|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 12, 2014 9:44:07 GMT
Just to show that I don't only read the Birmingham papers I would be interested in what others think of this piece. www.bristolpost.co.uk/Tourist-attraction-near-Weston-super-Mare-bans/story-24504477-detail/story.htmlI suppose the logical conclusion would be that single people will not be allowed to go swimming alone, go to a park or any other venue which attracted mainly children. And although the park were not available for comment one wonders whether a single woman would have been allowed in. The man in question by the way has in fact been CRB checked as part of his employment.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 12, 2014 11:13:25 GMT
They can't stay in youth hostels, either.
|
|
|
Post by waynerooneysmum on Nov 12, 2014 11:19:46 GMT
Just to show that I don't only read the Birmingham papers I would be interested in what others think of this piece. www.bristolpost.co.uk/Tourist-attraction-near-Weston-super-Mare-bans/story-24504477-detail/story.htmlI suppose the logical conclusion would be that single people will not be allowed to go swimming alone, go to a park or any other venue which attracted mainly children. And although the park were not available for comment one wonders whether a single woman would have been allowed in. The man in question by the way has in fact been CRB checked as part of his employment. I see no "logical conclusion" as you do. It is not the law, just a rule that this particular business thinks is a good idea. Like some pubs won't let you in wearing footie clothes or trainers.
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 12, 2014 11:42:35 GMT
They can't stay in youth hostels, either. Really? What are we teaching our children, that all adults are a threat? A little related thing. A couple of years ago I was walking my dog just around the corner from my house. On the kerb looking at the road was a little dot of under 2, vest on and no nappy. Although there was not much traffic I distracted her, then scooped her up and took her into the garden from where she had escaped. Mum was more than grateful (and at the same time bollocked an older child who was meant to be keeping an eye on her). I told that story in the office and one of my secretaries said 'but you should not have actually touched her, that could be seen as assault' And I checked, and sadly she was right. So I suppose the sensible thing to do in similar circumstances would be to let the child get run over, then console the mother. Without touching her of course.
|
|
|
Post by longarmofthelaw on Nov 12, 2014 13:30:14 GMT
They can't stay in youth hostels, either. Really? What are we teaching our children, that all adults are a threat? A little related thing. A couple of years ago I was walking my dog just around the corner from my house. On the kerb looking at the road was a little dot of under 2, vest on and no nappy. Although there was not much traffic I distracted her, then scooped her up and took her into the garden from where she had escaped. Mum was more than grateful (and at the same time bollocked an older child who was meant to be keeping an eye on her). I told that story in the office and one of my secretaries said 'but you should not have actually touched her, that could be seen as assault' And I checked, and sadly she was right. So I suppose the sensible thing to do in similar circumstances would be to let the child get run over, then console the mother. Without touching her of course. Allowing a small child to get run over would be wicked not "sensible"! You were not arrested or charged with any offence. But even if you had been and ended up in court I do not think a jury would convict. put it this way, has anybody here ever heard of such a case, where somebody trying is help a small child has ended up on the wrong side of the law? I know I havent.
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 12, 2014 13:53:58 GMT
Really? What are we teaching our children, that all adults are a threat? A little related thing. A couple of years ago I was walking my dog just around the corner from my house. On the kerb looking at the road was a little dot of under 2, vest on and no nappy. Although there was not much traffic I distracted her, then scooped her up and took her into the garden from where she had escaped. Mum was more than grateful (and at the same time bollocked an older child who was meant to be keeping an eye on her). I told that story in the office and one of my secretaries said 'but you should not have actually touched her, that could be seen as assault' And I checked, and sadly she was right. So I suppose the sensible thing to do in similar circumstances would be to let the child get run over, then console the mother. Without touching her of course. Allowing a small child to get run over would be wicked not "sensible"! You were not arrested or charged with any offence. But even if you had been and ended up in court I do not think a jury would convict. put it this way, has anybody here ever heard of such a case, where somebody trying is help a small child has ended up on the wrong side of the law? I know I havent. I said could be seen as, no more than that. No, of COURSE I would not see a child run over, and I doubt anyone with more than one brain cell would, but the point I was making and you seem to have missed is that we are no longer able to offer comfort to a child, or pick them up if they fall as there is a risk some lunatic will think we are in some way kiddy fiddling and we get reported. And that, together with the parks policy, which in my view is wrong, is just another sign of the title of this post, paranoia.
|
|
|
Post by loveliestlove on Nov 12, 2014 15:49:59 GMT
Really? What are we teaching our children, that all adults are a threat? A little related thing. A couple of years ago I was walking my dog just around the corner from my house. On the kerb looking at the road was a little dot of under 2, vest on and no nappy. Although there was not much traffic I distracted her, then scooped her up and took her into the garden from where she had escaped. Mum was more than grateful (and at the same time bollocked an older child who was meant to be keeping an eye on her). I told that story in the office and one of my secretaries said 'but you should not have actually touched her, that could be seen as assault' And I checked, and sadly she was right. So I suppose the sensible thing to do in similar circumstances would be to let the child get run over, then console the mother. Without touching her of course. Allowing a small child to get run over would be wicked not "sensible"! You were not arrested or charged with any offence. But even if you had been and ended up in court I do not think a jury would convict. put it this way, has anybody here ever heard of such a case, where somebody trying is help a small child has ended up on the wrong side of the law? I know I havent. What is wrong with these people, Jonjel? All I can say is thank god there are people out there like you who are prepared to flout this insane law to rescue small children in peril. If this isn't an example of POlitical correctness gone mad then I don't know what is.
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 12, 2014 15:58:08 GMT
I don't know if you are taking the piss but I will give you the benefit of the doubt.
One further example. I was in Mothercare a couple of years ago, looking for a present for my then 2 year old granddaughter. And it took a while but eventually I twigged I was not only being keenly watched by staff members but actually being followed by a security person. I challenged her, told her what I was doing and said that I was trying to buy a present, but it certainly would not be there, and walked out.
It wold have been OK of course if I had picked up a random woman in the street and gone round the shop with her.
|
|
|
Post by Love on Nov 12, 2014 16:42:29 GMT
I don't know if you are taking the piss but I will give you the benefit of the doubt. One further example. I was in Mothercare a couple of years ago, looking for a present for my then 2 year old granddaughter. And it took a while but eventually I twigged I was not only being keenly watched by staff members but actually being followed by a security person. I challenged her, told her what I was doing and said that I was trying to buy a present, but it certainly would not be there, and walked out. It wold have been OK of course if I had picked up a random woman in the street and gone round the shop with her. Did they say if they had you down as a paedo or just a shoplifter?
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 13, 2014 10:15:34 GMT
I rather think that if I had been suspected of shop lifting the demeanour of the staff, and the security would have been different.
|
|
|
Post by love on Nov 13, 2014 10:22:24 GMT
I rather think that if I had been suspected of shop lifting the demeanour of the staff, and the security would have been different. So you're saying that you believe the staff at Mothercare treated you as though you were a potential child-abuser just because you were shopping alone? I wonder if they treat all unaccompanied males that way? if they do then it's a wonder they've not gone out of business. The bastards! Ill certainly never shop there again.
|
|
|
Post by Jonjel on Nov 13, 2014 10:34:08 GMT
I rather think that if I had been suspected of shop lifting the demeanour of the staff, and the security would have been different. So you're saying that you believe the staff at Mothercare treated you as though you were a potential child-abuser just because you were shopping alone? I wonder if they treat all unaccompanied males that way? if they do then it's a wonder they've not gone out of business. The bastards! Ill certainly never shop there again. Now I KNOW you are taking the piss!
|
|
|
Post by love on Nov 13, 2014 11:01:48 GMT
So you're saying that you believe the staff at Mothercare treated you as though you were a potential child-abuser just because you were shopping alone? I wonder if they treat all unaccompanied males that way? if they do then it's a wonder they've not gone out of business. The bastards! Ill certainly never shop there again. Now I KNOW you are taking the piss! Not at all! I think you were treated very badly - if nough people complained then I'm sure they'd have to cease this disgusting practice. did you take it further?
|
|