I agree that there's a place for poems depicting children doing mischievous deeds, and many wonderful poems do just that. It's worth pointing out, though, that this is not the kind of thing that some of the best children's magazines are likely to publish. Highlights, for example, thinks very carefully about whether a given poem models undesirable behavior, and will not publish it if there is a chance it may. I'm less familiar with the other top magazines, but my sense is that they would have a similar attitude.
Say what you will about responsible parents, it's just as true that a responsible parent would rather be able to trust the editors 100% than feel the need to pre-read everything that their child might see, which is pretty hard to do since children find these magazines in school libraries and may subscribe to them at home. Even if a parent could pre-read everything, what's a parent who doesn't like a given poem to do? Blacken it out with a magic marker at home and leave instructions with the school librarian that Johnny is not to see page 27 of Highlights? It's just not practical. Responsible parents only subscribe to magazines whose editorial standards are acceptable to them and are reliable enough that there's no need to pre-read everything.
I think if we're talking about collections to be published in books, it's a whole other story. Many wonderful collections depict conduct that the magazines would not feel comfortable depicting. But I wouldn't waste my time sending such poems to most of the top magazines.