upstate New York mom has been arrested for an unspeakable crime. She allowed her 10-year-old child to shop alone at the Lego store in the local mall while she shopped in a different store.
Rochester stationÂ WHEC reports:
The Ontario County Sheriff’s Office says a Pittsford mother is accused of leaving her ten-year-old child alone in the Lego Store at Eastview Mall while she shopped.
Deputies say that 44-year-old Jia Fan was arrested at about 5:37 p.m. Sunday evening. She is charged with endangering the welfare of a child.
Ah yes, that poor, endangered kid, surrounded by small pieces of plastic.
Alert readersÂ may recallÂ that in 2014 a mom in Long Island, New York, was arrested for leaving her 7-year-old at the Roosevelt Field Mall Lego store for one hour and 20 minutes while she shopped elsewhere in the mall. And in 2015, a Lego store in Canada detained an 11-year-old for being “too young” to shop alone. That child’s father, Doug Dunlop, wrote a letter to the company:
Today, our son went to the Lego store in Chinook Mall, Calgary, Alberta. He had over $200 and was intending to purchase some Lego with it….
Imagine my surprise when I entered the store and found that the manager had called a security guard to detain my son….
I spoke to the security guard who told me that the Lego store required a parent to be with any child 12 or under. He stated that it was Lego store policy and that he was just enforcing it.
I then followed the guard to the manager, and asked him why he would call security on my son. He stated that for safety reasons, no child under 12 could be left unattended in the store.
My question: Is a child of double digits “unattended” or simply “on their own” if they are out in public without an adult chaperone? One label implies negligence on the part of the parent, the other implies a parent who has raised a competent young adult.
Another question: Did Lego call the cops on the latest kid, or did the cops stumble upon the kid on their own?
The Lego corporate press office has not responded to my request for comment. The manager of the Eastview Mall Lego store, Dan Prouty, told me that he could not comment on whether or not someone at his store called the cops. But Prouty did acknowledge that there’s a sign in his store’s window that says, in his words, “children under the age of 12 are not allowed to be unattended in the storeâ€”that’s paraphrased a little bit.”
I went into the Lego store at Rockefeller Center here in New York City yesterday and asked the guard if I could let my (hypothetical) 11-year-old come shop my himself. The guard told me no.
Lego does seem to be obsessed with age liability. Consider theseÂ admission rulesÂ at the Legoland in Toronto:
Please note:Â Children 17 and under must be accompanied by an adult supervisor 18 years of age or older. Adults (18+) will not be admitted without a child, with the exception of Adult Only Nights.
So people are almost always too old OR too young to visit Legoland alone.
As for the mom in upstate New York, WHEC says she was “given an appearance ticket, and is expected to answer the charge in Victor Town Court on a future date.”
It always seems to be a Lego store, doesn’t it?
(And before James jumps in to correct me, yes, I know it’s hyperbole. I said it anyway.)
The problem here is that we have incomplete information, the issue in question being how long the kid was left alone in the store. I completely get that Lego doesn’t want to have immature kids in their store making messes or getting in fights, or whatever poorly-raised kids do in the Lego store. I get that Lego does not want to babysit our kids, but in what way can these corporate preferences intersect with laws on child endangerment?
I’d guess the kid was in the store way too long. If I managed the place I’d probably put on my artificial, retail-worker smile and put up with the kid for 45 minutes or so, after which I’d begin to ask myself where the kid’s parents were. Later, rinse, and repeat until store security involves mall security, then mall security tries to find the kids mom… then they escalate to whatever police officers (if any) patrol the mall, etc.
This is a story which makes perfect sense if the kid was at the store for 3 hours, and zero sense if the kid was there for 30 minutes.
As a parent, I would have handled the issue (prior to cell phones) by telling my kid to meet me in an hour by the ______________, but apparently that has its own hazards these days.
Fer fuck’s sake — when I was 7-8 years old my parents started sending me to the convenience store more than a dozen scary blocks away to get bread, milk, etc. when needed. I don’t know how I ever survived!
Maybe she should get all the annoyed parents who kids aren’t supposed to be old enough to shop by themselves and start a petition. Maybe it would get rid of this dumb rule.
“My question: Is a child of double digits â€œunattendedâ€ or simply â€œon their ownâ€ if they are out in public without an adult chaperone?”
My biggest question would be: Does the store have a sign posted at the door forbidding unadulted children?
What it feels like to me is “we don’t want people using our stores as free babysitting centers, dropping off their kids in our store, to occupy our staff, while the parents go shop elsewhere… the entire time having no intention of buying our products.”
Working the cliches, Lego products draw kids from elementary-school age to middle-school age (then the videogame store gets them). However, very few kids of that age can afford to buy Lego products at the full retail price in the Lego store (they NEVER discount, to avoid undercutting the other retailers that carry their products.)
So, except for the kids coming in after birthdays and holidays with cash or gift-cards in hand, they mostly are not actual customers, the adults they drag behind them are the real customers. So, the Disney store would have the same problem, except that most of the kids in their demo are too young to wander in alone, and the videogame store tends to draw “kids” old enough to have cash in their pockets.
Back when bookstores were a thing, they (or at least, their managers) disapproved of people coming in, picking a magazine or book off the rack, and reading right there in the store. There is a line, sometimes hazy, between someone who’s examining the contents as part a purchase decision, and a person who never intends to buy. The stores were within their rights to demand not being treated like a public library. I think Lego stores are within their rights to demand to not be a drop-in child-parking depot.
Arresting mom or dad for disregarding this seems like a rough deal for a first offense, but, without knowing all the details, might be reasonable. And it probably makes more sense than the other “legal” option, which is arresting the kid for trespassing.
“It always seems to be a Lego store, doesnâ€™t it?
(And before James jumps in to correct me […]”
When you get it right the first time, there’s no reason to correct anything.
P.S. – Now you’ve started complaining about what I write before I’ve even written anything You’ve seriously GOT to drop your obsession with me. It can’t be healthy.
How do they know if they are 11 and not 12?
Are they carding minors at Lego stores??
When I read your blog, I don’t know whether to laugh or to cry.
“Back when bookstores were a thing”
That would be Monday of this week for the local Barnes and Noble, although I’m pretty sure it’s still there. They weren’t doing a going-out-of-business sale.
“they (or at least, their managers) disapproved of people coming in, picking a magazine or book off the rack, and reading right there in the store.”
Nobody said anything while I read two chapters of the latest Leo Durocher bio on my lunch hour.
“There is a line, sometimes hazy, between someone whoâ€™s examining the contents as part a purchase decision, and a person who never intends to buy. ”
But then I did buy it.
“That would be Monday of this week for the local Barnes and Noble, although Iâ€™m pretty sure itâ€™s still there. They werenâ€™t doing a going-out-of-business sale.”
They were never in the local malls here, they had stand-alone big-box stores. The ones near the malls have been closed for quite some time now.
On the other hand, Amazon DOES have a bookstore in the mall.
Here’s the directory:
Once summer Saturday in 1965 when I 10 years old, my father handed me the lawn mower and said. “See you in a couple hours…”. After 2+ years of running alongside my father with a hand grass-trimmer and carrying the filled bag of clippings to our compost bin, this was a promotion! Heck I even got a “good sip” of beer after I completed the job.
Two years later, I was mowing and ran over a wire croquet wicket hidden in the grass. A twisted portion of that wire ended up stuck in my leg, like a nail, just above the ankle. Yep… it pierced my jean cuff, socks and hit bone.
I turned off the lawn mower and after touching the protruding metal wire, decided against pulling it out of my leg. My father, who was nearby (but didn’t see the actual accident), knew something was wrong and came by to assist.
Later, the wire was removed at the ER, both the physician and my father complimented me on my “adult-like response” to the incident.
Though I wasn’t an adult, I reacted in such a manner that day, because I was treated like one. But knowing my father, he would have never given me that responsibility if in his judgement I wasn’t ready.
That is parenting.
I’ve left my 8 y.o. In the Lego store in the mall a handful of times. The first time, I let an employee know but after that I gave my son instructions about where I would be (nordstrom, for example), how long I would be gone (half an hour or so), told him to decide what he wanted while I was gone (reminding him of price range), and then made sure his phone was on. This was all done for the benefit of the employees. My thinking was that if they had a problem they could tell me before I left, otherwise they would know when I was coming back and that I expected my son to act responsibly. It may have helped that my son can initiate and carry on an interesting conversation with the average 18 y.o. so he may have made their shift feel faster. But I shouldn’t have to do any of this, it’s ridiculous.
Ps wonder if the legoland age policy gets them to sell more tickets.
Lego is particularly bad about this. They have an in-store event every month that is for ages 6 and up. My 5-year-old is very capable of building the toys, but in order to register you have to enter their birthdate online! I asked why, and the employee said that it’s because the kits they use are labeled “ages 6-8.” As though that is an exact science– a child who is 5-and-a-half can’t handle them but after their birthday they can suddenly add wheels to a little plastic car.
“Children under the age of 12 are not allowed to be unattended in the store”
I’m guessing this rule has more to do with possible discipline problems with young children more so than safety concerns. Same reason why young children are not allowed to use elevators unattended. Because the little devils might horse around by pressing all of the floor buttons which would jam up the elevator. But when a parent complains about their 11-year-old kid not being able to browse unattended in the store or use the elevator, a store employee will chalk it up to “safety of the child” as to not imply to the parent that their kid is too immature and bratty to be left unattended in the store or elevator.
But 17 and under not being allowed unattended in the Toronto store? Now that’s ridiculous.
“But 17 and under not being allowed unattended in the Toronto store? Now thatâ€™s ridiculous.”
To continue on your explanation, teens 14-17 are a major problem when it comes to shoplifting and vandalism.
But in order to not offend the parents of the little criminals store employees will say it’s for the children’s safety.
Interesting Dan. Back in the summer of 1965, it was my first year mowing the lawn and I was 9. My cousin Patty, who lived next door, turned 9-years-old that summer and she also had to mow the lawn to earn her allowance. Well on a hot, blistering day in July of that year, my parents took both Patty and me to see “The Sound of Music”. The theater was in a shopping mall and before the movie started we were sitting in a garden center where they sold lawn mowers and I remember Patty and I just begging my mom and dad to chip in with her parents to purchase a riding mower! No such luck…..LOL.
So is the 18-year-old gonna assure that his 17-year-old friend will not steal because he’s so much more mature? Because he reached that magical age of 18 when he all of a sudden became enlightened? I doubt it.
Is it just me, or is the Mid-Atlantic the absolute worst region for this kind of ridiculousness?
@Jessica, our public library is just as bad about this. They sponsor a free Lego event, which is a fun and fabulous idea. But they are STRICT about forbidding my 4-year-old from playing with the small Legos. He MUST play with the Duplos. Why? They’re worried about a choking hazard. Apparently preschoolers are just as prone to shoving random objects into their mouths as their 7-month-old siblings. This habit/urge goes away on the fifth birthday. Who knew?
Something I’ve heard about, and experienced to a certain degree, is scrutiny of adult customers coming in w/o a kid, despite the fact that the company has marketed to collectors for decades. There’s a location at one of the local malls that I usually take a look through when I’m around, and someone always asks if I want “help” within a few seconds. It’s a small enough store that they probably do the same thing to everybody.
The first time I sent my child to walk to the corner store (a few blocks away) by himself to pick up milk, he was eight years old. And this was one of the proudest days of his life. I’ve never run into any issues, but I’m sad that what could be a memorable and important moment in a kids life could end up being memorable for the wrong reason with trauma of the cops being involved. I do understand there may be behavioral issues or even theft issues with children, but I don’t believe profiling is any more moral with a child than it is with an adult. If a kid can’t behave herself or is caught stealing then by all means, take appropriate action, but let’s give them a shot. My oldest is very responsible and well behaved and although naturally mistakes are not beneath him, I would trust him just about anywhere to be on his best behavior. My daughter on the other hand, I wouldn’t leave for ten minutes in a store on her own, but that’s something only I (and other family members) know about my children and not people who have never met them before. Give the kids a shot at being independent and responsible and if an issue arises, deal with it then and appropriately.
This might discouraged kids from spending their allowance at their stores. I certainly wouldn’t spend my money at store that more interested in my age than my money.
@JohnB I know that, you know that, but some brainless corporate lawyer or clerk?
A novel legal tactic might be to state that if Legos endanger the welfare of a child, why are they allowed to be sold to anyone? Children play with these daily, do they not know the risks? Obviously there is callous disregard to the welfare of children, and no corporation should be allowed to continue to operate in such a manner.
Whatever she does, I hope it doesn’t involve a plea agreement. Not all of us can be as stubborn as I, but it would help if some were.
There is a big leap from not allowing the child in the store without a guardian, to calling the police. They can boot the kid out if they don’t like him in there. But involving the police is vindictive and really nasty way to treat your customers. Lego does far to much to create ill will with the public.
What next? I think the real problem is the store employees do not want to be responsible for watching the child, but, of course, a well behaved child of ten and above does not need to be watched all the time.
When I was about ten years old I used to ride my bike (It was about three to five blocks, I think.) by myself to Grants to shop by myself.
I learned to be independent, and I grew up feeling comfortable doing things by myself when I could not find someone to go with me. If I did find someone to go with me, that someone would usually be another child.
So, if I were to want to do a fun date with a gal to include a trip to Legoland, I would not be able to do so unless it’s a specified Adult-Only Night. That’s lame, insulting, and somewhat fear-inducing. The latter due to the implication that simply existing makes me a predator worthy of being arrested.
Hooray for @Dan Quigley! That’s the way it’s supposed to work. Freak accident, mature response from a 10-year-old. The only way to learn to act like an adult is to act like an adult.
With regard to the LEGO store, this is insanity. But what is most compelling is that there are no posted signs or a stated policy. It seems to be done on an ad hoc basis. If the LEGO store has a policy, they should be required to post it.
“Please note: Children 17 and under must be accompanied by an adult supervisor 18 years of age or older. Adults (18+) will not be admitted without a child, with the exception of Adult Only Nights.”
So 17 is too young???? But an 18 year old is considered an “adult”? By that reasoning, someone who turns 18 in 2 hours, is still “too young”, and not an “adult”. The ignorance and stupidity of people. It’s not about the age, it’s about LIABILITY, not about the “welfare of the child”. Basically, they don’t want to get sued by parents. In the eyes of the law, 18 is the legal age of adulthood. Stupid. Newsflash, 20 somethings are still kids, mentally. Not much different than a teen. My 10 year old is smarter and more mature than some 20 year olds I know. lol
How old the child is masks what gender is being over-protected.
Jessica: I will NEVER enter my child’s actual birthdate online unless it’s a secure medical or government portal. When my soc. sec. # was stolen last year (always been cagey with it- no idea who got hacked), they didn’t HAVE the correct birthdate, because I never enter it for myself online, and have had no issues after years of doing this for myself or kids (for business “birthday” clubs, it’s nice to get those things spaced out throughout the year)! Unless it’s for a school (who ought to know how to keep this info secure), for daycamps etc., I use the month and the 1st day of the month, for age purposes. Honestly, if your child is ready and well-behaved, no one will know or care if you age your son up a bit for Legos (parents of gifted kids are used to “aging them up” when necessary).
Lightbright: since you’re dealing with librarians, ostensibly educated people, I would pull up and present a bunch of developmental material by educators and pediatricians. Along with a nicely written letter to the Library director (mentioning that you could go to the local newspaper editor with it) about the choice between infantilizing children and providing them with enriching experiences.
Shawn D.: this asinine Legoland policy also means that single adults who work at children’s museums and want to visit a Legoland while on vacation are turned away (true story; happened to a female acquaintance of mine).
just asinine. I have a 10 yr old & I feel that if a parent thinks their child is responsible enough to be in the store by them selves it’s fine. I do live in fear when my boys are not with me, not because I think something will happen to them, but because some nosy nelly will call the authorities & cause a lot of unnecessary intervention.
What is most strange about this is that Legos are Danish and kids are left alone AS BABIES in Denmark!
Is this unattended “shopping alone”, or free child care?
It is one thing if the child was browsing alone for 10 minutes before the parent showed up, but another thing if they were left alone for an hour or two. How long it too long? It depends. What was the plan if the child became bored? Use their mobile telephone? Seek the parent? Find a bench and read a book? Walk home alone?
But arrested? Overkill.
It’s one thing, if there is a posted sign, to contact the parent and have them either take the child out of the store or stay with them. It’s another thing to call the police.
Lenore, NYC prohibits age discrimination in public places such as stores,
If a place wants to discriminate by age, they have to apply for exemption and have a really good reason, e.g. like the Frick Collection,
I suspect that it is not even fully legal to ban shoppers under any age without a chaperone, as the Rockefeller Center Lego store seems to have done. Did they have any comment on this?
@lollipoplover that was my question too – how did they know how old the kid was? One of my kids looks older than his age, one looks younger. Sad that they are policing to that extent.
@Andrew my kids could easily spend an hour or more actively shopping and deciding in a Lego store. Last time we went to one I nearly lost my will to live it took so long.
My dad would have done the same….but once I got home I would have got a lecture about clearing the space by walking it and looking into the grass.
A 10 year old isn’t “left unattended “, When they are shopping alone. They are a customer, shopping like everyone else. There’s no reason for managers to keep an eye on them or wonder where a parent is, they’re 10, not babies. Who sees a 10 year old and thinks their parents abandoned them in the store?
I can’t fathom any reasonable situation for arresting a parent because their kids shopped solo, not even if they’re shopping for 3 hours . I can’t even count the number of stores that I shopped alone in at 10. I took myself to most of them as well. My kids shopped solo at 10. If the store has an age policy, they can ask the person to leave. They wouldn’t arrest a 25 year old that went into the store, they’d just tell them the policy and have them leave.
Why doesn’t lego just issue a statement that all groups must include 2-5 people, at least one under the age of 17 and at least one over the age of 18. All groups must include at least one female and one male however the male may not be over the age of 18. Groups will be given hand stamps at the door identifying them with their party. There will also be a mandatory background check on all adults in the party before any of the party is admitted into the store. Oh, and let’s take pics of all the kids to compare with the national missing children’s data base. We can’t be too safe after all.
Ok, I’m done rambling now…
A lot of people here are filling in details that aren’t in the original story.
For example, blaming the Lego store or their corporate overlords. There’s nothing in the story that suggests Lego did anything but operate a store in the mall. Nothing about them singling out this kid, or applying any age limits, or calling the cops. (My guess, and I’ll repeat that everything that follows is GUESSWORK, is that mall security called the cops because they couldn’t find the kid’s mother, and the cops decided to issue a summons based on either the difficulty in locating her, or the actions she took after being contacted.)
If your young’un is old enough to roam the mall… that is, to be given free rein with a plan for collecting them and taking them home, that’s one thing. Good for you (and them). If the plan is “stay here in this store while I go do something else without you”, then that kid is not yet old enough to roam the mall and you’re using a store for something other than as a store, whether you admit it or not. You’re expecting that store’s employees to keep your kid safe and entertained. If you do this, you’re imposing on the store’s employees, who may or may not gladly embrace this duty. (This is, of course, for those familiar with the story, what happened to Adam Walsh… he was abandoned at a department store videogame display, and the store’s staff declined to take responsibility for him.)
Back to the original point: If you’re going to imagine details that aren’t in the original store, you can insert whatever details you want, including details that would make arresting the mom ENTIRELY reasonable. Y’all is imagining that the kid was briefly left in the store, where he acted appropriately to staff and customers… but if you imagine that he was left for hours, and he was disruptive and unruly, chasing actual customers out of the store… so they kicked him out, but he kept coming back in. When mall security called mom and asked her to come pick up the kid, she told them to practice some physically challenging sex acts with each other… then calling the cops seems reasonable and their decision to issue a summons doesn’t look out of place, either. The wiser course is to refrain from making decisions on insufficient information. (Sign: If only American voters did the same… not only do you get better candidates (hopefully), but the TV doesn’t have attack ad after attack ad for six months out of every two years. A guy can dream, right? Attack ads are run incessantly because they WORK. Ugh)
Ok, let’s consider the illogic:
If you are 17 years old, and about to turn 18, you need to have two other friends with you in order to go to the Lego store. One who will remain under 18 the entire time of your visit, and one who is already 18. Because if you’re almost 18, you’re not allowed in without the 18-yr-old, and if you’re 18 you’re not allowed in without someone less than 18.
On second thought, maybe an enterprising high-school-senior (age 18+) could have a lucrative little business hiring themselves out as the token adult that must be present for anyone younger than themselves to enter. And spare Mommy the nuisance of having to hang around in the Lego store.
On third thought, maybe it’s just more fun to have your 21-yr-old friend buy you and your friends a 6-pack and call it a day.
@Troutwaxer even if the kid stayed long, worker should have asked the kid to leave. If the kid did not left after being asked, security should have asked the kid to leave. If the kid did not left, then it is reasonable to keep the kid, call parent and complain to parent.
Unless mom attacked worker or security, arresting her for kid long in store is utterly unreasonable.
The charge of endangering welfare of kid is totally unreasonable and lego policy is completely irrelevant to it.
When I was a kid in my little town, the deal with retail was simple.
If you’re old enough (well behaved enough) to be in the store without ticking off the storekeeper(s), then you’re old enough to be in the store.
Thing is, we’d often check out a thing at 9 or 10, and come back and buy it at 11.
Kids scoping products.
We talked product all the time. In the schoolyard, in the lunch room, after school, and sometimes in the actual stores themselves.
Retailers understood this. It was good business.
A kid who became a serious collector was money in the bank.
A kid who was old enough to “scope” product was old enough to become a customer.
A um……..respected customer. Imagine.
So now we have big bully corp, scared of its own shadow, scared witless about liability – bringing in the police state to shut down kids’ scope (should they be so lucky to escape the umbrella.)
And sadly….kids just don’t have the perspective that even allows them a healthy outrage at the infantilization.
Big business (of a thousand stripes) makes good money off that infantilization.
And the kids pay the price. Now and later.
By the way – store scoping was just such a luscious occupation granted by freedom. Luved it to bits.
LEGOLAND is owned and operated by Merlin Entertainment, not LEGO.
This is ridiculous. While my son was still 10, he was just months away from earning his second degree black belt in Taekwondo, and he was a Boy Scout trained in first aid and emergency response. Also, it wasn’t uncommon for him to have hundreds of dollars of his own money to spend on LEGO and other hobbies.
The closest LEGO store to me is in a mall that doesn’t allow unaccompanied minors due to problems they’ve had with gangs in the past. I can understand that and they are up front about the policy. I would understand if the LEGO store in that mall had a problem with a minor being unattended because it is against mall policy. However, to charge a parent with child endangerment for leaving a 10 year old unattended is ridiculous. Granted, most ten year olds aren’t second degree black belts, but even without the self defense training that my son has had it is still possible for a boy or girl that age to be able to take care of themselves in a public place like a mall.
Thankfully the two closest stores my son visits on his own welcome well behaved kids (one is a comic/gaming store, the other a collectible toy resale shop).
He was left in the store for 2 hours…. http://www.whec.com/news/deputies-pittford-mom-accused-leaving-child-alone-store/4531793/
When my brother and I were little kids, our mom would give us each a dime once a week and let us walk to the Ben Franklin about a mile away, where we would blow our allowance on candy. (You could get a lot of candy for ten cents back in the old days.) No one ever looked askance at two little kids out walking and shopping without adult supervision; it was a perfectly normal everyday occurrence. Any mother allowing such shenanigans nowadays risks being arrested and having her kids put in foster care.
A similar thing happened to me in a mall in Los Angeles about eight years ago. A security guard approached me and my group and told us we had to be shopping at all times and asked where our parents were. The whole encounter was very intimidating, and my dad ended up lodging a complaint, to which the response was a claim to fear for children’s safety.
It seems things just keep getting worse.
I am trying to think what would be the best way in handling this. Parents make mistakes as well as children. If mom was shopping at another store and her child say about 10 years old asked her if he or she could go to the leggo store. Mom says yes but I want to go with you to see if there are any restrictions such as age that are posted. Just to be safe, wouldn’t it be best if mom talked to the manager and get their OK. after explaining to them that they are responsible and mom would be back in one hour. If the manager says OK, no problem. If not, get a good explanation of why they can’t. If, on the other hand that the child enters the store without mom, then that is another story. Then I feel it is not OK. If something happened at the store, who then is responsible? If the manager says OK, then I feel he is responsible as far as watching what the child is doing. After an hour, mom picks up child. Everything is fine.
If mom walked with her child to the store and a sign was posted of being underage not being by themselves, then mom and child both enter the store. Again, everything is OK. By the way it could be dad is involved.
Lets paint another scenario. A child entering the store themselves at being underage, I feel is not the best interest. There is absolutely no reason why security should be called and let the manager just keep an eyeon the child until mom takes him or her home or wherever. All this crap gets out of hand and guess who gets arrested? There is no reason of this whatsoever. I feel that law enforcement gets out of hand and punishes mom or dad. Both mom and child are taken to the police station and if mom is booked, the child may be put in another room being watched. If mom is booked, now she has a record. UNFAIR!! Now, everything gets sticky.
I already left a reply but this I want to add. When I was 9 or 10, my mom gave me money to go to the store on the corner to get her cigarettes and buy something for yourself with the change. I always bought a candy bar or soda and if I had enough change, I sometimes by a chocolate malt. Everyday my mother would ask me to by her cigarettes. Now, I am underage but then, the merchant didn’t care. As a matter of fact, there were probably no laws. This was in 1947. I always went to the store because I always bought a treat. I couldn’t wait until mom wanted me to get cigarettes for her. 🙂 Sometimes,, it was in the evening and would be dark outside. I wasn’t afraid even though I lived in a bad neighborhood. Who would pick on a child anyway? It was like Pavlov’s theory, Like a dog, when he does something like sit, rollover, etc., you always gave a treat. It kind of works similar to humans but at an earlier age. You know there is a treat for buying mom cigarettes. ha ha.
@Tim — as @Jessica pointed out…two hours is nothing in a lego store. Especially for a kid who is trying to decide. Heck, my 11 year old daughter could spend that long at the dollar store trying to decide what to buy. It’s a whole new experience for them. Decisions are hard. I’d be curious how long adults typically spend at the lego store — especially trying to find something for a lego enthusiast.
I’ve never been to a lego store but I’d bet that they have displays of assembled product as well as a spot with legos available for play…stores are designed to invite customers to linger because the longer they are in the store the more money they are likely to spend.
Possible now that rather than creating a lifelong customer, they’ve turned one away for good.
“Iâ€™ve never been to a lego store but Iâ€™d bet that they have displays of assembled product as well as a spot with legos available for playâ€¦”
There’s very little of the former, and it’s mostly window display that’s visible from outside the store. There’s close to zero of the latter.
Mall rent is fairly expensive per square foot. Displays of assembled kits and the room for people to stand around and admire them are non-productive. What there is, however, is lots of shelves with boxes displaying what the assembled kit looks like… that is, the same thing that is available in a department store, except that the Lego store has the complete line, and the department store probably skips the most expensive kits and less-popular products… for example, few department stores will have Mindstorms or the Creators Collection.
Unrelated true story: The local Target store was where they caught a fellow running a massive scam. What he was doing was printing bar code stickers for low-cost Lego sets, then walking into department stores and putting the bar code stickers over the real bar codes on expensive kits, then taking it all through the checkout. He’d buy $119.99 kits for $14.99, then take them home and put them on eBay for close to real price… it was a million-dollar operation. The store clerks didn’t know that the kits the guy had should have been coming up much more expensive, and the loss-prevention team was looking for shoplifters, not paying customers. This meant that regionally, it was not unusual for department stores to be out-of-stock on expensive Lego kits.
Oops. I was allowed to go, by myself, from our suburb to downtown Hartford, CT on the bus to go Christmas shopping. Didn’t tell my parents which stores, because I didn’t know until I got there. Had to be about 12, but I was very short and shrimpy, so anyone could have thought I was 9. This was the ’50’s. But both of my parents had served in the battle zones of WWII, so maybe they didn’t worry about hypothetical dangers.
hey, guys! Coleco is holding an expo in Edison NJ!! August 5-6 come join in the fun!!
Girl scouts will be there giving badges just for showing up! There will be special guests (including Sophie Reynolds from the Disney Channel), retro gaming, free arcade play, a cosplay contest, collectibles, give aways, and much much more!! Come join in the fun and get your tickets now!!!
Ive been sitting on this…how did they even know how old he was? When i was ten, i was tall enough to appear older. Ive met kids who looked both older and younger than their actual age. And, to my knowledge, most minors under fourteen (the minimum work age in most of the states) dont have id’s other than what their school might give them. So its nearly impossible unless you work with kids all the time to guess their age correctly (and even then its iffy). This is merely a feel-good policy.
“Ive been sitting on thisâ€¦how did they even know how old he was?”
By asking him? Why do they care how old he is?
Oh sheez. It does sound like a typical American craziness…. I’m not surprised LEGOLAND is run by something other than Lego itself. Can’t imagine the Danes restricting their customers like that.
Off-topic, Lenore: “askance” < I see that word so rarely, I now have 'Strangers in the night/school' stuck in my head – I can only assume you used that word in the lyrics…!
Once again I’ll point out that starting when I was 9 my Mom put me on a two hour train ride *by myself* every other Friday after school to visit my father and my father put me on another one back on the following Sunday night. I sometimes arrived at Trenton train station in Trenton, NJ (anyone been there? In the 1970s?) and my father didn’t arrive for another 30-45 minutes because he got caught in traffic or something. I sat by myself in the waiting room. That was where I first saw a transvestite prostitute.
This next story is more relevant to the mall situation, but it pales in comparison. starting when I was 10 my mother would drop me and my best friend off at the mall in the early evening and would pick us up 2-3 hours later. In the meantime we would see a movie, eat some pizza and go look in all our favorite shops.
Wow! It’s a wonder we survived. I was 11 when I had a paper route and would ride my bike downtown to turn in my collection money then go to the book store on Saturday mornings. My parents were no where around, obviously, and I’m sure thought nothing of letting me do this.
I can’t imagine not letting my children shop by themselves when they were this age and older. I raised them to be responsible and resilient. If a store had a problem with this, I would have had a problem with that store and ceased to do business with them.
It’s not the passage of time that causes us to become more mature, more capable, and more demanding of being left to our own supervision.
So the fact that one person, at age 10, is fully capable of handling themself does not imply that all 10-year-olds are, as well.
There’s a qualitative difference between allowing your child to go to the mall alone, shop alone, and generally manage their own time, on the one hand, and taking your child to a specific store in the mall and saying “stay here until I come back to get you.”
My kid was capable of this from an early age (I started mine at around 4 or 5, going to the counter in a fast-food place, money in hand, to order extra food or dessert, by the time she was 10 she could have been left at the mall with a “meet me at this time at this place” and she would have been fine… if she’d had any interest in any of the stores in the mall at the time.
There’s an argument to be made that a single mom SHOULD leave a young son in a different store while popping down to, say, a Victoria’s Secret store; having a very young man underfoot in that store might make other customers’ uncomfortable, even if mom is fine with having Junior in a store full of dainty unmentionables and Junior is quite well-behaved. But that’s a different discussion.
I think Ms. Skenazy put a spin on this that might not be justified, by saying that the arrest was because the boy in question was “allowed to shop” in the Lego Store. I strongly suspect that this is NOT the issue… if the boy had come in, looked at all the cool products, and left (like however many thousands of other browsers) or come in, picked out something he could afford, taken it to the counter, paid for it, and left (like however many thousands of other customers) then… nothing happens. Something was different THIS time, and it (I’m guessing) it had nothing to do with being “allowed to shop” at the store unsupervised… something that was more like “I’m dumping you here until I get back, even though you aren’t yet mature enough to roam this mall alone.” Something about THIS visit by THIS boy and the actions of THIS parent pushed it over the line into “something needs to be done about this”.
Ugh! I’m traveling right now with my two 10yos, and they certainly shop (and do many other things) alone! Even in foreign countries where they don’t speak the local language.
Interestingly, every time we go to leave the cruise ship, they hold back my eldest / smallest kid and demand to know where her mother is. (We aren’t the same race.) The odd thing is that they don’t do this to my younger kid. Granted, the younger kid is taller, but she doesn’t look more than her 10yo, I don’t think. I may ask the ship people how old a kid has to be to leave without a parent. (They do let the kids back in without the parent.)
James, thats my point. Given that not all kids look their age, how did they even guess it would be prudent to question him?
“thats my point. Given that not all kids look their age, how did they even guess it would be prudent to question him?”
They didn’t spot him walking into the store, say to themselves “say, that kid looks pretty young, let’s grill him about himself and his family.” He was in the store for TWO HOURS and then the police were somehow involved.
They didn’t hassle him because he looked too young to be in the store by himself. They hassled him because, at some point, he acted too young to be in the store by himself.
Imagine this entirely imaginary on my part dialogue:
Employee: You’ve been here for over an hour. Ya gonna buy anything?
Employee: OK, then. You’ve had time to see everything we’ve got. Time for you to move along.
Kid: My mommy said not to leave the store until she got back.
Employee: Well, yer gonna haveta meet her someplace else.
Kid: No! Mommy said…
Employee: I don’t care what mommy said. If yer here to buy something, buy it. If yer not, move along. Have ya seen the video game store down the concourse? Go hang out in their store.
Kid: No, I’m staying here.
Employee. No, yer not. (calls mall security).
Kid: (stony silence)
Rentacop: What’s the deal here?
Employee: Kid here won’t go.
Renatacop: OK, son, it’s time for you to go.
Kid: My mommy says […]
Rentacop: Ok, let’s call her.
Rentacop: OK then. (calls real cops)
Now, outside of the brilliant lyrical yet realistic prose of the dialog, did you notice that at no point does an employee know or care how old the kid is? In fact, at no point in the story did the writer convey anything to the reader about the kid’s age, either in actuality or appearance. It’s not integral to the story.
Now, at some point, the actual cops would have asked either the kid or the kid’s mother how old he actually was, and it would be in the police report, but it’s got nothing to do with anything, except that the fact that he is a minor is a required element of the crime cited.
So, since his actual age has nothing to do with anything, the age he looked has nothing to do with anything.
ABSOLUTELY TRUE STORY:
Two young Oklahoma boys rode their horses from Frederick to New York City in 1910 to greet former President Theodore Roosevelt when he returned from a safari in Africa and then drove a new car home.
It was an exciting adventure for Louis, 10, and Temple Abernathy, 6, and probably raised a few eyebrows even in that time of early self-reliance. But their Tillman County neighbors probably weren’t particularly surprised. It wasn’t the first adventure for Louis, known as Bud, and Temple;………
READ MORE: http://www.tulsaworld.com/archives/only-in-oklahoma-abernathy-boys-shared-many-adventures/article_5840c654-be95-5ca7-8fb0-6ac5542005b8.html
@James Pollock No part of your story suggest child endangering – the actual charge – the actually most serious damaging part of story.
10 years old are big enough to transport themselves in public buses, go to stores, leAve them and wait for mom outside store if kicked out.
“10 years old are big enough to transport themselves in public buses, go to stores, leAve them and wait for mom outside store if kicked out.”
No. Many are. Most even. Nearly all, maybe. But not, apparently, this one.
I concur with the statements about how long one can spend in a LEGO store looking at things.
I am an adult LEGO fan and I have no problems spending ages in various LEGO retailers looking at product. There are times I have spent 2 hours or more at the local LEGO retail store. Kids would probably spend just as much time there (even more so if they have money to spend).
I can see plenty of situations where an unsupervised kid could cause trouble in a LEGO store. Kids will mess up the build-a-minifig bins, the pick-a-brick wall and other things all day long. Not to mention all the sets on the shelves (and things like the little blind-pack bags of Minifigures and things). Should the LEGO store employees have talked to the kid? Yes. Should they have contacted mall staff when it was clear the kid wasn’t supervised and didn’t know where their mom was? (and there was the possibility the kid had gotten lost or run away from their mom or something) Probably. Should the cops have gotten involved? Hell no.
Get the cops involved if theft or damage to items in the store has occurred but leaving the kid alone in the store to browse shouldn’t be a crime or a police matter.
@James Pollock Where you have apparently from? There is nothing apparent in the story that suggest so.
“you can insert whatever details you want, including details that would make arresting the mom ENTIRELY reasonable”
Nope, sorry James, your cover is blown. You’re a certified helicopter. Whatever details you want to insert about the kid being unruly or disruptive should result in the kid, not the mom, being arrested.
You might as well imagine the kid was starting fights, damaging or stealing property, or even trying to kill someone. In that case, would you still have the mom arrested? Nope, juvenile laws are there for a reason. This story is clearly about the mom’s unjust arrest, not the kid. The mom wasn’t even there. Stop filling in details about the kid or the store.
I was young before, I’ve caused a ruckus at places before. They simply kicked me out and called my parents. Nobody got arrested, because no laws were broken. End of story. Why couldn’t the Lego store simply kick the kid out to the main mall area if he truly was unruly? Or did they simply kick him out because he was 11 and not 12? Is that one year going to really make a difference? Is the Lego Store going to start a ban on physically or mentally disabled adults too because they don’t want to babysit them? At what point do you draw the line between Lego Store policy and age discrimination? Kids can be unruly at schools, parks, county fairs, and libraries too. Might as well call the cops on mom when that happens too, right James Pollock? Because we want to make the teacher’s lives a little easier?
A helicopter is someone who screams danger or endangerment at every environment or situation that isn’t double-padded, air conditioned, and under constant armed guard. You sir, are clearly batting for the other team and not free range parenting.
“Where you have apparently from?”
“‘you can insert whatever details you want, including details that would make arresting the mom ENTIRELY reasonableâ€”
Whatever details you want to insert about the kid being unruly or disruptive should result in the kid, not the mom, being arrested. ”
I will accept your challenge.
Here are the details which are ENTIRELY of my own creation and are not in any way claimed or represented as being true or actually representative of objective reality (This is spelled out because you, Mike Tang, seem to struggle with this concept a touch, by which I mean “pretty much every time you write something about me or something I wrote.”):
1. The store employee asked the kid why he was still in the store after two hours.
2. The kid answers “My mom told me to stay here while she turns enough tricks to score us some meth.”
Mike Tang solution: Arrest this child.
1. The store employee asked the kid why he was still in the store after two hours.
2. The kid answers “Mom and her gang are busy casing the the mall bank branch because they’re going to rob it tomorrow. Tomorrow, I’m going to be in this store, and buy one of those, and one of those, and one of those…”
Mike Tang solution: Arrest this child.
1. The store is briefly closing for a meal break.
2. There’s a kid in the store.
Mike Tang solution: Arrest this child.
1. A one-year-old infant becomes unruly and disruptive in the store, because diaper? Hungry? Too cold? Whatever, the kid is wailing at 130 decibels in a tiny enclosed space.
2. A store employee asks the mother to take her infant outside.
Mike Tang solution: Arrest this child.
1. Mother sets fire to the Lego Store, because her ex works there. Her 10-year-old child is also in the store when the fire alarm goes off.
2. The child panics, runs away from mom, and triggers a panic amongst the rest of the crowd in the store. The child, along with three others, are trampled to death in the resulting chaos.
Mike Tang solution: Arrest this (dead) child..
So… In Mike-Tang-World, we should arrest children for being neglected or abandoned by their parents? That is your position? Sadly, it probably is.
“The mom wasnâ€™t even there.”
Uh, yeah. That’s what she was cited for.
” Stop filling in details about the kid or the store.”
Yes, sir. That was my point. The story has literally NO details about the kid, or the store, except that he’s 10, and the store he was found in was a Lego store. NOTHING else about either one, and nothing at all about what actions, if any, either one took leading to the arrest and citation of the mother.
You then went on to invent your own details about what happened (and, amazingly, also got the ONE fact we have about this kid wrong.)
* “Why couldnâ€™t the Lego store simply kick the kid out to the main mall area if he truly was unruly?”
There’s nothing that says he was being unruly. YOU invented that detail.
* “did they simply kick him out because he was 11 and not 12?”
He was 10. There’s nothing in the story that says he was kicked out. YOU invented that detail.
* “Is the Lego Store going to start a ban on physically or mentally disabled adults too because they donâ€™t want to babysit them?”
No. Because YOU are trying to invent this detail. And by using “too” in the sentence, you imply that there’s a ban on anything in the Lego Store. Which is, of course, a detail invented by YOU.
*”At what point do you draw the line between Lego Store policy and age discrimination?”
There’s no Lego Store policy in this story. Yet another detail YOU want to insert. Perhaps you could quote some Lego Store policy that ACTUALLY EXISTS, and we could go from there?
“Kids can be unruly at schools, parks, county fairs, and libraries too.”
True enough. Not relevant to the current discussion, but at least not entirely your imagination, for a nice change.
“Might as well call the cops on mom when that happens too, right James Pollock?”
Feel free to quote me (using words I actually wrote) saying anything even remotely like this.
I will accept your failure to do so as your confession that you are a raving loon, unhinged from reality..
>I was young before, Iâ€™ve caused a ruckus at places before.
While the first part may have changed, I’m not confident about the second.
I was responding to your comment that:
“Yâ€™all is imagining that the kid was briefly left in the store, where he acted appropriately to staff and customersâ€¦ but if you imagine that he was left for hours, and he was disruptive and unruly, chasing actual customers out of the storeâ€¦ ”
So yes, if that was the case, the kid was causing the disturbance, not the mother.
Do you not remember your own words? Seems like you like to like to attack me personally because I hurt your warm fuzzy feelings.
Whatever the kid does in the store is on him. Whatever the mom does after she left is on her. You’re the raving loon who likes to put words in other people’s mouths.
â€œMy mom told me to stay here while she turns enough tricks to score us some meth.â€
Really? That’s the best you could come up with? Or are you equating mom shopping at another store to the same level of crime as selling drugs or setting fires or robbing banks!
“In Mike-Tang-World, we should arrest children for being neglected or abandoned by their parents?”
Look up the word abandoned in a dictionary you illiterate scum. Here it is for you “having been deserted or cast off.”
If 2 hours alone is the equivalent of abandoned in your world, then that’s even more evidence you don’t belong here. Please just come out of the closet and admit you’re a helicopter.
So let me return the favor and paint a rosy picture of James Pollock’s world….
If the mom drops her kid off to a Harry Potter movie, easily over 2 hours, the mom should be arrested.
If the mom drops the kids off at school and the kid’s acting up, the teacher’s don’t want to babysit this kid, so call the cops that’s totally fine.
If the mom leaves the kids at home with enough food and water, and for whatever reason (fill in the blank) comes back after 2 hours, she should be arrested.
If the mom is clinically blind or has impaired vision, well, she can’t really keep an eye on her kids, so throw her in jail the second the kid is out of her womb.
Seriously, I wish Lenore would ban lunatics like you from here.
Me: “Feel free to quote me (using words I actually wrote) saying anything even remotely like this.
I will accept your failure to do so as your confession that you are a raving loon, unhinged from reality..”
Mr. Tang (random rantings and personal insults, but no quotes that are even remotely like what you prefer to imagine I said.)
Me again: I accept your confession, Mr. Tang.
Out of pity, I’m going to keep trying.
Here’s the deal: We don’t have nearly enough details to determine whether the arrest and citation in this case is an appropriate response to the events that led up to it. It’s possible that this particular arrest was a gross abuse of authority. It’s possible that it was entirely appropriate to the circumstances. We simply don’t know enough to tell.
Various people, not limited to you specifically, have inserted details in order to reach the conclusion they prefer to reach, as if those inserted details are known facts when they are nothing but supposition. I’ve counseled against this, by pointing out that, if a person wished to do so, they could insert details that would lead to an entirely different conclusion. A person of normal intelligence should be able to tell the difference between such a hypothetical person and the opinion I’ve actually expressed, on multiple occasions, in this thread; for some reason you are utterly incapable of it. I’m not sure if it’s because you have such an intense dislike for me that you cannot see things that are written in plain English, or if you struggle to understand plain English, but the truth is, I don’t really care why you choose to continue your ravings; they reflect poorly on you and not at all on me. Either way, you failed to quote me as saying anything like what you imagine my position to be, and therefore fail the challenge, and concede your inability to do so.
As promised, I accept your inability to do so as your confession as described previously. Good day, sir.
Out of pity, Iâ€™m going to keep trying.
Please don’t. A back and forth between a compulsive picker of nits and a person who, apparently, does not understand hypotheticals or anything not concrete-bound is the worst sort of back and forth. And I’m a law student, so I spent much of the last year watching annoying back and forths.
So sorry. Didn’t realize you were REQUIRED to read every word I write. Blink twice if the man standing behind you is holding a gun to your head…
As Reagan said – there you go again. I’m not required, but your comments tend to contain gems of wisdom, so I like to read them and look for the gems. The gems are likely to be few and far between when you are disputing with a madman who has already shown either an inability or lack of interest regarding responding to what you actually say.
Out of pity, Iâ€™m going to diagnose why you’re like this. Your parents never “abandoned” you enough and now as an adult you have this feeling of entitlement that the world must interpret laws the way you do. “Why? Because mommy said so, that’s why.”
You can’t defend your arguments without resorting to criticizing other parents’ parenting tactics or filling in blanks with your own made-up details. Yes, you’re correct, the story doesn’t contain every little detail. What color pants was the boy wearing? Did he have a watch on to tell time? Who cares! That’s not important, the story told you enough details to tell the audience the boy was not in danger.
Whatever insecurities you have about other parents leaving their children unsupervised is a poor reflection on your own childhood and your reason for existing on this forum. Go vouch for your dad-of-the-century award or legal-expert award on some other website, I’m not saying this mom’s parenting decision (or my own decisions) are the best that mankind’s ever come up with. I’m saying that they are not illegal.
Now, you want to talk legal speak, don’t you? Let me provide you with some legal authorities then on which I will base my personal crusade on to help all future parents wrongfully arrested win their cases!
Parham v. J.R. (1979) has ruled that â€œparentsâ€”who have traditional interests in and responsibility for the upbringing of the child â€“ retain the substantial, if not the dominant role in the decision, absent a finding in neglect or abuse,â€ and that â€œsimply because the decision of a parent is not agreeable to a child or because it involves risks does not automatically transfer the power to make that decision from the parents to some agency or officer of the State.â€
The Due Process Clause does not permit a State to infringe on the fundamental rights of parents to make childrearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a â€˜betterâ€™ decision could be made.â€ Troxel v. Granville (2000)
â€œThe fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child does not evaporate simply because they have not been model parentsâ€¦â€ Santosky v. Kramer (1982)
So if “The State of CA v Tang (2016)” needs to go to the U.S. Supreme Court in order to once-and-for-all legalize parents taking their eyes off their kid for a few moments, you can bet your last penny that’s going to be the road I take.
For all your lofty legal expertise, you don’t have any skin in this game. You said your children are all grown-up, so you’re off the hook already when it comes to paranoid policemen arresting parents who don’t deserve to be arrested. Must be nice not to have to worry about that. For the rest of us, this uphill battle will go on whether you like it or not.
“As Reagan said â€“ there you go again.”
Reagan was a decent actor, but a shitty president. He picked the wrong China for his “one-China policy” and now the U.S. is paying dearly for it.
But back to your comments, if you don’t like to read what I write, you’re more than welcome to click the X button at the top corner of your screen. Last I checked, I still have First Amendment rights, or do you want to take that away from me also?
I already accepted your confession, no need for further unhinged rantiness on your part, sir.
” Last I checked, I still have First Amendment rights, or do you want to take that away from me also?”
Kind of an odd comment for someone who wrote just yesterday that “I wish Lenore would ban lunatics like you from here.”
Is it your carefully-considered legal opinion that YOU have First Amendment rights, and I do not?
(I hate to tell you this, sir, but the First Amendment has absolutely nothing to do with your “right” to comment here. Nope. None whatsoever.)
On the other hand, you DO have a Constitutional right to remain silent, and advising you to consider using it is a public service..
“The gems are likely to be few and far between when you are disputing with a madman who has already shown either an inability or lack of interest regarding responding to what you actually say.”
I’ll freely concede this point. But doing so isn’t going to change anything.
Mr. Tang’s obsession with me… correction, Mr. Tang’s obsession with the imaginary construct in his head that he consistently confuses with me… amuses me, however slightly, and is likely to continue doing so.
“On the other hand, you DO have a Constitutional right to remain silent, and advising you to consider using it is a public service..”
I waive that right. And your advisement.
Please tell me which amendment contains this clause: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.”
History won’t change because you don’t like it.
Neither will laws, in this case curfew laws, which explicitly allow for minors to be alone before 10 pm, and for parents not to fear being arrested. “But James Pollock said that’s irrelevant.” But Mike Tang raises two fingers. Use your imagination there to fill in the blank.
“I waive that right. And your advisement.”
“Mike Tang raises two fingers. Use your imagination there to fill in the blank.”
Two thumbs up to you, too!
Lenore, seriously. THIS is what you want your comment section to be?
This is ridiculous! When I was in elementary school, many of the kids, myself included, walked home from school without adults, and stopped in at the corner store or the fire station to buy a Coke (southern for soda). Most were under 11. I did so regularly starting in the 3rd grade, and many started younger than that.
“many of the kids, myself included, walked home from school without adults, and stopped in at the corner store or the fire station to buy a Coke (southern for soda). Most were under 11.”
The problem isn’t that he was in the store. Approximately 0.0% of the commentary is that 10-year-olds should not be in stores generally, or stores of this type, unaccompanied. If he came in, browsed, perhaps made a purchase, and then left, approximately zero eyebrows would be moved into the raised position.
I base this assumption on the huge wave of arrests following unaccompanied children entering and patronizing stores which is not happening. Something about THIS kid’s visit (and extended stay) to THIS store, led to arrest of THIS parent.
I live not far from a large, suburban high school. A couple of blocks away from this large, suburban high school is a 7-11, which has a sign on the door limiting the number of high-school students permitted in the store at lunchtime on school days. I could choose to interpret this as “OMG! the Southland Corporation, parent of the 7-11 chain, no longer wants any business from teenagers, nationwide!”, or I could assume that there was some kind of a problem caused by too many students descending upon this particular store at lunchtime. Reminiscing about being allowed in convenience stores during my childhood isn’t really relevant to either one.
“Something about THIS kidâ€™s visit (and extended stay) to THIS store, led to arrest of THIS parent.”
Something about ___fill in the blank____ details courtesy of James Pollock’s vivid imagination.
“I could assume that there was some kind of a problem caused by too many students descending upon this particular store at lunchtime.”
More ___fill in the blank___ assumptions courtesy of James Pollock’s Hollywood script writing abilities.
Or perhaps James feels that store policies are allowed to violate age discrimination laws.
Or perhaps if I posted a big rosy sign that says:
JAMES POLLOCK NOT WELCOME ON FREE RANGE PARENTING WEBSITES
such as the one above, he would be arrested for criminal misdemeanor for violating random articulated sign.
“‘Something about THIS kidâ€™s visit (and extended stay) to THIS store, led to arrest of THIS parent.’
Something about ___fill in the blank____ details courtesy of James Pollockâ€™s vivid imagination. ”
Sir, my most vivid imaginings are but colorless shadows against the rich detail of the delusional state of mind you inhabit.
I can but revel in the reflection in the unrefined glory that is your incredible tapestry of unreality.
Well done, sir. Well done.