Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:18 PM
 
232 posts, read 152,009 times
Reputation: 76

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Hmmm, this is tricky. I don't see the issue in this particular case but as the mother pointed out:



What if it was sponge bob and the kid wanted it on his face and the parent consented?
Well. It is her child and he obviously knew what he wanted...I don't see why not. The government really needs to take a long walk off a short bridge when it comes to thinking they have any legal say so when it comes to a parents rights and their kids. I bet 1 day cps or police or someone is gonna mess with the wrong people and all hell will break loose. Now as a parent I would have had the common sense to say wait until your 16 or 17 to do this but again not my kid...so not my choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:20 PM
 
232 posts, read 152,009 times
Reputation: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
from the OP's linked story



Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
The law is stupid and goes against parental rights and should be challenged. Since when does getting a tattoo when a parent is present constitute a danger to the child? It doesn't. I know they should charge adults who get tattoos with harming themselves!!!! I mean why stop at telling parents what they can do with their child why not go all the way and tell adults they aren't allowed to get art on their skin?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:23 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,934,013 times
Reputation: 12828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dissent View Post
The law is stupid and goes against parental rights and should be challenged. Since when does getting a tattoo when a parent is present constitute a danger to the child? It doesn't. I know they should charge adults who get tattoos with harming themselves!!!! I mean why stop at telling parents what they can do with their child why not go all the way and tell adults they aren't allowed to get art on their skin?
Heavy metals in the ink are a danger. Why would any responsible parent willingly increase their child's direct exposure to heavy metals for something as optional as a tattoo? Isn't that why we have lead disclosures for older homes?

With freedom comes responsibility. YMMV
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:23 PM
 
232 posts, read 152,009 times
Reputation: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinny Puppy View Post
I have several tattoos and they are extremely painful, not to mention permanent. I consider this child abuse. No different than letting a kid drink liquor.
Shocker sir big government thinks its child abuse. I am seriously considering buying 100 acres building a home and just shutting the world out. home school the kids plant and slaughter our own food etc...you can't even smack yer kids butt in a store anymore without having the cops called or you being looked at weird. It was just 20 years ago I got my butt spanked good more than once and there was no weird looks there was none of that...I deserved it and my parents made sure it was taken care of. Now a days its the ole if you see something say something...the world has become so wrapped up with ratting on people when they aren't harming them or anyone else. If I wanna whip my kids I am gonna whip them I don't need anyone's permission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:24 PM
 
232 posts, read 152,009 times
Reputation: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Heavy metals in the ink are a danger.
Then why isn't tattooing outlawed? I have 4 tattoos my wife has 2 and we both plan on more. I have had no problems...also its the kid and his mother taking the risk. This is all about taking responsibility for our own actions. People need to live and let live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:28 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,934,013 times
Reputation: 12828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dissent View Post
Then why isn't tattooing outlawed? I have 4 tattoos my wife has 2 and we both plan on more. I have had no problems...also its the kid and his mother taking the risk. This is all about taking responsibility for our own actions. People need to live and let live.
You are an adult, your choice. The child does not know/understand the real long term health risk of heavy metal exposure.

Aren't the children already dumbed down enough? You want to add more heavy metals into their system under "live & let live"? Really?

http://www.autism.com/pro_research_metalexposure.asp

Note, this is a state law, not a federal one. Parents who want to brand their minor childen could move to a state where such restrictions do not exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:34 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
37,803 posts, read 41,013,481 times
Reputation: 62204
Why wasn't the tattoo parlor guy arrested? He should know the law since it was aimed at him. From the OP's link:

A 2010 law states: “It shall be unlawful for any person to tattoo the body of any person under the age of 18, except a physician or osteopath.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 12:39 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,934,013 times
Reputation: 12828
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
Why wasn't the tattoo parlor guy arrested? He should know the law since it was aimed at him. From the OP's link:

A 2010 law states: “It shall be unlawful for any person to tattoo the body of any person under the age of 18, except a physician or osteopath.”
last line of the OP's linked article:
Quote:
The artist who gave the tattoo is also under investigation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 01:52 PM
 
Location: Up in the air
19,112 posts, read 30,628,399 times
Reputation: 16395
No reputable artist would have tattooed a minor regardless of parental permission. I'm rather heavily tattooed and the parlors I go to wont even let a minor inside the shop, much less get tattooed. I refuse to do business with shops that allow minors inside.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2012, 02:39 PM
 
Location: TX
6,486 posts, read 6,388,858 times
Reputation: 2628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dissent View Post
Well. It is her child and he obviously knew what he wanted...I don't see why not.
Yeah, I remember when I was 10. I had it ALL figured out
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:37 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top