If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Make a stupid mistake & MD prohibits your seeing son, lest SUPERVISED
"JG" wrote
Tell you what, Jeff. Go ahead and draw up a list of *every*thing that a child does, or could *potentially* do, or that could *conceivably"* happen during his/her childhood and rate each item from 1-10 based on how "dangerous" you perceive it to be. ("Sleeping face up," for example, would be a "1"; "Sleeping face down" maybe a "2"; "Gun in the house, unloaded and properly stored" perhaps also a "2"; "Gun in the house, loaded, possibly accessible (to a really adventurous, agile kid)" perhaps a "9"; "Gun in house, loaded, easily accessible" a "10"; "Playing ball next to a busy road" perhaps an "8"; "Running with scissors" maybe a "6"... When you're done (10, 20 years?), attach an appropriate penalty to each number, with "serious" penalties (i.e., something other than simply a "slap on the wrist" warning) to, say, "6" and above. Next, submit the list to your state legislator and ask him/her to introduce it as a bill during the next legislative session. (Next, wait for the straight jacket-bearing guys in the white shirts to show up at your door. g) You are giving him ideas! g Here in California, we already have plenty of people who think that way. We have to have kids in car seats until age 6, helmets on kids riding bikes and other activities, etc. We just narrowly avoided a law against (non-hands-free) car phones, but that was probably only because of the state budget crisis in which Democrats had held up the required annual budget in order to attempt to raise taxes to increase welfare payments. No doubt the busybody legislators will be back passing nanny laws. There are homeschoolers who think that sending a kid to school is an unnecessary risk. Others object to swimming pools, eating meat, celebrating Halloween, pets, stairs, TV, hot dogs, soda, etc. If you make it a crime for a parent to allow a one-in-a-million risk to the kids, then at least 99% of all parents will be felons. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Make a stupid mistake & MD prohibits your seeing son, lest SUPERVISED
"Roger Schlafly" wrote in message t... "JG" wrote Tell you what, Jeff. Go ahead and draw up a list of *every*thing that a child does, or could *potentially* do, or that could *conceivably"* happen during his/her childhood and rate each item from 1-10 based on how "dangerous" you perceive it to be. ("Sleeping face up," for example, would be a "1"; "Sleeping face down" maybe a "2"; "Gun in the house, unloaded and properly stored" perhaps also a "2"; "Gun in the house, loaded, possibly accessible (to a really adventurous, agile kid)" perhaps a "9"; "Gun in house, loaded, easily accessible" a "10"; "Playing ball next to a busy road" perhaps an "8"; "Running with scissors" maybe a "6"... When you're done (10, 20 years?), attach an appropriate penalty to each number, with "serious" penalties (i.e., something other than simply a "slap on the wrist" warning) to, say, "6" and above. Next, submit the list to your state legislator and ask him/her to introduce it as a bill during the next legislative session. (Next, wait for the straight jacket-bearing guys in the white shirts to show up at your door. g) You are giving him ideas! g Here in California, we already have plenty of people who think that way. We have to have kids in car seats until age 6, helmets on kids riding bikes and other activities, etc. Good! We just narrowly avoided a law against (non-hands-free) car phones, but that was probably only because of the state budget crisis in which Democrats had held up the required annual budget in order to attempt to raise taxes to increase welfare payments. And pay for schools and other mandates. Too bad about not getting that law not allowing cell phones. No doubt the busybody legislators will be back passing nanny laws. Good. I don't want to get in a crash caused by some guy not paying attention because he is talking on the cell phone. There are homeschoolers who think that sending a kid to school is an unnecessary risk. Others object to swimming pools, eating meat, celebrating Halloween, pets, stairs, TV, hot dogs, soda, etc. If you make it a crime for a parent to allow a one-in-a-million risk to the kids, then at least 99% of all parents will be felons. There are certain risks that are reasonable. Locking a kid in a trunk, IMHO, is not reasonable. Unless you and JG have something new to add to the discussion, I will not be posting in it again. Jeff |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Most families *at risk* w CPS' assessment tools broad, vague | Kane | General | 13 | February 20th 04 07:02 PM |
Another child killed in kincare | Kane | General | 39 | February 12th 04 07:55 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 03:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 05:27 AM |
And again he strikes........ Doan strikes ...... again! was Kids should work... | Kane | General | 2 | December 6th 03 04:28 AM |