Racist Bigot spouting bile on tram

[DJKillaQueen]

Err well Baby P was physically abused in the most heinous manner. This child was only being subjected to the foul rant of it's parent. Do we take away all the children of BNP supporters? National Front members? EDL members? Or any parent that has a bad day for example and then lashes out verbally at an innocent member of the public. And why stop there? Let's take away the children of any parent with right wing views.....hmmmmm Prince Philip...the heir to the throne could be in care under that law.

It's a big leap from Baby P to that. This woman will be charged and fined probably and be given a criminal record. I think that's enough. And I don't know how from the clip Parkdrive you can assume she was drunk, or medicated or otherwise. She seemed perfectly sober to me, but angry. As I said before, the clip doesn't show what precipitated the rant.

[KidKruger]

In my view the woman was on something, whether illegal or prescribed I dont know.

The way she chews her bottom lip reminded me of a few techno clubs, may have been a habitual trait but the perpetual ranting with it for me says high or possibly a lunatic.

[zeban]

Totally agree KK

[Jah Lush]

I cannot see how anyone would think she was sober. She'd definitely had a few.

[Chick]

Anyone missing Skippy the kangaroo?

[Captain Scarlet]

In 100 yrs we will be all dead.

Racism,Religion,politics will still exist..Major causes of upheavel in the world.

[Chick]

Captain Scarlet Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In 100 yrs we will be all dead.

> Racism,Religion,politics will still exist..Major

> causes of upheavel in the world.

Tarot troll

[acm]

.

[Otta]

fair points acm.

[Captain Scarlet]

Ill take that as a compliment.

[Huguenot]

Racial harassment is a different offence to general public order offences for a very good reason.

And racial harrassment is not simply expressing an opinion, and not something worthy of defending: what Voltaire actually said was "Not only is it extremely cruel to persecute in this brief life those who do not think the way we do, but I do not know if it might be too presumptuous to declare their eternal damnation."

In this respect, the persecutor was the despicable woman abusing the black passengers.

Voltaire would have kicked her off, or prosecuted her under part 3 of the public order act, section 18.

As for the damage done to the kids in the brief absence of mum, I suspect that this will be more than compensated by her unwillingness to launch into verbal attacks on people for their skin colour in the future.

[Parkdrive]

I think she should apply for a job as a foster parent, she's a natural

[malumbu]

Dunnon what colour/ethnicity people are but it does get my goat when you get implicit racism "oh if it was a black/brown/yellow" person abusing a white honky then there wouldn't be all this fuss. This is really going down the EDL line.

I think at least one person who made such a comment did apologise on this site later. Equality in terms of racism (if this makes sense) may be an issue but is no excuse for bigotry.

Do love the term white honky though, perhaps EDL can use this as a moto "proud to be a white honky" and reclaim the word. In case any of you young readers haven't a clue what I am talking about I was going to insert a Wiki link, but then found this in the Daily Hate (only the DH could have an article like this, too rabid for even The Sun: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031126/White-man-convicted-racial-abuse-making-honky-jibe-WHITE-security-guards.html

[northlondoner]

Hey, where's Claudia? Morphed into different identity?

[acm]

.

[sheilarose]

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think she should apply for a job as a foster

> parent, she's a natural

Seriously? This is what you think of foster parents? I'm horrified. On what are you basing this view?

[Parkdrive]

sheilarose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Parkdrive Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I think she should apply for a job as a foster

> > parent, she's a natural

>

>

> Seriously? This is what you think of foster

> parents? I'm horrified. On what are you basing

> this view?

She is clearly a terrific role model, a well rounded, articulate and intelligent individual that can be trusted to bring up children and teach them right from wrong, the evils of drink and drug taking, morals, oh........hang on........

[DJKillaQueen]

This is where I have a problem.

If we start removing children because of what their parents 'think' then we are treading a thin line imo. Or do we only remove them if they 'say what they think'. And who decides what parents are allowed to say or not say in front of their children?

Most children who are removed from their parents, are done so because they are at a significant risk of abuse or the parent is incapable of caring for them. If the lady on the tram has a drink or drugs problem, that can't be managed, and the child is not being cared for properly then that's one thing, but to remove a child because a parent engages in a public verbal rant is something else, and takes us down a road that ends where?

[El Pibe]

Does anybody have any facts about this case?

I'm pretty sure social services aren't in the habit of removing children from their parents capriciously.

It's surely most likely that if she' has received a short custodial sentence that he's been taken into care for the duration rather than because of some sort of thought crime?

[Huguenot]

Good point - are these criticisms specific or general?

The suggestion in this case is that there is serious concern the woman is psychologically unstable, that she was remanded in custody for this reason, and that the kids being put into care was a side effect, not the intent?

[Parkdrive]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This is where I have a problem.

>

>

> Most children who are removed from their parents,

> are done so because they are at a significant risk

> of abuse or the parent is incapable of caring for

> them.

So you don't think this kind of episode can damage the child physcologically? Is that not a form of abuse? And just how do you "manage" a person who has a drink/drug problem and when they are out in public, and is clearly oblivious to the damage she is/may be doing to the child?

[Otta]

There is no way Social Services would remove a child in this situation. Unless the publicity generated by the YouTube video leads to pressure from other quarters.

[DJKillaQueen]

No I don't PD.

Children witness far worse every day of the week in their school playgrounds. At worst the child may have a viewpoint influenced by their parents thinking.......but we can't go and remove every child from a parent because of what that parent thinks or believes.

And yes, there are many cases of children with a parent who may have a drink problem where the social services award guardianship to a relative, usually grandparent so that the child can stay with the parent but the guardian is repsonsible for supervision. After all there are different degrees of drug or alcohol problems and not every case involves an adult who is completely incapable on every level or abusive. That's why every case is dealt with differently and after all the facts are know.

We know nothing about the woman and the child from that clip. We don't even know what prompted the outburst....how it started or why. Maybe the woman just needs some support or help. To condemn her child to a life in care just seems over the top to me.

[Annette Curtain]

Chick Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyone missing Skippy the kangaroo?

Yes, "Flipper"

Clik-clik

N:)

[ibilly99]

She was released from a psychiatric hospital 2 days before .....