I don't know whether you're just playing along here or whatever but what you're describing, again IMHO, is not healthy. Kids learn so much thru osmosis, picking up vibes. Are you going to freak him out permanently? It almost begs the question, if the world has become that dangerous, why are people having children? Seriously.
Amber alert
- Thread starter ToSlow
- Start date
I don't know whether you're just playing along here or whatever but what you're describing, again IMHO, is not healthy. Kids learn so much thru osmosis, picking up vibes. Are you going to freak him out permanently? It almost begs the question, if the world has become that dangerous, why are people having children? Seriously.
Only half joking. I do worry, but I am trying to ease up a bit. I know statistically the odds of something terrible happening are low, but I still worry.
But you are right, I don’t want them growing up and always fearing the worst.
Sent from a Samsung Galaxy far, far away using Tapatalk
Iceman
Well-known member
No, you are right to worry. My son was grabbed in the McDonald's playland in Midland, guy dropped him and ran for the doors when he screamed. Momma bear was 20 feet away, guy was just lucky she can't run very fast. I was at work. Very ordinary day except that my 4 year old autistic child was almost kidnapped.
The worst part is that back then if the guy offered him cookies instead of grabbing and scaring him, the kid would've gone willingly.
Sent from my Le Pan TC802A using Tapatalk
Wow. Scary story. So glad it turned out okay.
It sounds like the information is all over the place. This same source as yours (City News) says he came out of the store and the car was gone. http://www.citynews.ca/2016/03/20/car-theft-involving-3-month-old-ends-without-incident/
Just as likely that I got wrong information myself.
TBH I think I'd be more likely to leave my running car for a few minutes with a baby inside than without. A baby should serve as a theft deterrent but the thief obviously wasn't paying enough attention.
Firstly, this might be your world you live in ... consider our viewpoints and world we both live in to be different. Secondly, I never said "extremely negligent, charge him criminally" ... you are turning my "one criminal and one negligent person" into something else. BTW, "one criminal" is the car thief who obviously should be charged criminally ... does that make more sense now?
Firstly, may be our viewpoints are different but what does research and stats tell us? Are we not living in a world of over reaction now? People are calling for him to be charged criminally. You described him as an "extremely negligent person". If one quasi jaywalker gets mowed down is every quasi jaywalker "extremely negligent"? That seems to be the trend these days. Extrapolating one incident to the worst possible outcomes for everybody.
So true, and so unfortunate. But where do we draw the line? If we've managed to adequately control risks that are in the 0.01% range, don't we have to move on to controlling the lower 0.001% risks? I know at some point it becomes insane, but where do we stop?
The answer might be in your question. We. Why are "we" minding other peoples' business so much? But that's not good enough, oh no, "we" have to get the authorities involved.
So on the patio of a bar a very pregnant lady is chain smoking and sucking back beers...do we mind that business? Do we intervene? I know that I would want to, not sure that I would though. Am I too far off topic? I hope not.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
This winter when it was below 5c did you intervene on your neighbours for driving w/o winter tires? Oh, they all have winter tires? Did you kindly check tread depth? Oh, the tires were all in good nick? Did you get a chance to intervene on the dangers of public motoring? Road deaths are thru the roof! Sometimes 1 or2 a day in Ontario alone. Do you not love your neighbours?
That suggests we could get away with no protections of any kind. So the food you buy may or may not be contaminated, up to you to figure it out. The bridge you cross may or may not collapse. Have you done your due diligence by checking into the competence of the bridge engineers, before mindlessly crossing?
"We" need to have protections in place because the world is too vast, our knowledge too specialized, our reliance on complex systems too deep, our relationships too fragmented to be able to provide all the protection we need, like it used to do in the days of peasant farmers.
So again, where do we draw the line and stop looking for areas to protect lives?
The advance of the Nanny state. The government will strive for total safety even if it kills us.
Intervene? yes but only once shes good and loaded. Girls that chainsmoke and chug beers while preggers are usual down for it, and you cant get her pregnant, she's already there!
I can't give a specific answer but I do know the answers aren't found at either extremes. I don't want my life dictated by others irrational phobias or reckless disregard for safety. I'm just railing against the mindless mob think that allows the encroaching on our freedoms and personal responsibilities and the laws put into place by self appointed do gooders. Every action taken by every level of law, politics, governing bodies et al in some way restricts the average tax paying joe. It's not a good trend.
-D-
Banned
