Ultrathread I: Thread of the Year - 2014

[Misanthrope]

And loyalty to not getting myself thrown in jail comes first. You're no help to all your other friends and family if you go to jail for the sake of 1 idiot.

I'd imagine you're a 'loyalty to myself' kind of guy in all situations, tbh.

 

[Misanthrope]

Beyond that, my question wasn't about the legal ramifications. It asked 'What you would do'.

BM has elected 'betray friend at earliest available opportunity', clearly. I've said I'd hear them out and decide based on their reasons what I would do.

 

[Bazal]

Find out why. I'd never give a good mate up. But if necessary, I'd try and convince them to do the right thing. Of course if said dead dude had wronged them badly enough, I'd help them out, absolutely.

 

[Misanthrope]

That's pretty much my stance.

 

[Dragon2010]

I guess I would also put it down to the friend in question. That would take a bit of weight to. Depends how well I know/trust them and everything. In saying that, I think the only person who truly instilled such detail in you would be a best friend in the first place, so should be safe to say.

I'd trust them. My query in the legal bounds was more a question. As I said, I'd listen/talk to them about it. No doubt.

 

[BunniesMan]

Beyond that, my question wasn't about the legal ramifications. It asked 'What you would do'.

BM has elected 'betray friend at earliest available opportunity', clearly. I've said I'd hear them out and decide based on their reasons what I would do.

That's for the police and courts. Not all deaths result in murder or even manslaughter convictions. I'll let actual experts decide if the homicide is justified.

 

[afinalsin666]

Damn bm, that's cold.

There would have to be a reason for one of my boys to kill someone. I'd find out their story, and if it came to it in courts and shit I'd stay silent. I panic when I lie, f**k that. Hiding bodies and shit would be a different story though, probably draw the line at that.

 

[Apey]

[youtube]-jWH46rYOUE[/youtube]

Between the Simpsons, Seinfeld and South park, I don't even know why I bother thinking about or responding to any of life's tough questions. I'm sure one of the holy trinity will have the answer.

 

[Drew-Sta]

Here's a question.

At what point in a parent / child journey does the parent 'let go' for the child for their own free will and decision making, and the parent allow them to have responsibility and accountability for their own actions.

e.g., a child wants to make a significant life decision like get a tattoo. When does the parent say 'Yes, you can make your own decision' vs 'No, you are still under my responsibility'?

Somewhat relevant to my future thought process.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

When they are out from under the roof of home and paying their own way.

By then they should be mature enough to see the long term effects of their decisions and pay for it - be it financially or otherwise.

To use your example, if mini SMBN decided to get a tattoo (Wife and I have none, nothing against those who do as long as it isn't Turd Carney class) she won't be doing it while still on our coin.

If she does I do have friends who love tatts and can give me a very good estimate of what it would have cost and what she will owe us.

As a parent you're always there for your children, but part of raising them is teaching them to stand on their own two feet and have independence.

 

[Misanthrope]

That's for the police and courts. Not all deaths result in murder or even manslaughter convictions. I'll let actual experts decide if the homicide is justified.

You're a true product of the machine, sir. I'm surprised you don't post in baaaaas.

Here's a question.

At what point in a parent / child journey does the parent 'let go' for the child for their own free will and decision making, and the parent allow them to have responsibility and accountability for their own actions.

e.g., a child wants to make a significant life decision like get a tattoo. When does the parent say 'Yes, you can make your own decision' vs 'No, you are still under my responsibility'?

Somewhat relevant to my future thought process.

I agree with what senses said on the matter. If a child wants to be treated like an adult and make decisions as an adult, I would say that they'd need to have 'earned' their independence by earning their own way and having their own place.

 

[Dragon2010]

Here's a question.

At what point in a parent / child journey does the parent 'let go' for the child for their own free will and decision making, and the parent allow them to have responsibility and accountability for their own actions.

e.g., a child wants to make a significant life decision like get a tattoo. When does the parent say 'Yes, you can make your own decision' vs 'No, you are still under my responsibility'?

Somewhat relevant to my future thought process.

I'm 21 and still live under my parents roof. Mostly because, I have no issues staying there and I don't need to stress over paying rents or utilities. I either help with extra chores or give them $100-150 a week as at least a "Thank you and small token of responsibility".

I'm accountable for my own actions now, but my parents still will give me advice and try push me in the right direction. But in the end, they understand it's my decision to make.

I believe once they are 18 the choice is theirs to make, providing it's their own financial backing and not that of the parents. If I asked my dad now "I need $200 for a tattoo", he's kindly say "Get stuffed". If I told him I was doing it with my own money, he'd advise against it but say in the end - it's my decision to make.

I've had the privilege of being able to make such decisions from early on. Especially, in regards to my health (However, with their financial backing).

I'll give a prime example. My dad still offers to pay for my healthcare and any medical treatment. Why? Because he believe although I have an income and support to do it myself, he still feels it's his right (and privilege) to support me through such financial costs given he's still my father. No matter the age. A point I tried to debate, but to no avail.

 

[Rhino_NQ]

only people that have friends and can relate can answer that question so ignore BM

 

[BunniesMan]

If the kid is old enough to legally get the tat and he/she has saved the money for it they can get the tat.

 

[BunniesMan]

Damn bm, that's cold.

There would have to be a reason for one of my boys to kill someone. I'd find out their story, and if it came to it in courts and shit I'd stay silent. I panic when I lie, f**k that. Hiding bodies and shit would be a different story though, probably draw the line at that.

I agree with every word of Kramer's pov in that clip. If they're capable of murder and you're the only one who knows...

Imagine if your mate was Gerard Baden-Clay.

 

[Misanthrope]

I agree with every word of Kramer's pov in that clip. If they're capable of murder and you're the only one who knows...

Imagine if your mate was Gerard Baden-Clay.

What a simplistic world view to have. If a person is capable of killing one person, they're suddenly capable of murdering friends and family?

Who hurt you?

 

[afinalsin666]

Hmmm, it's a weird one with the kids. I would let them get whatever they wanted tattooed when they hit 18, but i would advise them against it. If you still want the same in a couple years as you do at 18, then get it. If they were going to get one anyway i would then advise them to get it done on their legs or back or some such, don't waste prime real estate on 18 year old tattoos.

There's also the question of letting them do stuff or not. Mum didn't let me drink when i was 15, of course. So i'd go down to the skate park with my friends and get drunk in public. And get home and pass out on the steps. So i'm of a mind that you should let your kids get used to booze, because they'll f**k off and do it behind your back anyway, and at least in the former scenario you can keep them somewhat safe. And me with three years of boozing under my belt, i wasn't too bad when i could legally drink in pubs and clubs compared to little Johnny No Drinks. And little Johnny No Drinks gets his head kicked in because he is a belligerent drunk, and nobody knew that because he never tested the matter before.

I think it also depends on the kid. My sister is mature, and was pretty early. Me, i'm a silly merkin, and always have been. Then again, i don't hit the drugs because mum would crack the shits, so maybe there is a case for some of it.

 

[Misanthrope]

When my Mum caught my mate and I sneaking around the liquor cabinet at home, she sat down with us and mixed us a bunch of different drinks and shots so we'd know what each was.

When the day came that I, late bloomer that I am, asked to attend a party (I was 17) - her and Dad furnished me with a sixer of beer and a bottle of Coke to use as a mixer.

They were the same with my younger brothers. Better to know your kid is getting drunk at a mate's place than to have no idea where he is or what he's doing IMO.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

If the kid is old enough to legally get the tat and he/she has saved the money for it they can get the tat.

I don't think you understand the metaphor.

 

[muzby]

e.g., a child wants to make a significant life decision like get a tattoo. When does the parent say 'Yes, you can make your own decision' vs 'No, you are still under my responsibility'?

i'm a responsible parent..

as such, i have already had my kids tattooed with full sleeves, as these seem to be the popular trend of today (and tattoos never go out of fashion, right?)..

the benefit being, i don't have to worry about them making the wrong decision later in life and getting a tattoo - they've already got one.

and the added benefit, given children have less skin, the tattoo parlour charges less...

gives me more money to put through the pokies, so it's a win for everyone really..