The assassination of a laptop

About a week ago, a "Southern gentleman" (translation: redneck) put up a video on Youtube in which he empties a half-dozen bullets into a laptop with what I'm assuming is a Colt M1911 clone. Normally, I'd think "Whoa, cool. This is kinda like Mythbusters, but without pretending to be scientific about it". Here's the catch, though: it wasn't his laptop. The hardware actually belonged to a 15-year-old girl who had posted something on the internet that he didn't like and wasn't even supposed to see in the first place.

Call me crazy, but I'm pretty sure that invasion of privacy and willful destruction of another person's property are frowned upon in most civilized parts of the world. However, the dozens of video responses and hundreds of thousands of comments that followed nearly all praised him for his actions. Why? Because he happened to be the girl's father.

This brings me to tonight's question: why do the law and common sense cease to apply, and criminals turn into heroes, when the perpetrator is the victim's legal guardian?

 

I don't know any of the specifics of this case but, a 15 year old doesn't have the same rights as an adult....

 

It was his kid and his computer he was letting the child use. He can do whatever he wants with it. And it was nine bullets, I finally counted them after I stopped laughing.

This little girl got seriously punked by her father. She probably has no friends left.

And she cusses too much for her age.

 

Fathers who give a (*)(*)(*)(*) is a global problem....

 

Are you (*)(*)(*)(*)ing serious?

First of all, there's already a thread on this. Secondly, much to the chagrin of libs everywhere, a parent still has the right to discipline his or her children. Thirdly, a fifteen year old who doesn't work, and refuses to get a job, doesn't own anything her parents didn't pay for. Do you actually think a fifteen year old girl should be allowed to publicly disrespect her parents on FB.....twice..... and not receive some kind of repercussions?

Libs, ya gotta love 'em.....or not.

These parents did nothing illegal, let alone criminal, stop lying.

BTW (and again, much to the chagrin of libs everywhere), NOTHING a fifteen year old girl does isn't supposed to be seen by her parents. I'm guessing you're a fifteen year old girl.

 

I had a child who disrespected me like that once on myspace.

 

Had a child?

Just kidding. What did you do to remedy the situation?

 

Yea that was the joke....pretty bad I know. Please forgive me

 

You're crazy.

 

Good one!

 

I kinda have a little crush on that Father myself.

 

Rights are rights, and don't change with age.

That's funny, because he clearly identifies the computer as hers in the video.

Of course. However, discipline can be accomplished without violating a person's rights.

Everything that is given to a person with no strings attached becomes that person's property. Age, employment status, etc. are irrelevant.

This is not about the fact that there were repercussions. This is about the nature of those repercussions.

The right to privacy is not dependent on age, nor does it cease to be a right when parents are involved.

27 and male, but thanks for playing.

 

The short answer is that most people are too stupid to tell the difference between an adult acting like a child and good parenting.

A large percentage of adults never really grow up. They may take on the responsibilities of an adult, but mentally, they still have the emotional maturity of a high schooler.

It's kind of like how the people you really don't want to breed are the ones who breed most often.

 

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Parent+and+Child

 

Tag him on FB

 

the father is an idiot and he did absolutely nothing in teaching his kid a valuable lesson..if he was my father I'd hate him too..
now she'll probably run away from home, turn tricks and get knocked up by the age of 16..guess who gets to pay for his redneck conservative mistakes..us tax payers..

 

Naturally, this story is raising hell on the NYRA forums.

Would you care to provide some kind of argument?

 

Actually, they do. Does a fifteen year old have a right to vote?

Nobody's rights were violated, don't be absurd.

Do you believe a child should never have anything taken away from them?

Yes of course, because you disagree with them.

Wrong again. Do you actually believe a parent doesn't have every right to monitor what his child is doing?

Playing? More evidence.

Okay, what would you have done to punish this fifteen year old brat? I'm guessing a time out.

 

I believe he highlighted part of his post for a reason. I suggest you read it.

Parents have the right to take things way from kids. They dont own it. The kids room in the house is not truly theirs. Its the parents house.

That child did not pay for that laptop. That child does not own the house that laptop is used in. That child does not pay for the internet for that laptop nor the electricity to use that laptop.

The reason you have an issue with this is because according to you he is a "redneck" and used a *gasp* gun. Oh the horror!

If he posted the SAME video and password protected the laptop so she couldnt use it you would have no issue with this. Come clean.

I cant believe you follow a site that decries "Ageism".

 

As I said earlier, there is already a thread on this. Mods, please combine. http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/231782-dad-uses-facebook-teach-daughter-lesson.html

Not that you care to know the truth BM but.....

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...k-teach-daughter-lesson-6.html#post1060844759

 

You can make the argument that if he bought it for her, it's still his property in a sense. Though normally the giving of gifts transfer all property rights to the receiver, that may not have been the implication here. Of course, she might have bought it herself with her own money; that would be another story.

It's a stupid and highhanded action regardless, which will just come back to bite him. Unfortunately, people who are unable to satiate their lust for power by being a cop or a politician often do so by becoming a parent, and we still live in a society where many assume that parents own their children.

 

His actions were typical and representative of a society which has too much and doesn't have a sense of value. He doesn't confiscate the laptop or sell it, no he destroys it. He throws away money and materials and an item of some worth to someone else.

 

He already "confiscated" it once that didnt work.

 

Owning a laptop is not owning the child. Nice stretch of logic there.

 

Whether or not she paid for it with her own money is irrelevant. Not sure how she would have done that without a job.