Image by Manuel de la Fuente from Pixabay
I just saw a report on a national news channel. The report addressed a very worrying issue. The sale of objects that are considered weapons under national law, and which can only be sold under certain circumstances.
The report mentioned and showed that some online platforms selling second-hand items, where we usually find clothes, shoes, decorations, etc., were selling items such as bladed weapons. Hunting knives with blades longer than 10 centimeters (which, according to Portuguese law, are prohibited from sale). There are exceptions, such as if the buyer is a farmer or, for example, a hunter, they can make this purchase, but they will have to justify it and prove that they carry out the activity that justifies it. Nevertheless, those who sell these items must obviously also be authorized to do so. As such, the only merchants, with a physical store or website, must have a gunsmith's license. And they can only sell these items to those who can purchase them, with the main requirement always being that the buyer is of legal age.
The report mentioned a police case in which a 16-year-old high school student managed to purchase a homemade taser on one of these second-hand goods platforms (popularly used for selling clothing, decorations, or even household appliances).
Possession of this device is a crime, and although he was not prosecuted for it, it was confiscated by the authorities.
This raises two major questions:
The first is: How can we control the sale of items on websites where all users can publish an offer for sale, with whatever description they see fit? In this particular case, the item was classified as a “fun” item, and the description made no mention of its ability to immobilize by electric shock.
This second question has more to do with the development of the aforementioned report. In it, the journalist took the opportunity to talk to young people about their shopping habits on online sales platforms. Many of them said that they could even use a more “rudimentary” system, where there would only be an exchange of one item for another. In other words, they could have a computer or console game that they were no longer so excited to play, and they would exchange it for another item. But one young woman said she had the details (one of her parents' credit card numbers) and used them to make purchases, informing them before using them....
But what is really happening here? Is it “normal” to give this power and ability to someone who, because they are not yet able to vote for a particular party at the polls and, in some countries, are not old enough to consume alcohol, can purchase goods or services on their own, informing their parents of what they are going to buy?
In my opinion, I don't think it shows a capacity for trust in these young people, nor does it determine anything about their independence as adults. It just shows a total lack of interest on the part of parents in taking a more active role in taking certain measures that could prevent an accident or a very unpleasant situation.
Of course, even if parents do not give their permission, or provide their bank card details, these purchases would still be made, with varying degrees of difficulty. But here I think the reasoning should go in another direction: “To what extent do we, as a society, ensure that our developing individuals gradually develop their sense of responsibility?” "Is trusting them, without worrying and spending time monitoring them, a recipe for complete and chaotic failure?
Time, which in my opinion is our most valuable asset, ends up being traded in exchange for something that, although it may guarantee us stability or comfort, will not bring peace of mind or even a sense of guidance to those who should look to us as a role model.
This issue, in my opinion, was the subject of an investigative report because it involved the illegal sale of prohibited material, which can be lethal or even fatal, to minors. Of course, this is a very sporadic situation, and fortunately, it is quite rare in our society. As such, it was carried out to explore something that may be more prominent in the future and that was not addressed with the proper distance and reference to its low probability of happening. However, it should not be taken into account as something that can only happen in other latitudes and in the distant future.
What do you think about this situation? How do you view it, as a problem essentially related to something that could be fatal, or as a lack of interest on the part of educators, which is mistakenly communicated as a feeling of trust in their sons?
Free image from Pixabay.com
Original text written by me in Portuguese and translated with DeepL.com (free version)
