Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. 22:22 - Oct 19 with 50733 viewsSpruceMoose

Look out for the bloke holding a kid.


Pronouns: He/Him/His. "Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country."
Poll: Selectamod

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:26 - Oct 20 with 7170 viewssparks

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:22 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

So you kind of agree then. All I'm saying is that with the gradual drift to the right don't be surprised to wake up one day to find child 'welfare' experts removing children from parents that maybe aren't quite thinking 'clearly' enough !
Similar reasons for not consenting to the surveillance society and erosion of civil liberties really. Not to worry though I'm sure it will never happen.


Happily, our society does not back away from getting involved in child welfare in response to such silly tinfoil hattery.

It is absolutely proper and good in a civilised society, that the state has mechanisms in place to try to assist the frightening number of children being physically or emotionally damaged daily by the environments they find themselves in.

Those mechanisms, whilst administered by humans and therefore inevitably imperfect, are measured, careful and accountable. The idea that some "expert" could simply have a bad day and waltz in to remove children is absurd and shows you know very little about the processes in question.

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:32 - Oct 20 with 7150 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:17 - Oct 20 by Darth_Koont

Eh? Why wouldn't they substantiate the assumptions about the home life?

Also, this is evidence of child neglect/abuse in itself. No assumptions needed.


On first reading of one of your comments I incorrectly interpreted it as implying that you worked in child care, in which case I would have been concerned at the presumptions you made in the first comment in this thread. Thankfully it appears that you are not.

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:39 - Oct 20 with 7131 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:26 - Oct 20 by sparks

Happily, our society does not back away from getting involved in child welfare in response to such silly tinfoil hattery.

It is absolutely proper and good in a civilised society, that the state has mechanisms in place to try to assist the frightening number of children being physically or emotionally damaged daily by the environments they find themselves in.

Those mechanisms, whilst administered by humans and therefore inevitably imperfect, are measured, careful and accountable. The idea that some "expert" could simply have a bad day and waltz in to remove children is absurd and shows you know very little about the processes in question.


One man's "tin foil hat" is another man's Trump ! In relation to the rest it seems a shame that the state doesn't resource doing the job well so that the end results are so appalling and also that the children of certain classes are so much more visible than others.
Also you don't half come across as smug ! (just saying). I know more than you might imagine !

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:41 - Oct 20 with 7104 viewsDarth_Koont

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:32 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

On first reading of one of your comments I incorrectly interpreted it as implying that you worked in child care, in which case I would have been concerned at the presumptions you made in the first comment in this thread. Thankfully it appears that you are not.


I'm making no presumptions in my first post. Purely based on the evidence in front of us that justfies action or at least some form of caution/censure and a closer investigation into the home situation.

As I say, a quite shocking and criminal way to treat a child.

Pronouns: He/Him

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:43 - Oct 20 with 7104 viewsvapour_trail

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:39 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

One man's "tin foil hat" is another man's Trump ! In relation to the rest it seems a shame that the state doesn't resource doing the job well so that the end results are so appalling and also that the children of certain classes are so much more visible than others.
Also you don't half come across as smug ! (just saying). I know more than you might imagine !


I think if you see a parent behaving in that manner whilst holding his child, it's fair to want to further examine the environment in which that child is bing raised.

Trailing vapour since 1999.
Poll: Should Gav and Phil limiti the number of polls?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:53 - Oct 20 with 7077 viewssparks

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:43 - Oct 20 by vapour_trail

I think if you see a parent behaving in that manner whilst holding his child, it's fair to want to further examine the environment in which that child is bing raised.


Quite.

And I am not so much "smug" about it, as appalled.
[Post edited 20 Oct 2017 16:53]

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:57 - Oct 20 with 7053 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:41 - Oct 20 by Darth_Koont

I'm making no presumptions in my first post. Purely based on the evidence in front of us that justfies action or at least some form of caution/censure and a closer investigation into the home situation.

As I say, a quite shocking and criminal way to treat a child.


As hinted at earlier I think their time would be better spent peeking through some 'nice people's curtains. If you can't see that you are making assumptions/presumptions regarding the home situation then so be it.
Just deal with what he has done not what he might be doing. If a well off person is caught drink driving with a kid in their car would you advocate looking into their home life too ?

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:59 - Oct 20 with 7047 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:53 - Oct 20 by sparks

Quite.

And I am not so much "smug" about it, as appalled.
[Post edited 20 Oct 2017 16:53]


And the drink driving scenario ?

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Login to get fewer ads

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 17:00 - Oct 20 with 7038 viewssparks

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:59 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

And the drink driving scenario ?


No idea what you are talking about.

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 17:05 - Oct 20 with 7022 viewsDarth_Koont

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:57 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

As hinted at earlier I think their time would be better spent peeking through some 'nice people's curtains. If you can't see that you are making assumptions/presumptions regarding the home situation then so be it.
Just deal with what he has done not what he might be doing. If a well off person is caught drink driving with a kid in their car would you advocate looking into their home life too ?


That makes no sense. If you know this guy treats his child this badly in public you're duty-bound to investigate the situation at home.

You seem to have lost sight of basic human decency and moral responsibility by getting caught up in this whole "State intervention" palaver.

And yes, anyone who puts their child in mortal danger through their actions or oversight should be investigated.

Pronouns: He/Him

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 17:09 - Oct 20 with 7013 viewsAxeldalai_lama

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:59 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

And the drink driving scenario ?


What are you talking about?
Why have you invented a fictional rich person? Why do you have to persue such ridiculous class narratives? Do you know that the man in the OPs video is not a rich person then?
You start with a random enough point about "the man" and just run with it. Sometimes you have a valid reason to try all this class warfare bollox, alas most of the time it's just bollox.
0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 17:09 - Oct 20 with 7010 viewsgiant_stow

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:57 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

As hinted at earlier I think their time would be better spent peeking through some 'nice people's curtains. If you can't see that you are making assumptions/presumptions regarding the home situation then so be it.
Just deal with what he has done not what he might be doing. If a well off person is caught drink driving with a kid in their car would you advocate looking into their home life too ?


Not everything has to be about class war. If you've got reason to peep through nice middle class curtains (like the occupants involving a child in a fight), then fine, look away.

Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
Poll: A clasmate tells your son their going to beat him up in the playground after sch

3
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 18:25 - Oct 20 with 6953 viewssparks

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 17:09 - Oct 20 by giant_stow

Not everything has to be about class war. If you've got reason to peep through nice middle class curtains (like the occupants involving a child in a fight), then fine, look away.


Quite. And there is no reason to think that a drink drive conviction would be any more likely to result in social services intervention in a poor household than a comofrtable one- all other things being equal.

Its nonsense, and deflection from the issues people are raising, and on which "bankster" has a pretty absurd and objectional position.

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 18:40 - Oct 20 with 6933 viewsLuciBlue

Great stewarding!

Poll: If you had to take one option..

1
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 18:43 - Oct 20 with 6931 viewspeterleeblue

Sadly an example of the imbeciles blighting our country. A complete waste of oxygen. I feel desperately feel sorry for the kid who probably through no fault of his own will grow up to be as cretinous as his father. Very Very sad.
0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 20:52 - Oct 20 with 6890 viewsjeera

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 05:26 - Oct 20 by crunchie1978

Oh my God! Please I never want to live in your world! The bloke done nothing...grow up!


Holy crap. What?

And to add, "done"?

"The bloke done nothing wrong?

Is English your 10th language?

Poll: Xmas dinner: Yorkshires or not?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 21:47 - Oct 20 with 6866 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 18:25 - Oct 20 by sparks

Quite. And there is no reason to think that a drink drive conviction would be any more likely to result in social services intervention in a poor household than a comofrtable one- all other things being equal.

Its nonsense, and deflection from the issues people are raising, and on which "bankster" has a pretty absurd and objectional position.


Agreed then, they should not investigate the home circumstances of either imaginary driver.......... nor those of fighty football man. My first reaction on seeing this story was that he's a fool (who would rightly deserve a lengthy ban ) but I still think It's a huge leap from there to think that child services (on behalf of the state/the rest of us, call it what you like) should make assumptions (if the family aren't known to social services anyway) and come prying.
Otherwise, where should the line be drawn ? If somebody risks their liberty by shoplifting food due to poverty, thus indirectly putting their child's welfare at risk should child services by default trail through every aspect of home life ? They're going to need a lot more homes if so.

I would happily have joined in the group think if it stopped at "what a silly bloke." Not deflecting from anything.

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 21:56 - Oct 20 with 6858 viewssparks

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 21:47 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

Agreed then, they should not investigate the home circumstances of either imaginary driver.......... nor those of fighty football man. My first reaction on seeing this story was that he's a fool (who would rightly deserve a lengthy ban ) but I still think It's a huge leap from there to think that child services (on behalf of the state/the rest of us, call it what you like) should make assumptions (if the family aren't known to social services anyway) and come prying.
Otherwise, where should the line be drawn ? If somebody risks their liberty by shoplifting food due to poverty, thus indirectly putting their child's welfare at risk should child services by default trail through every aspect of home life ? They're going to need a lot more homes if so.

I would happily have joined in the group think if it stopped at "what a silly bloke." Not deflecting from anything.


A parent who allows a young child to experience violence at close quarters is causing emotional harm and demonstrably lacks self control and awareness of the effect he has on the child. That incident alone is sufficient to warrant closer consideration of the child's home environment.

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 22:33 - Oct 20 with 6837 viewsStNeotsBlue

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:57 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

As hinted at earlier I think their time would be better spent peeking through some 'nice people's curtains. If you can't see that you are making assumptions/presumptions regarding the home situation then so be it.
Just deal with what he has done not what he might be doing. If a well off person is caught drink driving with a kid in their car would you advocate looking into their home life too ?


You seem to be inferring the guy is poor and from a rough background, he might be but just as equally he might just be a tw@t from any walk of life.

Your line about "deal with what he has done not what he might be doing" is a bit silly too. For clarity, I'm a firm believer that in most cases (obvious exceptions aside) if someone has served their sentence/punishment handed out by the courts a line should be drawn under it and they're given a clean slate.
[Post edited 20 Oct 2017 22:54]
0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:37 - Oct 21 with 6760 viewsHerbivore

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 16:22 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

So you kind of agree then. All I'm saying is that with the gradual drift to the right don't be surprised to wake up one day to find child 'welfare' experts removing children from parents that maybe aren't quite thinking 'clearly' enough !
Similar reasons for not consenting to the surveillance society and erosion of civil liberties really. Not to worry though I'm sure it will never happen.


Only courts can remove children permanently from their homes and in the UK the judiciary is distinct from the executive body (thankfully) and that acts as a significant safeguard against your little fantasy. You'd also be hard pressed to find anyone working in child protection who'd be happy to be involved in removing a child because they're parents aren't 'thinking clearly', in fact your views on this are pretty offensive.

Poll: Should someone on benefits earn more than David Cameron?
Blog: Where Did It All Go Wrong for Paul Hurst?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:43 - Oct 21 with 6752 viewsHerbivore

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 21:47 - Oct 20 by BanksterDebtSlave

Agreed then, they should not investigate the home circumstances of either imaginary driver.......... nor those of fighty football man. My first reaction on seeing this story was that he's a fool (who would rightly deserve a lengthy ban ) but I still think It's a huge leap from there to think that child services (on behalf of the state/the rest of us, call it what you like) should make assumptions (if the family aren't known to social services anyway) and come prying.
Otherwise, where should the line be drawn ? If somebody risks their liberty by shoplifting food due to poverty, thus indirectly putting their child's welfare at risk should child services by default trail through every aspect of home life ? They're going to need a lot more homes if so.

I would happily have joined in the group think if it stopped at "what a silly bloke." Not deflecting from anything.


Yeah, you're just massively wrong on this one though. In both the drink driving scenario - of which I know of assessments being carried out as a result of - and the football hooligan scenario a parent has wilfully placed their child in danger and that would warrant an assessment being undertaken of their capacity to keep their child safe. That is standard when you have clear evidence of a parent endangering their child, you need to ensure it's not happening regularly and causing the child harm or a significant likelihood of harm. That's not evil state control, that's protecting children who aren't able to protect themselves when their parents are potentially placing them at risk. I'm not sure why you can't see that.

Poll: Should someone on benefits earn more than David Cameron?
Blog: Where Did It All Go Wrong for Paul Hurst?

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:57 - Oct 21 with 6735 viewsClausThomsen

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:43 - Oct 21 by Herbivore

Yeah, you're just massively wrong on this one though. In both the drink driving scenario - of which I know of assessments being carried out as a result of - and the football hooligan scenario a parent has wilfully placed their child in danger and that would warrant an assessment being undertaken of their capacity to keep their child safe. That is standard when you have clear evidence of a parent endangering their child, you need to ensure it's not happening regularly and causing the child harm or a significant likelihood of harm. That's not evil state control, that's protecting children who aren't able to protect themselves when their parents are potentially placing them at risk. I'm not sure why you can't see that.


The least safe place for a child is in state control.

Unless you're buying the "historic" rhetoric.
0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 09:28 - Oct 21 with 6718 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:43 - Oct 21 by Herbivore

Yeah, you're just massively wrong on this one though. In both the drink driving scenario - of which I know of assessments being carried out as a result of - and the football hooligan scenario a parent has wilfully placed their child in danger and that would warrant an assessment being undertaken of their capacity to keep their child safe. That is standard when you have clear evidence of a parent endangering their child, you need to ensure it's not happening regularly and causing the child harm or a significant likelihood of harm. That's not evil state control, that's protecting children who aren't able to protect themselves when their parents are potentially placing them at risk. I'm not sure why you can't see that.


But when the reality is that the state does not keep them safe either then I would rather take my chances in my community. Obviously this would not apply in all cases but I know of many where once the interests of social services are pricked they tend to 'over focus shall we say. Interestingly home education is the latest area of interest from the authorities.
I can't see why, especially with the drift to the right, people can't see that we are making a rod for our own backs down the line (as per the surveillance state to protect us from all those rampaging terrorists.)
I would also suggest that the "assessments" you refer to probably have wealth/class biases inbuilt to them.

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

-1
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 09:32 - Oct 21 with 6716 viewsBanksterDebtSlave

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:37 - Oct 21 by Herbivore

Only courts can remove children permanently from their homes and in the UK the judiciary is distinct from the executive body (thankfully) and that acts as a significant safeguard against your little fantasy. You'd also be hard pressed to find anyone working in child protection who'd be happy to be involved in removing a child because they're parents aren't 'thinking clearly', in fact your views on this are pretty offensive.


I was hypothethising potential futures. (Similar say to the safety of nuclear power stations during Soviet style collapse) Just suggesting caution in giving too much control of our lives away.

"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Poll: If the choice is Moore or no more.

0
Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 09:34 - Oct 21 with 6707 viewssparks

Utter moron. Should never be allowed to set foot in a ground again. on 08:57 - Oct 21 by ClausThomsen

The least safe place for a child is in state control.

Unless you're buying the "historic" rhetoric.


Simply untrue.

The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it. (Sir Terry Pratchett)
Poll: Is Fred drunk this morning?

-1
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2024