" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch. The list of
tasks youth would not be allowed to do is astonishing to me. For example,
milking cows would not be allowed, and neither would building a fence. One
item that stood out to me was that no youth under the age of 16 would be
allowed to use a tool that was powered by any source other than hand or foot
power. That would eliminate youth using flashlights, garden hoses (because
hoses are powered by water) battery operated screwdrivers, etc. When
hearing this, my son asked me if that meant he no longer had to brush his
teeth since his toothbrush was battery operated. "

http://chrischinn.wordpress.com/2012...k-on-our-farm/

(How can you teach your children if you've forgotten how to use an
old-fashioned hammer?)

There was something about this, years ago. I remember seeing the video of
the farmer, and his 11 year old son, the 11 was aparently very skilled at
running a combine that did eight rows, or gosh knows what. I get visions of
him texting the kids from the Pacman club, and the combine going left and
right, as he lets go of the wheel.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch. The list of
tasks youth would not be allowed to do is astonishing to me. For example,
milking cows would not be allowed, and neither would building a fence. One
item that stood out to me was that no youth under the age of 16 would be
allowed to use a tool that was powered by any source other than hand or foot
power. That would eliminate youth using flashlights, garden hoses (because
hoses are powered by water) battery operated screwdrivers, etc. When
hearing this, my son asked me if that meant he no longer had to brush his
teeth since his toothbrush was battery operated. "

http://chrischinn.wordpress.com/2012...k-on-our-farm/

(How can you teach your children if you've forgotten how to use an
old-fashioned hammer?)

On Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:41:16 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch. The list of
tasks youth would not be allowed to do is astonishing to me. For example,
milking cows would not be allowed, and neither would building a fence. One
item that stood out to me was that no youth under the age of 16 would be
allowed to use a tool that was powered by any source other than hand or foot
power. That would eliminate youth using flashlights, garden hoses (because
hoses are powered by water) battery operated screwdrivers, etc. When
hearing this, my son asked me if that meant he no longer had to brush his
teeth since his toothbrush was battery operated. "

http://chrischinn.wordpress.com/2012...k-on-our-farm/

(How can you teach your children if you've forgotten how to use an
old-fashioned hammer?)


.... but a 15 year old can drive a car

"If you're tired of the passenger seat, you'll have to do a few things
for the Missouri DMV before you can hop behind the wheel. The first
step is to get an instruction permit, which lets first-time drivers
between the ages of 15 and 18 drive while accompanied by a qualified
person (someone over 21 with a valid license)."

On 2/10/2012 1:41 PM, HeyBub wrote:
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch....

They have placed a rethink hold on this for the time being under duress
by all the farm-related groups as well as farm-state Representatives and
Senators.

The trial-balloon modifications are somewhat better but still are far to
onerous if taken literally and would still eliminate virtually and
chance for 4H animals for any kid who wasn't on their parents' own farm,
for example (that is, about the only dispensations so far are
family-farm related, not task-specific or recognizant of such things as
city/town-living 4H members, etc.

It is, indeed, a very bad idea as drafted. Certainly farm safety is
critical to all, but such heavy-handed rules are over the top invasive
big-brotherism at it's finest....

--

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch. The list of
tasks youth would not be allowed to do is astonishing to me. For example,
milking cows would not be allowed, and neither would building a fence. One
item that stood out to me was that no youth under the age of 16 would be
allowed to use a tool that was powered by any source other than hand or
foot power. That would eliminate youth using flashlights, garden hoses
(because hoses are powered by water) battery operated screwdrivers, etc.
When hearing this, my son asked me if that meant he no longer had to brush
his teeth since his toothbrush was battery operated. "

http://chrischinn.wordpress.com/2012...k-on-our-farm/

(How can you teach your children if you've forgotten how to use an
old-fashioned hammer?)


I personally think it is proof of how far out of touch with reality the
Washington crowd really is.

I hope those of you with the ability to share this man's post will do so.


--
Colbyt
Please come visit http://www.househomerepair.com

From this bunch? Who'da thunk?
(Everybody'd thunk!)

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"dpb" wrote in message ...

critical to all, but such heavy-handed rules are over
the top invasive big-brotherism at it's finest....

--

"dpb" wrote in message ...
On 2/10/2012 1:41 PM, HeyBub wrote:
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch....

They have placed a rethink hold on this for the time being under duress
by all the farm-related groups as well as farm-state Representatives and
Senators.

If the 4H crowd wants to be exempted from the child labor laws, they should
buy a Senator or two the old-fashioned way, like Hollywood did. (-: What
could be more natural than a 10 year old kid supporting his family? Worked
great for Michael Jackson.

It's important to remember that these are proposed laws, so each side tends
to start out in extreme territory for negotiating purposes. In this case,
they started out in such remote territory that the two sides never even met.

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are driven by
the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents, crushed by
tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc. Rulemaking like this
often derives from analyzing the causes of death among children and looking
for ways to reduce them. It's like the swimming pool fence laws that exist
in most municipalities. Lots of kids drowned to get those laws put in
place. Kids under sixteen can *seem* awfully mature until they get into a
serious crisis. Childhood is short enough, why rush it so much?

It's a problem in Oz:

http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/art...test-news.html

Last year, 44 people died on farms, including seven children.Seven people
were killed in tractor accidents, six in utilities, three in aeroplanes and
three on quad bikes. Seven people drowned, including four children, one in a
sheep or cattle dip.Another 68 people suffered serious injuries from on-farm
accidents last year.

It's a problem in England:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/as10.pdf

and it's a problem he

http://www.wwgh.com/search/webpages/facts/farm.htm

Farm-Related Injuries

a.. The primary causes of injuries among children on farms include
tractors, farm machinery, livestock, drowning, transportation vehicles,
fires, building structures and falls.Nearly 40 percent of farm deaths among
children are due to machinery and another 23 percent are due to drowning.
b.. Younger children, ages 6 and under, primarily suffer from injuries on
the farm due to falls, large animals and close proximity to tractor
incidents.These injuries may result from a lack of adequate parental
supervision and physical barriers between young children and farm hazards.
c.. Older children, ages 6 to 12, are more likely to suffer from
mutilating farm equipment injuries that result from attempting
age-inappropriate farm tasks.
Kids under sixteen aren't able to evaluate the risk of operating heavy farm
machinery. We don't let them drive cars until that age, with plenty of
conditions. There's good historical reason for that. They're kids. Study
after study shows they just don't develop real critical decision making
capability until their very late teens and early twenties. They're like
high-functioning closet alcoholics in a way. They can function pretty well
in normal situations but they don't react well in a crisis.

When I was 14 or 15 I was operating belt-powered lathes, milling machines
and shapers (descendants of the swinging log door batterer) but I had been
given extensive safety training on their use. I don't think there are many
schools in the nation, if any, that allow kids that young to operate such
machinery anymore. As soon as I was able I got a work permit in NYC and
worked part-time in a carton factory, on Wall St. and at a few other jobs,
often operating heavy machinery. I also got kicked clear across a barn at
that age because I carried a broom and walked too closely behind a horse
that had been abused with a broom. Nobody told me "hey, stupid kid, that
horse is skittish." I can't imagine that stable is run using informal,
unpaid child labor anymore. (-: Things were different in the 60's.

Government has always had the right to act "in loco parentis" and decide
which risks are appropriate for children to take and which constitute child
abuse. Ever since I came across a UPI story about a blind man who drove
around by holding his grandson on his lap to "point out the way" I've come
to realize not all parents and grand-parents think responsibly and some
adjustments have to be made for them.

--
Bobby G.

On 2/10/2012 6:32 PM, Robert Green wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 2/10/2012 1:41 PM, HeyBub wrote:
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch....

They have placed a rethink hold on this for the time being under duress
by all the farm-related groups as well as farm-state Representatives and
Senators.

If the 4H crowd wants to be exempted from the child labor laws, they should
buy a Senator or two the old-fashioned way, like Hollywood did. (-: What
could be more natural than a 10 year old kid supporting his family? Worked
great for Michael Jackson.

It's important to remember that these are proposed laws,

They're not laws, they're rule-making by bureaucrats. ...

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are driven by
the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents, crushed by
tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc. ...

Government has always had the right to act "in loco parentis" and decide
which risks are appropriate for children to take...

Not in a free society, not necessarily, no.

Nobody is arguing that it shouldn't be safe growing up and working on a
farm. But it's a way of life, not just a job.

--

Robert Green wrote:
"dpb" wrote in message
...
On 2/10/2012 1:41 PM, HeyBub wrote:
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch....

They have placed a rethink hold on this for the time being under
duress by all the farm-related groups as well as farm-state
Representatives and Senators.

If the 4H crowd wants to be exempted from the child labor laws, they
should buy a Senator or two the old-fashioned way, like Hollywood
did. (-: What could be more natural than a 10 year old kid
supporting his family? Worked great for Michael Jackson.

It's important to remember that these are proposed laws, so each side
tends to start out in extreme territory for negotiating purposes. In
this case, they started out in such remote territory that the two
sides never even met.

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of death
among children and looking for ways to reduce them. It's like the
swimming pool fence laws that exist in most municipalities. Lots of
kids drowned to get those laws put in place. Kids under sixteen can
*seem* awfully mature until they get into a serious crisis.
Childhood is short enough, why rush it so much?


It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme meddling.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that owned
an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get boozed up
from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a burglary or
anything serious. Having to watch after the animal taught responsibility."

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

On 2/10/2012 1:41 PM, HeyBub wrote:
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch. The list of
tasks youth would not be allowed to do is astonishing to me. For example,
milking cows would not be allowed, and neither would building a fence. One
item that stood out to me was that no youth under the age of 16 would be
allowed to use a tool that was powered by any source other than hand or foot
power. That would eliminate youth using flashlights, garden hoses (because
hoses are powered by water) battery operated screwdrivers, etc. When
hearing this, my son asked me if that meant he no longer had to brush his
teeth since his toothbrush was battery operated. "

http://chrischinn.wordpress.com/2012...k-on-our-farm/

(How can you teach your children if you've forgotten how to use an
old-fashioned hammer?)



More nanny state male bovine droppings. ^_^

TDD

On 2/10/2012 11:38 PM, HeyBub wrote:


A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that owned
an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get boozed up
from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a burglary or
anything serious. Having to watch after the animal taught responsibility."


True dat but then they start having sex with farm animals.

http://www.thelocal.de/society/20120203-40531.html

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of death
among children and looking for ways to reduce them. It's like the
swimming pool fence laws that exist in most municipalities. Lots of
kids drowned to get those laws put in place. Kids under sixteen can
*seem* awfully mature until they get into a serious crisis.
Childhood is short enough, why rush it so much?


It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct outgrowth of
horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were occurring to poorly
trained young children operating heavy factory equipment for long hours and
without breaks. Oddly enough, it's often the parents of kids that are
killed or who are injured that become the strongest advocate for changing
the system, as in Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that owned
an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get boozed up
from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a burglary or
anything serious. Having to watch after the animal taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or kicked
in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too close to a large
animal without the experience or training required to do it safely. I'm
sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not be done according to the
principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in the US
that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm machinery like
400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for a sheep or other farm
animal. Nice attempt to distort and distract, though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their operating
dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not designed for sub-adult
sized bodies that worries me. Based on the number of adults who get their
children killed yearly on ATV's too large and powerful for them, there's
clearly a lack of proper parental concern. That kind of bad behavior is
what creates the laws and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of
"meddlers" with nothing better in the world to do. The state is forced to
act "in loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. That's been going on for quite some time now here and across
the globe.

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to disprove a
point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a kid? Are
YOU a felon? Neither are the millions upon millions of kids that didn't
grow up on farms. Congratulations for creating a uniquely specious
argument. We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons for Want of a Cow" rule.

Next case.

--
Bobby G.

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:06:25 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:



Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct outgrowth of
horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were occurring to poorly
trained young children operating heavy factory equipment for long hours and
without breaks.

It was not that long ago even adults were subjected to that. Most of
the laws were needed. Back then, unions wee also a good thing.




Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or kicked
in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too close to a large
animal without the experience or training required to do it safely. I'm
sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not be done according to the
principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in the US
that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm machinery like
400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for a sheep or other farm
animal. Nice attempt to distort and distract, though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their operating
dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not designed for sub-adult
sized bodies that worries me. Based on the number of adults who get their
children killed yearly on ATV's too large and powerful for them, there's
clearly a lack of proper parental concern.

I don't think it is lack of concern as much as a lack of common sense.
I have mixed feelings on this and won't decide a stand until I see the
actual laws. There are some 10 year old farm kids that I'd trust with
a machine over an allegedly mature adult. Some people have a natural
ability to be able to run and control things, others never get it. To
make a law with a hard and fast age cutoff is wrong.

You mention kids should not operate equipment that is not sized for
them. Perhaps we should make minimum size requirements for anyone
using power tools, machinery and driving. Get them short people off
the road. Where do you stop.

On Feb 11, 4:06*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message

...

Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of death
among children and looking for ways to reduce them. *It's like the
swimming pool fence laws that exist in most municipalities. *Lots of
kids drowned to get those laws put in place. *Kids under sixteen can
*seem* awfully mature until they get into a serious crisis.
Childhood is short enough, why rush it so much?

It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct outgrowth of
horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were occurring to poorly
trained young children operating heavy factory equipment for long hours and
without breaks. *Oddly enough, it's often the parents of kids that are
killed or who are injured that become the strongest advocate for changing
the system, as in Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that owned
an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get boozed up
from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a burglary or
anything serious. Having to watch after the animal taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or kicked
in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too close to a large
animal without the experience or training required to do it safely. * I'm
sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not be done according to the
principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in the US
that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm machinery like
400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for a sheep or other farm
animal. *Nice attempt to distort and distract, though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their operating
dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not designed for sub-adult
sized bodies that worries me. *Based on the number of adults who get their
children killed yearly on ATV's too large and powerful for them, there's
clearly a lack of proper parental concern. *That kind of bad behavior is
what creates the laws and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of
"meddlers" with nothing better in the world to do. *The state is forced to
act "in loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. *That's been going on for quite some time now here and across
the globe.

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to disprove a
point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a kid? *Are
YOU a felon? *Neither are the millions upon millions of kids that didn't
grow up on farms. *Congratulations for creating a uniquely specious
argument. *We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons for Want of a Cow" rule.

Next case.

--
Bobby G.

It is interesting to note that constantly being mentioned as the cause
of an accident is "lack of training" much more frequently than the
fact that a child is DOING the task. The problem appears to be that
with youth and inexperience one does not have the ability to 'self-
train', concluding then that a child is incapable of safely performing
a task. NOT!

Regarding safety education, I am very happy, and lucky, that my father
ALWAYS told me to "picture what can go wrong" Example, starting with
simple tasks like using an axe: miss your swing, hit your leg,
position your limbs out of harm's way; or, grinding wheel: things fly
off it.you can get 'grabbed, wedged, pinched' by it, loose things
pulled into it, and worst, the wheel could shatter throwing pieces.
Thus, I learned to NEVER stand in the plane of a turning wheel, keep
my clothes away, and to make certain fingers can't get caught and
wedged by a turning wheel. He taught me a very useful, transferrable
form of safety education, useable everywhere. He never said, don't
stand here, don't do such and such - a truly limited in value rote
form of safety education. As a result of this education, and in spite
of doing some of the most stupid activities - flame throwers, home-
made gunpowder, zip guns, handgun silencers, etc, etc I still have all
fingers and toes, and sight and hearing intact. Mental faculties are
still being questioned by spouse.

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:06:25 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct outgrowth
of
horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were occurring to
poorly
trained young children operating heavy factory equipment for long hours
and
without breaks.

It was not that long ago even adults were subjected to that. Most of
the laws were needed. Back then, unions wee also a good thing.

It happens in every country. The Chinese are starting to have union
troubles as the demand safer working environments. What goes round . . .

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or
kicked
in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too close to a
large
animal without the experience or training required to do it safely. I'm
sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not be done according to the
principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in the
US
that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm machinery
like
400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for a sheep or other
farm
animal. Nice attempt to distort and distract, though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their operating
dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not designed for
sub-adult
sized bodies that worries me. Based on the number of adults who get
their
children killed yearly on ATV's too large and powerful for them, there's
clearly a lack of proper parental concern.

I don't think it is lack of concern as much as a lack of common sense.
I have mixed feelings on this and won't decide a stand until I see the
actual laws.

That makes sense. As I said before, they're probably starting off at
extremes.

There are some 10 year old farm kids that I'd trust with
a machine over an allegedly mature adult. Some people have a natural
ability to be able to run and control things, others never get it. To
make a law with a hard and fast age cutoff is wrong.

What are the alternatives? To competence test 10 year olds? The law has to
take a sort of one-size-fits-all approach to avoid the creation of an
evaluation bureacracy. At least that's what Justice Scalia has argued
repeatedly when the Supreme Court is asked to make these sorts of decisions.

I've certainly seen adults I wouldn't trust with a burned out match that
couldn't pour **** out of a boot if the instructions were written on the
heel. However, that doesn't change the fact that there's really no
compelling reason for an 11 year old kid to operate a powerful combine. At
least I've yet to hear it.

You mention kids should not operate equipment that is not sized for
them. Perhaps we should make minimum size requirements for anyone
using power tools, machinery and driving. Get them short people off
the road. Where do you stop.

I brought that up to emphasis that in addition to them likely not having the
emotional maturity or the experience needed to operate dangerous equipment,
it's almost NEVER sized correctly for their small frames. Having an
immature person operate a machine that they can't control properly because
they're so small is then a triple whammy and good reason to forbid the
practice.

As for banging too hard on the shorties of the world, I believe that there
are already "obstructed vision" laws in place concerning operating a motor
vehicle when you're too short to see over the dashboard.

http://leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-484.html#NRS484Sec453

That rule's there with good reason. I certainly don't want to share the
road with someone who can't even see it. I would hope you wouldn't want to,
either.

--
Bobby G.

Humans are essentially "monkeys with car keys"

"Robert Macy" wrote in message
...
On Feb 11, 4:06 am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message

stuff snipped

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and
give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to disprove a
point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a kid?
Are
YOU a felon? Neither are the millions upon millions of kids that didn't
grow up on farms. Congratulations for creating a uniquely specious
argument. We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons for Want of a Cow" rule.

Next case.

--
Bobby G.

It is interesting to note that constantly being mentioned as the cause
of an accident is "lack of training" much more frequently than the
fact that a child is DOING the task. The problem appears to be that
with youth and inexperience one does not have the ability to 'self-
train', concluding then that a child is incapable of safely performing
a task. NOT!

I was running a huge turret lathe at age 14 at Brooklyn Tech. HS. But I
didn't operate it before I got serious training on the lathe AND was able to
pass a written safety test. Based on the some of the accidental deaths I've
been reading about, lots of kids are given control of dangerous gear without
proper training.

The number of deaths and injuries of kids using adult-sized ATV's alone is
proof to me that too many parents don't provide the common sense training
that kids need to successfully operate dangerous equipment. The pre-teen
German kids that learned how to use anti-tank guns and operate AA batteries
in WWII is proof that kids can do amazing, adult things, especially if
properly trained. That's the rub. Do they get that training in time to
prevent death or injury to themselves or others? It seems that far too many
don't get good safety training.

Lots of states make driver's ed course mandatory if kids want to get
licenses at an early age. That's done not just to create a meddling
bureacracy but out of the realization that parents that drive like idiots
(and I see a dozen every day on the roads around here) probably won't be
able to train their kids to be better drivers than they are.

Regarding safety education, I am very happy, and lucky, that my father
ALWAYS told me to "picture what can go wrong" Example, starting with
simple tasks like using an axe: miss your swing, hit your leg,
position your limbs out of harm's way; or, grinding wheel: things fly
off it.you can get 'grabbed, wedged, pinched' by it, loose things
pulled into it, and worst, the wheel could shatter throwing pieces.

I think you're luckier than most to have a father that appreciated how
dangerous even non-power tools can be. In our shop classes at BTHS there
was extensive safety training and someone was always walking the shop floor
as safety monitor. They walked around waiting to find someone doing
something unsafe so that they could tag them for a safety violation and that
violator would become the next safety monitor. That system worked out
exceptionally well. We had posted lists of rules (all ties tucked in or
removed, all rings and watches stowed, all workplaces regularly cleared of
debris, etc.) and good enforcement of them. Unfortunately I think in many
situations, the more informal, the less likely kids are going to get
thorough and meaningful safety instruction.

The skeet range I use has a wonderful and impressive display board that
consists of ruputured and exploded shotgun barrels that happened when (time
and time again) shooters got the barrel filled with mud and then fired them.
Hardened steel shredded to ribbons. Even with that display board, people
still explode their shotgun barrels after plugging them accidentally with
mud.

Thus, I learned to NEVER stand in the plane of a turning wheel, keep
my clothes away, and to make certain fingers can't get caught and
wedged by a turning wheel. He taught me a very useful, transferrable
form of safety education, useable everywhere. He never said, don't
stand here, don't do such and such - a truly limited in value rote
form of safety education.

I am concerned, based on the accidents that have killed or maimed child farm
workers, that their parents have been too informal about safety training.

http://www.wwgh.com/search/webpages/facts/farm.htm says:
RURAL DEATHS AND INJURIES

a.. Each year, approximately 70 children ages 14 and under die from
injuries occurring on a farm.
b.. An estimated 150,000 children suffer a preventable injury associated
with production agriculture each year.Although fatal farm-related injuries
among children have declined in recent years, the non-fatal farm-related
injury rate has increased.
c.. In 1998, more than 14,000 children ages 14 and under were treated in
emergency rooms for equestrian-related injuries.Nearly 40 percent of
equestrian injuries result in hospitalization.Head injury is the most common
cause of equestrian-related death and serious injury.
d.. In 1998, at least 43 children ages 14 and under died from All Terrain
Vehicle (ATV)-related injuries.
e.. In 1998, more than 23,500 children ages 14 and under were treated in
emergency rooms for ATV-related injuries and nearly 800 children were
treated for snowmobile-related injuries.
As a result of this education, and in spite of doing some of the most
stupid activities - flame throwers, home-
made gunpowder, zip guns, handgun silencers, etc, etc I still have all
fingers and toes, and sight and hearing intact.

Me too. But I know that some of that is just plain old good luck. There
have been plenty of times where I came very close to punching my ticket. I
remember one 4th of July where I lit an M-80, pulled my arm back to throw it
and had it explode between my thumb and forefinger inches from my ear.
Having what sounds like a church gong going off in my head for a week and a
thumb swolled to the size of a small banana really taught me a lot about
fireworks safety.

Still, a year or two later I lit an "aerial report" off in the street with a
punk, withdrew to a safe distance, heard the mortar report that launched the
explosive round, heard a loud DING as the payload hit a street lamp and
bounced back down to explode just a foot or two away from my. After that, I
began to check for overhead objects.

My buddy used to hold Roman candles in his hand after lighting them until
one day the last flare made a dull thud and exited the rear of the tube and
shot down his shirt sleeve into his shirt. That was the last Roman candle
he ever lit while holding it. You never heard such screaming. Left one
hell of a scar.

Mental faculties are still being questioned by spouse

Always. (-:

--
Bobby G.

On Feb 11, 9:49*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Robert Macy" wrote in message

...
On Feb 11, 4:06 am, "Robert Green" wrote:

"HeyBub" wrote in message

stuff snipped







So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and
give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to disprove a
point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a kid?
Are
YOU a felon? Neither are the millions upon millions of kids that didn't
grow up on farms. Congratulations for creating a uniquely specious
argument. We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons for Want of a Cow" rule..

Next case.

--
Bobby G.

It is interesting to note that constantly being mentioned as the cause
of an accident is "lack of training" much more frequently than the
fact that a child is DOING the task. The problem appears to be that
with youth and inexperience one does not have the ability to 'self-
train', concluding then that a child is incapable of safely performing
a task. NOT!

I was running a huge turret lathe at age 14 at Brooklyn Tech. HS. *But I
didn't operate it before I got serious training on the lathe AND was able to
pass a written safety test. *Based on the some of the accidental deaths I've
been reading about, lots of kids are given control of dangerous gear without
proper training.

The number of deaths and injuries of kids using adult-sized ATV's alone is
proof to me that too many parents don't provide the common sense training
that kids need to successfully operate dangerous equipment. *The pre-teen
German kids that learned how to use anti-tank guns and operate AA batteries
in WWII is proof that kids can do amazing, adult things, especially if
properly trained. *That's the rub. *Do they get that training in time to
prevent death or injury to themselves or others? *It seems that far too many
don't get good safety training.

Lots of states make driver's ed course mandatory if kids want to get
licenses at an early age. *That's done not just to create a meddling
bureacracy but out of the realization that parents that drive like idiots
(and I see a dozen every day on the roads around here) probably won't be
able to train their kids to be better drivers than they are.

Regarding safety education, I am very happy, and lucky, that my father
ALWAYS told me to "picture what can go wrong" Example, starting with
simple tasks like using an axe: miss your swing, hit your leg,
position your limbs out of harm's way; or, grinding wheel: things fly
off it.you can get 'grabbed, wedged, pinched' by it, loose things
pulled into it, and worst, the wheel could shatter throwing pieces.

I think you're luckier than most to have a father that appreciated how
dangerous even non-power tools can be. *In our shop classes at BTHS there
was extensive safety training and someone was always walking the shop floor
as safety monitor. *They walked around waiting to find someone doing
something unsafe so that they could tag them for a safety violation and that
violator would become the next safety monitor. *That system worked out
exceptionally well. *We had posted lists of rules (all ties tucked in or
removed, all rings and watches stowed, all workplaces regularly cleared of
debris, etc.) and good enforcement of them. *Unfortunately I think in many
situations, the more informal, the less likely kids are going to get
thorough and meaningful safety instruction.

The skeet range I use has a wonderful and impressive display board that
consists of ruputured and exploded shotgun barrels that happened when (time
and time again) shooters got the barrel filled with mud and then fired them.
Hardened steel shredded to ribbons. *Even with that display board, people
still explode their shotgun barrels after plugging them accidentally with
mud.

Thus, I learned to NEVER stand in the plane of a turning wheel, keep
my clothes away, and to make certain fingers can't get caught and
wedged by a turning wheel. He taught me a very useful, transferrable
form of safety education, useable everywhere. He never said, don't
stand here, don't do such and such - a truly limited in value rote
form of safety education.

I am concerned, based on the accidents that have killed or maimed child farm
workers, that their parents have been too informal about safety training.

http://www.wwgh.com/search/webpages/...farm.htm*says:
RURAL DEATHS AND INJURIES

* a.. Each year, approximately 70 children ages 14 and under die from
injuries occurring on a farm.
* b.. An estimated 150,000 children suffer a preventable injury associated
with production agriculture each year.Although fatal farm-related injuries
among children have declined in recent years, the non-fatal farm-related
injury rate has increased.
* c.. In 1998, more than 14,000 children ages 14 and under were treated in
emergency rooms for equestrian-related injuries.Nearly 40 percent of
equestrian injuries result in hospitalization.Head injury is the most common
cause of equestrian-related death and serious injury.
* d.. In 1998, at least 43 children ages 14 and under died from All Terrain
Vehicle (ATV)-related injuries.
* e.. In 1998, more than 23,500 children ages 14 and under were treated in
emergency rooms for ATV-related injuries and nearly 800 children were
treated for snowmobile-related injuries.
As a result of this education, and in spite of doing some of the most
stupid activities - flame throwers, home-
made gunpowder, zip guns, handgun silencers, etc, etc I still have all
fingers and toes, and sight and hearing intact.

Me too. *But I know that some of that is just plain old good luck. *There
have been plenty of times where I came very close to punching my ticket. *I
remember one 4th of July where I lit an M-80, pulled my arm back to throw it
and had it explode between my thumb and forefinger inches from my ear.
Having what sounds like a church gong going off in my head for a week and a
thumb swolled to the size of a small banana really taught me a lot about
fireworks safety.

Still, a year or two later I lit an "aerial report" off in the street with a
punk, withdrew to a safe distance, heard the mortar report that launched the
explosive round, heard a loud DING as the payload hit a street lamp and
bounced back down to explode just a foot or two away from my. *After that, I
began to check for overhead objects.

My buddy used to hold Roman candles in his hand after lighting them until
one day the last flare made a dull thud and exited the rear of the tube and
shot down his shirt sleeve into his shirt. *That was the last Roman candle
he ever lit while holding it. *You never heard such screaming. *Left one
hell of a scar.

Mental faculties are still being questioned by spouse

Always. *(-:

--
Bobby G.

Exploding gun barrel, or backfire can happen to the best. One year in
the Olympics the shooter's gun backfired and blinded him! Really a
terrible accident. Wasn't covered much on the news, though.

Robert Green wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of
death among children and looking for ways to reduce them. It's
like the swimming pool fence laws that exist in most
municipalities. Lots of kids drowned to get those laws put in
place. Kids under sixteen can *seem* awfully mature until they get
into a serious crisis. Childhood is short enough, why rush it so
much?


It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme
meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct
outgrowth of horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were
occurring to poorly trained young children operating heavy factory
equipment for long hours and without breaks. Oddly enough, it's
often the parents of kids that are killed or who are injured that
become the strongest advocate for changing the system, as in Mothers
Against Drunk Driving.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that
owned an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get
boozed up from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a
burglary or anything serious. Having to watch after the animal
taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or
kicked in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too
close to a large animal without the experience or training required
to do it safely. I'm sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not
be done according to the principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff
you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in
the US that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm
machinery like 400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for
a sheep or other farm animal. Nice attempt to distort and distract,
though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their
operating dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not
designed for sub-adult sized bodies that worries me. Based on the
number of adults who get their children killed yearly on ATV's too
large and powerful for them, there's clearly a lack of proper
parental concern. That kind of bad behavior is what creates the laws
and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of "meddlers" with
nothing better in the world to do. The state is forced to act "in
loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. That's been going on for quite some time now here and
across the globe.

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and
give birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to
disprove a point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a
kid? Are YOU a felon? Neither are the millions upon millions of
kids that didn't grow up on farms. Congratulations for creating a
uniquely specious argument. We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons
for Want of a Cow" rule.


You raise some thoughtful points. My basic fuss is over the regulation
prohibiting the use of ANY motorized tool. You focus on 400HP combines, I'm
interested in battery-operated drills, vacuum cleaners, blenders, and the
like. You seem to be okay with a 16-year old on a farm being able to drive a
sedan but not being able to drive a pick-up to the feed store.

For me, that doesn't compute.

... but a 15 year old can drive a car

"If you're tired of the passenger seat, you'll have to do a few things
for the Missouri DMV before you can hop behind the wheel. The first
step is to get an instruction permit, which lets first-time drivers
between the ages of 15 and 18 drive while accompanied by a qualified
person (someone over 21 with a valid license)."


Kids can get school permits here in Nebraska at the ripe old
age of 14.
Driving a farm tractor is probably a good way to get some of
the basics down. Maximum speed for most tractors is probably
around 25 mph.

Was that when Culkin moved in ?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

did. (-: What could be more natural than a 10 year old kid
supporting his family? Worked great for Michael Jackson.

That's profound. I may quote that, now and again.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme meddling.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that owned
an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get boozed up
from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a burglary or
anything serious. Having to watch after the animal taught responsibility."

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

On 2/11/12 8:04 AM, Robert Green wrote:

I've certainly seen adults I wouldn't trust with a burned out match that
couldn't pour **** out of a boot if the instructions were written on the
heel. However, that doesn't change the fact that there's really no
compelling reason for an 11 year old kid to operate a powerful combine. At
least I've yet to hear it.


Well, that kid is probably safer in the combine than running
the auger wagon and doing the unloading. The wagon runner could be
dumping into a pit or semi trailer. He could be running various augers,
checking the bin, scooping or whatever.
Some farmers' wives would run the combines while their husbands took
care of the other stuff.
Modern farm equipment is much safer than the older equipment. It has
rollover protection,
cabs, and a bunch of safety shields not found on the older stuff.
Some problems arise when Farmer Brown takes the shields off for whatever
reason, then doesn't replace them.
One problem is the physical size of the equipment nowadays. It's a
matter of being able to see to the sides or behind the equipment.
Harvest is like a lot of other things in farming. There is a lot
of work to do in a short amount of time. It's basically all hands on
deck.
Custom combine crews I've heard of usually do wheat harvest. They
start in Texas then work their way north. I don't know of any doing
corn or soybean harvest.

Humans are essentially "monkeys with car keys"

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 17:30:53 -0600, Dean Hoffman
" wrote:



... but a 15 year old can drive a car

"If you're tired of the passenger seat, you'll have to do a few things
for the Missouri DMV before you can hop behind the wheel. The first
step is to get an instruction permit, which lets first-time drivers
between the ages of 15 and 18 drive while accompanied by a qualified
person (someone over 21 with a valid license)."


Kids can get school permits here in Nebraska at the ripe old
age of 14.
Driving a farm tractor is probably a good way to get some of
the basics down. Maximum speed for most tractors is probably
around 25 mph.

I don't know Florida law now. At 12 (?) I got a work permit that
allowed me to work after school during school week. No permit was
needed to work on weekends.

At 14 I got my first driver's license. I could drive alone during day
light hours, but at night I had to have a licensed driver at least 16
years of age (sister).

I bought my first car at 14. Work is good as it teaches
responsibility, humility and gives experience never to be forgotten.

Working a shovel on farms made me go to work for the government G

On Feb 11, 5:52*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Robert Green wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of
death among children and looking for ways to reduce them. *It's
like the swimming pool fence laws that exist in most
municipalities. *Lots of kids drowned to get those laws put in
place. *Kids under sixteen can *seem* awfully mature until they get
into a serious crisis. Childhood is short enough, why rush it so
much?

It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme
meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct
outgrowth of horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were
occurring to poorly trained young children operating heavy factory
equipment for long hours and without breaks. *Oddly enough, it's
often the parents of kids that are killed or who are injured that
become the strongest advocate for changing the system, as in Mothers
Against Drunk Driving.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that
owned an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get
boozed up from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a
burglary or anything serious. Having to watch after the animal
taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or
kicked in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too
close to a large animal without the experience or training required
to do it safely. * I'm sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not
be done according to the principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff
you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in
the US that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm
machinery like 400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for
a sheep or other farm animal. *Nice attempt to distort and distract,
though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their
operating dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not
designed for sub-adult sized bodies that worries me. *Based on the
number of adults who get their children killed yearly on ATV's too
large and powerful for them, there's clearly a lack of proper
parental concern. *That kind of bad behavior is what creates the laws
and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of "meddlers" with
nothing better in the world to do. *The state is forced to act "in
loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. *That's been going on for quite some time now here and
across the globe.

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and
give birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to
disprove a point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a
kid? *Are YOU a felon? *Neither are the millions upon millions of
kids that didn't grow up on farms. *Congratulations for creating a
uniquely specious argument. *We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons
for Want of a Cow" rule.

You raise some thoughtful points. My basic fuss is over the regulation
prohibiting the use of ANY motorized tool. You focus on 400HP combines, I'm
interested in battery-operated drills, vacuum cleaners, blenders, and the
like. You seem to be okay with a 16-year old on a farm being able to drive a
sedan but not being able to drive a pick-up to the feed store.

For me, that doesn't compute.

A typical pick-up truck is much more destructive in an accident
than the typical sedan at the same speed...

If the pick-up truck is registered as a "farm" or "commercial"
vehicle and is intended to be used for the farming business
rather than a passenger car for the family use then why should
a teenager be able to drive the pick-up ? Safety of the other
people on and around the roads is more important than a
teenager's ability to drive whatever they want...

Using a battery operated drill can cause serious injury, if for
instance the user drills into a live power line or into a hidden
gas pipe... Proper training to use hand tools as well as power
tools should be required... You focus on all the tiny stuff
ans overlook the larger issues... The problem here seems to
be training and competency, so perhaps the portion of
youngsters who can demonstrate competency to an
examiner (like you have to at the DMV to obtain a driver's
license) could be allowed to use various tools and equipment
as they prove their knowledge and skills with those devices
to some sort of standardized assessment...

~~ Evan

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:30:01 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:06:25 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:



Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct outgrowth of
horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were occurring to poorly
trained young children operating heavy factory equipment for long hours and
without breaks.

It was not that long ago even adults were subjected to that. Most of
the laws were needed. Back then, unions wee also a good thing.

A few, perhaps. It didn't take long for organized crime to take over unions
(NOT a good thing).

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or kicked
in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too close to a large
animal without the experience or training required to do it safely. I'm
sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not be done according to the
principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in the US
that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm machinery like
400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for a sheep or other farm
animal. Nice attempt to distort and distract, though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their operating
dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not designed for sub-adult
sized bodies that worries me. Based on the number of adults who get their
children killed yearly on ATV's too large and powerful for them, there's
clearly a lack of proper parental concern.

I don't think it is lack of concern as much as a lack of common sense.
I have mixed feelings on this and won't decide a stand until I see the
actual laws. There are some 10 year old farm kids that I'd trust with
a machine over an allegedly mature adult. Some people have a natural
ability to be able to run and control things, others never get it. To
make a law with a hard and fast age cutoff is wrong.

I think it's wrong to meddle in the family. It's *certainly* wrong for the
federal government to do it.

You mention kids should not operate equipment that is not sized for
them. Perhaps we should make minimum size requirements for anyone
using power tools, machinery and driving. Get them short people off
the road. Where do you stop.

Que Randy Newman...

On Feb 10, 7:32*pm, "Robert Green" wrote:
"dpb" wrote in ....
On 2/10/2012 1:41 PM, HeyBub wrote:
" The Department of Labor has proposed new rules that would restrict
children under the age of 16 from working on a farm or ranch....

They have placed a rethink hold on this for the time being under duress
by all the farm-related groups as well as farm-state Representatives and
Senators.

If the 4H crowd wants to be exempted from the child labor laws, they should
buy a Senator or two the old-fashioned way, like Hollywood did. *(-: *What
could be more natural than a 10 year old kid supporting his family? *Worked
great for Michael Jackson.

It's important to remember that these are proposed laws, so each side tends
to start out in extreme territory for negotiating purposes. *In this case,
they started out in such remote territory that the two sides never even met.

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are driven by
the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents, crushed by
tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc. *Rulemaking like this
often derives from analyzing the causes of death among children and looking
for ways to reduce them. *It's like the swimming pool fence laws that exist
in most municipalities. *Lots of kids drowned to get those laws put in
place. *Kids under sixteen can *seem* awfully mature until they get into a
serious crisis. *Childhood is short enough, why rush it so much?

It's a problem in Oz:

http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/art...795_latest-new...

Last year, 44 people died on farms, including seven children.Seven people
were killed in tractor accidents, six in utilities, three in aeroplanes and
three on quad bikes. Seven people drowned, including four children, one in a
sheep or cattle dip.Another 68 people suffered serious injuries from on-farm
accidents last year.

It's a problem in England:

http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/as10.pdf

and it's a problem he

http://www.wwgh.com/search/webpages/facts/farm.htm

Farm-Related Injuries

* a.. The primary causes of injuries among children on farms include
tractors, farm machinery, livestock, drowning, transportation vehicles,
fires, building structures and falls.Nearly 40 percent of farm deaths among
children are due to machinery and another 23 percent are due to drowning.
* b.. Younger children, ages 6 and under, primarily suffer from injuries on
the farm due to falls, large animals and close proximity to tractor
incidents.These injuries may result from a lack of adequate parental
supervision and physical barriers between young children and farm hazards..
* c.. Older children, ages 6 to 12, are more likely to suffer from
mutilating farm equipment injuries that result from attempting
age-inappropriate farm tasks.
Kids under sixteen aren't able to evaluate the risk of operating heavy farm
machinery. *We don't let them drive cars until that age, with plenty of
conditions. *There's good historical reason for that. *They're kids. *Study
after study shows they just don't develop real critical decision making
capability until their very late teens and early twenties. *They're like
high-functioning closet alcoholics in a way. *They can function pretty well
in normal situations but they don't react well in a crisis.

When I was 14 or 15 I was operating belt-powered lathes, milling machines
and shapers (descendants of the swinging log door batterer) but I had been
given extensive safety training on their use. *I don't think there are many
schools in the nation, if any, that allow kids that young to operate such
machinery anymore. *As soon as I was able I got a work permit in NYC and
worked part-time in a carton factory, on Wall St. and at a few other jobs,
often operating heavy machinery. * *I also got kicked clear across a barn at
that age because I carried a broom and walked too closely behind a horse
that had been abused with a broom. *Nobody told me "hey, stupid kid, that
horse is skittish." *I can't imagine that stable is run using informal,
unpaid child labor anymore. *(-: *Things were different in the 60's.

Government has always had the right to act "in loco parentis" and decide
which risks are appropriate for children to take and which constitute child
abuse. *Ever since I came across a UPI story about a blind man who drove
around by holding his grandson on his lap to "point out the way" I've come
to realize not all parents and grand-parents think responsibly and some
adjustments have to be made for them.

--
Bobby G.

@Robert Green:

A child actor needs to be supervised at all times by a parent
or legal guardian while working in the media industry and MUST
also attend school on set during down time...

At all times means the parent or legal guardian must be
present at the work location and be supervising and
monitoring the activities of the child and everything that
child is doing...

It is not like a parent drops a child actor off at the set and
comes back to pick them up hours later...

This is why young children are allowed to work in the
entertainment media industry, their parent/guardian
is supposed to be there and looking out for their
safety at all times...

~~ Evan

On 2/11/12 9:25 AM, RonB wrote:

We live in rural SE Kansas and this has been getting some air-time
down here. Absolutely stupid, especially in and area like this were
farm work is one of the best options for young people. High School
kids are an important source of labor for farmers and it can pay well
for youngsters needing a source of income. I spent a lot of my
summers and some school-year weekends pitching hay, handling livestock
and mowing fields. Now we are raising an entire generation who think
the french-fry cooker at McDonald's is hard work.


The farmers in my area (southeast Nebraska) baled hay in
the 60# or so bales. Not much stacking. Hauling hay was good
money for some of my friends.
We have some big seed companies in my area: Pioneer, Monsanto,
and Mycogen. The kids can make some money detassling. I think
most are 13-16. Detassling is done before school starts.
Most of the actual work is just the walking down the rows. They
usually get together in groups of a couple or five then do their thing.
I think they try to get done by two or so in the afternoon before the
serious heat hits.
It's good for them. They learn about the basics of earning a living.
I tried to find the exact quote "Idleness is the devil's workshop".
This turned up in the search:

It is the working man who is the happy man. It is the idle man who is
the miserable man.
[info][add][mail]
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)
From http://tinyurl.com/7ba5bwg

On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:49:39 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:



of an accident is "lack of training" much more frequently than the
fact that a child is DOING the task. The problem appears to be that
with youth and inexperience one does not have the ability to 'self-
train', concluding then that a child is incapable of safely performing
a task. NOT!

I was running a huge turret lathe at age 14 at Brooklyn Tech. HS. But I
didn't operate it before I got serious training on the lathe AND was able to
pass a written safety test. Based on the some of the accidental deaths I've
been reading about, lots of kids are given control of dangerous gear without
proper training.

The number of deaths and injuries of kids using adult-sized ATV's alone is
proof to me that too many parents don't provide the common sense training
that kids need to successfully operate dangerous equipment.



The pre-teen
German kids that learned how to use anti-tank guns and operate AA batteries
in WWII is proof that kids can do amazing, adult things, especially if
properly trained. That's the rub. Do they get that training in time to
prevent death or injury to themselves or others? It seems that far too many
don't get good safety training.


I agree that too many kids are injured and killed. That said,
government meddling in the family is still wrong. A law may top a kid
from using a power tool, so since he cannot drill a few holes to mend
a gate, he takes the ATV out and wrecks it and himself.

You cannot legislate common sense. Just a little bit of it would do
more than a hundred laws. Because a few kids are not properly trained
or capable of performing a task, thousands of others are forbidden to
do those things. I have a hard time with that, especially coming from
Washington.

Some people turn sudafed into meth, so now it's outlawed. And only outlaws
have Sudafed.

I think the "it's for the children" routine is a bit over used.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...

I agree that too many kids are injured and killed. That said,
government meddling in the family is still wrong. A law may top a kid
from using a power tool, so since he cannot drill a few holes to mend
a gate, he takes the ATV out and wrecks it and himself.

You cannot legislate common sense. Just a little bit of it would do
more than a hundred laws. Because a few kids are not properly trained
or capable of performing a task, thousands of others are forbidden to
do those things. I have a hard time with that, especially coming from
Washington.

"Stormin Mormon" wrote

Some people turn sudafed into meth, so now it's outlawed. And only
outlaws
have Sudafed.

I think the "it's for the children" routine is a bit over used.

For one thing, it's not "outlawed." You just can't buy industrial
quantities of it.

The irony here is that the rules about quantity purchasing were part of the
extension of the Patriot Act signed into law by George Bush and voted for by
both parties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoephedrine

Attempts to control the sale of the drug date back to 1986, when federal
officials at the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) first drafted
legislation, later proposed by Senator Bob Dole, R-KS, that would have
placed a number of chemicals used in the manufacture of illicit drugs under
the Controlled Substances Act

It took a while, but the Republican controlled congress passed the Combat
Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005 ("CMEA") as an amendment to the renewal
of the USA PATRIOT Act. Signed into law by president George W. Bush on March
6, 2006, the act amended 21 U.S.C. § 830, concerning the sale of
pseudoephedrine-containing products

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archiv...us/patriotact/

Many states began writing their own laws concerning pseudoephedrine
products:

http://www.walgreens.com/marketing/l...oephedrine.jsp

In April 2006, restrictions began limiting the number of packages of
products containing these ingredients that can be purchased in one
transaction and the number that can be purchased in a 30-day period. Since
September 30, 2006, all products must be placed behind the pharmacy counter,
and purchasers of any of the above items are required to show identification
and sign a logbook. In addition to the federal law above, many state
governments have enacted their own laws regarding the sale of
pseudoephedrine products.

--
Bobby G.

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:49:39 -0500, "Robert Green"
wrote:

stuff snipped

The number of deaths and injuries of kids using adult-sized ATV's alone
is
proof to me that too many parents don't provide the common sense training
that kids need to successfully operate dangerous equipment.

The pre-teen
German kids that learned how to use anti-tank guns and operate AA
batteries
in WWII is proof that kids can do amazing, adult things, especially if
properly trained. That's the rub. Do they get that training in time to
prevent death or injury to themselves or others? It seems that far too
many
don't get good safety training.

I agree that too many kids are injured and killed. That said,
government meddling in the family is still wrong.

The farm family is an interesting hybrid animal, much like the family-owned
store or restaurant. Those other family entities long ago yielded to child
labor laws, although I believe they both managed to carve out exemptions for
family members.

A law may top a kid
from using a power tool, so since he cannot drill a few holes to mend
a gate, he takes the ATV out and wrecks it and himself.

Interestingly enough,

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/84/4/694

Talks about how people *thought* 3 wheeled ATVs killed SO many kids that
manufacturers and the government both agreed to withdraw 3 wheeled ATVs from
the market. But the numbers seem to indicate that more kids were injured in
4 wheel units. Sometimes it takes a while before the solution emerges.
Kids need to be trained on using ATV's the way they are sent to driver's ed.

Unfortunately the normal "back and forth" between concerned parties to reach
a balanced conclusion seems to be a relic of the past. Nowadays, both sides
are resorting to scare tactics and FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) to
falsely present the other side's agenda. Suddenly any attempt to regulate
is portrayed as a total ban on everything. I call it "Death Panelism."

To reach a good compromise solution, sometimes all it takes is raising
awareness on an issue so that the points can be debated fairly. It's easy
to see from this and other discussions is that people are naturally inclined
to examine and evaluate proposals. I doubt a push to ban ALL power tools is
realistic. That's not happening in the rest of America where I see 10 year
olds running gas mower businesses so why would anyone EVER expect farmers to
have to put up with it that sort of draconian restriction? It's common in
negotiations for both sides to ask for things they don't really want so they
have something they can yield on to get something they really want.

You cannot legislate common sense.

So true. That, unfortunately leaves a bunch of unpalatable options for
dealing with those who lack it. We've discovered that people are no damn
good and need regulatin' when it comes to automobiles. What do you think
the chances are of people buying car insurance if they weren't forced to?
Would you want to drive on roads alongside completely unlicensed or
uninsured drivers or 12 year old kids?

Just a little bit of it would do more than a hundred laws.

How do you beat it into people? (-: I've taken to watching "Hard Core
Pawn" and "Parking Wars" and it seems to me that the US is pretty "long" in
very stupid people. People who think they are somehow being cheated when a
pawnbroker refuses to lend them *anything* on a fake watch. Then they sit
there and say "I am not leaving until you give me something!" How do you
deal with people TFD? Figuring out what to do with the people at the
fringes who are few in number but make much of the trouble is a vexing
problem. The USMC uses company punishment (punish the group for the actions
of one man) to rein in the bad ones but civilians can't be run like the
Marines. And "Full Metal Jacket" demonstrated that company punishment can
backfire.

Because a few kids are not properly trained or capable of performing a
task, thousands
of others are forbidden to do those things. I have a hard time with that,
especially coming from
Washington.

It's not just Washington. I doubt in this day and age that you will find
very many high schools like mine that offered hands-on classes in foundry,
machine shop, woodworking, electronics, broadcasting (we had a 25KW station
on the roof of an eight story building that covered a city block),
metallurgy, drafting, etc. It's not the government that's behind the
disappearance of shop programs, it's litigious parents who think any injury
a child receives at school is "cha ching" like winning the lottery.
Insurance rates for such programs soared until they were unaffordable. It
seems at least part of the push to reform farm labor laws is coming from
insurers who want to clearly define (and then limit) their risks writing
farm policies.

In some ways it was like the big bulb makes pushing the CFL law so they
could sell bulbs for ten times what they used to charge. There's nothing
business seems to like more than to blame the government for something
they've done. They're doing it now with anti-cancer and RA drugs and many
more. Blaming the new healthcare law so they can increase prices sometimes
eighty-fold.

--
Bobby G.

On Feb 11, 6:08*pm, Dean Hoffman "
wrote:
On 2/11/12 9:25 AM, RonB wrote:

We live in rural SE Kansas and this has been getting some air-time
down here. *Absolutely stupid, especially in and area like this were
farm work is one of the best options for young people. *High School
kids are an important source of labor for farmers and it can pay well
for youngsters needing a source of income. *I spent a lot of my
summers and some school-year weekends pitching hay, handling livestock
and mowing fields. *Now we are raising an entire generation who think
the french-fry cooker at McDonald's is hard work.

* * *The farmers in my area (southeast Nebraska) *baled hay in
the 60# or so bales. *Not much stacking. *Hauling hay was good
money for some of my friends.
* * We have some big seed companies in my area: *Pioneer, Monsanto,
and Mycogen. * The kids can make some money detassling. *I think
most are 13-16. *Detassling is done before school starts.
* *Most of the actual work is just the walking down the rows. *They
usually get together in groups of a couple or five then do their thing.
I think they try to get done by two or so in the afternoon before the
serious heat hits.
* *It's good for them. *They learn about the basics of earning a living.
I tried to find the exact quote "Idleness is the devil's workshop".
This turned up in the search:

It is the working man who is the happy man. It is the idle man who is
the miserable man.
* * *[info][add][mail]
* * *Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)
* From *http://tinyurl.com/7ba5bwg

What this quote seems to gloss over is that the working man's OUTPUT,
his essencs if you will, is desired by mankind, which makes him hapy.
Where in contrast, the idle man is idle because nobody wants anything
from him, he has no need to be alive, very unhappy indeed.

It's like the religiious groups that ostracize a member by NOT letting
him contribute, a horrible punishment.

"Evan" wrote in message
...
On Feb 10, 7:32 pm, "Robert Green" wrote:

stuff snipped

@Robert Green:

A child actor needs to be supervised at all times by a parent
or legal guardian while working in the media industry and MUST
also attend school on set during down time...

At all times means the parent or legal guardian must be
present at the work location and be supervising and
monitoring the activities of the child and everything that
child is doing...

It is not like a parent drops a child actor off at the set and
comes back to pick them up hours later...

This is why young children are allowed to work in the
entertainment media industry, their parent/guardian
is supposed to be there and looking out for their
safety at all times...

That's what's *supposed* to happen. Read through Paul Petersen's site to
discover what actually DOES happen.

http://www.minorcon.org/

Even if all the "accomodations" you've listed were actually honored, the
bottom line is that child actors are often poorly socialized and unfit for
any *normal* career once their star stops shining. The story of TV's Dennis
the Menace, Jay North, is particularly disturbing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_North

We all know how child star Michael Jackson ended up. Kids become child
stars because their parents pushed them into it, and they usually pushed
them pretty hard. I call that exploitation and no amount of assurances that
the child is under constant, caring supervision could change my mind. You
don't really think little Jon Benet Ramsay woke up one day and decided she
wanted to compete in child beauty pagents? Or murdered by some scuzzball
who liked seeing little girls in lipstick.

I would say that the *real* reason that Hollywood gets a huge exemption from
the childhood labor laws is that there's an enormous amount of money to be
made. Often, the child sees very little of it. But producers make millions
from films like "Home Alone." Money talks and Hollywood's got dump trucks
full of it. And that's why they're exempt from the laws of the land. They
bought the lawmakers.

I hope Mr. Petersen doesn't mind my more than fair use copying of his
article, but here's how it works in the real world, from someone who's
walked the walk:

As with any system and any institution, the cracks began to appear as the
whole system matured. People (studios, new teachers, stage-parents and the
Industry generally) learned to manipulate the System. . . Over the next
twenty years the system degenerated to such an extent that the LAUSD threw
in the towel. It's teachers had been compromised, the rules were routinely
disregarded (violations were just never reported) and frankly, those folks
down on Grand Avenue in Los Angeles Unified headquarters had had enough.
Teacher credentialling was shifted over to the Labor Department which knew
nothing about teachers, let alone the movie business. The deterioration of
the Studio Teacher's union (Local 884) began at this point in time . . . In
1986 the "Twilight Zone" tragedy illuminated just how far we'd slipped. With
everyone turning the other way, two immigrant children where hired
illegally, made to work illegal hours (kids can't work past 12:30am) amidst
explosions and directly beneath a helicopter. When the choppers tail rotor
was blasted off because it dropped too low, the copter dropped down on Vic
Morrow and decapitated not only Vic but the two children he was carrying.
Incidentally, but for the minor guilty verdicts of no work permits and
illegal hours, no one was found guilty of anything substantial. Steven
Spielberg went on with his life and career. John Landis paid a minor fine
and went on directing.

But the two people who testified for the prosecution, the helicopter pilot
and the special effects man, have not worked since! Hollywood is a tough
town. Blacklisting is as real now as it was in the 50's ... **only this time
it is the liberal left doing the Blacklisting and acting holier than thou.**
(emphasis mine) The sole changes to the law that matter is that kids can no
longer work around whirling helicopter blades. How lame!

Source: http://www.minorcon.org/failingsystem.html

That's the real world, Evan, not the fairy-tale that Hollywood has created
to justify child exploitation.

--

Bobby G.

"Dean Hoffman" " wrote in message
...
On 2/11/12 8:04 AM, Robert Green wrote:

I've certainly seen adults I wouldn't trust with a burned out match that
couldn't pour **** out of a boot if the instructions were written on the
heel. However, that doesn't change the fact that there's really no
compelling reason for an 11 year old kid to operate a powerful combine.
At
least I've yet to hear it.


Well, that kid is probably safer in the combine than running
the auger wagon and doing the unloading. The wagon runner could be
dumping into a pit or semi trailer. He could be running various augers,
checking the bin, scooping or whatever.

I assume much of the danger from an 11 year old driving a huge combine is
not for the driver, but for the people and things he might collide with or
inadvertently harvest. (-: I seem to remember at least one film where
someone met their doom in the innards of a combine.

Some farmers' wives would run the combines while their husbands took
care of the other stuff.
Modern farm equipment is much safer than the older equipment. It has
rollover protection,
cabs, and a bunch of safety shields not found on the older stuff.

I'll bet. When I saw that the new ones drive themselves using GPS signals,
I realized why they cost as much as a house. As my Dad said, there's
usually at least one body behind every safety improvement, sometimes lots
more. Mountaineering equipment, for instance, often has a very high body
count behind each improvement.

Some problems arise when Farmer Brown takes the shields off for whatever
reason, then doesn't replace them.

A common industry practice. When I worked as an industrial carpenter, it
was SOP to remove guards from saws because they were so cumbersome.

One problem is the physical size of the equipment nowadays. It's a
matter of being able to see to the sides or behind the equipment.

The woman who was running a combine since age 11 on the Modern Marvels
program was STILL having trouble seeing out of the cab. It was clearly
designed for a 6' man, not a 4'10" woman. I nearly backed over a little
girl on a tricycle when I bought a van. I didn't realize how enormous a
blind spot there was behind the vehicle. We had a thread a while back about
how some single-engine planes provide very poor visibility of the ground
directly ahead of the airplane. During snow and ice storms here I routinely
see people driving cars, peering through the small, fist-size hole they've
scraped on the front windshield with no side or rear visibility. What was
Ed saying about common sense? (-:

Harvest is like a lot of other things in farming. There is a lot
of work to do in a short amount of time. It's basically all hands on
deck.

I can understand that. I've visited a number of farms and went to school
with a lot of kids who were raised on farms. The issues of illegals has
also "raised awareness" of how critical large amounts of labor at precisely
the right time are, and how neatly illegal immigrants fit into those needs.
I think it's hard for most non-farmers to understand how dependent farmers
are on weather. We sort of know about it from the freeze vigils in Florida
from time to time, but I don't think people really appreciate the effects of
abnormal rainfall or drought on farmers. To me it sounds a little like
playing poker and going "all in" on every round. Very tense.

Custom combine crews I've heard of usually do wheat harvest. They
start in Texas then work their way north. I don't know of any doing
corn or soybean harvest.

Yes, it was a program about wheat - they did a block of programs - corn,
rice, wheat and something else I am forgetting. They showed a fleet of
combines working several farms trying to stay ahead of the rain. They also
showed film from the '30's of people using scythes to do the same thing. It
reminded me of the progress that was made in the PC industry, going from
64Kb of memory and 180K floppies to 16Gb machines with 3 terabyte hard
drives. Ten thousand men with scythes couldn't come close to what those 5
huge combines were able to do in one afternoon. I was mightily impressed.

Ah yes, the fourth program was about nuts. I had never seen the huge
machines that grab trees and shake all the nuts off them in a few violent
seconds. I'd like to attach it to some people I know to shake some sense
into them. Farming has changed quite substantially in the last 100 years.
It's now a mechanized industry that's accumulated a large body of scientific
knowledge. You have to be a chemist, an engineer, an electrician, a
climatologist, a computer scientist, an accountant and be able to predict
the future to succeed.

--
Bobby G.

On Feb 11, 6:06*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message

...

Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of death
among children and looking for ways to reduce them. *It's like the
swimming pool fence laws that exist in most municipalities. *Lots of
kids drowned to get those laws put in place. *Kids under sixteen can
*seem* awfully mature until they get into a serious crisis.
Childhood is short enough, why rush it so much?

It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct outgrowth of
horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were occurring to poorly
trained young children operating heavy factory equipment for long hours and
without breaks. *Oddly enough, it's often the parents of kids that are
killed or who are injured that become the strongest advocate for changing
the system, as in Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

MAD is another fine example of an organization
run byy extremeists. When they get one more restriction
on alcohol, they are off to the next. The drunk
drivers causing all the carnage are for the most
part those with 3 DWIs already, driving around with
BAC of .3 MAD wants to
make sure the little old lady that's coming back from
a birthday party that's at .08 gets nailed. If they had
their way, we'd go back to prohibition. Of course
they won't tell you that.....





A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that owned
an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get boozed up
from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a burglary or
anything serious. Having to watch after the animal taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or kicked
in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too close to a large
animal without the experience or training required to do it safely.

How about children killed in skateboarding accidents?
My God! Think of the children! All the broken necks,
broken bones.. Why it should be banned IMMEDIATELY.
What's next? Oh, I know. I see little kids on the
ski slopes. That's a dangerous activity too. Let's
ban it.




I'm
sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not be done according to the
principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in the US
that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm machinery like
400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for a sheep or other farm
animal. *Nice attempt to distort and distract, though.

I don't see anything distorted.



I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their operating
dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not designed for sub-adult

Think of the CHILDREN. That horse or jackass could
kick them in the head and kill them!



sized bodies that worries me. *Based on the number of adults who get their
children killed yearly on ATV's too large and powerful for them, there's
clearly a lack of proper parental concern. *That kind of bad behavior is
what creates the laws and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of
"meddlers" with nothing better in the world to do.

Spoken by a meddler.





*The state is forced to
act "in loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. *That's been going on for quite some time now here and across
the globe.

Yes, if we listen to the libs like you, the govt will
be ticketing us for eating french fries or not brushing
out teeth next.




So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and give
birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

Not




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to disprove a
point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a kid?

No, but I worked with plenty of power eqpt that was
similarly dangerous.


*Are
YOU a felon?

Not yet, but soon we all will be if we choose not
to live our lives in cages as guys like you dictate.


Neither are the millions upon millions of kids that didn't
grow up on farms.

Which means what?




*Congratulations for creating a uniquely specious
argument. *We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons for Want of a Cow" rule.


The only specious thing here is your leftist logic.

On Feb 11, 7:54*pm, Evan wrote:
On Feb 11, 5:52*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:





Robert Green wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of
death among children and looking for ways to reduce them. *It's
like the swimming pool fence laws that exist in most
municipalities. *Lots of kids drowned to get those laws put in
place. *Kids under sixteen can *seem* awfully mature until they get
into a serious crisis. Childhood is short enough, why rush it so
much?

It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme
meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct
outgrowth of horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were
occurring to poorly trained young children operating heavy factory
equipment for long hours and without breaks. *Oddly enough, it's
often the parents of kids that are killed or who are injured that
become the strongest advocate for changing the system, as in Mothers
Against Drunk Driving.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that
owned an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get
boozed up from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a
burglary or anything serious. Having to watch after the animal
taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or
kicked in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too
close to a large animal without the experience or training required
to do it safely. * I'm sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not
be done according to the principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff
you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in
the US that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm
machinery like 400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for
a sheep or other farm animal. *Nice attempt to distort and distract,
though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their
operating dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not
designed for sub-adult sized bodies that worries me. *Based on the
number of adults who get their children killed yearly on ATV's too
large and powerful for them, there's clearly a lack of proper
parental concern. *That kind of bad behavior is what creates the laws
and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of "meddlers" with
nothing better in the world to do. *The state is forced to act "in
loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. *That's been going on for quite some time now here and
across the globe.

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and
give birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to
disprove a point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a
kid? *Are YOU a felon? *Neither are the millions upon millions of
kids that didn't grow up on farms. *Congratulations for creating a
uniquely specious argument. *We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons
for Want of a Cow" rule.

You raise some thoughtful points. My basic fuss is over the regulation
prohibiting the use of ANY motorized tool. You focus on 400HP combines, I'm
interested in battery-operated drills, vacuum cleaners, blenders, and the
like. You seem to be okay with a 16-year old on a farm being able to drive a
sedan but not being able to drive a pick-up to the feed store.

For me, that doesn't compute.

A typical pick-up truck is much more destructive in an accident
than the typical sedan at the same speed...

If the pick-up truck is registered as a "farm" or "commercial"
vehicle and is intended to be used for the farming business
rather than a passenger car for the family use then why should
a teenager be able to drive the pick-up ? *Safety of the other
people on and around the roads is more important than a
teenager's ability to drive whatever they want...

Using a battery operated drill can cause serious injury, if for
instance the user drills into a live power line or into a hidden
gas pipe... *Proper training to use hand tools as well as power
tools should be required... *You focus on all the tiny stuff
ans overlook the larger issues... *The problem here seems to
be training and competency, so perhaps the portion of
youngsters who can demonstrate competency to an
examiner (like you have to at the DMV to obtain a driver's
license) could be allowed to use various tools and equipment
as they prove their knowledge and skills with those devices
to some sort of standardized assessment...

~~ Evan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, good idea. Let's set up another big govt
bureaucracy to test, register, license 14 year olds
working on a farm. Let's make sure to hire inspectors
to go visit the farms. About 25,000 fed employees
should about do it. All this with a whopping 70
children deaths a year in the USA? How many
children die each year in bicycle accidents?
Tricycle accidents? School sports? Unfortunately
life has risks and big govt just brings about more big
govt without really solving anything.

On Feb 12, 10:49*am, "Robert Green"
wrote:
"Evan" wrote in message

...
On Feb 10, 7:32 pm, "Robert Green" wrote:

stuff snipped

@Robert Green:

A child actor needs to be supervised at all times by a parent
or legal guardian while working in the media industry and MUST
also attend school on set during down time...

At all times means the parent or legal guardian must be
present at the work location and be supervising and
monitoring the activities of the child and everything that
child is doing...

It is not like a parent drops a child actor off at the set and
comes back to pick them up hours later...

This is why young children are allowed to work in the
entertainment media industry, their parent/guardian
is supposed to be there and looking out for their
safety at all times...

That's what's *supposed* to happen. *Read through Paul Petersen's site to
discover what actually DOES happen.

http://www.minorcon.org/

Even if all the "accomodations" you've listed were actually honored, the
bottom line is that child actors are often poorly socialized and unfit for
any *normal* career once their star stops shining. *The story of TV's Dennis
the Menace, Jay North, is particularly disturbing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_North

We all know how child star Michael Jackson ended up. *Kids become child
stars because their parents pushed them into it, and they usually pushed
them pretty hard. *I call that exploitation and no amount of assurances that
the child is under constant, caring supervision could change my mind. *You
don't really think little Jon Benet Ramsay woke up one day and decided she
wanted to compete in child beauty pagents? *Or murdered by some scuzzball
who liked seeing little girls in lipstick.

I would say that the *real* reason that Hollywood gets a huge exemption from
the childhood labor laws is that there's an enormous amount of money to be
made. *Often, the child sees very little of it. *But producers make millions
from films like "Home Alone." *Money talks and Hollywood's got dump trucks
full of it. *And that's why they're exempt from the laws of the land. *They
bought the lawmakers.

I hope Mr. Petersen doesn't mind my more than fair use copying of his
article, but here's how it works in the real world, from someone who's
walked the walk:

As with any system and any institution, the cracks began to appear as the
whole system matured. People (studios, new teachers, stage-parents and the
Industry generally) learned to manipulate the System. . . Over the next
twenty years the system degenerated to such an extent that the LAUSD threw
in the towel. It's teachers had been compromised, the rules were routinely
disregarded (violations were just never reported) and frankly, those folks
down on Grand Avenue in Los Angeles Unified headquarters had had enough.
Teacher credentialling was shifted over to the Labor Department which knew
nothing *about teachers, let alone the movie business. The deterioration of
the Studio Teacher's union (Local 884) began at this point in time . . . In
1986 the "Twilight Zone" tragedy illuminated just how far we'd slipped. With
everyone turning the other way, two immigrant children where hired
illegally, made to work illegal hours (kids can't work past 12:30am) amidst
explosions and directly beneath a helicopter. When the choppers tail rotor
was blasted off because it dropped too low, the copter dropped down on Vic
Morrow and decapitated not only Vic but the two children he was carrying.
Incidentally, but for the minor guilty verdicts of no work permits and
illegal hours, no one was found guilty of anything substantial. Steven
Spielberg went on with his life and career. John Landis paid a minor fine
and went on directing.

But the two people who testified for the prosecution, the helicopter pilot
and the special effects man, have not worked since! Hollywood is a tough
town. Blacklisting is as real now as it was in the 50's ... **only this time
it is the liberal left doing the Blacklisting and acting holier than thou..**
(emphasis mine) *The sole changes to the law that matter is that kids can no
longer work around whirling helicopter blades. How lame!

Source: *http://www.minorcon.org/failingsystem.html

That's the real world, Evan, not the fairy-tale that Hollywood has created
to justify child exploitation.

--

Bobby G.

@Robert Green:

Your flawed use of an examples out of antiquity (Jay North)
was prior to the child labor laws for actors being tweaked to
what they are today... The very high incidence of drug abuse
by young actors in the 1970's and 1980's is what prompted
the major changes...

So really, what went on in the 50's, 60's and 70's with
your two example personalities is umm, basically what
instigated the "parent or guardian in attendance at all
times, as well as the teacher on the set for schooling'
requirements...

Linking a child's or families' choice to star in movies
and not develop a normal social life with non-famous
peers is indicative of only the youngster's greed for
money or fame and not that the entertainment
industry is using, abusing or exploiting them in
any way... Plenty of plain old ordinary children
who aren't in movies grow up spoiled and antisocial
without any employment in the film industry...

For every one example of a former child actor who
is still in the news due to their young adult or adult
mistakes or choices which lead to drugs or crime,
there are hundreds of child actors who starred in
a single movie (or even a few) and then faded
back into the obscurity from which they were
discovered to live a normal life...

I would say that given the entertaining nature of
news stories featuring famous people and the
countries borderline nosiness/voyeuristic tendencies
that your assertion of what took place 20 something
years in the past continuing today is a fallacy
of logic fed by a newsmedia with an agenda to sell
advertising time...

~~ Evan

On Feb 12, 12:09*pm, "
wrote:
On Feb 11, 7:54*pm, Evan wrote:









On Feb 11, 5:52*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

Robert Green wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message
...
Robert Green wrote:

stuff snipped

I can't help but think at least some of these proposed changes are
driven by the ghosts of kids horribly killed in combine accidents,
crushed by tractors, kicked in the head while milking cows, etc.
Rulemaking like this often derives from analyzing the causes of
death among children and looking for ways to reduce them. *It's
like the swimming pool fence laws that exist in most
municipalities. *Lots of kids drowned to get those laws put in
place. *Kids under sixteen can *seem* awfully mature until they get
into a serious crisis. Childhood is short enough, why rush it so
much?

It's NOT a problem when compared to the consequences of extreme
meddling.

Child labor laws aren't "extreme meddling" - they were a direct
outgrowth of horrific accidents, dismemberments and deaths that were
occurring to poorly trained young children operating heavy factory
equipment for long hours and without breaks. *Oddly enough, it's
often the parents of kids that are killed or who are injured that
become the strongest advocate for changing the system, as in Mothers
Against Drunk Driving.

A deputy sheriff once told me "I never saw a kid get in trouble that
owned an animal - a cow, a sheep, whatever. Oh, sure, some would get
boozed up from time to time, but I never saw one pull a robbery or a
burglary or anything serious. Having to watch after the animal
taught responsibility."

Apparently he's never seen a kid crushed by an overturned tractor or
kicked in the head and turned into a vegetable because the got too
close to a large animal without the experience or training required
to do it safely. * I'm sorry HeyBub, but law/ruling making should not
be done according to the principals of an apocryphal deputy sheriff
you claimed to have once met.

What we're *actually* talking about is perhaps the last workplace in
the US that allows young children to operate huge and dangerous farm
machinery like 400hp combines, not whether they can own and care for
a sheep or other farm animal. *Nice attempt to distort and distract,
though.

I'm all for kids learning to take care of animals. It's their
operating dangerous and extremely powerful farm machinery not
designed for sub-adult sized bodies that worries me. *Based on the
number of adults who get their children killed yearly on ATV's too
large and powerful for them, there's clearly a lack of proper
parental concern. *That kind of bad behavior is what creates the laws
and rules you seem to despise so much, not a bunch of "meddlers" with
nothing better in the world to do. *The state is forced to act "in
loco parentis" (in place of the parents) when parents fail to ACT
like parents. *That's been going on for quite some time now here and
across the globe.

So you save 100 children's lives a year with the new regulations and
give birth to 10,000 felons. What a choice. Let me think...

Talk about setting up a straw man -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

your last two lines should be used in the dictionary as a near perfect
example of setting up a consequence that's not true in order to
disprove a point that clearly IS true.

Did YOU care for a farm animal or drive a combine when your were a
kid? *Are YOU a felon? *Neither are the millions upon millions of
kids that didn't grow up on farms. *Congratulations for creating a
uniquely specious argument. *We'll call it "HeyBub's 10,000 Felons
for Want of a Cow" rule.

You raise some thoughtful points. My basic fuss is over the regulation
prohibiting the use of ANY motorized tool. You focus on 400HP combines, I'm
interested in battery-operated drills, vacuum cleaners, blenders, and the
like. You seem to be okay with a 16-year old on a farm being able to drive a
sedan but not being able to drive a pick-up to the feed store.

For me, that doesn't compute.

A typical pick-up truck is much more destructive in an accident
than the typical sedan at the same speed...

If the pick-up truck is registered as a "farm" or "commercial"
vehicle and is intended to be used for the farming business
rather than a passenger car for the family use then why should
a teenager be able to drive the pick-up ? *Safety of the other
people on and around the roads is more important than a
teenager's ability to drive whatever they want...

Using a battery operated drill can cause serious injury, if for
instance the user drills into a live power line or into a hidden
gas pipe... *Proper training to use hand tools as well as power
tools should be required... *You focus on all the tiny stuff
ans overlook the larger issues... *The problem here seems to
be training and competency, so perhaps the portion of
youngsters who can demonstrate competency to an
examiner (like you have to at the DMV to obtain a driver's
license) could be allowed to use various tools and equipment
as they prove their knowledge and skills with those devices
to some sort of standardized assessment...

~~ Evan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, good idea. *Let's set up another big govt
bureaucracy to test, register, license 14 year olds
working on a farm. * Let's make sure to hire inspectors
to go visit the farms. *About 25,000 fed employees
should about do it. *All this with a whopping 70
children deaths a year in the USA? *How many
children die each year in bicycle accidents?
Tricycle accidents? *School sports? * Unfortunately
life has risks and big govt just brings about more big
govt without really solving anything.

:

Good idea ? It is the FAIR idea...

A family farm is still a farm, and a farm is a combination
of: commerce, labor and agriculture, which means that
it is totally reasonable to have said activities regulated...

Why stop at the teenagers, why not test EVERY worker
on a farm who would operate heavy equipment or work
around potentially dangerous animals that weigh in at
1,000 pounds plus...

It could be like the gaming industry where you need to
pass a background check and be registered in a farmer's
database to work in the industry... Or like transportation
workers who need to pass a health check as well as a
skills examination to obtain a CDL to drive heavy trucks...
People can operate water craft of certain sizes for
personal enjoyment and leisure use without obtaining
training and certification but once you involve some
sort of business activity you need a master's certificate
and training in basic seamanship...

Since the major issue that everyone seemed to be in
agreement was the causation for the fatalities and
maiming type injuries was operator competency, it
seems fair that to protect everyone within the entire
industry, that some sort of theoretical and practical
skills assessment would be the way to deal with the
underlying problem...

Given that slightly more than half of the farms in the
U.S. are considered non-commercial farms they would
have little need to use heavy equipment like combines
and similar machines to produce the less than $10,000
per year revenue stream that is generated... But why
should farmers be exempted from proper licensing on
equipment like backhoes and skid steers... Landscapers
and snowplow operators are required to obtain special
operator's licenses to operate those pieces of medium
duty equipment, yet most agricultural uses are exempted...

I am quite confident that if you look into the issue more
deeply, you will find that the safety issue around motorized
equipment on a farm involves more than 70 accidents with
children involved on an annual basis...

Someone quipped about the proposed regulations about
using powered tools and equipment wouldn't apply to or
effect a child using an ATV... Well on a farm it would, as
unless the ATV was being used for entirely leisure purposes
which involved no activity being undertaken which was related
to or caused by the commerce, labor or agricultural activities
connected to the farming, ATV use by children to whom the
regulations applied would be prohibited...

Lastly, increasingly as of late, school sports are being given
more attention as to how dangerous an activity it is... Not so
much for the major injuries that can happen but from the
accumulation of all the smaller hits that can impact cognitive
functioning or cause repetitive strain injuries from pitching
in baseball, etc... But because they are not being regulated
by specific laws, but by the league rules you seem to not
be aware that the terms and conditions which apply to who
can participate and how they may participate conveniently
escape you... Student athletes have to have a sports
physical for each sport/season they participate in... That
alone screens out multitudes of would be participants
based on underlying medical conditions which would have
made injury much more likely...

Farming activities have no such basic safety precautions...
Perhaps that needs to change for everyone's safety...

~~ Evan

"Evan" wrote in message
...
On Feb 12, 10:49 am, "Robert Green"

@Robert Green:

Your flawed use of an examples out of antiquity (Jay North)
was prior to the child labor laws for actors being tweaked to
what they are today... The very high incidence of drug abuse
by young actors in the 1970's and 1980's is what prompted
the major changes...

Flawed use? Antiquity? That's what actually happened to child actors who
are still living and apparently is STILL what is happening to child actors.
It's hard to believe anyone would defend taking children out of a normal
childhood and placing them into a world of adults where they often end up
being their family's sole support without proper socializing with kids their
own age. That's just not right. No other industry in the country gets away
with that kind of crap. Just liberal-loving Hollywood.

FWIW:

antiquity -n , pl -ties 1. the quality of being ancient or very old: a vase
of great antiquity 2. the far distant past, esp the time preceding the
Middle Ages in Europe 3. the people of ancient times collectively; the
ancients.

Nothing about Hollywood qualifies as an "antiquity" in any sense of the word
I know.

http://listverse.com/2011/05/19/top-...ff-the-screen/

It's a common dream for a kid to say he wants to be a movie star when he
grows up, but to force him into the lifestyle, with everything that comes
with it, before he even gets the chance to grow up, or even enjoy the
innocence of childhood, is just messed up. No kid has the wherewithal to
badger agencies into finding "work" in Hollywood, as if a kid is looking to
work when he needs not pay for anything himself; no, it is parents looking
to exploit their children, whom they find adorable as all hell and insist
others must too, so they can pay the bills without having to actually do
hard work themselves. . . Remember when Maculay Culkin's parents robbed his
future savings blind because he was in no legal position to argue? Yeah,
that's what happens when you trust your parents to do what's in YOUR best
interest.

So, the whole idea of any kid *wanting* to become a child actor is
completely ludicrous. They are being exploited by their parents for
monetary gain, plain and simple.

So really, what went on in the 50's, 60's and 70's with
your two example personalities is umm, basically what
instigated the "parent or guardian in attendance at all
times, as well as the teacher on the set for schooling'
requirements...

Yeah, you can really trust a parent like Patsy Ramsay to protect her child's
best interests. Doesn't every good mother push her little girl to wear
provocative clothes, adult makeup, etc. to compete in pageants? Evan, you
need an injection of 100 cc's of reality. Just because I didn't write about
EVERY one of the scores (100's? 1,000's?) of abused child actors doesn't
mean, as you seem to imply, that it was tiny problem in the past that is now
completely solved by the application of a few "tweaks" to a law that
apparently never worked very well to begin with. Here's the latest twist in
the sad, sad world of kids FORCED into working at an age that NO OTHER
industry is allowed to do:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...625/story.html
First, it was the Catholic Church. Then Penn State. Now, a new
child-abuse scandal in Hollywood is raising questions over the safety of
minors in the entertainment business and sparking calls for new child-labor
regulations. Martin Weiss, a longtime manager of young talent, was recently
arrested on suspicion of child molestation after an 18-year-old former
client told police he had been abused by Weiss 30 to 40 times from 2005 to
2008. Weiss's arrest came just weeks after it was discovered that **a
convicted child molester and registered sex offender under the name Jason
James Murphy was working in Hollywood and helping cast children for movie
roles. . .**

"This problem is more pervasive than people want to believe," said Paula
Dorn, co-founder of the Biz-Parentz Foundation, a non-profit organization
that supports the families of children working in the entertainment
industry. "We have children trying to interact in an adult world." Paul
Petersen, a former child actor on The Donna Reed Show and founder of A Minor
Consideration, a non-profit that supports former child stars, said the
situation is "worse today than it was in the '30s, and there was a lot of
dirty stuff going on then."

Yep, just tweak a few laws and it's all fixed. In a pig's eye. Who should
I believe? You or the people who are actually working in Hollywood and have
worked as child actors? You or the current news reports that indicate abuse
still occurs? That's not a hard choice, Evan.

I think you *want* to believe things are all hunky-dory now, but like Ed P.
wrote about common sense, how do you legislate morality and people's deviant
urges? How many women did Phil Spector threaten with guns before he killed
one of them? In Hollywood, lots and lots of crimes are swept under the rug
with the money broom. Do you honestly think that Roman Polanski was the
last Hollywood figure to drug and rape an underage girl?

Petersen said his group is pushing for new regulations, including
background checks and fingerprinting for talent agents, and a stronger
enforcement of the California Talent Agencies Act, which is intended to
protect artists from contract exploitation.

No background checks? Sounds like the laws you tout are actually quite
toothless.

--

Bobby G.

On 2/12/12 10:53 AM, Robert Green wrote:

I assume much of the danger from an 11 year old driving a huge combine is
not for the driver, but for the people and things he might collide with or
inadvertently harvest. (-: I seem to remember at least one film where
someone met their doom in the innards of a combine.

Exactly right on the sight issue and the potential for others to
get hurt. A edge of a twelve row corn head will be at least 15 feet
from the centerline of the combine. It's a huge
jump from the two row combine I ran as a teenager. I don't know how
much use mirrors and such are. The dirt from harvesting could easily
make them unusable.
I know of a farmer killed because he had a dummy attack around a
combine. He tried to clear a clogged bean head using a screwdriver
while it was running.
His leg got caught and was badly damaged. He bled to death before he
could drive far enough to get help. This was in the days before cell
phones. Maybe no one could've gotten to him fast enough even today.
The firefighers and rescue units are volunteer. It takes a little
longer for help to show up.
The GPS guidance is a great thing from what I've heard. The
equipment can stay within a couple inches of a perfectly straight line.
I don't know if there is a dead man's switch on any equipment. I've
never thought to ask a farmer.