Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Children should not be put on leash

heart_of_the_matter
Posts: 408
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2009 12:15:06 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Children should not be put on leashes

Having no children myself, this makes me the perfect authority on how to raise kids properly :)
...I can easily see all of those things that parents are messing up! :D
Ahhh....Now if only I was still a teenager and still had all the answers to EVERYTHING...
-------------------------------

1. YOUNG CHILDREN SHOULD NOT HAVE INDEPENDENCE - To everyone defending the leash, saying it gives your child more independence, YOUR KID ISN'T SUPPOSED TO HAVE INDEPENDENCE AT age 3. And guess what? Your independent children are obnoxious and have no respect for strangers.

2. DEGRADING - To all of those parents who use leashes on their children, children are not pets, you don't take them on a walk. If you can't control your children, then you should not have children, plain and simple.

3. CHILDREN NEED TO LEARN PROPER DISCIPLINE FROM PARENTS WORDS - Children are very trainable. If you help the child understand the association between pain and acting up, you will not have any problems. You do the child and everyone else an injustice when you do not properly discipline him/her. Little children love to learn (that is a human's survival skill! and so it is very ingrained)...so "timeouts" work well on them because they can't explore and learn - physically hold them there if needed
(or if you still can't control your child seek professional help or go on nanny 911).
----------------------------------------

??? SAFETY ISSUE OF USING THEM -??? does it give more safety all the time?

The leash could give a false sense of security! the kid can still step off the curb and get hit...or do something else stupid and the parent will falsely be thinking that all is well and that they don't have to watch them...because the "leash" is watching them...but the leash doesn't have eyes or a brain to see the dangers that the child can't see.

The leashes are almost always at the max distance. A parent with one who is not paying attention to their kid may take a step torwards the kid and the sudden slack could put the kid on their face.

Also the leash could be used to jerk the child! (causing harm)

The leash itself is something that could get wrapped around the throat = choking hazard.
------------------------------

so anyway, that's where I'm coming from...what do YOU think about children being placed on leashes?
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2009 12:28:29 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I don't see anything wrong with a kid being put on a leash. It doesn't imply that their pets, and I don't think it says that a parent is irresponsible or unable to control their child either. I think the primary purpose of it is to prevent kids from wandering and getting lost. Sure, the ideal would be to be able to keep your eyes on your kid 24/7, and I'm sure most people do their best in that regard. Still, kids tend to disappear - sometimes at their own discretion, and sometimes because people take them (it's rare, but hey, it happens). So, what's the big deal if their parents leash their kid as an extra precaution? The implication behind just the sound of that - putting your kid on a leash, lol - makes it sound a lot worse than it really is, in my opinion. As long as the parent is still keeping an eye on the kid, and still disciplining the kid, then it's a-ok in my book.
President of DDO
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2009 12:48:35 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/30/2009 12:28:29 AM, theLwerd wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with a kid being put on a leash. It doesn't imply that their pets, and I don't think it says that a parent is irresponsible or unable to control their child either. I think the primary purpose of it is to prevent kids from wandering and getting lost. Sure, the ideal would be to be able to keep your eyes on your kid 24/7, and I'm sure most people do their best in that regard. Still, kids tend to disappear - sometimes at their own discretion, and sometimes because people take them (it's rare, but hey, it happens). So, what's the big deal if their parents leash their kid as an extra precaution? The implication behind just the sound of that - putting your kid on a leash, lol - makes it sound a lot worse than it really is, in my opinion. As long as the parent is still keeping an eye on the kid, and still disciplining the kid, then it's a-ok in my book.

Completely agree there, I've gotten into discussions about this before. As much as I'm against others controlling people, I think that it puts the parent more at ease when trying to do other things, as well as lower the chances of the child getting lost to zero. People also think it's an insult to the child as if he/she is a pet, but really, they're insulting animals as living beings.

.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2009 7:55:27 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
unless your kid had serious ADD and is going to run into the street or something, I have to think that a leash does more harm than good.

For example with dogs I've always noticed that those people whose dogs don't have to be on a leash are much better behaved, because they have to learn self control from when they're little, rather than being restrained into control. I've always wished I could walk my dog regularly this way, for she actually calms down and behaves better when I do, but It's illegal where I live.

I think that parents have to give their kids some responsibility, so they can learn to deal with it and make good decisions.
This would start with walking next to me.
And what ever happened to holding hands?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2009 8:43:27 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/30/2009 12:28:29 AM, theLwerd wrote:
I don't see anything wrong with a kid being put on a leash. It doesn't imply that their pets, and I don't think it says that a parent is irresponsible or unable to control their child either. I think the primary purpose of it is to prevent kids from wandering and getting lost. Sure, the ideal would be to be able to keep your eyes on your kid 24/7, and I'm sure most people do their best in that regard. Still, kids tend to disappear - sometimes at their own discretion, and sometimes because people take them (it's rare, but hey, it happens). So, what's the big deal if their parents leash their kid as an extra precaution? The implication behind just the sound of that - putting your kid on a leash, lol - makes it sound a lot worse than it really is, in my opinion. As long as the parent is still keeping an eye on the kid, and still disciplining the kid, then it's a-ok in my book.

Hey, some people like to kill other people, why don't we put everyone on leashes?
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Maikuru
Posts: 9,112
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2009 10:43:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/30/2009 7:55:27 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
For example with dogs I've always noticed that those people whose dogs don't have to be on a leash are much better behaved, because they have to learn self control from when they're little, rather than being restrained into control.

Which do you think came first, removing the leash or the dog learning self-control?
"You assume I wouldn't want to burn this whole place to the ground."
- lamerde

https://i.imgflip.com...
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2009 5:42:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Yeah, I think that it's a twisted and ill way to take care of your child.

I think you should at least give that minimal attention required to your child so that he doesn't hurt himself or get lost in a public place. And you need to teach him to not run off, not physically prevent him from doing so. By doing that you disregard the development and learning of your child and treat him as an animal, with a leash.
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2009 7:26:10 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/30/2009 8:43:27 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Hey, some people like to kill other people, why don't we put everyone on leashes?

(Fascist)
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2009 11:19:57 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/3/2009 7:26:10 PM, Nags wrote:
At 10/30/2009 8:43:27 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Hey, some people like to kill other people, why don't we put everyone on leashes?

(Fascist)

I'm anti-Child leashes. Just applying OP's logic
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2009 12:10:23 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I find people's reaction to this issue strange, it's really not a big deal.

I think a short leash can be extremely practical for the parents of kids of a certain age (around two years old) who want to walk independantly but aren't aware enough to do so safely in a city environment. Young kids are liable to walk straight out into a busy road if not supervised.

Holding hands is good but if you are holding your child's hand 100% of the time you are exerting complete control of their movements the whole time which could be restricting. A leash provides the opportunity for a toddler to have some freedom of movement to walk around but still be safely kept near.

It is also quite difficult to push a shopping trolley or a pushchair if you are holding your kids hand, so leashes can be very useful, especially for single parents.

I think it would be a bit wierd to have an older kid on a leash but if we're talking about little tots then I don't see the problem.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2009 1:37:58 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/4/2009 12:10:23 PM, feverish wrote:
I find people's reaction to this issue strange, it's really not a big deal.

I think a short leash can be extremely practical for the parents of kids of a certain age (around two years old) who want to walk independantly but aren't aware enough to do so safely in a city environment. Young kids are liable to walk straight out into a busy road if not supervised.

Holding hands is good but if you are holding your child's hand 100% of the time you are exerting complete control of their movements the whole time which could be restricting. A leash provides the opportunity for a toddler to have some freedom of movement to walk around but still be safely kept near.

It is also quite difficult to push a shopping trolley or a pushchair if you are holding your kids hand, so leashes can be very useful, especially for single parents.

I think it would be a bit wierd to have an older kid on a leash but if we're talking about little tots then I don't see the problem.

people put 2-3 yr olds in strollers if their going to walk in the city, they put 4-5 yr olds on leashes. lol HEEL Darnit!
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/4/2009 1:44:01 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/4/2009 1:37:58 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

people put 2-3 yr olds in strollers if their going to walk in the city, they put 4-5 yr olds on leashes. lol HEEL Darnit!

OK then, that is kind of strange. You should be able to control your child verbally by that age, unless they have special needs.
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2009 9:53:37 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/3/2009 10:43:36 AM, Maikuru wrote:
At 10/30/2009 7:55:27 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
For example with dogs I've always noticed that those people whose dogs don't have to be on a leash are much better behaved, because they have to learn self control from when they're little, rather than being restrained into control.

Which do you think came first, removing the leash or the dog learning self-control?

I would say the self control :) but yes I see your point and I agree completely and see nothing wrong. If the child is unable to behave than said child should be subjected to such device like a leash until it learns to.
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2009 9:55:33 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/4/2009 1:37:58 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 11/4/2009 12:10:23 PM, feverish wrote:
I find people's reaction to this issue strange, it's really not a big deal.

I think a short leash can be extremely practical for the parents of kids of a certain age (around two years old) who want to walk independantly but aren't aware enough to do so safely in a city environment. Young kids are liable to walk straight out into a busy road if not supervised.

Holding hands is good but if you are holding your child's hand 100% of the time you are exerting complete control of their movements the whole time which could be restricting. A leash provides the opportunity for a toddler to have some freedom of movement to walk around but still be safely kept near.

It is also quite difficult to push a shopping trolley or a pushchair if you are holding your kids hand, so leashes can be very useful, especially for single parents.

I think it would be a bit wierd to have an older kid on a leash but if we're talking about little tots then I don't see the problem.


people put 2-3 yr olds in strollers if their going to walk in the city, they put 4-5 yr olds on leashes. lol HEEL Darnit!

Are you saying that they needn't be put in strollers?

Also, in a way children are like pets. You must feed them, groom them, wash them, dry them, etc etc so why can't they learn self control the same way and wouldn't this protect against predators from snatching your lil kids?
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2009 11:18:09 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/5/2009 9:55:33 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
At 11/4/2009 1:37:58 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

Are you saying that they needn't be put in strollers?

Also, in a way children are like pets. You must feed them, groom them, wash them, dry them, etc etc so why can't they learn self control the same way and wouldn't this protect against predators from snatching your lil kids?

I am not saying they don't need to be put in strollers.

And I agree,
If: you think of your kid as a pet
Then: it is completely consistent to put them on a leash

However
If: you think that your kid is a person in vital stages of social developtment
Then: they ought to be able to have room to make mistakes, such that they can learn from them, and control themselves.

I do not think that one ought not punish their child, even by such means as a spanking, but I do have a problem with constraining children to the point where they can't make mistakes.

And though I don't say that this is what the "Pro" category is for, This is the kind of punishment that seems to go with the Leash (for Pets & People):

not very instructive.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2009 11:24:45 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
It reminds me of, I think it was, Ben Hur.
Where he was dragged in the coluseum by horses.

I suppose it's punishment of a sort, but it doesn't seem instructive. One would assume that she's dragging him b/c he wouldn't Heel (hell I wouldn't either), so in dragging him she's not teaching him to, or punishing him such that he does. But rather saying:
"Okay, if you won't cooperate, that's fine. I'll drag you."

I would prefer making the kid cooperate. And how is this achieved?? By good parenting.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
wonderwoman
Posts: 744
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/6/2009 6:36:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/6/2009 11:18:09 AM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 11/5/2009 9:55:33 PM, wonderwoman wrote:
At 11/4/2009 1:37:58 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:

Are you saying that they needn't be put in strollers?

Also, in a way children are like pets. You must feed them, groom them, wash them, dry them, etc etc so why can't they learn self control the same way and wouldn't this protect against predators from snatching your lil kids?

I am not saying they don't need to be put in strollers.

And I agree,
If: you think of your kid as a pet
Then: it is completely consistent to put them on a leash

However
If: you think that your kid is a person in vital stages of social developtment
Then: they ought to be able to have room to make mistakes, such that they can learn from them, and control themselves.

I do not think that one ought not punish their child, even by such means as a spanking, but I do have a problem with constraining children to the point where they can't make mistakes.

And though I don't say that this is what the "Pro" category is for, This is the kind of punishment that seems to go with the Leash (for Pets & People):


not very instructive.

Obvisouly abuse with any system or form of training occurs. This is unfortunate but it happens. It is instructive however, it shows the child who is in control, and that it needs to stop throwing a tantrum, get off its butt and walk. I don't necessarily agree with the dragging of the child but it surely shows that the obedience is mandatory.
kelly224
Posts: 952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 10:10:26 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/30/2009 12:15:06 AM, heart_of_the_matter wrote:
Children should not be put on leashes

Having no children myself, this makes me the perfect authority on how to raise kids properly :)
...I can easily see all of those things that parents are messing up! :D
Ahhh....Now if only I was still a teenager and still had all the answers to EVERYTHING...
-------------------------------

1. YOUNG CHILDREN SHOULD NOT HAVE INDEPENDENCE - To everyone defending the leash, saying it gives your child more independence, YOUR KID ISN'T SUPPOSED TO HAVE INDEPENDENCE AT age 3. And guess what? Your independent children are obnoxious and have no respect for strangers.

2. DEGRADING - To all of those parents who use leashes on their children, children are not pets, you don't take them on a walk. If you can't control your children, then you should not have children, plain and simple.

3. CHILDREN NEED TO LEARN PROPER DISCIPLINE FROM PARENTS WORDS - Children are very trainable. If you help the child understand the association between pain and acting up, you will not have any problems. You do the child and everyone else an injustice when you do not properly discipline him/her. Little children love to learn (that is a human's survival skill! and so it is very ingrained)...so "timeouts" work well on them because they can't explore and learn - physically hold them there if needed
(or if you still can't control your child seek professional help or go on nanny 911).
----------------------------------------

??? SAFETY ISSUE OF USING THEM -??? does it give more safety all the time?

The leash could give a false sense of security! the kid can still step off the curb and get hit...or do something else stupid and the parent will falsely be thinking that all is well and that they don't have to watch them...because the "leash" is watching them...but the leash doesn't have eyes or a brain to see the dangers that the child can't see.

The leashes are almost always at the max distance. A parent with one who is not paying attention to their kid may take a step torwards the kid and the sudden slack could put the kid on their face.

Also the leash could be used to jerk the child! (causing harm)

The leash itself is something that could get wrapped around the throat = choking hazard.
------------------------------

so anyway, that's where I'm coming from...what do YOU think about children being placed on leashes?

You have alot of valid points, but I don't think you not having a child can justify you saying you have the answers. I do think it is foolish to put children on leashes as well. People are so lazy these days. They want their children to grow up as healthy functional adults, but allow them to do what they want, say what they want to them(the parent).
My mother wasnt going to have that at all. I actually am grateful I was disciplined as a child, because it shows in the way I carry myself. Folks fought vehemently to give the child more "control" by not letting the parent discipline their child. You see what happens?...You get a society of egotistical barbarians who think that they are above authourity. andd in actuality it was perpertuated at home.

You can't throw money at all of your problem. Children need to be told NO. If they never hear no, than they will grow up to be self centered, and entitled to think they deserve this or that. If you don't talk to your children about these things, than you will regret them later, and so will the rest of society, because YOU let these mopnsters run rampant...yeas I said MONSTERS.
johngriswald
Posts: 1,294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 10:14:12 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/23/2009 10:10:26 AM, kelly224 wrote:
My points are more important than yours because mine are in bold
Having problems with the fans site? Suggestions? Can't log in? Forgot your password? Want to be an editor and write opinion pieces? PM Me and I'll get it sorted out.

ddofans.com
kelly224
Posts: 952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 10:15:39 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/23/2009 10:14:12 AM, johngriswald wrote:
At 11/23/2009 10:10:26 AM, kelly224 wrote:
My points are more important than yours because mine are in bold

I guess so. If you have something you want to say, dont be passive aggressive.
Harlan
Posts: 1,880
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 10:33:37 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
You get a society of egotistical barbarians who think that they are above authourity. andd in actuality it was perpertuated at home.

This is interesting, because authority really has no inherent power over you, but you are moved to follow it through habit, fear of punishment, or if you agree with it's decree.

So really I would say it's the other way around, and that you think that you falsely believe that you are under authority, and it was actually perpetuated at home.

Your goal as a parent should not be to raise conformists who simply function as efficient and obedient citizens of the state. It should not even factor into your parenting any consideration of what is good for society at large but rather what is good for your child as an individual. Teach them to be of strong and healthy mind and to make their own moral decisions.

If you don't talk to your children about these things, than you will regret them later, and so will the rest of society, because YOU let these mopnsters run rampant...yeas I said MONSTERS.

This is what I'm talking about. You are operating under the point of view of a statesman and not of a parent. Your primary concern should be the child, not general welfare and domestic peace for society.
kelly224
Posts: 952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 12:36:24 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/23/2009 10:33:37 AM, Harlan wrote:
You get a society of egotistical barbarians who think that they are above authourity. andd in actuality it was perpertuated at home.

This is interesting, because authority really has no inherent power over you, but you are moved to follow it through habit, fear of punishment, or if you agree with it's decree.

So really I would say it's the other way around, and that you think that you falsely believe that you are under authority, and it was actually perpetuated at home.

Your goal as a parent should not be to raise conformists who simply function as efficient and obedient citizens of the state. It should not even factor into your parenting any consideration of what is good for society at large but rather what is good for your child as an individual. Teach them to be of strong and healthy mind and to make their own moral decisions.

If you don't talk to your children about these things, than you will regret them later, and so will the rest of society, because YOU let these mopnsters run rampant...yeas I said MONSTERS.

This is what I'm talking about. You are operating under the point of view of a statesman and not of a parent. Your primary concern should be the child, not general welfare and domestic peace for society.

I'm definitely not claiming the stance of a statesmen. Home training is just that HOME TRAINING. I see where you are coming from with the individualistic standpoint of children, and all the home training in the world can't shield you from the world.
A solid base is essential, but some parents are screwed up, and they teach their kids to be just as misinformed as they are. Why should society not be a concern, because this child has to function in society,right? My question to you is do you discipline your childern, and how do you do it?...

wastes of time......
a.timeout
b.taking video games away
c.allowing children to talk to you like you are an equal(they should have a say, but should be treated as children),and etc
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 1:04:43 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
You get a society of egotistical barbarians who think that they are above authourity.
Contradiction. Barbarians, by definition, lack civilization, i.e., the setting of man free from men-- therefore, a barbarian can never be above authority, nor even conceive of disobeying it. The first frown at authority is the first touch of civilization on a human's brow.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
kelly224
Posts: 952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2009 1:10:05 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 11/23/2009 1:04:43 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
You get a society of egotistical barbarians who think that they are above authourity.
Contradiction. Barbarians, by definition, lack civilization, i.e., the setting of man free from men-- therefore, a barbarian can never be above authority, nor even conceive of disobeying it. The first frown at authority is the first touch of civilization on a human's brow.

Technical are we?....just a little original thought