Viewing Thread:
"Right or wrong - you decide..."

[URL]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/3785785.stm[/URL]

Some little f**ker gets what's coming to him, his Dad should be grateful.

All right.

If the boy had a "black eye that would not shut", then, surely, without the liquid that covers your eye each time you blink, one of his eyes would be all shriveled-up by now, right?

People will blow anything miles out-of-proportion when there's money about! :P


The kid certainly deserves to get something - especially is he did lug a brick through his window. This kind of thing seems to have become quite a regularity among youngsters and bridges these days, and it's about time someone started to actually do something about it (even CCTV Cameras would make a good start).

Then again, the grown-man hit a young-child, also. That cannot go amiss, no matter how frustrated he was and deserving the boy could've been.

I don't expect 'the right thing' to be done about it, however... :P

Both wrong.

Stick 'em both in prison and make 'em share a cell...

or something

Both did wrong, in my opinion.

mog wrote:
> He may have deserved a prison sentance and a shock. Not a beating.

I'm personally much rather have a good slapping than spend time in prison. Sorry.

Does it matter what this kid has done. The courts should be the ones who have more power. If they did, kids might think before they act. Knowing that they would go to jail, might stop them. If my child had done that I would expect them to face The person appologise and explain themselves, then explain to the court. No one has the right to assault a child. Violence does not solve anything. He may have deserved a prison sentance and a shock. Not a beating.

Also the BBC are sided towards the kid as they can get good headlines from putting ‘kid gets beaten by motorist’ instead of ‘rough kid bricks car’

Which one would grab you attention more?

All kid that throw stuff at cars need a beating like that kid got.

Its obvious that the kid threw a brick as all rough kids (most these days are) do it as its ‘ard’. Once the kid threw it the drive must have got out the car and tried to talk to him, but as tradition goes the 'rat kid' as I like to call them would have been acting ‘ard’ and shouting abuse back. This would have enraged the driver and the drive lost his head punched the kid out of rage.

The kid is to blame if you look at the picture you can tell he looks like a troublemaker and deserves a good beating as he most likely proved the driver anyway.

I've had my car bricked whilst on the motorway before. It's not a pleasant experience as you don't know what hit you or what damage may have been done.

The thing that strikes me most is that the kid cheeked the driver back when he got caught. That makes me take the drivers side more than anything. If it was actually a brick then there would have been damage to the car and the driver would have been well within his rights ritually cutting the kids hands off in front of his parents. Or at least complaining to them. But coward kid just refused to say anything, so at that point he really deserved it.

The father sounds like a gold digger and little more. At the age of 12 I knew it wasn't big or clever to throw things at moving vehicles. So either the kid is simply a juvenile delinquent or the father isn't doing his job properly.

Sure, on the drivers part he shouldn't really have hit the boy, but I'd probably crack as well. Plus he was unable to even tell the boys parents.

RoJ wrote:
> Right.
> But then again, if some guy beat the hell out of my kid I would do
> the same to him.


Which would be more or less the same reaction that the driver had in the first place...