Free-range kids picked up AGAIN by police

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What if it appears to passersby that it is a six and seven year old wandering about, heading toward four lane roads and looking behind office buildings? You'd see that and think, oh, two kids out having just having a good time?

That, by itself, nothing else? Yes, I would think, oh, two kids out walking somewhere the way kids do.

But, if I had actually seen them up close, and talked to them when they asked to pet my dog, I wouldn't have thought the 10-year-old was a 7-year-old, and if I were worried, I would also have taken the opportunity to chat with them to get a sense of whether they were worried.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And kudos to tbe neighbor in Arlington who called 911 about the kids sting alone in their own yard, someone who thought something was off and called authorities. Thank God for that person!!!

Yes, a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old in their pajamas in the front yard at 7:50 am on a Friday.

In the Free range world kids in their yard in pajamas is not off.

What information do you base this statement on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What if it appears to passersby that it is a six and seven year old wandering about, heading toward four lane roads and looking behind office buildings? You'd see that and think, oh, two kids out having just having a good time?

That, by itself, nothing else? Yes, I would think, oh, two kids out walking somewhere the way kids do.

But, if I had actually seen them up close, and talked to them when they asked to pet my dog, I wouldn't have thought the 10-year-old was a 7-year-old, and if I were worried, I would also have taken the opportunity to chat with them to get a sense of whether they were worried.

Except the kids look homeless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And kudos to tbe neighbor in Arlington who called 911 about the kids sting alone in their own yard, someone who thought something was off and called authorities. Thank God for that person!!!

Yes, a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old in their pajamas in the front yard at 7:50 am on a Friday.

I don't know those people, or what was going on, but I am actually glad someone did something. If my 3 and 5 year old were out alone at that time, it would mean they had snuck out while I was in the shower. And we're right by a road, so that would not be good. Of course, I'd rather someone come knock on my door rather than call the police, but if I didn't answer, I'd be glad they called the police. What if the person inside has had an accident or something?

Yes, I am glad someone did something in this case too. I think that a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old in their pajamas in the front yard at 7:50 am on a Friday is a reasonable reason to suspect that something may be wrong. I don't think that a 10-year-old and a 6-year-old in their regular clothes in DTSS at 5 pm on a Sunday is a reasonable reason to suspect that something may be wrong.[/quotes]
Sometimes you have to be there and you have a feeling that something is off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree with the PP. Because it's clear that everyone agrees that there's a place for intervention, and everyone things that the people who actually witnessed the Meitiv children (both times they were reported, by two different people) AND the police AND CPS are all wrong, and they are right about whether there were signs of something being wrong. And the first poster (and the one who posted about Sweden) who mentioned the 3- and 5-year-old ALSO assumed that it was overreach in that case. But it provably was not overreach. The strident, ridiculously insulting tone taken about this toward the police and CPS, whose only goal is to protect kids, is wrong. I don't know the truth of the Meitiv situation, and I don't pretend to. I do know that this is a factually complex situation that's being investigated. Honestly, of course the Meitivs should have their say --and we all know they do -- but everyone else who thinks they know better should STFU.

The police and CPS are public agencies with a lot of potential power (police power, in fact), which they are supposed to wield in all our names. It is therefore extremely important that they do not misuse this power. Did they misuse it in the case of the Meitivs? I think that's a valid question, not an insult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What if it appears to passersby that it is a six and seven year old wandering about, heading toward four lane roads and looking behind office buildings? You'd see that and think, oh, two kids out having just having a good time?

That, by itself, nothing else? Yes, I would think, oh, two kids out walking somewhere the way kids do.

But, if I had actually seen them up close, and talked to them when they asked to pet my dog, I wouldn't have thought the 10-year-old was a 7-year-old, and if I were worried, I would also have taken the opportunity to chat with them to get a sense of whether they were worried.

Except the kids look homeless.

Good grief. Do you have children? Are your children always dressed in new, clean, fashionable clothes, with combed hair? If so, you're doing it wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What if it appears to passersby that it is a six and seven year old wandering about, heading toward four lane roads and looking behind office buildings? You'd see that and think, oh, two kids out having just having a good time?

That, by itself, nothing else? Yes, I would think, oh, two kids out walking somewhere the way kids do.

But, if I had actually seen them up close, and talked to them when they asked to pet my dog, I wouldn't have thought the 10-year-old was a 7-year-old, and if I were worried, I would also have taken the opportunity to chat with them to get a sense of whether they were worried.

Except the kids look homeless.

Good grief. Do you have children? Are your children always dressed in new, clean, fashionable clothes, with combed hair? If so, you're doing it wrong.

No, my kids are alway sweaty and dirty. But they don't look like a vagabond.

I get it is very Takoma Park to look like a vagabond ... But that heir cut is just wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree with the PP. Because it's clear that everyone agrees that there's a place for intervention, and everyone things that the people who actually witnessed the Meitiv children (both times they were reported, by two different people) AND the police AND CPS are all wrong, and they are right about whether there were signs of something being wrong. And the first poster (and the one who posted about Sweden) who mentioned the 3- and 5-year-old ALSO assumed that it was overreach in that case. But it provably was not overreach. The strident, ridiculously insulting tone taken about this toward the police and CPS, whose only goal is to protect kids, is wrong. I don't know the truth of the Meitiv situation, and I don't pretend to. I do know that this is a factually complex situation that's being investigated. Honestly, of course the Meitivs should have their say --and we all know they do -- but everyone else who thinks they know better should STFU.

The police and CPS are public agencies with a lot of potential power (police power, in fact), which they are supposed to wield in all our names. It is therefore extremely important that they do not misuse this power. Did they misuse it in the case of the Meitivs? I think that's a valid question, not an insult.

It's a valid question. So is.. Is it reasonable to have a teen curfew in Potomac if all the crime is in Silver Spring. The answer is you don't live in a bubble, you live in a society, with rules, that are for the masses, not you little entitled world.

For the general population a 6 yo can't wander the streets without somebody 13 or older. That is your valid nswer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree with the PP. Because it's clear that everyone agrees that there's a place for intervention, and everyone things that the people who actually witnessed the Meitiv children (both times they were reported, by two different people) AND the police AND CPS are all wrong, and they are right about whether there were signs of something being wrong. And the first poster (and the one who posted about Sweden) who mentioned the 3- and 5-year-old ALSO assumed that it was overreach in that case. But it provably was not overreach. The strident, ridiculously insulting tone taken about this toward the police and CPS, whose only goal is to protect kids, is wrong. I don't know the truth of the Meitiv situation, and I don't pretend to. I do know that this is a factually complex situation that's being investigated. Honestly, of course the Meitivs should have their say --and we all know they do -- but everyone else who thinks they know better should STFU.

The police and CPS are public agencies with a lot of potential power (police power, in fact), which they are supposed to wield in all our names. It is therefore extremely important that they do not misuse this power. Did they misuse it in the case of the Meitivs? I think that's a valid question, not an insult.

If you think that asking that question is what I'm referring to, then you have clearly not read this thread or any of the comments or the Washington Post article or the might have statements them selves. No one's politely asking a question of whether this might be an overreach. People are accusing the CPS the police and the caller to 911 of all sorts of things. Stridently assuming they know the truth of the matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And kudos to tbe neighbor in Arlington who called 911 about the kids sting alone in their own yard, someone who thought something was off and called authorities. Thank God for that person!!!

Yes, a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old in their pajamas in the front yard at 7:50 am on a Friday.

In the Free range world kids in their yard in pajamas is not off.

What information do you base this statement on?

How about the facts about the ones on this very thread initially reacted with outrage that anyone would question the three-year-old and a five-year-old playing in the yard? You are so disingenuous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree with the PP. Because it's clear that everyone agrees that there's a place for intervention, and everyone things that the people who actually witnessed the Meitiv children (both times they were reported, by two different people) AND the police AND CPS are all wrong, and they are right about whether there were signs of something being wrong. And the first poster (and the one who posted about Sweden) who mentioned the 3- and 5-year-old ALSO assumed that it was overreach in that case. But it provably was not overreach. The strident, ridiculously insulting tone taken about this toward the police and CPS, whose only goal is to protect kids, is wrong. I don't know the truth of the Meitiv situation, and I don't pretend to. I do know that this is a factually complex situation that's being investigated. Honestly, of course the Meitivs should have their say --and we all know they do -- but everyone else who thinks they know better should STFU.

The police and CPS are public agencies with a lot of potential power (police power, in fact), which they are supposed to wield in all our names. It is therefore extremely important that they do not misuse this power. Did they misuse it in the case of the Meitivs? I think that's a valid question, not an insult.

It's a valid question. So is.. Is it reasonable to have a teen curfew in Potomac if all the crime is in Silver Spring. The answer is you don't live in a bubble, you live in a society, with rules, that are for the masses, not you little entitled world.

For the general population a 6 yo can't wander the streets without somebody 13 or older. That is your valid answer.

Except that it's not the single, valid answer. Because

1. It's not clear that it's against Maryland law, or constitutes child neglect in Maryland, for a six-year-old to walk in public without somebody 13 or older.
2. If it is against Maryland law/constitutes child neglect in Maryland, it's not clear that this makes sense (or is constitutional).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And kudos to tbe neighbor in Arlington who called 911 about the kids sting alone in their own yard, someone who thought something was off and called authorities. Thank God for that person!!!

Yes, a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old in their pajamas in the front yard at 7:50 am on a Friday.

In the Free range world kids in their yard in pajamas is not off.

What information do you base this statement on?

How about the facts about the ones on this very thread initially reacted with outrage that anyone would question the three-year-old and a five-year-old playing in the yard? You are so disingenuous.

Nobody initially reacted with outrage that anyone would question a 3-year-old and a 5-year-old in pajamas in the front yard on a Friday morning.

Also, there is no Free Range Manifesto, which one must sign and then adhere to with orthodoxy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you think that asking that question is what I'm referring to, then you have clearly not read this thread or any of the comments or the Washington Post article or the might have statements them selves. No one's politely asking a question of whether this might be an overreach. People are accusing the CPS the police and the caller to 911 of all sorts of things. Stridently assuming they know the truth of the matter.

Of all sorts of what things? And are the things the CPS, the police, and the 911 caller are getting accused of worse than the things the Meitivs are getting accused of? CPS and the police are public agencies; the Meitivs are private individuals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Except the kids look homeless.

Good grief. Do you have children? Are your children always dressed in new, clean, fashionable clothes, with combed hair? If so, you're doing it wrong.

No, my kids are alway sweaty and dirty. But they don't look like a vagabond.

I get it is very Takoma Park to look like a vagabond ... But that heir cut is just wrong.

Could you please post pictures of your children? Actually, a line-up of pictures would be useful, because I'm not sure that I can reliably distinguish between sweaty/dirty and vagabond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I disagree with the PP. Because it's clear that everyone agrees that there's a place for intervention, and everyone things that the people who actually witnessed the Meitiv children (both times they were reported, by two different people) AND the police AND CPS are all wrong, and they are right about whether there were signs of something being wrong. And the first poster (and the one who posted about Sweden) who mentioned the 3- and 5-year-old ALSO assumed that it was overreach in that case. But it provably was not overreach. The strident, ridiculously insulting tone taken about this toward the police and CPS, whose only goal is to protect kids, is wrong. I don't know the truth of the Meitiv situation, and I don't pretend to. I do know that this is a factually complex situation that's being investigated. Honestly, of course the Meitivs should have their say --and we all know they do -- but everyone else who thinks they know better should STFU.

The police and CPS are public agencies with a lot of potential power (police power, in fact), which they are supposed to wield in all our names. It is therefore extremely important that they do not misuse this power. Did they misuse it in the case of the Meitivs? I think that's a valid question, not an insult.

It's a valid question. So is.. Is it reasonable to have a teen curfew in Potomac if all the crime is in Silver Spring. The answer is you don't live in a bubble, you live in a society, with rules, that are for the masses, not you little entitled world.

For the general population a 6 yo can't wander the streets without somebody 13 or older. That is your valid answer.

Except that it's not the single, valid answer. Because

1. It's not clear that it's against Maryland law, or constitutes child neglect in Maryland, for a six-year-old to walk in public without somebody 13 or older.
2. If it is against Maryland law/constitutes child neglect in Maryland, it's not clear that this makes sense (or is constitutional).

It is very clear and the lawsuit will go nowhere.