The world IS going mad...

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by DillonFlatBack, Sep 16, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. A nursery owner admonishes a small kid for batting another kid over the head with a plastic brick or wooden railway track section (depending as to whom you believe), unfortunately while the local council stazi are making a routine visit and ends up in court.

    The parents of the admonished child do not back the legal action and still send her to the nursery, yet still the woman ends up being prosecuted....what is going on?
  2. have we heard the full facts including the court proceedings of the case?, until then I would not comment on it myself.
  3. Well, it would appear that she (allegedly) did such heinous things as pull/drag/frog-march (actuality, as ever, open to interpretation) said brat across the room, sit her down in a chair and gave her a verbal. Oh and possibly a finger-poke to the forehead. Wow...the kid is going to be traumatised for life by that experience. Not.
  4. If a worker had poked my daughter in the forehead when she was in Nursery, I'd have been none too chuffed.
  5. Sort it out like Tittybangbang, 'I want a fight'. Court? why bother with the expense.
  6. Even though she'd bashed some other kid with some item and apparently had a reputation of being "a handful"? The problem is these days is that any form of "clip around the ear" is not allowed.

    I have teenagers at skule who freely admit that they bad-mouth the teacher, **** about in class etc, as they know only too well that there is not any effective remedy of dealing with the little shits.

    The point is, the parents of this kid are not apparently complaining about it, so what is this court case all about, other than a futher imposition of PC thinking?
  7. Same here.
  8. Is that because you are of the opinion that there is no situation when a clip or any derivative thereof is justified?
  9. Erm... We are talking about a NURSERY here, aren't we? I have no problems with Corporal Punishment in Secondary School. But if someone laid a hand on my child in nursery and hadn't even contacted me about it, I'd be steaming in.
  10. Where is the reference for this piece?
  11. The point is, the parents haven't complained, don't apparently support the action against the woman and the kid still attends the self-same place, so in whose interest has this case been brought to court?

    It can only have been brought about by some self-serving over-zealous individual or organisation seeking to impose his/her/their interpretation of the way to behave on everyone else. Where is the being-in-the-public-interest aspect of this? If the parents were not concerned (at least certainly to the point of taking legal action), then is the State saying it knows better than any parent? Rhetorical... :)