So what went wrong? My experience has been that there is always a trail, always. Show me the gentle soul that just has a momentary loss of judgment, morals, compassion, intellect, and self-control and decides to murder someone they care for without some prior evidence of capability.
In the Fox News article, they quote a classmate who stated, "I never in a million years could expect that from George and I still find it hard to believe"," said one college classmate, speaking to FoxNews.com on condition of anonymity."I had multiple encounters and conversations with him and he never seemed capable of such a thing -- no matter what the circumstances."
"NEVER seemed capable"? But wait, just a few paragraphs earlier, Fox News reports that, "Police in Lexington, Va., about 70 miles from Charlottesville, said that in November 2008, Huguely was shocked with a stun gun by an officer there after resisting arrest for public intoxication. He pleaded guilty to two charges last year, was placed on six months of probation and given a 60-day sentence, which was suspended."
"The arresting officer, R.L. Moss, said in a statement Tuesday that she felt it necessary to use the stun gun because Huguely became abusive and his size was no match for her."
I'm having a hard time using the words "never seemed capable" and "stun gun" in the same sentence. There was evidence of anger. Documented evidence. What's not to get?
I'm not saying that every angry outburst ends up in a murder trail. What I am saying is that we are kidding ourselves if we think we can blindly negate the behavioral issues as they are presented and then deny any warning signs as evidence to the inevitable outcome. That is irresponsible and it this case, tragic.
Let's look at this from a different perspective. If my teen had 3 speeding tickets and 2 DUI's, how would you respond if I said that I was shocked when my son got in a drunk driving accident when he took your daughter on a date? What if I said, "I had multiple trips with him in the car and he never seemed capable of such a thing - no matter what the circumstances."? Really?
Here's the problem. We are a reactionary society. We have laws but we can't enforce the laws until there has been a violation. With driving, we have an entire police force combing the streets looking for traffic violations and enforcing the law. With dating, who are the police? Who will be the one to "let the authorities know" that a nice young High School student is verbally abusive to her boyfriend. Who is in place to "report" physical aggression witnessed at the mall? There is no such thing as the "Dating Cop." Are teens expected to be the enforcers? The parents? School officials?
The real tragedy about this story is that in might have been prevented and there will be others like it if we don't make a choice to heed the warning signs. If, as a culture, we continue to drive blindly through the evidence that should be raising red flags, then dating violence and abuse will accelerate faster than the throttle stuck open without any brakes. Prepare for the crash.
Thoughts on this teen dating advice?
Mama j
"IN THE BOOK DATER'S ED, LISA JANDER, THE TEEN-WHISPERER, HELPS PARENTS TEACH THEIR TEENAGERS TO LEARN HOW TO "DATE DEFENSIVELY, NAVIGATE SAFELY AND STEER CLEAR OF UNHEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS." WWW.DATERSED.COM"
0 comments:
Post a Comment