Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What law have her parents broken that would merit fining them as punishment?

 CptJake wrote:
What law have her parents broken that would merit fining them as punishment?

Misdemeanor breeding?

Well, technically you would be fining her, not the parents, though they would likely be the ones who end up paying it. I think its a pretty intelligent move to fine them personally, given that twitter is apparrently exploding with similar threats, it would probably be the most cost-effective way to deter such behavior.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, technically you would be fining her, not the parents, though they would likely be the ones who end up paying it. I think its a pretty intelligent move to fine them personally, given that twitter is apparrently exploding with similar threats, it would probably be the most cost-effective way to deter such behavior.

Kronk advocating fining her parents, to me that is silly. As for fining her or her parents as a deterrent to copy cat actions? That would most likely not work well to deter similar behavior. Especially fining her parents: "So they fined that other chick's parents? Who cares, I hate my folks". Fining the minors directly? Unless you intend to put them in debtor's prison if thy cannot pay, you are not really threatening much.

The most cost-effective way to deter such behavior would be to stop making a big deal about it so that it gets zero news coverage. Do a cursory investigation, not publicized, once you find out it is some dumb teenager being a dumb teenager, drop it.

Horse popp! Spare the rod and spoil the curtain! Er..or something like that.

No fly lists, internet bans, large fines, and being forced to walk around with a sandwich board proclaiming that they are morons.

Severe punishments need to be meted out.

 Hordini wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
None of them made jokes about what they were about to do though, they just did them. Comparing this to all the attacks that have actually happened in the past, making a tweet like this before hand is probably one of the biggest indications that the person is actually not serious about doing anything.

They wouldn't be jokes if they happened, so no, none of the people who warned other people - like the Columbine idiots - made jokes about shooting up the school. They made threats.

The warning signs for things like Columbine were different and a lot more significant than a ridiculous tweet claiming to be someone else from another country.

But the warning signs for guys who committed suicide via webcam or any of the countless other examples that used to be up on Encyclopedia Dramatica weren't. So, yeah, while this was obviously not a serious threat, and I'd be inclined to laugh at any suggestion of Dutch aggression myself, you can't have a policy of dismissing threats that appear to be jokes as unimportant. There are a lot of examples of kids doing something extremely dangerous or harmful to others with nothing more than a dumb statement prior.

That was such a stupid thing to do.
You know the police takes threats over the internet very seriously. But well, she is from Rotterdam, what shall we say? Confirmation of stereotypes?
I really laughed at the comments she posted after they said her IP adress was forwarded to the FBI: "My friend did it, take her IP adress, not mine!"
She was squealing and begging like she was being tortured or something
I think the scare was enough of a punishment, she should not be punished further.

No because that sets a poor example for the other brats out there too.
They need to be aware that actions will have consequences, something that seems to be being skipped lately through the whole special snow flake thing. They cannot think they cannot fail nor do the wrong thing and that it will simply be brushed aside. They actually need to learn.

 CptJake wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Well, technically you would be fining her, not the parents, though they would likely be the ones who end up paying it. I think its a pretty intelligent move to fine them personally, given that twitter is apparrently exploding with similar threats, it would probably be the most cost-effective way to deter such behavior.

Kronk advocating fining her parents, to me that is silly. As for fining her or her parents as a deterrent to copy cat actions? That would most likely not work well to deter similar behavior. Especially fining her parents: "So they fined that other chick's parents? Who cares, I hate my folks". Fining the minors directly? Unless you intend to put them in debtor's prison if thy cannot pay, you are not really threatening much.

The most cost-effective way to deter such behavior would be to stop making a big deal about it so that it gets zero news coverage. Do a cursory investigation, not publicized, once you find out it is some dumb teenager being a dumb teenager, drop it.

Fining her is fining her parents, which isn't silly at all. Happens all of the time with traffic tickets and so on. Not a hard concept, really.

Hit the parents in their pocket book, deter dumbass kids from being dumbasses.

Explain how a possible fine to parents deters teenagers from stupid actions.

Have raised two boys who are now in their early 20s and having a daughter about to enter her teen years, I honestly do not see how that would work, and have yet to see any examples to show me otherwise.

 CptJake wrote:
Explain how a possible fine to parents deters teenagers from stupid actions.

Have raised two boys who are now in their early 20s and having a daughter about to enter her teen years, I honestly do not see how that would work, and have yet to see any examples to show me otherwise.

If your daughter went to trial and was fined $500 or 10 days in the clink, you don't think that would have an impression?

 CptJake wrote:
Explain how a possible fine to parents deters teenagers from stupid actions.

Have raised two boys who are now in their early 20s and having a daughter about to enter her teen years, I honestly do not see how that would work, and have yet to see any examples to show me otherwise.

Gov't fines child.

Parents forced to pay.

When the parents pay the gov't money, they punish the child. Take away her car, phone, computer, whatever. Child learns not to do stuff.

You have 3 fething kids. Why am I having to explain this to you???

 Iron_Captain wrote:
That was such a stupid thing to do.
You know the police takes threats over the internet very seriously. But well, she is from Rotterdam, what shall we say? Confirmation of stereotypes?

I've got a friend from Rotterdam... and yes, confirmation.

 kronk wrote:
While it's not the worst thing in the world for someone to do, I think she and her parents she be fined heavily for her stupidity as an example to teens, twitter users, and kittens that hate freedom EVERYWHERE!

Dang, Steve's cover is blown.

Unit 134: Arrange immediate extraction for Agent 563. Priority 1.

Jesus girl, Why not just do the fake "Im Pregnant" prank on your parents like normal people do?

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Explain how a possible fine to parents deters teenagers from stupid actions.

Have raised two boys who are now in their early 20s and having a daughter about to enter her teen years, I honestly do not see how that would work, and have yet to see any examples to show me otherwise.

If your daughter went to trial and was fined $500 or 10 days in the clink, you don't think that would have an impression?

On her yes. Does her fine or her jail time deter other teenagers? No. Does it work as a deterrence as has been stated? I doubt it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:

 CptJake wrote:
Explain how a possible fine to parents deters teenagers from stupid actions.

Have raised two boys who are now in their early 20s and having a daughter about to enter her teen years, I honestly do not see how that would work, and have yet to see any examples to show me otherwise.

Gov't fines child.

Parents forced to pay.

When the parents pay the gov't money, they punish the child. Take away her car, phone, computer, whatever. Child learns not to do stuff.

You have 3 fething kids. Why am I having to explain this to you???

You stated it was a deterrence. That is a LOT different from a punishment. As a parent, I am very familiar with the difference between the two.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Let me clarify.

 kronk wrote:
While it's not the worst thing in the world for someone to do, I think she and her parents she be fined heavily for her stupidity as an example to teens, twitter users, and kittens that hate freedom EVERYWHERE!

The yellow is what I have been addressing. I do not see how fining this girls parents (or even her) acts as a deterrent to other teenagers. I just don't. That is not how teenaged kids think.

I get what you're saying, but to each his own, Captain Jack. When I was a teenager, if I saw someone get punished, I certainly learned from it. Either how to do a better job covering my own butt, or that the punishment isn't worth the crime.

But then, I'm not just handsome, but pretty smart!

Also humble. Don't forget humble. I'm more humble than any of you fethers!

Well...safe to say she did it the "safe" way. We actually captured young teens after they engaged us.

She's Dutch? blarg, you can keep her.

Dutch and a Bieber fan

 Soladrin wrote:
She's Dutch? blarg, you can keep her.

Ok there's some sort fo country joke going on here. English to Texan translation?

For a second I thought she was arrested in America, if so, you should've kept her.

We still have Justin Carter in prison, so you could probably trade her to us and we'd keep her. I think we're still looking for someone to pawn Beiber off on, and what greater irony than trading a stupid Beiber fan for Beiber himself?

 LordofHats wrote:
We still have Justin Carter in prison, so you could probably trade her to us and we'd keep her. I think we're still looking for someone to pawn Beiber off on, and what greater irony than trading a stupid Beiber fan for Beiber himself?

No.

We lost the hockey game. We have to keep him.

That hockey game only applied to Canada!

 LordofHats wrote:
That hockey game only applied to Canada!

There were...other consequences...

Whoa now.stopping hopping the goal post all over the place. The deal was if Canada won they get Bieber....wait...

The best thing to do is shut down twitter.

Wait, what is this thread about?

 Seaward wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Seaward wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
None of them made jokes about what they were about to do though, they just did them. Comparing this to all the attacks that have actually happened in the past, making a tweet like this before hand is probably one of the biggest indications that the person is actually not serious about doing anything.

They wouldn't be jokes if they happened, so no, none of the people who warned other people - like the Columbine idiots - made jokes about shooting up the school. They made threats.

The warning signs for things like Columbine were different and a lot more significant than a ridiculous tweet claiming to be someone else from another country.

But the warning signs for guys who committed suicide via webcam or any of the countless other examples that used to be up on Encyclopedia Dramatica weren't. So, yeah, while this was obviously not a serious threat, and I'd be inclined to laugh at any suggestion of Dutch aggression myself, you can't have a policy of dismissing threats that appear to be jokes as unimportant. There are a lot of examples of kids doing something extremely dangerous or harmful to others with nothing more than a dumb statement prior.

I'm not saying we should completely dismiss it, but I do think we should be careful not to overreact and waste a disproportionate amount of resources on it, as well as attempt to inflict a disproportionate punishment if/when it turns out to be nothing.