Thread: Children and Arson.

Couple of things come to mind with this thread,

1 It's not arson ! there has to be intent to cause deliberate, malicious, property damage using fire for it to actually be arson.

2. with kids 8, 10 around that age experimenting with fire is actually a normal developmental phase, most children will do it to some extent. Some will develop a fascination with fire, some will go on to become serial fire lighters.

So young kids are unlikely to have much appreciation of the consequences of their 'fire lighting'. Generally a 'stern' talking to by police/parents/firefighters fixes most of them.

I wonder whether we are starting as well to see the consequences of 'disaster fatigue' where the media bombards 24/7 with footage of disaster events that people start to become immune to what is happening.

The 'traditional' arsonist is a young male (20s) that has low esteem, low achievement, but higher than average intelligence, poor social involvement and irregular employment. From my (limited) involvement in fire investigation that seems to fit.


Martyn

Just to throw a question in, now that its been proven the blue mountains fire's where started by ADF who is going to pay for the houses burnt by that fire and the potential/actual? lives lost? Will it be the private who either fired the shot or didn't put out the campfire, or their commanders who ordered them there in those conditions?
2 versions, One is that it was a campfire not put out correctly, the other is that it was an explosive device that started the fire they couldn't control.Confirmed: army exercise started blaze in Blue Mountains | smh.com.au

Deport them to England for the term of their natural life. It is too cold and wet there for them to start anything

Originally Posted by jx2mad

Deport them to England for the term of their natural life. It is too cold and wet there for them to start anything

If they cannot deported because they are Australians then Macquarie Island is an option with the nice "tropical" weather there

Originally Posted by Bushie

Couple of things come to mind with this thread,

1 It's not arson ! there has to be intent to cause deliberate, malicious, property damage using fire for it to actually be arson.

2. with kids 8, 10 around that age experimenting with fire is actually a normal developmental phase, most children will do it to some extent. Some will develop a fascination with fire, some will go on to become serial fire lighters.

So young kids are unlikely to have much appreciation of the consequences of their 'fire lighting'. Generally a 'stern' talking to by police/parents/firefighters fixes most of them.

I wonder whether we are starting as well to see the consequences of 'disaster fatigue' where the media bombards 24/7 with footage of disaster events that people start to become immune to what is happening.

The 'traditional' arsonist is a young male (20s) that has low esteem, low achievement, but higher than average intelligence, poor social involvement and irregular employment. From my (limited) involvement in fire investigation that seems to fit.


Martyn

I agree with what you say and if you go back to my OP I state that kids can get into mischief and innocently cause problems through "experimenting" with matches and causing a fire. We were all kids once.
However, when a minor has a track record with police for bad behaviour, I think it is a different and more serious matter. These minors have behavioural problems and should be stopped before they do something that gets somebody killed. The argument they may use about having a bad homelife or some other crap does not cut it. They have to be made responsible for their actions and you can't convince me an 11 year old and particularly a 16 year old does not know right from wrong.
My thoughts anyhow.

Originally Posted by Chucaro

If they cannot deported because they are Australians then Macquarie Island is an option with the nice "tropical" weather there

Tassie is cold enough.

Maybe we could send them there to stimulate the Tasmanian economy with the insurance payouts you could get a building led recovery.

Originally Posted by Ausfree

I agree with what you say and if you go back to my OP I state that kids can get into mischief and innocently cause problems through "experimenting" with matches and causing a fire. We were all kids once.
However, when a minor has a track record with police for bad behaviour, I think it is a different and more serious matter. These minors have behavioural problems and should be stopped before they do something that gets somebody killed. The argument they may use about having a bad homelife or some other crap does not cut it. They have to be made responsible for their actions and you can't convince me an 11 year old and particularly a 16 year old does not know right from wrong.
My thoughts anyhow.

Agree - my comment was mainly about young kids 8-10yo. A 16yo should know the consequences and as such deserves the full weight of the law.


Martyn

Originally Posted by frantic

Just to throw a question in, now that its been proven the blue mountains fire's where started by ADF who is going to pay for the houses burnt by that fire and the potential/actual? lives lost? Will it be the private who either fired the shot or didn't put out the campfire, or their commanders who ordered them there in those conditions?
2 versions, One is that it was a campfire not put out correctly, the other is that it was an explosive device that started the fire they couldn't control.Confirmed: army exercise started blaze in Blue Mountains | smh.com.au

Ok mmm maybe I got this wrong but the houses lost and damaged in very large numbers was the Springwood fire Blue Mountains,

the ADF started the state mine fire...which largely burnt through a lot of National park....and only threatened townships like Bilpin etc.

Although saying that I'm not sure whether springwood was a result of the state mine fire