Father shot his daughter's computer

[Jamie (K)]

I'm not convinced the guy is a nut, Torsten.

In the first place, you're doing the same thing people in East Germany used to do when their information was filtered. They'd see a video of police in the Jim Crow south turning fire hoses on civil rights demonstrators, and they would decide that that's what America is like. That one bit of footage, frozen in time, was their whole reality, and they didn't consider that there was a continent of context surrounding it.

You are doing the same thing here, because you only know that A happened and then B happened. I definitely have my doubts that this guy shot up his daughter's computer on the first offense, and he had to have been provoked many times in worse and worse ways before she drove him to that.

Children still under the care of their parents (and to me that includes children over 18 who are still sucking on the nipple at home) do not have absolute freedom of speech within the family context. They don't have a right to say any damn thing they want to about or to their parents, and if they want that right, they should move out and stop depending on them.

Who cares if the girl is scared, upset or humiliated! She intentionally posted something humiliating to her family for the entire world to see, and she apparently wasn't concerned with how upset they'd be. She can humiliate herself all she wants online, but when she deliberately humiliates the people who gave her life and are still supporting her, she's crossed the line.

Her problem now is that her father won at the humiliation game, and good for him. So she goes to the media to continue the campaign of public humiliation against him that she started before he destroyed her computer.

If there had been something seriously wrong in the house, she could have called the social workers and had herself put in the care of the state, or have the state put her in the custody of a kinder relative. However, the only thing seriously wrong in the house was that she was a snot who was provoking her father. She tried to play chicken with him, and she lost.

Torsten, you don't know if the man is a psychopath or if he is insane. Certainly a psychopath would have done far worse than destroy her computer.

[Torsten]

It's a good thing the 'father won at the humiliation game'? The father has the right to view his daughter at the same level when it comes to 'humiliation'? The father has to right to play 'the humiliation game' with his daughter? If his daughther had started playing other 'games' with her father, should the father have played along and adopt the same behavior as his child? If the father had allowed his daughter to be provoked by her many times and his mental state got worse with each instance, he should have sought professional help. As a father he needs to be mentally stable and act as an adult who doesn't easily get provoked by his daughter. Who is in charge of this father's behavior? Who is responsible for his acts? He does not have the right to let his daughter dominate his behavior no matter how hard she might have been trying to provoke him. That's why he is the father and she is the daughter.

TOEIC listening, photographs: Loading a plane

[Jamie (K)]

Again, Torsten, you're still assuming the father was mentally unstable and shot the computer in a fit of rage. That is not likely the case. He could have done it in a calculated, deliberate manner in order to rattle her. I doubt he needed professional help. It may not be the way I would choose to resolve things, but I doubt he was mentally ill or out of control. After all, it was just a computer he was shooting, not a person. He was target shooting.

And your question to me is the same one I applied to the daughter: If there was something seriously wrong with her father, why didn't she seek professional help and have herself put in the custody of the state? The reason is that he is more than likely a good father, and she was only dissatisfied at home in trivial teenage matters.

As I say, I don't think I would have resolved the issue the same way, but I think the way he handled the situation was valid.

[Torsten]

So shooting things is the proper way of handling problems? If you shoot a person's property in 'a calculated, deliberate manner in order to rattle that person', you definitely need professional help.

TOEIC listening, photographs: A car accident

[Jamie (K)]

I didn't say shooting something is "the" proper way of handling problems, but in this case it was "a" useful way of handling a particular problem.

And you think a person needs professional help if he uses a gun for any purpose at all.

[Torsten]

How do you know what I think? Did I say anyone who uses a gun needs professional help?

TOEIC listening, photographs: Loading a truck

[Jamie (K)]

I know your general mentality from previous posts. The statement was an exaggeration, but I know you're big on imagining people have motives that they probably don't have. You merely assumed the man had lost control, just as you merely assume that American authorities feel powerful and gratified when they have a murderer executed.

It would be like when an American thinks Nazi sailors were happy when they sank a British ship. In fact the men themselves said they merely saw kids just like them drowning at their hands and that there was no joy or satisfaction in it at all.

[Cgk]

I remember the time when children were just grounded for their misbehavior. Those were the good ol' days . . .

Claudia
_________________
In the land of the ignorant, the biggest fool is king.

[Jamie (K)]

Kids still get grounded, although nowadays many parents don't believe in punishing their children at all.

[Our Tort System]

I can get behind this approach to child rearing (the paddle):

Talking out of turn, looking out the window - that's a paddling! Fair enough. That sure does it for me.



_________________
If it's not easy, don't do it!
That's how I got where I am.

[Jamie (K)]

When I was in school, the teachers who taught boys-only classes, like gym or woodshop, had paddles and used them. However, they were used only on very rare occasions (not even once a semester) for kids who were defiant and completely incorrigible. I don't think it was used on anyone who didn't deserve it. Usually, just the visible presence of the paddle kept everyone in line. This is not allowed in American schools anymore (most of them, anyway).

My mother used a wooden spoon on us. I think it was used on me twice in my whole childhood, and those were times when I was defiant and no other punishment worked. The rest of the time, just the words "wooden spoon" were adequate to make me behave.

[Cgk]