Oh, and I never said the guy should get the death penalty. I'm not saying the guy should be punished at all. Really, the fact that it happened is a worse punishment than anything that could be done to him. I'm just saying exactly what I said: this already could have been prevented, and if it wasn't going to be prevented, a camera probably would have made it worse for the guy.
So who's fault was it? Was it the father, because he wasn't properly supervising th echild from inside the car? was it the Mother, a big sister or brother? The child himself?
It was the fault of both the parents who failed to educate the child about not running in the path of cars, the fault of the father for not ensuring the child was properly supervised before attempting to leave, and the fault of whomever was suppose to be supervising the child at the moment.
I do not know if you have children or not, but short of locking them up 24/7, can you ensure that they will never ever get away from you? You will never, ever be distracted? Hell, if everyone drove with forethought and was always thinking, we wouldn't need one piece of safety equipment on vehicles. But everyone can be distracted, and accidents are going to happen.
I have 4 kids. And yes, I can manage to never let them let them run out the door when their father is backing up his car. If I didn't have this ability, I would have locks that are unlockable by anyone young enough to run out the door and into the path of cars like that. I double check the position of all my kids before moving my car. (What we do is we all come and say goodbye to the leaving parent, and we communicate with the staying parent where the kids are going to be after the other parent leaves. By having the front curtains open, the kids are either at the window waving the leaving parent, or haven't had a chance to leave the living room yet, and so all are visible.) I manage to not be distracted when it counts; my kids are more important than anything else I may have on my mind.
Accidents are going to happen, but a kid running out the door and behind a car is a preventable accident. It just takes a little more effort than many people are willing to put in.
And we all know that once you tell your kids not to run behind the car, they will never, ever, ever, run behind a car.
That is not what I said. I said WATCH AND educate. You have to properly supervise your kid until you are sure they won't run in front of/behind a car, ball or no. And that requires several years of education for the average child. If your child is mentally retarded to the point where they are doing that into adulthood, then you supervise them in adulthood too, or pay someone else to do so.
My method is, if a child is at risk of running into the path of the car, I have them within arms reach whenever they are near enough to any cars/streets to run in the path before I can get to them. It may not be fool proof, but it has always worked so far, even when I was putting groceries in my trunk and a car suddenly jumped a curb and rammed into my car, totaling it (I grabbed the kid and jumped out of the way).
Another poster who disagrees with me is proposing that a law requiring these backup cameras is not worth the cost. So he is placing a value of 100 dollars as more than a child's life is worth.
Nope, that's not how it works. Only if these cameras GUARANTEED survival of a child would the poster be putting 100 dollars above a child's life.
I buy in bulk. A lot of the stuff I buy literally will not fit between two cars in adjacent parking spaces. I'd hurt myself if I tried to carry a 50lb bag of rice the length of a car, and they don't make special parking spaces for small Asian women.
I have had times where I do the double ranked spaces thing and people park so close that I can't get to my trunk. In those cases, I've put the stuff inside the car rather than in the trunk. But I've also had times when people park so close on the sides that I can't get larger stuff in (or, what happens more often, that I can't get my kids in, because I usually park way off in nomans land when the kids aren't with me). These two events haven't lined up yet, but if I parked in that direction often, I imagine it would.
I have small kids. Personally, I'd rather watch and educate my own kids than pay $100. Not because I want the $100 more than I want my kids to be safe, but because paying the $100 would create a false sense of safety. I know I would still watch and educate my kids despite this law, but not everyone would, and that would increase my chances of running over someone else's kid. Also, drivers would be more careless, and if their camera malfunctioned or a kid was at just the right angle to not be seen by the camera, they would be more likely to run the kid over. Putting that $100 toward a "watch and educate your kids" campaign would be much more effective on the world.
Car seats. Not all that many children were killed by auto accidents. Yet we require them to be belted in. No one alive today who is older than 30 grew up using a car seat.
I'm not sure what your point is for that one. The child seat laws are kind of ridiculous. With a baby, there is really no way to put them in a regular seatbelt, so a carseat makes sense there... but they are allowed to ride in trains or buses with just an adult holding them, so it doesn't really make sense. With a small child, the seatbelt will hurt them without a booster seat. In my state, though, kids are required to use a booster seat until age 8, which is silly, they are big enough to fit a regular seatbelt before then, and it isn't like they suddenly grow on their 8th birthday.
It takes a special kind of callous to say I'd rather kill someone than spend a few hundred dollars to try to avoid killing them.
I don't think anyone is saying that; the point is there are other, better ways to try to avoid killing someone.
A backup camera may have helped, or he may not have been able to stop in time, and would have had to watch his child as he crushed it. Either way, the whole thing could have been prevented with proper supervision of the 3 year old by someone that wasn't leaving, and/or proper education of the 3 year old that you do not run behind vehicles.
Or you could just go outside with your child and teach them not to go in front of nor behind cars, only letting them out alone when you are sure they understand, which I seem to find happens at about age 4. Either way works.
Rent: get a roomate or two. 2 bedrooms are not necessary, that is a luxury. Depending on how many kids you have, you may not even need a room big enough to hold 2 beds. Some of the things I did when I was a single parent were work on a farm in exchange for getting to live there, and work a job for someone that owned apartment buildings in exchange for getting to stay in an apartment. At one point I lived in a 1 bedroom "apartment" that was really a house that had been turned into 3 apartments and an office. Yes it sucked, but it was a roof over my kid's head (at points before I was a parent, being homeless was an option, but I wouldn't do that with a kid), and it was cheap so allowed me to save up money to get into a better place.
Now I own a house (fully, I mean, without mortgage) and my property taxes are $600 per year (yes there is a lot of upfront costs, but in the long run, since I do the upkeep myself, it is cheaper than renting).
Child care: yes that is expensive, which is why working as little as possible as a single parent, or having 1 parent stay home in a 2 parent household is cheaper. When I was a single parent, I often worked jobs where I could take my child along, and/or traded child care with other single parents.
Even without any fucking taxes that will only leave no fucking more than $700 per month for food, transportation, minimum phone service, lowest tier internet plan, electric, gas, water, sanitation, basic medical, etc.
Phone, internet, and electricity are all luxuries. Before you say a phone is needed for emergencies, you don't need phone service to call 911, a phone connected to a service-less landline will call 911, so it isn't needed. Either way, when I was a single parent, I had food, transportation (when it was needed for my job; I worked at places I could walk to and from home whenever possible), minimum phone service, highest tier internet plan, electric, gas, water, sanitation, and basic medical, and it didn't cost me $700 per month. At the point where I was paying rent at the 1 bedroom "apartment," I was making $700 - $800 a month before taxes, and the rent was $300 a month.
(If you're planing on saying that I must have lived in cheap areas, I've lived all over the US and in parts of Asia, mostly in major cities and in suburbs of major cities. If I couldn't find work or just didn't like a place for some reason, I packed my stuff into a backpack (yes, I didn't have much, but much isn't needed), picked up my kid and left however I could afford to do so.)
As a fucking result many single parents have no fucking choice but to eat nothing but junk food. It's cheap and it requires little to no prep work.
Fruits and vegetables require little to no prep work and are cheaper than junk food.
It all depends on which version and translation of the Bible you are reading, and personal interpretation. For example, if I hear someone call a friend their "brother from another mother," I would not assume they are half-brothers. I see no reason to take "she was the mother of all living" literally.
Jewish tradition also asserts the existence of Lilith, a female created at the same time as Adam, and Adam's first wife.
I'd like to see garbage collection having the condition that garbage can not contain baby poop. It's an obvious biohazard (we all know it is a biohazard for adults to poop in the trash, and baby poop is no different) that for some reason, people either don't realize or want to pretend isn't there.
When paypal first rose up, it wasn't possible to grab a prepaid credit card at your corner drugstore, and atm cards that also worked as credit cards were rare, Paypal was essential for anyone that couldn't get or otherwise didn't have a credit card. Credit card security was also not as strong as it is now (and think about the flaws in it now), so most people were (rightfully) afraid to give their number out.
Checks, cash, and money orders all take time to get to the seller, can be lost/stolen in the mail, and are easy to lie about being lost/stolen. Wire transfer can not be done from all bank accounts. These were all common ways of transferring money before paypal came around - but once people saw how much faster and secure paypal was, it became the payment method of choice. For awhile, paypal was the only method of getting money from your bank account to a seller without either leaving your house or putting something in the mail; so lots of people started using it. Now, it's the easiest method, and people are familiar with it, so it continues to be used.
Okay, but who gets to decide which groups are protected? Why can't, say, people into pseudo-incest be just as protected as people into interracial sex?
but you and the publisher have the right to take your business elsewhere
Except there pretty much isn't an anywhere else when you're talking about what paypal does. This may not go against a "free market," but let's not argue semantics - Paypal is effectively banning books, and that's a horrible thing.
Kids can't really understand that sort of future consequences type of thinking. What we have to do is just make healthy eating and exercising part of their normal routine, and make healthy foods the only options (aside from rare special events). Don't bring unhealthy food into your house, and your kid can't eat it there. If their school has vending machines of unhealthy food, don't give them money. Show them how great tasting healthy food actually is, and don't make eating it a chore.
It costs my family of 6 $25 to have 1 meal at McDonalds, and we eat 3 meals a day. In a month where we eat no home-grown food and no fast food, we spend $460 on groceries - which comes out to less than $6 per meal. If we all ate meat, to spend $6 on a trip to our local McDonalds would mean we could each eat half a single hamburger, not including tax.
With a controller/keyboard? I never saw the point, myself, but I use to know a guy that would spend hours doing that. Or maybe on the easiest setting; with some of them that is less of a workout than walking to the kitchen and back.
But if the child then goes and plays virtual chess against someone, that would be little different than playing physical chess - except for the fact that his opponents are not limited by physical proximity.
You can just go out in the yard/playground/schoolyard/street and play tennis, you know. You aren't going to be arrested for playing tennis outside of an approved tennis court.
Real bread costs $3 - $4 where I live (in a suburb of Chicago). You can get some "bread" which is mostly high fructose corn syrup for $1 per loaf, though.
I get 25lb bags of flour for $8. Now I don't know how much lb of flour goes into a loaf, but I buy a bag every 2 or 3 months vs when I was buying bread I would get a loaf every 1 - 2 weeks (6 person family). I got a bunch of yeast off Amazon for $8 nearly a year ago and have not needed to buy more yet. My electricity bill did not rise noticeably when I started making my own bread. It takes about 5 minutes to put the ingredients in the breadmaker. The breadmaker cost $30.
If your electricity is really so expensive for you, you could always hand-mix and bake in a gas or wood stove (along with something else that needs to cook/bake to save even with that), which would take an additional 10 - 20 minutes of your time.
People have to go grocery shopping either way. It takes no more time to go to the fruit and vegetable isle than it does to go to the TV-dinner isle - heck, the fruit and vegetable isle is usually closer to the door and therefore faster! - and while 10 for $10 seems like a deal, both serving and nutrient wise, the fruit and vegetable isle is cheaper. The majority of stuff in the fruit and vegetable isle can be eaten as-is or after a kid peals them, you don't even have to wait for microwave time.
Unless you're suggesting that these time-pressed families are getting fast food for every single meal?
"People must work 3 fucking jobs just to make ends meet"
Bullshit. They may need 3 jobs to keep up with the Jonses and buy every luxury item known to man, but if you live frugally, even a part time minimum wage job is enough to pay for what you NEED.
When you have kids and a 2 parent house, having 1 parent stay home is actually cheaper than having both work. If both work you must pay for childcare, 2 cars, upkeep and gas for those 2 cars, work clothes, etc. etc. etc. When you have kids and a single-parent house, it is cheaper to work as little as possible.
I've been a single parent, and I've been a parent in a 2-working-parent household, and now I'm staying at home with the time to cook everything from scratch. Never mind the fact that even when I worked, eating a raw diet was an option.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and I never said the guy should get the death penalty. I'm not saying the guy should be punished at all. Really, the fact that it happened is a worse punishment than anything that could be done to him. I'm just saying exactly what I said: this already could have been prevented, and if it wasn't going to be prevented, a camera probably would have made it worse for the guy.
So who's fault was it? Was it the father, because he wasn't properly supervising th echild from inside the car? was it the Mother, a big sister or brother? The child himself?
It was the fault of both the parents who failed to educate the child about not running in the path of cars, the fault of the father for not ensuring the child was properly supervised before attempting to leave, and the fault of whomever was suppose to be supervising the child at the moment.
I do not know if you have children or not, but short of locking them up 24/7, can you ensure that they will never ever get away from you? You will never, ever be distracted? Hell, if everyone drove with forethought and was always thinking, we wouldn't need one piece of safety equipment on vehicles. But everyone can be distracted, and accidents are going to happen.
I have 4 kids. And yes, I can manage to never let them let them run out the door when their father is backing up his car. If I didn't have this ability, I would have locks that are unlockable by anyone young enough to run out the door and into the path of cars like that. I double check the position of all my kids before moving my car. (What we do is we all come and say goodbye to the leaving parent, and we communicate with the staying parent where the kids are going to be after the other parent leaves. By having the front curtains open, the kids are either at the window waving the leaving parent, or haven't had a chance to leave the living room yet, and so all are visible.) I manage to not be distracted when it counts; my kids are more important than anything else I may have on my mind.
Accidents are going to happen, but a kid running out the door and behind a car is a preventable accident. It just takes a little more effort than many people are willing to put in.
And we all know that once you tell your kids not to run behind the car, they will never, ever, ever, run behind a car.
That is not what I said. I said WATCH AND educate. You have to properly supervise your kid until you are sure they won't run in front of/behind a car, ball or no. And that requires several years of education for the average child. If your child is mentally retarded to the point where they are doing that into adulthood, then you supervise them in adulthood too, or pay someone else to do so.
My method is, if a child is at risk of running into the path of the car, I have them within arms reach whenever they are near enough to any cars/streets to run in the path before I can get to them. It may not be fool proof, but it has always worked so far, even when I was putting groceries in my trunk and a car suddenly jumped a curb and rammed into my car, totaling it (I grabbed the kid and jumped out of the way).
Another poster who disagrees with me is proposing that a law requiring these backup cameras is not worth the cost. So he is placing a value of 100 dollars as more than a child's life is worth.
Nope, that's not how it works. Only if these cameras GUARANTEED survival of a child would the poster be putting 100 dollars above a child's life.
I buy in bulk. A lot of the stuff I buy literally will not fit between two cars in adjacent parking spaces. I'd hurt myself if I tried to carry a 50lb bag of rice the length of a car, and they don't make special parking spaces for small Asian women.
I have had times where I do the double ranked spaces thing and people park so close that I can't get to my trunk. In those cases, I've put the stuff inside the car rather than in the trunk. But I've also had times when people park so close on the sides that I can't get larger stuff in (or, what happens more often, that I can't get my kids in, because I usually park way off in nomans land when the kids aren't with me). These two events haven't lined up yet, but if I parked in that direction often, I imagine it would.
Car seats. Not all that many children were killed by auto accidents. Yet we require them to be belted in. No one alive today who is older than 30 grew up using a car seat.
I'm not sure what your point is for that one. The child seat laws are kind of ridiculous. With a baby, there is really no way to put them in a regular seatbelt, so a carseat makes sense there... but they are allowed to ride in trains or buses with just an adult holding them, so it doesn't really make sense. With a small child, the seatbelt will hurt them without a booster seat. In my state, though, kids are required to use a booster seat until age 8, which is silly, they are big enough to fit a regular seatbelt before then, and it isn't like they suddenly grow on their 8th birthday.
It takes a special kind of callous to say I'd rather kill someone than spend a few hundred dollars to try to avoid killing them.
I don't think anyone is saying that; the point is there are other, better ways to try to avoid killing someone.
Nevermind, that's what I get for reading comments in reverse
The airbags are dangerous for children too.
A backup camera may have helped, or he may not have been able to stop in time, and would have had to watch his child as he crushed it. Either way, the whole thing could have been prevented with proper supervision of the 3 year old by someone that wasn't leaving, and/or proper education of the 3 year old that you do not run behind vehicles.
Or you could just go outside with your child and teach them not to go in front of nor behind cars, only letting them out alone when you are sure they understand, which I seem to find happens at about age 4. Either way works.
Now I own a house (fully, I mean, without mortgage) and my property taxes are $600 per year (yes there is a lot of upfront costs, but in the long run, since I do the upkeep myself, it is cheaper than renting).
Child care: yes that is expensive, which is why working as little as possible as a single parent, or having 1 parent stay home in a 2 parent household is cheaper. When I was a single parent, I often worked jobs where I could take my child along, and/or traded child care with other single parents.
Even without any fucking taxes that will only leave no fucking more than $700 per month for food, transportation, minimum phone service, lowest tier internet plan, electric, gas, water, sanitation, basic medical, etc.
Phone, internet, and electricity are all luxuries. Before you say a phone is needed for emergencies, you don't need phone service to call 911, a phone connected to a service-less landline will call 911, so it isn't needed.
Either way, when I was a single parent, I had food, transportation (when it was needed for my job; I worked at places I could walk to and from home whenever possible), minimum phone service, highest tier internet plan, electric, gas, water, sanitation, and basic medical, and it didn't cost me $700 per month. At the point where I was paying rent at the 1 bedroom "apartment," I was making $700 - $800 a month before taxes, and the rent was $300 a month.
(If you're planing on saying that I must have lived in cheap areas, I've lived all over the US and in parts of Asia, mostly in major cities and in suburbs of major cities. If I couldn't find work or just didn't like a place for some reason, I packed my stuff into a backpack (yes, I didn't have much, but much isn't needed), picked up my kid and left however I could afford to do so.)
As a fucking result many single parents have no fucking choice but to eat nothing but junk food. It's cheap and it requires little to no prep work.
Fruits and vegetables require little to no prep work and are cheaper than junk food.
It all depends on which version and translation of the Bible you are reading, and personal interpretation. For example, if I hear someone call a friend their "brother from another mother," I would not assume they are half-brothers. I see no reason to take "she was the mother of all living" literally.
Jewish tradition also asserts the existence of Lilith, a female created at the same time as Adam, and Adam's first wife.
I'd like to see garbage collection having the condition that garbage can not contain baby poop. It's an obvious biohazard (we all know it is a biohazard for adults to poop in the trash, and baby poop is no different) that for some reason, people either don't realize or want to pretend isn't there.
When paypal first rose up, it wasn't possible to grab a prepaid credit card at your corner drugstore, and atm cards that also worked as credit cards were rare, Paypal was essential for anyone that couldn't get or otherwise didn't have a credit card. Credit card security was also not as strong as it is now (and think about the flaws in it now), so most people were (rightfully) afraid to give their number out.
Checks, cash, and money orders all take time to get to the seller, can be lost/stolen in the mail, and are easy to lie about being lost/stolen. Wire transfer can not be done from all bank accounts. These were all common ways of transferring money before paypal came around - but once people saw how much faster and secure paypal was, it became the payment method of choice. For awhile, paypal was the only method of getting money from your bank account to a seller without either leaving your house or putting something in the mail; so lots of people started using it. Now, it's the easiest method, and people are familiar with it, so it continues to be used.
e.g. discrimination of protected groups, etc..
Okay, but who gets to decide which groups are protected? Why can't, say, people into pseudo-incest be just as protected as people into interracial sex?
but you and the publisher have the right to take your business elsewhere
Except there pretty much isn't an anywhere else when you're talking about what paypal does. This may not go against a "free market," but let's not argue semantics - Paypal is effectively banning books, and that's a horrible thing.
Paid vacation, in exchange for your dignity. Sounds like a fair deal!
Kids can't really understand that sort of future consequences type of thinking. What we have to do is just make healthy eating and exercising part of their normal routine, and make healthy foods the only options (aside from rare special events). Don't bring unhealthy food into your house, and your kid can't eat it there. If their school has vending machines of unhealthy food, don't give them money. Show them how great tasting healthy food actually is, and don't make eating it a chore.
Oops - we could each eat a single hamburger, not including tax. If we take tax into account, 2 people would have to share a hamburger.
It costs my family of 6 $25 to have 1 meal at McDonalds, and we eat 3 meals a day. In a month where we eat no home-grown food and no fast food, we spend $460 on groceries - which comes out to less than $6 per meal. If we all ate meat, to spend $6 on a trip to our local McDonalds would mean we could each eat half a single hamburger, not including tax.
Cancel their cable for a month?
With a controller/keyboard? I never saw the point, myself, but I use to know a guy that would spend hours doing that. Or maybe on the easiest setting; with some of them that is less of a workout than walking to the kitchen and back.
But if the child then goes and plays virtual chess against someone, that would be little different than playing physical chess - except for the fact that his opponents are not limited by physical proximity.
You can just go out in the yard/playground/schoolyard/street and play tennis, you know. You aren't going to be arrested for playing tennis outside of an approved tennis court.
Real bread costs $3 - $4 where I live (in a suburb of Chicago). You can get some "bread" which is mostly high fructose corn syrup for $1 per loaf, though. I get 25lb bags of flour for $8. Now I don't know how much lb of flour goes into a loaf, but I buy a bag every 2 or 3 months vs when I was buying bread I would get a loaf every 1 - 2 weeks (6 person family). I got a bunch of yeast off Amazon for $8 nearly a year ago and have not needed to buy more yet. My electricity bill did not rise noticeably when I started making my own bread. It takes about 5 minutes to put the ingredients in the breadmaker. The breadmaker cost $30. If your electricity is really so expensive for you, you could always hand-mix and bake in a gas or wood stove (along with something else that needs to cook/bake to save even with that), which would take an additional 10 - 20 minutes of your time.
People have to go grocery shopping either way. It takes no more time to go to the fruit and vegetable isle than it does to go to the TV-dinner isle - heck, the fruit and vegetable isle is usually closer to the door and therefore faster! - and while 10 for $10 seems like a deal, both serving and nutrient wise, the fruit and vegetable isle is cheaper. The majority of stuff in the fruit and vegetable isle can be eaten as-is or after a kid peals them, you don't even have to wait for microwave time.
Unless you're suggesting that these time-pressed families are getting fast food for every single meal?
"People must work 3 fucking jobs just to make ends meet"
Bullshit. They may need 3 jobs to keep up with the Jonses and buy every luxury item known to man, but if you live frugally, even a part time minimum wage job is enough to pay for what you NEED.
When you have kids and a 2 parent house, having 1 parent stay home is actually cheaper than having both work. If both work you must pay for childcare, 2 cars, upkeep and gas for those 2 cars, work clothes, etc. etc. etc. When you have kids and a single-parent house, it is cheaper to work as little as possible.
I've been a single parent, and I've been a parent in a 2-working-parent household, and now I'm staying at home with the time to cook everything from scratch. Never mind the fact that even when I worked, eating a raw diet was an option.