Didnt some girl get lost trying this?

Ridiculous. She had to be rescued because her boat was damaged in a storm not because she was a minor. Being 2 years older wouldn't have made her boat more resilient and so she would've still needed to be rescued.

So you do not believe that children should be kept out of harms way by their parents and should be protected against their own poor judgment? Now THAT is ridiculous. According to your reasoning pedophilia laws should be lifted, alcohol should be available for everyone aged 0 and up, etc., etc.
Until a person turns 18 they are their parents responsibility, and by allowing a child to do something so risky SOLO, they are needlessly endangering her life, which should be a criminal offense. To put it even clearer: Her parents endangered her life, without even having the decency to risk theirs alongside her and trying to keep her safe.
Once she's 18 it's her own decision to risk her life. But apparently you are a stranger to keeping children safe. You are probably one of those people who would hang a baby over the edge of a balcony, just like Michael Jackson did, just because it seems fun. Despicable.

Are you saying that they only rescued her because she was under 18? You don't think they would've rescued anyone who was stranded regardless of their age?

Now you're just trying your best to be a moron. Did I ever say she shouldn't or wouldn't have been rescued?

This comment shows just how much you know about her. If you knew anything about her you would know that "how cool she looks" had absolutely nothing to do with her endeavor.

The fact that she's trying to break a world record clearly shows that the ONLY THING that mattered to her was how cool she looks. If it was just about the experience the world record wouldn't have even factored into it, and she would've waited until after she had finished school, like a normal, responsible person.

Your arguments are not even consistent. First you assert that sailing is too risky and complicated that teenagers are incapable doing it safely and skillfully. Then you try to paint the activity as mind-numbingly simple. Which is it?

Boring/simple and dangerous are not mutually exclusive, you bleeping r*tard! Floating in a shark tank is simple as can be, but is it without danger? Screaming as loud as you can in avalanche country is simple as can be, but is it safe? Same goes for sailing an ocean. On most days nothing happens and you're bored out of your mind, but suddenly out of nowhere disaster can strike. Further more I never said TEENAGERS can't do it safely. NOBODY can do it absolutely safely. It's like a medical operation. There is always risk involved, and because of that MINORS SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO DO IT, BECAUSE THEIR REASONING SKILLS AREN'T FULLY DEVELOPED YET AND THAT'S WHY THEIR PARENTS ARE STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM. Maybe if you force them to wait a little longer (like until they're 18) they come to their senses and decide not to risk their life needlessly. Some people...

What I was trying to say was that just because one person has a child who knows nothing about sailing that doesn't mean that it is impossible for someone else's child to be extremely skillful in the same activity. Who cares what you would let your kids do or not do? We are not talking about your kids or even kids in general. We are talking about only one person - Laura Dekker. A person who before she even reached puberty had more sailing experience than 99.9999% of the world's population - adults included.

And I didn't mean to imply that their kids were genetically incapable of learning how to sail. Only that if you don't know anything about sailing, or if you do but never teach your kids anything about it, then chances are they are not going to have the skills needed to do what Laura did. I have no doubt though that if their kids were raised in the same environment Laura was that they would be just as adept as she is.

This is what people don't understand when they make the argument: "I wouldn't let MY kids do this - therefore it would be wrong for anyone else to let their kids do the same." Somewhere in the back of their minds they either think that all kids are created equal, or they are just trying to deny the fact that there are millions of kids out there who can run circles around their kids in any conceivable activity.

You did not make this clear in your first post. You wrote it like you were simply trying to insult the other poster, which is why I misinterpreted it.
But still, it doesn't matter how skillful a child is. Apparently this is something you are incapable of understanding (usually only children and pedophiles don't understand this distinction). A child is not an adult. It's brain isn't fully developed yet, and it's because of that that it's parents are responsible for it by law. This is a very good law. It should prevent parents from allowing their children to take insane risks, like sailing around the world solo in a tiny sailing vessel, or swimming with great white sharks, or wrestling alligators, or free climbing a skyscraper or any other insane activity. If your child wants to do any of these insane activities, it's your job to prevent them from doing so until you no longer can, i.e. when it turns 18. If you don't, you are a bad parent who is putting their child's safety at risk. I don't think I can make it any clearer than that.

reply share

add reply

formatting help