Dog Shock Collars Are Not For Children

Apparently, Todd Marcum failed to get this message. Todd thought it would be “funny” to shock his 4 kids, all under the age of 10. While I agree it sounds funny, I am sure there are some sort of rules against it. (Here’s a pic of Todd).


I guess this all happened when Todd’s wife was at work. He shocked each kid and then chased them around threatening to do it again. Unfortunately, these kids failed to see the humor in this fun game and one of the little rats called the mom. She came home, got the story, and then called the po-po on her old man. 

The truth is, this is despicable behavior. Water boarding is way funnier and much more age appropriate. Plus, the dog collar just doesn’t put out the kind of voltage you need to really have a good time. Too bad Todd didn’t have a Taser. Then he could have zapped them and watched them flop on the ground for awhile. 

What’s interesting to me is that no one has a problem electrocuting a defenseless dog but if you do it to a kid, everyone screams “abuse”. Ask the dog how he feels about having his nads shrunk every time he gets jolted for walking too far off of the beaten path. 

Todd was charged with four first-degree criminal mistreatment charges and is currently in jail. When he gets out and gets home, he is probably gonna get an a** whippin’ from Mrs. Marcum. You would think she would know what kind of sense of humor her husband has since they have a 9 year old. My guess is that he is not allowed to watch the kids anymore. Of course, that might have been his master plan all along. 

Now, before all of you dads run out and buy a shock collar so you too can get out of watching the kids, realize that it is illegal. Again, I would suggest using government approved torture so you can at least use that excuse when you go to court. “But your Honor, Dick Cheney said we could do it!” Of course, if you get a “Barry” judge, your goose is cooked. 

I hope the Kate + 8 husband doesn’t find out about this. He will be ordering shock collars for the whole gaggle of kids. 

Jon, just be sure to get a large one for your shrew wife and give her double the voltage. Maybe that will shut her the hell up for at least a brief period of time. By the way, good luck with your new girlfriend (who is way hotter than your crazy, narcissistic wife. What the hell is going on with her hair, anyway?)


51 Responses to Dog Shock Collars Are Not For Children

  1. Era says:

    Funny post. I’ve been wondering about Kate’s hair myself.

  2. Not to judge a book by it’s cover, but here goes: Todd kinda has that look about him that screams “If I’m not shocking them, I’m molesting them.”

    Best case scenario: he’s just a soulless jerk who uses phrases like “beer-thirty” and “just fueling ma’ sex mo-sheen.”

  3. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Vile, repugnant, revolting, repulsive (covered all the R’s), abominable, abhorrant, evil and disgusting. Child abuse pure and simple and let’s not forget to through in psychological torture. Why is just anyone allowed to breed without screening and parenting classes? I’ve got a serious urge to use Art’s gun on this a**hole.

  4. tannerleah says:

    Yeah, but it was funny abuse. Doesn’t that make it ok?

  5. elizabeth3hersh says:

    I said “through in” instead of “throw in”…I was foaming at the mouth with lightening bolts shooting from my fingertips when I wrote that. No TL, that is not funny, just like the Holocaust is not funny. After having three rounds of nerve conduction velocity tests which were EXTREMELY painful, I shudder to think of anyone (let alone a child) having to endure that kind of torture. It is torture and you have to remember it is psychological as well in that you don’t know when the next shock is coming.

    On a more cheerful note, your blog is hilarious and has an ameliorative effect on some of these horrific stories.

  6. Grahje says:

    Personally, asside from the fact that he did this for fun, I fail to see what he did wrong in all this. As stated above, why is it ok to use a shock collar on a small dog (weighing roughly 30-40 lbs) and not ok to use a collar on a child (weighing 50+ lbs). If regulated properly the shock will not injure the child at all. Let’s not forget that nice little peice of police equipment called a tazer emitting a shock up to 50,000 volts. Personally if you want to say its wrong to shock someone as a form of punishment at least be consistent about it and ban it across the board.

  7. Ram Venkatararam says:

    Hilarious Post, TL. Well done.

    You might want to think about pulling together some of the excellent parents you’ve profiled and having a year end “parent of the year” competition on your blog. You could have polls! And guest judges!

    Sorry I haven’t been around to comment much. It’s a 9 to 5 prison thing.

    Tone-Loc? Please…

  8. elizabeth3hersh says:

    I vehemently disagree with Grahje, but do agree on banning it across the board. A shock collar on a child is CHILD ABUSE at its core and is reprehensible and worthy of arrest, prosecution, incarceration and family services intervention. I have heard of tasers used on children as punishment as well. I would wholeheartedly welcome such a ban.

    • Grahje says:

      I think this is where the issue of discipline or abuse comes in. Have you ever played with one of those electric joke pens that shocks you when you try to click it? It doesn’t hurt at all, it’s just the supprise of being shocked that really gets you. I think it would be fine if it was toned down to that and worn on the wrist. (Kid friendly shock bracelet anyone? Your kids will never annoy the neighbors again. haha) About 10-15 years ago it was ok for a parent to spank their children to discipline them. And now its considered child abuse. At this point parents are running out of options on what they can do in order to discipline their child. Some children just don’t respond to “a good talkin’ to”, or being put in the corner. And it was only a matter of time before someone starts thinking outside the box, and taking things that are considered to be humane and acceptable in other applications and applying them to their children.

  9. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Just for ¡Ram!…here is a link to “I like it Funky” by the Angry Mexican DJ’s (I much prefer Tone Loc):

  10. elizabeth3hersh says:

    …”thinking outside the box”…there was no “THINKING” involved. This sounds like the sort of punishment meted out by Appalachians. Check out the 101 comments left by readers on katu (Portland, OR). Seems like they all agree with me and not with you Grahje. Hope you:

    1) don’t have kids
    2) work anywhere near kids
    3) work in any kind of job involving public trust

    I have copied/pasted some of the comments for you:

    I’m thinking retroactive abortion…

    Too bad we closed Guantanamo…

    Attach it to his itty bitty penis and let the kids chase him around and shock him, bet he doesn’t think it’s funny then! What a miserable excuse for a human!

    Tie him up naked and give me a cattle prod.

    He should be made to pee on an electric fence each time he has to go.

    Let’s hook up the jumper cables on this idiots ears, or how about this privates and rev up the motor and let this moron feel the pain his kids felt, he is a p.o.s. and should not ever be able to have any more children.

    Finally, they should turn this guy over to me and Art. We will work some good old fashioned Biblical justice on this dickwad.

    • Grahje says:

      Something makes me beleive that these people would in some way agree with me because only the first 2 and the last comments didn’t involve shocking the guy. The thing is when it comes down to it electricity is an excellent behavior modification tool.

      “Wow, he’s a real dream boat. I can’t believe he even HAS children.
      I think he should be executed by electrocution. He’s clearly beyond rehabilitation and is of no value to society”

      this person obviously underestimates the power of shock thereapy.

      “Kind of immature that a Dad would get kicks off of doing it to his kids, but these things give out less of a shock than touching a door handle after skipping across a Persian rug. Caring pet owners strap them up to their dog’s neck to get them to quit barking. It’s not the end of the world and I don’t think this guy deserves to lose his kids or get Human services involved because of it. I’d say he needs to go to some parenting classes though.”

      found one…

      “What the man did was abuse his kids, plain and simple. Abuse is abuse, even if you think its funny.”

      Goes back to my comment about banning across the board. Abuse to a dog (shock collar) Abuse to cattle (cattle prod) Abuse to a human (tazer)

      I think maybe you should go back and re-read all those posts and realize exacly how sick THOSE people are for some of the ideas they have come up with and suggested. Most of them involving shocking the guy. In the mean time I’ll wait for your kids to end up robbing a store or selling crack because you don’t do anything to discipline them for fear of it being abuse.

  11. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Grahje, your post is a little confusing. Are you saying that we should ban the shock collar, cattle prod and the tazer? If so, I’m on board and so is PeTA. But, your comments also included justifications for using electric shock “therapy” on children and toddlers no less (are infants next?).

    First, allow me to disclose that I have been the victim of child abuse (one particularly savage episode) and child neglect and I can tell you unequivocally, it DOESN’T WORK. What is does do, is create an adult with rage and trust issues. I am also a psychiatric nurse and I have seen and heard just about everything imaginable under the sun. So, from a professional and personal viewpoint, child abuse STINKS.

    Now, on to your argument. A child has a different pain threshold than an adult has. What may seem like an annoying zetz to you may be interpreted quite differently by a child. An electric shock, no matter what the voltage, is an unacceptable form of punishment ON EVERY LEVEL. It is barbaric, crude and completely uncivilized. The people I see utilizing this are potentially 1) a budding serial killer 2) a sadist or 3) someone woefully lacking an education and parenting skills and is flying by the seat of their pants. How you can justify this is beyond the comprehension of civilized society.

    Parenting is hard work. An occasional swat on the tuchis is not child abuse. Many parents go beyond a swat and if it leaves marks, it’s probably child abuse. One of the most touching articles I’ve ever read is by an attorney in Chicago named Andrew Vachss. He wrote an article in 1994 for Parade Magazine on the lasting effects of child abuse titled “You Carry the Cure in Your Own Heart”. Here is the link to this wonderful article:

    I have worked as a guardian ad litem (court advocate for abused children) and I can tell you these “creative” punishments do much more harm than good. The depth some parents sink to can be appallingly bad. What children do respond to (positively) is love and consistent teaching, not threats and violence. I understand your argument that a lack of discipline may turn some kids to a life of substance abuse and crime, but more often than not, it was EXCESSIVE discipline (or the wrong kind) that causes these kids to flounder. I should know.

  12. Wow, TL. How’d you suddenly get so un-funny here? And “just when my affection for you was growing” you get all serious like. 😉

    Anyhoo, I once attended a parenting seminar in which the inevitable “corporal punishment” topic came up. The speaker said, “I don’t necessarily have anything against spanking. It works fine. On good kids.”

    Shocking children, spanking or hitting them might get you immediate results and cause less aggravation for the parent, but a simple solution is not always the best one. If you want an uncomplicated, peaceful life, DON’T HAVE CHILDREN. It’s hard, and to do it right requires thought and patience.

    Unfortunately, the stupid continue to reproduce at an alarming rate. Go watch Idiocracy. Pretty much sums it up.

  13. Grahje says:

    I read the article you linked and it wasn’t bad, certainly worth the read. And although I don’t deny the connection between physical abuse and emotional abuse, the article only touched on the subject of physical abuse. It also failed to recognize that quite possibly millions of children are subjected to what could be considered “child abuse” each day, as forms of discipline but the majority of these children also receive possitive reinforcement from their parents and are well provided for. The issue I seem to come to in all this is “What is discipline and what is child abuse?”. Where is that line where a slap on the backside becomes a malicious beating?

    To explain why you are probably confused by my statements and trying to find out what side I’m on in this debate. Generally when I formulate an oppinion on something I look at it from both sides and try to see it both ways. On the one hand what the guy did was wrong, but why was it wrong and what can you do to make it right?

    Well obviously as I stated before I MOSTLY find it wrong because he did it for fun, not for punishment or discipline. Secondly, after figuring out that it hurt the children he didn’t stop. Next, the collars aren’t regulated for the use on humans and very well could have hurt the child.

    Now lets look at it from the other side. First, shock therapy has been widly used in the mental conditioning of both humans and animals (even rats learn to not touch the cheese after a few shocks). Secondly, an ordinary shock collar does not emit enough voltage or amps to injure even a small animal, and therefor will not hurt anything over ~25 lbs (provided they do not have a pacemaker). Lastly, law enforcement agencies around the world use electric devices to non-lethally subdue unruly individuals.

    And this is where I formulate my stand based on trying to find an acceptable “middle ground”.

    If you wish to claim that this man was in the wrong for even putting the collar on the kids in the first place then lets take it to a bit of an extreme and say that it is wrong to use ANY form of electric shock on ANY form of life. And one could even press farther into beleiving that we should prosecute people that have used a tazer for the purpose of self defense, or a cattle prod for herding cattle, or even a collar on an animal to keep them in the yard.

    Or if you want to say that he did do something wrong by putting it on the kid but the concept itself is not wrong then lets try to find a way to make it safer. Such as a more regulated voltage. Different placement (wrist not neck). And ultimately this creates a form of corporal punishment that can be made into a uniform standard.

    At this point it becomes and either or kind of thing. It’s either option 1 or option 2.

    As for your comment about using such a device on toddlers or worse infants, I should hope that everyone would have enough sense to know that at that age children lack the mental capacity to understand if what they are doing is right or wrong. And if for no other reason such a device would be useless.

    And I really hate to bring this thought up but it did come to mind. If you were a victim of child abuse according to the article (and my own understanding of how people think) your perceptions of this subject are a bit warped and there is a possiblity that you would beleive that ANY form of discipline or physical means of putting that little “don’t do that” thought in their head would be child abuse.

    Something makes me feel like I’m forgetting something but I’m not sure what.

  14. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Thank you Grahje for reading Vachss’ article. The article actually mostly covered emotional abuse. You asked if I was biased based on past experience. Yes, I am biased, but not in a way you would expect. I might be a little more forgiving of what others might deem abuse because I know how bad abuse CAN be.

    My second husband, a professor at a prestigious college, has a Ph.D. in zoology and I am well aware of the shock experiments with the fishies (and who can forget the ghastly pithing of frogs?). Not in a million years would I use shock as a teaching tool.

    You asked where we draw the line between calling a slap on the backside and a malicious beating. I can easily make that distinction for you: if it leaves marks, welts, or bruises, it’s child abuse. I remember well the occasions when I had to wear pants to elementary school in order to conceal the welts that covered my body. We had a strict dress code and it was “dresses only” for girls and I stuck out. It was a double whammy.

    As to whether we should ban tasers (except for law enforcement), cattle prods and other shock “tools”, you already know where I stand on that issue. May I gently suggest Grahje, that you are intellectualizing this subject when a strong visceral response is in order?

  15. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Make that EX-husband. A man can only take so much pontificating (abuse in its own right).

  16. Grahje says:

    I’d like to site that article you linked me to in your last posts as a rebuttle to your statement:

    “I can easily make that distinction for you: if it leaves marks, welts, or bruises, it’s child abuse.”

    by quoting:

    “When it comes to damage, there is no real difference between physical, sexual and emotional abuse. All that distinguishes one from the other is the abuser’s choice of weapons.”

    The issue I’m bringing to light is it’s a matter of opinion, or more rather, what does it take to make someone realize what they are doing is wrong.

    Another issue that I’ve come up with is that you’ve allotted an exception for law enforcement in the overall ban. If it’s THAT inhumane then even law enforcement shouldn’t have it. Remember police are people too.

    Also you claim to be a bit more leanient towards people that abuse children because of your experiences. However if you reread your first few posts you seem to want to just throw the book at this man, with no remorse.

    Lastly your final comment about itellectualizing the subject as opposed to going with a more “visceral” (had to look that word up lol) response, if the commons sense answer is the right one then why is it right? Yes I say what the man did was wrong but only for the ONE reason. Which is he did it for fun. Other than that I don’t see what is wrong with the concept.

    An addage that comes to mind is: What is the difference between a steak knife and a murder weapon?


  17. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Point one: I was clearly referring to physical abuse. You asked repeatedly where one draws the line on corporal punishment. I gave you an unequivocal answer.

    Point two: as to law enforcement, tasers are a necessary evil. If you have ever seen someone under the influence of PCP you would understand. For example, our unit once housed a suspect in four point restraints. This man was so agitated (and exhibiting what best can be described as superhuman strength) that he was able to bounce his way upright and was actually advancing with the bed on his back all the while remaining restrained. Suppose it was a loved one who had PCP slipped to them? Do the police shoot or taser?

    Point three: Yes, I do want to throw the book at this man because administering shock and terrifying a child really crossed the line and is the pinnacle of idiocy.

    Point four: you completely lost me here. I’m going to tell you the best way I can why it is wrong to use a shock collar on a three year old: IT HURTS and it is FRIGHTENING, especially to a CHILD. The person who is entrusted to your well-being is hurting you. I can only guess Grahje, that 1) you are male 2) you have a high pain threshold and 3) I would venture to guess you are young. There should be a parental Hippocratic Oath (“above all, do no harm”) that all parents would be required to swear to before bringing children into this world.

    In the final analysis, if shock devices were humane (yes, I concede they would be effective), the American Academy of Pediatrics would endorse such a product. I have no doubt what side of the issue they fall on and can be fairly certain of the blistering rebuke they would offer up on this subject.

    To encapsulate the above: it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts, it hurts. Grahje, it hurts!

  18. Grahje says:

    I think I’ll just go point by point for this one…

    Point one: Yes you gave an answer of what is child abuse, and a pretty good one at that. However, I can not accept that answer based on a simple instance: someone can strike a child (face/body doesn’t matter) not hard enough to physically injure them but if this is done repeatedly enough it can mentally/emotionally scar the kid. Would this not be considered child abuse? (I think it would and I’m sure you’d agree)

    Point 2: Personally I don’t have to see someone on PCP to know how usefull a tazer can be to law enforcement. There are very few non-lethal options available for officers to incapacitate someone (tazers, rubber bullets, bean bag rounds, tear gas, mace/pepper spray, and my personal favorite flash bangs to name a few). A tazer is the simplest and one of the most effective. I’m only asking for consistency in the subject. If it’s wrong, it’s wrong. PERIOD! But I personally don’t think it is wrong I think it just needs to be changed a lot.

    Point 3: Yes I can agree the man needs to be punished, but not prison. Give him house arrest (separated from the kids of course), community service, parenting class after parenting class after parenting class until he becomes an expert in the subject. But prison is a bit too harsh in my opinion.

    Point 4: Yes of course it hurts, and yes of course its frightening. That’s the point of a Punishment, to make it somehow unbarable either physically or mentally (or both) to make you not want to go through it again. Kids don’t want to sit in a corner with their nose to the wall because to them its unbarable. Being in one place too long, with nothing to do but count the small crevices in the paint is BORING!! And even the threat of this brings enough fear into the kid that they will do most anything to not have to go through it. For some kids though this is not a problem and the punishment doesn’t work. Ultimately you have to find what does instill that fear in the child for the punishment to work. But this fear shouldn’t be constant, nor should it be there for no reason.

    We can apply this logic to adults as well. What keeps honest people honest… fear.
    Fear of being thought of as a bad person.
    Fear of losing their job.
    Fear of being arrested.
    Fear of going to jail/prison.
    Fear of losing their family.
    Fear of being injured.
    Fear of being killed.
    People DON’T do things because they are afraid of what will happen to them if they get caught. It may not feel that way but mentally put yourself in the shoes of someone about to steal, let’s say… a box of cereal from a grocery store. If they get caught then they are labeled a criminal (thought of as a bad person), possibly arrested, sent to jail away from their family, if they resist arrest they could be injured or worse killed, and of course if they have a job they could lose it over this incident as well. This is of course not to say the people aren’t capable of doing things just because they feel it’s the right thing to do.

    Sub-point 4: Your right about me on all counts, but I fail to see how that has anything to do with the subject. I’ll even add a bit more for you, if you haven’t already guessed. I’m unmarried and have no children. But as I said these things have NOTHING to do with the subject, or why I think the way I do.

    Lastly: If the academy did endorse such a product then I’m sure it would be rated for use on kids 5+ and would probably undergo extensive product testing until it was deemed “safe” (I kind of wonder how that would go). Of this I can most definitely agree. I can also agree that the academy would also agree with you and your thoughts on the subject, at the very least the majority would. But maybe they should start looking into it.

  19. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Grahje, you have obviously put a lot of thought into your argument, but what is your thesis? Can you distill and whittle it down to its essence? Perhaps I don’t want to believe that you are advocating such a device on the premise that it works…

    As to the rest of your comments:

    Point 1: You are 100% correct and you provided an excellent example. I only furnished an example of what would constitute physical abuse.

    Point 2: Was the deployment of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima during WWII ethical and consistent with morality? (I especially need you to clarify your premise on this point as it is murky).

    Point 3: I could go along with that. I especially like your suggestion of a crash course in parenting classes. The truth is, most of these bozos were poorly parented themselves and DON’T KNOW HOW to parent properly. One would think it would be instinctual…

    Point 4: If you are talking about normal kids, okay. However, there are kids with ADHD, varying forms of autism, bipolar disorder, lead toxicity, malnutrition, sleep deprivation, depression, anxiety, stress, short bus syndrome and any other multitude of mental, chemical or environmental imbalances and those kids are not going to function the same nor will they necessarily respond to punishment the same. Some creativity may be in order, but certainly not along the lines of shock collars!

    Sub-point 4: When you’re older you will become wiser and when (if) you have children, your viewpoints will change. Trust me on this.

    What is it I should start looking in to? I’ve already figured out to discipline my daughters: the essay ( for some good old fashioned introspection) and CHORES. It’s win/win (they hone their writing skills and the house gets clean). Get sassy? Wash the floor. Call your sister a name? Clean the bathroom. Surly or acerbic? Go vacuum. Come to think of it, maybe I am instilling a work ethic to boot.

  20. Grahje says:

    I don’t honestly beleive that I can break all of the many thoughts and opinions that I have shooting through my mind down into one or two sentences, but I can give it a try.

    “Shock collars. No, shock bracelets. Dumb it down, make it safe and it could be an acceptable option to discipline children”

    I dont think that quite sums it up but I think its the best I can do for you.

    Now down the line again.

    Point 1: We agree, woot. We’re getting somewhere.

    Point 2: Applying MY morals to that question. No it wasn’t right. Killing is wrong, unless of course it’s for food (hunting) or self defense. However in the 2 explosions set off by atomic bombs we accomplished what could have taken 10 more years and millions more deaths to do. But what you’re getting at is “it was necessary” or “the lesser of 2 evils” correct? I agree a tazer is a necessary evil. But what I was doing is rationalizing the concept by using real world examples that work. The basic idea is “if it’s ok here, why is it not ok here?” just to a bit of an extreme.

    Point 3: BAM! 2 things we agree on. I don’t necessarily agree with the “maybe he wasn’t raised right” thing but who really knows what makes people think/do the things they think/do.

    Point 4: Totally agreed. However, this is where good parenting comes in. Part of being a parent is finding out how to teach your kid right from wrong. What will work for one will not always work on another, And it’s a matter of finding what works best for you and your child.

    Sub-point 4: I’m not sure if this is what you meant by that statement, but I’m going to be very blunt about this. The incinuation that I may not be as intellectually developed as someone older than me, or lack the experience necessary to make a judgement. I find absolutely infuriating. I came to my conclusions from my own thoughts which are drawn from my own logic and experiences which are just as valid as those of anyone older or younger than myself.

    Lastly: It wasn’t you that was supposed to be looking into the “kid-safe shock bracelet”. It was supposed to be the academy. In either case props to you for finding a disciplinary measure that works for you and your kids. But that goes back to what I stated in point 4 about needing to find what works. So long as it keeps working, keep using it. When/if it stops working, maybe switch to yardwork lol.

  21. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Would I visit a doctor who utilized shock therapy on adults/children (bracelets, collars, etc)? No.
    Would I have a friend who used shock therapy on a child? No.
    Would I stand by and allow a family member to use shock therapy on a child. Hell no.
    Would I send my child to a school that utilized shock therapy? A resounding no.

    These would not be people I would trust and these would not be people I would want to foster a relationship with.

    As to sub-point 4: “The insinuation that I may not be as intellectually developed as someone older than me, or lack the experience necessary to make a judgment, I find absolutely infuriating.”

    Do you know any young judges? Young tenured med school professors? Young police chiefs? There is nothing like a couple of decades of experience under one’s belt plus an innate moral compass and good character to round out a person. I made a lot of boneheaded decisions and held some equally boneheaded beliefs in my youth. Experience and years have given me a new perspective and have made me a better person. Are you not different than you were ten years ago?

    I wouldn’t even recommend shock therapy on prisoners. Why? Because many also suffer from concomitant mental illness. And when you hurt a criminal, they only want to hurt you back.

    If you honestly believe that it is okay to create a shock bracelet (even if in concept only), than I would implore you to never have children. Yes, I can say that.

  22. Grahje says:

    Would you jump off a bridge? No. But this is YOU. Not some thrill seeker, not some suicidal person, but YOU.

    If I think this way then maybe there are a hundred people that think the same as I do (in ALL age groups). And if there are a hundred people that think like me, then maybe there are a thousand that can at least see where I’m coming from with this. And this seems to be something that you just can’t seem to understand. It’s not for people like YOU. YOU found a way to deal with your children. Many people are still trying to figure it out and the idea is for THEM not YOU.

    Do you have any idea what it takes to become a judge? A professor of anything? A police cheif? All 3 of these possitions you can’t get into without a post-secondary education. Possibly even going as high up as a doctorate. All 3 of them also require the pursuit of a career BEFORE you can even look into becoming one of them. I understand that there are some things that are best learned through experience. But to all but completely dismiss my ideals based entirelly on my AGE is absolutely absurd. And coming from someone older than me I would have expected a much higher level of maturity about such a thing. On top of this, if you did do some “boneheaded” things in the past then maybe just maybe you weren’t smart enought to realize that you shouldn’t do what you did, or you just didn’t take the time to think things through.

    Am I different than I was ten years ago than I am now? Yes of course but I can honestly tell you that ten years ago I probably wouldn’t have been this articulate or well-mannered when answering a question. But I assure you my ideals would have been the same because if you’ve changed your ideals then its safe to assume that even you realized you were wrong. Thus far my ideals, “moral compass”, and experience have not failed me. Maybe I can wait five or ten years and your morals will change again.

    And if you honestly believe that my opinion on this or any subject is null and void because of my age then I implore YOU to start understanding that you can’t just go around dismissing people’s ideas and opinions based on age or experience. Steve Jobs completely revolutionized the world of technology and built a multi-million dollar industry before the age of 30. I hope for your daughter’s sakes that when they get older you can at least accept them as an intellectual equal.

  23. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Grahje, I have not “dissed” or dismissed you due to age. My two young daughters bury me intellectually and I relish it. It means I performed my job well. I respect your keen intellect and I respect your ability to hold up your end of the argument. And yes, there are thousands who think like you and frankly, I find them scary. I think that you and them are grossly out of sync with what the average caring Joe feels about this issue (feels and caring are the operative words here). For the life of me, I can’t figure out why you would even conceive that there is a place in society for shock therapy on a defenseless child whose care you are entrusted. You remind me of the neighbor that does nothing when they KNOW the child next door is being abused. Unfortunately, it is not always a “father knows best” kind of world and to quote an ancient African proverb “it takes a village to raise a child”. You do realize, that you are validating to some degree, Mr. Marcus’ despicable and utterly reprehensible behaviour?

    Your intellect and reasoning would be better served by exploring an alternative to this hypothetical bracelet. I know you can do it. If you wanted to.

  24. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Can we get back to Jesus, boobs and the ACLU?

  25. Grahje says:

    You make it sound like I want to strap kids to a chair and shock them for 3 hours, 3 times a day. And I’m not even saying that we should abolish conventional means of discipline. It’s kind of like taking the bus to work. The majority of people don’t do it, and there are others that refuse to do it. But the option is still there. And that’s all I’m really saying is maybe we should find a way to make a “child shock bracelet” an option.

    The neighbor that stands by when they know that the child next door is being abused. This unfortunately I chalk up to being a matter of perception. As most of the above posts would clearly show, you and I have differing opinions on this. And what may look like an act of abuse to you might look like an act of discipline to me. Circumstance changes a lot. And honestly if I honestly think it’s child abuse, yea I’ll call it in.

    I’ve known from the very begining that I was in some way validating what Mr. Marcus did. Remember I’ve stated more than once that I only think that this man should be punished because he did this to his kids FOR FUN. I think the concept of a shock device for kids is fine.

    There are plenty of alternatives to disciplining a child. And beleive me I’d probably exhaust a lot of them before turning to a shock bracelet myself.

  26. elizabeth3hersh says:

    I think you summed up your views nicely. TL, you know where to send a cut of the proceeds.

  27. elizabeth3hersh says:

    I’m just curious Grahje, would you be comfortable sharing your views with:

    1) your prospective employer?
    2) in your law or med school application?
    3) any friend who might want you to babysit their
    4) your future wife?

  28. Grahje says:

    Prospective employers have to not only figure out if you are qualified for the job. But what kind of person you are to understand if the rest of the work crew will have a problem with you. It may not land me a job but if it’s that big a problem to the employer then maybe it will be that big an issue to the crew and create unnecessary tension. So I generally wouldn’t have any issues with answering any of their questions.

    Honestly I don’t think a school application would even have such a question, but for the sake of arguement lets say they do. This one I would have to say no I wouldn’t put that information down on any application. However if I were asked about it, or the subject came up then I wouldn’t have any issues sharing my views. Personally I don’t think it’s the schools business to know what each and every person’s thoughts are on any subject. They just need to know who you are, if you qualify to go to school there, have you paid your tuition, and if your grades are high enough to stay enrolled.

    Yes of course. Anyone who leaves their child in the care of another person should at least have an idea of how their children were going to be treated and cared for. You wouldn’t put either of your kids in a daycare center without at least taking a tour of it (while it’s open and children are there) would you?

    This one is an absolutely yes. Your spouse is a person that you very well could end up spending the rest of your life with. Parenting children with, etc. This person is someone that you should have an unequalled level of comfort with and should be comfortable talking to them about anything. Ask any relationship councellor and they should tell you, “communication is the basis for any healthy relationship”. It’s a partnership both people have an equal part in not only the relationship but parenting the child. But there has to be consistency. example: I can’t shock the kid for not eating their vegitables and their mother sends them to a corner for 10 minutes the next time it happens.

  29. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Do you realize that each time you elaborate, you are digging yourself in a little deeper? I can’t figure out if you’re for real or someone is pranking me under an assumed name (Grahje)…? If you ARE for real, then you are in some serious need of moral clarification.

    And yes, it is the schools business to know their applicants character. Reminds me of a psychologically unhinged cardiologist in Sarasota, FL. who had a penchant for taking his girlfriends into his office and…I’m not going to tell you what he did, because I think you might enjoy reading it. Suffice it to say, his med school wished they had weeded him out early on. Thank God for Facebook and MySpace as it has become a tool to glimpse inside the minds of prospective employees, students, paramours, etc.

  30. Grahje says:

    Yes I’m real and not a prank. Would you have rather I just said Yes No Yes Yes. That gives you no explanation as to why I said yes or no. It’s kind of like saying “because I said so” to your kids.

    As for your example about the doctor. So what if he is a man whore (unless he killed them because then that’s cause for concern).

    Remember during the holocaust Nazi scientists did many experiments leading to many discoveries in medicine that we still use today. These experiments also killed thousands of people.

    • Grahje says:

      Forgot to rebuttle that comment about needing “serious moral clarification”. I haven’t kill or injured anyone severely or intentionally for that matter. I don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t do drugs, don’t engage in meaningless relationships, don’t steal, I pay my bills, I work hard every day, I treat people with respect, and to top it all off I don’t even really like to lie. I think my morals are fine.

  31. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Why am I not surprised that you would try and find “good” in the morally repugnant Nazi medical experiments? Some of the atrocities included:

    1) exposure to mustard gas resulting in severe chemical burns and death
    2) death by hypothermia from immersion in ice for hours on end
    3) dripping chemicals into the eyes of children to change their color
    4) sewing very young twins together, artificially forming conjoined twins
    5) bone scrapings on children without the use of anesthesia
    6) horrific torturous experimentation with indescribable pain, anguish and suffering
    7) brain dissection while the victims were still alive
    8)) artificially induced gangrene and amputations without anesthesia
    9) sterilization by subterfuge (victims were told to fill out paperwork and while doing so were sterilized by radiation)…not a bad idea for inflictors of shock “therapy” on children

    You do not seem to be able to make the distinction between good and evil, just and unjust. Maybe you should consider changing your user name to Mengele-IsMyHomie because the way I see it, morally, you are two peas in one pod. No, you wouldn’t be Dr. Mengele, but I have a sneaking suspicion you would hand him his tools.

  32. Grahje says:

    I’m fully aware of what atrocities were committed by the nazis. The point you obviously missed was that even bad people can still be good at what they do. You failed to provide me with enough information about the cardiologist in sarasota to give you a better more accurate statement about that point. So I attempted to provide you with a very broad example.

    The thing you fail to realize because your so blinded by your overzealous sense of right and wrong, is that there is right in wrong. There is wrong in right. Basically the concept of yin and yang. There will always be something good that comes from any atrocity you just have to look hard enough for it.

    Examples: The A-bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki effectively ended the war between the US and Japan allowing the US to focus on the european front and help end the war that much sooner. Human experimentation (not only carried out by the nazis) has yielded many medical breakthroughs at the cost of many lives. The rocket technology that takes the space shuttle into orbit is based on the very same missile tech that caused much damage in WW2.

    But this doesn’t mean that you should just go out and do something rash. As I stated above, my morals are fine. In either case we are also getting off subject.

  33. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Making an emphatic declaration that it is plain wrong to shock a child is what you call having an “overzealous sense of right and wrong”? Do you realize that every time I respond to your posts, I have to view Todd Markums mug (which is a shock in itself) and then have to scroll down to read you acting as his criminal defense attorney? Your morals need a realignment and it would behoove you to stop intellectualizing evil.

  34. Grahje says:

    No, what I call your overzealous sense of right and wrong is your inability to understand that there can be something good that comes from something you consider morally reprehensible.

    Have you even stopped to consider that I have to see that same photo? A photo of a man that is probably going to have his children taken from him, and sentenced to live in what amounts to a cage. Not able to watch his kids grow, or be a part of their life. To have to talk to them over the phone instead of being there on their birthday. And what about the kids. The have to live the next few years, essentially fatherless. And all of this because of a mistake he made. And you think I don’t care?

    Then I scroll down and read your posts. Which I can only really relate to a kid jumping up and down yelling “I DON’T LIKE THIS!”.

    Personally I think that if I really do need to have my morals “realigned”. What do you really want me to do? Start smoking, start drinking, start doing any drugs I can get my hands on, start having sex with random people, start stealing, neglect to pay my bills, slack off at work, and treat people like garbage. and lying about it all? Would all that make me a better person? No, if I need to have my morals realigned then you clearly need to learn to think critically and start considering everything from other points of view. And besides evil is a matter of perspective. Honestly I don’t think that you can come up with an example of something PURE evil.

  35. elizabeth3hersh says:

    I can’t help but think that Hitler, Ted Bundy, Pol Pot, Stalin, Lenin, John Wayne Gacy, and Uday and Qusay Hussein, et al., would appreciate your line of reasoning. All were articulate and persuasive. Grajhe, no one cares if Shocky Marcum has to pay the piper for his evil deeds. I have learned (in a professional capacity) that when a parent gets caught doing something deemed child abuse, then there were probably hundreds of other “events” that slipped under the radar.

    Since you are so concerned about Shocky, perhaps you can fund his commissary account and campaign to exonerate him (what a noble and worthy cause). I, on the other hand, prefer to fund my virtual amigo ¡Ram!, who is unjustly housed in a Mexican jail and who would not hurt a wetback gnat (sorry for dragging ¡Ram! into this whole sordid affair).

    In the book “The Mask of Sanity” by Hervey Cleckley, Cleckley describes how the sociopathic personality outwardly appears to be normal, charming and engaging, hence the title of the book. Only by delving into the thoughts housed behind the mask do you see the real person and the real character. Child abusers do not wear an ugly mask. They wear a shield of trust and when that trust has been compromised, it’s time for child protective services to get involved.

    Evil does not exist in a PURE form? I close with a quote by Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel when asked if he believed in God: “God, I’m not so sure of, the devil I AM SURE OF.” Feel free to counter with your quote from Mein Kamph.

  36. elizabeth3hersh says:

    Actually, I don’t know if ¡Ram! would hurt a fly…just trying to inject some levity in this dreary subject.

  37. Grahje says:

    First and foremost at what point did this become a discussion about everything BUT the shock collar incident.

    I’m honestly sure they would appreciate my views, as Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, and Lenin all beleived they were doing what was best for their country. Much in the same way the christians beleived they were doing what was best for christianity during the crusades and the inquisition. Christians are good people right? And I know your not going to like the next thing that comes up but… These cereal killers provide business for hospitals, morgues, police agencies, coffin makers, and cemetaries. These places employ people and pay them so that they can feed their families. So in a sense by creating death they are helping people live. Although I in no way condone their behavior.

    Sure if someone gets caught for spanking their kid too hard then there probably will be many previous incidents of this. It’s called consistency.

    Personally I don’t really care enough to do either. I’m more disgusted by your claim of caring. Yet you’ve not considered the possibility of rehabilitating this person. It also seems that you care much for this iRAM! person as you seem to not have an issue using them a point of leverage (nothing personal iRAM!. My appologies). And name-calling…. really? I beleive the punishment you listed above for that was “clean the bathroom”?

    You had to read a book to figure that out? Everyone wears a metaphorical “mask”. And you can’t tell me that even your kids have ever not trusted you, for any reason what-so-ever. Should you lose your kids? What about the parents out there that tell their kids santa is not real? That could create some trust issues.

    I’ve never read Mein Kamph. For that reason I refuse to pull a quote as it might be used out of context. However you’ve provided me a quote, not an example of evil.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: