Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070316/ap_on_...irt_bike_arrest For riding it on the sidewalk. The bike wasn't even turned on. I feel bad for the kid. I don't think he knew better. After all he's only 7.
Chilly Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070316/ap_on_...irt_bike_arrest For riding it on the sidewalk. The bike wasn't even turned on. I feel bad for the kid. I don't think he knew better. After all he's only 7. "I told them to let go of my baby," Dinkins said. Wut a kitty
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 17, 2007 Author Posted March 17, 2007 Wut a kitty "I told them to let go of my baby," Dinkins said Well that's a little out of character.
BoondckCL Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Wut a kitty Way to keep it real. HAHA. They should have asked him where he lived and gone and arrested his parents. What kind of !@#$ing tards let their kid ride a dirt bike alone at the age of 7?
VABills Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 First off the kid did do something wrong. He was riding a motor vehicle on a sidewalk. That said he shouldn't have been arrested, however, he probably should have had the bike taken away. What you are seeing is only one side however. Did he hit someone or something doing damage? Was he a menance? Has he or the parents been warned before? Lord knows the media would never only tell one side of the story that never happens.
Wacka Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Maybe the kid learned that actions have consequences (which a lot of people don't seem to know today). A friend of mine was about 12 and went to a nearby construction site. Him and another kid wee tking plywood to build a fort. The cops caught him. Tey hauled him down to the station and called his father. Hid dad said "Do I have to pick hi up right now?" The cop said no, he could sit. My friends father decided to let him sit in a cell for 3-4 hours to let him know what it was like to be locked up. I was told this story by them when we were adults. Today, almost all parents would rush down and complain abot locking up a kid.
ieatcrayonz Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 'Nooooo! Not my child!' Welcome to the excuse factory. Lemme guess. The Mungos are Dr. Spock neophytes and the kid never got a spanking or saw a corner as a small child.
meazza Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 First off the kid did do something wrong. He was riding a motor vehicle on a sidewalk. That said he shouldn't have been arrested, however, he probably should have had the bike taken away. What you are seeing is only one side however. Did he hit someone or something doing damage? Was he a menance? Has he or the parents been warned before? Lord knows the media would never only tell one side of the story that never happens. Yep. So rather than just tell him, come with us, they handcuff the poor bloke.
VABills Posted March 17, 2007 Posted March 17, 2007 Yep. So rather than just tell him, come with us, they handcuff the poor bloke. That's a nice little sotry, but let's not convict the police until the facts come out and not the media and parents "view" of the events. Is it quite possible that he was trying to run, and while calming the parents the cops decided that cuffing him might keep him in place and not let him endanger himself by running off into the streets. Afterall he is only 7 , gotta look out for his welfare. Could you imagine the story if the kid had run away into traffic and been hit? Yup, I'll wait for the actual facts to come out. There are always two sides to the story. Let's hear them both.
VABills Posted March 18, 2007 Posted March 18, 2007 The child committed a misdemeanor (by SC state law). I would have arrested him as well. He is in Maryland, where the just outgoing mayor and now governer has a 100% arrest policy. Meaning if the police question whether to arrest someone or not the policy if to bring them in and let the supervisors and DA sort it out.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 18, 2007 Author Posted March 18, 2007 He is in Maryland, where the just outgoing mayor and now governer has a 100% arrest policy. Meaning if the police question whether to arrest someone or not the policy if to bring them in and let the supervisors and DA sort it out. That's not right.
VABills Posted March 18, 2007 Posted March 18, 2007 That's not right. Oh yes it is. It was a direct order and left the cops with no leeway.
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 18, 2007 Author Posted March 18, 2007 Oh yes it is. It was a direct order and left the cops with no leeway. I guess you have a point.
meazza Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 He is in Maryland, where the just outgoing mayor and now governer has a 100% arrest policy. Meaning if the police question whether to arrest someone or not the policy if to bring them in and let the supervisors and DA sort it out. That's a great policy.
WWVaBeach Posted March 19, 2007 Posted March 19, 2007 I say write it off as a valuable lesson learned. I also say the over/under is 20 days for a lawsuit.
Recommended Posts