Yesterday the girl’s mother Angela Godwin, 34, said: ‘I think it is disgusting he has got away with just a £40 fine.
‘It’s pathetic. My daughter was vulnerable and she was put in a compromising position by this man.’Oo-er! Just what has gone on? The mind boggles...
Oh, wait. It's that most heinous of crimes. The unlicensed tattoo.
Hey, it's not like the 'Mail' hasn't banged the hysteria drum over these before, is it, as MacHeath points out?
So, are we talking something tasteful here, at least? Reader, we are not:
The schoolgirl paid him £20 for the tattoo – designed to commemorate her late grandfather...Lovely! It's the modern way, innit?
The mother-of-three, who works as a midwife, said: ‘I’m so angry and so upset with what has happened and the tiny amount of punishment he received.
‘It was an unforgivable act of selfish greed. I despise him.’Hey, love! It takes two to tango, so to speak...
Speaking at their family home in Gloucester, she said: ‘She had blood tests and they are clear but it has petrified her.
‘She hates it and regrets it entirely. She is desperate to have it removed and is really upset she has this horrible mark on her.’No doubt the NHS will helpfully remove it for her, if you lay it on thick enough.
I mean, why not? Why should anyone be expected to carry with them the visible marks of their foolish behaviour? I mean, that way, they can not learn any lessons...
She said: ‘He never asked her age [or] gave her any information on safety and just did not seem to care.
‘He asked her who knows about it and she lied and said her dad, to which he apparently replied “That’s good enough for me”.
'At the age of 14 I do not see how it can be her fault. She didn't have the capacity to make her own decisions. He had a responsibility to say no to her.'I wonder just how many times she's said that word to her own daughter, the accomplished liar..?
12 comments:
There's that "Licenced" word again. Why is it we aren't allowed to do anything without the permission of the great and the good? For a fee obviously.
What is so wrong with leaving things to market forces? You do a shit job, and you go out of business. Simples...
I bet mums got a "tramp stamp". No dad mentioned in the article, there's a surprise.
Basically I agree with Budvar, HOWEVER!!
With Tats (I have 17), you have just as much infection risk as an NHS Horsespital.
AIDS, Hep B and all other letter combinations, down to the common cold.
You have less chance of infection at a dentist. Would you go to an "unliceced" tooth smasher?
I may be old-fashioned, but where does a 14-year old get £20? I wonder what the little-darling originally told her mum she was going to spend it on?
An "unlicenced toothsmasher", in the old days (Not that long ago really) teeth and broken bones were set by the local barber. OK techniques have improved over the years, but novocaine isn't really available in any corner store, and no I wouldn't be asking Shaz the local hairdresser to be yanking any teeth of mine. That said, would I have a problem getting a tooth yanked by an unqualified student at the local dental school? Probably not.
Thanks for the link.
Interestingly, Mother doesn't appear to have an issue with navel-piercing.
I don't like the idea of state controls, but, given the potential for things to go horribly wrong - aesthetically as well as hygienically - I think some form of professional certification of competence would be helpful. (The council licences, apparently dished out to anyone with an autoclave and wipe-down surfaces, are largely irrelevant.)
The trouble with market forces is that tattooists are a bit like motorway service stations in terms of repeat business; there are always enough first- or one-time customers to keep the bad ones in business.
"At the age of 14 I do not see how it can be her fault. She didn't have the capacity to make her own decisions."
And if your daughter, Amy-Marie Jessamy Curtis, decided to cross a busy road without looking. Or played marbles on Heathrow's Runway 28R. Whose fault would that be?
And 14? Well two months shy of 15 actually, but we'll let that one go. Up until 1947 kids of 14 were deemed old enough the leave school and start work in this country. In many places around the world they still are.
According to the local news: Yesterday Stroud Magistrates' Court was told Richardson, 23, was pestered by the girl into giving her a tattoo in memory of her late grandfather – after her mum told her not to get one.
Sorry Miss Godwin, but the fault here - either by way of genetics or upbringing - is yours. As was, I suspect, the decision to allow her to get piercings, dress in a mini skirt and cavort with her friends on a lap-dancing pole... After all, like you said yourself; "She didn't have the capacity to make her own decisions".
XX I may be old-fashioned, but where does a 14-year old get £20?XX At 14 (1974) I was lucky to get 2,50, and for that I had to wash three of the familys cars.
But then, you coukld get an Airfix kit for 49 pence. Maybe you could even afford the glue, and two pots of paint (In glass bottles those days!). Paint brush cleaner? Na "Wait till your birthday!"
@John Pickworth
Or played marbles on Heathrow's Runway 28R
That should be relatively safe, it's 27L and R since 1987.
The rest of your points are utterly sound.
Judging by the photographs, I would rather have him give me a tattoo than let her deliver my child.
Don't you just HATE it when yot get an air traffic/ground traffic controler on your site??? :-) :-)
... it's 27L and R since 1987
I blame the drifting poles... you just can't have that many Polish plumbers coming to Peterborough without it having some effect.
;-)
"I may be old-fashioned, but where does a 14-year old get £20?"
*bites tongue*
"Interestingly, Mother doesn't appear to have an issue with navel-piercing."
Indeed!
"Judging by the photographs, I would rather have him give me a tattoo than let her deliver my child."
Heh!
Post a Comment