Smoke this one over.

[layoutshooter]

Sue, you are MORE than welcome to say anything you wish.

You will find, however, that the so called child protective services in the US are VERY bad, seldom, if ever, any better than those that they PRETEND to protect children from.

There is also a mind set in the US that is FAR different that what is found in Europe or England. We do not trust governments. For good reason. Governments have been the cause of more evil than most can imagine. It is just how it is here.

I don't pretend to know the solution, BUT, giving the State authority over children is NOT the answer. FAR to Stalin for us.

 

[Turtle]

Oh so thats it?

I'm not allowed to say anything else?

Tough!

I don't know how you could possibly come to that conclusion, considering I didn't say or even hint at anything of the sort. You are allowed to say anything you want. I'm simply telling you what my answer will be to any of those types of questions that might be posed. I never gave any indication that you weren't allowed, or even shouldn't, pose those questions.

People who endanger children belong in prison.

That's awfully broad, don't you think? "Endanger" covers a lot of ground, most of it open to interpretation and opinion. Where does the line get drawn? And is it absolute? The woman in the story was arrested and booked (and will probably be convicted) on child abuse and aggravated assault charges, despite the child not being injured in any way. She's being charged with what might have happened, rather than what did actually happen. Frankly, just by putting a child in a motor vehicle and taking the vehicle onto a public road is child endangerment.

What you stated above was not in line with this story.

Correct. It was, however, in line with my assertion that parents should be allowed to raise their kids in any way they see fit.

• May 1992, three-month-old Matthew Murray of Worcester, MA, was left strapped in his baby seat on top of his dad's Hyundai. The vehicle got up to speeds of 50 mph on Interstate 90 before the seat slid off the roof, landing the baby (miraculously uninjured) on the busy highway. Astonishingly, dad wasn't stoned or drunk.
• In December 1997, two-month-old Marcus Abram of the Chicago area was placed in his car seat on the roof of his mom's car while she moved things around inside to make room for two more passengers she was picking up. The child, still strapped to the car seat, fell off the roof of the car into a busy intersection with cars whizzing by in all directions. A passing trucker noticed the baby seat, stopped, and rescued the injured infant. The child fortunately suffered nothing more serious than lacerations to the face and head. Astonishingly, mom wasn't stoned or drunk.
• In July 1980, six-week-old Brian Kornbach was left in his infant seat on top of the family car while the adults switched places in the front seat. The child was found by a roadside in Queens by a passerby who took the injured infant to the hospital. His parents did not notice they'd failed to bring their son in off the roof until they were somewhere in the Bronx. Astonishingly, neither of the parents were stone or drunk.

Such accidents of forgetfulness happen with surprising regularity, and it doesn't take all that diligent a search through old newspapers to dig up news reports documenting one such incident after another. Like I said, if children got taken away from their parents every time a parent makes a mistake, no children would be with their parents.

Parenting may very well be the most important job in the world, but it's one that doesn't come with an instruction manual. And for good reason - parents should be free to raise their children in any way they see fit. And the seemingly good intentions of nosy busybodies trying to impose the will of their own opinions is not a substitute for a missing instruction manual. Children who become wards of the State have a very poor track record of become solid, productive citizens. They're far better off being raised in the traditional dysfunctional family.

 

[EnglishLady]

Turtle I would have quoted you, but it was an awfully long piece.

Keeping with the point of this thread ... as I posted in reply to Dennis ...

This woman recklessly and KNOWINGLY endangered the life of her child even without putting him on the roof of the car.


As for your comment ....

"I don't know how you could possibly come to that conclusion, considering I didn't say or even hint at anything of the sort"

let me refresh your memory ...

"And before you ask, the answer will be YES to any ridiculous, absurd, or extreme "Well, what about....?" questions ..."


Sounds like a shut down to me.



Ridiculous .... absurd ... really Turtle?

tut tut

 

[layoutshooter]

It likely was assault but not battery. Whether there was intent to commit battery would be hard to prove. Reckless endangerment is rather obvious in my opinion.


Assault and Battery legal definition of Assault and Battery. Assault and Battery synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

 

[Turtle]

Turtle I would have quoted you, but it was an awfully long piece.

Keeping with the point of this thread ... as I posted in reply to Dennis ...

This woman recklessly and KNOWINGLY endangered the life of her child even without putting him on the roof of the car.

Reckless, possibly, but that would be only if she was aware of the danger and chose to ignore it. Same with KNOWINGLY endangered. In order for that to be true, her intent would be to injure the baby. There is nothing in the story to indicate she was intentionally trying to cause harm to the baby. Being stupid isn't necessarily the same thing as knowingly endangering. Making a mistake and not being mindful of the danger is not the same as knowingly and recklessly ignoring the danger. Using your criteria, mistakes are not allowed. I do think that if you get drunk or high, you are doing so while knowing full well that you judgement will be impaired, so you are responsible for your actions, nonetheless.

As for your comment ....

"I don't know how you could possibly come to that conclusion, considering I didn't say or even hint at anything of the sort"

let me refresh your memory ...

"And before you ask, the answer will be YES to any ridiculous, absurd, or extreme "Well, what about....?" questions ..."


Sounds like a shut down to me.

I'm sorry you inferred it that way, because it was not intended at all to be a shutdown. I merely gave you my answers in advance to what are often typical questions. It's simply a way to let you know my position, in advance, without you having to bother with asking.

Ridiculous .... absurd ... really Turtle?

tut tut

tut tut yourself. Don't forget "extreme", as it's a word which is just as contextually important as ridiculous and absurd. As often happens in a debate, a ridiculous or absurd or extreme premise will be presented as a vehicle to show ridiculousness or absurdity. When I say a parent should be able to raise their child any way they please, and can do anything they want, I do, in fact, mean anything. Any questions of the "Well, what about this or that?" type, no matter how ridiculous, absurd or extreme the situation of the question might be, my answer will still be in the affirmative. You are still free to ask those questions, to your heart's content.

 

[hossman2011]

At least mitt put his dog on the roof.... Clark griswold tied theirs to the bumper!!!!

 

[EnglishLady]

Turtle if I did not explain myself fully (which I believe I have) then I apologise.

Yes I am talking about the woman in this story.

This woman who smoked 2 more pot cigarettes and then made the conscious decision to get into her car with her baby.

I cannot believe in this day and age, with all the advertising ...warnings etc etc, she would not know that smoking pot would impair her.
Therefore, with or without the baby on the roof (meaning even if she put the baby inside the car) she knowingly endangered her childs life by driving impaired, whether he was injured or not, his life, IMO, was endangered.






Apology accepted - thank you

 

[skyraider]

Why do parents or whomever place small children on the car roof anyway? Why not on the ground, u dont have to left them so high, duh. It is stupid to put your child in harms way like that.
some where along lifes journey, someone or all of us need to slow down and think what we are doing. Child endangerment is a big deal with the Division of Childs Services. You will not get far with the argument that a parent has the right todo anything to a child in this situation, just visit child services and ask them.

By the time u get thru the child neglect stuff, and hire an attorney,and go thru the courts if u want your child back, ur in for about 20 grand and thats just for starters. Then there is the endless childparenting classes that u pay for.. Whoops, and drug test twice a month and if u miss a drug test, well well, u are considered dirty and thats another can of worms. But in the case above, no baby died, but if the baby had died, well then its possible jail time.

 

[Turtle]

Child endangerment is a big deal with the Division of Childs Services. You will not get far with the argument that a parent has the right todo anything to a child in this situation, just visit child services and ask them.

You bet it's a big deal with the Division of Child Services. It's such a big deal to them that they make a big deal out of it when it's not even a big deal. They've gotta justify their jobs somehow.

By the time u get thru the child neglect stuff, and hire an attorney,and go thru the courts if u want your child back, ur in for about 20 grand and thats just for starters.

That's kinda one of my point. They take your child away without due process, and then you've got to prove they shouldn't have done it, and you've got to prove it to them, not the judge, as the judge defers to the experience of the experts, namely Child Services. It's literally guilty until proven innocent, because in the opinion of someone who's job rests with their opinion, the welfare of the child outweighs any of that innocent until proven guilty nonsense.

Spank your child, lose your child, go to jail, now you're a convicted child abuser. Good luck getting your kid back.

 

[Turtle]

I cannot believe in this day and age, with all the advertising ...warnings etc etc, she would not know that smoking pot would impair her.

And yet people still text while driving, sometimes with kids in the car, despite all the advertising and warnings. Young people know that they're invincible.

The problem with knowing full well that you'll be impaired if you get drunk or high is the fact that once you get drunk or high, you're impaired to the point where you don't feel like you're impaired enough to do whatever you want, like driving.

The thing about this story is, people are outraged because the mother got high and endangered her child, even though the child is fine. I can see the outrage, somewhat, if perfectly sober and rational parents didn't often do the very same thing. Anyone want to get in on a pool on how many babies die this summer because their stone cold sober mothers left them in back seat of the car and they baked like they were in an oven, simply because they were forgotten about?

 

[Moot]

Why do parents or whomever place small children on the car roof anyway? Why not on the ground, u dont have to left them so high, duh. It is stupid to put your child in harms way like that.

You put the kid on the ground you could damage your car when you drive over them. I've pulled empty trailers over wheel chocks. The tires on the leading axle tend to cause the chock to flip and turn 90° allowing it to get stuck between the duals on the trailing axle. It's somewhat difficult to pry a wheel chock from a set of duals. I'm no obstetrician, but I gotta believe pulling a kid out would be a whole lot messier.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

Go to 55 second mark.

 

[skyraider]

How many of us in this thread are parents, I have 2 adult children, 6 grandkids and we are all perfect, well somedays are better then others.

 

[layoutshooter]

I have two adult sons and one granddaughter. I was not a perfect parent. I have yet to meet a parent who is or was. I never drove off and left either son on the roof of the car. I don't ever recall putting them on the roof of the car. When getting them ready to go somewhere we put them IN the car. Driving stoned or drunk with a kid? Holy Christmas tree Batman, just how plain stupid and useless can a person be?

A 'mother' would not do that. Neither would a 'father'. Those two 'titles' are far more verb than noun. Once a person takes on adult responsibilities they should act accordingly.

 

[skyraider]

Go to 55 second mark.

scary moment to say the least

 

[witness23]

Go to 55 second mark.

Classic!!

 

[witness23]

One of the best chase scenes ever!

"Son....you gotta a panty on your head"

 

[layoutshooter]

What do movie scenes have to do with real life problems? Hollywood is FAKE, PRETEND and, for the most part, a joke when it comes to REAL life. This so called 'mother' is REAL LIFE SCUM. It is NOT funny, NOT a movie and NOT a mistake. She is a bad as depicted. Useless. I feel quite sorry for that kid. Starting off life with a millstone like that hanging around it's neck.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

What do movie scenes have to do with real life problems? Hollywood is FAKE, PRETEND and, for the most part, a joke when it comes to REAL life. This so called 'mother' is REAL LIFE SCUM. It is NOT funny, NOT a movie and NOT a mistake. She is a bad as depicted. Useless. I feel quite sorry for that kid. Starting off life with a millstone like that hanging around it's neck.

And your point is?

 

[layoutshooter]

That was the point. Posting clips from movies prove nothing about real life. Movies are fake, unreal, pretend. This 'mother' is a REAL LIFE problem. She and her boyfriend, husband, what ever he is, will ruin this kid. IF they were even CLOSE to being adults they would put this kid up for adoption. As it is now, the kid stands a better than even chance of being ruined by the scum that spawned it. They are obviously NOT parents. All they did was party and pop. Parenting, like mothering and fathering is a VERB. It requires ACTION. It requires RESPONSIBLE ACTION. It is unlikely those two are capable of it.