Wouldn't This be Considered Child Abuse.

[gslack]

oh let me see, the time you tried to claim a higher education to stifle debate... And then there is the time you claimed you do not work with any other poster to attack or plan, yet just in your previous post you basically admitted as much...

When and where did I do that slackass? We've already established that you found out about my education level from another poster.

Evidence? Uhm.... its the internet, where you can use a proxy server fro free or use Two pc's and a router to play dual roles on here anytime you choose... THe only evidence one could get would be to use your IP, and thanks to the things I mentioned you can hide or disguise that easily.. So evidence is null and you know it.... But it doesn't change the fact you act like at least a couple other posters on here.. Same style, same "im educated so you shut up now" shtick.... Gimme a break your a proxy boy..

I'll tell you this right now, fuckstick, and I could give a damn if you believe me or not.

I've never posted here under any other name than "geauxtohell". Your are entitled to your beliefs, but they are wrong. Furthermore, even if you were right, you just admitted you could never prove it. So where does that leave your dumb-ass? You just admitted that you are in the habit of making accusations that you can't prove.

Now, where else have I misrepresented myself?

Well you went on a rant about me in another thread all night and then denied doing it depsite the fact it was there in plain sight... you denied obsessing over me yet you obviously are obsessing over me right now...

if I am so wrong why do you care? If I am so ignorant and all that you say, and you do not seek the approval of others and their support against me; why do you stalk, cry, whine, and obsess like you do with me?

look pal I personally think you are full of shit... And not just a little bit.. in fact i believe you are the latest persona of one or two little twerps who use the same MO and style... Can I prove it? No not really.. Do I care? Nope..... Either way I think you are as i said you are, and thats how I feel... you don't like it? Fine you don't have to.. But if you harass me, then continually derail my thread, and then cry that i am the one derailing threads to others, I will take exception to you and speak my mind...

in short kiss my ass, If you dont like what I think tool...

 

[geauxtohell]

Well you went on a rant about me in another thread all night and then denied doing it depsite the fact it was there in plain sight... you denied obsessing over me yet you obviously are obsessing over me right now...

if I am so wrong why do you care? If I am so ignorant and all that you say, and you do not seek the approval of others and their support against me; why do you stalk, cry, whine, and obsess like you do with me?

look pal I personally think you are full of shit... And not just a little bit.. in fact i believe you are the latest persona of one or two little twerps who use the same MO and style... Can I prove it? No not really.. Do I care? Nope..... Either way I think you are as i said you are, and thats how I feel... you don't like it? Fine you don't have to.. But if you harass me, then continually derail my thread, and then cry that i am the one derailing threads to others, I will take exception to you and speak my mind...

in short kiss my ass, If you dont like what I think tool...

Slack:

I know you are stupid so this is really hard for you, but let's try to stay on topic here.

You claimed I misrepresented myself.

I am merely asking for you to back up your claims.

I would shudder to think that "Mr. Integrity" was making shit up.

 

[gslack]

Well you went on a rant about me in another thread all night and then denied doing it depsite the fact it was there in plain sight... you denied obsessing over me yet you obviously are obsessing over me right now...

if I am so wrong why do you care? If I am so ignorant and all that you say, and you do not seek the approval of others and their support against me; why do you stalk, cry, whine, and obsess like you do with me?

look pal I personally think you are full of shit... And not just a little bit.. in fact i believe you are the latest persona of one or two little twerps who use the same MO and style... Can I prove it? No not really.. Do I care? Nope..... Either way I think you are as i said you are, and thats how I feel... you don't like it? Fine you don't have to.. But if you harass me, then continually derail my thread, and then cry that i am the one derailing threads to others, I will take exception to you and speak my mind...

in short kiss my ass, If you dont like what I think tool...

Slack:

I know you are stupid so this is really hard for you, but let's try to stay on topic here.

You claimed I misrepresented myself.

I am merely asking for you to back up your claims.

I would shudder to think that "Mr. Integrity" was making shit up.

Look, if you want to play dumb be my guest, but I gave you several examples of it... I backed them up before and you denied it like an idiot.... What would be the point in it again? you will lie and pretend a lie isnt a lie, truth is subjective, and do so regardless the evidence.... And your attempts to bait me into another tit for tat which has no bearing in this thread, just so you can go and cry about me derailing threads is tiresome now too.....

Ya think im that stupid? Dumbass ya been trying to make that claim against me to anyone who will listen... I may not be cattle man but I know bullshit when I see it...

So fuck you tool I won't play with you just so you can cry about me all over the place anymore...

And speaking of shit, ya know the white speck on top of chicken shit? Thats chicken shit too..

 

[geauxtohell]

Look, if you want to play dumb be my guest, but I gave you several examples of it... I backed them up before and you denied it like an idiot.... What would be the point in it again? you will lie and pretend a lie isnt a lie, truth is subjective, and do so regardless the evidence.... And your attempts to bait me into another tit for tat which has no bearing in this thread, just so you can go and cry about me derailing threads is tiresome now too.....

Ya think im that stupid? Dumbass ya been trying to make that claim against me to anyone who will listen... I may not be cattle man but I know bullshit when I see it...

So fuck you tool I won't play with you just so you can cry about me all over the place anymore...

And speaking of shit, ya know the white speck on top of chicken shit? Thats chicken shit too..

Slack:

Speaking of bullshit, do you realize that when you remove the bullshit from your posts, you are basically left with five or six words?

Now, you claimed I misrepresented myself. You also called me a liar.

I am not so egotistical as to think anyone else besides us gives a fuck about this exchange, but just in case there is, here is your chance to back up your claims.

You know, in line with the whole "burden of proof falls on the accuser" thing.

So quite wasting your scant mental energy on insulting me, and lay out your case.

Start with your claim that I misrepresented myself. That should be the easiest to back up.

 

[gslack]

Look, if you want to play dumb be my guest, but I gave you several examples of it... I backed them up before and you denied it like an idiot.... What would be the point in it again? you will lie and pretend a lie isnt a lie, truth is subjective, and do so regardless the evidence.... And your attempts to bait me into another tit for tat which has no bearing in this thread, just so you can go and cry about me derailing threads is tiresome now too.....

Ya think im that stupid? Dumbass ya been trying to make that claim against me to anyone who will listen... I may not be cattle man but I know bullshit when I see it...

So fuck you tool I won't play with you just so you can cry about me all over the place anymore...

And speaking of shit, ya know the white speck on top of chicken shit? Thats chicken shit too..

Slack:

Speaking of bullshit, do you realize that when you remove the bullshit from your posts, you are basically left with five or six words?

Now, you claimed I misrepresented myself. You also called me a liar.

I am not so egotistical as to think anyone else besides us gives a fuck about this exchange, but just in case there is, here is your chance to back up your claims.

You know, in line with the whole "burden of proof falls on the accuser" thing.

So quite wasting your scant mental energy on insulting me, and lay out your case.

Start with your claim that I misrepresented myself. That should be the easiest to back up.

Already did that a few times with you liar boy....

now do you want to debate the OP here? If not I would remind you that deliberately picking an argument that derails a thread, and then crying about me derailing threads in another thread(s) is a completely unethical thing to try and do....

now grow up junior......

 

[kurtsprincess]

 

[bodecea]

The fact that Abby had HER parents CONSENT is the only matter.

I doubt that Abbys parents would have consented to russian roulette.

holy fuck you are stupid. YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT CONSENT TO PUTTING YOUR CHILD IN IMMINENT RISK OF BEING IN HARM'S WAY. You do NOT have that right as a parent.

Sailing solo around the wold has inhearent risk and danger. Just as and all any sports do.

Giving Abby permission to sail solo does not put her in IMMINENT danger.

Correct....methinks someone doesn't understand the definition of "IMMINENT".

 

[mal]

IN YOUR OPINION I AM WORNG, THAT DOES NOT MAKE ME WRONG.

Emancipation means you want your parents the hell out of your life so that THEY can no longer have a say in YOUR life. As minor Abby had Parental consent. Again please show the law where she may not sail solo around the world.

Again shall we talk children, teens and young adults participating in sports and the inherent danger?

No, not my opinion. FACT, but just in case I posted this is in the legal forum, we'll see what lawyers say.

Again the fact that Abby had parental consent has no bearing on the matter, they can NOT consent to let her do something that presents an imminent risk to her life. Baseball and such do not pose an imminent risk, and you know it. Can you give your child your consent to play Russian Roulette? Of course not.

Actually they can....as long as it is not illegal. Show us that there is some age requirement for sailing like there is for driving...THEN you might be onto something...Otherwise, you are wrong again.

Child Endangerment Laws

I am Certain a Case could be Made...



peace...

 

[geauxtohell]

Already did that a few times with you liar boy....

now do you want to debate the OP here? If not I would remind you that deliberately picking an argument that derails a thread, and then crying about me derailing threads in another thread(s) is a completely unethical thing to try and do....

now grow up junior......

You derailed the OP a long time ago with your typical rage-o-holic antics. It's basically how you operate. You weren't concerned with "debating the OP" for three pages worth of name calling with ConHog (and one page worth of sexual innuendo with Syrenn).

You stated I misrepresented myself. I've simply asked you to back up that claim. There are several posters on this board who I've been interacting with in various forms since '03, and I am sure they would be shocked at your "slam-dunk" evidence that proves me to be a fraud.

So if you've got the case, then lay it on all of us.

If not, then stop saying you do and then refusing to lay it out for people to consider.

Because it makes you look fairly full of shit.

 

[Samson]

No, not my opinion. FACT, but just in case I posted this is in the legal forum, we'll see what lawyers say.

Again the fact that Abby had parental consent has no bearing on the matter, they can NOT consent to let her do something that presents an imminent risk to her life. Baseball and such do not pose an imminent risk, and you know it. Can you give your child your consent to play Russian Roulette? Of course not.

Actually they can....as long as it is not illegal. Show us that there is some age requirement for sailing like there is for driving...THEN you might be onto something...Otherwise, you are wrong again.

Child Endangerment Laws

I am Certain a Case could be Made...



peace...

In what state?

Most states have no minimum age at which kids can be left alone, and none has a problem with parents leaving a 16 year old alone:



Alabama None Alabama Babysitting Laws
Alaska Unknown No Resource Found
Arizona None Arizona Department of Economic Security
Arkansas None Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect - Arkansas
California Unknown No Resource Found
Colorado 12 * Colorado Department of Human Services
Connecticut None State of Connecticut Attorney General's Office
Delaware 12 * Delaware Division of Family Services
Florida None Florida Eighth Judicial Circuit Family Court FAQ
Georgia None No Resource Found
Hawaii None Hawaii Department Of The Attorney General
Idaho None Idaho Department of Health & Welfare
Illinois 14 University of Illinois Child Care Resource Service
Indiana None No Laws Govern Leaving Children Alone
Iowa None Iowa Department Of Human Services
Kansas 12 * Kansas Health & Environment
Kentucky None LAW & JUSTICE Children at Home Alone Nov, 2003
Louisiana None Louisiana Department of Social Services
Maine None Maine Kids & Kin
Maryland 8 Maryland Unattended Children Law
Massachusetts None Massachusetts Trial Court Law Libraries
Michigan None Calhoun County Courts
Minnesota None Minnesota Dakota County Attorney's Office
Mississippi None Mississippi Coalition Against Domestic Violence
Missouri None KRCG Latch-key limbo An Education Report 2006
Montana None Montana Child & Family Services
Nebraska 11 * Midwest Child Care Association
Nevada Unknown No Resource Found
New Hampshire None State Of New Hampshire Attorney General
New Jersey None NJ Department of Human Services
New Mexico None VogueSeattle.com Lawyer Answers
New York None New York Children & Family Services
North Carolina None NC Health & Human Services
North Dakota 9 * North Dakota CSCC (Kid's Council)
Ohio None The Cleveland Law: Home Alone Children
Oklahoma None Lawton PD - Guide For Working Parents
Oregon 10 City of Albany, Oregon FAQ
Pennsylvania None Pittsburg Post-Gazette.com article June, 2007
Rhode Island Unknown No Resource Found
South Carolina 8 * NBC Augusta.com
South Dakota None South Dakota Cooperative Extension Service
Tennessee 10 * Tennessee Juvenile & Family Court Judges
Texas None Texas Family & Protective Services
Utah None Children's Service Society of Utah
Vermont Unknown No Resource Found
Virginia None Chesterfield County, Virginia Social Services
Washington 10 * Child Care Resources
West Virginia Unknown No Resource Found
Wisconsin 12 * Prevent Child Abuse Wisconsin
Wyoming 12 * Wyoming Child Protective Services

* Guideline ONLY. These states do not set a specific age after which a child legally can stay home alone but do provide recommendations.

 

[gslack]

Already did that a few times with you liar boy....

now do you want to debate the OP here? If not I would remind you that deliberately picking an argument that derails a thread, and then crying about me derailing threads in another thread(s) is a completely unethical thing to try and do....

now grow up junior......

You derailed the OP a long time ago with your typical rage-o-holic antics. It's basically how you operate. You weren't concerned with "debating the OP" for three pages worth of name calling with ConHog (and one page worth of sexual innuendo with Syrenn).

You stated I misrepresented myself. I've simply asked you to back up that claim. There are several posters on this board who I've been interacting with in various forms since '03, and I am sure they would be shocked at your "slam-dunk" evidence that proves me to be a fraud.

So if you've got the case, then lay it on all of us.

If not, then stop saying you do and then refusing to lay it out for people to consider.

Because it makes you look fairly full of shit.

Why are you trying to derail this thread, after crying in other threads about me doing it?

Conhog and I argued the topic of this thread you are trying to bait me to posting from other threads in this one... And you are doing so expressly so you can cry and complain to everyone that I derail threads... Which you have done numerous times already.. Whats worse, you came and derailed my thread which started the whole thing. This fact you conveniently fail to point out every time you go crying about me...

And as far as syrenn and myself, thats called humor and fun... And whats more she didn't dedicate a day to crying to people that I derail threads.. Don't get upset with me simply because no one wants to joke with you like that... Its probably your shitty attitude and ego...

Grow up moron, I have no intention of playing your lying game with you again..

 

[Samson]

holy fuck you are stupid. YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT CONSENT TO PUTTING YOUR CHILD IN IMMINENT RISK OF BEING IN HARM'S WAY. You do NOT have that right as a parent.

Sailing solo around the wold has inhearent risk and danger. Just as and all any sports do.

Giving Abby permission to sail solo does not put her in IMMINENT danger.

Correct....methinks someone doesn't understand the definition of "IMMINENT".

I think sailing solo promotes lesbianism..

***yeah, I'm bored with the gslack v. geau show.***

 

[gslack]

Sailing solo around the wold has inhearent risk and danger. Just as and all any sports do.

Giving Abby permission to sail solo does not put her in IMMINENT danger.

Correct....methinks someone doesn't understand the definition of "IMMINENT".

I think sailing solo promotes lesbianism..

***yeah, I'm bored with the gslack v. geau show.***

Funny but slapping that idiot has the same effect on me......

 

[geauxtohell]

Grow up moron, I have no intention of playing your lying game with you again..

Just so we are straight, then, you were making it all up. You are full of shit.

Think about it the next time you accuse me of being a fraud. I will call you on it, again and you will look stupid. Again.

I'll let this thread get back to whatever the hell it was about before you showed up and fucked everything up.

 

[syrenn]

holy fuck you are stupid. YOU ABSOLUTELY CAN NOT CONSENT TO PUTTING YOUR CHILD IN IMMINENT RISK OF BEING IN HARM'S WAY. You do NOT have that right as a parent.

Sailing solo around the wold has inhearent risk and danger. Just as and all any sports do.

Giving Abby permission to sail solo does not put her in IMMINENT danger.

Correct....methinks someone doesn't understand the definition of "IMMINENT".

Methinks your absolutely right.

 

[ConHog]

Sailing solo around the wold has inhearent risk and danger. Just as and all any sports do.

Giving Abby permission to sail solo does not put her in IMMINENT danger.

Correct....methinks someone doesn't understand the definition of "IMMINENT".

Methinks your absolutely right.

I agree, why don't you two idiots read the exact definition which I've posted several times now


im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.

Even a monkey could understand that being in a dangerous sea alone is 100X the imminent risk that playing football is. You are not LIKELY to be killed playing football, sure it CAN happen, but it isn't likely. You are LIKELY to face a life threatening storm in the southern Indian Ocean this time of year.

 

[gslack]

Correct....methinks someone doesn't understand the definition of "IMMINENT".

Methinks your absolutely right.

I agree, why don't you two idiots read the exact definition which I've posted several times now


im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.

Even a monkey could understand that being in a dangerous sea alone is 100X the imminent risk that playing football is. You are not LIKELY to be killed playing football, sure it CAN happen, but it isn't likely. You are LIKELY to face a life threatening storm in the southern Indian Ocean this time of year.

im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.


Yeah and none of that applies to her trip.... It is a possibility, but not imminent or likely to occur or pending....

Grow up dickhead you are wrong face it like a man....

 

[ConHog]

Methinks your absolutely right.

I agree, why don't you two idiots read the exact definition which I've posted several times now


im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.

Even a monkey could understand that being in a dangerous sea alone is 100X the imminent risk that playing football is. You are not LIKELY to be killed playing football, sure it CAN happen, but it isn't likely. You are LIKELY to face a life threatening storm in the southern Indian Ocean this time of year.

im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.


Yeah and none of that applies to her trip.... It is a possibility, but not imminent or likely to occur or pending....

Grow up dickhead you are wrong face it like a man....

You are a child, and totally ignorant in the law.

Who decides if her little cruise was an imminent risk that violated the law? you? me? No to both, a JURY as is standard in American law.

 

[gslack]

I agree, why don't you two idiots read the exact definition which I've posted several times now


im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.

Even a monkey could understand that being in a dangerous sea alone is 100X the imminent risk that playing football is. You are not LIKELY to be killed playing football, sure it CAN happen, but it isn't likely. You are LIKELY to face a life threatening storm in the southern Indian Ocean this time of year.

im·mi·nent
   /ˈɪmənənt/ Show Spelled[im-uh-nuhnt] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
likely to occur at any moment; impending: Her death is imminent.


Yeah and none of that applies to her trip.... It is a possibility, but not imminent or likely to occur or pending....

Grow up dickhead you are wrong face it like a man....

You are a child, and totally ignorant in the law.

Who decides if her little cruise was an imminent risk that violated the law? you? me? No to both, a JURY as is standard in American law.

Gotta be a trial for that first and there is no legal precedence nor specification for it... And taking shit from the media and calling it truth is not evidence....

Since you ran from this post and you try to claim I am "ignorant in the law" (thats of the law moron) I am reposting this here until you can confront it like a man or shut up....

So to be clear, a parent does NOT have the right to neglect their child?

As far as proving your case, that does not equal a law being broken.

and no Syrenn, you haven't won, not a single lawyer has disputed my claim that under the federal guidelines for child abuse you have do NOT have the absolute right to decide what is too dangerous for your child to do.

Yeah right so now you are going to change the meaning of the word "dispute".. Nice... Real mature buddy....

You had several people on here tell you over and again how you would not have a case, and somehow you still claim no one disputed it.... Gimme a break already... Get over yourself psycho, you have no case... I pointed out why in a very thorough manner, and nearly everyone on here came to the same conclusion that you had no case and there is no legal precedence..

If that is not disputing your claim I have no idea waht you would consider such.. I can only decide you are an idiot who will call himself right no matter what...

Here is my previous post on this which you ignored and no one challenged so far...

No, Syrenn doesn't get off that easily, she just mislead you with the question. IF something poses an imminent risk and a parent allows their child to do it anyway, that is breaking the law. yes or no?


by the way I posted the law in the other thread, but I will do sere as well


Definitions in Federal Law

Federal legislation provides a foundation for States by identifying a minimum set of acts or behaviors that define child abuse and neglect. The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) (42 U.S.C.A. §5106g), as amended by the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003, defines child abuse and neglect as, at minimum:

* Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation; or

* An act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.

If this is the operative law, then allowing a child to do something which presents an imminent risk of harm would be a violation of that law. The action that would violate the law would be the failure of the parent to to prevent the child from doing the dangerous act.

Of course, each case turns on its facts, and no prosecutor is going to file if they think they don't have a reasonable chance to get a conviction. Much depends on the age of the child, the experience of the child and the risk of the particular activity.

Understood that of course each case is different. But given some facts that we know

A) Experts sailors from that part of the world are on record saying that NO sailor should have been sailing that ocean solo this time of year

B) Family members are telling people that her boat was inadequately repaired from a mechanical problem earlier in the journey

C) The world organization that keeps track of sailing records has dropped their youngest category due to the danger

D) Family members are testifying that the father urged maybe to the point of coercion this girl continue when she wanted to stop after her boat broke down the first time

E) It turns out that the father had made a deal with a reality TV show contingent on her completing the trip before she left


Now given those facts to begin with would you as a prosecutor file charges?

This is the very last time i bother giving a legitimate and thoughtful response to you conhog.... Don't make me regret it again....

A) What experts? Who said they were experts, what makes them experts? All of those things are required BEFORE assessing a legal case or causality for anything even resembling child abuse by wealthy and otherwise responsible parents... Just taking whats on the news and going with it is not a legal process, nor is it evidence...

B) What family members? how well do they know the child and the family? How are they related? How often have they been in close contact? What are the family particulars which could prove negative to their testimony? And are they sailing or boating/sailboat experts? Are they qualified to judge who is and who is not able to take such a risk in particular the point of sailing open seas?... And again simply taking the media at its word on this is not evidence nor is it legal precedence.. Any such charges regarding the potential removal of a child from a family or charges of abuse or neglect, require the utmost care and careful consideration of ALL the actual facts and particulars... The legal system and courts know this all too well, and no one wants to be labeled a home wrecker....

C) The world organization on sailing sets their age limits by their own system and guidelines using their own reasoning. They are not a legal Representative or represent in any fashion the legal system, the government, or the health and human services agencies. And further, they did not set their guidelines to the standard of qualifications this girl has, but rather the qualifications of general competitors or members... Most people do not have her expertise, and I dare say few adult sailors would as well...

D) Again I refer you to my previous points raised in section B) above.... All those questions raised apply here as well as the following.... Do you have hard and real evidence of this other than from the news or media? If not, are the media you cite or reference and/or the claimed "witnesses" ready to testify to this in court and under oath? Also we have the problem of proving "coercion" which in its own right is a daunting task to prove with merely the claims of people who have shown a desire to appear in the media or give their voice inappropriately and out of turn to a source given to dramatization and exaggeration.

E) Did HE make the deal alone and or without her consent? Or was it an attempt to capitalize on the trip and make the most of her journey? I understand, despite the claims of some media the deal was made while she was home and BEFORE the trip, in fact I believe they went together and worked the deal.. if that IS the case, than one cannot very well establish a solo attempt to elicit funds for selfish gain at her expense and without her knowledge.. And most importantly this does not establish anything legally.... It does not establish abuse at all, in fact it would lend to the belief he was trying to get as much money for her as he could which would appear the opposite of abuse. In fact when we realize the very risks she is undertaking even in your own posting here, we can very easily see how any funds she can get are well deserved baring some illegal actions...

Now, all the legalese aside..... You need to take a nap... you have just made an ass of yourself in two threads now... Enough is enough, you are wrong.. Wrong from a legal standpoint, wrong from a common sense standpoint, and wrong in the fact YOU do not get to be the boss of the rest of the world... And YOU do not have the right to tell anyone else how to raise their child simply because you don't like it......