If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Bluenoser)   Move over UK, there's a new Nanny State. Couple in their 70s hauled in on child abduction suspicion for waving at small boy   (ngnews.ca) divider line 115
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

11005 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Nov 2009 at 12:28 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



115 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-11-26 11:54:13 AM
Meh. I don't see how the police/state did anything wrong. If someone reports an attempted child abduction, they have to investigate. Assuming the McCaras are telling the truth (which seems like a reasonable assumption), it's the person who complained who's in the wrong. The sergeant's comments sum it up fine:

"It was one person's word against another," he said. "We were satisfied no abduction took place. It was a pretty ordinary and by the book investigation, as far as I was concerned."
 
2009-11-26 12:31:49 PM
This is not a nanny-state issue.

If someone calls the police and reprots an attempted child abduction, you investigate. Any decent detained citizen would say, "Well, I wish I wasn't inconvenienced, but at least the cops are doing their jobs."
 
2009-11-26 12:32:39 PM
Whoever reported it is an asshole and the police are assholes.

/Stories like this are downright scary and happen WAYYYY too often.
//Where have we gone in life that we can't even wave at people anymore? Jesus.
 
2009-11-26 12:33:08 PM
TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.
 
2009-11-26 12:33:27 PM
Man seen near child, was promptly arrested
 
2009-11-26 12:33:44 PM
where's the tazering?? I was promised tazering...
 
2009-11-26 12:34:28 PM
Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.


Granted I wasn't there, but what exactly was there to be in doubt about? They waved and drove off from the sound of it.
 
2009-11-26 12:35:19 PM
beefer1: where's the tazering?? I was promised tazering...

It happened in canada. I'm sure if it happened in America there would have been, maybe even some good old fashioned baton style beating.
 
2009-11-26 12:35:35 PM
TheSpaceAdmiral: Meh. I don't see how the police/state did anything wrong. If someone reports an attempted child abduction, they have to investigate. Assuming the McCaras are telling the truth (which seems like a reasonable assumption), it's the person who complained who's in the wrong. The sergeant's comments sum it up fine:

"It was one person's word against another," he said. "We were satisfied no abduction took place. It was a pretty ordinary and by the book investigation, as far as I was concerned."


agreed, asinine tag is for the asshat parents.

/all people who like children are not automatically child abductor creepo pedos. There are a lot of people in this world who just like children. Thats why they have them and raise them, and get all excited about grandkids...
 
2009-11-26 12:36:15 PM
Mixed feelings on this one.

Nothing against the police as they were just investigating a complaint about attempted child abduction.

The elderly couple apparently did nothing more than wave at a kid.

As for the person who reported the attempted abduction, besides a wave, what else was included in their story? We're short a lot of information here. Perhaps the Smoking Gun can score the police report?
 
2009-11-26 12:37:17 PM
Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.


No the person was a douche. How do you "think" someone abducted a child by waving at them? Did the douche see them take off with the kid? Obviously not.
 
2009-11-26 12:37:40 PM
Cheesus: Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

Granted I wasn't there, but what exactly was there to be in doubt about? They waved and drove off from the sound of it.


From a reporter, who heard it from the couple, who are trying to minimize the event to make themselves look like they didn't do anything creepy.

You didn't see how it went down; I doubt someone called the police unless something made them feel like they should. If they overreacted, great! No harm done. That's a hell of a lot better than telling themsevles the next day, "Wow, I wish we called the police, now that that little kid was found chopped up in the park."

This is exactly why we have cops - to look into shiat like this. Not to chase around 16 year olds with a half a joint in the ashtray.
 
2009-11-26 12:38:04 PM
Barakku: Man seen near child, was promptly arrested

THIS
 
2009-11-26 12:38:07 PM
Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.


And do you know why people choose not to get involved? Because they're terrified some asshat helicopter mom is going to completely destroy their lives with hysterical allegations.
 
2009-11-26 12:41:06 PM
Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.


Are you kidding? Little kids who first learn how to wave will wave at anything, even inanimate objects. Elderly people who are waved at will do the polite thing and wave back. This is a long haul from "attempted child abduction".

Now, if they'd asked the kid to get in the car or something, that would be a point, but all they did is wave to each other from afar. What illegal action exactly is supposed to be happening with that?
 
2009-11-26 12:42:02 PM
Tainted1: And do you know why people choose not to get involved? Because they're terrified some asshat helicopter mom is going to completely destroy their lives with hysterical allegations.

THIS
 
2009-11-26 12:42:29 PM
TheBigBadCrystallineEntity: Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

No the person was a douche. How do you "think" someone abducted a child by waving at them? Did the douche see them take off with the kid? Obviously not.


My neighbors around the block called the cops when some strange car stopped to talk to my three kids this summer. Don't know if the person in the car was just some random person meaning no harm, or some psycho hoping to lure my kids in the car. Don't care. I bought my neighbor a 12-pack, and now we look out for each other's kids.
 
2009-11-26 12:42:59 PM
It all depends on what they were waving, doesn't it?
 
2009-11-26 12:45:08 PM
Arresting a 70 year old man, questioning him and his wife on the scene for half an hour, then taking them back to the station for a couple of hours of the old interrogatin' sounds perfectly reasonable. Who knows, that old bitty might have come back to the car, found the kid bound and gagged in the back seat and gone along with her hubby. Although, sheesh, can you imagine the embarrassment this kid's going through? If you're old enough to ride a bike and you're not wiley or strong enough to get away from an elderly man you're never gonna live that down.
 
2009-11-26 12:46:39 PM
Occam's Nailfile: TheBigBadCrystallineEntity: Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

No the person was a douche. How do you "think" someone abducted a child by waving at them? Did the douche see them take off with the kid? Obviously not.

My neighbors around the block called the cops when some strange car stopped to talk to my three kids this summer. Don't know if the person in the car was just some random person meaning no harm, or some psycho hoping to lure my kids in the car. Don't care. I bought my neighbor a 12-pack, and now we look out for each other's kids.


Did the cops get there in time to arrest and interrogate them for a few hours for talking to your kids? Gosh I hope so.
 
2009-11-26 12:46:51 PM
I bet that after they were seen waving to the child, their crappy Senior Citizen method of driving made them look suspicious.
 
2009-11-26 12:48:55 PM
Tainted1: Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

And do you know why people choose not to get involved? Because they're terrified some asshat helicopter mom is going to completely destroy their lives with hysterical allegations.


Right, because a helicopter mom is going to go after a person for reporting that someone creepy was eyeballing their kid.

Have some kids, lose one in the mall for 30 seconds, experience the panic, and you'll understand. 7,000 kids a year go missing (not including those that are found in a few hours). Nothing wrong with a concerned citizen calling the cops if something feels odd about a situation.
 
2009-11-26 12:49:17 PM
Oh Canada, you so crazy.
 
2009-11-26 12:49:36 PM
Tainted1: Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

And do you know why people choose not to get involved? Because they're terrified some asshat helicopter mom is going to completely destroy their lives with hysterical allegations.


Yep.

Not having been a witness to a child abduction, I can't say with certainty what I'd do, but most likely my attitude would be "child? what child?". The way things are these days, if I admitted to seeing anything the parents would probably try to sue me for some damn thing or another.

Meh - they can always make more children if they lose one. I hope the old people sue the shiat out of whoever accused them in the first place.
 
2009-11-26 12:51:17 PM
Occam's Nailfile: Tainted1: Occam's Nailfile: TheSpaceAdmiral: it's the person who complained who's in the wrong

Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

And do you know why people choose not to get involved? Because they're terrified some asshat helicopter mom is going to completely destroy their lives with hysterical allegations.

Right, because a helicopter mom is going to go after a person for reporting that someone creepy was eyeballing their kid.

Have some kids, lose one in the mall for 30 seconds, experience the panic, and you'll understand. 7,000 kids a year go missing (not including those that are found in a few hours). Nothing wrong with a concerned citizen calling the cops if something feels odd about a situation.


You sound all UH-60ish.
 
2009-11-26 12:53:25 PM
I KNEW the homecoming queen was trying to abduct me from the back of that convertible in today's parade!
 
2009-11-26 12:54:52 PM
I am so aggravated by how so many folks, especially LEA, are overprotective of children. Last year, I was in a public park with my three-year-old niece and my dog. I was trusted with my niece's care by my brother and his wife, who seem to think that I can take care of a young child for a few hours. So it's my niece, my dog and me in a park, doing little kid and dog stuff, and I wanted to capture the moment so I snapped a picture on my phone's camera.

Not ten minutes later, a county cop walked up to me, explained that he had received a report of a man taking a picture of a young child (which apparently warrants attention from the police) and asked me who I was and why I took the picture. I asked him if it was illegal to take pictures of children.

He said that it might be construed as perverse that I took a picture of a young girl.

I asked him what was perverse about a picture of a fully clothed three-year-old girl playing with a dog in a public park. This opened up a whole line of interrogation from the cop, who was alluding to continuing my interrogation with me in custody (since taking pictures of one's clothed relatives is apparently a crime in suburban New Jersey). Half an hour later, the cop left AFTER taking down my name, viewing the picture on my phone (and the other pictures as well) and calling my brother to confirm that his child was indeed entrusted to my care.

I really hate this modern Zeitgeist of "man with child" = "deviant predator." It's getting to the point where male relatives of children can't even go out in public with said children.
 
2009-11-26 12:56:26 PM
Not US not US...
clicks link.
Oh thank god, CA.
 
2009-11-26 12:57:59 PM
Krieghund: It all depends on what they were waving, doesn't it?

Damn you. And I was all prepared for my posting:
www.chicagonow.com
 
2009-11-26 12:58:57 PM
This is why you treat a kid as one who is infected with a disease in this day and age. I don't even make eye contact with one while going about my business.

/raised 3 so dont call me a kid hater
 
2009-11-26 01:02:03 PM
Also had a relative accused of doing things to a kid about 10 years ago b/c he went by their house once to get $5 he was owed. Ya, the system worked and charges were dropped for lack of evidene (no medical, was found out that mom created story and implanted kid's head with it along with social workers), but it cost him and our parents $55k in attorneys fees, and two years of hell.

If I had been this couple, I'd have made it a lot harder on the cops doing their "investigation". Not physically, but the interrogation session would have been fun.
 
2009-11-26 01:03:28 PM
Waving does not equal attempted abduction.

/geez
 
2009-11-26 01:03:34 PM
WOW, I don't know if any one realizes this(or cares), but we almost have a NOVA SCOTIA Legal Trifecta today...
One more to go!!
 
2009-11-26 01:03:46 PM
Please take the authority away from these people(?).

And pay victims for the 1/2 day that they will never get back.

And dock the pay from the wasted officers.

And fer cryin out loud hire some decent officers, there are plenty of applicants.
 
2009-11-26 01:05:55 PM
I have to side with the Nanny Staters.

How the police call should have went:
Caller: I would like to report an attempted child abduction
911: What did you see?
Caller: Two old people waved at a child as they drove by.
911: ...and?
Caller: That's all.
911: WTF is wrong with you?
 
2009-11-26 01:06:15 PM
Criminally Negligent: Not having been a witness to a child abduction, I can't say with certainty what I'd do, but most likely my attitude would be "child? what child?". The way things are these days, if I admitted to seeing anything the parents would probably try to sue me for some damn thing or another.

Meh - they can always make more children if they lose one.


I know you're just trolling, and trying to sound hip and aloof, but you should die in a fire anyways.

clutchcargo2009: You sound all UH-60ish.

I'm 35, a single dad, and I don't want my kids to be raped and tortured to death. Or anyone else's. Don't like the way things have become, having to worry about child predators? Me either. But it is what it is, and it's better to inconvenience someone than to look the other way while an innocent kid is potentially victimized.

The old couple will go on with thier lives - a couple hours inconvenience is not going to kill them. Did the cops go overboard? Maybe. But that's a lot better than the alternative.
 
2009-11-26 01:09:09 PM
Death_Poot: Also had a relative accused of doing things to a kid about 10 years ago b/c he went by their house once to get $5 he was owed. Ya, the system worked and charges were dropped for lack of evidene (no medical, was found out that mom created story and implanted kid's head with it along with social workers), but it cost him and our parents $55k in attorneys fees, and two years of hell.

The mom should have been imprisoned for making a false report, and everything she owns should be given to your relative as compensation. But that doesn't mean people should look the other way when they see something that looks suspicious.
 
2009-11-26 01:09:33 PM
BlackDebbie: beefer1: where's the tazering?? I was promised tazering...

It happened in canada. I'm sure if it happened in America there would have been, maybe even some good old fashioned baton style beating.


Yeah,..we do just as much of that.
 
2009-11-26 01:09:47 PM
Occam's Nailfile Quote 2009-11-26 01:06:15 PM

You haven't been on the flip side of incidents like this before have you? You'd sing a different tune, believe me.

And yes, I raised 3 kids, the youngest still in the house at 15, so dont give me the "omg my snowflake!!!1@!!!, Think of the Children!" line.
 
2009-11-26 01:10:02 PM
Thunderpickle: I am so aggravated by how so many folks, especially LEA, are overprotective of children. Last year, I was in a public park with my three-year-old niece and my dog. I was trusted with my niece's care by my brother and his wife, who seem to think that I can take care of a young child for a few hours. So it's my niece, my dog and me in a park, doing little kid and dog stuff, and I wanted to capture the moment so I snapped a picture on my phone's camera.

Not ten minutes later, a county cop walked up to me, explained that he had received a report of a man taking a picture of a young child (which apparently warrants attention from the police) and asked me who I was and why I took the picture. I asked him if it was illegal to take pictures of children.

He said that it might be construed as perverse that I took a picture of a young girl.

I asked him what was perverse about a picture of a fully clothed three-year-old girl playing with a dog in a public park. This opened up a whole line of interrogation from the cop, who was alluding to continuing my interrogation with me in custody (since taking pictures of one's clothed relatives is apparently a crime in suburban New Jersey). Half an hour later, the cop left AFTER taking down my name, viewing the picture on my phone (and the other pictures as well) and calling my brother to confirm that his child was indeed entrusted to my care.

I really hate this modern Zeitgeist of "man with child" = "deviant predator." It's getting to the point where male relatives of children can't even go out in public with said children.


Funny, this is actually why I flat out refuse to do anything with my nephew or niece in public if I'm asked to watch them or something like that. It's maddening that people assume that since I'm in my mid 20s and a male that I have to have abducted and plan on raping/killing any child that may be in my near vicinity. Too many incidents of people being accused unfairly makes it too much of a pain in the ass to be a good citizen.

The funny part is that all these retarded parents run around screaming "I just don't understand why no one did anything" if something goes wrong and no one will is willing to help out when it's needed. Jesus, they're the ones who will assume that if you try to help that you're in on the crime, or just another pervert trying to abduct their children. These helicopter parents and their tendency to be offended with the environment they created fills me simultaneously with amusement and disgust.

It's all a perfect example of reaping what you sow.
 
2009-11-26 01:11:02 PM
Thunderpickle: I am so aggravated by how so many folks, especially LEA, are overprotective of children. Last year, I was in a public park with my three-year-old niece and my dog. I was trusted with my niece's care by my brother and his wife, who seem to think that I can take care of a young child for a few hours. So it's my niece, my dog and me in a park, doing little kid and dog stuff, and I wanted to capture the moment so I snapped a picture on my phone's camera.

Not ten minutes later, a county cop walked up to me, explained that he had received a report of a man taking a picture of a young child (which apparently warrants attention from the police) and asked me who I was and why I took the picture. I asked him if it was illegal to take pictures of children.

He said that it might be construed as perverse that I took a picture of a young girl.

I asked him what was perverse about a picture of a fully clothed three-year-old girl playing with a dog in a public park. This opened up a whole line of interrogation from the cop, who was alluding to continuing my interrogation with me in custody (since taking pictures of one's clothed relatives is apparently a crime in suburban New Jersey). Half an hour later, the cop left AFTER taking down my name, viewing the picture on my phone (and the other pictures as well) and calling my brother to confirm that his child was indeed entrusted to my care.

I really hate this modern Zeitgeist of "man with child" = "deviant predator." It's getting to the point where male relatives of children can't even go out in public with said children.


biatch of it is, there is an apparent large and active child abduction business at work. A lot of young people disappear, not just kids.
So we beat up on the police, who are not trained nor equipted to do the impossible.
They respond by being stupid.

Usual chit, move along.
 
2009-11-26 01:15:23 PM
"The mom should have been imprisoned for making a false report, and everything she owns should be given to your relative as compensation. But that doesn't mean people should look the other way when they see something that looks suspicious."

Doesn't work that way in Texas. My family was literally told to take a hike. Accusers and prosecutors have immunity.

People have been programmed by the media to think like this, it's sad. I can remember a time last year when I was looking for longjohns in a Target. A small kid came up and started talking to me. I backed away and put my hands behind my back and asked him to find his mom (she was about 5 feet away, well within earshot).

When his mom grabbed him, she looked at me suspiciously and asked me why I put my hands behind my back. I told her "Exactly because you're treating me the way you are treating me right now." She left in a huff, etc.

The public has gone insane regarding this shiat. Yes there are evil people out there, but it has gone too far.
 
2009-11-26 01:18:24 PM
78% of all abductions begin with a wave.
 
2009-11-26 01:23:45 PM
Thunderpickle: I am so aggravated by how so many folks, especially LEA, are overprotective of children. Last year, I was in a public park with my three-year-old niece and my dog. I was trusted with my niece's care by my brother and his wife, who seem to think that I can take care of a young child for a few hours. So it's my niece, my dog and me in a park, doing little kid and dog stuff, and I wanted to capture the moment so I snapped a picture on my phone's camera.

Not ten minutes later, a county cop walked up to me, explained that he had received a report of a man taking a picture of a young child (which apparently warrants attention from the police) and asked me who I was and why I took the picture. I asked him if it was illegal to take pictures of children.

He said that it might be construed as perverse that I took a picture of a young girl.

I asked him what was perverse about a picture of a fully clothed three-year-old girl playing with a dog in a public park. This opened up a whole line of interrogation from the cop, who was alluding to continuing my interrogation with me in custody (since taking pictures of one's clothed relatives is apparently a crime in suburban New Jersey). Half an hour later, the cop left AFTER taking down my name, viewing the picture on my phone (and the other pictures as well) and calling my brother to confirm that his child was indeed entrusted to my care.

I really hate this modern Zeitgeist of "man with child" = "deviant predator." It's getting to the point where male relatives of children can't even go out in public with said children.


Holy smokes! That really ticks me off.
 
2009-11-26 01:24:44 PM
Occam's Nailfile: Criminally Negligent: Not having been a witness to a child abduction, I can't say with certainty what I'd do, but most likely my attitude would be "child? what child?". The way things are these days, if I admitted to seeing anything the parents would probably try to sue me for some damn thing or another.

Meh - they can always make more children if they lose one.

I know you're just trolling, and trying to sound hip and aloof, but you should die in a fire anyways.

clutchcargo2009: You sound all UH-60ish.

I'm 35, a single dad, and I don't want my kids to be raped and tortured to death. Or anyone else's. Don't like the way things have become, having to worry about child predators? Me either. But it is what it is, and it's better to inconvenience someone than to look the other way while an innocent kid is potentially victimized.

The old couple will go on with thier lives - a couple hours inconvenience is not going to kill them. Did the cops go overboard? Maybe. But that's a lot better than the alternative.


Have fun with your paranoid delusions that everyone is out to get you and your kids. Thanks to people thinking like you, even false accusations can ruin lives and families.

How about this: everyone who drives a van needs to be detained and questioned too, because everyone knows that pedophiles love to abduct kids in vans.

Stupid, right?
 
2009-11-26 01:24:53 PM
Occam's Nailfile: Nope. When in doubt, protect the kiddos. People choosing to not get involved is the reason so many kids get abducted to begin with.

IN a country with 33.8 million people, 41 children are abducted by strangers every year. That's 1.2 abductions for every 1 million Canadians.

The rest are runaways, or abducted by parents.

source:
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/85-002-x2005001-eng.pdf

Your moral panic is simply unjustified. The only reason you think there's "so many" is because kids who don't get abducted go unreported.

This is irresponsible journalism at its finest.
 
2009-11-26 01:25:42 PM
Site Farked !
 
2009-11-26 01:25:51 PM
Occam's Nailfile: I know you're just trolling, and trying to sound hip and aloof, but you should die in a fire anyways.

Hehe, the very idea of me "trying to sound" like anything but myself, let alone "hip", is ridiculous. If you want to believe I'm a troll because it's less disturbing than believing I really feel that way - then believe what you want.

Nope - I'm serious. The whole "every child is precious" attitude is silly. Children are only potentially valuable to society. Some call them an "investment in our future", I call them a necessary evil.

If someone had abducted Osama bin Laden when he was a child and he ended up in a dumpster somewhere, would it have really been a bad thing?
 
2009-11-26 01:30:39 PM
just_another_asshole/jaa: Site Farked !

It's back.
 
2009-11-26 01:35:34 PM
If the missus and I am eventually blessed with children, one thing I'll always try to keep in mind is that stranger abductions/molestation are staggeringly rare compared to kids being victimized by people they know or are related to. Luckily, both our immediate families are largely creepazoid-free, so that only leaves neighbours, soccer coaches, ballet instructors, violin teachers, school teachers, long-lost cousins, and that carnie who sleeps on my couch sometimes as the usual suspects.
 
Displayed 50 of 115 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report