Man arrested for beating down boy in shower with daughter

[Viritica]

Does no one here except Trollgaard understand that the parents are her legal guardians, and that what they say goes?

Do you not understand corporal punishment is illegal?

I never said it was.

You're good at putting words in people's mouths.

[Viritica]

I admit, he may have got a bit far, but its nothing I wouldn't have potentially done in the heat of the moment.

So you now admit he didn't have any right to beat him up! Good.

Everyone! NSG may have just produced an actual consensus!

No one's saying he did.

[Risottia]

Does no one here except Trollgaard understand that the parents are her legal guardians, and that what they say goes?

Do you not understand corporal punishment is illegal?

And let's not even start about beating a minor who is NOT under their legal custodianship.

[Trollgaard]

And as long as the parents aren't breaking the law, their word is law in their house.

There, I think we figured it out.

No, I think you still fancy yourself a future legistlator. That's not how it works, by the way.

I don't understand how we are disagreeing. I just cannot fathom what we are disagreeing on.

Parents make the rules, yes?

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

Parents make the rules, the 'laws' of the house.

Children follow the rules their parents set for them, or face punishment.

I don't see how we can disagree on this.

[Senkaku]

But you did say her stepfather should be allowed to beat up boys who do have sex with her, which amounts to pretty much the same thing.

No, I said that the stepfather overreacted, he was perfectly within his rights to order him from the home, not to beat the punk.

Actually...

I remember a time in which you didn't just go into another man's house without his permission (the house was NOT the girl's property), and then have sex with his daughter (step daughter or not). If the little punk wanted to act like a man, he should be treated like a man (I understand he is still a minor, and is not seen as an adult before a court of law).

Mr. Ward had no idea that there was someone else in his house, the article states that he thought the girl was speaking to a friend on the phone.
Again, the house is NOT the girl's property, it is Mr. Ward's, yet he has no idea that anyone is in his house, let alone the fact that the little punk is having sex with his stepdaughter in his shower!

If you were a father, and your naked daughter walked out of the bathroom followed by a naked male, would you have politely greeted him and inquired about his day and such? NO! I can almost assure that most of you would get pretty angered at the boy, let ALONE the fact that your daughter thought it was okay to do such a thing without even mentioning it to her father.

I agree that he might have over-reacted in a big way, and that he probably should not have beat the punk, but it was a heat of the moment reaction.

To all those who think there was nothing wrong with this, I doubt you have children, and if you do, how would you feel if you saw a naked boy walking out of the shower with your daughter? It was quite apparent that they weren't having a card game or anything innocent, they were obviously having sex. Would you treat the boy with civility, with no touch of anger in your voice? Or would you tell him to get the hell out immediately.

Regardless of the age of consent, these two people were still minors (U.S.A. law qualifies a minor as <18) and thus still subject to their parental guardians.

Sorry if this is a bit long.

You justified assault on a minor ("it's just heat of the moment!"), you also said he should have to get consent from the father before he has sex (or just a sensual shower) with his daughter. So, while you didn't go quite as far as the OP and say he was legally justified, you did say it was okay that he punched the kid and that it was understandable.

[Risottia]

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

No.

You clearly don't have a clue about the hierarchy of the sources of right.

[Viritica]

No, I think you still fancy yourself a future legistlator. That's not how it works, by the way.

I don't understand how we are disagreeing. I just cannot fathom what we are disagreeing on.

Parents make the rules, yes?

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

Parents make the rules, the 'laws' of the house.

Children follow the rules their parents set for them, or face punishment.

I don't see how we can disagree on this.

cuz viva la freedom

Even for stupid teenagers who should listen to their parents.

[Senkaku]

So you now admit he didn't have any right to beat him up! Good.

Everyone! NSG may have just produced an actual consensus!

No one's saying he did.

Except for you.

[Jetan]

No, I think you still fancy yourself a future legistlator. That's not how it works, by the way.

I don't understand how we are disagreeing. I just cannot fathom what we are disagreeing on.

Parents make the rules, yes?

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

Parents make the rules, the 'laws' of the house.

Children follow the rules their parents set for them, or face punishment.

I don't see how we can disagree on this.

Rules paren't make are not equal to law. There is your disagreement. The notion that they somehow were is absurd.

[Viritica]

No one's saying he did.

Except for you.

Quote where I said he did.

[Brilliant Equestria]

No, I think you still fancy yourself a future legistlator. That's not how it works, by the way.

I don't understand how we are disagreeing. I just cannot fathom what we are disagreeing on.

Parents make the rules, yes?

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

Parents make the rules, the 'laws' of the house.

Children follow the rules their parents set for them, or face punishment.

I don't see how we can disagree on this.

Because rules are not equivalent to law in any way shape or form. The second they defy the law, they become invalid. End of story.

[Grantica]

I can understand why he was arrested (on the assault charge, not the cruelty charge), but seriously, pushing the kid and punching him a few times is not that bad considering the circumstances. Personally, if he had no priors, I'd stick him in jail for a few or a few weeks and then let him go with a stern talking to. However, that's not the way the justice system works. I hope he doesn't catch too much heat though.

[Jetan]

I can understand why he was arrested (on the assault charge, not the cruelty charge), but seriously, pushing the kid and punching him a few times is not that bad considering the circumstances. Personally, if he had no priors, I'd stick him in jail for a few or a few weeks and then let him go with a stern talking to. However, that's not the way the justice system works. I hope he doesn't catch too much heat though.

Because beating up minors is totes okay "under the circumstances".

[Bezombia]

>.>

I thought he took his daughter and beat a boy with her.

Misleading title is...disappointing.

[Senkaku]

Except for you.

Quote where I said he did.

It would be breaking in if none of the legal residents of that home consented. She, the daughter, is a legal resident, and consented to his presence.

Not the parents who superseded her.

Shall I find you another?

[Viritica]

Quote where I said he did.

Not the parents who superseded her.

Shall I find you another?

That's... Not even close.

[Trollgaard]

I don't understand how we are disagreeing. I just cannot fathom what we are disagreeing on.

Parents make the rules, yes?

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

Parents make the rules, the 'laws' of the house.

Children follow the rules their parents set for them, or face punishment.

I don't see how we can disagree on this.

Rules paren't make are not equal to law. There is your disagreement. The notion that they somehow were is absurd.

Perhaps I'm speaking in...what is that word...coloquialisms? Speaking in phrases that are commonly understood in one area, but not in another?

I'm not trying to say that a parent saying bedtime is at 10 PM is equivalent to a law stating that you can't tamper with a mailbox. What I"m trying to say is that the parents are the authority figure, and as such what they say goes. (I suppose I can add that as long as what they say isn't breaking the law).

Ever heard the phrase a man's house is his castle? That's the type of thing I suppose I was getting at...maybe it doesn't translate well over the internet.

This all besides the point of the news story, though.

[Ancient Magmia]

He absolutely should be charged. If the boy was raping her or was an adult, then I could understand not charging him. But that wasn't the case.

I can sympathize with the father, but this is unacceptable.

[Senkaku]

Sorry.

Quote where I said he did.

Not the parents who superseded her.

Shall I find you another?

The area I quoted here was preceded by this exchange.

Dracia, both the boyfriend and girlfriend were within Age Of Consent by Georgia law. Both were consenting individuals in a relationship. The only person here who was on the wrong side of the law was the father.

He was in his home without consent, which can be considered breaking in under the context of the law, and he was in the shower WITH HIS DAUGHTER. HE DIDN'T EVEN KNOW SHE HAD SOMEONE WITH HER. It's like the man down in Texas that shot the guy who was having sex with his daughter and killed him. bOTH were minors, he had no idea he was in the house, etc. There are many factors to this stuff.

Dracia claims father has legal right to beat kid up. When Thafoo pointed out a valid flaw in the argument, you backed Dracia. Explain to me how this is not saying he had legal rights to assault this boy?

Additionally, in multiple other posts, you also said that the father was morally justified, which is wrong, but is an entirely different topic.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

No, I think you still fancy yourself a future legistlator. That's not how it works, by the way.

I don't understand how we are disagreeing. I just cannot fathom what we are disagreeing on.

Parents make the rules, yes?

Yes!

Rules are equivalent to law, yes?

No!

Parents make the rules, the 'laws' of the house.

Ah, "laws" in quotation marks now. Better!

Children follow the rules their parents set for them, or face punishment.

Right!

I don't see how we can disagree on this.

Because the rules of the house can be superseded by the laws of the land.

The rule may indeed be "If I catch you having sex, I'm going to assault the guy."

Problem is, that assault breaks the laws of the land, which state that you don't get to just beat someone up, even if that person has participated in breaking household rules.

You could have a rule stating "Every time you forget to take out the trash, I'll chop off a finger of yours", but once the neighbors or the child's teachers start to notice the missing digits, you're going to have a price to pay for that.

[Senyosu]

The parents are to be pressured to discipline their child, but not in the manner where it involves physical punishment and abuse. Good riddance of the father, serves hoim right for loosing his cool.

[Jetan]

Rules paren't make are not equal to law. There is your disagreement. The notion that they somehow were is absurd.

Perhaps I'm speaking in...what is that word...coloquialisms? Speaking in phrases that are commonly understood in one area, but not in another?

I'm not trying to say that a parent saying bedtime is at 10 PM is equivalent to a law stating that you can't tamper with a mailbox. What I"m trying to say is that the parents are the authority figure, and as such what they say goes. (I suppose I can add that as long as what they say isn't breaking the law).

Ever heard the phrase a man's house is his castle? That's the type of thing I suppose I was getting at...maybe it doesn't translate well over the internet.

This all besides the point of the news story, though.

This clears things up a bit.

[Grantica]

I can understand why he was arrested (on the assault charge, not the cruelty charge), but seriously, pushing the kid and punching him a few times is not that bad considering the circumstances. Personally, if he had no priors, I'd stick him in jail for a few or a few weeks and then let him go with a stern talking to. However, that's not the way the justice system works. I hope he doesn't catch too much heat though.

Because beating up minors is totes okay "under the circumstances".

Not okay, but understandable. I favor commonsense in justice, and if he has no history of violence or crime, there's no point ruining his life over this. Anger management, community service, etc. might be a better way to handle it.

[Senyosu]

Not okay, but understandable. I favor commonsense in justice, and if he has no history of violence or crime, there's no point ruining his life over this. Anger management, community service, etc. might be a better way to handle it.

Disproportionate retribution is more amusing and much more suitable than weak willed justice.

If you can't discipline a child without blowing into anger, you are not really a good parent by any standard.

[Grantica]

Not okay, but understandable. I favor commonsense in justice, and if he has no history of violence or crime, there's no point ruining his life over this. Anger management, community service, etc. might be a better way to handle it.

Disproportionate retribution is more amusing and much more suitable than weak willed justice.

If you can't discipline a child without blowing into anger, you are not really a good parent by any standard.

Disproportionate retribution is just bad.

Also, he didn't blow up at his daughter physically if I remember right. He went after her naked boyfriend.

Personally, I would have yelled very scarily at both of them, told the boyfriend to beat it immediately, and then taken disciplinary measures (grounded, no internet, no phone, all the draconian parental stuff) against the daughter once my wife got home.