Adrian Peterson Charged w/Child Abuse - Deactivated

Vikingwoman wrote:Little did you know you could have achieved the same thing without physically harming your child.

Vikingwoman wrote:Little did you know you could have achieved the same thing without physically harming your child.

Sal wrote:For "beating" his son with a switch. 


I'd have to see a picture of the injuries to make a judgement on this one. 


During the summers of my childhood, we were sent outside to come home only at lunch time and sunset. 


If we were late for either, my mother came huntin' with a switch. 


I can still remember the sting of those welts on the backs of my legs. 


But, that was a different time. 

Vikingwoman wrote:The marks are very significant. Whether he hit him one or ten times he broke the skin and bloodied the child. It is unacceptable and constitutes child abuse. I don't care how many of you had parents who abused you. You will be arrested today for such abuse.

Chrissy* wrote:Teen crime has exploded.

Chrissy* wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:The marks are very significant. Whether he hit him one or ten times he broke the skin and bloodied the child. It is unacceptable and constitutes child abuse. I don't care how many of you had parents who abused you. You will be arrested today for such abuse.

Stop trying to make it PERSONAL" against posters. Its you're Schick I know, cut it out.

switches have a way of leaving this shallow scary looking mark that really isn't a severe laceration.

Here's the deal. these days many daddies don't even hang around to help raise their off spring. Especially black men.

Now you have a public situation that has opened a debate about spanking your children.

This man might need parenting class or anger management or something of that nature. But he is trying to be a parent and discipline his child.

If you don't discipline your child, you are not a good parent. Does that mean I think this is acceptable discipline? no. I think its a bit much.

The don't spank your kids crowd has done the country a severe injustice. I have watched this agenda grow during my life time. It has failed our children and parents as a whole. Teen crime has exploded. children do not respect. They have no fear of repercussion for bad behavior.

I'm an advocate of spanking. I would hate to see this incident create more stringent laws than we have now. And I know the fluffy puffy don't spank your kids group want that. That's why we are still talking about this. Because the fluffy puffy nannies want to force some more social engineering on us.

Vikingwoman wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:The marks are very significant. Whether he hit him one or ten times he broke the skin and bloodied the child. It is unacceptable and constitutes child abuse. I don't care how many of you had parents who abused you. You will be arrested today for such abuse.

Stop trying to make it PERSONAL" against posters. Its you're Schick I know, cut it out.

switches have a way of leaving this shallow scary looking mark that really isn't a severe laceration.

Here's the deal. these days many daddies don't even hang around to help raise their off spring. Especially black men.

Now you have a public situation that has opened a debate about spanking your children.

This man might need parenting class or anger management or something of that nature. But he is trying to be a parent and discipline his child.

If you don't discipline your child, you are not a good parent. Does that mean I think this is acceptable discipline? no. I think its a bit much.

The don't spank your kids crowd has done the country a severe injustice. I have watched this agenda grow during my life time. It has failed our children and parents as a whole. Teen crime has exploded. children do not respect. They have no fear of repercussion for bad behavior.

I'm an advocate of spanking. I would hate to see this incident create more stringent laws than we have now. And I know the fluffy puffy don't spank your kids group want that. That's why we are still talking about this. Because the fluffy puffy nannies want to force some more social engineering on us.

I'm going to say this again and whoever wants to take it personally can. I really don't care and don't have any intention of cutting it out. If you hit your kid with objects and leave a mark your chances of being arrested are very high. Lack of beating your child has nothing to do with teen crime or bad behavior. That's just pure ignorance and a lack of education. You can spank your child within reason but when you cross the line into this stuff you're going down the road to jail. People did these things many years ago and are no longer allowed to get away with it. If you can't discipline your child w/o hitting them then you got a problem and need to go to parenting classes.

Vikingwoman wrote:Tell it to the Judge.

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/stats_at-a_glance/vca_temp-trends.html





http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/stats_at-a_glance/vca_temp-trends.html





http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200

1. Confusing correlation with causation fallacy.

The chart is being used inappropriately to indicate that there is a correlation with causation. Namely that juvenile crime is down.


The chart could just as easily indicate that...

The juveniles could just be getting smarter about not being caught or the law enforcement officers just don't care.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMnNAGLAc_w

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200

1. Confusing correlation with causation fallacy.

The chart is being used inappropriately to indicate that there is a correlation with causation. Namely that juvenile crime is down.


The chart could just as easily indicate that...

The juveniles could just be getting smarter about not being caught or the law enforcement officers just don't care.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMnNAGLAc_w

You are beyond dense.  Chrissy said that 1) we have "way more teen crime" today and 2) this phenomenon is caused by the fact that parents are spanking less.

Chrissy is the one who implied a causal relationship between spanking and teen crime.  All I did is provide the underlying facts that show us that her entire premise is wrong - because teen crime is currently near historical lows.

Now, if you wish to make the case that teen crime really isn't at historical lows and that it may very well be much higher due to the suggestion that today's teens are smarter and are getting caught less, well, that is certainly your choice.  Just realize that you're speculating out of your ass.

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200

1. Confusing correlation with causation fallacy.

The chart is being used inappropriately to indicate that there is a correlation with causation. Namely that juvenile crime is down.


The chart could just as easily indicate that...

The juveniles could just be getting smarter about not being caught or the law enforcement officers just don't care.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMnNAGLAc_w

You are beyond dense.  Chrissy said that 1) we have "way more teen crime" today and 2) this phenomenon is caused by the fact that parents are spanking less.

Chrissy is the one who implied a causal relationship between spanking and teen crime.  All I did is provide the underlying facts that show us that her entire premise is wrong - because teen crime is currently near historical lows.

Now, if you wish to make the case that teen crime really isn't at historical lows and that it may very well be much higher due to the suggestion that today's teens are smarter and are getting caught less, well, that is certainly your choice.  Just realize that you're speculating out of your ass.

I'm simply pointing out your statistical fallacy.

You're the one full of...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rpq6u8hYgk

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200





1. Confusing correlation with causation fallacy.

The chart is being used inappropriately to indicate that there is a correlation with causation. Namely that juvenile crime is down.


The chart could just as easily indicate that...

The juveniles could just be getting smarter about not being caught or the law enforcement officers just don't care.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMnNAGLAc_w

You are beyond dense.  Chrissy said that 1) we have "way more teen crime" today and 2) this phenomenon is caused by the fact that parents are spanking less.

Chrissy is the one who implied a causal relationship between spanking and teen crime.  All I did is provide the underlying facts that show us that her entire premise is wrong - because teen crime is currently near historical lows.

Now, if you wish to make the case that teen crime really isn't at historical lows and that it may very well be much higher due to the suggestion that today's teens are smarter and are getting caught less, well, that is certainly your choice.  Just realize that you're speculating out of your ass.

I'm simply pointing out your statistical fallacy.

You're the one full of...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rpq6u8hYgk

My statistical fallacy?

You pointed out the fallacy of causation vs correlation.  I never suggested any causation or correlation.  That was Chrissy.  

Learn to read.

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200





1. Confusing correlation with causation fallacy.

The chart is being used inappropriately to indicate that there is a correlation with causation. Namely that juvenile crime is down.


The chart could just as easily indicate that...

The juveniles could just be getting smarter about not being caught or the law enforcement officers just don't care.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMnNAGLAc_w

You are beyond dense.  Chrissy said that 1) we have "way more teen crime" today and 2) this phenomenon is caused by the fact that parents are spanking less.

Chrissy is the one who implied a causal relationship between spanking and teen crime.  All I did is provide the underlying facts that show us that her entire premise is wrong - because teen crime is currently near historical lows.

Now, if you wish to make the case that teen crime really isn't at historical lows and that it may very well be much higher due to the suggestion that today's teens are smarter and are getting caught less, well, that is certainly your choice.  Just realize that you're speculating out of your ass.

I'm simply pointing out your statistical fallacy.

You're the one full of...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rpq6u8hYgk

My statistical fallacy?

You pointed out the fallacy of causation vs correlation.  I never suggested any causation or correlation.  That was Chrissy.  

Learn to read.

You're the one who brought in the charts attempting to prove something statistically.

So yes it's your statistical fallacy.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Chrissy* wrote:yes it was a different time.

and now with all the fluffy puffy dont swat your kids group we can see that we have way more teen crime and a whole lotta other crap.

Do you always just make shit up?


http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/JAR_Display.asp?ID=qa05200





1. Confusing correlation with causation fallacy.

The chart is being used inappropriately to indicate that there is a correlation with causation. Namely that juvenile crime is down.


The chart could just as easily indicate that...

The juveniles could just be getting smarter about not being caught or the law enforcement officers just don't care.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMnNAGLAc_w

You are beyond dense.  Chrissy said that 1) we have "way more teen crime" today and 2) this phenomenon is caused by the fact that parents are spanking less.

Chrissy is the one who implied a causal relationship between spanking and teen crime.  All I did is provide the underlying facts that show us that her entire premise is wrong - because teen crime is currently near historical lows.

Now, if you wish to make the case that teen crime really isn't at historical lows and that it may very well be much higher due to the suggestion that today's teens are smarter and are getting caught less, well, that is certainly your choice.  Just realize that you're speculating out of your ass.

I'm simply pointing out your statistical fallacy.

You're the one full of...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rpq6u8hYgk

My statistical fallacy?

You pointed out the fallacy of causation vs correlation.  I never suggested any causation or correlation.  That was Chrissy.  

Learn to read.

You're the one who brought in the charts attempting to prove something statistically.

So yes it's your statistical fallacy.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diOuUYcenW0

I'm not sure this can be dumbed down any more but I'll try.  

1.  Chrissy said that we currently have "way more teen crime".

2.  I posted data from two sources that showed us that teen crime is actually near historical lows


OK.  What statistical fallacy have I committed there?