Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

So now it comes down to an assumption that she was "guided" and not genuinely mistaken...?  Because simply ignoring the testimony of a child who's saying that they're in danger is not good practice.  We can say in hindsight that in this particular case it would have been fine, but there are others where dismissing what children say as their overactive imaginations is a really, really bad idea.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Look, you can't get much information out of a four year old that isn't at least somewhat guided by the older party, even if they aren't intending to do so. It's a very impressionable age.

She never said she was in danger, she said her father had a gun. The school and the government completely flipped out over this, arrested the guy at his daughter's school, and sent people after his wife and other children. That's just plain crazy. It's a witch hunt-esq level of overreaction.

[MonkeyHead]

If this was a precedented manner of behaviour from the relevant law enforcement agencies, then fair enough. However, I suspect that it was not a typical reaction. It would be bizzare to think that the police would react in this way for every story/tale/whatever given by every four year old, which is what makes it seem to me to be heavy handed. Of course the child was going to say thier daddy had a gun - they just drew a picture of it, and would give an answer in terms of thier picture. My child loves to draw. One of her most fave images is of me pushing a broken down car on a family holiday. She draws it on fire and with me smiling. Neither thing is true other than in her minds eye. I also have no legs or a nose quite often in her artwork which she loves to shout about ("My daddy has no nose! How does he smell? Auful!"), but I clearly am in posession of both of them.

There is a big difference between an innocent drawing of thier daddy and a story about a secret that they have been told not to share. I would hope most people in a law enforement capacty have the wherewithal to not blow thigs out of proportion in this manner.

Heres hoping my 5 yr old doesnt go to school tomorrow morning and tell thier teacher about the rude words daddy was shouting at the rugby this weekend, bringing a SWAT team to my door to haul my ass to jail.

[Max White]

Oh, we on to drawings and guns.
In the given example, action was taken after a kid draw a picture with her dad holding a gun. A little over the top, but hey, sometimes things happen and you need to be a little pre-emptive. Better safe than sorry.

The action taken was to raid his home without a warrant, and arrest and charge the man with illegal possession of a fire arm, with no evidence other than a childes drawing. This is over the top insane. If the police felt they should be going into this man's home to arrest him, they should have got a warrant, the judge would have asked them for evidence, and they would have produced this little girl's drawing. The judge would then have asked if they had anything else, any history of crime, anything that might get them into this house, and if they didn't, he would have dismissed it. The police over stepped their bounds when they said "fuck it!" to the legal system.

[Montague]

I do remember my brother getting in trouble as a 5 year old because he drew some crayon art with black and red everywhere.

Teachers must be 'educated' in some sort of pseudoscience psychology idea that the images and colors used in art indicates some state of mental health in a child.

Canada is a bizzare place anyways. Perhaps the child psychology ideas the US rejected in the 90's are now relevant there. I dunno.

[Max White]

Maybe they go backwards in psychology? I avidly await Freudian theory to make it's triumphant return! You see these things?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Guess what the engineer was thinking about!

[Nadaka]

Oh, we on to drawings and guns.
In the given example, action was taken after a kid draw a picture with her dad holding a gun. A little over the top, but hey, sometimes things happen and you need to be a little pre-emptive. Better safe than sorry.

The action taken was to raid his home without a warrant, and arrest and charge the man with illegal possession of a fire arm, with no evidence other than a childes drawing. This is over the top insane. If the police felt they should be going into this man's home to arrest him, they should have got a warrant, the judge would have asked them for evidence, and they would have produced this little girl's drawing. The judge would then have asked if they had anything else, any history of crime, anything that might get them into this house, and if they didn't, he would have dismissed it. The police over stepped their bounds when they said "fuck it!" to the legal system.

NO... Not better safe than sorry. Owning a gun isn't even remotely illegal, even in Canada. Any and all reaction to that picture is complete and total lunacy.

[Max White]

You don't need a license or something like that?

[G-Flex]

Oh, we on to drawings and guns.
In the given example, action was taken after a kid draw a picture with her dad holding a gun. A little over the top, but hey, sometimes things happen and you need to be a little pre-emptive. Better safe than sorry.

The action taken was to raid his home without a warrant, and arrest and charge the man with illegal possession of a fire arm, with no evidence other than a childes drawing. This is over the top insane. If the police felt they should be going into this man's home to arrest him, they should have got a warrant, the judge would have asked them for evidence, and they would have produced this little girl's drawing. The judge would then have asked if they had anything else, any history of crime, anything that might get them into this house, and if they didn't, he would have dismissed it. The police over stepped their bounds when they said "fuck it!" to the legal system.

NO... Not better safe than sorry. Owning a gun isn't even remotely illegal, even in Canada. Any and all reaction to that picture is complete and total lunacy.

Did you miss the part where some of those details turned out to be wrong?

[Loud Whispers]

Watched national geographic as a kid, drew cute animals dying everywhere. Teachers were a little surprised to say the least.

[Descan]

Yes, Max, you do. But they didn't have any proof he DIDN'T have a license. Not enough to warrant his arrest, maybe enough to get a warrant knock on his door and ask to see it. Maybe.

[Max White]

Can't they just look up if he has a licence on their great big data bank of gun owners? They can easily prove if he does or does not have a license with a quick search.

[Nadaka]

Can't they just look up if he has a licence on their great big data bank of gun owners? They can easily prove if he does or does not have a license with a quick search.

In the US at least, it is completely forbidden to have any electronic database of firearms registries. IIRC it is also illegal for a central repository of paper records to exist either.  This is a result of NRA screaming bloody murder that such tracking is the first step to rounding everyone with a gun up and confiscating them/executing owners for not being communists.

[scriver]

That is so fucked up.

[Nadaka]

I would note that only partially dripping with sarcasm.