

When Children Attack... - g-garron
http://linuxlock.blogspot.com/2011/08/when-children-attack.html

======
wicknicks
This guy is a real hero. The work of going into such neighborhoods and
providing services is a highly commendable one. Even if these kids are
probably going to destroy this computer, there might be that one kid in some
home like this who actually starts using computers the way they must be.
Reaching out to such people is the best thing that can happen to them in the
long run.

------
tokenadult
Charity begins at home. The best gift any parent can give a child is a sense
of responsibility for appropriate behavior, especially around visitors to the
home. (Yes, I am a parent. I have four children. We don't have any pellet guns
in the house.)

~~~
16s
The pellet gun is not the problem. The child is the problem. Take the pellet
gun away and he'll stab his victims with scissors. Take the scissors away and
he'll beat his victims with a ball bat.

The tool (pellet gun) is not the problem. Stop blaming the tool. Blame the
attacker. The kid will probably grow up and sling sulfuric acid on his girl
friends face. When he does that, will that be the acid's fault, or the
shopkeeper who sold the acid, or the company that manufactured the acid... no
it'll be the _attacker's_ fault.

I have a pellet gun and kids. They all use it responsibly and enjoy doing so.
They would never shoot someone with it or threaten anyone... they know better.

~~~
mrmaddog
I wouldn't even argue that the kid is the problem, but rather that the kid's
behavior is symptomatic of a completely dysfunctional family.

At a certain age, responsibility starts shifting to the individual, but a 6
year old can hardly be considered the heart of the problem here. How to fix
the deeper problem (having a mother that doesn't/is unable to care for her
children) will always be an unsolved problem, but the best solutions I have
seen so far involve beefing up our public school system so that the kids have
a place that they can be given individualized attention.

~~~
DasIch
You cannot possibly beef up the public school system to the point that it
replaces parental attention to children.

~~~
noduerme
Illiterate idiots can't raise responsible, intelligent children. Giving them
free computers isn't the answer. What they need is to feel a constant sense of
extreme shame for letting themselves and their situation degenerate to that
degree. As it is, instead of shaming slothful, lazy, degenerate idiots,
society shames itself into allowing them a free pass on the grounds that all
else being equal, some people must be too stupid to figure anything out for
themselves. Which turns out to be false when it comes to gaming the welfare
system, cooking crystal meth or jacking peoples' shoes... but those kinds of
smarts are what you get when you start coddling and nannying to the point
where individuality and ambition are wiped out and the neediest and laziest
survive. I hope none of my tax dollars went toward buying them a computer. In
fact, I hope they eat each other. Great post, though.

~~~
run4yourlives
_What they need is to feel a constant sense of extreme shame for letting
themselves and their situation degenerate to that degree._

Have you perhaps by chance considered that a sense of extreme shame is exactly
what prevents them from changing their situations?

It's quite obvious that you haven't been exposed to anything beyond the silver
spoon you were born with in your lifetime. If you had some life experience
you'd understand how silly your comment is, given that these are issues are
much more complex than people being "illiterate idiots".

~~~
rglovejoy
I didn't grow up with a silver spoon in my mouth, and I think noduerme's
comments were spot on. In fact, I wish I could give his comment ten more
points, and downvote your arrogant screed by the same amount.

It really _isn't_ that much more complex than people being "illiterate
idiots". Believe me, I've seen it with my own eyes.

~~~
cma
And the problem with you guys isn't much more complex than being "arrogant
idiots".

~~~
noduerme
Ostracizing people socially -- rather than using bureaucracy as a method of
enforcing ever more bloated statutes -- is a tried and true human tradition.
It happens all the time online. Note the emergence of up-ranking news sites,
for instance. Downranking is a powerful form of social censorship that helps
civilize the worse traits in human nature. To rely solely on law or on
bureaucracy to keep people acting in a civilized fashion is to discard
thousands of years of social/moral wisdom. The argument usually begins with
moral relativism -- e.g. you don't know what it's like to be XYZ, you were
born ABC, and how dare you judge anybody -- and ends with the credo that all
is permissible. The problem with everything being permissible is that,
contrarily, in a situation where there is a refusal on the part of individuals
to judge each other, no individual has any rights. Their rights are either
abrogated by the police and the faceless majority, or everyone's rights
directly infringe on each other's, in an anarchic context that only begs for
further control. Therefore, face-to-face settlement of conflict and the
boundaries between individuals is preferable to settlement by the state, and
also preferable to a complete lack of settlement. And THEREFORE, we must use
the best tools in the arsenal to settle such conflicts on a local basis, which
most definitely include humiliating and ostracizing and, yes, JUDGING people
based on how they behave.

------
davvid
_I pointed my finger at him and told him firmly. "If you get up from that
couch, I'm going to take the computer away."_

Really? I would have just slapped the kid ;-) It's quite effective.

