Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: AlanG <invalid@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 03 May 2009 14:59:31 +0100
On Sun, 3 May 2009 14:00:32 +0100, Richard Miller
<richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In message <a4qqv4h9dpcvcplhjh7icvenc0uicc46il@xxxxxxx>, AlanG
<invalid@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes
On Sun, 3 May 2009 08:33:17 +0100, Richard Miller
<richard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In message <mpgqv41lkurcpgkit1air3jgrct61t4s0d@xxxxxxx>, Jon Thomas
<jt@xxxxxxx> writes
Svenne wrote:
Blah wrote:
Richard Miller wrote:
I just can't get my head round the idea that leaving your children, 3 of
them aged 3 and under, unattended in an apartment while you go off
carousing is "within the bounds of normality". You may feel that it is,
but to me it is well beyond the pale, however many people do it.
It used to be VERY normal - remember the days of Butlins and the signs
in all the cinermas/theatres/pubs - "Baby crying in Chalet Number XX"
That was in the old days when there were no paedophiles.
And before the burgeoning child abuse industry. I played
out on the street at night and was taught by priests during
the day, but I was born too early.
This has got nothing to do with paedophiles or the "child abuse
industry". It is about basic care of children.
Why should your opinion override that of others because of a single
incident?
At 14 I used to go fishing with friends and stay out all night. There
would be screams of outrage today from the wanna mollycoddle classes
if that happened now. Go and read some children's books from the 50s.
The common day things they did in those books most kids did. And they
did it without adult supervision.
At 14, yes. Your choice. And knowing where your parents were and how to
get hold of them.
6 miles away and no telephone in the street
Not at age 3 with two younger siblings in the house with you, and your
parents out of sight, earshot and contactability.
Something that can and does happen in large houses. It even happens
with neighbours having a chatter in the front garden while the kids
are asleep in the back bedroom. Your latter point, 'contactability',
is subjective anyway. There is a broad band between smothering and
neglect and the point either is approached will depend on
circumstances at the time.
.
- References:
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Vernon
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Ret.
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: The Todal
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Richard Miller
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Blah
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Svenne
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Jon Thomas
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Richard Miller
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: AlanG
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- From: Richard Miller
- Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- Prev by Date: Re: UK state interference continues apace ... Now your name needs state approval
- Next by Date: Re: Tape Recording/Eavesdropping Laws in the UK
- Previous by thread: Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- Next by thread: Re: Maddie 'abducted by opportunistic paedophile'
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|