper." "Go to your room, don't come out for 24 hours". "Go to your room, don't come down for a week, I'll slip your dinner under the door". Where do you draw the 'acceptable' line? It's going to be -somewhere- between those extremes. Are you going to write an entire new penal code into law for child misbehaviour, similar as we have for criminal activity? It's impractical.

If you take your 'no latitude at all' to its logical conclusion, you prohibit all forms of disciplining outside of the court system.

I'm happy enough with the 'common sense' approach we have here in California.

CountingR · 22-09-2018 5:49am

1) The sorts of parents who are going to be abusive aren't, I submit, the sorts of parents who are going to care much about whether or not the law says they can use physical punishment.

Yes, but again, it comes back to shades of grey. To my mind - if a society decides that a reasonable level of physical force can be used by parents when disciplining their children, then it is far more likely that your average ‘moderate’ parent will use that force. If you normalize it, it happens more (you can see that in any society where force is accepted - if it’s accepted more people do it, if prohibited and taboo less people do it. Look at it the change in Ireland). And if more parents are using more force, then a percentage of that force - even from ‘moderate parents’ will naturally cross that line into aggressive force (maybe not all the time but certainly on occasion - bad day at work is taken out on a kid). So it’s not just about the big bad ‘abuser’ per se, I think by creating the grey area, and by sanctioning the use of reasonable force, you just naturally create more instances of force, and it follows, more instances of excessive force. I just think it shouldn’t be something that’s in a parents toolkit - it’s just too easy to misuse, in a split second you can snap, and if force is acceptable to you, you could overstep the mark very quickly, and do something that could be very impactful for you and the child. So I think force is just too easy to misuse (and is misused - not necessarily just by ‘abusers’).

2) The desire to restrict the reasonable in order to protect others is hardly unique, and can be seen in all sorts of things from gun control to food restrictions (Just because I may know how to cut Fugu without poisoning myself, should it be permitted to be sold in Tesco's?). However, I submit that behaviour cannot be so easily regulated as can commodities. Take the most extreme case: It is not illegal in Ireland to kill someone. It is illegal to murder someone (well, duh, by definition). The difference between legal and illegal can be a matter of third party opinion (eg, a claim of killing in self defense). Dropping down a level, what may be excessive force to one Garda may not be to another. We certainly don't prohibit Gardai from using force in all circumstances, what we do is sanction Gardai who, in the view of third parties, overstepped the bounds of acceptable behaviour. How is this different?

Yeah, I get where you’re going but not sure you can conflate killing/garda force, with physical discipline of a child.

Let’s take killing/murder - our laws don’t allow a reasonable amount of force to be used against others - other than in a scenario where self-defense applies, or if it is deemed unintentional. So killing is essentially illegal if not in those circumstances. There’s no reason this shouldn’t be the same for physical discipline - if a parent was acting in self-defense, or unintentionally, they should not be prosecuted. Otherwise, it’s an intentional act that (in my opinion) should not be permitted.

With Garda force - I guess the difference is that they don’t use force as a corrective/disciplinary tool. They use it - at the minimal possible level - to prevent threats, and subdue those resisting. Which is completely different from using it as a discretionary disciplinary method.

I’m not sure you’d agree that guards should have the freedom to use a reasonable amount of force to ‘teach people a lesson’?

3) In terms of child disciplining, you are always going to have a moving target and there is always going to be some level of discretion required, even if not a hand is laid on them. Let's assume a total and complete prohibition on slapping is enacted, as is the case in Sweden. If a bold child is told to stand in the corner, is it abuse? What if they're told to stand in a corner wearing a "dunce" cap? What if they're told to stand outside on the street corner wearing a "dunce cap" and a sign stating their malfeasance? And so on. There will be a point, not a black and white point, but a point nevertheless where a discipline technique subjectively turns into abuse, just as traumatic psychologically as physical abuse is. "Go to your room, don't come down for an hour". "Go to your room without your supper." "Go to your room, don't come out for 24 hours". "Go to your room, don't come down for a week, I'll slip your dinner under the door". Where do you draw the 'acceptable' line? It's going to be -somewhere- between those extremes. Are you going to write an entire new penal code into law for child misbehaviour, similar as we have for criminal activity? It's impractical.

If you take your 'no latitude at all' to its logical conclusion, you prohibit all forms of disciplining outside of the court system.

As above, I think there’s a massive difference between physical and non-physical forms of punishment. Physical punishment - if in parents toolbox - can be misused in a split second, from tiredness, over-zealousness, frustration. Non-physical punishment is by its nature more considered. Sending a child to its room for a week, sliding food under the door - as you’ve mentioned - is certainly crossing a line, and tbh is much less likely to be something that a more ‘moderate’ parent would do. There’s time to reflect, to see impact, to be aware of what you’re doing. Same goes for putting your child in a dunce cap. You’d have to go out and buy the cap (or make one!), you’d have to think it out, you’d have to do it... and if you did, you’re really crossing a line (and the more moderate parent would reflect somewhere in that process and say ‘wait, no, this isn’t right.’) With physical punishment it’s too immediate. A parent loses their rag, gives a child a wollop, the child cries, the parent feels guilty. However, the line has been crossed. So I guess my point is - physical punishment by its nature is vulnerable to temper and emotion, non-physical much less so.

FingerDeKat · 22-09-2018 6:15am

CountingR wrote: »

1) The sorts of parents who are going to be abusive aren't, I submit, the sorts of parents who are going to care much about whether or not the law says they can use physical punishment.

Yes, but again, it comes back to shades of grey. To my mind - if a society decides that a reasonable level of physical force can be used by parents when disciplining their children, then it is far more likely that your average ‘moderate’ parent will use that force. If you normalize it, it happens more (you can see that in any society where force is accepted - if it’s accepted more people do it, if prohibited and taboo less people do it. Look at it the change in Ireland). And if more parents are using more force, then a percentage of that force - even from ‘moderate parents’ will naturally cross that line into aggressive force (maybe not all the time but certainly on occasion - bad day at work is taken out on a kid). So it’s not just about the big bad ‘abuser’ per se, I think by creating the grey area, and by sanctioning the use of reasonable force, you just naturally create more instances of force, and it follows, more instances of excessive force. I just think it shouldn’t be something that’s in a parents toolkit - it’s just too easy to misuse, in a split second you can snap, and if force is acceptable to you, you could overstep the mark very quickly, and do something that could be very impactful for you and the child. So I think force is just too easy to misuse (and is misused - not necessarily just by ‘abusers’).

2) The desire to restrict the reasonable in order to protect others is hardly unique, and can be seen in all sorts of things from gun control to food restrictions (Just because I may know how to cut Fugu without poisoning myself, should it be permitted to be sold in Tesco's?). However, I submit that behaviour cannot be so easily regulated as can commodities. Take the most extreme case: It is not illegal in Ireland to kill someone. It is illegal to murder someone (well, duh, by definition). The difference between legal and illegal can be a matter of third party opinion (eg, a claim of killing in self defense). Dropping down a level, what may be excessive force to one Garda may not be to another. We certainly don't prohibit Gardai from using force in all circumstances, what we do is sanction Gardai who, in the view of third parties, overstepped the bounds of acceptable behaviour. How is this different?

Yeah, I get where you’re going but not sure you can conflate killing/garda force, with physical discipline of a child.

Let’s take killing/murder - our laws don’t allow a reasonable amount of force to be used against others - other than in a scenario where self-defense applies, or if it is deemed unintentional. So killing is essentially illegal if not in those circumstances. There’s no reason this shouldn’t be the same for physical discipline - if a parent was acting in self-defense, or unintentionally, they should not be prosecuted. Otherwise, it’s an intentional act that (in my opinion) should not be permitted.

With Garda force - I guess the difference is that they don’t use force as a corrective/disciplinary tool. They use it - at the minimal possible level - to prevent threats, and subdue those resisting. Which is completely different from using it as a discretionary disciplinary method.

I’m not sure you’d agree that guards should have the freedom to use a reasonable amount of force to ‘teach people a lesson’?

3) In terms of child disciplining, you are always going to have a moving target and there is always going to be some level of discretion required, even if not a hand is laid on them. Let's assume a total and complete prohibition on slapping is enacted, as is the case in Sweden. If a bold child is told to stand in the corner, is it abuse? What if they're told to stand in a corner wearing a "dunce" cap? What if they're told to stand outside on the street corner wearing a "dunce cap" and a sign stating their malfeasance? And so on. There will be a point, not a black and white point, but a point nevertheless where a discipline technique subjectively turns into abuse, just as traumatic psychologically as physical abuse is. "Go to your room, don't come down for an hour". "Go to your room without your supper." "Go to your room, don't come out for 24 hours". "Go to your room, don't come down for a week, I'll slip your dinner under the door". Where do you draw the 'acceptable' line? It's going to be -somewhere- between those extremes. Are you going to write an entire new penal code into law for child misbehaviour, similar as we have for criminal activity? It's impractical.

If you take your 'no latitude at all' to its logical conclusion, you prohibit all forms of disciplining outside of the court system.

As above, I think there’s a massive difference between physical and non-physical forms of punishment. Physical punishment - if in parents toolbox - can be misused in a split second, from tiredness, over-zealousness, frustration. Non-physical punishment is by its nature more considered. Sending a child to its room for a week, sliding food under the door - as you’ve mentioned - is certainly crossing a line, and tbh is much less likely to be something that a more ‘moderate’ parent would do. There’s time to reflect, to see impact, to be aware of what you’re doing. Same goes for putting your child in a dunce cap. You’d have to go out and buy the cap (or make one!), you’d have to think it out, you’d have to do it... and if you did, you’re really crossing a line (and the more moderate parent would reflect somewhere in that process and say ‘wait, no, this isn’t right.’) With physical punishment it’s too immediate. A parent loses their rag, gives a child a wollop, the child cries, the parent feels guilty. However, the line has been crossed. So I guess my point is - physical punishment by its nature is vulnerable to temper and emotion, non-physical much less so.

even with paragraphs I'm not gonna rear that

Graces7 · 22-09-2018 7:06am

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Entirely unrelated. Violent assault on a child is his case to answer.

There is then no case to answer as a simple slap that did not make the boy flinch or fall over is NOT "violent assault"

CountingR · 22-09-2018 8:24am

FingerDeKat wrote: »

even with paragraphs I'm not gonna rear that

TDLR

The Be Sharps: Hot
Slapping: Not

vicwatson · 22-09-2018 8:54am

Graces7 wrote: »

There is then no case to answer as a simple slap that did not make the boy flinch or fall over is NOT "violent assault"

Define assault (in law, not opinion)

Dakota Dan · 22-09-2018 9:06am

vicwatson wrote: »

Define assault (in law, not opinion)

Assault could be as little as a thump but you are forgetting the violent part.

freddie1970 · 22-09-2018 9:07am

Its hard to call as there are so many scumbags out there and they are scared of no one ..
But as a child of the 70's i grew up getting back handers for anything and it destroyed me as a child ..Its is still affecting me as a adult more so as im a father myself ..I couldnt imagine knocking my 8 yr old across the room with a slap it would destroy him ..and yet i got it almost daily and everyone thought it was acceptable..

The Rape of Lucretia · 22-09-2018 9:34am

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Assault could be as little as a thump but you are forgetting the violent part.

A slap is clearly violent. One person striking another, on the face, with intent to hurt them, is unarguably violent assault. If the driver had slapped a grown woman in the same way, in the same situation, would people still think it OK?
Going around slapping people as a means of correcting behaviour (which becomes a very fine line between expressing anger, revenge, and outright pleasure of inflicting dominance and violence on others) is not a world we should condone if we are civilised people. Exempting children from this protection, and considering it OK to slap one, is hypocracy and inconsistent double standards, in the extreme.

manual_man · 22-09-2018 9:35am

CountingR wrote: »

There’s a lot of people on here taking the line that ‘I was hit as a child and it never did me any harm.’

However the majority of these people are currently on an internet discussion forum, arguing that a 12 child deserved to be hit, that he should have been hit harder to make it ‘worth it’ , that he was a little prick etc. etc.

Hate to say it, but I think those couple of slaps may have done you more harm than you think! You do have a normalized view of something that would be unquestionably abhorrent to a lot of people. Publicly supporting an adult hitting a child (without even knowing the facts) seems like misplaced aggression more than anything else.

Anyway, he will probably lose his job, and probably should be prosecuted. Yes there are some shades of grey in this, but if you accept it in this instance then where do you draw them line? If the boy hadn’t given lip would he ‘deserve’ to be hit? If he had given cheek then what amount of cheekiness would mean the driver was in the wrong. Sorry, but you can’t go shades of grey in this one - adults can’t hit children. That’s one of the good rules!

Please, get off your virtue signalling pedestal. And stop lying in the process. The majority of people you are referring to have NOT been saying he should have been hit harder to make it 'worth it'. Nice attempt for the likes though.

Wanderer78 · 22-09-2018 9:37am

Probably sacked at this stage

CountingR · 22-09-2018 9:45am

manual_man wrote: »

Please, get off your virtue signalling pedestal. And stop lying in the process. The majority of people you are referring to have NOT been saying he should have been hit harder to make it 'worth it'. Nice attempt for the likes though.

Grand, I’ve gotten off my ‘virtue signaling pedestal.’ Although, I have to say, I don’t really like being down so low - at this level. Makes it really difficult for me to look down on people. Also I had a really nice view of the city skyline from my pedestal - could see right past liberty tower to the mountains on a clear day.

Anyway, luckily enough I’m still fairly tall, so I can still look down on people a little bit.

I’m going to miss that view though...

manual_man · 22-09-2018 9:47am

CountingR wrote: »

Grand, I’ve gotten off my ‘virtue signaling pedestal.’ Although, I have to say, I don’t really like being down so low - at this level. Makes it really difficult for me to look down on people. Also I had a really nice view of the city skyline from my pedestal - could see right past liberty tower to the mountains on a clear day.

Anyway, luckily enough I’m still fairly tall, so I can still look down on people a little bit.

I’m going to miss that view though...

Ah look, do anything but address your lie that I exposed

CountingR · 22-09-2018 10:01am

manual_man wrote: »

Ah look, do anything but address your lie that I exposed

Actually, it’s grand, I’m getting used to life ‘off the pedestal’ already. People have stopped thinking I’m a statue, which is a good thing (I guess). On the negative, women are giving me a lot less attention - as I’m not up on my pedestal anymore. I’ve kept the pedestal though. It’s under a tarpaulin in the shed. You never know when it might come in handy in the future. Could use it for painting the fence or something.

Anywho... look, what I meant is that the majority of people are arguing that a 12 year old child should have been hit and deserved it, and also some (and not an insignificant number) are calling him a scumbag, scrote, prick, and saying he deserved more. I’m not trying to say everyone said everything, but there’s a concerning number of people who are saying the above!

Anyway I apologise if I wasn’t clear - I’m attempting to feed a baby human most of the time while writing!

MadDog76 · 22-09-2018 10:12am

I suspect that a lot of the posters on this thread advocating the violent assault (and yes, it was both violent and assault) on the child don't have have children themselves and/or were abused themselves as children resulting in their perspectives being damaged and probably shouldn't have children themselves. The abused have the potential to become the abuser.....

If I, as a parent, have decided not to discipline my children through violence then why the f#ck would I accept a total stranger dishing out his chosen form of punishment on My child?!??

Also, for those posters who are holding up the 70's as an example of how children should be disciplined, don't assume that your personal experiences of being abused as a child is indicative of society as a whole back then, ie. not every child in the country was suffering physical abuse from their parents for being "bold".

Ginger83 · 22-09-2018 10:30am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Probably sacked at this stage

A chat and a new route. It wasn't in soft Ireland.

Dakota Dan · 22-09-2018 10:38am

MadDog76 wrote: »

I suspect that a lot of the posters on this thread advocating the violent assault (and yes, it was both violent and assault) on the child don't have have children themselves and/or were abused themselves as children resulting in their perspectives being damaged and probably shouldn't have children themselves. The abused have the potential to become the abuser.....

If I, as a parent, have decided not to discipline my children through violence then why the f#ck would I accept a total stranger dishing out his chosen form of punishment on My child?!??

Also, for those posters who are holding up the 70's as an example of how children should be disciplined, don't assume that your personal experiences of being abused as a child is indicative of society as a whole back then, ie. not every child in the country was suffering physical abuse from their parents for being "bold".

You need to check out the meaning of violent assault it’s akin to assault and battery. Assault and battery. the culmination of a military attack, in which fighting takes place at close quarters.

iamwhoiam · 22-09-2018 10:41am

MadDog76 wrote: »

I suspect that a lot of the posters on this thread advocating the violent assault (and yes, it was both violent and assault) on the child don't have have children themselves and/or were abused themselves as children resulting in their perspectives being damaged and probably shouldn't have children themselves. The abused have the potential to become the abuser.....

If I, as a parent, have decided not to discipline my children through violence then why the f#ck would I accept a total stranger dishing out his chosen form of punishment on My child?!??

Also, for those posters who are holding up the 70's as an example of how children should be disciplined, don't assume that your personal experiences of being abused as a child is indicative of society as a whole back then, ie. not every child in the country was suffering physical abuse from their parents for being "bold".

My thoughts on this and on your points is that I suspect many are simply sick to death of young people acting like this lad and no consequences at all being handed out . Personally speaking I do not agree with the drivers action but can understand provocation and frustration . Daily we hear about young lads( and girls too) running wild, causing damage , intimidating , taunting and nothing being done because they are " too young "

Only very recently I witnessed a group of boys aged about 12 or 13 standing behind a low wall along a road . I was in a traffic line and watched them .As a young woman or girl passed ( never a man or boy ) they would suddenly jump up with sticks and hit the girls while passing . My point is that even if I callled the Guards and they witnessed it nothing would actually happen to punish these lads . At one stage a middle aged man approached them and they laughed in his face and carried on .
That is only one episode of many such incidents seen and witnessed by people in this country and much much worse too . People in some parts of this country are being hounded out of houses by gangs of kids .

Daily I see small kids in a playground hitting others , pushing others and screaming like banshees if anyone dares ask them to be nice and kind . The parents stand by often and watch this enfold and see no reason to remove the offender from causing harm . And this continues into their youth

So it is understandable that frustrated people who see this in increasing incidences are really not going to get outraged at a man who in frustration lashed out .

You must agree that if we dont use the fist or slap as punishment then it must be replaced with an effective alternative ? Unfortunately for many young lads nothing replaced this and they carry on being disruptive and intimidating with no consequences or punishment . So now people are getting fed up of this behaviour and see a slap as a quick and maybe effective one to teach this kid to be less disrespectful and that he doesnt rule the world

MadDog76 · 22-09-2018 10:48am

Ginger83 wrote: »

A chat and a new route. It wasn't in soft Ireland.

The driver has admitted he was wrong.

His employer has condemned his actions and begun disciplinary procedures.

The local Mayor and Frances Minster for Transport have condemned the driver's actions.

The boys Mother has made an official complaint to the Police.

There were dozens of eye witnesses to the incident as well as damning video evidence.

The video has gone viral and made headlines around the world, ie. the world is watching.....

He won't get away as lightly as you think.....

MadDog76 · 22-09-2018 11:01am

Dakota Dan wrote: »

You need to check out the meaning of violent assault it’s akin to assault and battery. Assault and battery. the culmination of a military attack, in which fighting takes place at close quarters.

Have you decided to make up your own definitions regardless of the legal definitions in context?

KevinCavan · 22-09-2018 11:01am

I’d imagine if the guards here could slap a few teenagers around, it would sort a lot of anti-social behaviour. Minors here from disadvantaged backgrounds have no fear of repurcussions, they have caused chaos on the luas and other railway lines, as they know the law is on their side.

CountingR · 22-09-2018 11:01am

iamwhoiam wrote: »

My thoughts on this and on your points is that I suspect many are simply sick to death of young people acting like this lad and no consequences at all being handed out . Personally speaking I do not agree with the drivers action but can understand provocation and frustration . Daily we hear about young lads( and girls too) running wild, causing damage , intimidating , taunting and nothing being done because they are " too young "

Only very recently I witnessed a group of boys aged about 12 or 13 standing behind a low wall along a road . I was in a traffic line and watched them .As a young woman or girl passed ( never a man or boy ) they would suddenly jump up with sticks and hit the girls while passing . My point is that even if I callled the Guards and they witnessed it nothing would actually happen to punish these lads . At one stage a middle aged man approached them and they laughed in his face and carried on .
That is only one episode of many such incidents seen and witnessed by people in this country and much much worse too . People in some parts of this country are being hounded out of houses by gangs of kids .

Daily I see small kids in a playground hitting others , pushing others and screaming like banshees if anyone dares ask them to be nice and kind . The parents stand by often and watch this enfold and see no reason to remove the offender from causing harm . And this continues into their youth

So it is understandable that frustrated people who see this in increasing incidences are really not going to get outraged at a man who in frustration lashed out .

You must agree that if we dont use the fist or slap as punishment then it must be replaced with an effective alternative ? Unfortunately for many young lads nothing replaced this and they carry on being disruptive and intimidating with no consequences or punishment . So now people are getting fed up of this behaviour and see a slap as a quick and maybe effective one to teach this kid to be less disrespectful .

Hiya think this is a good summary of how people feel.

However - it just doesn’t really make sense to me that people would think that you could solve a lifetime’s worth of bad disciplining by parents, by giving a child a smack across the face. If a child has been brought up with no proper boundaries, and it’s ingrained in them to be disrespectful etc., then unraveling that is going to be a lot more complicated than giving them a smack in the face. More likely they will just react really badly - and you’ll probably just create more violence at some point down the chain.

For example, what if that bus driver hit the 12 year old, and then on instinct the 12 year old and his friends all attacked the bus driver? And that’s a fairly credible scenario - I know a good few bus drivers, and I guarantee that most would not be getting out of their bus to approach a group of 12/13 year olds - because they know what would likely happen if they did. That’s the sad reality.

You can’t solve years of neglect with a slap to the face, no matter how much you feel like doing. You’ll likely just make the problem worse.

That’s not to say that everything you’ve said above isn’t a huge issue.. but we should probably be trying to look at how we improve parenting and discipline, and unravel those patterns of behaviour, rather than applauding when someone snaps, and lashes out in anger.

I just don’t get the cheers of support for the guy who lashes out - yet, it was at the 12 year old kid who is the product of a system, family and society that has created him - and no one seems interested in talking about how you change that system, the family and societal structures to alter this.

French bus driver slaps teenager for disrespect

Comments