*tsk tsk*

Such a violent people we are.

Why don't we just lay on the kid, the mother, the old stranger, and the Walmart greeter and be done with it?

That'd be epic.

We dropped the grandparents off at the airport today and on the way home, our 2 year old daughter threw a screaming fit because she wanted to go in and watch planes.

We tried everything we could think of to get her to stop but failed and gave up and continued to drive while ignoring her. Then our 4 year old son became so frustrated that he started hitting her.

So he's a hero then I guess. Or maybe we're just horrible parents.

Internet parenting is teh awesome!

Nyquil ftw.

:p

Uh, for all these posts chastising the mom for ignoring her little girl, where in the article does it say that? It's just assumed that she's a bad parent because a 61 year old, prone to child abuse, found the scenario unbearable?

Where did it say he was prone to child abuse?

http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/wp-co...2009/09/64.jpg

figured this was appropriate.

for my part, I haven't chastised the mom for anything. my comments about ignoring emotional outbursts in public have all been 'in general,' so to speak. I didn't even read the article.

He start hitting a child not his own. That makes him prone to child abuse.

If you're asking if he's done it before, that's another question - which will likely come out in court.

Righto. We have evidence he doesn't mind hitting kids, there's no evidence this woman was ignoring her daughter.

What is or isn't appropriate in public has certainly changed these last few years. People consistently astound me.
And while something like this has certainly happened before. And while (based off of things my parents told me, and off of Mad Men) scolding children other than your own was the norm sometime around 1960s, it sure isn't the norm now.

I've worked part-time in retail for a few years now. I've also worked as a young children skating instructor. You learn to drown out the screams based on your work. When I was a coach, the objective was to get the kid to stop asap.
While working in retail, the objective is to get the woman/parent/guardian with the child out of the store asap.

Hollering kids in a store gets irritating fast. And seeing as we sell crystal and glass,well, we'd rather not see it shatter before its sold. :/

And there's no evidence this dude ever hit a child before.

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/3788/kettlepot.gif

This guy should have had his head handed to him the minute he made the "shut her up for you" comment.

Had that been -my- daughter (which I don't yet have), they'd have been picking pieces of this asshole's skull out of the Ore-Ida display. 155gr .40S&W>Abusive, assaulting asshole.

Given that head trauma can cause death, and given that the mother had no idea that he -wasn't- about to mortally injure the child if he hadn't done so already, (reasonable person perceives risk of imminent death or severe bodily harm) or cause a severe closed-head injury, that woulda been a "clean shoot."

The gene pool needs some chlorine, and asshats like this should be the second to go, directly behind pederasts.

Oh, hey, and that would be a great way to introduce a toddler to the virtues of effective headshots.

Two birds, one stone.

...or bullet, rather.

Mind you, I'm out of touch with American children's television. Maybe they already cover this these days on Sesame Street and Dora the Explorer.

At least Walmart will sell the right product for getting bloodstains out of OshKosh B'Gosh overalls.

Nobody who casually assaults children has any reason to continue breathing my air, or my hypothetical child's. Hopefully such an incident would instruct the child, later in life, on taking care of their own and how to respond to unprovoked Violations of their Sovereign Person.

Why the arbitrary capitalization of "Violations of their Sovereign Person"? Are you living in the Romantic Era?

Anyone who casually assaults children deserves to be held accountable to the law.

I would assume the best lesson for children would be conflict resolution; common courtesy; understanding the law; basic self-defense, perhaps; or how to make a citizen's arrest.

It's difficult to get the idea of a bullet in the brain across to children who get conflicting messages from pretty much every other area in life besides adult entertainment and local news.

A stranger "disciplining" a child isn't disciplining, it mine as well be attacking. The kid doesn't see it the way adults do. When I was a kid, and I was a tough red necked kid mind you, I had been hit before, but my baseball coach hit me over the head with my a glove for messing up some play. It didn't really hurt but I broke down into tears.

If I was at a store and had a kid as soon as he said "If you don't shut the baby up, I will shut her up for you." I would have jumped him. Actually I probably would have turned my kid around, broken his knee and walked out the store.

Agreed, the Law of Natural Selection.

Such as decisively putting a stop to conflicts which they did not begin, but which were rather initiated upon them.

Agreed.

Agreed again; "This is an arm-bar, this is a torque-lock, this is Pepper Spray, and this is a proper sight picture."

Which not every State recognizes, and damned few places outside of the US.

Really? I learned it at 4yrs old, when my Mom shot a squirrel and made me hold it while it died. Believe me, I got it. Nothing says "permanent" like feeling something alive and furry and warm go cold and stiff.

If their parents aren't doing their job/s, I agree. However, any child of mine would have been raise in an environment that was 103% clear on the following issues:

1: They own their body. Nobody else does. Ergo, nobody else has the right to so much as touch them without their permission; the only possible exceptions being medical personnel with the consent of their (the kid's) parents.

2: Anyone who -does- touch them without their permission or against their expressed wishes is violating their Rights; not only the Right of ownership over their own property (their bodies), but also their right to associate or disassociate as they like.

3: Any violation of their Rights, especially on an interpersonal level, may be repelled by whatever means, using whatever force, is necessary.

So, this man slapping a child is beyond the pale, but reacting to it violently is not? This is what I find amazing.
How can these ideas coalesce without making you feel like a total moron?

Ok...let me explain it to you. If someone does violence upon you or those you are charged to protect you respond in kind to make sure it doesn't continue to happen, happen again, or happen to someone else. This is called being a responsible adult, i.e. not a doormat. It's what us grown-ups do to protect lil ones like you. Its something you'll better be able to appreciate when you grow up. :thumbsup:

I have three children of my own and if you think bashing someone's head in because they slapped your child is responsible and mature then you're an idiot.

I never said I'd bash his head in, that would kill him.

I feel sorry for your kids. I hope the father is willing to protect them.

The man who hurt my kids will be out of prison in 2024.
In my estimation and by every other sane and sound estimation I've ever heard, what I did was the mature and responsible thing.
What's more, I am here to raise my children. What's even more, they know I am capable of protecting them.

You realize I have no idea what you're talking about? Also, each situation is different, if the guy got a prison sentence that long then it probably was for the best. But sometimes you need immediate action and sometimes that guy isn't going to/can't be caught.

I think you're talking out of your ass, that's what I think. Do you have children? Have they ever been hurt by someone?

This thread's turned into a pissing contest a few times already.

The situation that occurred is unfortunate. At least everyone can agree on that.

/thread

No one said he had done so before - just that he had done it this time.

Which makes him a piece of shit in the estimation of most.

MM, were not going to "bash his brains in" or shoot the man. If it was allowed then we very much would (bash his brains in to death, that is). But we are going to do a bashing of sorts. Possibly one that will place the parent in jail for assault.

What I do fail to understand is how you don't get the instinct to mortally maim someone who harms anyone in your nest. How is it you don't feel this transcends all maturity, social conditioning, self restraint goes out the window and animal programming kicks in?

My point was that poppinjay, stating 'a 61 year old, prone to child abuse,' is just as much an assumption in this case as 'the mother is a bad parent.'

We're going on 2 articles here. Not biographies of the individuals. Maybe he just had a really bad day lol.

Excuse me? Did you not just read my post that stated I've had this happen to me as a child? I don't think one can get a better perspective than that.

This makes no sense. The man is clearly past most of the conditions of natural selection that would apply. It's the mother and child that should be more concerned by this law. The man proved to be a challenge in that respect.

Anyway, what you're getting at in your post doesn't really apply in my society...so I have no use for it.

I really have no idea what Georgia is like. It very well might compare to the other Georgia.

Where I'm from, perhaps it's a different world. I'm used to more civil and stable society.

Our slapping friend from the news story did. Two anecdotes to one. Sorry your coach didn't serve time or get his head blown off... :rolleyes:

Children have no perspective but their own, by definition. "It happened to me as a child" is likely the single most suspect thing a human being can say. Ask any psychologist. Case in point, notice your post starts by acknowledging that, but then you go on to talk as if how you experienced it as a child WAS objectively what happened.

You didn't break down into tears because of the coach's vicious mitting of your poor little head. You broke down into tears from the humiliation of it, the hurt feelings of it, the surprise of it. Fundamentally a self-perspectived phenomenon, and very appropriate to a child. So I'm sorry you had that experience, but you can't go thinking it informs how grown people ought to behave.

You mean when your coach hit you with a baseball glove? And just what sort of action should have been taken against him that couldn't have been handled without violence?

My point is (and I didn't direct my comment only to yours because this thread has been full of such statements) there is no justifying a violent reaction to someone hitting your child, including this case.

It's one thing to say it, lots of people would say it (i'd kick his ass!) and find themselves more rational when it actually happens to them. But to believe that it is a preferred course of action - in front of your child - is just ridiculous.

Wow. I never expected to read something so disrespectful and blatantly out of line on this forum. You can't be serious. Are we not better than this?

Rat- first off, that was only part of the story, and you have no fucking clue what happened.

Objectively? Both my parents were there, many people witnessed it. The guy nearly got lynched. I know what happened exactly, and from several sources outside my own.

I swear this is the last time I ever share anything like that here. You guys act as if each post is a testimony of every exact fact and have no respect for the poster.

mixed, have you stopped to think that there might be some gender differences in our actions? Or that not everyone is going to react like you?

Ok, since we're making up crazy shit then how about some guy is pounding the shit out of your kid and he won't stop? You going to wait for the police officers?

---------- Post added at 01:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:07 PM ----------

I admit that was a cheap shot but I don't like it when people refer to me as a total moron. Besides that fact, it has/had some legitimacy. At the time it appeared that she would honestly not stop someone from attacking her kids. So how about stop viewing things out of context?

Sorry I missed this before. I didn't say I failed to understand it. Perhaps it is just me, but I am fine with the mechanisms we have enacted in 'civilized' society to handle these situations. What I don't get, is how someone thinks they would be protecting their child by exposing them to even more brutal behavior (perpetrated by their parent) that would likely end in them watching while their parent is handcuffed and carted off to jail...for a slap. It's not like he tried to kill her.

Maybe it is just me, but I have no, none, nada of that impulse in me and I don't think it has anything to do with my gender as we have heard several women on this thread echo those sentiments about kicking ass.

To be honest though, it does irk me a little because I think such claims are bluster and bravado and they generally come from people who have never had anything serious happen to their children. The year after the situation with my kids happened, I talked to a lot of parents online who had been in similar situations and the most common reaction they would express to me was not rage - it's something else. Far more primal and quieting than vengeance. If at anytime, that luxury usually comes later.

Once again, I fail to understand, why, you are thinking objectively and out of the box. Yes, it was just a slap. Yes he was just irritated that the kid is crying and invading his quiet adult space.

But he was a complete stranger.

You do not know him or his motives behind his actions or his intentions further.

It's not just bluster bravado and show off.

I think I explained my thinking pretty well.
Sorry, but couldn't it be possible that you are wrong in your imagining of what most people would do? After all, I think if every instance similar in nature and intensity as this one erupted into unchecked violence there would be a lot more of it happening.
Reality isn't out of the box.

I appreciate your opinions on this, and maybe your reactions are more civil. But judging by the responses so far, I wouldn't stipulate that they're more common. I unfortunately don't have children yet, but I do know I would most likely respond to violence upon them the same as I would on any family member less able to protect themselves. Violence stops violence, right there, right then. Until the incident resolves, there's no way to anticipate how that violence will escalate or when it will end. Besides the fact that this was a child, for whom a slap to the face can be injurious, not just insulting. So yes, I throw my vote in with those who would react with immediate violence, in order to stop the violence being committed. It's just self-defence, extended to those who can't defend themselves.