Friend refused exit at Chuck E Cheese

[twoskinsonemanns]

This reply wasn't about the politics of RAS.

It was directed specifically at someone who has helped campaign for Republican candidate for government in our state. And was meant to show there is really no difference of substance between his viewpoints as a Republican supporter than those the Democrats put forth.

But it would be short sighted to think politics have nothing to do with policing and RAS, and all the other things that effect our lives.

So will ignore all posts who point out that Republicans are no better than Democrats?

Koolaide drinkers don't want to hear it. It's all the other team's fault.

 

[WalkingWolf]

Your third sentence there, about the school, is irrelevant in regards to Chuck E. Cheese and this discussion. You entrust your child to them, and then at the end of the day, your child is returned. With a few exceptions, the parent does not stay with the child. Your last sentence, again, is not relevant, as you are talking about entities that talk custody of your child....schools, summer camps, boy/girl scouts, etc. CEC does NOT take custody. When you enter with your child, they stamp you, you go in, AND RETAIN FULL CUSTODY AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR SAID CHILD(ren). It is, at best, a weak attempt to prevent the very bad things from happening. All you gotta do is wait until either there is no one at the counter or its VERY busy. Then just walk out. In my view, it's there more as a "make you feel safer, when you're really not" thing.

Out of curiosity, has anyone ever gone there with their kid and REFUSED the stamping of hands?

It(policy) is there to entice lazy irresponsible parents to come spend their money. +1 on the bold print, if the parents or guardians remain responsible and diligent the policy is totally unneeded. Even their website they contend parents are still responsible for their children.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

That isn't a free market then is it?
You do realize your precious Republicans are real complicit in this.
Your last line is simply not very true. A business knows to stay in business and even greedy ones know if they kill off their customers they will loose money.
What your precious government agency does is give the public a false illusion of safety and create a moral hazard for the business by taking some of the responsibility off of them.




It has worked well often times in history, but of course government propaganda machine and apologists like to distort that history to show the need for themselves. It has been debunked in the threads you started on the subject.

How can you trust government over big business when you just admitted they are bought by big business?

I just can't twist my head around government apologist thinking like this, ultimately you are saying we can't be free because we are bad, but we must obey and trust a government made up of who, "We the people" the bad ones you can't trust to run their own lives are some how magically transformed into angelic creatures who will take care of our every need and selflessly rule us with our best interests in mind?

Oh you mean I must've completely invented the open field enclosures in Medieval England, the ownership of slaves in colonial america, the outright dirt conditions of the meat packing industry in the late 1800s or the brutish thugs who manned the mining companies private "free market" police forces?

I reject your notion, 100% free market economies are not possible, even a 70% free market economy is not possible. because the biggest interests who make the most money will simply establish a coercive government to meet their needs. Why do you think private companies are any better then the government? they're almost the same thing!

if you find 10,000 barrels of oil under your yard, you can't just stick a pumperjack on your lawn to extract it, their will be all sorts of regulations to prevent you from doing so, who do you think wants all those regulations? BIG OIL LOVES THOSE REGULATIONS because if you were able to extract oil freely from smaller wells and sell it outside of NYMEX you's undermine their profits if enough people started doing it

Seatbelt/helmet laws were championed by insurance companies so they would have to pay smaller claims in accidents

The Taxicab medallion system in most major cities (including Seattle) rations the number of cabs so a handful of larger cab companies can control the market.

If you put up an anarcho capitalist society tommorow then I promise you the big business interests would have the current set up restored in full by monday morning. unless you take away all their money, equipment and property and freely spread it to all businesses so that everyone is equal, but something tells me Mr. Hazlit would be very dissappointed to see that...


Think about just one thing, how was meat prepared before Upton Sinclair published "The Jungle" which led to the pure food and drug act. think about how dangerous it can be for those with compromised immune systems to eat such meat, and the meat industry was well aware of this, name me one company that went bankrupt as a result of Upton Sinclair's expose on their filthy practices. cross contamination can cause illness and death. how many people died or had their lives permanetly changed as a result of disease cause by eating that product? maybe the "market" doesn't force people into gulags and execute them, but it can wrought death and despair all the same, but that's ok because people chose to buy a product that was really unsafe without proper warning, because no one said there had to be a warning

Or what about in Pennsylvania in which police commissions were bought and sold on the open market, with the big mining companies buying their own police forces, who worked to prevent the high crimes of union organization, prosecuting with deadly force and brutal beat downs. That wasn't stopped until Theodore Roosevelt used the United States Army to supervise the C&I Police to prevent such activity, and only after a violent strike caused coal shortages across the country.

private industry is as big a source of oppression as public government. the only difference between libertarians and socialists though, is that socialists admit that coercion is part of their system. libertarians just stick their fingers in their ears and go "BLAH BLAH BLAH" when you try to point out that the "free market" is an implement of coercion. they absolutely deny any form of force taken by a private person as force. They'll sit and argue someone's rights were violated because a police officer stopped and talked to them for 5 minutes, but if a private company puts out dangerous products and suppresses knowledge of their danger, your recourse is to be clairvoyant, magically find out about danger, and then boycott and hopefully they'll change or a competitor will somehow form.... so therefore no oppression. it's all a crock.

I'd rather have two equally powerful groups of crooks who have competing interests in charge then 1 all powerful group of crooks in charge, as far as I'm concerned, big government and big business are all cut out of the same cloth. What's funny too is when libertarians stand up to defend big business becuase they support "freedom" HAHA you think the big corporate executives are libertarian in outlook? no way, but they love libertarians because the libertarians act as their apologists whenever they get into trouble with the government...

A few years ago the Mises institute put out an article supporting Wal-Mart, only thing wrong was... what would wal mart do if there were no social services to make up the difference between what they pay their workers and what's standard in the mostly unionized retail industry? I guess more free-market capitalism there...

I ain't going to rush to adopt your system in the current business climate, I'd rather stick with the devil I know... thank you very much...

How can you trust government over big business when you just admitted they are bought by big business?

simple, because if enough people are pissed the government WILL act because they have to or they will lose re-election. while business can be worked the same way, that's only if meaningful competition exists, if you live in an area where all your gasoline comes from one oil company, you just going to choose a different company or start your own multi-mllion dollar competitor like that?

It provides another check on the power of business when business gets bad enough. remember how much things changed when the Muck-rakers emerged? the muck rakers emerged, exposed big business practices, and meaningful reform was passed that has saved countless lives and improved health and safety in bounds.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

(carpenter v stigler, if i remember correctly) based purely on having an out of county license plate was upheld as probable cause for a stop. It is you who is confusing the law. How the pimple faced kid comes to believe you may be abducting the child is irrelevant, only that such belief is reasonable. The report alone will most likely support a stop of the vehicle.

Do you perchance mean Carpenter v State(which oddly enough happened in Stigler, Oklahoma)?
If so, then that case doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Do you perchance mean Carpenter v State(which oddly enough happened in Stigler, Oklahoma)?
If so, then that case doesn't mean what you think it means.

No I'm certain it wasn't that.

it was a case involving a car being stopped in a small town at 2 in the morning because when the officer ran the plate the address was out of town, so he stopped the car and found four young males who had screw drivers and pry bars, they were charged with possession of burglary tools.
different case altogether, it was in an old addition of a seattle police manual on probable cause, the entire decision was cited in an appendix in the back of the manual. the link is now broken though... so I'm trying hard to locate the text of the decision again....

 

[carolina guy]

This still does nothing to prevent custodial interference, for which CEC might be held liable if they turned a kid over to the non-custodial "papa."

Again, as long as they do not physically stop you, and they call the police in the event a person with a non-matching stamp leaves with a child before CEC can reasonably establish that he should, they are doing that which protects them legally from the custodial parent and from the patron leaving with the child.

When I taught at a private school, each child (under a certain age) was specifically matched with a parent on whom we had a card before that child was released at the end of the day. If someone came to pick him up who was not on the card, the child was not released until the custodial parent could be contacted.

Entities that take custody of children have a legal responsibility to take action to ensure that the child is not released to anyone other than the person who brought him, a custodial parent, or someone the custodial parent has designated. To do anything else is legally foolish.

Only flaw I see in this is that CEC is given and takes no real custodial care of the children other than to "guard" one of the doors. The exit doors are not so guarded, and they exercise no control inside more than any other place that we have been.

This feels more like apples and oranges.

 

[carolina guy]

Honestly just how many times a night do you think this takes place? How long before the police get tired of responding and refuse service? The parent is responsible for the child, and if the parent neglects the child they can get arrested, as happened to one woman. CEC own website says that parents are responsible for their children. The whole program is dangerous as it can't be enforced, and it lulls parents into a false sense of security. And it is only a matter of time before a parent is assaulted by either police or the security staff of CEC.

http://blogs.citypages.com/food/2011/07/elizabeth_molne.php

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-Chuck-E-Cheese--parents-notice-morning.html

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlin...3-at-chuck-e-cheese-find-out-on-evening-news/

http://thejailreport.blogspot.com/2012/02/augusta-mom-arrested-for-dropping-off.html

http://chuckecheese.com/discover/the-experience"This program is not a substitute for adult supervision."

(*thumbs up*)

 

[Freedom First]

Easiest solution.

"Kids, we're not going to waste our time at that dump. Go outside and play. Papa loves you!"

 

[carolina guy]

easiest solution.

"kids, we're not going to waste our time at that dump. Go outside and play. Papa loves you!"

(*grin*)

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Long lengthy reply to EMN, off topic. deleted.

I guess we just throw the constitution, government check and liberty out the window. Those in power know best and have our best interests at heart.

We should set up road blocks outside all Chuck E. Cheese and check if all parents belong to the kids.

 

[Freedom First]

Those in power know best and have our best interests at heart.

Glad you are finally getting the message. They've been preaching it for decades. You're pretty slow, aren't 'cha?

 

[carolina guy]

Glad you are finally getting the message. They've been preaching it for decades. You're pretty slow, aren't 'cha?

(*Chuckle*) :banghead:

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Glad you are finally getting the message. They've been preaching it for decades. You're pretty slow, aren't 'cha?

Yes I am!

I will freely admit I am absolutely thick skulled in accepting the fact that somehow a few oligarchs, be it corporate or in democracy or any other sort somehow knows what is best for the rest.

 

[Ca Patriot]

Not to hijack the thread, but on a somewhat related topic......How about those parks that have signs saying "adults not allowed unless with a child". First time I saw one at a city or state park in San Fransisco and I thought it was a joke and I tried to enter to take pictures of an overlook and some nazi parent called the park attendant over and they told me I had to leave.

After getting home and researching on the internet I found these places were quite common and every parent I have talked to says they support these things.

Personally, I think paranoa has taken over the human race in America.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Not to hijack the thread, but on a somewhat related topic......How about those parks that have signs saying "adults not allowed unless with a child". First time I saw one at a city or state park in San Fransisco and I thought it was a joke and I tried to enter to take pictures of an overlook and some nazi parent called the park attendant over and they told me I had to leave.

After getting home and researching on the internet I found these places were quite common and every parent I have talked to says they support these things.

Personally, I think paranoa has taken over the human race in America.

are they a publically funded park?

 

[Ca Patriot]

are they a publically funded park?

I am pretty certain the park I was at is publically funded.