Originally Posted by Tracym

The drinking age was raised, and the drunk driving accidents went down. That was the reason for it. Good idea or bad, it isn't some kind of repression - it was with the intent to save lives.

I don't know where you live - I almost never show an ID. I get on the train all the time - noone's ever asked for my ID. If you were writing a check to purchase it, I guess you'd need an ID. But so what? You show an ID to get on a plane. I've never EVER seen a mall that IDs everyone.

And a bar with 100% ID policies - again so what? They make sure you're of legal age.

I really don't understand the big deal about showing an ID - they glance at the pic and hand it back. Doesn't seem like giving up a personal freedom to me - honestly seems a big deal about nothing really.

Originally Posted by Rete

No, they have a healthy attitude about young people drinking and driving and raised the legal drinking age to 21 in the hopes that by that age the person would be mature enough to see the consequences of irresponsible behavior.

Originally Posted by another bloody yank

Sorry, in your earlier post you made it sound like your problem was that we had a minimum drinking age at all.

So you think the British attitude toward alcohol is healthy? By that I mean that the UK attitude and minimum age fosters a society of responsible drinkers?

Originally Posted by Octang Frye

This thread (string) serves to illustrate the difference between what I call the American mindset, and the mindset which seems to be prevalent in the UK at the moment.

The UK mindset tends to focus on the individual incident, the emotions of those involved etc, putting oneself in kins' position. It focuses on the personal; an emotional, empathic response. I'm not trying to be offensive but I do think of it as a hand-wringing response. And the children must be protected from this threat *at all costs*. I understand that as a parent.

The mindset of people like Ray, TracyM and myself comes from abstracting up from the emotional level. As I said in an earlier post, we are viewing this incident from the macro level, focusing on the larger picture.

I would posit that this explains to some degree the differences between the current American and British cultures.
When incidents like school or mall shootings occur, the British are astonished why there isn't a groundswell of opinion in the US to ban firearms. If it saves just one life is the refrain.
The American - I would say libertarian - viewpoint is that the rights and freedoms of the majority should not be restricted because of the actions of the very few.

It's horses for courses, I guess. If you have more of the British mindset, you'd probably be happier living in the UK.
If, like me, you have more of a libertarian bent, you'd be happier here, as I am.

I used to read the tabloid press in the UK, even while over here. (The Sun, the Mirror, the Daily Mail etc.) Now I can't stand the sensationalism and voyeuristic wallowing in other people's grief.

Originally Posted by pejpm1

nope, as stated above I think we (the British) have a terrible attitude towards alcohol, although that clearly has nothing to do with the drinking age as plenty of other countries seem to manage just fine with 18 or even younger. I have no idea why we seem equate drinking with getting drunk.

Originally Posted by Ray

We hid in out hut ...

And you know what happen when people are falseley accused ..i.e Richard Jewel


No I don't ..I have see many weirdos ... that MO ..does not tally ...
As an afterthough he may well realize he could have seen to be suspicious

But of course we will never know for sure ...

Its is good that the subject is aired though it will make
people more aware ...

but the fact remains that most child abusers are
member of their own family ..

Originally Posted by another bloody yank

From what you've said, it sounds like your (UK) problem is the minimum drinking age is set too high. Needs to be set lower, like the French.

Originally Posted by kins

Long one, sorry...

I'm in Boston for a couple of days with my kids, husband and my mother in law.

It's hot so we went to Boston Common where there's a huge paddling pool. It was full of kids in either underwear or swimsuits.

After my three kids played there for over half an hour in their underwear we got them out and started getting them dressed. Several people came up and told us that a man in a blue shirt had been filming my 7 year old daughter for a good half an hour.

I looked at the man they were pointing at, and sure enough his camera was pointing at us. My daughter was getting changed at this point (we were doing it as discreetly as possible) so I walked straight at him and he dropped the camera.

We found some 'staff' and talked to them about him, but they were all teenagers just there to lifeguard. They started talking to him but nothing much seemed to happen.

My husband went up to him and asked him if he'd been filming our daughter. He said 'Yes I have. If you take your daughter into a public place I am allowed to film her.'

My husband asked why he'd been filming her in particular and he said something about her embodying the innocence of children having fun.

My husband asked what he planned to do with the film and he said 'I don't have to tell you that, you don't have any right to know.'

My husband said he was extremely unhappy about this. The guy said something about working in multimedia, and it only being low res film, but my husband said once again that he wasn't happy that this man had been filming our daughter and we didn't know what he was going to do with the film, and that he had not asked our permission.

We both made it clear that we specifically did not give him our permission to publicise or use the film in any way.

My husband had also taken some photos of the guy, and he said we would be sending these photos to the police when WE got home.

The guy (who had obviously picked up our British accent) said he didn't think the police back home would be very interested.

I said we would be contacting the Boston police, and that my husband and the children were actually American citizens living nearby. He looked a bit worried at this point.

Then he said 'Fine, let's call the police together.' We said, no, we were leaving, but that we would be ensuring someone was informed ASAP that he was videoing children at a paddling pool without anyone's consent. At this point the teenager lifeguards were asking us to 'Take it elsewhere.'

At that point we left the paddling pool, but shortly afterwards (still on Boston Common) we saw a Park Ranger. My husband told them about the man, showed them the man's photo, and gave them his business card so they could call if anything further happened.

The Ranger radioed for help, and said he would go immediately and find this man and stop him filming. They said once you ask someone to stop filming they must stop, but nothing about whether someone can film children without permission in a public place, nor about whether they can do anything with the film if you expressly forbid them to. The rangers were not going to let him continue however.

Now I have no idea what this man planned to do with the film, but he did not have my permission to do anything with it, and I have no idea if I can do anything more. I wish we had called the police at the time so he could at least be checked out in some way and to make sure they were aware of what he was doing.

I don't think there are paedos everywhere, but I know they are on the internet, and I absolutely do NOT want film of my daughter on there.

I know that my 7 year old daughter's photos on Flickr get more views than anyone else in the family. I am very careful what photos of my children I put online, especially her, and if I am at all worried I make them viewable by family and friends only.

I know that my daughter probably appears in the background of other people's photos, and that potentially they could get online and be perved at, and I do accept that you can only control so much.

But I'm just so angry that this man thought it was fine to video MY daughter without asking me or her.

No idea what the debate is here, I just wanted to vent really. And I am wondering whether to contact the police with this man's photo, and put in a formal complaint.

I have no idea if the law is on my side in any of this but I suspect it isn't :-(

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP

Here's a key cultural difference: Americans would refer to this post as a joke, while Brits would describe it as taking the piss.

This is not a left vs. right, Brit vs. America issue, but a matter of whether you care more about the rights of your kids to not be harassed and objectified, or whether you give deference to the rights of a freakshow pervert to get off on your kid.

Originally Posted by pejpm1

possibly. I also think the other countries have a much stronger wine culture so they associate drinking as being an integral part of a meal, while we see drinking as purely a leisure activity.

Originally Posted by another bloody yank

So what would the US gain exactly by lowering the drinking age to 18?

Originally Posted by SecretGarden

First day of school tomorrow.........I'd better be off to sleep! 5 am will be a rude awakening.

~SG

Originally Posted by Ray

More profit for bars and drink companies

Originally Posted by Lord Lionheart

You're late

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP

Here's a key cultural difference: Americans would refer to this post as a joke, while Brits would describe it as taking the piss.

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP

This is not a left vs. right, Brit vs. America issue, but a matter of whether you care more about the rights of your kids to not be harassed and objectified, or whether you give deference to the rights of a freakshow pervert to get off on your kid.

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP

The laws have failed to keep up with the times, the technology moves much more quickly than the courts possibly could. The internet provides far too much ability to privacy haters to impose themselves on others who would rather be left alone.