Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

freerangekids.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 534 posts

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#501

Post by clouddrover »

TheGrumpyBrit wrote: post #349
clouddrover wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He quizzed me on what I was doing, asked to look in my backpack, and after 15 minutes, I was on my way I don't know what the laws are where you live but I would guess he had no right to search your backpack without your consent. To me, what you're describing is police aggression and you must always push back against any such aggression. You should not have submitted to the search. The legal system is adversarial an…

He didn't search his backpack without consent - he asked for, and was presumably given, consent. There are certainly scenarios where you should consider the police to be your adversary and enforce every right you have to its fullest extent, but choosing your battles is just as important. The police have far more rights to detain a juvenile compared to an adult, and an unaccompanied 13 year old with a backpack at 5am…

> He didn't search his backpack without consent

I never said he did. I said greedo shouldn't have given that consent.

> Allowing a quick search to confirm that you're just pursuing a harmless hobby and are not putting yourself in any danger or likely to be reported missing a couple of hours later, seems like the easiest and fastest way to deal with that particular encounter.

It puts you in danger of arrest and false charges. It's irrelevant what police suspect. You do not submit to them to make things 'easier' or 'faster'. Your only concern must be to protect yourself, even and especially when you're 13.

Duane's book is full of examples of people who thought it would be a good idea to cooperate with police, only to find themselves charged with crimes they didn't commit and some of them ended up in jail.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#502

Post by losteric »

jimmaswell wrote: post #197
losteric wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it. There's a difference between playing and exploring the real world, and sitting in a room. My parents took the easy route of indoor parenting, with video games / books / school / instrument practice... be safe all the time. I was consistently at the top of my class and reasonably successful socially... but that upbringing did a lot of damage mentally. It's like being raised in a glass cage. I plan to go th…

How did the mental damage express itself, more specifically? Not necessarily doubting it, but I'm curious what you feel the effects were on you.

I never visited a psych so I don't know the right terms, but it was probably some form of derealization. Reality always felt shallow, every experience lacked detail and substance... that served as the foundation for other problems. Mechanically, I suspect the derealization resulted from under-trained neurons/networks that couldn't accurately feed forward perceptions of the world.

Once I got to college, I spent the vast majority of my time outside and offline... after a month I distinctly remember noticing how everything felt so real. After a year I'd realized and unwound most of the neurosis on my own.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#503

Post by chmaynard »

iamleppert wrote: post #47

I think this is highly dependent on the parents. I'm 32 and my parents let me go all over town, pretty much where I wanted with no adult supervision, for as long as I wanted. I was allowed to stay out past dark until about 9 on school nights, later on the weekends and in the summer. All this and I have a medical condition that could get me seriously hurt or killed. My parents trusted me, and they taught me early on t…

> I'm 32 and my parents let me go all over town

Your parents are taking a big risk. I hope you're carrying a cell phone.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#504

Post by solipsism »

dtech wrote: post #280
solipsism wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never has a thread been more full of survivorship bias. If you had juggled chainsaws as a kid and survived it wouldn't be any more relevant.

You're making it sounds like there's a pile of dead kids just growing on the side of the road every day. Lethal traffic incidents among children are non-trivial, but no-where near enough to introduce any kind of "survivorship bias" effect.

The point is that "I did X and I survived!" does not advance the conversation, regardless of which side is right.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#505

Post by tmnvix »

clarkmoody wrote: post #205
erikpukinskis wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have purposely designed our cities to maximize vehicle throughput and require car ownership This is just one specific example of the broader phenomenon, which is corporations seek to remove all of our abilities to take care of ourselves and our communities, so that they may resell those things to us as products. Requiring cars to move around is just the surface. We go to coffee shops and restaurants to see our f…

> corporations seek to remove all of our abilities to take care of ourselves and our communities Please. It's in a corporation's best interest to give the customer exactly what he wants . We still have "our abilities to take care of ourselves and our communities," but we also have the option of a corporation providing for our every whim.

> It's in a corporation's best interest to give the customer exactly what he wants.

It's in a corporation's best interest to instil in the customer an idea of what he or she wants.

...and then yes, your version.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#506

Post by greedo »

clouddrover wrote: post #500
greedo wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was 13, maybe 5'8, and 100lbs soaking wet. He was probably twice my size, armed with numerous weapons. Sure I could have exercised my 4th Amendment rights, but most judges would believe that he had probable cause. Expecting a 13 year old to be a constitutional lawyer (especially back in 1977) is a bit much.

> I was 13, maybe 5'8, and 100lbs soaking wet. He was probably twice my size, armed with numerous weapons. This is the best possible reason to know your rights. Might does not make right. > Expecting a 13 year old to be a constitutional lawyer (especially back in 1977) is a bit much. No one's expecting you to be a lawyer but it's not too high an expectation to know your rights, which is the point of Duane's book. Lea…

So I resist, get arrested, taken to jail. My folks woken up at 6am on a weekend to come pick me up. When my parents try to hire a lawyer, they'll be informed of how reasonable suspicion and probable cause work, for an hourly fee. All because a cop did his job by investigating a minor who from his perspective could have been a runaway or someone stealing junk.

Now while I can foresee situations where a 13 year old could successfully resist a search of their body/property, but I can't see a lawyer counseling it in this situation. Then again, IANAL.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#507

Post by flukus »

manmal wrote: post #185
noonespecial wrote: post #122

I was thinking about this the other day. Ironically this is the safest time in all of history to let kids do this. Crime is historically very low and our kids want to carry around magical devices that lets us know where they are at all times and contact them instantly. This should be a golden age, yet we've turned it into jail. What gives everyone? Edit: And by "what gives" I mean literally, I live in the US and have…

Crime is not the problem, traffic is. I grew up in a blind alley, and the whole town was really low in traffic. I started cruising around with my bike together with the neighbors at age 7, and we met a car every 10 minutes, tops. They slowed down to a stop, mostly, when they saw us. Fast forward, we are living in a city of 30k citizens now, though on the outskirts; there is a major road about 200m away, and although…

I grew up on a fairly busy road, 60Km/h two lanes both ways, not exactly a highway but still quite busy. We were crossing unassisted with no lights or zebra crossings since about the age of 6 or 7.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#508

Post by clouddrover »

greedo wrote: post #506
clouddrover wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was 13, maybe 5'8, and 100lbs soaking wet. He was probably twice my size, armed with numerous weapons. This is the best possible reason to know your rights. Might does not make right. > Expecting a 13 year old to be a constitutional lawyer (especially back in 1977) is a bit much. No one's expecting you to be a lawyer but it's not too high an expectation to know your rights, which is the point of Duane's book. Lea…

So I resist, get arrested, taken to jail. My folks woken up at 6am on a weekend to come pick me up. When my parents try to hire a lawyer, they'll be informed of how reasonable suspicion and probable cause work, for an hourly fee. All because a cop did his job by investigating a minor who from his perspective could have been a runaway or someone stealing junk. Now while I can foresee situations where a 13 year old cou…

> So I resist, get arrested, taken to jail.

You don't resist, you assert your rights. You fail to assert your rights and that will be exploited. If you get arrested for asserting your rights then you take them to court and you win.

> All because a cop did his job by investigating a minor who from his perspective

His perspective is irrelevant. Your only concern must be to protect yourself, which you failed to do.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#509

Post by flukus »

emiliobumachar wrote: post #331
jedberg wrote: post #78

The biggest issue is the courts. I have a two year old, and her grandma lives one mile away. I fully intend to let her walk there by herself when she is 6 or 7. Crime rate data supports me in that this is perfectly safe. But I'll always have this nagging feeling in my mind of some local busybody parent (and there are a lot) reporting me to CPS and then having to defend my decision and hope that I get a data driven ju…

There's a way to pre-emptively ask a court whether it's legal to do something. A few years back, some researches did just that in the USA, asking whether they could publish their research despite some deal with the funding corporation, which did not want it published. I'm afraid I don't remember the details. May be a state-specific thing.

Never thought about this before but it really does make sense for every government to provide a service like this.

Re: How Children Lost the Right to Roam in Just 4 Generations

#510

Post by mjevans »

someguydave wrote: post #141
m_mueller wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that a chicken-and-egg problem? IMO if a society treats people like responsible adults they'll rise up to the task. The question is of course how to transition there. I can't say to have any recipes, but I'm reasonably sure that taking away civic rights is counterproductive. Maybe try to get one electable political party that makes it their thing to protect and even expand citizen's rights and allow for more se…

>IMO if a society treats people like responsible adults they'll rise up to the task. That's one hypothesis. Another is that trustworthiness is a genetic trait.

I am more inclined to believe it is a CULTURAL trait.
Post reply on HN