Childfree by choice

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by MaggieL
*Found* alive and safe"? She was a little more proactive than that. Got out of the duct tape she was bound with, broke though a locked door, and broke a window and called out to her friends in the street,

The news bulletin came over MSNBC as I was typing that post...that was the information given at the time. They didn't give more detail about the how until after 9.

The newswire is giving the time of her abduction as around 9:40pm.. Not unreasonably late for a city kid to be playing outside with her friends in the summertime, IMHO. Especially one with this level of independance and initiative.

If there was an adult present, I would agree with you. The adult factor was the premise of my original question. As smart as this kid was, she's still only 7.

On mirror: "You are looking at the person responsible for your safety."

I certainly wouldn't apply that to a 7-year old.

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by sycamore
I certainly wouldn't apply that to a 7-year old.

Good thing she did. :-)

I don't see how the "presence of an adult" would have made any difference here. These clowns knew that Grandmom had just come into the exact amount of their ransom demand from an insurance payment arising from the murder of Erica's uncle, who was evidently a drug dealer.

They put the snatch on her on the sidewalk outside her row home. How long does it take to grab a little kid, throw her in a car and speed away? What difference would her grandmom being outside have made?

You can demonstrate your superior judgement when it's your turn to raise kids. Oh...wait a minute...I forgot.

Originally posted by MaggieL
What difference would her grandmom being outside have made?

Perhaps she would have recognized them and been able to give the police the names of the kidnappers that night.

Or perhaps she was packing a Glock 21 and could have dropped their asses right there.

But that really doesn't suit your argument at all, so hey...

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by MaggieL
I don't see how the "presence of an adult" would have made any difference here. These clowns knew that Grandmom had just come into the exact amount of their ransom demand from an insurance payment arising from the murder of Erica's uncle, who was evidently a drug dealer.

I'm curious...where did you hear that information? I did hear that the uncle had been murdered, but that the insurance policy stuff was rumor at this point...apparently the family is saying that they received no money.

You're right in that an adult presence might not have made a difference, however:

--An adult could have told her, "No. You're not going outside this late." and kept an eye on her if she tried to go outside.

--The presence of an adult could have been a deterrent to the kidnappers.

Dave also made a good point about recognition.

You can demonstrate your superior judgement when it's your turn to raise kids. Oh...wait a minute...I forgot.

While I can't step in a parent's shoes, I don't think one being a parent or not is relevant in this situation. I think it is more an issue of common sense and good judgement, which I find lacking based upon the information known thus far.

[LordSludge]

While I can't step in a parent's shoes, I don't think one being a parent or not is relevant in this situation. I think it is more an issue of common sense and good judgement, which I find lacking based upon the information known thus far.

Heh, agreed over here, but neither common sense nor good judgement are prerequisites for having kids. Too often, the opposite is true...

Back on topic (sorry! heh): I'm childfree, myself, for pretty much the same reasons. I, too, like kids a lot, just don't want any of my own. I do, however, resent society & media being dumbed down to the least common denominator of offensiveness in the name of "family friendliness". Try watching a formerly rated-R on broadcast TV -- it's so chopped up with alternate dialog and cut out scenes that it's often hard to even follow the plot. Not real "friendly" to me, and that's just an example wrt media.

I guess that's my biggest beef as a childfree adult: having my world altered to suit parents. (Well, that and the constant "So when are you two having kids?" previously mentioned.) Regarding media, my hope is that, before long, technology will allow each viewer to watch whatever level of offensiveness they want, so everyone's happy. Of course, the fundies aren't happy unless they're controlling what *everybody* can watch...

[warch]

True scene from weekend wedding in Phoenix. Spouse not there, but parents were. Mom finds moment to raise child topic.

Mom: "I really want to to see Jake, hes so cute."
(Takes me to my cousin's house to meet his wife and two year old son)
Me: "Hi Jake! Nice to meet you."
(Jake runs from the far end of the room and slams his fists into my abdomen)
Cousin's Wife: "Jake, be gen-tle.", "He's in this aggressive phase..."
Me: "Oh...well...hmm."
(Jake turns attention to torturing old complacent dog by tearing at his ears- dog yelps)
Mom: "He a cutie,(to me) doesnt it make you want one?!"
Me: "Oh, well...hmm."

Later when with Mom,
Me: "No, I just dont think its in the cards. We're still not planning on kids."
Mom: (Sighs and looks away with teary eyes)
Me: "Who needs a margarita?!" (leaves to find strong beverages)

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by sycamore

I'm curious...where did you hear that information? I did hear that the uncle had been murdered, but that the insurance policy stuff was rumor at this point...apparently the family is saying that they received no money.

From the coverage in The Inquirer, who did indeed say that was a rumor. Evidently the rumor was belevable enough for the perps to act on it.

I still don't think insisting a seven-year-old stay inside a Philly row house at 9:30 on a super-hot summer evening makes sense. These kids don't have yards to play in, the house was likely not air-conditioned, the sidewalk is their play space. Row houses are unbearably *hot* in the summer. This is a close-knit neighborhood, and a hue and cry was raised the instant these guys made their move.

The very same technique would have worked at a suburban shopping mall with adults around everywhere. In fact, the very same technique works *on adults* in suburban shopping malls.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by MaggieL
I still don't think insisting a seven-year-old stay inside a Philly row house at 9:30 on a super-hot summer evening makes sense. These kids don't have yards to play in, the house was likely not air-conditioned, the sidewalk is their play space. Row houses are unbearably *hot* in the summer. This is a close-knit neighborhood, and a hue and cry was raised the instant these guys made their move.

I understand what you're saying Maggie. Yeah, Philadelphia rowhouses without A/C are unforgiving. But then you live at 60th and Kingsessing in SW Philadelphia...and it's dark out. Granted, each family situation is unique, but from my own personal experience at age 7, I had to be in by dark, unless my parents were sitting out in front of the apartment and I was right in front of the apartment. Truth be told, I don't know of many kids who didn't have to be in by dark at that age, and IMO, that seems like a bit too much freedom for a 7-year old. IMO, 7-year olds shouldn't be outside by themselves at Academy Rd. and Morrell Ave. or Haldeman Ave. and Tomlinson Rd. for that matter. At the very least, an adult should have been keeping an eye on these kids.

Apparently, most of the adults were at a block party that night, and these two girls were walking home from said party. One of those adults certainly could have accompanied them.

The very same technique would have worked at a suburban shopping mall with adults around everywhere. In fact, the very same technique works *on adults* in suburban shopping malls.

Sure it has. But if one can take preventative steps to reduce the chances of a kidnapping from occurring, then why not take them? No, they might not work, b/c some criminals are that daring. I don't know if you carry your gun all the time, but someone could still snatch you off the street even if you have it on you. That gun is your preventative and protective step. Better to do something than nothing, right? Given that her grandmother is her guardian and she is only 7, her grandmother could have had someone walk those children home. It might not have helped, but...

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by sycamore
I don't know if you carry your gun all the time, but someone could still snatch you off the street even if you have it on you. That gun is your preventative and protective step. Better to do something than nothing, right?

I'm licenced to carry, and the weapon is very small and light. Like the US policy on nukes, in any specifc case I will neither confirm nor deny. There are a few places (damned few, in this state) where it's not legal for me to carry. But I've been at pains to make it easier to carry than not to--draw your own conclusions. Point being I don't give up anything by carrying.

Instilling the idea in a child that they are in constant danger against which they are helpless and must rely upon others *is* giving up something. There's a constant balancing act between raising a child who's too big a risk taker, and one who cowers in a corner with her spirit broken.

It's an interesting question to think about: if Erica *had* been constantly supervised as you're advocating, would she have had the moxie to escape as she did?

(How dark *is* 60th and Kingsessing at 9:30 in late July..less than an hour after civil sunset? Street lighting in most row-house districts is fairly bright...this isn't the Great Northeast we're talking about)

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by dhamsaic


Perhaps she would have recognized them and been able to give the police the names of the kidnappers that night.

Perhaps. Have you seen a report that she knew them well enough to identify them?

Originally posted by dhamsaic

Or perhaps she was packing a Glock 21 and could have dropped their asses right there.

That's also a "perhaps". But, knowing how much it costs to use a shooting range in Philly, I doubt that even if grandmom was licenced to carry and even assuming that she had as expensive a gun as a Glock, that she would have been proficient enough to drop a hostage taker without seriously endangering the child hostage.

Have you ever shot a handgun against a "hostage shield" target? It's humbling.

I don't know. Would you be proficient enough to drop a hostage taker without endangering the child?

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by dhamsaic
I don't know. Would you be proficient enough to drop a hostage taker without endangering the child?

Probably not.

I can imagine some possible circumstances in which I'd feel justified in taking the shot, but in general, facing a hostage-shield situation at moderate range with my usual short-barreled handgun carry weapon: no.

I'd have to be confident of a near-perfect head shot with the first shot, with little danger of hitting the kid. I'd also consider shooting to disable their vehicle (windshield, tires) but the perps' record suggests that they were armed...and thus likely to hurt the kid if attacked.

That's why I said "it's humbling".

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by MaggieL
Instilling the idea in a child that they are in constant danger against which they are helpless and must rely upon others *is* giving up something.

I don't see a child being escorted on a dark night in a bad neighborhood as "giving up" anything. You can certainly teach a child to not talk to strangers, get in a car with them, scream and holler, etc. But a 7-year old child is dependent on others for their basic needs...they're only going to be able to do so much for themselves. One of the things under the umbrella of basic needs is protection.

Not to mention, there's strength in numbers.

It's an interesting question to think about: if Erica *had* been constantly supervised as you're advocating, would she have had the moxie to escape as she did?

I am advocating that a 7-year old child should not be outside after dark without adult supervision.

I would think that she would still have the moxie for escape, whether supervised or not. For all we know, that's something she could have learned from the suspected drug dealers in her family. I don't deny the intelligence that a 7-year old can have. I'm amazed by kids sometimes...but as I already mentioned, a 7-year old is only going to be able to do so much.

(How dark *is* 60th and Kingsessing at 9:30 in late July..less than an hour after civil sunset? Street lighting in most row-house districts is fairly bright...this isn't the Great Northeast we're talking about)

Perhaps it is time to find out.

[ladysycamore]

[quote]Originally posted by kbarger
You know, what pisses me off about a lot of discussions about this.. but not this one, because, this being The Cellar, we can discuss a controversial idea civilly.. (most of the time.. almost always...)...
What pisses me off is the idea that this subject matters, or that anybody should care.

Why? Discussing being childfree DOES matter, to some of us.

What I mean is that the reason the childfree-by-choice folks get so worked up (Womblice?? ) is that there are so many people who feel like it's your freakin' DUTY to go out and have kids. Even if you don't want to. Even if you can't afford it. Even if you know you're too damn lazy to get up from watching Monday Night Football to change a diaper.

Exactly. It's that pushing of the "social script" that gets most CF-by-choice people (myself included) so "worked up".

And, vicious circle-style, this somewhat selfrighteous and obnoxious rhetoric from a small minority of the more imflammatory non-breeders becomes very offensive to some parents. etc. etc. etc.

Just as parents can get right nasty with the CF.

Did it ever occur to any of these nuts (on both sides) that they should just shut their mouths and mind their own business?

When the day comes when certain people within certain circles of society stops with the "be fruitful and multiply" chant, THEN maybe your wish will be granted.

[ladysycamore]

[quote]Originally posted by MaggieL

Good thing she did. :-)
I don't see how the "presence of an adult" would have made any difference here.

Mmm...well, I sort of disagree. I'm thinking that an adult (or a couple of adults) could have walked the girl home from the house she was coming from. After all, that's how it USED to be done.

These clowns knew that Grandmom had just come into the exact amount of their ransom demand from an insurance payment arising from the murder of Erica's uncle, who was evidently a drug dealer.

True enough.

They put the snatch on her on the sidewalk outside her row home. How long does it take to grab a little kid, throw her in a car and speed away? What difference would her grandmom being outside have made?

Possibly none, but I am of the belief that the presence of adults would have had the abductors think twice about trying it.

You can demonstrate your superior judgement when it's your turn to raise kids. Oh...wait a minute...I forgot.

Totally uncalled for.