that has a lot more to due with safe transit. I would NOT send a 10 year old kid to take BART or MUNI by themselves. In fact i literally know a couple who's 12 year old son basically got intimidated into giving away their iPod on MUNI.
that has a lot more to due with safe transit. I would NOT send a 10 year old kid to take BART or MUNI by themselves. In fact i literally know a couple who's 12 year old son basically got intimidated into giving away their iPod on MUNI.
While I'm sure the financial loss was irritating, if this is the worst that comes from letting children ride transit alone, I'd consider it an acceptable cost. Depending on the details, it could even make for a good learning experience.
You may not have defended what happened but if you don’t think it’s acceptable either my reading comprehension or your writing needs work.
I think they meant 'acceptable cost' from the perspective of a parent deciding whether to let their children use public transport unsupervised. Meaning: despite the risk, it's still worth letting them roam free. (Not meaning: it's socially or morally acceptable that people sometimes intimidate and rob children.)
I agree that it's a big deal (and perhaps more to the point, in a place where this happens, it's unlikely to actually be the worst thing that happens). But I don't think Wowfunhappy meant 'acceptable' in the way you might have read it. I think they meant it is outweighed by the benefit of being free to travel alone.
I mean, the "lunch money stolen by the bully" is a trope to this day and is pretty much the very same thing like a stolen iPod.
While it wasn't nice, it at least taught me a couple of things about life and gave me more confidence when dealing with high-stress/tension situations and the ability to mostly recognize them before they fully escalate.