Ratbag kids aren’t teaching themselves how to act up

Kochie says:

08:31am | 16/11/10

Hi S.L,
You can watch the interview here http://bit.ly/9YmJ7M

Why are people so shocked? says:

09:12am | 16/11/10

This is the end result of a generation that has never been told “No”, and has never been smacked.

Discipline, courage and honour are traits that rarely seen in these kids. Unfortunately, lazy, stupid parents raise lazy, stupid children.

If you want to see where the human race will end up after a few more generations of this exemplary level of parenting, do yourselves a favour and watch a movie called “Idiocracy” (staring Luke Wilson - released in 2006).

Petros says:

09:45am | 16/11/10

Idiocracy….essential viewing for everyone. My favorite take on our pathetic future

Mons says:

09:51am | 16/11/10

I guess we’re very lucky that we live in a town with some of the most courteous kids around! I grew up in brisbane during all the social unrest of the 80’s and I can honestly say we were ratbags… thankfully my kids and their friends are not like us.  I think the community also has a lot to do with what lessons the kids will absorb and who they chose to look up to.  Our little town, Maleny has an extremely community focused theme running through most facets of the town, the kids here are amazing, sure there are the stereotypical ‘bad teens’ but on the whole, lovely kids.

angry gen X says:

10:00am | 16/11/10

I think every old fart that came here to rant needs to take a step back and ask themselves who did this “Terrible” job raising my generation.

Seriously…

I’d love to see the Crime rate from GEN Y to GEN X, I think you ignorant fools would be in for a shock.

Everyone just needs to realise…we all $hi7 in the same toilet and being so negative towards the topic doesn’t help

Jack Africa says:

10:17am | 16/11/10

I was a high school teacher for 31 years and taught Marine Studies which is a great subject, as part of the program I taught sailing to high school kids. The school had 6 sailing dinghies, a trailer for them and a bus that held 30 kids - I offered to teach kids to sail on the weekend (in my own unpaid time) and take them to sailing regattas all over the state at no cost.

I thought I would be deluged with kids who wanted to take up the offer - I was lucky to get a hand full of keen kids, they wanted to stay at home in front of the box, or the computer or hang out at the local shopping centre.

S.L says:

10:43am | 16/11/10

Kochie thanks for the link to the interview. Yes that Einstein mirrors many of my parents except mine are much more animated when little Johnny or Sarah are getting “picked on”,and that kid unfortunately is the steroetype of their offspring.
Gen X, GenY, Gen ABC or whatever, what trendoid came up with such catagorizing?

djrtmum says:

11:11am | 16/11/10

I thought it was the funniest interview, and just so you know there are parents out there with values.  My children aged 7 & 4 call adults Sir or mam or mr… or miss…. I believe it is important, I speak about the importance of respecting authority, we talk about how police put bad people in jail and they are brave people who look after us and help catch bad people.  I am only 39 however was brought up this way.  I had a lot of aunties and uncles though they were not actual relatives.  Most we still call uncle and aunty and I still contact.  My pet hate is when I here parents swear around children or behave disrespectly around authority.  I struggle and want to stand up and say enough.  I have done so on 2 ocassions where it was just extreme, however know it is not excepted to interfere.  I adore my children and I believe giving boundaries shows this, I understand just like most that they will push this and this is when we have discussion.  My little people are still young and I know teenagers are different, however we were all there and I think the issues are universal and I am sure I will handle this when the time comes.

Parents I beg… Be parents not friend, friends happen after your children turn 30

Astounded says:

11:38am | 16/11/10

SL - I am horrified by your comment that children with special needs are the result of poor parenting. I spent many months deliberating whether ot not to get my son assessed because i didn’t want him to be labelled. I al didn’t want to have to deal with being a ‘bad mother’. As it was, he was diagnosed at age 4 with Aspergers. A fact for which I continue to feel enormous guilt, even though he is now doing fine 7 years later (in fact was recently awarded student of the week and is in the enrichment class at school). I have three other children, all ‘normal’. Surely if it was bad parenting that caused his issues, my other children would also have special needs? Do you realise how damaging your comment could be to guilt-ridden parents of special needs children? How dare you make such a statement as a so-called professional? You’re clearly in the wrong job.

I says:

11:41am | 16/11/10

Why are people so shocked - you’re clearly not a parent. Parents are no longer allowed by law to smack their children. We’re also advised by the ‘experts’ not to say ‘no’. In fact many pre-schools are child-care centres do not allow this word to be used.
As parents we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. Instead of laying blame, how about coming up with some solutions. After all, if you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.

J says:

12:10pm | 16/11/10

Kochie for PM! You’ve hit the nail on the head mate. I see youths disrespecting adults most days of the week in my line of work, and coming from a similar upbringing to yourself, I find it very confronting. Kudos to you for sticking your neck out!

J says:

12:10pm | 16/11/10

Kochie for PM! You’ve hit the nail on the head mate. I see youths disrespecting adults most days of the week in my line of work, and coming from a similar upbringing to yourself, I find it very confronting. Kudos to you for sticking your neck out!

Anne71 says:

12:32pm | 16/11/10

“My colleagues claimed adults must earn the respect of children before they than can expect to be shown it” - I’m sorry, but the notion that we have to “earn” some snot-nosed little brat’s respect before they will deign to show us any makes my blood boil. How about mutual respect, or is that too much to ask?

Metey says:

12:42pm | 16/11/10

@ I - I’ve never read any advice from any parenting expert that suggests not using the word ‘no’. My kids school, and the schools/day-care centres of my friends kids, all use it.

Mrs B says:

01:04pm | 16/11/10

Jack Africa - did you teach it at Rockingham High? Because I think I remember the class. It was all the cool and popular kids who took sailing and they didn’t let any of the other kids join. They were bullies. I wanted to take the class but the kids told me to get lost. Off topic I know, but I just thought you should know.

Laila (Gen-X) says:

01:18pm | 16/11/10

I am not an “old man” and have the same views as you Kochie, though I never thought I would say that! I am a mother of a 15 month old and she gets a smack (albeit a light tap) when she has done something wrong and is often told “no” much to her displeasure. This is the negative side of parenting but it has to be done. I had a child and now it’s my responsibility to raise her and to learn to respect others. It’s not for teachers or the police to do my job for me.  She will call people older than her Mr or Mrs X or uncle or aunty until invited to be called otherwise.  It’s about discipline and setting boundaries and to hell with what “others” may think of your parenting style. As parents and adults we need to take responsibility for our actions and respect others and only then will our children learn to do the same.

em says:

01:22pm | 16/11/10

Why should I respect someone who is older than me for that reason alone? If you want my respect you can earn it. I wouldn’t respect a pollitician who hadn’t done anything to earn it, why should I respect anyone else who hasn’t done anything to earn it?

Paul prentice says:

03:11pm | 16/11/10

Kochie
if you were serious about this issue you would   get on National TV and expose
Agenda 21…(treaty signed by Labor Jone kelly 1992)This treaty bought about police having no rights,parents not having rights,second grade social studies now is all about transferring the loyalty of children from Parent to state…if your children cannot read…do maths, blame the treaty it is deliberate, if they are too well educated they know global warming is bull,Whats worse Kochie is you dam well know it too.You journos have played a heavy part in its implementation….Expose it Koshie…the people are waking up…(Google )Agenda 21 for dummies…its American video…just to check it is effecting you here in Australia…Google Penrith council agenda 21…  Grow some balls kochie..become a great Australian kochie ....Dont leave it all to the good men at 2gb

Why are people so shocked? says:

03:51pm | 16/11/10

@ I: You’re correct. I’m not a parent. But I am a mentor to my nephew. He was getting really out of hand, thanks to his mum who never smacked, and never said “no”. This kid was well on his way to Juvenile Detention.

I stepped in and commenced teaching him all the things he needed to know about life. Manners, chivalry, honour, courage, the things most modern parents think are too old fashioned to worry about.

I won’t claim complete victory yet, he’s a teenager, but the change in this boy is incredible. I’m no longer ashamed to be seen with him in public. In fact, I’m proud of him and the fact that he has made such improvements in himself, and wants to be a better person.

Sorry to say, but yes, I will keep laying blame on lazy parents for rat-bag children. They turn out how you raise them. If you want them to be better people, try spending some time with them and show them how you want them do things, and why you want them to do it. Unfortunately, this solution won’t sit well with many people, because spending time with children is also considered old fashioned.

And the catch-cry of people who want others to do their work for them: “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem” is very, very warn out by now. The solution starts with the parents, and it starts when the children are young.

Anne71 says:

05:04pm | 16/11/10

@ Em - yet you expect older people to show you respect without you doing anything to earn it. See anything wrong with that logic? I’m guessing probably not.

Heather says:

07:38pm | 16/11/10

@Em: I am almost 40, with children of my own (2 of them adult aged)  and yet I will still show older people respect until they have done something to unearn it by virtue of the fact that they have seen more sun than I have and therefore have a unique, more experienced perspective due to that fact alone, and I expect my children to do the same. I have not, ever, regretted showing someone respect, no matter who they are.

S.L says:

08:02pm | 16/11/10

@Astounded
As with the parents I deal with you are reading into it your own interpretation of what I said and as a result your son’s Aspergers will be the cause of everything he does wrong and he will never be responsible for his own actions. I’ve dealt with kids with Aspergers for many years and as with other forms of autism they can learn to adapt to their situation and can go on to lead productive lives. As with my kids they may have to be taken out of the regular school system but I’ve seen kids thrive in a different environment with people trained to handle difficult situations.  If you have the “I feel sorry for myself” syndrome that’s not my issue. Now Mr or Ms Astounded as far as I’m aware Aspergers is a form of Autism and not classed as the behavioral problems with which I’m refering.
I stand by what I’ve said!  My kids are the result of poor parenting!

acotrel says:

08:10pm | 16/11/10

Do you remember when we were ‘bodgies and widgies’, and rock and roll was the devil’s music? And members of the older generation accepted money to play certain records for us, on the radio?  Boy, weren’t we STUPID? If we’d have been as smart as these modern kids, none of us would have got sucked into Vietnam!

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

10:20pm | 16/11/10

I only partly agree with you, the reality is a lot closer, the parents are @ssholes! ! ! Every baby is a blank canvas, how the child is socialised in it’s early years determine how it will turn out. Just like a puppy,if you don’t stop it biting you when it’s a pup, you’ll have a very nasty uncontrolable full grown dog. Angry gen X you are soooo right.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

10:27pm | 16/11/10

@I stop making excuses, I ran play groups for years 0-5yo & never encouraged parents to parent this way, maybe you should change your preschool or at least stand up to the parenting Nazis. Ironically most of the school teachers who have kids their kids are usually ferals. Remember how your mum brought you up, that’s usually not a bad guide, or better yet, do what YOU think is right.

Jay says:

01:13pm | 18/11/10

Ah, nothing like the smell of the straw man, rampant stereotypes, selective reasoning, applying single cases en-masse, and cries of ‘the youf of today’!

Children are no worse than any earlier romantically-revised ‘perfectly behaved generation’, any more than the new-old whingers like to decry them as much as the old-old whingers.

shep says:

08:00am | 16/11/10

Absolute rubbish comment designed to make the writer feel superior.  I couldn’t find a teacher in my massive school that would agree.  Bet you like to think all your students love you. 

One thing that hasn’t changed is that kids can see through a phoney a mile off.

Thomas says:

08:13am | 16/11/10

Most children nowadays are smarter, astute and more informed and these children are not the subject of Kochie’s commentary.

Its quite obvious that the subject of the article are the ‘free range’ kids who are neglected by their ‘drop kick’ parents.

We were kids once and I remember the standards of behaviour imposed on and required of us by our elders.  In some ways it made the majority in my generation better people, we should not be ridiculed for trying to uphold these standards.

I believe the adults who don’t give a hoot and have very low standards in life by choice are to blame, like the mother of the ‘drop kick’ in this article.

Sam says:

08:24am | 16/11/10

Being a teacher for 30 years means nothing in this case.  I’m over 50 and was once a kid too, and I say your wrong.  In this instance Kosh has got it spot on, and I’ve never really been a fan of his.  Kids today have no respect for authorty or their elders.  And yes, it was so much different 30-40 years ago.  I don’t know about you persephone but maybe I was just brought up by decent parents to respect people.

Shopping Centre Manager says:

08:40am | 16/11/10

Kids maybe the same P but the ability to discipline them has changed.  As a shopping centre manager I have the degradation in kids attitudes over 25 years.  Much of this is due to their perceived rights.  I had a kid assault me and when I held him and calle dthe police he said he would tell them I attacked him and wanted to touch him up.  The little piece of crap didn’t know the whole event happened in front of the CCTV.  When confronted with the truth he showed no gall.  The police said I could have him charged but that nothing owuld happen. They intimated that the next time I should just give the kid a flogging as self defence.  Hmmmm don’t know about that but when it is your only option….
Anyway the kid was banned form the Centre but a week later came shopping with his mother.  I told them he had to leave.  she abused me.  This skanky junkie looking woman said she would have his father come and sort me out.  I simply said that I doubted she even knew who his father was.  (good to get a witty reply in at the time and not 5 minutes later).  Suffice to say this kid is now causing problems at another centre and the woman and the fatrher have never returned to sort me out.  The whole family is known to police so we are talking generational ratbagedness,  I know all the problem kids in the area (they congregate around shopping centres) but after a couple of years of being hassled and threatened their crime (grafitti and shop lifting) has been reduced.  But to sum it up Kochie is right - it is parents - though not trying to be friends just incompetent at raising kids.

Z of Perth says:

08:41am | 16/11/10

“The world is passing through troublous times. The young people of
today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for
parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as
if they knew everything, and what passes for wisdom with us is
foolishness with them. As for the girls, they are forward, immodest
and unladylike in speech, behavior and dress.”
-Peter the Hermit, 13th Century AD

“The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for
authority, they show disrespect to their elders…. They no longer
rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents,
chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their
legs, and are tyrants over their teachers.”
-Socrates, 5th century BC

“What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders,
they disobey their parents. They ignore the law.
They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions.
Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?”
-Plato,5th century BC

“I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on
frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond
words… When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and
respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly wise
[disrespectful] and impatient of restraint”
-Hesiod, 8th century BC

I think these just show that the whole idea of a previous generation thinking a newer one is going to cause the downfall of society that they had it tougher or were smarter and morally superior than the newer one is something that’s been going on since civilization began and will continue to happen in the future. It doesn’t matter how good or bad the succeeding generation is, the preceding one will always view them in a less favorable light, and we’ll end up doing the same with our kids and grand kids.

Jury of Peers. says:

08:56am | 16/11/10

Being a teacher for 30 years Sam, you aught to know how to spell your’e instead of your…
But you’re right. They have no respect. whats worse, their parents also have no idea of wrong and right, and they should have been corrected by the reporter on his opinion of wrong and right, instead of only reporting what “they” thought.
I have thought reporters were human too, and could have put in their opinion.
I may be wrong though!

Macca says:

09:06am | 16/11/10

@Persephone, I agree with you. I think kids are the same now as they have always been.

Yes, as DK has indicated, there are some Free-loading parents who would be even more utterly uselss if it wasn’t for TV and FaceSpace, but most kids are no worse now then they were 20, 30 50 + years ago.

The concern is a society that no longer takes any personal responsibility. Sam De Brito’s blog today talked about the stupid situation where the bloke wandered into an empty train at Bondi, got stuck. and blamed City Rail. The mother in the story above has taken absolutely no responsibility for her Child’s well being, blaming the police instead, and consequently instilling the same lack of respect in her son’s belief that she clearly holds towards authority.

She believes the police have the authority to look after her child’s well-being, and then shows increadible disrespect when they do so. The problem isn’t the children, its rubbish parents.

And for all those who disagree, I’ll ask you again come July after we read another story about a teenage referee being punched by a parent of the superstar in the U/11s in Parramatta

the other pete says:

09:32am | 16/11/10

point 1 bravo Kochie

point 2 If memory serves me correctly, all this rubbish of blurred boundaries for kids started around about the same time that secondary teachers in the 70’s started telling kids their parents “couldn’t talk to them like that” and that they had “rights”.  So probably todays parents have trouble communicating with their kids about boundaries and rights, because they themselves dont have any idea.

Kochie is right on all counts and tell your colleagues Kochie, they need to take their rose coloured glasses off before it’s to late.  In Germany if a child below the age of majority is found out after a certain time by the police they are taken to the police station and their parents have to come down to the police station and explain why they have allowed their child to be out at that time..  A bit of assuming responsibility is required from both parent and child.

Children should respect adults and authority until they find that respect is ill placed.  Maybe it would be a nicer place if they did and no I’m not an old codger.

Budz says:

09:35am | 16/11/10

I think the following lines from Baz Luhrmann’s song Sunscreen explains it all:
Accept certain inalienable truths, prices will rise, politicians will
philander, you too will get old, and when you do you’ll fantasize
that when you were young prices were reasonable, politicians were
noble and children respected their elders. Respect your elders.

Aitch B says:

10:09am | 16/11/10

Um…. Jury of Peers:

Sam hasn’t been a teacher for 30 years…. Persephone has.

Stones and glass houses? It’s “you’re” not “your’e”. You got it right the second time, though….. C+

Aitch B says:

10:23am | 16/11/10

@Jury of Peers

Oh…. and let’s add “aught” (should be “ought”) and “whats” (should be “what’s”).

Sorry….. D (fail)

Kate says:

10:48am | 16/11/10

Z of Perth.  Love those quotes. Legend.

To the teachers who are whinging about lack of respect from your students.  I agree.  There are two problems here.  One is the education institutions themselves refusing to keep a standard.  Why are teachers turning up to school in boardies and without a tie at public school?  Why in private schools are the minority whinging parents determining a change in school policy for thier *little angels*?  The second problem, already touched on, is parents themselves, some are indeed deluded.

Good on you Kochie for getting your kids to use *Mr* and *Mrs* its a beautiful tradition.  It would mean a lot to many.

Reg says:

11:00am | 16/11/10

#Jury of Peers…” They have no respect. whats worse, their parents also have no idea of wrong and right,” ...you lack of apostrification sears me to the core…:)

I have two families 16 years apart. The first were demanding but respectful. The second high maintenance but fully expectant that they could have what-ever they wanted without restraint. The difference? Their mothers. At least I was allowed an input in my first family but the second mother was totally possessive and taught her children to be the same. Sorry girls but if behind every good man there’s a good woman then if follows that behind every naughty boy…oh bugger it…. stop choking meeeeeeee.

Steve says:

11:03am | 16/11/10

I wish I taught at your school. I’ve taught at several schools and while the kids are always kids, it’s teh changes in parents that surprises me. More and more often it’s become a novelty for parents to be supportive of teachers. It’s become more and more common for parents of the more difficult children to blame the teachers and anyone else except their little angel. In this regard Koshie’s nailed it.

I generally find it usual for problem students to have supportive parents. In most cases the parents either don’t seem to give a damn about their kid’s schooling, or just swallow whatever their kids tell them without question.

Georginorx says:

11:05am | 16/11/10

Wow Z, I like your quotes!

They shouldn’t excuse the responsibilities of parents of the behaviour of children though -we still need to get stressed about it so that there are some pressures on us to be responsible.

Some parents are less capable than others, some children are more problematic than others. Unfortunately the exceptions will always draw our attention, and with new media it is easier to broadcast these exceptions. The increased access and exposure to videos of violence etc makes the normalisation of these behaviours more likely.

Nicole says:

11:15am | 16/11/10

@Aitch B, two Hi-Fives!!!

persephone says:

11:38am | 16/11/10

One of the reasons granting women equal rights was resisted was that men liked living in a world where their sex automatically meant that they were better than 50% of the population.

It’s the same with some oldies attitude to youngies. They want respect, they can’t earn it, so they demand that they are automatically given it even if they don’t deserve it.

As Sam rightly said, kids see through phonies. Someone who demands respect but doesn’t think they need to earn it won’t get it.

There’s no magic about being older than someone else. The older you get, the more people there are than will be younger than you. Why does that mean that more people should respect you?

Some adults don’t show respect for others, just as some kids don’t.  It’s always been like that.

People who demand respect from young people just because they’re older than them do so because they don’t think they can win it in other ways.

Ratbag says:

12:21pm | 16/11/10

@Sam being a teacher of over 30 years one would think you’d be able to identify the difference between ‘your’ and ‘you’re’.  Then again, I guess, being part of filthy Gen Y, I should probably just keep quiet and learn to respect my elders. I think a smack would help.

John says:

12:25pm | 16/11/10

Maybe for pre-schoolers, see if you comments hgold merit in the highschool ages.

shep says:

12:54pm | 16/11/10

Every civilization that has an automatic repect for elders (unless they prove themselves unworthy) turns out a respectful, and I would say responsible younger generation.  They may not agree on everything but they are respectful.

That younger generation, in proving that they are capable of showing great respect has then earned the right to be shown automatic respect from the next generation, (again unless they prove themselves unworthy) and so on an so forth.

Its the circle of friggin life people, one generation should learn respectfully from the next and then pass that on….

Regretfully it would seem that Western Civilizations’ circle of life and respect has,  in the most recent few generations, shattered.  Its used to be rare to find disrecpectful youngsters .... now the opposite is true.

God help the next generation.

Jack Africa says:

03:23pm | 16/11/10

Mrs B - sorry, wrong state, I taught in Queensland but I feel sorry for Rockingham students, I would not allow any of that stuff with my classes.

Bellejaye says:

09:43pm | 16/11/10

I’ve been teaching for 30+ years and have seen the deterioration in standards, respect, manners and behaviour, particularly over the past 10 years. I have been hit, kicked, spat on and verbally abused by children, some as young as 5. I regularly meet with parents who want to excuse/justify their child’s behaviour by accusing someone of “provoking” them- it is always someone else’s fault. Abuse/assault of others, children or adults, is due to the child being frustrated or angry, the message being that this makes it okay. Ask any teacher and they can point out the child who will end up in jail for assault or murder unless they are made to manage their anger and accept responsibility for their own behaviour. Sadly, many parents are teaching their children the opposite.

Matt says:

03:19pm | 18/11/10

Z of Perth, well done. Defined the scope of the entire argument in a few short quotes. We can learn a lot from history if we choose to.

Unfortunately, based on the comments here, most of us would rather stand on a soapbox and say everything that is wrong with the world.

But maybe nothing is wrong with it? Maybe everything is as it always has been, in a state of constant change and evolution. Maybe being scared of that is unneccessary and there is a better way of being?

Allan says:

07:53am | 16/11/10

May be so Ron, but the police do not have all day to follow this little darling around to make sure he is wearing his helmut. The 30 minute walk breathing clean air into his lungs would have done him a world of good and owuld have been safer than if he had fallen off and bagned his head. Can you imagine the outrage from the mother if the kid had had an accident after seeing the police and had suffered a head injury and they had not stopped him from riding? What’s more, who knows what verbal exchange went on between the 15 year old who obviously has alot of respect for the law and his elders. In terms of authority, police have all types of powers to give direction especially if someone is endangering themselves by carrying on an unsafe activity. Perhaps you may want to brush up on police powers before you make satements about what police can and cannot do.

RB says:

08:04am | 16/11/10

Yep, you’re right.  Common sense has no place in modern policing…

Hopefully you can pick the sarcasm.

Good on the cops I say.  Reject the revenue raising fine option and teach the snot nose brat a lesson.  Give those cops a star!

Barbara Brook says:

08:19am | 16/11/10

Aww give me a break - he had to walk, end of the world! I would appreciate if the police did the same for my children, Id rather they take awhile to get home than they get on again with no helmet- if they get hit? Then the police get blamed for not enforcing the helmet rule more strigently. Speeding fines dont reduce fatalities since idiots will still speed - fines dont deter, especially (pardon the pun) hard headed teens. I remember being one and Im glad I got told when I was being an ass. Deal with it

Markus says:

08:29am | 16/11/10

Allan let’s see if you have the same viewpoint when an officer demands you let the air out of your car tyres and walk home after being caught going 15km/h over the speed limit.
After all, he does not have all day to follow you around to make sure you won’t speed again as soon as you are out of sight?

Perhaps you may want to brush up on the laws and your rights as a citizen before you make statements about what police can and cannot do.

Gavan says:

08:29am | 16/11/10

I got a foot in the bum from the local copper when i was about 14. Sent me home as i had no business hanging around town after dark. While he had no ‘authority’ to do that, I’m glad he did. It changed the direction I was heading in, and SAVED me from myself. Once upon a time, coppers were ‘Men’

Louiedfly says:

08:29am | 16/11/10

They should have slashed his tyres so he had to repair them! Nothing he doesn’t deserve after the lip he would have given those cops! Agree with Allan !

PaulB says:

08:35am | 16/11/10

Respect for police began tanking when Governments decided it was better to use them to collect Fine revenue than it was to police.

Dan says:

08:39am | 16/11/10

Go Ron, rage against that machine, but you missed the point didn’t you. Such a terrible injustice to see a child taught a lesson relating to his own safety in a way that he can actually relate to, and therefore comprehend. I hope its your child one day, and you end up paying all the fines. Less self-righteousness and bitterness would get you a long way.

Phil says:

08:51am | 16/11/10

Go hug a tree, ohh wait if parents stopped doing that and started to to their kids what they should the Police would not have to let tyers down!!!
Ohh rights this rights that!! what about the rights other others not to have to put up with these no belt wearing, knife carrying, backward baseball cap, YO boys who spend their lives trying to copy US gangs??? Sorry the Police have my support to let down tyres anytime, yes I respect the Police authority, and yes I learnt that from my parents and the Police!!!

T.Chong says:

08:54am | 16/11/10

Thats the way Louie. Police destroying things, in what the individual officer thinks is appropriate amount of damage that should be inflicted in such situations.
Why not just bring back the days when beltings were delivered by telephone books ? ( and fists, boots, battons, firearms, and fire hoses- just like that criminally convicted policeman in QLD)
Namby Pamby do gooders. What would they know ?
What do we want ? Unaccountable police forces!
When do we want it ? In any situation that does not affect us ! ( or so we hope)

NOLLY says:

08:55am | 16/11/10

Its guys like you Ron and your Civil Rights at all costs movement that are killing this world. The kid’s lucky he got to take the bike home and as for you Markus you’re just an idiot. Can you spell tacing rusponsibillity for yor aktions

Pete says:

09:09am | 16/11/10

Pull your head in Ron. Warn him about a lack of helmet?
I totally agree with Kochie, congratulate the cops, and shake my head at the Mum. If it were my son I’d agree with the coppers.

BK says:

09:24am | 16/11/10

I suppose that the police union will have no problems when when police internal affairs investigators start inventing “commonsense” punishments and using the “attitude test” on police officers.

Jade says:

09:27am | 16/11/10

If I’m caught speeding, drink driving, or with an inappropriately modified vehicle, the police will impound my car or refuse to let me drive it home. Where is the outrage that thousands of vulnerable young women are put in this situation every day by the police? Oh that’s right, we are expected to take responsibility for our choices.

I say well done to the police for this excellent action. The child was in less danger walking home than if he had been riding without a helmet. And probably won’t let the police catch him again without a helmet or acting inappropriately.

Gordy says:

09:37am | 16/11/10

It was good old fashion policing, great job by the cop’s who would have taught the kid a lesson, note I use the word ‘would’ unfortunately the dumb useless mother went in to bat against the cop so as far as her drop kick son is concerned mum thinks it is OK to gob off at authority and not bother with a helmet. Lets see how she reacts when drop kick has a fractured skull when he falls off his bike.

mum of one says:

10:04am | 16/11/10

The kid was breaking he law and the police could have issued the little darling with a fine costing mummy dearest $140.  Instead they decided to give him a warning and to ensure he did not continue his ILLEGAL activity they ordered him to let down his tyres.  Could you imagin if they had of said “Hey mate what your doing is against the law and unsafe, so we’re going to issue you with a warning / fine.  Now toddle off and don’t do it again” No dooubt this darling would have got straight back on his bike.  Now imaging this turd got knocked off his bike and suffered head injurys and they police warning was found in his pocket.  Guess the bleding hearts would be singing a different tune!
I am a mother if a 3 year old who gets nothing without a please and thankyou, is discplined and will address elders with respect.  It is how I was raised and its how children should be raised.
Get a grip and show your children what is right and maybe I will be able to go the local shopping mall on a Friday night without 13 year olds running around swearing, smoking and a causing trouble.
Ron I bet your one of those rude people who don’t bother to say please or thank you either.  The thing is manners cost you nothing!

Markus says:

10:32am | 16/11/10

Good to see the moderaters blocking my opinions while allowing baseless insults through.
NOLLY I fail to see a single spelling mistake in my statement, nor anywhere where you have addressed my point.

The teenager had no responsibility in allowing a police officer to act unlawfully to a situation. Had he been fined, fine, I’d tell him to suck it up. But what he did was not within his authority as an officer.

Let’s see how much responsibility you take if an officer were to sock you one for having the audacity to ask why you were being arrested.

S.L says:

11:34am | 16/11/10

@ Ron
While I’m no fan of the attitudes of some police towards the general public , not just feral teens, I think the copper telling our hero to let his tyres down showed a degree of “thinking on his feet” that many boys and girls in blue are being discouraged to do from “up top”. I worked with a retired country cop who told me once when he was transfered to a new town the first thing he did was find the local trouble maker and beat the hell out of him to announce a new sherrif was in town! Sure highly illegal and probably a sackable offence but affective!  The law can be one big grey area so the directions given to this teen get my vote!

Von says:

12:10pm | 16/11/10

Ron & Markus, perhaps it SHOULD be within the police’s authority to mete out similar punishment. How will a fine affect a kid? His mummy or daddy pays it (or ignores it). Essentially he is learning that there are no consequences for his actions until he ends up in an accident and it splits his head open. Too late mate.

Reg says:

12:32pm | 16/11/10

T Chong you have exceeded the allowable sarcasm count and your head will now explode. PC49.

Markus says:

12:37pm | 16/11/10

Then lobby to get the law/s changed Von. Don’t villify a teen just for knowing that what was done to him was not within the law.

Applauding an officer for ‘thinking on his feet’ seems to be all well and good until people change their tune the second it affects them in some way. Then the cries of ‘police corruption’ and ‘abuse of power’ begin.

If people are going to whinge at least be consistent.

Mikey says:

12:38pm | 16/11/10

And the poor little bogan had to walk for 30 minutes…...and with NO CIGARETTES !!  What a waste of blood & organs…

Empire says:

12:38pm | 16/11/10

If the kid had a brain he would have just turned into one of the many service stations, that he would have walked passed (on his thirty minute walk home) and pumped the tires back up.

On a different note, My children get in trouble for every tiny little thing they do wrong at school, which is fine. (I tell them this will happen)
What annoys me is the special little crafty snake children, who never get in trouble, they use their powers of manipulation, lies and some inbuilt homing devise, that assures that their nastiness never gets seen or heard by any figures of authority. They go through life being seen by their teachers and parents as sweet little angels that they certainly aren’t.(as i seem to be the only parent that sees how they behave)
One day my year seven er asked if he could take a voice recorder to school to tape these little angels, I said no but he took it anyway. When he came home he told me how he had arrived at school with i, and not being able to keep it to himself told one of his friends. By the time lunchtime came around and he got to the oval all the kids knew he had it.(the school captains, the house captains etc.. who had told him the day before to piss, off that he wasn’t welcome, and that no one liked him.) The girl school captain said “go away Caleb we all know you have a tape recorder” and he replied “Yes but what you didn’t know was that I had it yesterday.” They all stood there with horrified looks trying to remember what they had said.He hasn’t been bullied by any children since, even-though he was lying about having the tape recorder. I feel sorry for the kids who aren’t as smart as my kid, who knows maybe they even act up as a result.

acotrel says:

09:01am | 18/11/10

PaulB, my respect for the police waned, when they charged one officer for being involved in running the drug scene in our town.  We complain about bikies being involved in organised crime?  The solution is part of the problem!

Brian says:

08:04am | 16/11/10

Hey Macca, what’s wrong with Family Guy DVDs. lol, love the show.
but agree with the rest of your comment.

The Badger says:

08:44am | 16/11/10

Peter: I’m getting an Audi!
Brian: Peter, there’s a “T.” That says “audit.”
Peter: No, Brian, it’s a foreign car “the “T” is silent. Sweet, I’m getting an Audi!

Paranoia says:

09:54am | 16/11/10

Hey Macca, while I appreciate what you’re saying, we’ve got a 30yo temp here, and I’m waiting for her to make the connection between “abusing permanent senior staff” and “not a good career move”.  It’s very slow coming.  So while you’re right that parents don’t want to and schools should have to teach manners… waiting ‘til they’re in the workplace to remove that sense of entitlement is very harsh on the other employees… 

Macca says:

11:58am | 16/11/10

@Paranoia, surely there there is some grouchy 50+ who knows the place inside out and can tell her to pull her head in or get stuffed.

One of the best things about working on a unionised site, if the young fella is more of a porkchop than the delegate, he’s going to get pulled aside very soon.

Mother of 2 says:

10:45am | 16/11/10

I agree to a point that there is a correlation between each generation’s youth, as the period of time during adolesence is the same biologically.  As biology and the changes that occur physically have an effect on behaviour this period of time is the same for every generation.  The difference comes with how as adults we respond to this time.  Unfortunately many are given no guidance, are treated as adults way before they are able to deal with the responsibility and have been raised with a sense of entitlement.
I have a 15 year old and there is no way I would tolerate her smoking, nor would I allow her to wander the streets.  She may not agree with my rules but the simple fact is I don’t expect her too I just expect her to follow them.  I have explained that I love her and because of that I will protect her not only from others but from herself.  She knows that as she matures, more responsibility will fall on her but not before she is ready and able.  We have both had too compromise but that is how relationships work.

Ruth says:

08:15am | 16/11/10

My children were given boundaries by me.  Now they are in their teens.  I fought constantly with a husband who constantly broke and still breaks boundaries (we are now separated and the only way to enforce the boundaries is for me to move).  So I now have teens that do not always show the respect that they should.  My fault is I should have left earlier but then that is filled with challenges of its own. 

The other contention I have is the schooling system.  There is no consistency among high school teachers in up holding school rules or behaviour expectations in the classrooms.  In some classes it is OK to swear. In others not.  Some playground teachers will flaunt the “no lingering sexual hugs and kisses” others will not.  The kids play off it. 

People tell me my kids are great, warm and friendly and respectful.  But believe me they have issues, some of my making, some of the schools making and some of societies making.

Seano says:

08:43am | 16/11/10

Certainly it’s easier if you have two sensible parents and you’re both on the same page. Having one parent undermine the other is just not on. We sometimes disagree about various parenting issues but we always support each other in front of the kids and discuss it later.

And whilst I agree having a good school discipline policy properly enforced is a great support to parents discipline and respect still start at home.

Mick says:

08:59am | 16/11/10

This is a bit naive. I also thought my kid was a little angel, until the police brought him home at 3 am after he’d snuck out. This is normal teenage behaviour and he certainly took the fairly severe punishment on the chin, but lets be realistic here. Normal kids act as kids, that’s what they are. I’m sure you children are well behaved most of the time but to claim they are “absolute angels” is very blinkered thinking.

Seano says:

10:02am | 16/11/10

@Mick - No it’s not. I know where my kids are and what they are doing. I’m not claiming they are perfect my any stretch and I have had on extremely rare occasion had to discipline them in public, it is the effect of that discipline that makes them angels whenever we go out because they know there are boundaries.

Although I agree that just because they are good kids now doesn’t mean I can be lax as they grow up, parenting is 24/7.

Anne71 says:

12:43pm | 16/11/10

Good on you, Seano. Although you chose not to smack your kids you obviously used other forms of discipline to get your point across, and it has worked. What annoys me is these self-righteous parents who say “I’d never smack my child” but don’t do anything else to discipline them either.

Anne71 says:

12:54pm | 16/11/10

@Mick - that’s just it. When your child was brought home by the police, you punished him for his bad behaviour, and therefore you essentially showed him that you supported their authority. In other words, you did what any good parent would do in those circumstances. The sort of parents Kochie is talking about would have abused the police for daring to lay a hand on their kid, thus sending a message to the kid that no-one has the right to stop them from doing what they want.
No child is going to be an angel 100% of the time, so it’s unfair to use the “bad parent” tag just for that. The difference between good parent and bad parent is how the parent in question responds to the bad behaviour.

Aaron says:

01:10pm | 16/11/10

Seano, I’m a little worried about your statement that you “know where they are and what they are doing”. You have cameras set up all over the house? you have the phones and their rooms bugged? you have somebody snooping around after them whenever they aren’t home?

No parent will ever know where their kids are 100% of the time.

I think this whole give elders your respect until they do something to not deserve it is seriously flawed.

Can anyone honestly say that they respect everyone older than themselves who as of yet has not done anything to them to remove that respect?

Something else for everyone to think of (as I copped this a fair bit growing up) just because SOME youths are disrespectful that does not mean we all are, so the majority of a generation telling the next generation that “They are all a bunch of useless, disrespectful idiots who will not amount to anything” starts to make people think that they are “useless, disrespectful idiots who will not amount to anything”.

As we all know it’s a case of mind over matter.

Seano says:

03:40pm | 16/11/10

Tx Anne, so far so good.

I really think smacking is lazy and teaches them nothing. But better some discipline than none. Personally I think the biggest mistake many parents make is caving to demands.

Seano says:

07:24pm | 16/11/10

Aaron - don’t be silly, if my kids are in my house they’re relatively safe. Sure they might be up to mischief such as the time one they decided to make play dough soup but that’s kids learning and exploring their universe not being disrespectful or flirting with criminal behaviour.

Also I’m only talking about the kids who are disrespectful, rude and do the wrong thing, I see plenty of them in schools. I agree the majority are good kids. And I don’t blame kids for their behaviour I blame parents for doing a piss poor job.

David C says:

08:53am | 16/11/10

I think this is a great point Super, if you set boudnaries for your kids and instill in them strong values (ie be a good parent) they will be your friends when they grow up and become adults. One leads to the other, you cant skip a step

Kate says:

02:38pm | 16/11/10

Exactly right Super.

My mum and I are really close now and I consider her a friend as well as my mother. This was definitely not the case when I was younger - she and my dad set boundaries, and they were strict, and all I did was complain about how unfair it all was.

I can respect their decisions now - I still don’t agree with all of them, but I respect the thinking behind them - and I’m quite glad they were so strict with me.

Tim says:

08:17am | 16/11/10

This was what i was also going to comment on. Why would I respect someone just because they’re older? For all i know, they could be a jackass. I’ll show them courtesy towards them, but not initial respect. You still need to earn it. Just like I need to earn yours.

In saying that, the mother complained when the cop took his ciggies? Haha, oh some parents. How I loathe thee.

Mayday says:

09:03am | 16/11/10

A ridiculous statement and attitude.

As an early childhood professional I see first hand the respect reciprocated to me because I respect the children. 
By setting this example I model behaviour they are relaxed and comfortable with, consistency and empathy for everyone around and then respect becomes the norm for everyone regardless of age!

Parents who leave there children to look after themselves are the ones lacking respect not the “mamby pamby” parents who actually care for their children.

I live in Dept of Housing and see many parents demand respect they don’t deserve as they sit on there bums all day spending their family assistance money on ciggies, booze and drugs while the children are left to their own devices. 
The attitude “every adult deserves respect from children until they do something to lose it”  is the same attitude these ‘adults’ use to justify their selfish needs when belting their children for doing something wrong if they are not supervised or are copying their parents less edifying behaviours.
A rather ignorant opinion and one that simply exacerbates the problems many caring parents today experience.

fairsfair says:

10:08am | 16/11/10

I detest Kochie. I’ve commented to that effect more than once - he and his cronies are absolute tools. I agree with your comment in its entirety (following Koch exposure) but I see what he is getting at and it pains me to say that I somewhat agree with the man.

Respect should be afforded to all. And upon initial meeting and in public everyone should be shown respect. Particularly kids to adults,  but also adults to kids. Gone are the days where kids should be “seen and not heard”. I don’t mean screaming and tantrums are ok - children are able to hold a conversation and can accept responsibility. This whole tyre letting down situation is a farce. 

So schoolkids don’t hoon your scooter into the path of a group of adults on your way to school. Don’t hoon your scooter in front of anyone because after you have severed my toe I am not going to respectfully say “you little skamp”. Call your parents friends by Mr and Mrs until they say - “gawd that makes me sound old call me Jan”... Take your plate to the sink after dinner. Don’t publically sh*tcan your friends. Treat others the way in which you wish to be treated.

Cross generational respect is not the problem. Just plain respect is, including the way some jumped up adults speaks to others in general and the way kids speak to kids. I think it is called life and taking responsibility for your own actions. Just like you don’t have to be disrespected… you can say/do something about it you know…

John C says:

12:02pm | 16/11/10

Well, I somewhat agree with him too but that really worries me.

The general point that kids lack respect today and that they are overindulged by their parents has validity; its just that such a position being held by someone who is himself disrespectful and is quite clearly self-indulgent smacks of hypocrisy.

Why is he even given a spot by The Punch?

Darren says:

08:20am | 16/11/10

Sounds like you’ve done OK Rebecca.  Your teen is courteous outside the home so understands society’s requirements but still feels safe enough within the family home to push the boundaries and see where it goes. 
Kids are under a lot of pressure and they’ve a lot to learn about themselves and life, schooling and socialising.  All this while growing from children to adults.  If the home is a “safe house” where they can release the pressure occaisonaly then I’m OK with that.

Steve says:

08:36am | 16/11/10

but Daniel they do not have equal experience, wisdom or judgement so how can they have equal say?

Should parents put the choice of the evening meal to a vote - McDonalds happy meals verses home cooked balanced nutrition? 

Should the kids go to school today? - lets put that to a vote as all family members are equal, irrespecitive of age and responsibilities. 

A new playstation or the monthly mortgage payment? The playstation if the kids say thats what they want.

Vicki PS says:

10:21am | 16/11/10

@Daniel:  Except for basic human rights, children do not have the same rights as adults.  They are not equal to adults, in fact or in law.

Daniel says:

06:47am | 17/11/10

Parents have a different relationship with children. They have the responsibility that is involved with being a parent. They still need to show respect. You can still set rules and boundaries whilst being respectful.
Young people should not have to put up with being bullied by for example the fat rude guy on the bus who demands a seat.

Rebecca says:

08:00am | 16/11/10

Hmmm wonder what the mother would have said if the police had issued the kid with a fine, waited for him to start riding his bike again and then issued him with another one?? I wonder how many fines he would have accumulated on the way home if the police had followed the law?? How many people would have been outraged that the police had issued multiple fines to the kid while he continued to break the law while riding his bike home? Of course the alternative could have been to issue him with one fine, take him to the local police station and let the parent pick him up from there because I’m sure that would not have cause any uproar at all…

BK says:

08:53am | 16/11/10

Good point Lynne. All of the “parenting experts” on Sunrise give out flatter your kids to boost their self-esteem type advice. The obsession with self-esteem is the key difference between this generation and earlier generations of kids.

ImaWestie says:

09:07am | 16/11/10

The alternative - see link - is simply detain the child at the point of the crime, contact the parent, and have them come and collect their child.

http://mt-druitt-standard.whereilive.com.au/news/story/police-bust-youths-on-the-streets-at-all-hours-of-the-night/

KH says:

10:06am | 16/11/10

I wonder what she would have done if they had let the idiot ride off, he had been hit by a car and now had a serious brain injury.  No doubt she would be suing them for letting him ride off.  Because its always someone elses fault, isn’t it…......

Fiona says:

12:55pm | 16/11/10

I think the mother was aware that her son had done the wrong thing, however was calling the safety aspect. I’m only surprised she didn’t throw Daniel Morcombe’s name into it. (And tg she didn’t).

Real terms - the kid is 15. Walking his bike home for half an hour in the afternoon was hardly a safety issue. Silly mother should have concentrated on the real issues rather than turn against the police.

Wonder why the cops didn’t just throw recalcitrant teenager and bike into the van and drop him home with a severe warning? Still, he got the message… one would hope…

James1 says:

12:15pm | 16/11/10

I often find grumpy old people very disrespectful, and the least deserving of respect themselves.
I know it is hard, but before blaming others it is often good to have a look at your own behaviour.  My father in law is rude, abusive, racist, and often drunk.  Yet he still expects my daughter to respect him.  She doesn’t, and nor would I expect her to, as I am of the firm belief that regardless of age, rude people should never be respected.  And my daughter is as well-mannered as they come.

iansand says:

07:57am | 16/11/10

Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food, and tyrannize their teachers.
Socrates

http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/20946.html

marley says:

07:59am | 16/11/10

I think Kochie’s point has more to do with the parents than the kids, actually.  And I don’t think Socrates was complaining about parents’ trying to be best mates with their 8 year olds, or Plato’s mom demanding he give her boy a higher grade.

petesbrew says:

09:23am | 16/11/10

Mmmm, Pliny the Elder. I feel like a drink now

Gavan says:

08:37am | 16/11/10

Grumpy is wise, he is.

Paranoia says:

09:27am | 16/11/10

Brilliant!!  Well said, sir.

Romli065 says:

10:13am | 16/11/10

Absolutely spot on.  Congratulations on such an eloquent and accurate comment in rebuff to the stupidity of the comment by Daniel.  You are clearly not just a grumpy old man but a very wise one too.

Anne71 says:

12:59pm | 16/11/10

Round of applause for grumpy old man, please!

Queenslander says:

09:18am | 16/11/10

You are right to a point but fail to recognise that behaviour is learnt most effectively by observing the behaviour of parents and significant other. 

And to top that the behaviour that gets teens into trouble is often done impulsively and spur of the moment with no thought.  There have been times when I have pulled up my teens after the event (usually because they wanted it - eg snatching etc) or the daughter decides she wants to see what happens if you pour water toward you instead of away.  The damage has been done.  I have encouraged them since babies, talked to them about consequencies while babies, but has that stopped inmpulsive, non-thinking behaviour as teens.  NO.

Teens by their hormonal changes will do stupid things.  They still need guidance and great role models.  this has always and will always be the case.  The challenge is how to challenge behaviours in a world where kids have access to far more information than you and I have had in a life time.  As a parent of teens I am very much struggling with this.

Drew says:

09:49am | 16/11/10

Agreed ... While I have no issue with any of the other statements in your article, and am very surprised to find myself agreeing with you on anything, why is it a constant whine about “spoilt rotten” only children ? Please get over this ongoing perception that because a family has only one child instead of 3 or 7, that it must obviously be spoiled. The actions of the parent of the reported idiot with the bike are far more spoiling behaviour than any of the only children I have ever met as responsible, well adjusted and self sufficient adults.

Reg says:

11:24am | 16/11/10

Gladys I’m walking on egg-shells here but I notice it is YOU who is demanding she respect her father. It is YOU who will make sure she respects her father, “if it kills YOU,” it is YOU who resents your daughter defying you. YOU even overrule the child-psychologist YOU first hold up as an authority ... until she disagrees with YOU. May I suggest that YOU are hell bent on having such an influence on your daughter’s life, that if things later go off the rails there is only one person to blame. YOU.

Then rounded off with ... ” one-child families are selfish is something on which I will never agree with you.” Do you get the message?

I’d even suggest that lots of crazy kids are only trying to escape from their domineering mother’s apron strings…..“apron strings” there’s a chortle. They’re only mummy’s boy’s at heart. Sissies trying to display their manhood.

fairsfair says:

12:18pm | 16/11/10

@reg WTF?

Von says:

12:44pm | 16/11/10

Reg, surely any child families are selfish. Just as selfish as no child families. I mean why else do you bring a child into the world? Because of the child’s sake? I sincerely doubt that. You bring a child into the world because YOU want a child. That in itself is selfish since it’s driven by YOU. 

One of the roles of being a parent is to have influence in your child’s life. I don’t see how you would be a good parent to do anything BUT. To do otherwise, is just negligence. I see your point though, of domineering parents. Maybe they need a chill pill sometimes

The difference between one child and multiple children families, is that one child gets ALL the attention of the parents. This can either mean the child is spoilt and/or they are under more pressure to perform and be what their parents want them to be. If their child is naughty, bad parents could encourage that behaviour because, by agreeing they are naughty, it’s seen as a reflection of themselves and their own bad parenting. Some may not want to accept that they have made a mistake themselves in parenting. Naturally if you have more children, your attention gets divided between them. If one plays up, you still have the other to rely on!

Reg says:

02:11pm | 16/11/10

Fairsky, Von, granted it is the right of the mother to boast at her children’s (always exaggerated) achievements, but it also reveals the deep drive that has brought on the possessiveness or ownership of those achievements. Spread this across several children and there is a moderation that cannot take place with fewer children, especially with only one.  I’m sure there would be very few who would challenge the idea that, for better or worse, the mothers are the power-houses of the family. I’m old and had a mother who needed support and two wives, each with their own highly illustrative kinks. I am continuously appalled by the mother’s who maintain that their children can do no wrong and will defend them to the death. Sounds good eh? Well it often is totally destructive because the children grow up certain that they can get away with anything.  Point out to that kid in the interview that he went home and got his mum to come and stand up for him while he displayed his quivering lip at the dreadful hurt inflicted by the awful policeman, and he begins to look like a real pansy. The lady back there with the child of two is hell bent on basking in the achievements of her 2 year old, if it kills her.  Yes I’ve seen kids like that in pre-school and what little shits they are.  Then you see and hear the mother and all is revealed.

Gladys says:

03:15pm | 16/11/10

Thanks for that, Reg. I’m not sure what you’re saying, it’s all a bit muddled and weird. But I feel I should respond anyway.

When I see my daughter defy her father, I tell her that defiance isn’t acceptable.

My child is 2 so everything is about her identity at the moment. She is learning what she can say no to and what she can get away with. When she pulls the cat’s tail, that is wrong. But she can sing cat songs till the cows come home. Even if it drives us batty.

The reason why this constant ‘do as your father has said, he deserves our respect and love’ is because he does. First because he has the benefit of many years of life experience to help guide my daughter’s choices. Second because fathers are as important as mothers in riasing children.

I think it helps that I (a malcontent from way back) have huge respect and admiration for my husband. I will not talk him down to my daughter.  My father raised me to speak respectfully to him and my mother and I have never sworn at a manager or shown disrespect to authority. I don’t get drunk in front of my parents, I don’t swear at or near my parents.

That’s not to say I don’t swear. I do. Nor am I saying I don’t take a drink. I do.

But ultimately if I don’t support my husband and him me, and we don’t ct as a team of parents rather than a father and mother doing their own things, then we’ll be played off.

So Reg, I may in a few short sentences come across as a controlling domineering mother, and you can see my poor daughter’s future stuck in anorexia clinics or rebelling later in life.

But you are wrong. I’m just in a bloody good marriage with a really decent bloke and we’ve got one fantastic little kid.

Gladys says:

03:28pm | 16/11/10

Oh, Reg! I so don’t brag about my child. I love her and think she’s the bees knees, but that’s about it.

She’s no child prodigy. No. Wait. She does fingerpaint with milk and do some sort of vegemite stamping thing with the toast, so clearly she’s the next Rembrandt.

You don’t know me to say that!

fairsfair says:

03:55pm | 16/11/10

Reg I totally agree - I am so sick of helicopter parents who are under the false assumption that other people care about their lives and the achievements of their kids. Yes your kids are special - to you. Nobody else loves them as much as you do so please realize that their existance is not a hot topic of wider discussion. I only started to notice this shift about ten years ago (ie children are gods) so you may be on to something in that these now teenage trailblazers are rebelling against their smothering idiotic parents.

But I just don’t think that Gladys exhibts any of that in her comment. She appears to me to be the kind of parent that I want to be (one day) - she doesn’t let a two year old little person rule her life which tells me that she can hold a normal conversation outside of the home that doesn’t revolve around vomit, poo and I saw this great little outfit on sale….... god my eyes are crossing as we speak… 

I don’t think persevering through routine and consequence in an effort to produce a well rounded individual is selfish. Rather the non-confrontational and friendly style of parenting that revolves around naughty corners and rationalising decisions that leads to kids learning how to play their parents and develops manipulative little sh*ts - is…

All this reminds me of that episode of the Simpsons where Bart steals that computer game. Outside the shop he is being led away by Marge and another mother complete with spoiled child states something like “what kind of bad mother lets their child do that” to which the spoiled child replies “Shutup Mom!” and they get in their car and go.

Reg says:

09:17pm | 16/11/10

Thank you both for being so kind in letting me use your inputs as those of “sample” parents. First when you speak of a two or 2 1/2 year old you are not talking of a “normal” person or even a “normal baby”. A 2+ year old is undergoing a mental storm of choices and unfulfilled wants. A very critical stage, one of first becoming conscious of themselves and how far they can push their boundaries. I think it’s a period that actually worse than the teen years but with patience and restraint, and sparing use of the word no, it’s over in a short period. I have a very strong objection to the use of the word NO. It rules out any possibility of negotiation and establishes a formidable barrier in the infant mind. OK, some will say that’s what they want but I would argue this is exactly what they do NOT want. By the way this conviction is not one from the banks of the PC, it is one from experience. I’ll say it again, I believe parents should have at the forefront of their minds a determination to have a child develop into a teenage with only pleasant memories of their upbringing, not ones of confrontation and insensitive demands. I believe many delayed parents are not even aware of the magnitude and importance of this few months sprung upon them as their dear little chap becomes a torrent out of no-where. I’ve been there six times and it never gets any easier. i sincerely believe that mis-handling of this period can create big problems later in life.  Which, I’m sure is the topic we are discussing.

Reg says:

09:43pm | 16/11/10

One late thought before I give up on this bloody Windows 7 installation, ....  If I have convinced you that the “terrible twos” are a crucial period in child development that can engender long term positive or negative results, then just imagine what might happen if you decide to allow your precious infant to serve it in a child-minding centre. If the parents are potentially dreadful, then it might be money well spent. Not otherwise. I might even suggest that a core of child development assistants roving the countryside may be advantageous for those who find it all too much. That what I’d call planning for the future.

s m says:

09:52am | 17/11/10

Not for lack of trying, our son was an only child for four years.  I don’t believe he was spoilt during that time any more than I was as one of seven kids.

Dena says:

08:42am | 16/11/10

A girl (can’t be more than 20 - so less than half my age) at the local cafe calls EVERYONE ‘darls’, as in “what can I get for you darls?”. She is exuberantly familiar, but I don’t mind it too much - she’s trying very hard to be friendly.  But I did watch in amusement yesterday as she served a table of elderly people. They were well spoken 80 year olds, nicely presented ladies off the land, and I watched to see how she would address them. Some instinct within her must have kicked in (I could almost see her thinking: “Aah! Older Australians, look a bit like my grandma, how do I address them again?”) . She said “What can I get for you (slight pause to think).....today?”  neatly bypassing any need for her usual over-familiar greeting. I was pleased at her restraint!

Kate says:

02:57pm | 16/11/10

@Dean - I do think ‘champ’ is a bit too familiar for customer service, regardless of your age or the salesperson’s age.

You may prefer ‘Sir’, but I’ve worked customer service for eight years during school and uni, and boy do ‘Sir’ and ‘Ma’am’ irritate people. Some people think being called ‘Sir’ implies that they are old and they dislike this implication. And I don’t blame them - I got ‘Ma’am’ in a shop once and found it really weird. I’m 22, surely I’m too young to be a ma’am!

I usually go with ‘Good morning’ or ‘Good afternoon’ and leave the other terms out, unless I know the customer by name, and then it’s Miss/Mr/Mrs (name).

Romli065 says:

10:22am | 16/11/10

Yes, this is a pet irk of mine as well.  Ferals on public transport who treat it like it’s their loungeroom.  Speaking at the top of their voices, either to another feral or on their phones, being completely obnoxious and inconsiderate to anyone else around them.  Some people like to read a book (like me) and you just cannot do this with rude, noisey people around. And God forbid if you give them a bit of a look with attitude, you’ll more than likely get a swift “what you lookin’ at bitch, you got a problem”, so decent people who don’t want this sort of confrontation just put up with it.  And these people are bringing up kids! What can we expect?

Sam says:

12:43pm | 16/11/10

My neighbours are like this, though the parents would be in their 40’s.
This past weekend I was outside and could hear the kids playing next door. (A girl 6 and a boy 4). Something happend and the girl told the boy the F off. The boy then told his sister to F off. The father then chimed in and stated ‘How many times do I have to tell you two not to F-ing swear’.
The parents are quite nice people, and the kids seem pretty well behavied, but they can’t seem to form a sentence that doesn’t include a swear word. I always wonder how the little girl gets on at school.

Missy says:

09:07am | 16/11/10

That’s great, No Free Ride.

Its good, responsible parents like yourself who console me that there are some good people in the world who cares about the impact and quality of the legacy they leave behind in the world.

Back where I’m from, some examples of courtesy and respect we are brought up with:

- We are not allowed to use the names of our elder siblings unless we are referring to them as a third party to someone as means of ID, we called them by their honorific and respectful titles - ‘big sister’, ‘big brother’, ‘second sister’, ‘second brother’, etc.

- Anyone who is elderly to us a generation and above are referred to as ‘Auntie’ or ‘Uncle’ respectively as it is extremely offensive to use their name. We also sometimes use Mr.(sir name), Mrs (sir name) as well if we have to refer to them in business or formal context.

- We are not allowed to use our parents name and use honorific titles in spoken and written to address them.

- We respect and defer to the elderly and their opinion is always heard first and considered first as they are experienced in ways of the world and we care about their input, before we proceed to consider others.

- Men are expected to be polite to women and women respectful to men - for example, men will open doors for women and help them with heavy stuff/fixing stuff, women will always ensure he is comfortable with his surroundings and doesn’t scorn him in public or private.
Any non-adherence to this is frowned upon.

-  Children are taught to behave, be polite and families consider studies the most important to everything else.

- Discipline using caning is practised on children and accepted as long as it does not constitute outright abuse and reasonably practised. Parents have the option to choose but rules and society ensure the parent does not overstep boundaries or it will end up in the hands of the law.

- Teachers are greatly respected. In my school, we had to bow and greet teachers with ‘Good morning/afternoon, Mr/Mrs (sir name)/Sir/Ma’am’ and we never EVER spoke against or replied back to a teacher.

We saw them as people who care for us and as a result there was a great closeness bourne out of student and teacher where we as students always returned even in our 20’s and 30’s to visit our teachers.

Many other societal etiquette which I think is greatly beneficial to society.

As a result of such an upbringing, I have a wonderful life, surrounded by wonderful people, have respect for all and all have respect for me.

Respect is a two way street, yes, but how can you expect someone who is more knowledgeable than you are in life and greater in age than you are to respect you when they have earned theirs and you have not?

James1 says:

12:23pm | 16/11/10

What kind of homework necessitates a game console, and why did I never get any?

James1 says:

12:29pm | 16/11/10

If it is so bad here, you could always leave.  Those of us with effective parenting methods and the right attitude towards our children can raise well behaved children without beating them.  Like they taught me in preschool - “use your words”.  I feel sorry for your kids.

Steph says:

07:32pm | 16/11/10

Yes, James1, because a short sharp slap on the bottom for a wrongdoing is beating a child.

Grow up. It’s your kind of attitude raising kids with no respect.

I was brought up on the Spare the rod, spoil the child theory and by gods, did it work for me and my siblings. You talk back to your parents, you get punished - you learn respect a lot quicker and a lot easier than a parent saying “Now you musn’t do that, dear”. And I don’t consider myself to be abused, beaten or raised improperly.

James1 says:

06:05pm | 19/11/10

By those evidentiary standards, I am proof of the complete opposite.  I was never smacked as a child - my parents made me sit in a corner of the room with no stimulation for set periods as punishment - and I never talked back and behaved myself as well.  In any case, compared to me and many others like me you were abused.  And you were also taught that violence was the solution to problems, and I was never taught any such thing.

Keith says:

08:26am | 16/11/10

Noob. The laws in Singapore aren’t draconian but at least they’re more effective than what we have in Australia. People there are actually more progressive and they actually achieve things there rather than thinking on how to break the law.

Set someone down on the right path and they would be a benefit to your society rather than become a liability.

K J Beinke says:

09:03am | 16/11/10

Noob, the difference between Singaporean laws and Australian laws is they still have capital and corporal punishment.  They also dont go down the path of continual good behaviour bonds and so on until the young offender is a recidivist.  They are held accountable first up and no repeat offenders.  They know from the onset what penalty will be and that is what they get.  I dont call this draconian, I call it true and courageous justice.

noob says:

12:57pm | 16/11/10

I stand corrected.  Draconian wasn’t the correct word to use.  I agree with all your points.  Especially the number of chances given to offenders.  What annoys me is that do-gooders always say “well that didn’t work in the past”.  Well no system will ever work perfectly but it worked a lot better than the current system.

Paranoia says:

10:07am | 16/11/10

You don’t think that the fact that your parents are contributing members of society, while you’re still freeloading from them deserves respect?  You don’t think that the fact that they’ve paid for everything so far in your life, giving you a safe home to live in, clean water, food, a place in society, education etc while you have contributed little or nothing to this is worthy of respect?

That said, I agree, parents do need to treat their children as prospective adults and try to deal with them in a calm and respectful manner - you are correct, respect engenders respect.  However, look at it from their point of view (an adult concept).  They’ve been at work all day, earning the money, putting up with psychotic bosses, ridiculous customers and whining colleagues, and they come home to find the person that they’ve been paying for for fourteen years is giving them attitude for some petty thing.  Are you seeing the point here?  I’m not condoning their actions, I’m asking you to see their side of the story before YOU judge them.

I also disagree with the “adults” who act with their sense of entitlement or the bad attitude towards younger people.  I think they’re wrong, but again, what’s made them that way?  Have they worked hard for fifty years or served their country and then come out to find some teenager smoking, swearing, drinking and being disgustingly rude for no reason?  Has this happened repeatedly?  Walk a mile in their shoes.  That way, you’ll be a mile away, and you’ll have their shoes. (Pratchett)

James1 says:

12:32pm | 16/11/10

Paranoia, 

A safe home is not one where you get regularly beaten.  That is the opposite of a safe home.  There are better ways of dealing with things than violence.

NEFFA says:

04:43pm | 16/11/10

So we should all so complete disrespect to each other until the respect is earned?

Wel Done says:

10:29am | 16/11/10

This mentality is also the cowardly level of the petty criminal. He threatened to break the law, you took a minor step to prevent this, he then called the police to dob you in, and expects you to be severely punished for what you did, but not him, he is the innocent victim in this situation.

It is just like when these fools assault someone. They hit their victim. Their victim takes exception to this and hits them back. They then run to the police, with their tail between their legs, crying that you assaulted them.

Isn’t it funny that they have rights, but no responsibilities? They somehow believe that there are no negative consequences for their actions.

Biteme - I applaud your constant efforts to raise decent citizens for the next generation of Australian adults.

Seano says:

10:10am | 16/11/10

There’s nothing wrong with modelling good manners. And there’s nothing wrong with explaining why, or else how do they learn? The problems begin when the child does not respond appropriately and boundaries aren’t enforced.

I heard a parent saying to a misbehaving child recently, “If you keep that up we’ll go home”. The child kept misbehaving and the parent did not follow through on the consequence, so the parent was actually reinforcing bad behaviour. Not smart.

noob says:

01:43pm | 16/11/10

You’re wrong.  There is something wrong with trying to teach your kid manners in public.  Firstly saying ‘Excuse me’ should be used for pardon in the hope of being forgiven or understood.  Why on earth should the parent be seeking forgiveness from a brat being noisy?  And if they really feel the need to teach immaculate manners then they should do so in their own house, in their own time or take the little snot outside and teach them manners out there for a while so my wife and I can enjoy our meal.

Seano says:

06:36pm | 16/11/10

Get a grip on life. Things don’t work that way and children aren’t something you can turn on or off. Yes some parents don’t do a good job at home but one indiscretion does not a bad kid or parent make.
Every opportunity should be taken to teach kids manners; that is why we model the right things to do.

What shouldn’t happen when the child is disturbing other dinners is that the parent doesn’t end the disturbance quickly.

lv says:

09:12am | 16/11/10

Zeta says “Imagine how pissed off you’d be if you were pulled over for not wearing your seat belt, and instead of giving you a fine and sending you on your way, the Police let down your tyres and made you walk home just in case you took your seat belt off again? “

If you were driving a car with no seatbelts (like this kid riding his bike with no helmet) your car would be considered unroadworthy and you would not be allowed to drive it home.

Ihatenaivety says:

09:23am | 16/11/10

And here is a perfect example of one of these shining parents referred to in this article. Go forth and produce many criminal children with no respect for others or the law!

1. As long as its the law, we have to obey it. Its respect for the law. If you teach your kids to selectively obey the law, they will pick and choose which laws they obey including drugs laws.
2. Police are an authority position in society. If they talked back to the police, then it shows no respect for law and order and it creates an environment of anarchy.
3. Any parent who chooses to support her 15yr old’s choice to argue over the police confiscating cigarettes does not deserve to be a parent.

Macca says:

09:37am | 16/11/10

@Zeta, I was looking fwd to your comment after days of gold from you, but today I am disappointed. I believe that your point of view here is simply skewed by the source of the article.

The repeat offending argument regarding driving a car is silly, because in reality you would be fined again. Doing the same to a teenager would have resulted in an even greater uproar.

Zeta says:

10:09am | 16/11/10

@ Ihatenaivety - 1. You don’t ‘have’ to obey the law. For example, you choose to ignore the laws of grammar by ignoring the apostrophe in ‘it’s’.  A 15 year old chose to ignore the laws governing helmet wearing. There exists an equilibrium between the pay off of obeying some laws and penalty of breaching them. Every day we all pick and choose which laws to obey based on the pay off matrix for breaching that particular law. I didn’t buy a train a ticket this morning because there were no transit officers at the station. Tomorrow, I’ll assess that situation again and perhaps choose differently.

Maybe if we taught our kids to study John Forbes Nash instead of teaching them slavish devotion to social constructs they’d realise every one acts in their own self interest - especially Police - and to choose which laws they follow accordingly.

2. The authority of Police comes from the State’s monopoly on Force. A Police officer can physically restrain you, imprison you, or even kill you. So the pay off matrix for obeying a Police officer’s direction correlates to the likelihood of that Police officer assaulting you in some way. If the 15 year old kid didn’t think he was going to be assaulted, why not talk back?

You an others like you fail to articulate why anyone should ‘respect law and order’. Deserved authority is never challenged - so an authority that can be challenged by a 15 year old using naught but a pack of cigarettes, some unkind words, and a lack of helmet really isn’t authority at all.

3. You can teach your kid the dangers of cigarette smoking - but it’s harder to teach anyone to challenge authority when they think it’s unjust. I might not be happy my child was smoking and not wearing a helmet - but I’d be over joyed they had the guts to stand up to what they’re taught is the ultimate authority in our society.

@ macca - somedays I take red pills, somedays I take the blue pills.

Vicki PS says:

11:10am | 16/11/10

@Zeta: Crap.  More Philosophy 101 for naughty boys looking to justify sociopathic behaviour.  Sounds like you’re still stuck in the gleeful euphoria of anarchy 70s-style.  Perhaps when you’re grown up and/or sober you might like to reflect on how your intrinsically self-destructive 15 year old will acquire and internalise values that do not need external enforcement in order to affect his decisions.

Paranoia says:

11:36am | 16/11/10

I was going to ask you to share your drugs, Zeta, after your first comment.  I’m glad I waited for the second one.  The police have authority granted to them by SOCIETY.  ie, you and me.  I have asked the police if they could please, on my behalf, try to enforce the laws of this society in which we live.  Those laws exist to ensure that everyone has the right to be safe and to feel safe, and to enjoy certain freedoms in their lives.  Unfortunately, the laws must exist because certain elements of society feel that politeness and courtesy extended to others is something that’s directly related to a “payoff matrix”. 

You are, of course, correct.  In the past, those who did not extend courtesy and consideration to others within their society were rejected from that society, and were not accepted back in until they had made reparations and shown they would not continue with their antisocial behaviour.  Today we call that “prison”, however we do tend to put up with an extensive amount of antisocial behaviour prior to utlising that option.

In putting yourself above the law - which you’ve stated you have done - you are showing disrespect for everyone else.  You are stating that you condone theft (“I didn’t buy a train ticket this morning”) and are teaching this to your children in the guise of “challenging an unjust authority”.  Could you please explain how you justify this stance?  Ethically and morally? 

I agree that thought should be applied to all laws and authority, and that responsibility should be taken for your own actions, however from your posts, you seem to be advocating mindless rebellion for it’s own sake.  Anarchy is an attractive concept, until you’re faced with a mindless drooling idiot intent upon causing you grievous bodily harm, who’s been taught that police are simply state-sanctioned bullies by other mindless drooling idiots with an education but no brain.

Does this meet your criteria of “You an others like you fail to articulate why anyone should ‘respect law and order’.”?

Zeta says:

02:47pm | 16/11/10

@ Paranoia - There is no ethical qualm in stealing from a Government or Corporation. You’re not stealing from a person. If everyone evaded their train fare, then the Government would have to increase security, thus providing more jobs for security workers and providing safer environments on trains. If no one did, then they’d decrease security - so dodging your train fare is a public service. I steal my groceries as well - I use the self-check out and put all my groceries through as Green Beans by weight - so a $100 trolley of goods costs only about $20. Pretty soon they’ll figure this scam out, and they’ll have to re-hire some of those students and immigrants they were exploitng until they sacked them and replaced them with machines.

I don’t advocate rebellion for its own sake - I advocate rebellion for your own sake.

dw says:

04:32pm | 16/11/10

Zeta is correct - deserved authority is never challenged - it doesn’t need to be because it is obviously acting in the best interests of all. If the child challenges ‘authority’ it means that the authority is incongruent in some way.

I can understand the teen’s behaviour with the police because their actions - as authority - are incongruent. they want the child to follow the letter of the law - yet the police themselves fail to follow the letter of the law in dealing with him.

we should not respect the law - unless unless the law makes sense for the common good. So Zeta is right. the helmet law should be abolished or we should all be strapping one on when we leave the house. Anything else in incongruent.

breaks the law daily says:

03:37pm | 18/11/10

Lol good post Zeta. A bit of anarchism is healthy after all.

Vicki PS says:

01:15am | 19/11/10

@Zeta: What you choose to call rebellion for its own sake is also theft, which you then attempt to justify by arguing that if you can’t be stopped it must be okay.  For many people (and I would challenge your contrary assertion and say a majority of people) there is an ethical qualm in stealing, whether the victim is one person or many.  I have to admit, though, that morally whitewashing theft by calling it personal development is sort of cute.  You must let us all know how it goes down with the beak.

Shane says:

09:34am | 16/11/10

How strange, snoogens. I’ve gone out countless times in the last few years and not been abused by an arrogant drunken lout.
Hooray, it must be 30 years ago!!

snoogens says:

11:57am | 16/11/10

@ Shane,

A night at the bingo doesn’t count.

noob says:

01:21pm | 16/11/10

and even if you didn’t get it, the fear of getting it made you think twice.

Ms P says:

12:42pm | 16/11/10

You’re right.
Rules and boundaries are there to be broken - but only if and when the child understands the consequences of their actions.
I think that’s what Zeta was referring to earlier. He chose not to buy a train ticket (you big rebel you) BUT he would have been prepared to pay the consequences if he was caught.
The difference is when kids break the rules, get caught, get punished then cry foul.
“It dont work that way sunshine”

Shifter says:

01:21pm | 16/11/10

Media sensationalism, as you put it, is probably a major cause in all of the nanny-state laws which are cropping up around the place. So who knows, maybe we will get some breeding legislation thrown in there as well.

Alternatively, returning to a Darwinistic approach might be more favourable. If a 15 year old kid wants to ride with no helmet, I fully support this, and will also fully support them in their endeavour if they impact a lamp post.

Elphaba says:

01:38pm | 16/11/10

@Shifter - personal responsibility.  What a rational idea.  It’ll never catch on.

Sarah B says:

08:55am | 16/11/10

Agree COMPLETELY

smack them and get it over with says:

10:30am | 16/11/10

I’m not sure what you expect of us Sam? Are we meant to stop and help you because you have a child? You’d already ensured the child was safe so why is it up to us to pick up your groceries? Or would it be more convenient if you used a trolley rather than overload a pram that obviously wasn’t made for balancing all your groceries on? If I was around I would have stopped to help you however you need to understand that nobody helps me when i’m struggling with my groceries because I don’t have a child handy so it goes both ways and that’s possibly why people just walked by. In this day and age you need to rely on the fact that nobody is going to help you. I don’t agree with it but it’s the way life is these days. Just saying….

lynne says:

01:04pm | 16/11/10

I think your supermarket story is a really sad reflection on society.  Unfortunately though no one knows these days what the right thing to do is.  I opened a door at the drs surgery once for an elderly gentleman with a walking stick only to be told in a gruff voice he didnt need my help.  I have knocked on the door of new neighbours to welcome them only to have a hello and the door closed on me..I ran after someone at a checkout to give her the handbag she had left behind when taking her groceries ..only to have her snatch it and not even a thank you.  not that I go around trying to do good deeds but it does make you think twice next time you are considering whether to help someone or not.  Not the way it should be I know..

sam says:

01:33pm | 16/11/10

dear ‘smack them and get over it’ I think you may have missed my point. I wasnt saying that you should only stop and help mother’s who happen to be carrying a baby, i am saying that this was my particular circumstance. If i were holding a sack of potatoes and obviously needed help, I would be offended if the same people walked past. It seems you attribute this lack of respect for others to the fact you ‘don’t have a child handy’ however, I would say it is a sign of SOME attitudes within the society in which we live (and that is the point) but that doesn’t mean i am lowering my expectations. I would be disappointed if someone i knew walked past a person in need of help and so, will continue to teach my children respect for others by setting that example myself.

sam says:

08:17pm | 16/11/10

Lynne, thank goodness for people like you. It is like a slap in the face everytime someone disregards your efforts to help them. The fact that you still continue makes me think that maybe i’m not looking hard enough to see the good people.

smack them and get over it says:

08:19am | 17/11/10

I didn’t miss your point Sam, whether you have a baby in your arms or not has nothing to do with it. If you need help with your sacks of potatoes then I suggest you either use a trolley, take someone shopping with you or quite simply just buy a smaller amount of potatoes.

As for the comment about ‘it takes a village to raise a baby…” well all I can say is that your children are your responsibility and nobody else’s. I’m probably contributing enough to support your family with my hard enough taxpayer dollars, the rest is up to you!

I stop and help people where possible, open doors for the elderly and contribute as best as I can as a decent human being but I draw the line at parents who complain about simple things like their struggles with managing children and expecting people to help them because they have them. My mother raised 3 daughters alone and somehow managed to make all that happen and we all turned out decent adults. It wasn’t easy and i’m sure she struggled but if anything it taught us to be independent , to look after ourselves and not rely on others. You chose to have children so manage them yourself!

sam says:

12:22pm | 17/11/10

wow! you missed the point again. I am still not saying that you should stop because i had a baby. AGAIN, i am only explaining the scenario. From everything you’ve said, i do not believe for one second that you would have stopped. You seem to me to be the type of person who would snicker and think ‘your problem, deal with it’. this is exactly the attitude that is causing the lack of courtesy in our society that this article discusses.

sam says:

12:35pm | 17/11/10

NB the phrase ‘it takes a village to raise a child’ means that how a child turns out is a result of both how they are parented and the society in which it is raised. A child’s social conscience is formed by seeing how other members of that society treat each other.

Reg says:

02:24pm | 16/11/10

You know Ned, I’m sure there are lots of people who can’t bear the thought of having to endure little snots like they were. A 30 minute walk should be bugger-all to any reasonably aware kid. In the days before TV I used to ride my bike 10 or 15 miles in any direction, often forgetting to allow time before Sunset to get back home. I actually did get a puncture 10 miles from home at dusk once. Learned a lot from that. Always carry a repair kit and two spoons and a pump. Oh, and the lights, those bloody trucks never see you riding the rough edge. Helmets hadn’t been invented for bikes back then, only for people.

Really? says:

03:25pm | 16/11/10

SIL?  So only the mother has responsibility for the children, not the father?

Mayday says:

03:53pm | 16/11/10

A very good point and unfortunately too true!

I moved our eldest son out of the local state High school for that exact reason and followed through with his younger brother at age ten. 

We enrolled them a reasonably priced local Catholic High school and both boys found they could be themselves within their peer group without fear of being bullied for showing an interest in learning.

Mayday says:

10:16am | 16/11/10

Excellent point Dena.

I firmly believe if a child is removed from a family and put into care the parents MUST attend effective parenting classes and an anger management course before the child is returned.

Teaching good parenting techniques will not only help the children in these families but the adults as well; a good parent is a good person.

Dash says:

09:15am | 16/11/10

Murray, you hit on what may well be the chief problem with modern society. Everyone now seems to be focused on what their rights are. Very few seem to be focused or have a good understanding of what their responsibilities to society are.

We’re so hung up on telling our kids they have a right to this and a right to that. How many parents or schools actually teach their kids a sense of community responsibility or a responsibility to their fellow man.

Previous generations had a sense of responsibility. It may have been for King and country and they may have been prepared to lay down their lives for it. These days, that attitude is more likely to be ridiculed than embraced.

Society develops and moves on. That means ethics and morality change and develop. What gets me though is the assumption that the ideas of the past are wrong or those people who judge yesterdays actions by todays morals.

Anyway, that’s my little rant. I just think we would live in a better world if there was less selfishness and a little more attention to what our responsibilities are.

Nathin says:

12:29pm | 16/11/10

The problem with modern society IS: Modern family.

Hey Punch, I want a “Like” button, stat!

Lynne says:

03:11pm | 16/11/10

spot on sd.  The media also have a lot to answer to.

Reg says:

09:17am | 17/11/10

Raoul, I choose jail every time now because I’m sure many out there would simply not recognise what gaol meant. Same with color and all the other sms originated variations. I use Ustrayn when I’m talking to bogans, which is a new collective adjective to me, and I even notice that Koshie is proud of his Ustrayn lack of tonal vowels. Yes I took a look this morning after years of avoiding it and what a nasty shock to discover the shift to the hairy faces. Stop it Koshie your credibility is at risk from that nasty thing and you look like Con the Fruiterer. Perhaps you could use a well established Brazillian lady or two to help with the sweeping of the studio?

Steph says:

07:42pm | 16/11/10

And then, when he’s supporting the masses on welfare with his salary, he’ll look at himself and wonder why he’s surged forward ahead of the general population to make something of himself, only to pay out the the bogans in welfare housing? Sad, really. I’d love my children to make something of themselves - go to Uni, get a bachelors, or a masters, or even a PhD - but then I think about the amount they’re going to work for someone else to put into pokies. The more people requesting welfare, the more the working class gets taxed, to the point it’s cheaper to join the rest of australia and receive handouts from our wonderful government.

Seano says:

10:52am | 16/11/10

I love the excuses, “I’m a bad parent, but it’s someone else’s fault”.

John says:

10:17am | 16/11/10

Hi Garry, I bet this is the result of mum an dad whinging about your mower noise and the kids over hearing it, then acting out. Mum and Dad were probably peeking through the curtains having a laugh a little Jonny. I find it very hard to believe a 9 year old would take that action without feeling it would be condoned by his parents. I have a nine year old and know he would never do that as I would be extremely angry with him.

Garry says:

03:14pm | 16/11/10

If the parents were peeking I’d be surprised, that would indicate interest in what their son was doing. I haven’t seen much evidence of that.
I’m a poor judge of age apparently, another neighbour informs me this afternoon that the budding kick boxer is not yet seven years old.

Reg says:

02:27pm | 17/11/10

I don’t see why minorities should be denied consideration. The blind the lame and the young may be identified by their affliction but we don’t have to be afflicted to be justified a hearing. The mark of civilisation is to give consideration to all, rather than to exclusive groups.

From limitation of space Kochie’s headline has failed to display the stress to many readers. It should have read, “Ratbag kids aren’t teaching THEMSELVES how to act up, something or someone has a hand in it.” That can be either deliberate or by neglect. I blame John Howard as well.

James1 says:

01:36pm | 16/11/10

What a surprise.

Reg says:

01:16pm | 16/11/10

There’s part of the problem Tyler, having your breakfast in front of the T bloody V.  ‘cos he’s a mummies boy Tyler.  “Here you have your ciggies son don’t take any notice of those silly smoking police they’re only trying to spoil your fun, you bugger up the lovely lungs I brought you, you’re entitled.  There’s always Medicare. And while you’re at it give the copper the finger. Why should you have to walk for a miserable 15 minutes when there lots more risk of being killed on the road.” Strewth Chongie, see what you’ve done now!  It’s always someone else’s fault.

Wombat says:

10:39am | 16/11/10

I would do the same Chris, but as you said, will you be the one who gets into trouble. I guess you fight fire with fire & video them. Take it to the cops, surely they will reconise the kids from previous “move on” notifications. Than again, maybe it’s too much paper work for them to file a report & action it only to get kicked out of court.

Chris 74 says:

12:16pm | 16/11/10

Sadly Wombat filming them and going to the police requires way too much effort on my behalf, too much effort for the police too. Too difficult, too costly and too time consuming to then involve the law and for no result.

So if its too hard to do things the right way we don’t bother. People are too affraid to say ‘Hey don’t do that’. Yet these days we are supposed to then ask why is the boy naughty? Maybe the boy then grows up to be a jerk because he wasn’t told no as a kid. So while people defend bad behaviour we have no hope of helping society in the future.

Ric says:

12:58pm | 16/11/10

Chris, what you have done is called assault. If you had restrained the boy you could be charged with unlawful detention, you may however detain some one under the powers of a “citizens arrest” but be careful. You may only carry out an arrest if you actually saw the person carry out the crime AND that the offence comitted is an offence, that if proved, is an idictable offence. You must then ensure that the person is delivered to the Police ASAP. The Police can arrest on suspicion of an offence.It’s a rocky road my friend, be wary. Having said that, if it is YOUR property you can ask them to leave, if they do leave, they are guilty of trespass and you can forcebly remove them from the property. If you live at this place you could argue that the area is a common area for use by the tenants and you were acting to remove the trespassers, as they are not tenants?

Chris 74 says:

02:48pm | 16/11/10

Yes Ric, that’s also my point. I know I can’t detain the kids and I don’t want to. Unfortunately the kids know I can’t and won’t do that too. So they play the bluff game.

If the kids parents wanted I’m sure I could be potentially charged for assault. Am I still nervous. Yes. That’d be a big issue for me because these days I’d have trouble working or even volunteering in an area that required a check on my past. I’m sure there would be a big percentage of our society that would then say if I was prepared to grab a kids arm to walk him off the property then I shouldn’t work with kids.

See how it goes? See how easy it is for the kids. See how easy it is for the parents. See how easy it would be to destroy a person’s reputation? I lose and the various clubs I help would lose. I could also lose one of my main passions in life and my life becomes really depressing.

Let’s look again at what happened. I asked really nicely on more than one occasion for them not to be there. But the kids who caused the situation became even more arrogant and the kids who elevated the situation, well, they simply they win the game.  Did I actually hurt him? No. Did I scare him by taking him by the arm and walking him off my shared common property? Probably.  Do I think they will break in and wreck my car now? Good chance. Will I be able to prove it if they do. No. Am I prepared to buy expensive CCTV. No. Will the kid grow up to be a jerk. Likely. Could this situation have been helped if the kid had manners and respected an adult or authority? Yes.

So what Koshie said about parents is right. I feel these days we defend bad behaviour. We have lost the fear of retribution. We are disconnected with potential reality. What if I was a psycho who was extremely prone to violence? The kid would have been a smarty pants not knowing that and then he would have ended up with a violent situation and who knows what next?

This is not the first time I’ve observed this behaviour. For example, I’ve been innocently driving along the road in my clean normal and quite modern car only to have teenage boys yell insults at me because they thought it was a crap car. I didn’t do anything, but again, what if I was a violent person?

It starts at home. Parents getting on national TV and defending bad behaviour is sad. In this case I think the policeman did a great job.

wake up to yourself says:

09:24pm | 16/11/10

“…As someone on the cusp of Gen Y and Gen X, im 29, I have had my ‘rose coloured’ glasses removed (as you put it) and seen your generation for what it truly is. I have seen your generation riddled with divorce, hypocracy, greed, infidelity, lies, war (i believe the majority of you support the invasion of Iraq)...”

You’re quite right Grumpy. Every other generation is an utter disgrace but Gen Y. The number of intentionally single parent families is spiralling out of control, record numbers of kids assaulting their teachers in schools, kids assaulting other kids just so they can put it on You Tube, the number of 15 year olds (and younger) who are pregnant and proud of it, the number of alcohol related assaults on the street, the number of assaults involving a group of people assaulting one person, the number of assaults involving weapons, the number of women with a different father for each child (three, four or more), the number of people getting glassed every year, and the list continues.

Yep Grumpy, you’re right. The rest of society should be looking to Generation Y for moral guidance.

Reg says:

05:30am | 17/11/10

Gee coots spelled koots is very informative. If you two have experienced all this, then I’d suggest you’re mixing in the wrong circles. A social shift is called for. On the other-hand if you have found your hand-wringing excesses in the naked pages of the papers or on the TV, then you need to seek a bit of balance. Only place I have ever seen a glassing was on TV drama or heard of it in the news. Just as the only place I’ve ever seen a throat slashing demonstrated was in a shopping centre by an eight year old. Yes I see, hold him by the top of the hair and run the blade from ear to ear. Now where would he have seen that demonstrated. Maybe he was just being inventive because his mum thought nothing of it.

Damian says:

12:58pm | 16/11/10

Sorry, I find your comparason of having your car tyres let down for not wearing a seatbelt completely irellivent to the helmat inciedent.

To drive a car you must first obtain a licence,  to obtain it you must be wearing your seat belt during the examination so you admit your knowledge of such a law.

If you are then caught driving without it you are fined on the spot and 3 demerit points added (5 if more than one occupants of the car are lacking a seatbelt.)

Please explain your rational behind your argument that they can even remotely be compared…

Lauren G says:

12:29pm | 16/11/10

So now it’s a religious debate and children of today are sh*ts because their parents don’t believe in God? C’mon! I suppose you also think scripture in schools should be compulsory in primary school because us Pagans, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists aren’t capable of teaching our children ethics and responsibility?
Of course you would agree with corproal punishment, it being encouraged by the Church - spare the rod and spoil the child.
Research shows that corporal punishment in schools is not effective as a means of modifying bad behaviour, that’s why headmasters don’t carry canes anymore. (Incidentally, there are female principals these days, exactly how ancient are you?) Corporal punishment in the form of spanking is apparently popular in South Korea - why don’t you move there?

Nathin says:

12:42pm | 16/11/10

So we increase the instances of murder? Good thinking Phil. Way to lower the crime rate! Why don’t we gas some Jews as well.

Angela says:

12:53pm | 16/11/10

interesting thought: I would be interested if some one could pull the statistics for teenage crime / obesiety amoungst youths over a time peroid. I think you would find that both are increasing. My Parents and there friends were all brought up in the life style of health living before the conscept was even coined. Maccas and fast food and junk food was a rare treat if they were exteremerly well behavioured not a bargining tool to shut them up.Sitting at home with the family over a meal and have a polite and well mannered conversation was the norm.
I think Parents have to take a MASSIVE responsiblitiy for their kids Actions. I think that all these ADD and ADHD things get thrown around so much it gives kids excuse to misbehave.  Discipline your children and they will learn quickly what they can and cant do. Children are incredibliy resilient if you set the ground rules from the beginning then they wont know any different.

Grumpy says:

12:36pm | 16/11/10

your spelling is ‘fanomanal’.

Tim says:

11:29am | 16/11/10

Sorry,
nice sentiment but not a Bill gates speech.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/schoolrules.asp

Romli065 says:

12:42pm | 16/11/10

Well Tim, it was an honest mistake.  I had no idea it was not a real Bill Gates speech.  I don’t really care who said it, the point is that it’s true!

Sam says:

01:08pm | 16/11/10

“It was explained to me that yes, another child was responsible but the bus driver was a ‘large man with a booming voice’. This large man with the booming voice reduced my children to fearful tears by yelling at all the children collectively. He did not show the innocent any respect.”

I suggest you sue the driver. How dare that man raise his booming voice within earshot of your innocent sons. I hope that they have not been permanently emotionally scarred by this incident. Just to be sure that they haven’t maybe you should take them to a child psychologist straight away. That way you would also have a record of the trauma for your court case.

Childless & glad. says:

12:45pm | 16/11/10

Well done, the cycle has to be broken at some point (or have it’s tyres let down ha ha)

Prisoner says:

12:39pm | 16/11/10

This is a tricky one. The problem with physical punishment is that it must be modified. Pre-meditated spanking as punishment may be acceptable but bashing a small child to death with a hammer in the heat of anger is most definitely not. A line must be drawn and the challenge to authorities is where to draw that line.
From my own experiences, I believe hitting a child only teaches them to hit.  We don’t punish adult criminals by physically hurting them (some might say more’s the pity), we take their rights away. However, as a parent I also know that a physical response is often the only way to get the attention of a small child that is screaming or acting in a way that may endanger themselves and counting loudly to 3 will either not be heard or will be too late. (And in the case of adults we can relate this to tasering or the use of pepper spray). Unfortunately there’s a tendency to assume that if an errant child is hit in public the punishment at home is more severe. In public, children are still expected to be seen and not heard. I simply don’t go out anymore.

Jay Sherman says:

12:56pm | 16/11/10

Very well said Craig,

I too was spanked as a child, which taught me clearly what the boundaries were for right and wrong. I too believe that I was raised very well by my parents.

I have twin 1 year old girls, and I have no qualms about spanking my children should the need arise. I sholuld be very clear though that I believe spanking to be a last resort, and not a first one.

GenXmum says:

01:24pm | 16/11/10

Nathin, As an atheist I find your comments insulting.  We don’t need religion or a God to teach us the difference between right and wrong, respect and disrespect. I am kind to others and moral because it actually feels good to behave that way and I know it brightens others’ day to be treated how I too like to be treated.  I hope my children grow up to feel that way, where it is an intrinsic part of their essential character rather than something they have to be reminded of by going to church or reading the bible thankyou.

Elphaba says:

02:01pm | 16/11/10

@Nathin, given the fact that people have committed atrocious acts whilst subscribing to a belief in God, not just people who don’t believe, I don’t think God is an answer to how to treat people.  It’s an option.  One of many.

Regardless of your belief system, a belief in God does not automatically make you a good person.  Having no belief does not make you morally bankrupt.  I’d suggest you get out more…

DG says:

01:01pm | 16/11/10

If you don’t have time to be a parent, don’t have kids.

That problem was easily solved.

Mrs G says:

12:51pm | 16/11/10

“...thankful for the amazing life I can live because of what my elders did for this country.” Oh yeah, bayonetting babies and raping indigenous women and children. Laudible behaviour.
Tell me, in a World War, do you reckon your 17yo brother would be the victim or would he be the one holding the gun?

Von says:

05:15pm | 16/11/10

Nathan, you just seem jealous. Your brothers have a significant age difference to you. It seems to me at about the 10 year age difference is when there is just the little bit of extra jealousy there (I see it coming from my cousins who have a large age difference too). Anyway, youngers will ALWAYS have more lax discipline than their eldest sibling. I am the eldest in my family too and I know my younger sisters get away with more than I do. It’s not a generational thing, it’s a parents getting older, more tired and realisation that kids are relatively resilient (no need to be too strict) thing.

John says:

01:13pm | 16/11/10

Run Forest Run !!!

Reg says:

11:51am | 17/11/10

No-one does that Greg. I mean the bit you tacked on the end about responsibilities.

The rest I interpret you to mean that the right-wing wowsers would rather take away the rights and responsibilities of ordinary people to live and play, and put it in the restrictive hands of the authorities whom you regard as endowed with the right and capacity to rule. I believe a certain German had the same philosophy while the Yankie Rupublicans still think King George III is coming back to take away their freedom, which was of course and still is, just another trumped up charge to help keep hate alive.

Richard says:

01:38pm | 16/11/10

For as long as the brusque arm of the fascist nanny state keeps poking their noses into ordinary citizen’s business instead of focussing on the real criminals (e.g. bikie gangs, murderers, thieves, drug cartels etc) and engaging in gratuitous revenue raising, I say they deserve to be disrespected.

Damian says:

01:43pm | 16/11/10

“would ride my bike everywhere, saving carbon emissions, getting fitter therefore saving on future public hospital expenditure”

and what happens when you hit a pothole, come off your bike and smash your head on the ground,  where do you go?

“I would ride my bike, except that I don’t want to look like a retard doofus wearing an uncomfortable, ridiculous ‘stackhat’”

and thanks to comments like these is why kids think they can get away without wearing one, which is a law.

“I’ve been fined too many times in the past to risk it again.”
Mission accomplished.

“But for sneerious! Its my flippin’ head, I don’t see what business it is of the government’s or the cops if I ride bare-skull. “

You fall off and an ambulance is called, that’s a service that could have been put to better use by possibly going and saving a person from more serious unpreventable accidents.

but lets look at it on your wave length, it could just be darwin’s theory of natural selection at hand.

Pete says:

01:51pm | 16/11/10

@Richard

Why do they have a right? Because when you smack your head on the pavement and end up a vegetable, you will be cared for, however indirectly, by the public purse.  Nobody else wants to pay because you are vain.  Besides, if you can’t find a decent looking helmet these days, you’re not looking very hard.

And please explain how compulsory helmet is “an invasion of privacy”?  By not wearing one, you’re advertising to all and sundry that you are a complete fool, with no comprehension of the risk you are taking.

Which comes back to parenting. Kids need to learn their responsibilites, along with their rights.

Richard says:

02:12pm | 16/11/10

Don’t be melodramatic you blokes. Here’s a wikipedia quote for you:

“Overall, cycling is beneficial to health – the benefits outweigh the risks by up to 20:1.[30] To cycling activists, the major problem with helmet promotion is that in order to present the idea of a “problem” to match the solution they present, promoters tend to overstate the dangers of cycling.[31][32] Cycling is no more dangerous than being a pedestrian.[33][34] A UK opponent of compulsion has pointed out that it “still takes at least 8000 years of average cycling to produce one clinically severe head injury and 22,000 years for one death.”[35] Ordinary cycling is not demonstrably more dangerous than walking or driving, yet no country promotes helmets for either of these modes.[36] “The inherent risks of road cycling are trivial… Six times as many pedestrians as cyclists are killed by motor traffic, yet travel surveys show annual mileage walked is only five times that cycled; a mile of walking must be more “dangerous” than a mile of cycling…” The proportion of cyclist injuries which are head injuries is essentially the same as the proportion for pedestrians at 30.0?% vs. 30.1?%.[37]”

What, are you gonna make a law that all pedestrian’s have to wear helmet’s next? Plenty of other countries like the Netherlands don’t see fit to impose draconian fascist laws without every cyclist spontaneously dropping dead.

“In 1998 the European Cyclists’ Federation adopted a position paper rejecting compulsory helmet laws as being likely to have greater negative rather than positive health effects.[111] The UK’s largest cyclists’ organisation, the CTC, believes that the “overall health effects of compulsory helmets are negative.”[113] The British National Children’s Bureau has said “The 2004 BMA statement announcing its decision to support compulsory cycle helmets shows how the uncritical use of accident statistics can lead to poor conclusions.”[114] The same report estimated that, at most, universal helmet use would save the lives of three children aged 0 to 15 each year. That figure “assumes universal and correct use of helmets, it assumes that risk compensation does not occur and it assumes that no children die as a result of strangulation or other injuries caused by helmet use. These assumptions are most unlikely to be correct in the real world.”

“The Norwegian Government has eschewed adopting bicycle helmets after their research determined that widespread use in Australia and New Zealand increased risk by 14%.[115]”

Dave says:

02:20pm | 16/11/10

The emergency services should not have to pick up pieces of your skull because you do not want to wear a helmet. They do not care if you want to risk cracking your skull, but they should not be subject to the nightmare job of cleaning the mess.
It is a good point you are showing, as you see the problem from your rights and do not see beyond that. But your actions effect more than just you. They respect your right and desire to not wear the helmet and probably do not care. What they do care about is having to clean the un necessary mess that could have been avoided.
I understand that you think you may not look cool with a helmet but people really do not care, no ones looking

Pete says:

02:27pm | 16/11/10

@Richard

I have heard about the studies against compulsion, but how are they relevant in the Australian context?  Many European countries have dedicated off-road cycle lanes, even in CBD areas and in the Netherlands, the bicycle has right of way over everything, including pedestrians.  They also use bicycles differently day-to-day.  It’s all short distance, slow commuter cycling.

It’s a little different to Australia, longer cycling distances and on-road cycle lanes, on top of drivers who generally aren’t aware of cyclists.

Anyway, I would love to hear your argument against motorcycle helmets.  And Wikipedia articles don’t count by the way.

Richard says:

02:50pm | 16/11/10

I don’t have a problem with motorcycle helmet laws, but then again motorbike riding is whole lot more different (not to mention dangerous) than bike riding.

As for your wikipedia comment, I don’t understand why people continue to slag it off, as if they’re so superior because they never use wikipedia. Its the democratisation of knowledge, I think its really great. So just to annoy you I’ve dug up another one of their gems:

“It is observed that the countries with the best cycle safety records (Denmark and the Netherlands) have among the lowest levels of helmet use.[121] Their bicycle safety record is generally attributed to public awareness and understanding of cyclists, safety in numbers, education, and to some extent separation from motor traffic.[citation needed] A study of cycling in major streets of Boston, Paris and Amsterdam illustrates the variation in cycling culture: Boston had far higher rates of helmet-wearing (32% of cyclists, versus 2.4% in Paris and 0.1% in Amsterdam), Amsterdam had far more cyclists (242 passing bicycles per hour, versus 74 in Paris and 55 in Boston).[122] Cycle helmet wearing rates in the Netherlands and Denmark are very low.[123][108][124] An Australian journalist writes: “Rarities in Amsterdam seem to be stretch-fabric-clad cyclists and fat cyclists. Helmets are non-existent, and when people asked me where I was from, they would grimace and mutter: “Ah, yes, helmet laws.” These had gained international notoriety on a par with our deadly sea animals. Despite the lack of helmets, cycling in the Netherlands is safer than in any other country, and the Dutch have one-third the number of cycling fatalities (per 100,000 people) that Australia has.”[125]

The UK’s CTC say that cycling in the Netherlands and Denmark is perceived as a “normal” activity requiring no special clothing or equipment.[126] Pucher and Buehler state: “The Dutch cycling experts and planners interviewed for this paper adamantly opposed the use of helmets, claiming that helmets discourage cycling by making it less convenient, less comfortable, and less fashionable. They also mention the possibility that helmets would make cycling more dangerous by giving cyclists a false sense of safety and thus encouraging riskier riding behavior.”[127]

Richard says:

02:51pm | 16/11/10

I don’t have a problem with motorcycle helmet laws, but then again motorbike riding is whole lot more different (not to mention dangerous) than bike riding.

As for your wikipedia comment, I don’t understand why people continue to slag it off, as if they’re so superior because they never use wikipedia. Its the democratisation of knowledge, I think its really great. So just to annoy you I’ve dug up another one of their gems:

“It is observed that the countries with the best cycle safety records (Denmark and the Netherlands) have among the lowest levels of helmet use.[121] Their bicycle safety record is generally attributed to public awareness and understanding of cyclists, safety in numbers, education, and to some extent separation from motor traffic.[citation needed] A study of cycling in major streets of Boston, Paris and Amsterdam illustrates the variation in cycling culture: Boston had far higher rates of helmet-wearing (32% of cyclists, versus 2.4% in Paris and 0.1% in Amsterdam), Amsterdam had far more cyclists (242 passing bicycles per hour, versus 74 in Paris and 55 in Boston).[122] Cycle helmet wearing rates in the Netherlands and Denmark are very low.[123][108][124] An Australian journalist writes: “Rarities in Amsterdam seem to be stretch-fabric-clad cyclists and fat cyclists. Helmets are non-existent, and when people asked me where I was from, they would grimace and mutter: “Ah, yes, helmet laws.” These had gained international notoriety on a par with our deadly sea animals. Despite the lack of helmets, cycling in the Netherlands is safer than in any other country, and the Dutch have one-third the number of cycling fatalities (per 100,000 people) that Australia has.”[125]

The UK’s CTC say that cycling in the Netherlands and Denmark is perceived as a “normal” activity requiring no special clothing or equipment.[126] Pucher and Buehler state: “The Dutch cycling experts and planners interviewed for this paper adamantly opposed the use of helmets, claiming that helmets discourage cycling by making it less convenient, less comfortable, and less fashionable. They also mention the possibility that helmets would make cycling more dangerous by giving cyclists a false sense of safety and thus encouraging riskier riding behavior.”[127]

Richard says:

02:51pm | 16/11/10

I don’t have a problem with motorcycle helmet laws, but then again motorbike riding is whole lot more different (not to mention dangerous) than bike riding.

As for your wikipedia comment, I don’t understand why people continue to slag it off, as if they’re so superior because they never use wikipedia. Its the democratisation of knowledge, I think its really great. So just to annoy you I’ve dug up another one of their gems:

“It is observed that the countries with the best cycle safety records (Denmark and the Netherlands) have among the lowest levels of helmet use.[121] Their bicycle safety record is generally attributed to public awareness and understanding of cyclists, safety in numbers, education, and to some extent separation from motor traffic.[citation needed] A study of cycling in major streets of Boston, Paris and Amsterdam illustrates the variation in cycling culture: Boston had far higher rates of helmet-wearing (32% of cyclists, versus 2.4% in Paris and 0.1% in Amsterdam), Amsterdam had far more cyclists (242 passing bicycles per hour, versus 74 in Paris and 55 in Boston).[122] Cycle helmet wearing rates in the Netherlands and Denmark are very low.[123][108][124] An Australian journalist writes: “Rarities in Amsterdam seem to be stretch-fabric-clad cyclists and fat cyclists. Helmets are non-existent, and when people asked me where I was from, they would grimace and mutter: “Ah, yes, helmet laws.” These had gained international notoriety on a par with our deadly sea animals. Despite the lack of helmets, cycling in the Netherlands is safer than in any other country, and the Dutch have one-third the number of cycling fatalities (per 100,000 people) that Australia has.”[125]

The UK’s CTC say that cycling in the Netherlands and Denmark is perceived as a “normal” activity requiring no special clothing or equipment.[126] Pucher and Buehler state: “The Dutch cycling experts and planners interviewed for this paper adamantly opposed the use of helmets, claiming that helmets discourage cycling by making it less convenient, less comfortable, and less fashionable. They also mention the possibility that helmets would make cycling more dangerous by giving cyclists a false sense of safety and thus encouraging riskier riding behavior.”[127]

Ben says:

03:21pm | 16/11/10

Richard, I just did another search of that bastion of accurate and peer reviewed information, Wikipedia, and found an article dedicated solely to yourself! What an amazing stroke of good fortune.

“Richard, who originally posted a comment on The Punch at 1:24pm on 16/11/10, is in fact, an idiot.”

How about that. Move on moron.

Adrian says:

03:36pm | 16/11/10

Ben is the winner

Pete says:

04:26pm | 16/11/10

@Richard
I didn’t mean to imply that you couldn’t refer to Wikipeadia at all, just that it’s not the be all and end all.  I can’t find the articles you quote from though.  Anyway, far from annoying me with your post, the quote:

“Their bicycle safety record is generally attributed to public awareness and understanding of cyclists, safety in numbers, education, and to some extent separation from motor traffic”

kind of backs up what I was saying.  In any case, this is way off topic, so I guess I’ll see you out on the road, or bike path.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

10:45pm | 16/11/10

Richard, is Cranium your surname, who will you expect to look after you after you get a brain injury? ?  Not us the taxpayer that’s for sure

Peter says:

04:32pm | 16/11/10

Your right Paul… The Addams Family wants to rule the world. We’ll it’s one bloke really. Nice bloke bloke, likes to hide in the shadows and before you know it, he’s controlling your country. The USA is next on his list.. From there, the world is his oyster. His name roughly translates to “next in line”. Not his real name, but his happy to try to live up to that expectation. He just wasn’t counting one on thing….. GB & PG were able to smell him coming… What an amazing world we live in.

Unstated says:

09:59pm | 16/11/10

Oh what a load of complete cow pats.  You obviously don’t have children or, if you do, they are the type of children that none of your friends want in their homes.  I am so fed up with the general un-childed public trying to dictate how parents should bring up their children.  Bring back a sense of personal responsibility in the primary schools - my kids went to a private school and had this rammed through their heads and they actually accept responsibility for their own actions instead of whining how society has let them down.  Bring on a society where everyone has to accept their own stupidity (or otherwise) and end the moronic law suits etc that are poisoning our society.