Scots call for electronic monitoring of 8yo-excess crime

[Fern5827]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33257


Wednesday, June 25, 2003



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE …
8-year-olds face electronic tagging
High-tech monitoring proposed
for out-of-control pre-teens

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Posted: June 25, 2003
5:00 p.m. Eastern




--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
In an effort to crack down on an epidemic of youth crime, Scotland is
considering a proposal to electronically tag repeat offenders, possibly as
young as eight years old, the daily Scotsman reported.

Complaints about youth crime and anti-social behavior have been overwhelming,
says Margaret Curran, the Scottish Executive minister for communities.


Margaret Curran (photo: The Scotsman)

"We need to do what has to be done," she said. "If that's tough then that's
tough. We are not helping these young people at all if we don't try to deal
with their behavior."

Under the proposal, parents who fail to help impose tagging orders on their
out-of-control children will face fines and even jail, the Scotsman said.

In an interview on BBC Scotland's Politics Show, Curran said no specific age
would be stated in a consultation paper the Executive will submit on the issue.


However, when asked if children as young as 8 would be tagged, she replied:
"Some people might say that we should. Some people might say there should be a
higher age limit. I will take a view when we see the evidence."

The Scotsman reported Curran had confirmed 10 was the lowest age for tagging
being considered.

England and Wales already have tagged 4,000 pre-teens since 2001 with a device
that sends a signal to a transmitter in the offender's home and relays it to a
central control. Similar monitoring has been done in the U.S. for more than a
decade.

For the past year, Scottish courts have had the option of electronic tagging as
an alternative to prison but only for adult offenders.

Statistics from the Scottish Executive show a 34 percent increase in breaches
of the peace by juveniles since 1991.

"You get people coming in at 16 or 17 who are almost beyond redemption,
hardened criminals," Curran told the Scottish newspaper. "Or having engaged in
enough behavior to feel as if they're in a 'them and us' situation. We want to
introduce them to behavior modification at an earlier age."

Civil libertarians and child advocacy groups are wary of the proposal, however,
and some child psychologists insist the tags would become a "badge of honor"
for rebellious youth.

"What tagging does to kids is give them status," said Jack Boyle, who has
worked with older youths who have been tagged. "The only peers anti-social kids
have are other anti-social kids."

He added though, he understands the "government has to do something about this
minority who wreak havoc and misery."

"Tagging can have a short-term effect," he said. "It might keep them from
committing a crime, keep them away from certain areas or keep them in the
house."

The Scottish National Party's justice spokeswoman, Nicola Sturgeon, said
legislators must "ensure tagging is not a cheap alternative to solving
anti-social behavior."

"Children need to change by having their offending addressed, and they must
have the opportunity to do so instead of all cases resulting in electronic
tagging," she said, according to the Scottish Daily Record newspaper.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[billy f]

Why not just spanked their defiant little asses. I laugh every I read a
story like this. When are these so call experts going to wake up a realize
that these kids need discipline and tough love. Hopefully one day the will
see that kids who are brought up in a loving, but firm home are far less
likely to be repeated offenders. Parents all over the world are laughing
with me on this because they know that their children do not have these kind
of problems and know the reasons why. There is obviously more to than
spanking, but spanking does play a role.

"Fern5827" > wrote in message
...
> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33257
>
>
> Wednesday, June 25, 2003
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE .
> 8-year-olds face electronic tagging
> High-tech monitoring proposed
> for out-of-control pre-teens
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> Posted: June 25, 2003
> 5:00 p.m. Eastern
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
> In an effort to crack down on an epidemic of youth crime, Scotland is
> considering a proposal to electronically tag repeat offenders, possibly as
> young as eight years old, the daily Scotsman reported.
>
> Complaints about youth crime and anti-social behavior have been
overwhelming,
> says Margaret Curran, the Scottish Executive minister for communities.
>
>
> Margaret Curran (photo: The Scotsman)
>
> "We need to do what has to be done," she said. "If that's tough then
that's
> tough. We are not helping these young people at all if we don't try to
deal
> with their behavior."
>
> Under the proposal, parents who fail to help impose tagging orders on
their
> out-of-control children will face fines and even jail, the Scotsman said.
>
> In an interview on BBC Scotland's Politics Show, Curran said no specific
age
> would be stated in a consultation paper the Executive will submit on the
issue.
>
>
> However, when asked if children as young as 8 would be tagged, she
replied:
> "Some people might say that we should. Some people might say there should
be a
> higher age limit. I will take a view when we see the evidence."
>
> The Scotsman reported Curran had confirmed 10 was the lowest age for
tagging
> being considered.
>
> England and Wales already have tagged 4,000 pre-teens since 2001 with a
device
> that sends a signal to a transmitter in the offender's home and relays it
to a
> central control. Similar monitoring has been done in the U.S. for more
than a
> decade.
>
> For the past year, Scottish courts have had the option of electronic
tagging as
> an alternative to prison but only for adult offenders.
>
> Statistics from the Scottish Executive show a 34 percent increase in
breaches
> of the peace by juveniles since 1991.
>
> "You get people coming in at 16 or 17 who are almost beyond redemption,
> hardened criminals," Curran told the Scottish newspaper. "Or having
engaged in
> enough behavior to feel as if they're in a 'them and us' situation. We
want to
> introduce them to behavior modification at an earlier age."
>
> Civil libertarians and child advocacy groups are wary of the proposal,
however,
> and some child psychologists insist the tags would become a "badge of
honor"
> for rebellious youth.
>
> "What tagging does to kids is give them status," said Jack Boyle, who has
> worked with older youths who have been tagged. "The only peers anti-social
kids
> have are other anti-social kids."
>
> He added though, he understands the "government has to do something about
this
> minority who wreak havoc and misery."
>
> "Tagging can have a short-term effect," he said. "It might keep them from
> committing a crime, keep them away from certain areas or keep them in the
> house."
>
> The Scottish National Party's justice spokeswoman, Nicola Sturgeon, said
> legislators must "ensure tagging is not a cheap alternative to solving
> anti-social behavior."
>
> "Children need to change by having their offending addressed, and they
must
> have the opportunity to do so instead of all cases resulting in electronic
> tagging," she said, according to the Scottish Daily Record newspaper.
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
>
>

[Fern5827]

Bill, it is very lucrative to keep the industry alive which disempowers
parents.

Why, a whole industry is built upon the *experts* coming into a family to teach
them how to conduct themselves.

Some have declared it a "War against Parents."

Billy demonstrates the absurdity of the law enforcement industry taking over
parenting:

>Subject: Re: Scots call for electronic monitoring of 8yo-excess crime
>From: "billy f"
>Date: 7/11/2003 4:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Why not just spanked their defiant little asses. I laugh every I read a
>story like this. When are these so call experts going to wake up a realize
>that these kids need discipline and tough love. Hopefully one day the will
>see that kids who are brought up in a loving, but firm home are far less
>likely to be repeated offenders. Parents all over the world are laughing
>with me on this because they know that their children do not have these kind
>of problems and know the reasons why. There is obviously more to than
>spanking, but spanking does play a role.
>
>"Fern5827" > wrote in message
...
>> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33257
>>
>>
>> Wednesday, June 25, 2003
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>> YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE .
>> 8-year-olds face electronic tagging
>> High-tech monitoring proposed
>> for out-of-control pre-teens
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>> Posted: June 25, 2003
>> 5:00 p.m. Eastern
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>> © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
>> In an effort to crack down on an epidemic of youth crime, Scotland is
>> considering a proposal to electronically tag repeat offenders, possibly as
>> young as eight years old, the daily Scotsman reported.
>>
>> Complaints about youth crime and anti-social behavior have been
>overwhelming,
>> says Margaret Curran, the Scottish Executive minister for communities.
>>
>>
>> Margaret Curran (photo: The Scotsman)
>>
>> "We need to do what has to be done," she said. "If that's tough then
>that's
>> tough. We are not helping these young people at all if we don't try to
>deal
>> with their behavior."
>>
>> Under the proposal, parents who fail to help impose tagging orders on
>their
>> out-of-control children will face fines and even jail, the Scotsman said.
>>
>> In an interview on BBC Scotland's Politics Show, Curran said no specific
>age
>> would be stated in a consultation paper the Executive will submit on the
>issue.
>>
>>
>> However, when asked if children as young as 8 would be tagged, she
>replied:
>> "Some people might say that we should. Some people might say there should
>be a
>> higher age limit. I will take a view when we see the evidence."
>>
>> The Scotsman reported Curran had confirmed 10 was the lowest age for
>tagging
>> being considered.
>>
>> England and Wales already have tagged 4,000 pre-teens since 2001 with a
>device
>> that sends a signal to a transmitter in the offender's home and relays it
>to a
>> central control. Similar monitoring has been done in the U.S. for more
>than a
>> decade.
>>
>> For the past year, Scottish courts have had the option of electronic
>tagging as
>> an alternative to prison but only for adult offenders.
>>
>> Statistics from the Scottish Executive show a 34 percent increase in
>breaches
>> of the peace by juveniles since 1991.
>>
>> "You get people coming in at 16 or 17 who are almost beyond redemption,
>> hardened criminals," Curran told the Scottish newspaper. "Or having
>engaged in
>> enough behavior to feel as if they're in a 'them and us' situation. We
>want to
>> introduce them to behavior modification at an earlier age."
>>
>> Civil libertarians and child advocacy groups are wary of the proposal,
>however,
>> and some child psychologists insist the tags would become a "badge of
>honor"
>> for rebellious youth.
>>
>> "What tagging does to kids is give them status," said Jack Boyle, who has
>> worked with older youths who have been tagged. "The only peers anti-social
>kids
>> have are other anti-social kids."
>>
>> He added though, he understands the "government has to do something about
>this
>> minority who wreak havoc and misery."
>>
>> "Tagging can have a short-term effect," he said. "It might keep them from
>> committing a crime, keep them away from certain areas or keep them in the
>> house."
>>
>> The Scottish National Party's justice spokeswoman, Nicola Sturgeon, said
>> legislators must "ensure tagging is not a cheap alternative to solving
>> anti-social behavior."
>>
>> "Children need to change by having their offending addressed, and they
>must
>> have the opportunity to do so instead of all cases resulting in electronic
>> tagging," she said, according to the Scottish Daily Record newspaper.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>------
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Frank Bloater]

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 08:35:01 GMT, "billy f" >
wrote:

Parents all over the world are laughing
>with me on this because they know that their children do not have these kind
>of problems.

Don't OVER estimate how many people read this newsgroup, billy!!!!

Frank Bloater ;->

[LaVonne Carlson]

billy f wrote:

> Why not just spanked their defiant little asses.

How do you know these children had not been spanked? I didn't see anything in
the article below indicating anything about spanking?

> I laugh every I read a
> story like this. When are these so call experts going to wake up a realize
> that these kids need discipline and tough love.

I laugh every time I read a post from someone who associates disciplinary
problems with lack of spanking, especially when responding to an article that
gave no reason for drawing that conclusion.

I cry when I read posts from individuals that have such limited understanding
of parenting that they cannot imagine discipline and tough love without
spanking.

> Hopefully one day the will
> see that kids who are brought up in a loving, but firm home are far less
> likely to be repeated offenders

Children who are hit and hurt in the name of discipline are far more likely to
be first and second juvenile offenders than are children who are raised in
loving but firm homes. Thank you for making my point, billy.

> . Parents all over the world are laughing
> with me on this because they know that their children do not have these kind
> of problems and know the reasons why. There is obviously more to than
> spanking, but spanking does play a role.

If there is a role, you have failed to provide the link. You rail about lack
of spanking regarding the youth in Scotland, yet there is nothing in the post
indicating anything about spanking. You advocate a firm and loving home, as we
all do, and then you assume that firm and loving homes must include spanking.

Children need firm and loving homes. Children do not need to be hit and hurt
in the name of discipline. One can have a firm and loving home without
spanking. If you cannot imagine firmness without hitting a child, please learn
something about parenting. If you think hitting is love, please learn
something. It's hard to find a child in the juvenile system that hasn't been
spanked! Wonder why that is?

LaVonne

>
>
> "Fern5827" > wrote in message
> ...
> > http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33257
> >
> >
> > Wednesday, June 25, 2003
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> > YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE .
> > 8-year-olds face electronic tagging
> > High-tech monitoring proposed
> > for out-of-control pre-teens
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> > Posted: June 25, 2003
> > 5:00 p.m. Eastern
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> > © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
> > In an effort to crack down on an epidemic of youth crime, Scotland is
> > considering a proposal to electronically tag repeat offenders, possibly as
> > young as eight years old, the daily Scotsman reported.
> >
> > Complaints about youth crime and anti-social behavior have been
> overwhelming,
> > says Margaret Curran, the Scottish Executive minister for communities.
> >
> >
> > Margaret Curran (photo: The Scotsman)
> >
> > "We need to do what has to be done," she said. "If that's tough then
> that's
> > tough. We are not helping these young people at all if we don't try to
> deal
> > with their behavior."
> >
> > Under the proposal, parents who fail to help impose tagging orders on
> their
> > out-of-control children will face fines and even jail, the Scotsman said.
> >
> > In an interview on BBC Scotland's Politics Show, Curran said no specific
> age
> > would be stated in a consultation paper the Executive will submit on the
> issue.
> >
> >
> > However, when asked if children as young as 8 would be tagged, she
> replied:
> > "Some people might say that we should. Some people might say there should
> be a
> > higher age limit. I will take a view when we see the evidence."
> >
> > The Scotsman reported Curran had confirmed 10 was the lowest age for
> tagging
> > being considered.
> >
> > England and Wales already have tagged 4,000 pre-teens since 2001 with a
> device
> > that sends a signal to a transmitter in the offender's home and relays it
> to a
> > central control. Similar monitoring has been done in the U.S. for more
> than a
> > decade.
> >
> > For the past year, Scottish courts have had the option of electronic
> tagging as
> > an alternative to prison but only for adult offenders.
> >
> > Statistics from the Scottish Executive show a 34 percent increase in
> breaches
> > of the peace by juveniles since 1991.
> >
> > "You get people coming in at 16 or 17 who are almost beyond redemption,
> > hardened criminals," Curran told the Scottish newspaper. "Or having
> engaged in
> > enough behavior to feel as if they're in a 'them and us' situation. We
> want to
> > introduce them to behavior modification at an earlier age."
> >
> > Civil libertarians and child advocacy groups are wary of the proposal,
> however,
> > and some child psychologists insist the tags would become a "badge of
> honor"
> > for rebellious youth.
> >
> > "What tagging does to kids is give them status," said Jack Boyle, who has
> > worked with older youths who have been tagged. "The only peers anti-social
> kids
> > have are other anti-social kids."
> >
> > He added though, he understands the "government has to do something about
> this
> > minority who wreak havoc and misery."
> >
> > "Tagging can have a short-term effect," he said. "It might keep them from
> > committing a crime, keep them away from certain areas or keep them in the
> > house."
> >
> > The Scottish National Party's justice spokeswoman, Nicola Sturgeon, said
> > legislators must "ensure tagging is not a cheap alternative to solving
> > anti-social behavior."
> >
> > "Children need to change by having their offending addressed, and they
> must
> > have the opportunity to do so instead of all cases resulting in electronic
> > tagging," she said, according to the Scottish Daily Record newspaper.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> >
> >

[LaVonne Carlson]

Fern5827 wrote:

> Bill, it is very lucrative to keep the industry alive which disempowers
> parents.

No Fern, it is not lucrative. If the system was lucrative, there would be no
reason for the massive budget cuts now being experienced in education, in health
care, and in social services.

> Why, a whole industry is built upon the *experts* coming into a family to teach
> them how to conduct themselves.

And what planet are you from? Yes, there are trained individuals who may meet
with families to help them resolve their issues and be better parents.
Unfortunately, this was never adequately funded, and the funding is now cut even
more. If this was lucrative, I'd imagine a huge increase in those services,
wouldn't you?

After all, the US is facing a huge deficit, and some predict worse than in the
30's. Why decrease programs that are lucrative?

LaVonne

[Kane]

Doan > wrote in message >...

Snipping the pottage..............


> >
> Simple! Because spanking is almost universal! It is hard to find a
> senator or a congressman that hasn't been spanked! Can you name a
> non-spanked Nobel Laureate? ;-)
>
> Doan

Sure.

I don't think Elie Wiesel was.

Don't know if these following guys were unspanked or not, but they
sure as are against it, and a few of them laureates:

James Prescott, Ph.D., wrote the "Ashley Montagu Resolution" in 1994.
Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1962) and discoverer of
the structure of the DNA molecule, endorsed the Montagu Resolution in
1995, along with Dr. Jonas Salk and many others.

Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1967) and discoverer of
vitamin A in the retina of the eye and how it works there with light
to form the molecular basis of vision, was also a strong defender of
the human right to bodily integrity.

You might look up the Ashley Montagu Resolution. It'll make you cry.

If you can.........

You think your a smart ass with your questions that can't be answered
don't you?

Just how many people that haven't been spanked would even bother to
mention it? Millions of people haven't been spanked, they just haven't
a reason to mention it.

ON the other hand, those that have been report it a lot. I wonder why
that is?

Could be we tend to talk about the negative more than the positive.

Kane

[billy f]

Law enforcement should not be taking over parenting. They should however
help those that are unable to handle their children, but I think their
approach is a little off.
"Fern5827" > wrote in message
...
> Bill, it is very lucrative to keep the industry alive which disempowers
> parents.
>
> Why, a whole industry is built upon the *experts* coming into a family to
teach
> them how to conduct themselves.
>
> Some have declared it a "War against Parents."
>
> Billy demonstrates the absurdity of the law enforcement industry taking
over
> parenting:
>
> >Subject: Re: Scots call for electronic monitoring of 8yo-excess crime
> >From: "billy f"
> >Date: 7/11/2003 4:35 AM Eastern Daylight Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >Why not just spanked their defiant little asses. I laugh every I read a
> >story like this. When are these so call experts going to wake up a
realize
> >that these kids need discipline and tough love. Hopefully one day the
will
> >see that kids who are brought up in a loving, but firm home are far less
> >likely to be repeated offenders. Parents all over the world are laughing
> >with me on this because they know that their children do not have these
kind
> >of problems and know the reasons why. There is obviously more to than
> >spanking, but spanking does play a role.
> >
> >"Fern5827" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33257
> >>
> >>
> >> Wednesday, June 25, 2003
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >> ------
> >>
>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >> ------
> >> YOUR PAPERS, PLEASE .
> >> 8-year-olds face electronic tagging
> >> High-tech monitoring proposed
> >> for out-of-control pre-teens
> >>
>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >> ------
> >> Posted: June 25, 2003
> >> 5:00 p.m. Eastern
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >> ------
> >> © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
> >> In an effort to crack down on an epidemic of youth crime, Scotland is
> >> considering a proposal to electronically tag repeat offenders, possibly
as
> >> young as eight years old, the daily Scotsman reported.
> >>
> >> Complaints about youth crime and anti-social behavior have been
> >overwhelming,
> >> says Margaret Curran, the Scottish Executive minister for communities.
> >>
> >>
> >> Margaret Curran (photo: The Scotsman)
> >>
> >> "We need to do what has to be done," she said. "If that's tough then
> >that's
> >> tough. We are not helping these young people at all if we don't try to
> >deal
> >> with their behavior."
> >>
> >> Under the proposal, parents who fail to help impose tagging orders on
> >their
> >> out-of-control children will face fines and even jail, the Scotsman
said.
> >>
> >> In an interview on BBC Scotland's Politics Show, Curran said no
specific
> >age
> >> would be stated in a consultation paper the Executive will submit on
the
> >issue.
> >>
> >>
> >> However, when asked if children as young as 8 would be tagged, she
> >replied:
> >> "Some people might say that we should. Some people might say there
should
> >be a
> >> higher age limit. I will take a view when we see the evidence."
> >>
> >> The Scotsman reported Curran had confirmed 10 was the lowest age for
> >tagging
> >> being considered.
> >>
> >> England and Wales already have tagged 4,000 pre-teens since 2001 with a
> >device
> >> that sends a signal to a transmitter in the offender's home and relays
it
> >to a
> >> central control. Similar monitoring has been done in the U.S. for more
> >than a
> >> decade.
> >>
> >> For the past year, Scottish courts have had the option of electronic
> >tagging as
> >> an alternative to prison but only for adult offenders.
> >>
> >> Statistics from the Scottish Executive show a 34 percent increase in
> >breaches
> >> of the peace by juveniles since 1991.
> >>
> >> "You get people coming in at 16 or 17 who are almost beyond redemption,
> >> hardened criminals," Curran told the Scottish newspaper. "Or having
> >engaged in
> >> enough behavior to feel as if they're in a 'them and us' situation. We
> >want to
> >> introduce them to behavior modification at an earlier age."
> >>
> >> Civil libertarians and child advocacy groups are wary of the proposal,
> >however,
> >> and some child psychologists insist the tags would become a "badge of
> >honor"
> >> for rebellious youth.
> >>
> >> "What tagging does to kids is give them status," said Jack Boyle, who
has
> >> worked with older youths who have been tagged. "The only peers
anti-social
> >kids
> >> have are other anti-social kids."
> >>
> >> He added though, he understands the "government has to do something
about
> >this
> >> minority who wreak havoc and misery."
> >>
> >> "Tagging can have a short-term effect," he said. "It might keep them
from
> >> committing a crime, keep them away from certain areas or keep them in
the
> >> house."
> >>
> >> The Scottish National Party's justice spokeswoman, Nicola Sturgeon,
said
> >> legislators must "ensure tagging is not a cheap alternative to solving
> >> anti-social behavior."
> >>
> >> "Children need to change by having their offending addressed, and they
> >must
> >> have the opportunity to do so instead of all cases resulting in
electronic
> >> tagging," she said, according to the Scottish Daily Record newspaper.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >------
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

[Doan]

On 14 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

> Doan > wrote in message >...
>
> Snipping the pottage..............
>
>
> > >
> > Simple! Because spanking is almost universal! It is hard to find a
> > senator or a congressman that hasn't been spanked! Can you name a
> > non-spanked Nobel Laureate? ;-)
> >
> > Doan
>
> Sure.
>
> I don't think Elie Wiesel was.
>
> Don't know if these following guys were unspanked or not, but they
> sure as are against it, and a few of them laureates:
>
In short, you don't know jack! Being against spanking is not the same
as being unspanked. Just ask Chris and LaVonne, they are against but
were beaten as children!

> James Prescott, Ph.D., wrote the "Ashley Montagu Resolution" in 1994.
> Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1962) and discoverer of
> the structure of the DNA molecule, endorsed the Montagu Resolution in
> 1995, along with Dr. Jonas Salk and many others.
>
Irrelevant!

> Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1967) and discoverer of
> vitamin A in the retina of the eye and how it works there with light
> to form the molecular basis of vision, was also a strong defender of
> the human right to bodily integrity.
>
Irrelevant!

> You might look up the Ashley Montagu Resolution. It'll make you cry.
>
> If you can.........
>
> You think your a smart ass with your questions that can't be answered
> don't you?
>
Of course! And you still can't answer it! ;-)

> Just how many people that haven't been spanked would even bother to
> mention it? Millions of people haven't been spanked, they just haven't
> a reason to mention it.
>
And your prove is???

> ON the other hand, those that have been report it a lot. I wonder why
> that is?
>
> Could be we tend to talk about the negative more than the positive.
>
Then why did you claimed to be "never-spanked"??? ;-)

Doan

[Kane]

Doan > wrote in message >...
> On 14 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:
>
> > Doan > wrote in message >...
> >
> > Snipping the pottage..............
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > Simple! Because spanking is almost universal! It is hard to find a
> > > senator or a congressman that hasn't been spanked! Can you name a
> > > non-spanked Nobel Laureate? ;-)
> > >
> > > Doan
> >
> > Sure.
> >
> > I don't think Elie Wiesel was.
> >
> > Don't know if these following guys were unspanked or not, but they
> > sure as are against it, and a few of them laureates:
> >
> In short, you don't know jack!

Ah, but I do know Doan...r r r r

> Being against spanking is not the same
> as being unspanked. Just ask Chris and LaVonne, they are against but
> were beaten as children!

As I mentioned in the previous reply to your question, it was a stupid
question. People that are spanked often report it, either out of the
negative trauma it created, or out of defense of their abusers from
trauma bonding effects.

People who haven't been spanked don't even think to mention it. I've
read many a biography that had no mention of it at all, while in
others it was a central theme in some sections of their writing, and
it had the one of the two characteristics I mentioned above.

>
> > James Prescott, Ph.D., wrote the "Ashley Montagu Resolution" in 1994.
> > Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1962) and discoverer of
> > the structure of the DNA molecule, endorsed the Montagu Resolution in
> > 1995, along with Dr. Jonas Salk and many others.
> >
> Irrelevant!

No, Doan. YOU are irrelevant and I enjoy engaging you so people can
see just how irrelevant you are.

> > Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1967) and discoverer of
> > vitamin A in the retina of the eye and how it works there with light
> > to form the molecular basis of vision, was also a strong defender of
> > the human right to bodily integrity.
> >
> Irrelevant!

No, Doan, the point is you don't know if they were spanked or not.

I've been waiting patiently for this. Please provide us with the names
of Nobel Laureates that have been spanked, and prove it.

> > You might look up the Ashley Montagu Resolution. It'll make you cry.
> >
> > If you can.........

Passed right by it, eh? Now that is a case for your irrelevance if
ever I've seen it.

I love it when you set here claiming someone like LaVonne hasn't
answered your challenge because of some inability to do so. She may be
gone, she may think you are too funny for words, or she may think you
are irrelevant and crasy as a loon...who knows, but your assumptions
are comic.

> > You think your a smart ass with your questions that can't be answered
> > don't you?
> >
> Of course! And you still can't answer it! ;-)

And that is relevant how, given the question has no value since it
asks nothing that can be answered?

> > Just how many people that haven't been spanked would even bother to
> > mention it? Millions of people haven't been spanked, they just haven't
> > a reason to mention it.
> >
> And your prove is???

Opps! Walked right into it, didn't you? r r r r r

10 percent of the population, according to YOUR claims, has not been
spanked, or has made no claim one way or another. What's 10% of the
population of the US please?

Could it be in the millions?

>
> > ON the other hand, those that have been report it a lot. I wonder why
> > that is?
> >
> > Could be we tend to talk about the negative more than the positive.
> >
> Then why did you claimed to be "never-spanked"??? ;-)

I said that, did I? Can you provide a cite? Someone must be posting
under my handle and addy. I've never discussed it one way or another.

I have discussed my two children, who, except for one highly
educational swat on the butt to one kid when he was five, were not
spanked, and for that matter not punished deliberately. They were
taught. Turned out fantastic, if I say so myself. Very successful and
independent, law abiding, productive, and jolly good fun to be around.

By the way, the educational part that came out of that one swat was
not my child's education, but rather, MINE. He obeyed me immediately,
when he shouldn't have. He got an immediate apology and a promise, and
he never once in his whole childhood or later, ever took advantage of
the fact he had my promise he'd never be hit again.

> Doan

Poor little puppy. Sit up and beg for us Doan, there's a good boy.

Kane

[Doan]

On 16 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:

> Doan > wrote in message >...
> > On 14 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:
> >
> > > Doan > wrote in message >...
> > >
> > > Snipping the pottage..............
> > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > Simple! Because spanking is almost universal! It is hard to find a
> > > > senator or a congressman that hasn't been spanked! Can you name a
> > > > non-spanked Nobel Laureate? ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Doan
> > >
> > > Sure.
> > >
> > > I don't think Elie Wiesel was.
> > >
> > > Don't know if these following guys were unspanked or not, but they
> > > sure as are against it, and a few of them laureates:
> > >
> > In short, you don't know jack!
>
> Ah, but I do know Doan...r r r r
>
LOL! That is what you think!

> > Being against spanking is not the same
> > as being unspanked. Just ask Chris and LaVonne, they are against but
> > were beaten as children!
>
> As I mentioned in the previous reply to your question, it was a stupid
> question. People that are spanked often report it, either out of the
> negative trauma it created, or out of defense of their abusers from
> trauma bonding effects.
>
Load of craps! :-)

> People who haven't been spanked don't even think to mention it. I've
> read many a biography that had no mention of it at all, while in
> others it was a central theme in some sections of their writing, and
> it had the one of the two characteristics I mentioned above.
>
More load of craps! ;-)

> >
> > > James Prescott, Ph.D., wrote the "Ashley Montagu Resolution" in 1994.
> > > Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1962) and discoverer of
> > > the structure of the DNA molecule, endorsed the Montagu Resolution in
> > > 1995, along with Dr. Jonas Salk and many others.
> > >
> > Irrelevant!
>
> No, Doan. YOU are irrelevant and I enjoy engaging you so people can
> see just how irrelevant you are.
>
LOL!

> > > Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1967) and discoverer of
> > > vitamin A in the retina of the eye and how it works there with light
> > > to form the molecular basis of vision, was also a strong defender of
> > > the human right to bodily integrity.
> > >
> > Irrelevant!
>
> No, Doan, the point is you don't know if they were spanked or not.
>
Actually I do. Simple probability!

> I've been waiting patiently for this. Please provide us with the names
> of Nobel Laureates that have been spanked, and prove it.
>
I don't have to since I am not stupid enough to say spanking/no-spanking
has anything to do with being a Nobel Laureates! Got it? ;-)

> > > You might look up the Ashley Montagu Resolution. It'll make you cry.
> > >
> > > If you can.........
>
> Passed right by it, eh? Now that is a case for your irrelevance if
> ever I've seen it.
>
> I love it when you set here claiming someone like LaVonne hasn't
> answered your challenge because of some inability to do so. She may be
> gone, she may think you are too funny for words, or she may think you
> are irrelevant and crasy as a loon...who knows, but your assumptions
> are comic.
>
Why don't you asked her? ;-)

> > > You think your a smart ass with your questions that can't be answered
> > > don't you?
> > >
> > Of course! And you still can't answer it! ;-)
>
> And that is relevant how, given the question has no value since it
> asks nothing that can be answered?
>
You figure it out! ;-)

> > > Just how many people that haven't been spanked would even bother to
> > > mention it? Millions of people haven't been spanked, they just haven't
> > > a reason to mention it.
> > >
> > And your prove is???
>
> Opps! Walked right into it, didn't you? r r r r r
>
> 10 percent of the population, according to YOUR claims, has not been
> spanked, or has made no claim one way or another. What's 10% of the
> population of the US please?
>
> Could it be in the millions?
>
And how you know they haven't mention it? Did you talk to them? And
how did this fit into a study by anti-spanker that show 98% of college
freshmen were spanked? Is non-spanker not making it to college? ;-)

> >
> > > ON the other hand, those that have been report it a lot. I wonder why
> > > that is?
> > >
> > > Could be we tend to talk about the negative more than the positive.
> > >
> > Then why did you claimed to be "never-spanked"??? ;-)
>
> I said that, did I? Can you provide a cite? Someone must be posting
> under my handle and addy. I've never discussed it one way or another.
>
So by your claim above, you were never-spanked? ;-) C'mon, Kane9!
You are flip-flopping! Can't even keep your story straight? Sounded
like "La Moron"!!! ;-)

> I have discussed my two children, who, except for one highly
> educational swat on the butt to one kid when he was five, were not
> spanked, and for that matter not punished deliberately. They were
> taught. Turned out fantastic, if I say so myself. Very successful and
> independent, law abiding, productive, and jolly good fun to be around.
>
So one kid was spanked and one was not, both turned out successful.
Thanks for making my case - spanking/non-spanking has nothing to
do with it!

> By the way, the educational part that came out of that one swat was
> not my child's education, but rather, MINE. He obeyed me immediately,
> when he shouldn't have. He got an immediate apology and a promise, and
> he never once in his whole childhood or later, ever took advantage of
> the fact he had my promise he'd never be hit again.
>
> > Doan
>
> Poor little puppy. Sit up and beg for us Doan, there's a good boy.
>
And the little puppy is Kane9! So what is his mom? ;-)

Doan

[Kane]

From: Doan ) Subject: Re: Scots call for electronic
monitoring of
8yo-excess crime
View: Complete Thread (12 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: alt.parenting.spanking Date: 2003-07-17 07:02:24 PST
On 16 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:
>
> > Doan > wrote in message
> >...
> > > On 14 Jul 2003, Kane wrote:
> > >
> > > > Doan > wrote in message
> >...
> > > >
> > > > Snipping the pottage..............
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > Simple! Because spanking is almost universal! It is hard to find a
> > > > > senator or a congressman that hasn't been spanked! Can you name a
> > > > > non-spanked Nobel Laureate? ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Doan
> > > >
> > > > Sure.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think Elie Wiesel was.
> > > >
> > > > Don't know if these following guys were unspanked or not, but they
> > > > sure as are against it, and a few of them laureates:
> > > >
> > > In short, you don't know jack!
> >
> > Ah, but I do know Doan...r r r r
> >
> LOL! That is what you think!

Yep. That is exactly what I think. I once was paid to know you.
rrrrrrr

> > > Being against spanking is not the same
> > > as being unspanked. Just ask Chris and LaVonne, they are against but
> > > were beaten as children!
> >
> > As I mentioned in the previous reply to your question, it was a stupid
> > question. People that are spanked often report it, either out of the
> > negative trauma it created, or out of defense of their abusers from
> > trauma bonding effects.
> >
> Load of craps! :-)

You are free to provide any proof you wish to support your claim of it
being
a "Load of craps! :-)"

We'll wait.

And do a lookup on Stockholm Syndrom, and trauma bonding before you
make an
even larger foolish puppy out of youself.

> > People who haven't been spanked don't even think to mention it. I've
> > read many a biography that had no mention of it at all, while in
> > others it was a central theme in some sections of their writing, and
> > it had the one of the two characteristics I mentioned above.
> >
> More load of craps! ;-)

Obviously you are poorly read, and you have demonstrated repeatedly
what you
think are your "debates" with Chris, or LaVonne, how well you
understand what
you read. Care to show us how what I said is "More load of craps! ;-)"

> > >
> > > > James Prescott, Ph.D., wrote the "Ashley Montagu Resolution" in 1994.
> > > > Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1962) and discoverer of
> > > > the structure of the DNA molecule, endorsed the Montagu Resolution in
> > > > 1995, along with Dr. Jonas Salk and many others.
> > > >
> > > Irrelevant!
> >
> > No, Doan. YOU are irrelevant and I enjoy engaging you so people can
> > see just how irrelevant you are.
> >
> LOL!

Glad to bring any little ray of sunship into an obviously dark and
sordid
life.

> > > > Dr. George Wald, Nobel Laureate in Medicine (1967) and discoverer of
> > > > vitamin A in the retina of the eye and how it works there with light
> > > > to form the molecular basis of vision, was also a strong defender of
> > > > the human right to bodily integrity.
> > > >
> > > Irrelevant!
> >
> > No, Doan, the point is you don't know if they were spanked or not.
> >
> Actually I do. Simple probability!

Actually you don't. Probabality will tell you a trend, not the facts
in any
single instance...such as a person's life. You don't know if any of
these
people were spanked or not. Probably will only tell you the
probability, not the definative answer one way or another. You going
on probability are you? Figgers.

In fact, knowing what I know I could make the same silly claim, if I
were as stupid as you....I know by actual examples, from people I know
personally, (no "probability to it) that are at the top of their
profession or art that the great majority were NOT spanked, or in fact
came from a punishment oriented family.

I also know that there is a very high incident of folks in prison and
mental
health establishments that report coming from a punative family life.
Take it
or leave it.

> > I've been waiting patiently for this. Please provide us with the names
> > of Nobel Laureates that have been spanked, and prove it.
> >
> I don't have to since I am not stupid enough to say spanking/no-spanking
> has anything to do with being a Nobel Laureates! Got it? ;-)

Apparently you are stupid enough to ask someone else to answer the
question
about Nobel Laureates who weren't spanked as though their failure to
do so was
some evidence that you are correct.

So why did you ask about it if you aren't stupid enough to try and a
connection?

> > > > You might look up the Ashley Montagu Resolution. It'll make you cry.
> > > >
> > > > If you can.........
> >
> > Passed right by it, eh? Now that is a case for your irrelevance if
> > ever I've seen it.

Still not going to read the Ashley Montagu Resolution, and respond
with some of your brilliance, eh?

> >
> > I love it when you set here claiming someone like LaVonne hasn't
> > answered your challenge because of some inability to do so. She may be
> > gone, she may think you are too funny for words, or she may think you
> > are irrelevant and crasy as a loon...who knows, but your assumptions
> > are comic.
> >
> Why don't you asked her? ;-)

I've barely enough time for you. I don't need to question or even
discuss issues much with people that already agree with me in
principle.

She can take care of herself quite nicely. She's made a fool of
you...well, you helped a great deal, repeatedly in this ng.

> > > > You think your a smart ass with your questions that can't be answered
> > > > don't you?
> > > >
> > > Of course! And you still can't answer it! ;-)
> >
> > And that is relevant how, given the question has no value since it
> > asks nothing that can be answered?
> >
> You figure it out! ;-)

Yep. Sure have. :-]

You are a damaged hapless fool that was spanked in childhood damaging
your psyche to the point you just have to defend folks right to spank.
You couldn't possibly acknowledge what your folks did to you. And
certainly not publically.

I think folks should keep an eye on you around water towers. You might
get a hankerin' to climb.

> > > > Just how many people that haven't been spanked would even bother to
> > > > mention it? Millions of people haven't been spanked, they just haven't
> > > > a reason to mention it.
> > > >
> > > And your prove is???
> >
> > Opps! Walked right into it, didn't you? r r r r r
> >
> > 10 percent of the population, according to YOUR claims, has not been
> > spanked, or has made no claim one way or another. What's 10% of the
> > population of the US please?
> >
> > Could it be in the millions?
> >
> And how you know they haven't mention it?

I don't know that.

How could I.

I don't recall claiming they did. In fact I claim it's unlikely, as,
not being spanked, to the unspanked, is nothing remarkable. They were
far too busy proceeding, without the savage interuption of such
treatment, with their lives.

> Did you talk to them?

No. I have no such capacity to talk to 10% (or even 2% you claimed
didn't report being spanked) of the US population even if I could
locate them. The number came from the remainder in your claim of 90%
having been spanked. But 2% of the population is still in the
millions, as I claimed.

So, what is the relevance of your question, "Did I talk to them"?

By the way, if you don't start answering my questions try not to be
surprized when I give up even replying to you. It's pointless to have
a debate with someone that backs off the questions asked. I make it a
practice to answer each of your claims, comments, and questions when
it is at all possible to do so. I even answer the impossible by
pointing out your total lack of wit.

> And
> how did this fit into a study by anti-spanker that show 98% of college
> freshmen were spanked? Is non-spanker not making it to college? ;-)

Oh, now it's 98% of self reporteres. By the way, which study was this,
a
cite please, with source. We'll see if you lie, as usual. Or you use
the old self reporting "study" that of course is slanted.

And why would I want to fit anything into a "survey" that was not
really a study at all, eh?

> > >
> > > > ON the other hand, those that have been report it a lot. I wonder why
> > > > that is?
> > > >
> > > > Could be we tend to talk about the negative more than the positive.
> > > >
> > > Then why did you claimed to be "never-spanked"??? ;-)
> >
> > I said that, did I? Can you provide a cite? Someone must be posting
> > under my handle and addy. I've never discussed it one way or another.
> >
> So by your claim above, you were never-spanked? ;-)

What in the sentence "I've never discussed it one way or another"
indicates to you that I was never-spanked, or spanked? You do have an
odd way with the language. Would you prefer to converse in your first
language?

I don't recall making a claim one way or another.

> C'mon, Kane9!
> You are flip-flopping!

Come on little silly puppy, you are despritely thrashing about trying
to avoid the truth.

> Can't even keep your story straight?

Always have. You are free to point out where I haven't, but you will
have to do better than to project your understanding, such as it is,
into my language.

> Sounded
> like "La Moron"!!! ;-)

No one "sounded" like anyone else. This isn't an aural communication.
You could say my words looked like someone elses, but not that they
sound like. By the way, your little english less for today. "Like"
means to like something, not similar to or even "alike" something.

It would have been more correct to say, if I understand correctly your
impotent attempt to make a funny or rude comment, "Kane, your words
are similar to LaVonne's!!!", assuming you were referring to her.
Though the redundant "!" is akin to shouting the same thing three
times. Pointless, as you are.

All you have to do to prove your claim is to post evidence I made such
a statement of being never spanked, or spanked. I'm curious where and
how I might
have done that, having no memory of having done so. You'll probably
find, as you so often do, something entirely out of context and claim
it was mine. Go ahead.

Are you trying to ask me if I was spanked or not? Why the circular ...
oh, wait. My apology. I know why you can't ask a direct question.
Never mind.

> > I have discussed my two children, who, except for one highly
> > educational swat on the butt to one kid when he was five, were not
> > spanked, and for that matter not punished deliberately. They were
> > taught. Turned out fantastic, if I say so myself. Very successful and
> > independent, law abiding, productive, and jolly good fun to be around.
> >
> So one kid was spanked and one was not, both turned out successful.
> Thanks for making my case - spanking/non-spanking has nothing to do with it!

You have no "case" except the one you carry your macroencephalic head
around in.

Apparently you didn't read the following paragraph before you declared
yourself the winner.

I chose to, had to really for ethical reasons and the good mental
health of my child, do some repairs before "both turned out
successful," which included a
promise of NO SPANK for him for life and my most heartfelt apology.
And some time listening supportively to the reason he was being fussy.
A reminder to listen to the child and his needs instead of focusing on
controlling the child....like you silly assholes do.

Are you really going to try and claim that because a child received an
uncalled for (at least in my value system) light swat on the butt a
"spanked"
kid?

Now I see what's up. You got spanked way too far up your back.

> > By the way, the educational part that came out of that one swat was
> > not my child's education, but rather, MINE. He obeyed me immediately,
> > when he shouldn't have. He got an immediate apology and a promise, and
> > he never once in his whole childhood or later, ever took advantage of
> > the fact he had my promise he'd never be hit again.
>

Gee, no response? I thought so. Figgers.

> > > Doan
> >
> > Poor little puppy. Sit up and beg for us Doan, there's a good boy.
> >
> And the little puppy is Kane9! So what is his mom? ;-)

makuahine

How long has english been your second language?

> Doan...

The son of a me thit cho
.....


Kane

[Kane]

Doan > wrote in message >...

sni..........................................p


I'm sorry. I was going to let this go and not comment, but frankly I'm
feeling vunerable and weak today. My willpower has failed me....r r r
r r r

Doan asks the brilliant question in reparte:

> Simple! Because spanking is almost universal! It is hard to find a
> senator or a congressman that hasn't been spanked!

These are your examples of the quality of character, intelligence, and
honesty in favor of spanking?

Oh puuuuuleeeeeezzzzzzzzzzz....

> Can you name a
> non-spanked Nobel Laureate? ;-)

Can you name a spanked one?

I asked before and I notice you haven't answered. Don't you have a
thing about people not answering your questions? r r r r r, as if
they haven't been answered time and time again with you refusing to
even see the words in front of you.

Could it be you are hysterically blind? wait, don't answer that
question. How could I be so silly as to ask a blind man to answer a
written question.

I guess I can assume that when YOU don't answer....r r r ... rrrr
hehehe...

> Doan ...

.... his mother's pup.

Kane

sni...........p