BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

Children respond out of love/affection, respect or fear, in that order.
Love/affection - they want to please you
Respect - they understand you knowledge, wisdom and how it benefits them
Fear - they do not want your adverse reaction to whatever they may think to do or, conversely, do not think before doing

paulrph1 Loc: Washington, Utah

I believe you are correct, however I believe it is also age related to make that statement.

waldron7 Loc: State of Confusion

Put a man's nuts in a garlic press and he'll sing .

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

I don't think so.
Give thought to the circumstances under which you would give heed, regardless of age

crissx09 Loc: FL-USA

Most of you guys lost the point. The subject to discuss was supposed to be "Torture" not corrective action to kids. Torture does work and you can get valuable information but, the one applying these methods has to use some common sense and not go to the point that the victim will have to fake facts in order to get out of the hook.
In my opinion whoever think that torture does not work most of the times also think that death penalty is not a deterrent. For a hard criminal may not be but for a guy that goes for money to the corner store with a gun, I bet he will think twice before shooting someone.

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

Must be nice to be so certain of your opinions. Want to provide some actual evidence?

crissx09 Loc: FL-USA

Certainly I could. It is a fact that people talk when heavy pressured/tortured but ...by the same token, could you probe me wrong?

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

You could, but you didn't.
As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."
Do you have any inkling how dangerous it is to go through life maintaining your beliefs are "certain" or "a fact" ?
I have posted (probably too) many times on this topic, but never have I insisted that the issue of the ineffectiveness of torture is a "proven fact". I even sited an isolated example of where not only was it successful, but also probably necessary. It is likely, in a preponderance of situations, that under heavy pressure "people talk". The problems are that they do not provide useful information; and the methodology is both illegal and unethical.
Finally here is the "proof" you asked for. It won't "probe" (sic) you wrong, but it is far more reliable that me just saying so.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/cia-torture-report/senate-report-finds-cia-interrogation-tactics-were-ineffective-n264621

crissx09 Loc: FL-USA

Do I have to remind you what the Gestapo did to prisoner when they need information about member of the underground resistance in all European countries during WW 2? Or how the British "interviewed" the Irish resistance in their conflict? Or how the police in many countries get information on illegal activities after "scientific" method of interrogation? Most of the ones that did not provide useful information was because they did not have it.
I had a friend who was a detective ( not in USA ) and he told me that the best informer where the experienced delinquent. They start talking before they were done. The new ones did not know what is going to happen to them. They did not had the experience...I agree this is not correct, it is barbaric, etc..etc
but don't tell me that it does'nt work. I understand not 100% but let's be realistic... it works!!

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

I suspect that nothing I could say or show you would change your preconceived notions. And that's what they are - - - notions or beliefs, but not facts. The Congressional Study reported " the CIA's own records found that seven of 39 detainees subjected to especially aggressive interrogation yielded no intelligence, and that others provided useful information without being subjected to the harsh techniques." Ask yourself: What ulterior motives could the bipartisan panel have in releasing such a report?
I never claimed that torture "did not work"; but that it does not produce the desired results in a majority or cases, that it is illegal and embarrassing and puts the United States into the unethical and untenable position of attempting to defend its use, and that there are better methods of obtaining information.
It is human nature to form opinions based on emotion or selective evidence. It just isn't constructive or particularly wise to do so.

crissx09 Loc: FL-USA

I will agree with you that in a percentage of cases will not produce the desired results. What percentage? I will not guess.
Anyway, has been nice to change opinions with a person like you. Thanks for the time you gave to this subject and good luck sir.

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

I come from a family where we didn't so much communicate as yell. He who screamed loudest apparently won. I've spent a good chunk of my life trying to do better. Thanks for an intelligent, enjoyable, and calm discussion.