wrote in message
...
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:06:09 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 11:33:11 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

You're going to use darwin to explain the death of a 3 year old?


Should the parents of a 3 year old who is not in a car seat be thrown in
jail if the child is killed in an accident?


Again, just like the gun, they would charge the parent in Florida for
a child not in a car seat. I suppose that is OK too.
In the infamous "moral equivalency" business, what is the difference?

We have decided there are no accidents, only criminal offenses, if a
kid is killed.
I suppose you know, the National Electrical Code now requires all
receptacles are child proof (shuttered).

So, to hell with child safety? That's what you're arguing for... let's go
back to the robber barrons...

http://tinyurl.com/2f57cwl


We already have a buttload of swimming pool rules but drowning it is
still the biggest cause of death for toddlers. (mostly because people
disconnect the pool alarm and leave the door open) Again, should we
throw grandma in jail for it?
The question is where do you stop?

Should we require a fence on your boat dock and all the way down the
canal? How about a fence around every lake and pond? (BTW that has
been suggested here after a kid drown in a lake)

Should we require stoves have locks on them so kids can't turn them on
and burn themselves? (a couple thousand a year)

How about child safety locks on lamp holders so kids can't unscrew the
bulb and stick their finger in the hole (again there have been NEC
proposals to ban edison lamp sockets as the incandescent bulbs are
phased out).



Nope... http://www.statisticstop10.com/Cause..._Toddlers.html

Feel free to cite ridiculous examples.