Infant arrested

[Smith John]

Doesn't Russia compete in the Euro football tournaments? Just what is Europe all abouts anyways? Sorry, I meant: Just what is Europe all abouts anyways/infant gets arrested...that's bad.

[lil weasel]

This is all really (?) interesting, but here in the U.S.of A. we have:

19 Crazy Things That School Children Are Being Arrested For In America

By Michael Snyder, on January 31st, 2012

#1 At one public school down in Texas, a 12-year-old girl named Sarah Bustamantes was recently arrested for spraying herself with perfume.

#2 A 13-year-old student at a school in Albuquerque, New Mexico was recently arrested by police for burping in class.

#3 Another student down in Albuquerque was forced to strip down to his underwear while five adults watched because he had $200 in his pocket. The student was never formally charged with doing anything wrong.

#4 A security guard at one school in California broke the arm of a 16-year-old girl because

after cleaning up some cake that she had spilled.

#5 One teenage couple down in Houston poured milk on each other during a squabble while they were breaking up. Instead of being sent to see the principal, they were arrested and sent to court.

#6 In early 2010, a 12-year-old girl at a school in Forest Hills, New York was arrested by police and marched out of her school in handcuffs just because she doodled on her desk. “I love my friends Abby and Faith” was what she reportedly scribbled on her desk.

#7 A 6-year-old girl down in Florida was handcuffed and sent to a mental facility after throwing temper tantrums at her elementary school.

#8 One student down in Texas was reportedly arrested by police for throwing paper airplanes in class.

#9 A 17-year-old honor student in North Carolina named Ashley Smithwick accidentally took her father’s lunch with her to school. It contained a small paring knife which he would use to slice up apples. So what happened to this standout student when the school discovered this? The school suspended her for the rest of the year and the police charged her with a misdemeanor.

#10 In Allentown, Pennsylvania a 14-year-old girl

by a school security officer even though she had put up her hands in the air to surrender.

#11 Down in Florida, an 11-year-old student was arrested, thrown in jail and charged with a third-degree felony for bringing a plastic butter knife to school.

#12 Back in 2009, an 8-year-old boy in Massachusetts was sent home from school and was forced to undergo a psychological evaluation because he drew a picture of Jesus on the cross.

#13 A police officer in San Mateo, California blasted a 7-year-old special education student in the face with pepper spray because he would not quit climbing on the furniture.

#14 In America today, even 5-year-old children are treated brutally by police. The following is from a recent article that described what happened to one very young student in Stockton, California a while back….

 

Earlier this year, a Stockton student was handcuffed with zip ties on his hands and feet, forced to go to the hospital for a psychiatric evaluation and was charged with battery on a police officer. That student was 5 years old.

#15 At one school in Connecticut, a 17-year-old boy was thrown to the floor and tasered five times because he was yelling at a cafeteria worker.

#16 A teenager in suburban Dallas was forced to take on a part-time job after being ticketed for using foul language in one high school classroom. The original ticket was for $340, but additional fees have raised the total bill to $637.

#17 A few months ago, police were called out when a little girl kissed a little boy during a physical education class at an elementary school down in Florida.

#18 A 6-year-old boy was charged with sexual battery for some “inappropriate touching” during a game of tag at one elementary school in the San Francisco area.

#19 In Massachusetts, police were sent out to collect an overdue library book from a 5-year-old girl.

Edited April 5, 2014 by lil weasel

[GTA_stu]

Well a country can be in more than one region, and its not like there's just one widely accepted definition of the Middle East. Pakistan could definitely be included in it.

[Frantz Fuchs]

 

 

It's the middle east. Where atheists are considered terrorists and where you get 40 virgins for flying planes into buildings. f*ck them.

Pakistan isn't in the Middle East

 

+ Didn't know US gov. is from the Middle East.

You wouldn't consider this the middle east?

 

 

No. South Asia.

 

This is the Middle East.

[Mr. House]

Well a country can be in more than one region, and its not like there's just one widely accepted definition of the Middle East. Pakistan could definitely be included in it.

It could if you're stupid, sure.

[Frantz Fuchs]

I thought Turkey was Europe.

 

f*cking Eurovision songfestival.

 

Istanbul is in Europe, rest of Turkey is in the Middle East.

 

 

Doesn't Russia compete in the Euro football tournaments? Just what is Europe all abouts anyways? Sorry, I meant: Just what is Europe all abouts anyways/infant gets arrested...that's bad.

 

Russia is also split between Europe and Asia.

 

Edited April 5, 2014 by Frantz Fuchs

[T0X1C]

 

Still not as bad as women in Dubai who get arrested for being raped.

You're confused mate, that isn't Dubai.

 

I assume you've never been there. The women are hot as f*ck, they go clubbing and they're not exactly what you'd call "conservative."

[GTA_stu]

 

Well a country can be in more than one region, and its not like there's just one widely accepted definition of the Middle East. Pakistan could definitely be included in it.

It could if you're stupid, sure.

 

 

 

Is the G8 stupid? Considering they define it as being in the Middle East. It's really not a strictly defined term. It's not like there's a strict criteria of what a country needs in order to be considered a part of it, or like there's a complete list of countries that are definitely in it and ones which definitely aren't. Different organisations include different countries in their definitions. E.g. The BBC includes Libya in it's definition, and Wikipedia doesn't. Are the BBC stupid then? Or is Wikipedia? The G8 and Wikipedia include Cyprus in their definition, whereas the BBC doesn't. So who's right?

Edited April 5, 2014 by stu

[IDredMan]

Pakistan: Cops get threatened by 9 month old baby.

Dubai: Lamborghini cops.

[GunWrath]

If only we could arrest infants in the US. All their drooling and diaper changes.

[lil weasel]

If only we could arrest infants in the US. All their drooling and diaper changes.

That applies to both ends of the voyage of life.

[GunWrath]

Valid point.

[Clem Fandango]

 

If only we could arrest infants in the US. All their drooling and diaper changes.

That applies to both ends of the voyage of life.

 

Hey, if you can't laugh at yourself...

[Guest]

congrats on the milestone

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wait wtf

[Doc Rikowski]

There's a pic.

[c00lrajboy]

No rascism here please.

Okay, the child did a crime and his Father IS found guilty for it but that does not make the whole of Pakistan bad.

[Detective Phelps]

No rascism here please.

 

I agree with this,

 

that does not make the whole of Pakistan bad.

and this,

 

the child did a crime

but not this. The child is innocent.

 

There is a severe corruption problem in Pakistan (and India!). The situation is gradually improving, though (compared to previous years).

Edited April 7, 2014 by Los Santos Police Department

[Doc Rikowski]

Apparently the police inspector has been suspended and the other policemen are under investigation now.

[D4 Damager]

Doesn't Russia compete in the Euro football tournaments? Just what is Europe all abouts anyways? Sorry, I meant: Just what is Europe all abouts anyways/infant gets arrested...that's bad.

UEFA isn't really split along continental lines. This is partly due to politics (Israel would never be able to play in Asia) and partly due to money (Kazakhstan admit to playing in UEFA competitions just for the added money). The Soviet Union successor states had to choose whether to play in Europe or in Asia -- All of the states that were partially geographically or politically in Europe now play in UEFA and all of the ones that weren't (mostly insignificant countries in sporting terms) are members of the AFC.

 

 

 

Well a country can be in more than one region, and its not like there's just one widely accepted definition of the Middle East. Pakistan could definitely be included in it.

It could if you're stupid, sure.

 

 

 

Is the G8 stupid? Considering they define it as being in the Middle East. It's really not a strictly defined term. It's not like there's a strict criteria of what a country needs in order to be considered a part of it, or like there's a complete list of countries that are definitely in it and ones which definitely aren't. Different organisations include different countries in their definitions. E.g. The BBC includes Libya in it's definition, and Wikipedia doesn't. Are the BBC stupid then? Or is Wikipedia? The G8 and Wikipedia include Cyprus in their definition, whereas the BBC doesn't. So who's right?

 

Well the G8 is not stupid (maybe), but they are talking about the Greater Middle East when they talk about Pakistan in that way. That is a term invented to try and foster partnerships with and democracy in the region, which was/is obviously pretty crucial in the War on Terror.

 

Really the Middle East refers to areas that are in Western Asia (minus the areas of the Transcaucasus, and Cyprus) plus Egypt (they've always been closely allied to Western Asia) and Iran (who the UN places in South Asia, but who are to me the last outpost of the Middle-Eastern geopolitical area because they're not in SAARC and identify the most with other Middle Eastern states politically).

 

Pakistan, on the other hand are South Asian -- they're founder members of the SAARC and are to all intents and purposes geographically, economically and politically in South Asia.

 

No rascism here please.

Okay, the child did a crime and his Father IS found guilty for it but that does not make the whole of Pakistan bad.

It's not racism to point out that Pakistan is a corrupt basket-case of a country, there has only been one instance of racism in this thread that I remember and he was a complete moron who was probably dealt with.

 

And the child could not possibly have 'done a crime'. That's what makes this situation so absurd.

Edited April 7, 2014 by D4 Damager

[Frantz Fuchs]

I think people are missing the point as to why this happened. The police didn't intentionally blame the child.

 

They could not find the actual criminal, so needed a scapegoat to take the blame. The went to a database of the people in the area and randomly chose someone. Turns out he was a child.

[lil weasel]

All children commit crimes. The only real question should be at what point should they be considered to be responsible for them.

Some courts in the U.S.A. have ruled that age Five is when a child should know the difference between right and wrong.

 

Then there is the problem of: If the government, schools, and parents don't take the law seriously why and how would an impressionable child?

 

Some kids are naturally evil, and others seem to be trained to be that way...

Evil or Good, which is the natural path?

[D4 Damager]

All children commit crimes. The only real question should be at what point should they be considered to be responsible for them.

Some courts in the U.S.A. have ruled that age Five is when a child should know the difference between right and wrong.

 

Then there is the problem of: If the government, schools, and parents don't take the law seriously why and how would an impressionable child?

 

Some kids are naturally evil, and others seem to be trained to be that way...

Evil or Good, which is the natural path?

OK I don't agree that all children commit crimes. And I don't see what possible relevance this has towards the topic at hand. But you've touched on something quite interesting so I'll respond to your latter point.

 

I don't agree that people are born 'evil' -- people can definitely be born with a predisposition towards doing 'evil' (there is some evidence to suggest that psychopathy can be heritable) but not all psychopaths become criminals and not all violent criminals are psychopaths. However, the main factor in whether or not somebody becomes a violent criminal seems to be nurture -- which makes sense when you think about it.

 

And as for what the natural path is -- it's a crock of sh*t. Nobody has only ever done good and nobody has ever done pure evil. Everyone zigzags between the two depending on personal circumstances and the wiring of our brains, meaning that there is no absolute black and white outside of philosophical tomes and that we are all somewhere in a vast spectrum of grey.

Edited April 7, 2014 by D4 Damager

[lil weasel]

Child throws a stone through a window, child scratches a car's paint, child pockets a candy bar in a store (actually anywhere)

the child is confronted with these crimes.

The response is, "I don't know". and some also have the snappy comeback, "I'm gonna get you! [for catching me]"

Would not need a penal system if it wasn't natural.

Oh... so you believe, "The Devil Made Me Do It!" right,

Edited April 7, 2014 by lil weasel

[GTA_stu]

Well the G8 is not stupid (maybe), but they are talking about the Greater Middle East when they talk about Pakistan in that way. That is a term invented to try and foster partnerships with and democracy in the region, which was/is obviously pretty crucial in the War on Terror.

 

Really the Middle East refers to areas that are in Western Asia (minus the areas of the Transcaucasus, and Cyprus) plus Egypt (they've always been closely allied to Western Asia) and Iran (who the UN places in South Asia, but who are to me the last outpost of the Middle-Eastern geopolitical area because they're not in SAARC and identify the most with other Middle Eastern states politically).

 

Pakistan, on the other hand are South Asian -- they're founder members of the SAARC and are to all intents and purposes geographically, economically and politically in South Asia.

 

Pakistan might be South Asian geographically, but really it isn't that closely related to other South Asian countries economically or politically. It's largest trading partners in terms of imports and exports are countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and UAE, not South Asian countries like India Or Bangladesh. It's also the same in terms of Pakistani migrant workers sending money home, Arab countries account for a larger amount than SA countries. Because of it's hostilities with it's South Asian neighbours Bangladesh and India, Pakistan has had to look elsewhere for political and economic support, It's found that support with China, and with Muslim countries in the Middle East. Even further back historically speaking, Pakistan has been influenced just as much by it's neighbours to the west as it has by those to it's east in cultural, political and economic terms.

 

The Middle East is itself a fairly recently invented term, like you say it was historically intended to reference Western Asia + Egypt, at least roughly speaking. Clearly it wasn't chosen on just geographic basis though, as there is no uniformity in that respect whatsoever, and if you look at the historical descriptions around 100 years ago of what/where the Middle East actually is, they're pretty ambiguous and unclear. During WW2 British "Middle Eastern command" was in charge of territories which included sudan, Somalia and Kenya. Turkey was also never originally part of the Middle East.

 

Point is, it's a term which has changed so much and never really been permanently and rigidly defined. Pakistan is clearly very closely related in a lot of ways, as are other countries which aren't traditionally included in it (Libya), more so than some which are (Cyprus), so to simply say it's not in the Middle East I don't reall think is really correct. Because for a country to be "Middle Eastern", it's really more of a sliding scale, than a simple in or out equation.

 

It's pretty easy to say which country is an African country, or which country is landlocked or not landlocked. In that same vein it's pretty hard to define which countries are "western" and which are not. The same applies with defining the Middle East.

[D4 Damager]

Responding to a couple of posts and still haven't got the hang of quoting piece by piece so I'll just give numbers to paragraphs and respond to them in turn:

 

1. Child throws a stone through a window, child scratches a car's paint, child pockets a candy bar in a store (actually anywhere)
the child is confronted with these crimes.
2. The response is, "I don't know". and some also have the snappy comeback, "I'm gonna get you! [for catching me]"
3. Would not need a penal system if it wasn't natural.
4. Oh... so you believe, "The Devil Made Me Do It!" right,

 

1. So you've created a hypothetical child and (s)he's supposed to represent all children. Brilliant stuff -- except that isn't proof that all children commit crimes, it's just conjecture and generalisation. I'm not denying that some children commit those acts, but I do object to your assertion that all children commit crimes -- since I myself have never engaged in any of the 3 acts that you talk about, and I only know a handful of people who have.

 

2. That is the whole point of having a minimum age of responsibility for one's actions: it gives the child the chance to gain an education in what is wrong and right before being punished. Children under the age of criminal responsibility in many countries can still be sanctioned but just cannot be held criminally liable for the crime.

 

And as for what children say in response to this, how many children/parents/carers/teachers have you surveyed in reaching this conclusion? Seems to me like another wacky generalisation.

 

3. Bizarre assertion. I'm going to have to ask you to explain it further. If you're saying that criminals are born and not a product of their circumstances -- then I disagree and you need to provide evidence, and if you are trying to say something else then you need to work on your self-expression.

 

4. No, I don't believe in such a being so I couldn't possibly believe in him causing people to commit crimes. If you were trying to say something interesting and not just being sarcastic would you mind explaining this part of your post to me as well please?

 

1. Pakistan might be South Asian geographically, but really it isn't that closely related to other South Asian countries economically or politically. It's largest trading partners in terms of imports and exports are countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and UAE, not South Asian countries like India Or Bangladesh. It's also the same in terms of Pakistani migrant workers sending money home, Arab countries account for a larger amount than SA countries.

 

1b. Because of it's hostilities with it's South Asian neighbours Bangladesh and India, Pakistan has had to look elsewhere for political and economic support, It's found that support with China, and with Muslim countries in the Middle East. Even further back historically speaking, Pakistan has been influenced just as much by it's neighbours to the west as it has by those to it's east in cultural, political and economic terms.

 

2. The Middle East is itself a fairly recently invented term, like you say it was historically intended to reference Western Asia + Egypt, at least roughly speaking. Clearly it wasn't chosen on just geographic basis though, as there is no uniformity in that respect whatsoever, and if you look at the historical descriptions around 100 years ago of what/where the Middle East actually is, they're pretty ambiguous and unclear. During WW2 British "Middle Eastern command" was in charge of territories which included sudan, Somalia and Kenya. Turkey was also never originally part of the Middle East.

 

3. Point is, it's a term which has changed so much and never really been permanently and rigidly defined. Pakistan is clearly very closely related in a lot of ways, as are other countries which aren't traditionally included in it (Libya), more so than some which are (Cyprus), so to simply say it's not in the Middle East I don't reall think is really correct. Because for a country to be "Middle Eastern", it's really more of a sliding scale, than a simple in or out equation.

 

4. It's pretty easy to say which country is an African country, or which country is landlocked or not landlocked. In that same vein it's pretty hard to define which countries are "western" and which are not. The same applies with defining the Middle East.

 

 

1. I would bet my bottom dollar that most of those imports would be accounted for by oil. The UAE, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait account for quite a large volume of imports for quite a lot of South Asian countries, primarily due to fuel exports but that doesn't mean that they have anything in common with them. And as for the imports and jobs question, that's simply down to money talking. If you add up the total percentage of Pakistani exports going to the EU, the USA, China and the Middle East that comes to between 60-70% of their total exports -- this is because Pakistani factories make cheap goods and rich countries buy them, not because Pakistan has any affinity with these countries.

 

It is exactly the same for migrants in foreign countries -- the money on offer in India or Bangladesh is dwarfed by the money on offer in the oil-rich Arab states so people go there to work.

 

1b. I'm not denying that there has been some influence on Pakistan from Middle-Eastern countries, however to say that they have more in common with such countries than they do with South Asian countries is just wrong. Pakistan is just below average in GDP per capita for South Asia, but if you compare it to the Middle Eastern countries of my definition it gets rather embarrassing. The average GDP/capita among these states is 6-7 times larger than the average South Asian one (depending on whether or not you factor in outliers such as Qatar and Yemen). The export profile of Pakistan fits with it being a manufacturing based economy which is in keeping with India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. The people in Pakistan use roughly the same amount of fuel per capita per day as people from India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Most measures point towards it being a South Asian country.

 

On a social level the people speak Indo-Aryan languages, just like most Indian, Bangladeshi and Sri Lankan people (there are more languages of an Iranian influence spoken in Pakistan than anywhere else in South Asia, but that is mainly down to the Pashtun Diaspora near to the border with Afghanistan and even so Indo-Aryan speakers still account for nearly 80% of the population in Pakistan).

 

And on a political level Pakistan again fits more into the South Asian mould as it is a republic while most Middle-Eastern countries tend to be run by monarchs. In fact only one traditionally seen as Middle-Eastern country (Lebanon) has any real semblance of a democracy right now.

 

2. Yes, the term was never invented to describe Pakistan. It seems to me that it was chosen politically in order to lump together a group of countries with similar aims and resources. Pakistan doesn't fit into those brackets because of its wildly differing political concerns and resources.

 

There is a pretty reasonable uniformity if you look at a map with just those countries highlighted. It covers a peninsula that juts down from the Mediterranean Sea into the Arabian Sea, with Egypt and Iran joining onto it.

 

With regards to Middle East Command, they were called that because they were based in the Middle East. The fact that their remit was extended to include Kenya during WWII is really neither here nor there because Middle East Command was only a name.

 

3. I personally don't think there can be any real arguments about whether or not certain countries are Middle-Eastern. It's a term that's primarily used to describe the countries that I mentioned earlier, with the possible addition of Turkey (and if you add Turkey you have to add Cyprus (or at least Northern Cyprus) because of the politics of that area). While some countries may have more in common with the Middle Eastern group (Libya and Pakistan share a religion with them, for example) they are just too divergent ethnically, politically, and in other terms too, to be considered Middle Eastern at all.

 

4. I don't think it's very difficult to make a distinction between a country that is 'Western' and a country that isn't. The problem (like in many other such cases, including the Middle East) comes when people conflate a cultural concept with a political one and an economic one. Then things get rather messy...

Edited April 8, 2014 by D4 Damager