New swimming pools built here require fences around them as part of the building code.
I'm sure you'd let your toddler fall into the pool as a lesson and be dead within 15 seconds, that's just too bad isn't it? you can always have another one.
That is the way to go - $0.5 Billion seized!
- Thread starter Rippy
- Start date
New swimming pools built here require fences around them as part of the building code.
I'm sure you'd let your toddler fall into the pool as a lesson and be dead within 15 seconds, that's just too bad isn't it? you can always have another one.
Drug use wasn't really decriminalized, they increased the amount of drugs you can carry for your own consumption.
Just to clarify, it is still a crime to sell drugs.
Holland is far more "advanced" (lack of better term) in this matter.
Oh so now you have to supervise the child 24 hours a day? The child can never play in the backyard without adult supervision?
Why wasn't amateursurgeon watching his child when she fell down the stairs multiple times?
In John's socialist paradise, people are replaced by rules. Humans can't be allowed to live freely. If he had his way, people probably wouldn't be allowed to live at all.
I don't see the part when he stated he wasn't watching.
You don't have to supervise your child 24/7 as long as your child understands the dangers coming from some activities or places. I see my role as a father as someone who explains the world and helps the child to develop a set of tools so child can explore the world bravely and safely. Those 'tools' I see as the best protection I can give to my child. I know there is no way I will always be next to my daughter and there will be no fence or padding neither.
If you have different vision of parenting then so be it.
At what expense? Their safety and wellbeing? What if they don't survive the sink or swim approach?
Government is the one who is selling the drugs, actually taking all the profits.
This is how it works:
1) Government lets you become a small dealer easily.
2) Just few smart moves and you will have cash
3) You become big fish, in just 2-4 years you can become a really big fish.
4) They know all about it, mostly, and let you grow even more.
5) At one point they arrest you, seize everything, destroy the drugs, and take all your property, cars, houses, cash...
Now all this money is made from selling drugs. Who has it? Government.
Basically, drug lord was a pony for the government.
So be smart, once you are a middle fish, run to a different country and quite
This is how it works:
1) Government lets you become a small dealer easily.
2) Just few smart moves and you will have cash
3) You become big fish, in just 2-4 years you can become a really big fish.
4) They know all about it, mostly, and let you grow even more.
5) At one point they arrest you, seize everything, destroy the drugs, and take all your property, cars, houses, cash...
Now all this money is made from selling drugs. Who has it? Government.
Basically, drug lord was a pony for the government.
So be smart, once you are a middle fish, run to a different country and quite
If a neighbour saw your child drinking vodka in the park would you want them to intervene?
I would.
Looking out for each other is a function of society, it is not about 'authority' or 'the right', which is the mistake I think you are making in this debate.
On a side note: I get the feeling that Americans think of Europe as some sort of Orwellian nightmare. However from anecdotal evidence I see the USA as having a lot more rules and regulations for daily life. Fences around swimming pools?? lolz ... not in Europe! Ideas like 'political correctness' came from the USA and have horribly polluted European culture and society, as has the development of the litigious society - totally an American invention (don't get me wrong: I really like the USA and Americans in general, this is not an anti-USA bashing session). I think Europeans are freer than Americans. Anyway this is off-topic.
I think it is necessary that society self-regulates. The degree of regulation is where the debate should be, not whether we should have laws or not. I don't want to live in anarchdom, thanks.
It is, but the method suggested above (let the child fall down the stairs) is completely wrong and, if I might say, pretty lazy parenting.
What if I allowed my child to drink alcohol? Who gives you the right to stop it?
In my personal opinion, stair gates are lazy parenting. You're letting a device do the job of a parent. At no point did I say she was unsupervised. We watched her constantly until we were confident she'd learned to navigate stairs successfully. It took 3 falls in total, and she'd got them mastered by 18 months.
It's interesting the level of judgement this raises from people. As Guerilla says, "what about the children?". I'd never recommend this approach for someone else, because I believe everyone has to parent in their own way. Our way of parenting is very, very labour-intensive (she's never been apart from either of us for more than 20 minutes, and she's nearly 3). I'm happy with the results, and she seems to be too, although we shan't really know for another 25 years.
As to where I'd draw the line - anything which is likely to be immediately fatal or cause serious injury. So - upstairs window restrictors fitted, blind cords removed etc, because the risk their is just too great. And if we had a swimming pool/pond in our house, I'd have drained it and filled it with plastic balls until she learned to swim.