Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire PSA: Old People That Talk to Children They Don't Know

Yeah look at those little terrors just hoping and praying JoeBob will be along to tell them all about the job he used to have.

Idunno......looks like maybe they aren't sufficiently anesthetized.

The first thing I would tell him is how to use a fork so that he doesn’t look like an animal.

Lmao

That would go over really well for you I’m sure.

Well, in today's world, you're probably right... Too bad that trust is not a human factor any longer..

Fork usage? looks fine to me.

Dunking his sausage in the ketchup? You need to nip that in the bud.

Ill go no further with that for obvious reasons.

Tell the parents of crying children that their kid needs a good shaking. The whole store goes silent.



mike r

So I guess if I come upon a youngster in a supermarket or mall that has obviously lost his parent, I ought to walk on by and think "Your on your own kid""
Some people get paranoid about non problems.Maybe you should just keep your kid locked up at home. One a$$ hole teaching his kids to grow up the same telling people to fugoff.

Sure thing, gramps.

Brings to mind the time a few years back and I felt like shaking the holy crap out of the young teenybopper acting mother of a little boy of about 3 +/- years old that was crying and sobbing hard and had been for a good while. It wasn't a temper tantrum kind of crying but a pitiful hurting kind of crying. The kid was laying down inside the cart, looked feverish, had a persistent congested cough. It was pretty obvious that he wasn't well at all. All the while his young mother and another young girl about the same age were gabbing and giggling endlessly showing each other whatever back and forth on their 'smart' phones, totally oblivious the little boy's crying and misery.

Wow quite the educational thread. I was raised to the line of thought that everyone was innocent till proved guilty. Liberals believe your not guilty of anything unless caught and convicted even if you are guilty of doing something that you aren't convicted of. When you have a CDL you have to prove your innocence by a piss test for drugs or your guilty of using controlled substances. And now for the final insult if you talk to a child you are a pedo. JFC damned glad in 9 months I am retiring and only coming to town twice a month for supplies . On the internet I can hear all of you, not so face to face. JFC what have we become?

Those kids are just pissed they are Florida

Yes, maybe try again - because you are not projecting much logic or sense here. Maybe some positive interaction that ends without harm could wind up being harmful to the child - that seems a vague assumption or proposition - but all sorts of seemingly harmless interactions might be harmful to that particular child. You seem to be straining after a gnat on this stuff - maybe trying to salvage an OP that still seems quite odd. Your broken arm may have come from naught. I think that you can do better than this - much better.

Like I said, it’s a PSA.

Not a discussion.

So, what you're saying, is that if a child participates in an activity, where there is the slightest chance that harm could later ensue, then you should prevent that child from participating in that activity. Especially if the child actually experienced something positive from that activity.

Like riding in a vehicle. Or swimming, bicycle riding, skateboarding, shooting, running....

All of which are much more likely to end up with childhood harm (certainly up to and including death) than abduction from strangers. Thus, all should be off limits, per the 'flave logic system.

Right?

Nope.

Not even close.

Go back and read the thread two more times.

Except, that it is a concise summary of your logic.

Exactly.

1) Looking at the numbers, at present there's an approximately 1 in 40,000 chance that a child in the USA might be the victim of a "stereotypical kidnapping" while between the age of 0 and 18. (76,000,000 children * 18 years/100 incidents yearly)

2) Due to the chance of this happening, deflave does not want his children to have any interaction with a stranger. Negative interaction would mean abduction. While a positive interaction would mean that deflave's children would possibly learn that interaction with a stranger is not dangerous. And thus might not feel anxiety when some person does have evil intentions towards them.

3) Children are exposed to activities that are statistically tens to hundreds times more likely to end in injury or death to the child. These activities do include: Riding in a vehicle, swimming, bike riding, running etc...

4) Children that have only have positive experiences while participating in the activities in 3) above, may learn to not treat them as the dangers that they (statistically speaking) truly are: Vehicle deaths account for the majority of childhood deaths in the USA from ages 5-19. Drowning kills more children 1-4 than any other accidental cause. Suffocation in a crib is the leading cause of accidental death in infants.

Ergo, were deflave's thoughts to be logical, not only would talking to strangers be off limits, so should the above activities in 3)

But like I said, if you'd phrased your PSA as "Hey, if someone says "Please don't talk to my kids". Just listen to them and move on", well then you'd likely have 100% buy in. Your kids, your parenting. Got it.

But don't frame it as being logically consistent, or that for a man to talk to a child is tantamount to pedophilia.

Holy schit.

Can people be this stupid?

The more this thread goes on the more I should be thanked. It was clearly needed.

Yep.

My daughter's have been taught to give a firm handshake, and look people in the eye.
Also, to be cautious and aware of their surroundings.
The 12 year old has trouble paying attention, but, she is 12.

Also, they understand what to do if alone. They were schooled on the rules, if alone outside.

Looks like it's gunna be a nice day in South Dakota......