dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3
share rss forum feed


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to CanadianRip

Re: Parental responsibility

said by CanadianRip:

Really, so you would go advertise to the media your child is a shoplifter. The shameless there alone has me shake my head, that's not sanctimony at all. I mean, honestly who wouldn't be ashamed of that? Seriously walk into a crowded room and announce your child is a shoplifter and tell me how proud of that statement you would be. Tell me you'd have an expectation of them patting you on the shoulder saying, there there -it's all the schools fault.

No, I wouldn't advertise it, but I wouldn't allow someone to extort me when they have no legal grounds or means to do so. Your comments about being so very sure you would provide restitution to the company if your child was caught shoplifting is what makes your comment sanctimonious and worth nothing more than a laugh. No one - not even you, no matter what you say - would pay $500-$900 to a company in addition to the legal sanctions their child already faced.

said by CanadianRip:

when all the other side has left is hurling unfounded insults based on supposition.

Calling someone an asshole, a douchebag or a dumbass is an insult. Pointing out that someone is being over the top and laying it on thick with their comments is not an insult, no matter how much you may not like it. You would do well to learn the difference between the two, because crying about non-existent insults only furthers my point about laying it on thick and being over the top.


CanadianRip

join:2009-07-15
Oakville, ON

said by Gone:

You would do well to learn the difference between the two, because crying about non-existent insults only furthers my point about laying it on thick and being over the top.

Well you've already suggested I'm uneducated which is somehow not an insult - so obviously learning this would be beyond me.

said by Gone:

No one - not even you, no matter what you say - would pay $500-$900 to a company in addition to the legal sanctions their child already faced.

Nope - wouldn't have to, I would have dealt with it instead of avoiding accountability. The Pharmacist wouldn't have felt they had to deal with it through a lawsuit. End of the day I can almost guarantee you that that's all the Franchise owner was after. The laissez-faire parents to actually do their job and parent their children.

Do you think for a second if this parent showed up with the child made them pay for the stolen merchandise and apologize and promise never to enter the store that the owner would waste his or her time with any of this?

Everything else out of your keyboard has been a bunch of specious non-sense trying to defend your absurd position. Because if you're sincere in your belief that its all the School's fault - I really hope you don't and choose never have children.

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON

said by CanadianRip:

Do you think for a second if this parent showed up with the child made them pay for the stolen merchandise and apologize and promise never to enter the store that the owner would waste his or her time with any of this?

It may affect the motivations of the franchisee but I think these are corporate decisions based on fiscal recovery beyond the pharmacist's intentions.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to CanadianRip

said by CanadianRip:

Nope - wouldn't have to, I would have dealt with it instead of avoiding accountability.

You're operating on the assumption that you would have even known any of this was going on until you got a call from the local police service advising you that your child was being charged with theft under $5000 and to come to the station to pick him/her up.

At that point, you're SOL as far as "dealing with it" goes, and your assumption that you could is nothing but hot air that goes to my previous points about sanctimonious comments that you would never follow through on. Sure, you can go to the store, talk to the manager, apologize, and they'll smile say it's okay blah blah blah but when it comes down to it, as peterboro already mentioned, you're still going to get that extortion letter in the mail - a letter for which I have no doubt in my mind you would never follow through on.

said by CanadianRip:

Everything else out of your keyboard has been a bunch of specious non-sense trying to defend your absurd position. Because if you're sincere in your belief that its all the School's fault - I really hope you don't and choose never have children.

... and everything out of your keyboard has been nothing but a bunch of sanctimonious bullshit from someone who blames all the ills of the world on "socialism" and does not understand the realities of the way corporations and the legal system work. It's not the 1960s anymore.

And I do have a son, he's wonderful and in my mind better and smarter than any children you could ever have or hope to have.