The stupidity of some people is unbelievable.

[Adam West]

Potentially in Danger. I never said I agreed with what she did. I said we didn't know the circumstances. Those are two vastly distinct different things. Yes, children are always in danger, you can only do what's best for your own children to protect them. That does not give you the right to regulate how someone else protects their own children. That's the point I'm trying to make. Remember we all were brought up with different standards and morals. I myself would never leave a child unattended. But people born in my generation who were left in cars as children might have a different perspective. I know I was left alone many times and fortunately nothing ever happened to me. That's where that kind of mindset comes from.

Just so I'm clear, if you saw an unattended child left in a locked car with no one in sight, you would simply walk away?

[SUP-Ronin]

I don't think feel that the pros and cons of gun control are all that relevant. People killed each other just as effectively long before there were fire arms. According to certain highly regarded texts, it only took 2 generations of people before the guy murdered his own brother out of jealousy.
The odds are really pretty good you'll be killed in a car accident as opposed to being shot, but we don't ban cars and we let practically everyone drive. I realize that argument isn't new....

[ScottA]

And yet so many children are killed by gun related accidents as opposed to being abducted or dying from heat in a car. You just proved my point on selective morality. And it's great to know that leaving a loaded gun on a table is NOT a potential risk of danger to your children, but leaving a child in car is...yeah that makes sense.

The point is the gun won't kill anyone on it's own, anymore than a knife sitting on the kitchen table would. Those things aren't deadly until a person picks them up. Every gun related accident that has ever occured has happened because a person has squeezed the trigger, either on purpose or by accident, weather an innocent child or an experienced hunter. And yes, a loaded gun IS a potential danger. I never said it wasn't. I know you nor I would ever do such a thing. We just have to try and prevent those accidents buy not leaving a loaded gun or a knife lying around or a child unattended in a car anytime we can.

[grayhank]

Deleted

[grayhank]

Deleted

[megocrazy]

I guess the valiums have worn off so I'll apologize to some of you in advance.

I'm sure those kids really don't want to visit Grandma in jail..

They probably don't want to be locked in a car either!

I'm sure that late March in Massachusetts is not currently experiencing 100 degree weather. Probably more like 50 degrees.this time of year..

You really don't understand the issue here do you?

The lady being in her mid 50s is probably from a different generation where parent's leaving kids in cars was very much common..

And maybe her grandparents still own slaves.

Not everyone graduated the Over Obsessive School of Parenting..

And fortunately not everyone graduated from the School of Complete Ignorance.

People have no right to tell other people how to raise their kids..

Actually the law does have something to say about it.

don't push your morals on anyone else..

It's not a moral issue, it's against the law!!

Every one is quick to point out the mistakes of somebody else, but it doesn't look like anyone's volunteering to pay for this family's daycare..

Nobody paid for the daycare for my 3 kids and we never left them in the car.

Then complain that so many kids are angry, bitter, drugged out and on the streets in gangs because somebody didn't approve of someone else's parenting skills..

Maybe if their parents parenting skills were questioned, they wouldn't have turned out like that!!

Unless another child is bleeding, has broken bones or appears to be in serious mortal injury or jeopardy, stay out of it..

Do you even read what you write?? I can't even justify this statement with a response. If you ever hear someone calling for help outside your house, make sure you don't jam a finger slamming your windows and locking your door.

Obviously the child in this case was quite healthy because of the way she was laughing, playing games and responding.

Which is good. If I was an abductor she probably would have gone with me willingly.

I think the laws you are asking for are already in place...it's called involuntary manslaughter. If somebody causes somebody else harm in an unreasonable fashion such as leaving an infant in a car and the child dies, then yes by all means have them arrested and charged. But you can't change the laws to reflect against something that "might" happen.

So wait until something happens rather than try to prevent it. Brilliant!!

People are not born with common sense.

A point you have proven well.

The key point here is: How was the child's life in jeopardy?.

How can you not be able to answer that question yourself??

Child abduction. Ok, does that crime fall under the grandmother or the abducter?.

It falls under anyone that facilitated the action.

It can only be child endangerment if it is determined that the child was in fact in danger..

An unattended 1 year old is not a dangerous situation??

Was the child 2 or 5 or 8?.

Does this really matter??

Children do know certain degrees of responsibility, so without knowing this child, again an assumption comes into play..

So we should let all 2,5, and 8 year olds drink, drive, and vote. Assuming they all know enough responsibility to be left alone unattended.

Does the car have a running cooling system in place?.

If the child is comfortable it's OK.

Suppose a mother has 6 small children she needs to get from point A to point B. She can only carry 3 of them at a time. Does that mean she is breaking a law by leaving three of them in the car while she's carrying three of them in the house?.

I don't expect a mother of 6 to be running to the Post Office and leaving kids in the car. You don't do the normal day to day things when you're in that situation.

So it comes down to, if you "Frak" up, you need to pay the consequences for your actions..

That's the way it works. You speed you get a ticket, you shoot someone you go to jail, and you leave your 1 year old unattended in a car you deal with DSS.

I can almost guarantee that any vote regarding proactive precautions would be split right down the middle of the country.

There's no way half the country would take your side on this matter. There are already laws in place, that have been approved. If they weren't there there would be no reason for DSS and other agencies.

What if he ruined this family's life. Mom and Dad are apparently not in the immediate picture..

What if it stops this from happening again and becoming a potential tragedy??

Don't you think that most parents would be just as devestated over that concept?.

Just as devastated dealing with DSS vs. dealing with the kidnapping or death of a child?? Are you insane??

Again, I go back to "GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT". We don't know the circumstances.

She is guilty! PERIOD! The circumstance is she left a small child unattended in a locked car. There is no grey area or excuse.

But instead of using logic the majority of the people here are using "reaction".

Actually most here are being proactive, wanting to do something before the tragedy takes place. You're the one being reactive not wanting to act until the worst happens.

I don't have kids so I can look at the situation in an unbiased frame of mind.

Saying your view is unbiased because you have no kids, is basically saying I'm not a parent so who cares what happens to someone else's kid.

How many of you have children and drive around talking on a cell phone? The people that have this need to talk on the phone and drive are not only putting their lives and children's lives at risk, but also people like myself. That's stupidity for you right there..

I agree with you. It scares me to say that right now, but I do. Thankfully they are trying to pass laws to stop that right now. Fortunately they have already passed laws against child negligence.

It amazes me how we can be so selective about what can do our children harm..

Yes it's better to not address any of the issues than some of them.

The second leading cause of death in children is gun accidents. If we're going to go the precautionary route why don't we do away with guns? Well because that goes against our constitution and many of us like guns, whether we have children or not. But the likelihood of of a child getting killed by a gun is FAR greater than a child dying from being left in a car.

Actually I think you'll find most of those guns were not owned by the children but by an adult that did not properly store and lock that weapon. Probably hidden under the seat and found while the kid was left unattended in the car.

There is no greater loss than the loss of a child. But rather than address the greater concerns.

If there is no greater loss is there really a greater concern?

Potentially in Danger. I never said I agreed with what she did. I said we didn't know the circumstances.

So if I walked into your house with a bomb strapped to myself, it would be OK. You would only be potentially in danger. You might not agree with me, but you don't know the circumstances. So you would do nothing. We could just sit down and enjoy a cup of tea.

That does not give you the right to regulate how someone else protects their own children. That's the point I'm trying to make..

Actually the law does have the right to determine if you're negligent in the care of your child.

Remember we all were brought up with different standards and morals.

And some needed to be addressed which is why there are laws protecting those that can't protect themselves.

I know I was left alone many times and fortunately nothing ever happened to me.

Are you sure?

And yet so many children are killed by gun related accidents as opposed to being abducted or dying from heat in a car. You just proved my point on selective morality.

You have to see that there is no difference in either scenario using your own logic.

Either way the child is the victim of a negligent adult. It's not a selection. It's a crime. You're right there is no difference. 99% of the time the child is the victim and the parent is responsible.

[Adam West]

Thank you for that. Now you are thinking. It's the circumstances involved, not the act. Which is all I have been saying all along. Until we know what the actual circumstances are there's no need for a hanging! My whole point to even responding to this was because people were saying that this person needs to be punished, locked up, killed or whatever. One doesn't justify the other. We are so quick to judge rather than trying to gather the necessary information.

I think the main point that you are missing is that this is not a matter of morality, it is illegal to leave your child unattended in a car.

From my thought process, it isn't a matter of imposing morals on anyone. An illegal act is being committed and I feel that citizens have a moral obligation to report crimes.

I am morally opposed to abortion. It is not illegal. Just because I'm morally opposed to it, I am not going to form a human chain in front of planned parenthood or prevent someone for doing things that I am morally opposed to but is perfectly legal.

That's where we disagree. You are talking morals and I am talking law. Whether or not it should be legal or illegal is a different discussion altogether.

[grayhank]

Deleted

[grayhank]

Deleted

[JPkempo]

102 CMR 8.10(5) says: "A caregiver must never leave a child unattended in a vehicle."

Now your just being a jerk about this. Your from CA how would you know MA law.

Here is the link
http://www.eec.state.ma.us/docs/fami...gs.pdf#page=15

I think we should lock this down befor people start saying what they think of you.

[grayhank]

Deleted

[huedell]

I think Hue said it early on...Two wrongs don't make a right.

Well...I did use that sentiment...but not in the context that you are.

I certainly think this woman should be punished....there may be no official "law"
---but I'm sure with some elbow grease a child sevices case could be
stimulated.

I don't think a child should be left alone in a public area...ever...too dangerous.

[ScottA]

Thank you for that. Now you are thinking. It's the circumstances involved, not the act. Which is all I have been saying all along. Until we know what the actual circumstances are there's no need for a hanging! My whole point to even responding to this was because people were saying that this person needs to be punished, locked up, killed or whatever. One doesn't justify the other. We are so quick to judge rather than trying to gather the necessary information.

I do agree with you on that part. I don't believe she should be strung up or tared & feathered either. Just be reminded she made a bad decision (for whatever the reason) and to please be careful next time she takes her grandkids to run errands.

[megocrazy]

Well I did say that I didn't know whether it was a law or not. So you'll have to forgive me on that one. And I further went on to say that if a law has been broken then by all means arrest and convict.

Funny how those little things are overlooked.


AND just for the record...there is currently NO LAW in MASSACHUSETTS at this time which states it is against the law to do so. Each state has very specific circumstances in regards to what those laws are. They vary from state to state. So just saying something is against the law is not enough, it depends on the actual circumstances (how old the child is, is the car running, how long they are left alone, are they out of sight, are they beyond a specific distance...look them up at the link).

Harrison's Hope

Legislation

You're right the law falls under the child endangerment laws in Massachusetts. Capter 265 Section 13L

Whoever wantonly or recklessly engages in conduct that creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury or sexual abuse to a child or wantonly or recklessly fails to take reasonable steps to alleviate such risk where there is a duty to act shall be punished by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than 21/2 years.

For the purposes of this section, such wanton or reckless behavior occurs when a person is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his acts, or omissions where there is a duty to act, would result in serious bodily injury or sexual abuse to a child. The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard of the risk constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.

[megocrazy]

Well what do you know, it appears my morals have come into question here. I must be the biggest scum in the universe. I should probably go shoot myself. I think I know someone who might potentially have a loaded gun on a table.

Why don't you go back and read all the posts rather than taking things out of context. But here's some you might want to take out of context also! Love they neighbor. Treat others as you would have them treat you. Judge not lest ye be judged. Forgive!

I just hope you never get selected for Jury duty! For that matter why do we even need a Jury when we can just automatically draw conclusions without knowing the evidence. It's unfortunate that you can't see that in my posts. So let's string her up and call it a day.

Actually I didn't bring up the moral issue and that's for you to deal with not me. I also don't think you're scum. You are free to believe whatever you want, that's the great thing about freedom. I could never disagree with you about anything that would make me wish you would shoot yourself, and I would never shoot you myself. At least not over a passionate debate such as this. However I hardly think I took what was said out of the context they were meant. I openly apologize if you feel I did but I truly don't think so. And by the way, I spent the better part of the morning reading your posts over and over to make sure I was certain of what you were saying. I do love my neighbor which is why I would stand up to someone that would handle the care of a child with such blatant disregard IMO. If my kids are ever left in a locked car I certainly do hope they would treat me in the same manner as I did this. I would deserve it. I believe your first post referred to my graduating from the school of obsessive parenting and unless the child was bleeding, had broken bones, or was in jeopardy I should have minded my own business. That's not a judgement of my handling of the situation? Judge not lest ye be judged! And I have no problem forgiving people, but I also feel people need to be held accountable for their actions. Especially when the one that stands to lose the most is uncapable of controlling the situation themselves. By the way I was on jury duty last month. The case was thrown out so I didn't get to send him to the chair. Damn! Right now the way you feel about me and jury duty is the way I feel about you and parenting. Though I would bet being a parent would extremely change your point of view. I do not hate you,think you're scum, want you to shoot yourself or anything of the sort. I do really disagree with your views though.