|
Post by keresm on Jul 8, 2009 21:57:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 8, 2009 22:16:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by keresm on Jul 8, 2009 22:18:30 GMT -5
Wow, a whole, what, eight cases over ten or so years proves that the other 95% are also deliberate attempts at murder? And one of those you provided wasn't even relevant, as the child LOCKED HIMSELF IN THE TRUNK. . My little idiot, those were only the first links that popped up on google. Perhaps you should try actual research?
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 8, 2009 22:25:53 GMT -5
Perhaps you should try being a little less condescending?
I feel sorry for your kid(s) if you're like this at home.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 8, 2009 22:31:45 GMT -5
wmdkitty, you have no place telling others to be less condescending.
In the universe you live in, all arguments about kids are about parental moral superiority full stop. I prefer to live on planet Earth. You have a piss poor track record of being able to process what other people are telling you and you have a fabulous record of assuming everyone is out to get you. Trying to explain something to you is an act of masochism.
|
|
|
Post by keresm on Jul 8, 2009 22:39:10 GMT -5
Perhaps you should try being a little less condescending?. Perhaps you could be a little less of a hypocritical idiot? So, demonstrating your entire argument was ignorant and false is being 'condescending'. Should I have tried to spare your feelings after the insults and name-calling you directed at me? Next time do some fucking research before spouting off.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 8, 2009 22:41:36 GMT -5
wmdkitty, you have no place telling others to be less condescending. In the universe you live in, all arguments about kids are about parental moral superiority full stop. I prefer to live on planet Earth. You have a piss poor track record of being able to process what other people are telling you and you have a fabulous record of assuming everyone is out to get you. Trying to explain something to you is an act of masochism. No, no, I get it. The parents in this thread have been nothing but moronic, going on and on about how it's "impossible" to forget a child, even after it's been pointed out by multiple people that, yes, it is entirely possible, thanks to the way the human brain works. According to keresm, ANY child left in a car was left there deliberately by "stupid" people who "didn't really care about their child." I don't see where that -isn't- some kind of superiority complex on the part of parents. I have continually said that, while SOME cases are deliberate instances of leaving a child in a car for a long period of time, there are far too many cases of a parent genuinely forgetting that the child was there to automatically discount them all as liars. And what about the cases where a child accidentally locks themselves in the trunk of a car? Did their parents "not really give a damn"? It is unfair to the grieving parents for you to sit here and say, "it can't happen, so you must have wanted the child to die."
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 8, 2009 22:42:15 GMT -5
You're right -- it's all totally a parental conspiracy to make you look bad and all parents look superior.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 8, 2009 22:44:19 GMT -5
Perhaps you should try being a little less condescending?. Perhaps you could be a little less of a hypocritical idiot? So, demonstrating your entire argument was ignorant and false is being 'condescending'. Should I have tried to spare your feelings after the insults and name-calling you directed at me? Next time do some fucking research before spouting off. No, showing me eight cases that were prosecuted, out of the (alleged) thousands of results just tells me you're a lazy asshole. Eight cases does not prove that ALL unattended children were deliberately left behind.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 8, 2009 22:46:18 GMT -5
So you're asking for all links to all cases of children left in cars?
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 8, 2009 22:53:35 GMT -5
You're right -- it's all totally a parental conspiracy to make you look bad and all parents look superior. Which is NOT what I was saying. I'm just pointing out the FLAW in your (and keresm's) reasoning, that "no parent can forget a child, therefore it was deliberate neglect." Parents can and do forget children in the car. Children sometimes die when this happens. There have been some cases where parents deliberately leave the child behind. Your conclusion: ALL parents/caregivers involved were deliberately leaving the child behind. My conclusion: Parents aren't perfect, deal with it, and leave them to grieve in peace. I don't see where you can extrapolate, based on a handful of cases, that ALL incidents of a child left alone in a car were deliberate acts of neglect.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 8, 2009 22:55:21 GMT -5
You fail at reading, honey. I, for one, certainly never said that "no" parent would ever forget a child or that "all" of them were doing it deliberately. I have actually clarified this for you twice in posts that are less filled with words and therefore less pesky to read.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 8, 2009 23:01:21 GMT -5
You fail at reading, honey. I, for one, certainly never said that "no" parent would ever forget a child or that "all" of them were doing it deliberately. I have actually clarified this for you twice in posts that are less filled with words and therefore less pesky to read. No, but keresm did, REPEATEDLY, and I've been dealing with the both of you. DV, is it in fact possible for a parent, regardless of your opinion of their parenting skills, to forget a child in a car? Yes or no. Keresm, is it in fact possible for a parent, regardless of your opinion of their parenting skills, to forget a child in a car? Yes or no.
|
|
|
Post by dantesvirgil on Jul 8, 2009 23:05:01 GMT -5
I have already told you three fucking times now, not counting the longer posts you have an aversion to reading, that in my opinion the answer is yes. That's not what's at issue here. Reading the actual conversation instead of making this about parental moral superiority would've told you that.
|
|
|
Post by wmdkitty on Jul 9, 2009 1:00:30 GMT -5
K, DV.
I'm not trying to be stupid or cute, I'm just ... piecing it together, here, trying to get it straightened out a bit in my head.
I don't think that, when it has been ruled accidental, the parents should face any punishment more severe than what their own consciences inflict on them. That's not the kind of thing you can just shrug off. And adding external guilt and pressure to that is just salt in the wound.
On the other hand, when it's been ruled a deliberate act, the person responsible should face appropriate charges.
The problem lies in making the distinction between "honest fuck-up" and "deliberate neglect". It looks to be, from here, a thin line. When does, "went in to the store for five minutes and was stuck in line for ten" turn into "hey, I'll just leave the kid here for two or three hours while I go do something else"?
How do we determine the intent of the parent, outside of personal testimony from the parent, and perhaps that of people around the parent?
Do I have it?
|
|