Shreveport.com

Shreveport.com (http://www.shreveport.com/forums/index.php)
-   World News (http://www.shreveport.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=57)
-   -   3-Year-Old Killed At Car Wash (http://www.shreveport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1379)

piemaker720 05-08-2007 12:39 PM

3-Year-Old Killed At Car Wash
 
http://www.wyff4.com/news/13274709/d...0421&qs=1;bp=t


Quote:

A 3-year-old boy was killed Monday night at a Greenville County Car wash when a pickup truck rolled over the child.

See Joe, you never know.

rhertz 05-08-2007 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piemaker720
See Joe, you never know.

Is that really a fair statement? My sister and brother-in-law happen to own a car wash. It is against the rules to leave your child strapped in a child seat and run it through the tunnel. The car should be empty to get run through.. The fact is that a child seat has nothing to do with keeping a 3 year old from getting killed at a car wash. This was pure negligence on the part of the childs guardian at that moment, probably a parent who will be kicking themselves for years to come. Sad...

Quote:

According the coronerís office, the child's parents were vacuuming their car and gave him change to buy a soft drink from a machine.
Yeah I thought so. Using a sad story like this to make a jab at joepole is just wrong. Not that he needs me to stick up for him. I don't even know joepole, but there are times I think this board gets polarized (or digitized) into 1-bit black and white judgements. Speaking for myself, I enjoy reading a variety of opinions as long as they aren't evil or illegal....

piemaker720 05-08-2007 02:01 PM

My point was not to make a jab at Joe but to say accidents happen. I did not mention a car seat. What kind of person would get out to wash their car and leave a child in it with the windows up. I blame the parents of that child because he was too young to be running loose by hisself.Even they were not washing the car, but vaccuming it.
As for Joe, if he does not want to be critized for comments he makes then he should think about some of them. [Like on the 17 chidren] Where he has more children each time he loses one. I DO NOT find that funny. It sounds very heartless. He has made comments about locking his in her room. Again, not funny, heartless.
So I say again he needs to think some before he throws out some of his comments.

LateNight 05-08-2007 02:21 PM

O.k. lighten up everyone :) I thought Joe's comment was pretty funny and to the point as well.

It was mentioned in that other thread. about the larger families everyone used to have. You had to have as many kids as you could.. for you didn't know which ones would be taken by yellow fever or small pox or the like.
and then who would work the farm ? :)

piemaker720 05-08-2007 02:44 PM

Get real. You found his comment funny.
His exact comment was I
Quote:

I only wanted two kids, but we keep losing them to traffic accidents so we keep having to make more to ensure we have enough in stock.
No where did he mention losing them to yellow fever or small pox or even working a farm.

AnimeSpirit 05-08-2007 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhertz
Yeah I thought so. Using a sad story like this to make a jab at joepole is just wrong. Not that he needs me to stick up for him. I don't even know joepole, but there are times I think this board gets polarized (or digitized) into 1-bit black and white judgements. Speaking for myself, I enjoy reading a variety of opinions as long as they aren't evil or illegal....

This doesn't feel like a jab at Joe. This is, as Pie says, an example that accidents do happen. In addition, accidents can be prevented with a little common sense and some simple preventive measures.

Joe was implying on another thread that preventive measures are not necessary because accidents are so rare. This is a common misconception that Piemaker was trying to dispel. She wasn't at all taking a jab at Joe.

joepole 05-08-2007 03:01 PM

Actually, my point was that we all add risk to the lives of ourselves and our children for the sake of pleasure/convenience.

AnimeSpirit 05-08-2007 03:06 PM

Of course, I can agree to that. Simply driving a car adds risk in exchange for convenience. However, does this mean we should do so foolishly? Does it mean we should not license people to drive and have laws that make us drive safely?

By enacting these conveniences safely and wisely, we get the convenience without as much risk.

joepole 05-08-2007 03:13 PM

Correct. The difference is see a five block drive through Spring Lake as a risk not worth considering and you people seem to think it's the automotive equivalent of Russian Roulette.

We all draw a line somewhere.

rhertz 05-08-2007 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joepole
We all draw a line somewhere.

Either that, or the government draws the line for us. I vote that individuals have the freedom to make their own mistakes, rather than have no freedoms and make no mistakes.

rhertz 05-08-2007 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnimeSpirit
By enacting these conveniences safely and wisely, we get the convenience without as much risk.

Without much risk? 43,443 people were killed on the road last year despite billions for traffic citations, airbags, seatbelts, education, and more. I have known lots of people killed in car accidents... my brother, my bookeeper, my next door neighbor... and I hardly know anyone killed any other way (other than growing old)

Why don't we make our kids wear crash helmets? Wouldn't that make them safer? How about 4-point harnesses like professional drivers have used for decades? Heh, I guess "convenience" and "safety" are relative terms in our society.

Seems like I would be the one pushing for these measures given my personal experiences. But I know there is no reward without some risk involved. I also know that insurance companies play their games too. Why don't car's have heavy roll bars for instance? The irony is that if I install a safety device such as a roll bar to my car to make me (or my family) safer, the insurance company would freak out and actually raise my rates. In other words, its not all about pure safety, it is often about money or convenience or something else.

AnimeSpirit 05-08-2007 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joepole
Correct. The difference is see a five block drive through Spring Lake as a risk not worth considering and you people seem to think it's the automotive equivalent of Russian Roulette.

We all draw a line somewhere.

True and it's really personal where that line is. Everyone just seems to think why gamble with your kids' life. Just inconvenience yourself for a moment by putting them in a car seat. It's not really a Russian Roulette, but it's just a simple gesture that could turn out to be a wise one.

LateNight 05-08-2007 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piemaker720
Get real. You found his comment funny.
His exact comment was I
Quote:

I only wanted two kids, but we keep losing them to traffic accidents so we keep having to make more to ensure we have enough in stock.


yes, that is FUNNY. in fact, I laughed out loud when I read it.
Having read other comments from Joe, I quickly took this as sarcasm, as a comment on the thread/topic itself .

Joe's always good for a laugh :D

piemaker720 05-08-2007 04:28 PM

Well whatever, I do not care to discuss JOEPOLE anymore with anyone else. God forbid if we should pick on him or hurt his little feelings.

joepole 05-08-2007 05:07 PM

I can promise you that nothing anyone ever says to me via the Internet will offend me or hurt my feelings, so feel free to be candid.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:20 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
2008 Shreveport.com