It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Georgia Mom Arrested for Allowing 10-Year-Old to Get Tattoo

page: 11
56
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I feel the law is the law unfortunately in this case. The issue though is not really with the kid and his Mother but rather the tattoo artist who did the work on a 10 year old kid and not asking how old is the kid and secondly then turning them away due to the age limit on this type of thing. Same as if a kid of 10 years old had to go into a store to buy smokes. The kid wants them but it is the storemans responsibility to uphold the law and not sell them to him / her




posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


Yeah but dude, that really does look like someone inexperienced with a tattoo gun just went and did that.

Almost gang initiation style, even though I do fully agree with your stance in the op!



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Submarines
Not only was I shocked, but I was speechless!

What shocked me even more was your post! I can't believe that you have a problem with the arrest of a mother who allowed a TEN YEAR OLD CHILD to be permanently tattooed.


Please tell me, someone, that I'm not the only one here that has a problem with this!


Yeah, really! Forget the 10,000 year+ history of human civilization and tribal peoples tattooing children as a right of passage and acceptance! Those damn Samoans as well, Tattooing children. What are they thinking!

[/end sarcasm]

I don't think we even need to mention laser tattoo removal; that tattoos are NOT permanent with modern technology.

Thanks for being ignorant!



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:28 PM
link   
I'm curious, after having read a number of supporting posts in this thread, given the logic you use, would her son had been OK had got something like this?

Smart looking guy, sure anyone would employ him - or is this one of the extremes that you won't answer? Seeing as some of you suppose taking your 10 year old to a bar, or a stripper or a hooker would be OK if the parent consented?



As I said, curious.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
I agree, OP.

As awful a mother as she probably is, this is far from a legal matter. Not a legal matter that requires an arrest anyway. This is pretty lame. Isn't there any actual crime in Ga.?

I can see the artist not wanting to do it because of the situation, but to have the woman arrested because the state knows what's best for her family????? For some ink under the skin? That's completely out of control.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 10:44 PM
link   
This is ridiculous. I am so sick of the "big" government getting involved in everyone's business. This is another reason I want Ron Paul to win the presidency, as more federal arms will be cut off, and their power given to the STATES where it should have been all along. It is much easier to listen to a state's population, and what they want and need, as opposed to the entire nation. It makes more sense.

And if I have said it once, I will say it again...NEVER co-operate with police when they pull something like this. By "co-operate", what they really mean is "tell us what we want to know so we can use it against you". There is nothing you can say that can help you...only hurt you. But the police take that as an insult and say she is not co-operating.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   
Hmmm . . . I guess the mother has the right to let her kid do whatever she wants him to do. I mean, kids under 18 can get pierced with a parents consent and I had numerous friends who were tatooed at 15-16 with parental consent (in MN). However, I really don't think it's the right parenting choice on Mom's part. Why couldn't she just have told him to wait a few years? Even 14 is better than 10!



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
I am seeing a number of posts that basically state, "Well it's the law." As if that makes it right. Whether the kid should get a tattoo or not is up to his parent and should not have anything to do with the government. If the mother were to cause harm to her child then we have punishment for that. I don't care if the kid wanted a full body tat... it is his parents choice to allow it or not. You can hate it and the parent all day but I do not see any readily apparent harm coming to the child so, it is none of our business.

Our government has passed too many nanny laws that really should not be any of their business either. And, just because something is a law does not mean we should automatically and blindly follow it. So, sick of that. I would really like to know where that mentality comes from.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
I guess its ok if little 10 y/o Missy to want to get her tongue pierced or an ass tattoo because Grandma was the only person who brought her joy in life? One of two things is happening here…

1. The Mom is a kid herself and thinks this is pretty cool.
2. The kid has more control of Mom than Mom does of the kid.

I didn’t dig too deep into the article, but I would bet the kid has some stupid name Mom thought was REALLY cool. Not thinking about how it would effect his life in the future. Maybe in the area of let’s say…..

Barretta, Jambz, Pluto, Yotta, etc. etc. etc…

AND where is Dad in all of this?
Could he be the tattoo artist

edit on 20-1-2012 by Propulsion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
I wonder who they would of put in jail.
If the kid had given his self the tattoo.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Propulsion

2. The kid has more control of Mom than Mom does of the kid.

. . . but I would bet the kid has some stupid name Mom thought was REALLY cool. Maybe in the area of let’s say…..

Barretta, Jambz, Pluto, Yotta, etc. etc. etc…


You win!


She says she couldn't say no when her 10-year-old son, Gaquan, asked to get one, . . .
www.theroot.com...



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by insanedr4gon
 


She. Broke. The. Law.
That's why she was arrested.
Not because the "evil government is out to take away parental rights" or anything like that.
She. Broke. The. Law.
She's paying the price for it.
Laws are in place for a reason.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Propulsion

2. The kid has more control of Mom than Mom does of the kid.

. . . but I would bet the kid has some stupid name Mom thought was REALLY cool. Maybe in the area of let’s say…..

Barretta, Jambz, Pluto, Yotta, etc. etc. etc…


You win!


She says she couldn't say no when her 10-year-old son, Gaquan, asked to get one, . . .
www.theroot.com...
Sure she gets the wonderful opportunity to live with THAT name for a good 18 years, BUT the kid has to live with it the rest of his life! I wonder if "GAQUAN" has a sister. I'm curious as to what her name is? Girls normally mature before boys do. She'll probably want to get an ass tattoo of Justin Berber when she turns 8. Am I the only one who is seeing the big picture here



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by RestingInPieces

Originally posted by Submarines
Not only was I shocked, but I was speechless!

What shocked me even more was your post! I can't believe that you have a problem with the arrest of a mother who allowed a TEN YEAR OLD CHILD to be permanently tattooed.


Please tell me, someone, that I'm not the only one here that has a problem with this!


Yeah, really! Forget the 10,000 year+ history of human civilization and tribal peoples tattooing children as a right of passage and acceptance! Those damn Samoans as well, Tattooing children. What are they thinking!

[/end sarcasm]

I don't think we even need to mention laser tattoo removal; that tattoos are NOT permanent with modern technology.

Thanks for being ignorant!






I know, it doesn't seem to be abuse.
1) The child requested it.

I could see if the parent forced or coerced the child to get a tattoo, but not this. If anything it is negligent parenting. Not abusive parenting.

The only thing abusive about this story is the Prosecutor out to get another notch before elections.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Propulsion
Am I the only one who is seeing the big picture here


NO!

I'm with ya.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:19 AM
link   
How silly. I agree the mother should not have let her child get the tattoo. HOWEVER..... going to jail for this? AMAZING.

How much more is it going to take for the sheeple to wake up? When is enough enough? Our rights are getting stripped from us by tptb more and more.

This and the megaupload shut down.... whilst our govnmnt assists in drug trafficking and arms dealing with anyone willing to pay.

I hate our leaders... I hate them



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Believer101
reply to post by insanedr4gon
 


She. Broke. The. Law.
That's why she was arrested.
Not because the "evil government is out to take away parental rights" or anything like that.
She. Broke. The. Law.
She's paying the price for it.
Laws are in place for a reason.


Okay, so.... Why is this law in place?

People are afraid that without the law, children would just start getting tattoos in large quanity? or...

Because part of the society are uncomfortable with tattoos? or...

Because some religions say tattooing the skin is a sin? or (probably the real reason)...

Groups of people have power trips, and love pushing their authority over everyone else. They pass thousands of laws every year that are against non violent people. Thousands of laws that are only on the books, to cook the books and raise funds for cities and towns. If you can add a fine to it, then even the better. To quote In Living Color, "Mo money mo money mo money."

Is it odd to any one else here, that a physician has to okay and perform the tattoo for it to be legal? Not going to ask why, but considering the lack of health care millions of "Poor" people live with, this law seems to affect those who can't afford a physician for a tattoo.

Must note I was 17 when I received my first tattoo (despite having the same 18+ law in RI). I had a parent okay the tattoo. The artist (thankfully) wouldn't do the tattoo on my forearm, but on my shoulder because of legalities. Was anyone hurt by this tattoo? No. Am I a criminal? No. Must also note that the parent who brought me in is a Nationally certified teacher, received teacher of the year awards from the city of Providence. So under this logic, no one was hurt, but it's time to pay the piper because a bunch of power tripping people decided upon a law?

More importantly, he got a small tattoo in memory for his deceased brother. This isn't a giant meaningless tattoo on his face, but a small tattoo on his arm to remind him of his dead brother. Something I feel should be a private matter. It's horrible that his mother was arrested and made example of, considering the back story.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by roshambo
How much more is it going to take for the sheeple to wake up? When is enough enough? Our rights are getting stripped from us by tptb more and more.


Not meaning to be offensive, but this is hardly Tiananmen Square style stuff.

As for the actual issue ... I have plenty of tattoos. No, I do not support a parent tattooing a child. In this instance, and I hope a court would realise, it's not that terrible. Imagine the instance though of a parent who has political or religious based tattoos, and the child consenting to recieving copies of those. Gang tattoos is obviously a huge one.

To me this is no different from not allowing a child to drink, do drugs, or have unrequired plastic surgery. I understand where getreadyalready and others are coming from ... but I'm not sure. I've seen some quite backwards home schooled children in my life time ...

I particularly found the comparison to chopping fingers off interesting, where getready stated it was a clear injury and the tattoo clearly wasn't. I firmly believe emotional trauma to be much worse than physical trauma in the long run. Just look up 80% of serial killers upbringings.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pinke
In this instance, and I hope a court would realize, it's not that terrible. Imagine the instance though of a parent who has political or religious based tattoos, and the child consenting to receiving copies of those. Gang tattoos is obviously a huge one.


Its a misdemeanor. Child protection service will probably investigate - - if they don't find any other issues - - she'll probably get off with a warning - - maybe a fine.

Laws are in place so you have legal cause to investigate. They're for protection.



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Its Lil Waynes fault. Seriously.

When I saw this album cover come out, I told my wife- "Watch parents, SPECIFICALLY BLACK parents are gonna start tatting their children".







I just knew this was gonna happen. Now everybody in 1st grade is gonna have one.



new topics

top topics



 
56
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join