coogar:
busy at work....when i break free....i would scour the net for your delight.

I can guarantee you that you will struggle to find such just like you are struggling now because the reference you made is usually of a kid using the land line to call emergency services to save their parent.

As I have said repeatedly, it is lame to say a child needs a mobile phone since there will virtually ALWAYS be other options.

coogar:
let me be the judge of what is an expensive venture when my child is concerned.
unfortunately, you cannot make that decision for me or anyone but yourself.
some people think putting their kids on the bus is expensive, they can trek whilst
some people think putting their kids in maybach benz is the way to protect them.

Obviously you are the judge.

Obviously I cannot make that decision for you.

Obviously I can point out the folly of such opinion if you state it online.

coogar:
it's not fear consumerism. that's what today's world dictates. mobile phone
is for emergencies. a child could lose me in a crowded mall. what do i do as a parent?
call him, tell him to hold his position and i would find him there....rather than having
to go through the stress of getting the PA to make lousy announcements n blah blah blah.

too many reasons a child should have a phone. it's endless.

No, it is fear consumerism when you decide to buy something for safety that you will hardly ever need. Worse still when it will not prevent the danger you are irrationally scared of.

coogar:
so me being in the car would prevent a driver high on 'caine to hit us
and maim everyone in the car? really? putting a child can only reduce the
risk, it does not completely nullify the risk in the same way as giving him
a phone does not nullify any danger that might occur but it can prevent some.

both goals is to reduce the danger to the barest minimum.....

You being in car reduces the risk drastically. A child in a car is far, far, far, less likely to have an accident than a child walking on the road and being hit by a vehicle.

Your child walking on the road and being hit is still far more likely than your child being in a situation they use a mobile to avoid danger. So if you are going to do something about the latter, don't you think as a responsible parent you should do something about the former? Are you not going to reduce the danger of the more pertinent risk (which can lead to death or disability of your child) to the bearest minimum?

coogar:
i am not. i am saving his life.
auto accident isn't the only potential danger on the streets.
with a phone, i can do a prompt check on the whereabouts of my child rather than
making wild guesses. you did not use a phone when growing up because there were no mobile fones.
if there were, your parents would have provided one for you to make sure you don't come into any harm.

You still don't get it.

Kids using mobile phones and being distracted to the point they are hit by a car is a far higher possibility than a kid using mobile phone to avoid danger and save his life or injury to his self?

So getting your child a mobile phone means you are increasing the possibility of harm to them. They are MORE likely statistically to face danger because they have a mobile phone than if they did not have a mobile phone. They are more likely to be distracted using the phone and be hit by a car, than to use the phone to avoid danger.

coogar:
so i will bear the pain of waiting and searching all the police stations in my borough instead
of the luxury of placing a call to that child and getting the answer i need? thanx but no thanx.
i prefer the mobile.......lose a child in lagos and see how missing person's list would help you locate him.

That is my point. A phone hardly reduced the danger, it most likely will just give you quicker time to react to the sorrow.

So buying a mobile phone for "safety" as you claim is more of fear consumerism as I explained above.

If you say you buy it to accelerate your reaction to unfortunate occurence your child experiences, then that would be more apt.

coogar:
it does. when accidents happen, good samaritans or emergency services
reach for the pockets to search for a diary or a mobile phone so they
can alert the next of kin.....it's very very important!

How does that prevent the danger?

Wehn Emergency services are reaching for phone in one's pocket, are they there to stop danger or to attend to the person that has already been harmed and incapacitated?

Again look at my definition of fear consumerism above. See the second sentence.

Sagamite:
I can guarantee you that you will struggle to find such just like you are struggling now because the reference you made is usually of a kid using the land line to call emergency services to save their parent.

As I have said repeatedly, it is lame to say a child needs a mobile phone since there will virtually ALWAYS be other options.

there aren't always other options. there are plenty of kids
with medical issues. kids who can come into an instant attack
and they need a mobile phone to reach out. attacks can happen at

Obviously you are the judge.
Obviously I cannot make that decision for you.
Obviously I can point out the folly of such opinion if you state it online.

folly in buying a £50 phone for my kid?

No, it is fear consumerism when you decide to buy something for safety that you will hardly ever need. Worse still when it will not prevent the danger you are irrationally scared of.

that's the modern world. why do people insure their lives n properties?
for instance, you have insurance on your car you pay monthly, have you ever
had to use it? has everyone ever had to use it and yet you pay gazillions on
insurance every year. i have been on aa since 2007, i have never called them once
to come tow my car or whatever. would that stop me from paying? hell nah!

You being in car reduces the risk drastically. A child in a car is far, far, far, less likely to have an accident than a child walking on the road and being hit by a vehicle.

i doubt it. a child in a car has the same chance of being hit by a drunk driver
with a child trekking on the side-walk. a child walking on the road is another
matter entirely. why should a child walk on the road? roads are meant for cars
not pedestrians.

Your child walking on the road and being hit is still far more likely than your child being in a situation they use a mobile to avoid danger. So if you are going to do something about the latter, don't you think as a responsible parent you should do something about the former? Are you not going to reduce the danger of the more pertinent risk (which can lead to death or disability of your child) to the bearest minimum?

it is not.....you only think it is cos you see danger as what affects that particular child only.
what about the danger that might affect the people around your child and his mobile phone would
save someone else's life. his phone isn't there to save himself alone....but to save others should
the need arises.

You still don't get it.

Kids using mobile phones and being distracted to the point they are hit by a car is a far higher possibility than a kid using mobile phone to avoid danger and save his life or injury to his self?

i have already told you. mobile phones are different from mobile phones.
my kid will not have instant messaging features, no camera, no music and no picture
messaging. it would be a basic phone. i fail to see how a phone as grotesque as nokia
3310 would distract my kid. in most cases, he would be embarrassed to bring it out in public.

So getting your child a mobile phone means you are increasing the possibility of harm to them. They are MORE likely statistically to face danger because they have a mobile phone than if they did not have a mobile phone.

keep telling yourself that....they would have something extra
as an insurance should they or anyone around them come near harm.
it is when the phones are upgraded to blackberry or androids that the
dangers are imminent. not with a basic phone that can only make calls or
send sms.

That is my point. A phone hardly reduced the danger, it most likely will just give you quicker time to react to the sorrow.
So buying a mobile phone for "safety" as you claim is more of fear consumerism as I explained above.
If you say you buy it to accelerate your reaction to unfortunate occurence your child experiences, then that would be more apt.

my reaction to unfortunate occurrence can save his life.
one minute can be the difference between life and death. it is still the same umbrella.
as long as a life is saved by whatever means, the purpose of giving him that phone has been achieved.
qed!!!

How does that prevent the danger?
Wehn Emergency services are reaching for phone in one's pocket, are they there to stop danger or to attend to the person that has already been harmed and incapacitated?

it depends on the danger.
with the phone, certain facts can quickly be reeled out by the parent.
my child is allergic to xyz, he's blood group xyz, phenotype xyz. it saves
few minutes if there's a need for transfusion or whatever information the parent can quickly
get across. in the medical world, prompt action saves lives!

Again look at my definition of fear consumerism above. See the second sentence.

i disagree......
as a parent, i know what it takes to send a child out by himself in this cruel
world where accidents n mishaps occur everytime. i would promptly want to know first hand
what has happened to my child by reaching him anytime i want.

coogar:
there aren't always other options. there are plenty of kids
with medical issues. kids who can come into an instant attack
and they need a mobile phone to reach out. attacks can happen at

Again that is like talking about an immigrant kid that can not speak English but lives in the UK as you did earlier.

The average child does not have severe medical issues. If a child has severe medical issues then a mobile might be useful. But we are talking about the average child here, so I don't see the point is this point.

coogar:
folly in buying a £50 phone for my kid?

It is waste of £50 in the large scheme of things.

coogar:
that's the modern world. why do people insure their lives n properties?
for instance, you have insurance on your car you pay monthly, have you ever
had to use it? has everyone ever had to use it and yet you pay gazillions on
insurance every year. i have been on aa since 2007, i have never called them once
to come tow my car or whatever. would that stop me from paying? hell nah!

No 1, there is a lot of fear consumerism in the West, that is not necessarily good.

No 2, don't compare insurance to this argument. Insurance virtually always does what it plans to do as long as you do it right. What it is there for is to compensate as a reaction to an unfortunate occurence, not to prevent it.

So don't compare them.

coogar:
i doubt it. a child in a car has the same chance of being hit by a drunk driver
with a child trekking on the side-walk. a child walking on the road is another
matter entirely. why should a child walk on the road? roads are meant for cars
not pedestrians.

Absolute tosh.

You would be surprise that children do have to cross the road in life.

A child crossing the road (which is when majority of accidents happen) is more at risk than a child in a car.

coogar:
it is not.....you only think it is cos you see danger as what affects that particular child only.
what about the danger that might affect the people around your child and his mobile phone would
save someone else's life. his phone isn't there to save himself alone....but to save others should
the need arises.

Again, there are likely to be adults with mobile phones where a 10 year old is. Except the child does not stay in city and stays in the wilderness of Siberia.

coogar:
i have already told you. mobile phones are different from mobile phones.
my kid will not have instant messaging features, no camera, no music and no picture
messaging. it would be a basic phone. i fail to see how a phone as grotesque as nokia
3310 would distract my kid. in most cases, he would be embarrassed to bring it out in public.

You have a point there. But if it text and calls, it still has a chance only that it is lower than the advanced phones.

Many kids are in accidents in the UK because they are talking or texting on the phone. It is bad enough for there to be street adverts put up by govenrment to warn them.

coogar:
keep telling yourself that....they would have something extra
as an insurance should they or anyone around them come near harm.
it is when the phones are upgraded to blackberry or androids that the
dangers are imminent. not with a basic phone that can only make calls or
send sms.

Then what you are saying is that you are happy to increase the risk of harm to your child.

coogar:
my reaction to unfortunate occurrence can save his life.
one minute can be the difference between life and death. it is still the same umbrella.
as long as a life is saved by whatever means, the purpose of giving him that phone has been achieved.
qed!!!

it depends on the danger.
with the phone, certain facts can quickly be reeled out by the parent.
my child is allergic to xyz, he's blood group xyz, phenotype xyz. it saves
few minutes if there's a need for transfusion or whatever information the parent can quickly
get across. in the medical world, prompt action saves lives!

The perfect sounds of fear consumerism.

"One minute. You never know."

coogar:
i disagree......
as a parent, i know what it takes to send a child out by himself in this cruel
world where accidents n mishaps occur everytime. i would promptly want to know first hand
what has happened to my child by reaching him anytime i want.

You would get to know, not prevent. So the mobile is not primarily for safety, it is to react.

All of you lot that don't even have kids yet, enough already!

This argument is inane. Why would any kid need a mobile phone? Who are they talking to? It's nothing but a major distraction. With all the sexting (in the West) and the 4 hours of yammering utter nonsense in the name of Free Midnight Calls (in Nigeria), any responsible parent would keep a mobile phone away from their kid until the kid can afford it with his first paycheck.

Even Nigerian teens have turned Twitter to something else. So many handles abound, of silly boys and girls with 10k plus followers, yammering nonsense, all day long, on Twitter.

None of my kids are getting mobile phones of any kind. I'll put tracking devices on them, but no cellphones. No effing way.

AjanleKoko: All of you lot that don't even have kids yet, enough already!

I am pretty more sure I might have a few, I am just not yet aware of them.

AjanleKoko:
This argument is inane. Why would any kid need a mobile phone? Who are they talking to? It's nothing but a major distraction. With all the sexting (in the West) and the 4 hours of yammering utter nonsense in the name of Free Midnight Calls (in Nigeria), any responsible parent would keep a mobile phone away from their kid until the kid can afford it with his first paycheck.

Even Nigerian teens have turned Twitter to something else. So many handles abound, of silly boys and girls with 10k plus followers, yammering nonsense, all day long, on Twitter.

None of my kids are getting mobile phones of any kind. I'll put tracking devices on them, but no cellphones. No effing way.

You nailed it on the head.

Add the computer games they have to it. They are just bombarded with distractions and even the sense of relevance/importance (Facebook and Twitter) when they have not done or achieved nada.

This is what a 13 year old girl did with her 21 year old "boyfriend" with a mobile phone that made her mother flip.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18152002

Mother flipped so bad, she killed the murrafcker.

Sagamite: This is what a 13 year old girl did with her 21 year old "boyfriend" with a mobile phone that made her mother flip.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18152002

Mother flipped so bad, she killed the murrafcker.

the age gap was the problem here, not the mobile phone.
if the boy was 14, the mother wouldn't flip...as far as the mum
was concerned, boyfriend was a pedo....

another thing, the topless pics were found on the boyfriend's fone,
not the daughter's. boyfriend was 21, he's not a child. i don't see
how this lends credence to the argument that kids shouldn't own mobile phones.

would you argue kids shouldn't use a desktop/netbook too? can they not
be on twitter/facebook/youtube with the laptop and derail just like they
would if they were using a mobile phone? can you see the hypocrisy in your argument now?

why is the mobile phone evil to a child and a netbook isn't?

coogar:

the age gap was the problem here, not the mobile phone.
if the boy was 14, the mother wouldn't flip...as far as the mum
was concerned, boyfriend was a pedo....

another thing, the topless pics were found on the boyfriend's fone,
not the daughter's. boyfriend was 21, he's not a child. i don't see
how this lends credence to the argument that kids shouldn't own mobile phones.

would you argue kids shouldn't use a desktop/netbook too? can they not
be on twitter/facebook/youtube with the laptop and derail just like they
would if they were using a mobile phone? can you see the hypocrisy in your argument now?

why is the mobile phone evil to a child and a netbook isn't?

Who told you my focus was on the mother killing him?

My focus is on the girl's pix being on the mobile. There is no report on how it got there, but considering the amount of kids that have mobiles, the cultural background of these people (Bangladeshi) that would restrict her movement at 13 and the frequency young kids use to send explicit pix according to research, I can safely assume she sent it to him as her puberty hormones are raging and she feels "in love".

He actually then put the pix online in his own childishness. That is the risk people face when they let young children have phones. Girls that are in their late teens and early 20s are very susceptible to such stewpidity, talkless of kids. They older ones volunteer it without you asking. I personally have had to tell many girls, altruistically, that if you are going to do it at least be intelligent enough to make sure your face is ALWAYS excluded because not all guys have principles like me.

What hypocrisy?

As the whole school curricullum would inevitably evolve around online research, I can't avoid my kids not having access to internet without damaging their ability to compete in the real world. But, preferably, I would rather they do not use online when they are young because I know how easy it is to access rubbish or even be offered it without solicitation. But I would still attempt to control their access by making them have access to only my laptop or a desktop in the living room.

I would explicitly make it clear they are not allowed FB or twitter account but reality is that you cannot control what they do outside the house, they might set it up outside on school computers, but they would know my rules and breaking my rules have consequences if caught.

I don't even intend to have Sky in my house because of the junk I see them proffer as "teenage TV". They might see some of these programmes when they are at their friend's place but I will surely restrict the access to it.

Because something is hard to control in the wayward world we are developing does not mean I should throw my hands in the air like a foool and follow the crowd without trying.

Little wonder why so many teenage girls and boys commit suicide. Cell phone ko, cell phone ni. Let them grow-up earn their own money, they can buy what ever they like.

Sagamite:
Who told you my focus was on the mother killing him?

My focus is on the girl's pix being on the mobile. There is no report on how it got there, but considering the amount of kids that have mobiles, the cultural background of these people (Bangladeshi) that would restrict her movement at 13 and the frequency young kids use to send explicit pix according to research, I can safely assume she sent it to him as her puberty hormones are raging and she feels "in love".

i am 100% sure the guy took the pics of the babe when she's topless.
what other explanation can you give? if she sent it to him with her mobile,
they should have found the pics on the daughter's mobile phone. it was the adult
that was culpable here, not the child.

He actually then put the pix online in his own childishness. That is the risk people face when they let young children have phones. Girls that are in their late teens and early 20s are very susceptible to such stewpidity, talkless of kids.

he's 20/21 for feck's sake. you are going to say a 21 yr old
is not responsible for his own actions too?

What hypocrisy?

As the whole school curricullum would inevitably evolve around online research, I can't avoid my kids not having access to internet without damaging their ability to compete in the real world. As, preferably, I would rather they do not use online when they are young because I know how easy it is to access rubbish or even be offered it without solicitation. But I would still attempt to control their access by making them have access to only my laptop or a desktop in the living room.

they let them use netbooks in school even though they claim their internet usage is monitored.

on your laptop, they can pretty much do anything, delete their footprints and you would
not know ish. kids of nowadays are super-smart. they tell you they are playing online games
on cbbc or disney but they are doing other things. how would you control such whilst you
are busy listening to larry king's rants on cnn. you can't be in 5 places at a time. this
is why the watchdogs are clamouring for online protection for these kids......

I would explicitly make it clear they are not allowed FB or twitter account but reality is that you cannot control what they do outside the house, they might set it up outside on school computers, but they would know my rules and breaking my rules have consequences if caught.

thank God you know that sometimes what they do at home is different from what they do outside.
it even becomes more difficult if their best buddies in school are given the access you restrict them from having.
grooming a child is a career. it's very very difficult to keep today's kids on a leash.

I don't even intend to have Sky in my house because of the junk I see them proffer as "teenage TV". They might see some of these programmes when they are at their friend's place but I will surely restrict the access to it.
Because something is hard to control in the wayward world we are developing does not mean I should throw my hands in the air like a foool and follow the crowd without trying.

i wish you all the luck you would need in your attempt but i am sure
after a while, you would be mentally exhausted. modern technology has
come to stay. there's nothing we can do about it until there's an airtight
web watchdog protecting the kids.

coogar:
i am 100% sure the guy took the pics of the babe when she's topless.
what other explanation can you give? if she sent it to him with her mobile,
they should have found the pics on the daughter's mobile phone. it was the adult
that was culpable here, not the child.

What makes you 100% sure she did not delete it from her phone as precaution because she lives with her parents?

coogar:
he's 20/21 for feck's sake. you are going to say a 21 yr old
is not responsible for his own actions too?

Where did you see me say or how did you deduce I said he is not responsible for his actions?

coogar:
they let them use netbooks in school even though they claim their internet usage is monitored.

I thought schools had desktops, not netbooks? Where is the child going to get the netbook from?

coogar:
on your laptop, they can pretty much do anything, delete their footprints and you would
not know ish. kids of nowadays are super-smart. they tell you they are playing online games
on cbbc or disney but they are doing other things. how would you control such whilst you
are busy listening to larry king's rants on cnn. you can't be in 5 places at a time. this
is why the watchdogs are clamouring for online protection for these kids......

Really?

A 10 year old child would know how to completely delete their history on a desktop?

And the desktop would be in the sitting room and they would get away with it everytime?

Stop sillily exaggerating. Kids of nowadays are not all Einsteins.

coogar:
thank God you know that sometimes what they do at home is different from what they do outside.
it even becomes more difficult if their best buddies in school are given the access you restrict them from having.
grooming a child is a career. it's very very difficult to keep today's kids on a leash.

I would rather attempt to than throw my hands in the air like an ediot and give up. I have a responsibility as a parent.

coogar:
i wish you all the luck you would need in your attempt but i am sure
after a while, you would be mentally exhausted. modern technology has
come to stay. there's nothing we can do about it until there's an airtight
web watchdog protecting the kids.

Don't ever under-estimate my resilience and intellect. I can achieve more than the average man with far less effort because I think differently. Those are some of the attributes that makes me a catch to women.

AjanleKoko: All of you lot that don't even have kids yet, enough already!

This argument is inane. Why would any kid need a mobile phone? Who are they talking to? It's nothing but a major distraction. With all the sexting (in the West) and the 4 hours of yammering utter nonsense in the name of Free Midnight Calls (in Nigeria), any responsible parent would keep a mobile phone away from their kid until the kid can afford it with his first paycheck.

Even Nigerian teens have turned Twitter to something else. So many handles abound, of silly boys and girls with 10k plus followers, yammering nonsense, all day long, on Twitter.

None of my kids are getting mobile phones of any kind. I'll put tracking devices on them, but no cellphones. No effing way.

big daddy is following you on watcher

i see your point though , but can we really keep the genie in the bottle?

Sagamite:
What makes you 100% sure she did not delete it from her phone as precaution because she lives with her parents?

maybe, maybe not.
the adult in this case should have been wiser to delete the images
on his phone too especially when he could have been pulled by cops
at anytime to explain why a topless child was on his phone.

I thought schools had desktops, not netbooks? Where is the child going to get the netbook from?

they use netbooks. the autistic ones amongst them use iPads.
i saw that with my very own eyes the last time i went to an
event in a school.

Really?
A 10 year old child would know how to completely delete their history on a desktop?

yes - they get the ideas from their other friends in school on how to get away with
their footprints.

And the desktop would be in the sitting room and they would get away with it everytime?
Stop sillily exaggerating. Kids of nowadays are not all Einsteins.

they might not get away with it every time but they would get away with most of it.
parents can't be everywhere. if you have a child that obeys all your commandments, it's
a joint effort. the credits shouldn't go to you alone cos a child would be what he wants
to be regardless of you idiabgbon policy.

I would rather attempt to than throw my hands in the air like an ediot and give up. I have a responsibility as a parent.

yes you do.....and the ones who have unruly kids attempted too but it was futile in the end.
i know a kid who got banned from attending any school in the whole of great britain. he was sent
to naija in the end. if you see this kid, he's the most composed kid you can see @ 7. yet, when he's
at school, he's a terror. he couldn't stop beating his classmates and the moment he gets home, he's
a saint. he fears only his parents, he does not fear school authorities so idiagbon policy has it's
limitations.

Don't ever under-estimate my resilience and intellect. I can achieve more than the average man with far less effort because I think differently. Those are some of the attributes that makes me a catch to women.

so tell me, how many women have you caught with your super-intelligence?

coogar:
maybe, maybe not.
the adult in this case should have been wiser to delete the images
on his phone too especially when he could have been pulled by cops
at anytime to explain why a topless child was on his phone.

Obviously, you can't be. So I wonder how you arrived at your "i am 100% sure the guy took the pics of the babe when she's topless"?

Now think about it and think of the more realistic possibilities:

- Why would he be bothering to delete it when he is an adult (hence not subject to parental monitorship) and he does not live with her parent?

- Why would he bother deleting it when it is not his own [i]n[/i]udism and he enjoys looking at it?

- Men tend to keep more incriminating evidence sent to them by women, that is why they are often caught cheating.

- Do you think a guy that would put her pix online is likely to be bothered deleting it on his phone to save her?

- You really think a 21 year old guy would be thinking of cops stopping him because of the pix on his phone? Just like the way he was thinking of the cops tracing him for putting her pix online?

coogar:
they use netbooks. the autistic ones amongst them use iPads.
i saw that with my very own eyes the last time i went to an
event in a school.

You mean the school provides pupils with netbooks?

Really? In which country and which region of it?

coogar:
yes - they get the ideas from their other friends in school on how to get away with
their footprints.

Really?

They get the idea of how to delete their history on a computer perfectly at 10 from school?

So if 100 random kids are picked and asked how to clear their history on a computer, how many do you roughly think would know how to do it?

coogar:
they might not get away with it every time but they would get away with most of it.
parents can't be everywhere. if you have a child that obeys all your commandments, it's
a joint effort. the credits shouldn't go to you alone cos a child would be what he wants
to be regardless of you idiabgbon policy.

Thank you! In life all it takes is everyday for the thief, one day for the owner. If the owner now happens to be smart and dedicated, there would be very, very few days for the thief.

coogar:
yes you do.....and the ones who have unruly kids attempted too but it was futile in the end.
i know a kid who got banned from attending any school in the whole of great britain. he was sent
to naija in the end. if you see this kid, he's the most composed kid you can see @ 7. yet, when he's
at school, he's a terror. he couldn't stop beating his classmates and the moment he gets home, he's
a saint. he fears only his parents, he does not fear school authorities so idiagbon policy has it's
limitations.

Futile in the end?

That is why Asians and Africans frequently have kids witht their heads screwed on?

You feel free to put your hands in the air and say you don't need to do anything because it would be futile. I would do what I have to do.

coogar:
so tell me, how many women have you caught with your super-intelligence?

Come on, men. That would be plainly showing-off!

They call me the Icon for a reason.

Sagamite:
Obviously, you can't be. So I wonder how you arrived at your "i am 100% sure the guy took the pics of the babe when she's topless"?
Now think about it and think of the more realistic possibilities:

- Why would he be bothering to delete it when he is an adult (hence not subject to parental monitorship) and he does not live with her parent?

- Why would he bother deleting it when it is not his own [i]n[/i]udism and he enjoys looking at it?

- Men tend to keep more incriminating evidence sent to them by women, that is why they are often caught cheating.

- Do you think a guy that would put her pix online is likely to be bothered deleting it on his phone to save her?

- You really think a 21 year old guy would be thinking of cops stopping him because of the pix on his phone? Just like the way he was thinking of the cops tracing him for putting her pix online?

common sense should have prevailed - i don't support what the girl's mum did
but the guy was asking for trouble putting a topless image of her daughter on his phone.
he knew he was visiting them. he could have deleted the picture or put a password on his phone
to prevent an unauthorised access.

You mean the school provides pupils with netbooks?
Really? In which country and which region of it?

netbooks for normal children. tablets for
the ones who are autistic. sagamite, you
need to start a family soon and be conversant
with what's happening in today's primary schools.

Really?
They get the idea of how to delete their history on a computer perfectly at 10 from school?
So if 10 random kids are picked and asked how to clear their history on a computer, how many do you roughly think would know how to do it?

10 random kids? i dunno about random kids but i have heard a friend
of mine complain to me about his 6 yr old son cleaning up his footprints.

Thank you! In life all it takes is everyday for the thief, one day for the owner. If the owner now happens to be smart and dedicated, there would be very, very few days for the thief.

and crime rate is on the rise....day after day.
what have the smart and dedicated owners done to curb the crime rate?

Futile in the end?
That is why Asians and Africans frequently have kids witht their heads screwed on?
You feel free to put your hands in the air and say you don't need to do anything because it would be futile. I would do what I have to do.

this is because asia/africa don't really have a credible statistics to work with.
i am quite sure the teenage pregnancy in nigeria is worse than that of britain. i don't
need to be a rocket scientist to work that out - but it's nigeria, no news media would
talk about it....

Come on, men. That would be plainly showing-off!
They call me the Icon for a reason.

you either prove this or i brand you a sophomaniac!

coogar:
common sense should have prevailed - i don't support what the girl's mum did
but the guy was asking for trouble putting a topless image of her daughter on his phone.
he knew he was visiting them. he could have deleted the picture or put a password on his phone
to prevent an unauthorised access.

Neither am I supporting the mother. I am just highlighting the risk of kids having mobiles.

coogar:
netbooks for normal children. tablets for
the ones who are autistic. sagamite, you
need to start a family soon and be conversant
with what's happening in today's primary schools.

Honestly, I am not getting this. Maybe their is no alignment in our slangs.

Is netbook a laptop or a desktop?

coogar:
10 random kids? i dunno about random kids but i have heard a friend
of mine complain to me about his 6 yr old son cleaning up his footprints.

Your friend is a bloody liar!

Just like the guy that came here to say his 2 year old has a personal ipad that he uses.

coogar:
and crime rate is on the rise....day after day.
what have the smart and dedicated owners done to curb the crime rate?

Huh? What kind of question is this?

coogar:
this is because asia/africa don't really have a credible statistics to work with.
i am quite sure the teenage pregnancy in nigeria is worse than that of britain. i don't
need to be a rocket scientist to work that out - but it's nigeria, no news media would
talk about it....

Hell No! I doubt it.

If you are going to compare Nigeria with UK you have to exclude the dearth poor who marrying at 15 is not a big deal to. You need to compare the enlightened class with the UK.

Tell me how many of your contemporaries you knew that were teenage baby mamas or got pregnant.

coogar:
you either prove this or i brand you a sophomaniac!

You really don't understand. Here is just a snippet of how it goes with my intellect:

https://www.nairaland.com/742962/love-sagamite-lol/3#9021560

Sagamite:
Honestly, I am not getting this. Maybe their is no alignment in our slangs.
Is netbook a laptop or a desktop?

it's a laptop!
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/carlisle-primary-school-pupils-get-netbooks-to-make-them-all-grown-up-1.808219?referrerPath=2.3540
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HV2krygDZsU

everything has changed since the government introduce nappy curriculum!
a kid of 2 is now expected to surf the web using a laptop "catch them young"

Your friend is a bloody liar!
Just like the guy that came here to say his 2 year old has a personal ipad that he uses.

his son is quite computer/mobile phone savvy. i have seen him
take my iphone apart several times looking for games to download on
apps store....taking pics n editing it using the red eye effect.....

Hell No! I doubt it.
If you are going to compare Nigeria with UK you have to exclude the dearth poor who marrying at 15 is not a big deal to. You need to compare the enlightened class with the UK.

i have excluded those. i am talking about girls who got themselves pregnant by their teenage
boyfriends or a "bros" in the neighbourhood. if i include the villages where kids just born
like it's going out of fashion then the statistics become laughable.

Tell me how many of your contemporaries you knew that were teenage baby mamas or got pregnant.

plenty of them. majority of the those small time clinics are run efficiently
by the money girls pay to remove pregnancies. those funds form a large
percentage of their income. abortion is a process here in the uk and it's
discouraging. in naija, a babe can wake up, decide to walk into a clinic and do the
deed and get it done in a matter of minutes.

You really don't understand. Here is just a snippet of how it goes with my intellect:
https://www.nairaland.com/742962/love-sagamite-lol/3#9021560

coogar:
it's a laptop!
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/carlisle-primary-school-pupils-get-netbooks-to-make-them-all-grown-up-1.808219?referrerPath=2.3540
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HV2krygDZsU

everything has changed since the government introduce nappy curriculum!
a kid of 2 is now expected to surf the web using a laptop "catch them young"

Which country, which region and which shcool do they give kids laptops? Please educate me.

coogar:
his son is quite computer/mobile phone savvy. i have seen him
take my iphone apart several times looking for games to download on
apps store....taking pics n editing it using the red eye effect.....

He is a liar!

No six year old would know the way a computer system is set up. Knowing Learning how to use application is diffrent from knowing how computer systems store data.

He is a pure liar!

coogar:
i have excluded those. i am talking about girls who got themselves pregnant by their teenage
boyfriends or a "bros" in the neighbourhood. if i include the villages where kids just born
like it's going out of fashion then the statistics become laughable.

plenty of them. majority of the those small time clinics are run efficiently
by the money girls pay to remove pregnancies. those funds form a large
percentage of their income. abortion is a process here in the uk and it's
discouraging. in naija, a babe can wake up, decide to walk into a clinic and do the
deed and get it done in a matter of minutes.

So how many contemporary girls (family friends, class mates) did you know that was pregnant. Don't give me conjectures!

How did you arrive that it is worse in Nigeria than in the UK?

Sagamite:
Which country, which region and which shcool do they give kids laptops? Please educate me.

united kingdom
most primary schools.
the youtube video i posted up there is a school in
the uk.

He is a liar!
No six year old would know the way a computer system is set up. Knowing Learning how to use application is diffrent from knowing how computer systems store data. He is a pure liar!

han han.
what's the biggie in that? he goes to history on
tools and he deletes his footprints in the last hour or
last 3 hours on google chrome! it takes 10 secs.

So how many contemporary girls (family friends, class mates) did you know that was pregnant. Don't give me conjectures!
How did you arrive that it is worse in Nigeria than in the UK?

i would never know how many have aborted!
but you know it happens. you be bobo. how many
babes did you impregnate in naija that aborted. how
many people knew about it? these facts are not out
there if you're not in the circle.

coogar:
united kingdom
most primary schools.
the youtube video i posted up there is a school in
the uk.

Wow. That is not a development I support.

coogar:
han han.
what's the biggie in that? he goes to history on
tools and he deletes his footprints in the last hour or
last 3 hours on google chrome! it takes 10 secs.

That is superficial. All those can be recovered from Windows registry or System restore.

No way that would become general knowledge amongst 10 year olds.

coogar:
i would never know how many have aborted!
but you know it happens. you be bobo. how many
babes did you impregnate in naija that aborted. how
many people knew about it? these facts are not out
there if you're not in the circle.

None.

No 1, Naija teenage girls don't have sex as frequently as UK girls. Hence no way can they ever have the same pregnancy rates.

No 2, Naija teenage girls have less places to do it because we operate an extended family system. Which leads to less opportunities.

No 3, Naija teenage girls will be more shy going for an abortion as the doctors are not going to be politically correct like UK. So they will be more careful than a UK girl or simply refrain from it.

You can't compare Naija to a country where parents let teenage kids bring their boy/girlfriends home and even let them have sex at home because as they will say "they will do it anyway, you can't stop them so why don't you let them do it within a controlled environment".

Basically, they throw their hands in the air and say there is no point doing anything about it.

Sagamite:
Wow. That is not a development I support.

the government supports it and it seems it's working.
read the testimonies of the head teachers...

We are only small school situated in an area of high deprivation and as a result the majority of our pupils are entitled to FSM and were not eligible for help from e-LF. We started a small project going to give the remaining Yr3/4 pupils a mobile device to take home and use in school. Only 20 pupils took up this offer … but what a difference it has made to them and it has been a huge success all round.
The pupils confidence and pride in their devices has been outstanding and we are extremely grateful to e-LF for their help in getting this project off the ground. Many thanks must also go to Sue who has been a great help throughout the launch and to Michelle who looks after our donations.
Sally Hupfield-Smith, School Business Manager, Our Lady of Perpetual Succour RC Primary, Blackburn

The e-Learning Foundation was instumental in helping set up Holy Family's netbook project. Financially, it would not have been possible for all our Year 5 and 6's to have a personal netbook without the support of the Foundation. Teaching and Learning at our school has been transformed by this technology. There has been a significant impact on independent learning for our children which in turn has improved the quality of learning.
Helen Moreton, Headteacher, Holy Family Catholic Primary School, Blackpool

The St Peter's Netbook project was an extremely ambitious innovation - providing netbooks for 240 pupils to use at school and home. With the invaluable advice and support from the e-learning foundation, coupled with grant funding, we have over 2 years, been able to realise our ambition. The impact on teaching and learning has been considerable and we feel we are only just beginning to explore this. The project could not have been launched without support from our Local Authority and the experienced advice and fund management from the e-learning foundation. The project has created a buzz amongst parents and staff.
Rod Dean, Headteacher St Peter's Bratton, Telford

That is superficial. All those can be recovered from Windows registry or System restore.
No way that would become general knowledge amongst 10 year olds.

proper general knowledge...boys who are hacking each other's playstation
network account on fifa 12 cannot delete ordinary history? haba......

No 1, Naija teenage girls don't have sex as frequently as UK girls. Hence no way can they ever have the same pregnancy rates.

they do....but it's coded! it's not in your face like the uk
where kids in school uniform make out in every corner of the street.

No 2, Naija teenage girls have less places to do it because we operate an extended family system. Which leads to less opportunities.

less places? what does it take to have sex?
hehehe---so a girl @ 16 in the uni staying by herself @ osu
cannot have sex because of extended family?

No 3, Naija teenage girls will be more shy going for an abortion as the doctors are not going to be politically correct like UK. So they will be more careful than a UK girl or simply refrain from it.

valid point. this is why majority swallow limestone and shekpe!
home-made concoction or whatever mixture they can lay their hands on.
abegggi, it's worse in naija.

You can't compare Naija to a country where parents let teenage kids bring their boy/girlfriends home and even let them have sex at home because as they will say "they will do it anyway, you can't stop them so why don't you let them do it within a controlled environment".

Basically, they throw their hands in the air and say there is no point doing anything about it.

sagamite, it must have been ages since you went to naija.
nigeria has changed....they are only few notches behind the united kingdom
as far as moral decadence is concerned. kids don't listen to their parents anymore.

MRbrownJAY: ^^^football practice, field trips, music classes, after class studies, private tutor etc the list is long. yes, some may have a driver that take their kids to school and back home, but many live in a world where their kids are out there in the real world.

anyone who has a kid in the west would certainly understand that.

I really really do and the list goes on ....Before and after schl, dance class, swimming, music class, playdates and a Ipad for my 3yr old to scribble on,color and play endless games when I am very busy outside the house or on the phone, technology has really saved the day! lets pray for continuous God's blessing and provision.

toluxa1: It actually depends. For example, my younger brother is 15 and my mum bought him a Nokia X2. Up till tomorrow I made it clear to them that its a bad idea. Immediately he comes back from school, first place is to his phone, 2go, chatting. Sometimes I see him online at 12am. The truth is these things are a serious deterrent to the seriousness of our young ones. Many kids failing WAEC and NECO, fail because they are distracted by 2go, whatsapp, facebook, etc.

But if its a touch light for for example just for the purpose of communication, they its allowed.

PS: infact am going to seize that his phone, I don vex.

Abeg no vex lol..

I understand your points but that said, not all children behave the same.

Reason why I said that, my kid brother at the same ago as your lil bro, 15years, my mom decided to buy him a phone infact iPhone 4S at that, infact a contract at that. I didn’t support the whole idea of the phone plus he owns xbox also.

Sometimes, he goes to bed at 2am playing games and always on FB chatting away.

I and my younger sisters were very worried on how he is coping in school. We always shout at him telling him to sleep more and read his book more, the boy will just give us one look like that.

To our greatest surprise, his performance report came home addressed to my mom, so we opened the letter, this boy was above target in school o .

Infact when they were doing exams in their school, they asked him to attempt GCSE exams even though he was in year 11, and GCSE is meant for year 12 pupils. To our greatest surprise, this boy results came out, and he score 6 As and the rest B .

Since then we decided to let him be as we know and trust him that he is not doing bad in school.

But as for children of age 3 – 5 yrs, hmmm I’m not too sure if phones are suitable at that such age.