Want to Tattoo Your Child???

• Con_Alma

  It's considered endangering and is a third-degree felony...at least in this case of a one year old.
  
  http://www.cantonrep.com/news/crime/x1025055179/Police-Man-tattoos-tot
• se-alum

  

  What's wrong?? It adds character!!
• DeyDurkie5

  

  ccrunner609 wrote: What a total loser. Obviously a defective human that should be put to sleep like a bad dog.

  I mean it's not THAT bad...
• jmog

  He SHOULD be put in jail for tatooing a 1 year old.
• Con_Alma

  Maybe the "A" had meaning.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  jmog wrote: He SHOULD be put in jail for tatooing a 1 year old.

  Why?? it's a fucking tatoo, yeah it's wrong to put it on a 1 year old but jail time should not even be in the discussion
• Con_Alma

  Is it any different than piercing the ears of a one year old?
• jmog

  Seriously? In today's society where you can get in trouble for spanking a child for doing something wrong, you are saying he shouldn't get child abuse for tatooing a 1 year old?
  
  What about if he branded the kids arm like some teenagers/adults do? Would that have been a non-criminal offense in your mind too?
• eersandbeers

  DeyDurkie5 wrote:

  jmog wrote: He SHOULD be put in jail for tatooing a 1 year old.

  Why?? it's a fucking tatoo, yeah it's wrong to put it on a 1 year old but jail time should not even be in the discussion

  
  I disagree because the child did not make a conscious choice to receive a tattoo that is extremely difficult to remove. Not to mention, it could have harmful effects on a 1 year old.
  
  At minimum, that is child abuse.
• power i

  

  Con_Alma wrote: Is it any different than piercing the ears of a one year old?

  Good point.
• Upper90

  He obviously shouldn't be put to death.
  
  But, by all accounts, he broke the law. So, jail time certainly should be in the discussion...and it wasn't even his kid? Odd.
• jmog

  Con_Alma wrote: Is it any different than piercing the ears of a one year old?

  Yes.
  
  Down the road if the kid decides she doesn't want to have pierced ears she takes them out and the holes heal/close up.
  
  A tatoo is permanent.
  
  However, I don't believe 1 year olds should have their ears pierced either, they need to be older and make the decision themselves.
• Con_Alma

  I am not saying he should or shouldn't get anything. I was soliciting opinions.
  
  How different is piercing an infants ears when compared to this tiny letter tattooed on the child's rear?? I don't know. I am asking.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  jmog wrote: Seriously? In today's society where you can get in trouble for spanking a child for doing something wrong, you are saying he shouldn't get child abuse for tatooing a 1 year old?
  
  What about if he branded the kids arm like some teenagers/adults do? Would that have been a non-criminal offense in your mind too?

  two entirely different things and in the end of the day, the child isn't going to feel the pain of it because no one in the end remembers anything from when they were 1. To say he deserves jail time for this is absurd. He didn't physically abuse the child, he put a meaningful tatoo on him. Just because it seems like a crazy idea to you doesn't mean it's completely deserving of jail time, let alone getting put down like a dog
• Upper90

  Con_Alma wrote: Is it any different than piercing the ears of a one year old?

  Well, I would think so, yes.
  
  I mean, I find both practices ridiculous, but tattoos are different than piercings, IMO.
  
  I would imagine in both cases, though, that a 1 year old doesn't have the option of saying "no" to either practice.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  jmog wrote:

  Con_Alma wrote: Is it any different than piercing the ears of a one year old?

  Yes.
  
  Down the road if the kid decides she doesn't want to have pierced ears she takes them out and the holes heal/close up.
  
  A tatoo is permanent.
  
  However, I don't believe 1 year olds should have their ears pierced either, they need to be older and make the decision themselves.

  not really, if you leave the earrings in long enough, it is a lifelong hole. So I mean jail time there as well
• Con_Alma

  Jmog... We wouldn't pierce our daughter's ears either...and didn't.
  
  The question though relates to child endangering. Is the tattoo endangering because it's permanent?
• jmog

  DeyDurkie5 wrote:
  
  two entirely different things and in the end of the day, the child isn't going to feel the pain of it because no one in the end remembers anything from when they were 1. To say he deserves jail time for this is absurd. He didn't physically abuse the child, he put a meaningful tatoo on him. Just because it seems like a crazy idea to you doesn't mean it's completely deserving of jail time, let alone getting put down like a dog

  So jabbing a needle 1000s of times into a 1 year old isn't abuse? You do realize tattoos involve pain correct?
  
  By your logic that the kid won't remember it, well shoot, let me give a 1 year old cigarette burns in a cool pattern that has "meaning" since he won't remember the pain.
  
  Your argument of the child not remembering it is asinine.
• jmog

  Con_Alma wrote: Jmog... We wouldn't tattoo our daughters ears either...and didn't.
  
  The question though relates to child endangering. Is the tattoo endangering because it's permanent?

  Its endangering because its a needle being inserted into a 1 year old 1000s of times.
  
  Its painful, and it nearly can't be removed down the road.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  jmog wrote:

  DeyDurkie5 wrote:
  
  two entirely different things and in the end of the day, the child isn't going to feel the pain of it because no one in the end remembers anything from when they were 1. To say he deserves jail time for this is absurd. He didn't physically abuse the child, he put a meaningful tatoo on him. Just because it seems like a crazy idea to you doesn't mean it's completely deserving of jail time, let alone getting put down like a dog

  So jabbing a needle 1000s of times into a 1 year old isn't abuse? You do realize tattoos involve pain correct?
  
  By your logic that the kid won't remember it, well shoot, let me give a 1 year old cigarette burns in a cool pattern that has "meaning" since he won't remember the pain.
  
  Your argument of the child not remembering it is asinine.

  Listen I agree that it is fucked up to do, and I would never do it or condone it. I just don't agree that it is something punishable by jail time/death haha was it wrong and not common? yes of course, but in the end it's really not that bad as you make it out to be. Also you aren't getting jabbed with a needle a thousand times lol have you ever seen a tattoo being done? Plus, wasn't it an A?
• Con_Alma

  I see. I will be interested in watching this defense.
  
  I hope it doesn't create a precedent of some crazy nature.
• Swamp Fox

  The mere fact that we are discussing the act of tatooing a one year old child as a normal event that causes no harm because they don't remember what happened at one anyway, is perhaps a sign that society in general is headed in a very depressing direction. "Meaningful"??? To who? Certainly not the one year old. I would much rather read to my child than to read my child like he was a billboard.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  Swamp Fox wrote: The mere fact thaty we are discussing the act of tatooing a one year old child as a normal event that causes no harm because they don't remember what happened at one anyway, is perhaps a sign that society in general is headed in a very depressing direction. "Meaningful"??? To who? Certainly not the one year old.

  I'm not saying it's normal by any means...What I'm saying is that it's not child abuse, it's the same type of action as piercing the ear.
• Con_Alma

  Swamp Fox wrote: ... "Meaningful"??? To who? Certainly not the one year old.

  I hope you took my "meaningful" post as sarcasm if you were referencing it in your post for that's what it was meant to be.
• Apple

  

  Maybe doctors should go to jail for performing circumcisions... that's a permanent disfigurement on a child who has no say, (or memory) in the matter.