#1
My class was discussing this article:
http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=637ee67b-533a-4c2a-9c8f-d9dc17d4344f

This is an event that occured not too long ago in a town bordering the town I live in. We were discussing wether or not it was the parents of the kids who attended the party who were to blame, or the kids themselves. I played a huge part in the arguement, supporting the idea that it was the kids who were responsible. My teacher on the other hand, argued that it was the parents of the children who attended who were to blame. I think that this article in itself isn't valid, as all it does it try to shift the blame from the kids to anyone that they can, including television and alcohol ads. I also didn't like the ecstasy connection they use, a point that I also argued. Just because there are lollipops strewn around doesn't mean that ecstasy was being taken, especially considering the high prices and rarity of the drug around here.

Basically, I want to know what my fellow UGers think, kids or parents to blame?

And another interesting question, at what age do you think a child can take full responsibility for their actions, 18 like the law says, or earlier/later?
OH NOES! My sig is gone.
#2
Kids definetly. There is no way they learnt from their parents to crash cars, do drugs, drink to excess and Wreck homes (unless the parents recently got out of jail).
Member of The Bass Militia. PM DinkyDaisy to join.
Co-Founding member of the Save the Funk club. PM jimmypage27 or me to join.
Founding Member of "Using gay as an insult proclaims your idiocy" club.
Member #11 of the UG RIP Cliff Burton Club
#3
Quote by jesusgonewrong
Kids definetly. There is no way they learnt from their parents to crash cars, do drugs, drink to excess and Wreck homes (unless the parents recently got out of jail).


Well, the arguement is that the parents should have been more aware about where their children were, even if their children lied. They should have called wherever it is they thought their children were going to validate that they were there.
OH NOES! My sig is gone.
#4
Kids... I dont see how the parents could've done anything, they were on vacation. Now if the parents were in town, I could see a possibility of action.


Well, the arguement is that the parents should have been more aware about where their children were, even if their children lied. They should have called wherever it is they thought their children were going to validate that they were there.

I can find your answer right to an extent. The reason I would find this illegable is because we dont know too much about the kids being at home. I might have missed it, but I didn't read anywhere that the kids were at their parents house, rather than staying at a friends house while their parents were on vacation, meaning the parents would eventually trust that the new hosts were making sure that there was going to be no partying.
"Guitarmen, wake up and pluck wire for sound, let 'em hear you play"
-Charlie Christian
"You have to give people something to dream on"
-Jimi Hendrix
"I try to make any guitar do what I want it to do"
-Slash
Last edited by ericgentz at Mar 24, 2007,
#5
Originally Posted by goods2006
And another interesting question, at what age do you think a child can take full responsibility for their actions, 18 like the law says, or earlier/later?


I myself beleive that people come to maturity at very different ages, most kids around 16/17 I would think would be mature but some wouldn't reach maturity until about 19 or as early as 14.
#6
Quote by ericgentz
Kids... I dont see how the parents could've done anything, they were on vacation. Now if the parents were in town, I could see a possibility of action.


They are blaming the parents of the kids who attended the party, not the parents who owned the house.
OH NOES! My sig is gone.
#7
Why the **** wasn't I invited?!

It's true the parents should be more aware, but the kids shouldn't be doing shit like this in the first place...whats the appeal in it?!
#8
Quote by goods2006
They are blaming the parents of the kids who attended the party, not the parents who owned the house.

Oh.. I guess I missed that too.... Oh well, then my whole theory is 'as they would drop a piece of sheet metal on myth busters'... busted.
"Guitarmen, wake up and pluck wire for sound, let 'em hear you play"
-Charlie Christian
"You have to give people something to dream on"
-Jimi Hendrix
"I try to make any guitar do what I want it to do"
-Slash
#9
What do lollipops have to do with ecstacy?
We spent a lifetime on the
Beaches of Normandy in vain


Quote by poopsmith666
oooh look at me, i'm clincher, internet tough guy


Quote by theBaartMan
When Nostradamus predicted badassery, he spoke of clincher09.


<//////> ~


UG's NIN fan club
#10
that article is ridiculous, it is entirely biased towards blaming anything but the kids. it blames the parents, movies, MTV, the liquor industry, advertising companies, but not once is it even hinted that the kids might actually be to blame.

It's obviously the kids fault, they knew they were commiting crimes. Nobody forced them to do it, they all did it of their own free will.

Parents shouldn't be held responsible for their kids actions if the parents aren't there because how can they disipline their kids if they aren't aware of whats their kids are doing.

Granted they could have been more aware, but their kids aren't gonna tell them they are at a massive house party pissed out of their heads are they. They'll say nothing unless they are asked where they are going and then they will lie.
Quote by bassmanjoe08
Dan

Don't stop being you <3


Quote by fatgoogle
I think after this relentless adding for the last 10 mins, that Dan is the coolest looking. Goddamn welsh people and my great etc etc etc etc etc granddad is welsh.
Last edited by skater dan0 at Mar 24, 2007,
#11
Quote by skater dan0
that article is ridiculous, it is entirely biased towards blaming anything but the kids. it blames the parents, movies, MTV, the liquor industry, advertising companies, but not once is it even hinted that the kids might actually be to blame.

It's obviously the kids fault, they knew they were commiting crimes. Nobody forced them to do it, they all did it of their own free will.

Parents shouldn't be held responsible for their kids actions if the parents aren't there because how can they disipline their kids if they aren't aware of whats their kids are doing.

Granted they could have been more aware, but their kids aren't gonna tell them they are at a massive house party pissed out of their heads are they. They'll say nothing unless they are asked where they are going and then they will lie.


That is what the rest of the class and I said. Especially me, arguing that the article was trying to blame everyone but the kids. The teacher, and the adults that came into the room after school (it was my last period, so I stayed after and continued debating the topic) all thought it was the parents fault.

The teacher and I even got into a debate about the captain morgan commercials, with her claiming it is the commercials that caused these kids to drink hard alcohol instead of beer. I claimed that teens will drink hard alcohol and beer, regardless of commercials.
OH NOES! My sig is gone.