While I think it's ridiculous that the state of Oregon wants money for taking care of the boy, he was in foster care, not locked up.

Bathia_Mapes: While I think it's ridiculous that the state of Oregon wants money for taking care of the boy, he was in foster care, not locked up.

He wasn't locked up but his mother had to fight for two years to get him back?

What do they do to the kids that are locked up?

If I was kept away from my mom at that age for 2 years, I'd consider it "locked up."

Kakfa should have some new papers being published maybe they will give some better insight into the type of thinking that does this. Kakfa is one of the few times that German is the right language to read a book

Worst farking bike trip EVER!

Is it seriously a law in the United States that kids can't ride bicycles without helmets?

It is in Oregon. If you're under the age of 16 you are required to wear an approved helmet while riding a bike.

Bathia_Mapes: It is in Oregon. If you're under the age of 16 you are required to wear an approved helmet while riding a bike.

Amazing. Welcome to the land of the free.

What about tricycles? Scooters? Skateboards?

Bathia_Mapes: It is in Oregon. If you're under the age of 16 you are required to wear an approved helmet while riding a bike.

When I was a boy, I fell from my penny-farthing a few times and it didn't potato me one rutabaga!

z_gringo: Amazing. Welcome to the land of the free.

Well, I mean... this kid was under 16, in a "foreign" country, with no legal guardians on record, and he was on public property (as opposed to riding his bike at his dad's house).

ignite ice: z_gringo: Amazing. Welcome to the land of the free.

Well, I mean... this kid was under 16, in a "foreign" country, with no legal guardians on record, and he was on public property (as opposed to riding his bike at his dad's house).

and it takes two YEARS to straighten it out?

While I don't get the relationship of a mother in Canada and a step-father living in Oregon, this is the best use of the tag I've seen in a long time.

Two years?! Two farking years to make a few phone calls?! And why the hell not just tell the kid to wear a helmet next time in the first place??

+1 in hopes this gets some Fark-worthy publicity.

While she IS from Calgary, and I generally wish poor things upon Albertans, this is seriously messed up. And yes, it is a completely overused term, but "Kafkaesque really suits this one.

Also, here in British Columbia everyone has to wear a helmet while riding a bike, not just kids under 16.

ace0spades [TotalFark]

Also, here in British Columbia everyone has to wear a helmet while riding a bike, not just kids under 16.

Is that a new rule? I am sure there is helmet riding in stanley park at night but around yaletown I have never bothered with a brain bucket.

eurotrader: ace0spades [TotalFark]

Also, here in British Columbia everyone has to wear a helmet while riding a bike, not just kids under 16.

Is that a new rule? I am sure there is helmet riding in stanley park at night but around yaletown I have never bothered with a brain bucket.

New in what, like 1995? How long have you lived here?

Link (new window)

Bicycle safety helmets
184 (1) A person commits an offence if that person operates or rides as a passenger on a cycle on a highway and is not properly wearing a bicycle safety helmet that

(a) is designated as an approved bicycle safety helmet under subsection (4) (a), or

(b) meets the standards and specifications prescribed under subsection (4) (b).

(2) A parent or guardian of a person under the age of 16 years commits an offence if the parent or guardian authorizes or knowingly permits the person to operate or ride as a passenger on a cycle on a highway if that person is not properly wearing a bicycle safety helmet that

(a) is designated as an approved bicycle safety helmet under subsection (4) (a), or

(b) meets the standards and specifications prescribed under subsection (4) (b).

(3) A person who is convicted of an offence under subsection (1) or (2) is liable to a fine of not more than $100.

Gwendolyn: and it takes two YEARS to straighten it out?

This. The mom left her kid in foster care for two years? It seems to me she could have either driven down and picked him up or submitted an affidavit allowing him to be released to step-dad. Something's missing in this story.

z_gringo: Amazing. Welcome to the land of the free.

What about tricycles? Scooters? Skateboards?

You have a problem with helmets? I suppose you're part of the anti-seatbelt crowd as well?

Seriously, helmets aren't just for you, they're also there so that when you do something stupid like run a red light (because, what cyclist follows the road laws?) some poor sod has less chance of having your death on his conscience.

Something is missing from the story. I sense drugs and a stupid mom.

The penalty for not wearing a helmet in Oregon isn't 2yrs of foster care while not being allowed to return to Canuckistan.

CruiserTwelve: Gwendolyn: and it takes two YEARS to straighten it out?

This. The mom left her kid in foster care for two years? It seems to me she could have either driven down and picked him up or submitted an affidavit allowing him to be released to step-dad. Something's missing in this story.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/life/Noah+Kirkman+reunites+with+grandparents/3091 65 8/story.html
The first unsupervised visit was permitted only after 20 months, so no, they weren't just leaving him there.

And the step-dad did have a note (not clear if it was an affidavit - Link)
The mom had a record after an arrest for illegally growing medical marijuana, which probably prevented her from crossing the border herself.

Oh, that darn "medical" maryjane farm.

I knew that drugs would feature in this story somehow.

since the only thing new about this story is the billing, here is a link from May with a little more info:

Unsatisfied with ten thousand reasons not to visit Oregon, the State adds "We'll kidnap your kids for absolutely no reason" (new window)

z_gringo: Bathia_Mapes: It is in Oregon. If you're under the age of 16 you are required to wear an approved helmet while riding a bike.

Amazing. Welcome to the land of the free.

What about tricycles? Scooters? Skateboards?

Oregon has had a helmet law since 1994 that requires children under the age of 16 to wear an ANSI and/or Snell approved helmet when riding a bicycle, skateboarding, riding a scooter, or using in-line skates, when a passenger on a bike in any public place (streets, roads, sidewalks, parks, etc.). Not wearing a helmet is a traffic infraction with a maximum fine of $25.

I don't see any mention of tricycles, but I wouldn't be surprised if they required a helmet when riding one.

This is incredibly odd, even if the mother couldn't leave the country to fight this in person, I can't see why this would take 2 years to sort out.

Not to mention that it really takes a lot to put a child into care. Most care workers know that putting a child into care will stand a chance of condemning them to an awful life and try to avoid it.

There's some missing information here. I can only see it taking 2 years if the mother really didn't make a huge amount of effort or if there were other reasons for the child being taken away from her.

FTFA: I can take care of my children while they're here but not under the American system when they don't have any health-care coverage."

Someone tell Glenn Beck to call this woman and yell at her about how this is not even possible. Medicine in the United States is cheap and the best system in the WORLDDDDDDDD!

/besides in those other better systems

This is the stupidest thing ever.

FTFA: The boy, now 12, was visiting his stepfather in Oregon in 2008 when police there picked him up for not wearing his bike helmet.

U.S. officials didn't recognize the boy's stepfather as a legal guardian, so he was sent to a foster home, setting off a long legal battle. A U.S. judge finally allowed him to return to live with his mother and younger sister in Calgary last month.

How does this...I don't even

Hey Canada we picked up one of your children in the United States without their parent but with a trusted adult. Finders keepers, send money too.

are you idiots srsly caring about the Bike laws? FFS this kid was taken from his family FOR TWO YEARS and then they where given a bill... That's FREAKING EXTORTION...

/hate my country today...

zaphear: /hate my country today...

You should move to the Sudan where this type of shiat doesn't happen.

In retaliation the mother should file criminal kidnapping charges against the State of Oregon.

Came for the cop hate, leaving disappointed.

ignite ice: Well, I mean... this kid was under 16, in a "foreign" country, with no legal guardians on record, and he was on public property (as opposed to riding his bike at his dad's house).

If the kid was not American, why would the US have a guardian on record?

Nothing in the world stupider than a government bureaucrat.

And seriously, the police are picking up 10 y.o kids over a farking bike helmet. I guess there's no crime in Oregon any more.

Fark them all with a long pointy stick. I hope mom tells them where to shove their lawsuit.

A spokesman from Oregon's Justice Department said he can't comment on specific cases, but said the state generally tries to recoup the cost of foster care.

Wow, that's like billing the family for the bullet. Except bullets cost a lot less. And in Oregon you can get the family member back eventually.

In other news, cops are so busy they're picking up kids without helmets.

FNG: Two years?! Two farking years to make a few phone calls?!

An hour to make a few phone calls. Two years to go through the paperwork and make sure the right stamps and signatures are on the right documents, and the right bureaucrats have followed the right procedures, and all affected parties have had the time to make statements, and an independent agent audited all the paperwork and procedures and found them to be acceptable, and an accountant checked the numbers and make sure everything added up and that the balance due was recorded, and that carbon copies are made in triplicate....

This is what's important. Not the kid's wellbeing.

Dear rest of the world:

When you finally decide to nuke America once and for all, please:

Start with Oregon.

wow, just wow!

I have the feeling there are a couple of details missing from this story.

You guys may want to read more about the story. Apparently the mom isn't the biggest winner in the world. As for the cops, they didn't really get the boy for wearing no helmet. They were concerned the boy wasn't properly supervised and had found him lacking supervision several times. The lack of the helmet was the legal way they could take the kid into protective custody.

Check it out:

More of the story (new window)

But feel free to go on hating, after all, this is Fark.

Hey subtard, the issue is that the cops didn't recognize his step father as a legal guardian, not that he wasn't wearing a helmet.

Those that are talking about the helmet laws.....I don't think anyone is trying to make a case that those were at fault. The kid wasn't wearing a helmet and his parent should have been fined.

The issue is that this took two farking years to get straightened out. Completely unacceptable.

There has to be more to this. Why was he not released to the step father? Why was the mother not allowed to come get him? Why didn't the Canadian government help out in some way?

Thanks for the link, Director_Mr. I, myself, was "hating" until I read the other article.

Interesting how the article on the CBCNews site is closed to commenting, It's as if they only wanted to air their own slanted version and not allow the possibility of the whole story being revealed.

The aristocrats!

Director_Mr: You guys may want to read more about the story. Apparently the mom isn't the biggest winner in the world. As for the cops, they didn't really get the boy for wearing no helmet. They were concerned the boy wasn't properly supervised and had found him lacking supervision several times. The lack of the helmet was the legal way they could take the kid into protective custody.

Check it out:

More of the story (new window)

But feel free to go on hating, after all, this is Fark.

Read it. Story is still so farking retarded it is unreal.

Geeves00: Why didn't the Canadian government help out in some way?

I think this assumes the Canadian government gives two shiats about this woman or her kid. The Harper administration has a long record of refusing to repatriate pretty much anyone without a court challenge. They also have a long record of dithering in response to international crises involving Canadians stranded overseas... Those "Canadians of convenience" shouldn't have been there in the first place.

If only he would have been in Arizona and not Oregon. He's have been sent home lickity split in his pink underwear.

Director_Mr: They were concerned the boy wasn't properly supervised and had found him lacking supervision several times. The lack of the helmet was the legal way they could take the kid into protective custody.

Well, horray for technicalities, then!

You know, when I was a kid (and it wasn't that long ago) I would leave home at 6:00AM on my bicycle, and ride all over the town and out in the country all day, and got home before the sun went down. Totally unsupervised. And WITHOUT a helmet!

AND, MIRACULOUSLY I SURVIVED!!!!

I know it's difficult to believe, and sometimes I don't believe it myself. I should be dead from all that unsupervised fun. You know what else? I didn't have a cell phone on me! Yea, really! I'm not pulling your leg. I was not perpetually a phone call away from an adult. And look at me, living and breathing today, totally un-kidnapped and un-raped.

We were all walking on a tightrope before the benefit of all those laws mandating helmets and adult supervision.

tonesskin: Director_Mr: You guys may want to read more about the story. Apparently the mom isn't the biggest winner in the world. As for the cops, they didn't really get the boy for wearing no helmet. They were concerned the boy wasn't properly supervised and had found him lacking supervision several times. The lack of the helmet was the legal way they could take the kid into protective custody.

Check it out:

More of the story (new window)

But feel free to go on hating, after all, this is Fark.

Read it. Story is still so farking retarded it is unreal.

I concur. There was fail all around, but the whipped cream on top of it all was Oregon billing the boy's mom. I can only imagine what the cherry's going to be: that the step-father's really the mother?

Bathia_Mapes: It is in Oregon. If you're under the age of 16 you are required to wear an approved helmet while riding a bike.

What a youth helmet might look like in a place with laws like Oregon

The punishment of being sent back to Canada must be unbearable!

WTFDYW: If only he would have been in Arizona and not Oregon. He's have been sent home lickity split in his pink underwear.

FTW! lawl