16 replies to this topic

[ShyWriter]

.
 ScreenHunter_04 Feb. 11 12.56.jpg   3.79K   1 downloads

Dad Shoots Laptop After Daughter Complains on Facebook (VIDEO)

By Emma Koonse , Christian Post Reporter
February 11, 2012 |8:38 am

A North Carolina man has taken his anger out on his 15-year-old daughter by shooting her laptop computer repeatedly with a .45 pistol after the dared to complain about her chores on social networking site Facebook.

 ScreenHunter_05 Feb. 11 13.03.jpg   100.35K   1 downloads

SOURCE... Read FULL story at http://global.christ...ok-video-69220/

Steve

[David H. Lipman]

Parenting, well that's a tough job and I can't say I know better.

Having to take care of chores and responsibilities are character builders and are important for maturation.

Dissing one's parents as this minor had done is not a good thing. It does show there is a lack of communication in the family. The father hinted at a stepmother so that may be the causative factor. He's the parent and and while I don't necessarily agree to the destruction method I do agree that taking the notebook away is correct.

The father indicated he was out of the house and taking on monumental responsibilities at an early age. While that may be good for him, he shouldn't be using that experience as a benchmark for his daughter.

Is this a little over the edge ?
I think it is only because of the way the notebook was destroyed and doing it publicly. I do believe that there is a communication problem between father and daughter and I believe he widened the chasm.

[ShyWriter]

He did communicate to her (I read several versions of the same story) that she'd be paying him $1 a piece for each bullet he shot into the laptop.

That .45ACP *did* fulfill the job of a great "parental filter".

Steve
PS: It's all Dr. Spock's (NOT the Star Trek version) fault for the permissive pablum he fed the parents for forty-something years that helped lead to the lack of respect for parental authority to start with.

[GT500]

If the guy payed for the laptop, then I don't see a problem with him putting a few rounds of .45 ACP into it. That's his own money that he just shot up.

As far as his issues with his daughter, I'll admit that the chores he has her do are not very hefty or burdensome. That being said, I still blame the parents for the issues with their daughter. If all you do is send you kid to school, then have them do some work when they come home (schoolwork/housework/etc), and then just leave them to themselves or to their friends they do tend to become more bitter towards you. Think about it for a moment. If your life is going to school and hanging out with friends, and then someone who doesn't play much of a role in your life tells you that you have to do something or you will endure some punishment, why wouldn't you be bitter? Also, don't think that providing a house, food, clothing, laptop, etc. means that a parent plays a significant role in a child's life. If the majority of a child's time is spent with friends (and that includes time at school) then those friends play the most significant role in the child's life, regardless of the contributions made by the parent.

In all honesty, a parent that does nothing more than provide necessities, toys, and gadgets for their child is not a parent. The government does that for people as well, and government social workers tend to spend more time with people than parents do with their children. If you cannot be bothered to spend time with your child, and be the primary mentor and teacher in your child's life, then you should expect them to not respect you and to be rebellious during their teenage years. If someone else is the primary mentor or teacher of your child (and that includes Church youth groups) then you are going to have problems with them, as they will not respect you as a parent when you never fulfilled the role of a parent.

Now let me be perfectly clear that I don't have a problem with children doing chores. I just have a problem with parents who have their children doing work for them, but they won't spend any actual time with their children. At least go do the chores with your children, and patiently teach them how best to do them. Some day, you might actually find your children volunteering to go out and do the chores themselves.

[Firefox]

Bit of over kill if you ask me, and I agree with you that its a parenting thing, you have to be involved in your kids lives in order to gain respect and you have to teach by example, and this to me is not a good example...

[screen317]

A 15 year old girl complaining on Facebook? This is gun-worthy?

[GT500]

screen317 said:

A 15 year old girl complaining on Facebook? This is gun-worthy?

I know a lot of people that said "Good for him!" when they heard he shot up his daughter's laptop.

My personal position is simply that as long as he was the one who paid for the laptop and all of the software/upgrades/etc. then he is well within his rights to unload whatever firearm he wants to on the laptop for any reason he wants to.

Of course, regardless of whether or not the guy had the right to do what he did, the comments I made above still stand.

[David H. Lipman]

A snippet of the video made it to US New York City, CBS channel 2 news.

All they had to say was the father is outside the city limits thus the gun fire was legal and the local yocals paid him a visit to make sure the daughter is safe.

[ShyWriter]

GT500, on 14 February 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

I know a lot of people that said "Good for him!" when they heard he shot up his daughter's laptop.

My personal position is simply that as long as he was the one who paid for the laptop and all of the software/upgrades/etc. then he is well within his rights to unload whatever firearm he wants to on the laptop for any reason he wants to.

Of course, regardless of whether or not the guy had the right to do what he did, the comments I made above still stand.

Arthur; without knowing both sides of the story "right down to the nitty-gritty of he said, she said, and the period of time involved" before it lead up to the extreme action can we really make an informed opinion?? Maybe the rants on FACEBOOK were the proverbial "straw"??

Hey; at least he didn't shoot the girl.

As a parent with now grown kids that have kids of their own I can only say they turned out perfect ( ) DESPITE myself or my wife and the actions we did/didn't do over their formative years.

Steve

[GT500]

ShyWriter said:

Arthur; without knowing both sides of the story "right down to the nitty-gritty of he said, she said, and the period of time involved" before it lead up to the extreme action can we really make an informed opinion?? Maybe the rants on FACEBOOK were the proverbial "straw"??

As I said Steve, the guy had every right to shoot that laptop, so long as he was the one who paid for it. It isn't the shooting of the laptop that I have a problem with.

I am quite in favor of carrying and using firearms, so long as you are respectful of others and their property.

My comments above, about parenting in general, still stand.

[David H. Lipman]

GT500, on 14 February 2012 - 12:08 PM, said:

My personal position is simply that as long as he was the one who paid for the laptop and all of the software/upgrades/etc. then he is well within his rights to unload whatever firearm he wants to on the laptop for any reason he wants to.

Even if the father did NOT pay for the laptop, she is a minor. Her father is still "...within his rights to unload whatever firearm he wants to on the laptop for any reason he wants to."

[GT500]

David H. Lipman said:

Even if the father did NOT pay for the laptop, she is a minor. Her father is still "...within his rights to unload whatever firearm he wants to on the laptop for any reason he wants to."

There are some courts that might convict the father of a criminal act if he were to destroy something his daughter payed for without her permission (and at the price of a laptop that could be a felony). Depends on state law, the disposition of the jury, and the judge's interpretation of property rights.

If the father had destroyed a laptop that the daughter had payed for, then I would at least expect him to reimburse her the full purchase price of the laptop. Destroying someone's personal property is not punishment, it is a criminal act, regardless of the age of the individual or your relationship with them. That is why I said "as long as he was the one who paid for the laptop and all of the software/upgrades/etc.", because what a man does with property that he paid for is his own business. Since the girl is his child, and is a minor, I can overlook the fact that normally property changes ownership the moment you give it away, even if there was no payment in return.

[David H. Lipman]

I don't think any federal, state or municipal court will deny parental rights of a minor who has not been emancipated. A minor can't even enter into a contract.

[GT500]

David H. Lipman said:

I don't think any federal, state or municipal court will deny parental rights of a minor who has not been emancipated. ...

Strange things happen in courts these days David. In many places, you can be jailed just for spanking a child.

[David H. Lipman]

GT500, on 14 February 2012 - 01:19 PM, said:

Strange things happen in courts these days David. In many places, you can be jailed just for spanking a child.

That's a different story. A parent does not have the right to abuse a child so there is a legal, but imperceptible, boundary going from spanking to abuse. This imperceptible line may be drawn at lasting marks (welts and bruises) or in the case of using a belt, whip, lash or instrument other than the parents bare (open) hand.

There's a big difference in the law concerning a minor's processional rights vs. their human rights.

EDIT:

Let's discuss Susie for a moment...

Fifteen year old Susie purchases a laptop on sale from Best Buy for $750.00 USD under a no-return policy.
Susie takes it home and 10 days later Susie's father finds the laptop. The father takes it back to Best Buy for a refund.

Best Buy says it was bought as-is and the sale was final and can't be returned.
Is that correct ?

No. The laptop was sold to a minor and minor's can not be a party of a contract and thus Best Buy's on sale no-return policy is null and void. Best Buy needed to secure the parent's approval for the on sale no-return policy to be in effect.

This is why you see on TV ads a qualification that the purchaser "must be over 18."

[GT500]

David H. Lipman said:

There's a big difference in the law concerning a minor's processional rights vs. their human rights.

With the right jury present, you could argue that destruction of personal property is a violation of laws banning "cruel and unusual punishment", and a parent would get jail time for doing it. Also, with the right judge and jury, you can convince them that property rights normally considered as only applying to adults also apply to minors.

As I said, whether or not it could be pulled off depends on a few factors, but it is possible. Obviously it wouldn't work in every municipality, however there are places where this father would have been arrested for shooting that laptop, even though he paid for it (even if the arresting charge was nothing more than shooting a firearm within city limits). It just so happens that he did it in a place where it was legal, so there is no issue with it.

Our legal system does not always make sense when it comes to laws regarding minors, and those laws are different in every state, with each county and city having the ability to make their own laws on minors. You have to do a lot of reading to figure out what is and isn't legal for parents to do these days, and the laws are not always sane.

[AdvancedSetup]

Getting a bit out of hand on for a Tech Support site folks.... let's please wind it down