It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Enrique Gonzalez wanted his 7-year-old son to have a gang tattoo, like the many that adorn his own body. About that there is no dispute.
The question that a judge says she will decide Friday is whether placing a tattoo on a minor is a permanent and painful disfigurement worthy of the potential life sentence that comes with a mayhem conviction, or is it something less?
Are there other procedures children routinely undergo that are decidedly more painful and permanent?
Originally posted by jd140
That poor kid will always have a gang tattooed on his body because his dad was a moron.
Imagine how much pain that poor kid was in.
Life in prison just for torturing the poor boy.
The core of this case has to do with whether or not it should be a parent's right to decide whether their child can receive minor cosmetic surgical procedures such as ear-piercings or tattoos...which should not be illegal for a parent to decide for their child.
Originally posted by getreadyalreadySo, do we really want somebody other than the parents monitoring this stuff?
'look at my baby boy! Isn't he cute with the Mohawk and ear rings and tattoos? Honey, it's your turn to change his diaper.'
Originally posted by SquishyFishy
... It isnt like he beat the child, and i would bet it was his way of showing love to his child. He just values things differently than most people.