Skip to comments.Baby death from shopping cart accident serves as warning
Posted on 04/01/2012 4:50:49 PM PDT by Altariel
aybe it's the culture in Los Angeles, but every time I go to a different grocery store, there are so many options for children in the grocery cart, I wonder what's next: A teenager cart equipped with an Xbox? I've seen infant seats, booster seats, plastic cars that fit two toddlers or big kids attached to the front of the cart, and carts that have a traditional seat that fits two kids instead of one.
But even with all of these options, we can never be too safe when it comes to putting our children on top of a shopping cart, where the risk of falling exists. Sadly, a mom in Macon, Georgia learned this lesson in the most tragic way when her baby fell from the top of the shopping cart onto the ground and died.
Clearly all of the above options weren't available at the local Kroger's, as the 3-month-old was in her own car seat seat, balanced on top of the shopping cart. As a friend, and Kroger employee, pushed the cart over a speed bump, the infant seat fell to the ground, killing the newborn. It makes you pause when you think of how many times babies fall off a bed or a changing table, and be thankful this wasn't you.
(Excerpt) Read more at shine.yahoo.com ...
While I understand what you mean, isn’t the whole reason for “winning the argument” or “getting the last word” simply the tactic used to deny admitting I’m wrong and my opponent’s right?
Isn’t it just a refusal to concede I lost the argument?
>>Sure: Every time a kid gets hurt by getting access to a Father’s guns. <<
Strawmen look terrible wearing Conservative garb.
I ask again: tell me when a man was accused of killing his child by leaving it improperly attended in a shopping cart. Please include links — you didn’t even bother to supply links to your strawman, so I am not holding out hopes to support of the actual situation to which you lay claim.
Anyone THAT fuzzy brained, knows it.
If this is a mistake, it’s a mistake the way drunk driving is a mistake. I.e. no excuse.
>>If this is a mistake, its a mistake the way drunk driving is a mistake. I.e. no excuse<<
So they put the child in the cart, knowing they were unable to manage the cart. Then they continued on, and missed the bump in the parking lot because their brain was unable to comprehend the situation before them in an immediate fashion, thus resulting in the drop from the cart.
Just how many strawmen do you have in that “cart” of yours?
If you are going with analogies, at least make them of the same general properties.
You’re going to pull the “gagging at gnats” card, now?
Thanks for demonstrating my point by playing the “outhouse attorney.”
>>Youre going to pull the gagging at gnats card, now?<<
IOW, you don’t have an answer.
As I and almost everyone else watching this thread already knew.
I am left speechless.......wow....
Then I guess you are proving my point that she couldn’t have been that impaired, huh.
Oh, I gave you an answer.
It just wasn’t the one you pre-loaded to allow yourself no possibility of being proven wrong.
And frankly, I’m more than satisfied for those watching this thread to see how you tried to “game” the argument.
>>Then I guess you are proving my point that she couldnt have been that impaired, huh.<<
I see Non Sequiturs are in your arsenal as well.
It doesn’t so much bother me you are embarrassing you. But this is a publicly viewable forum and you are embarrassing us.
Either construct a logical argument or just stop.
>>Oh, I gave you an answer.<<
No you didn’t. You just fell back on argumentum ad absurdum.
It is a valid forensic approach, but certainly a classic (and humorous) logical fallacy.
Are you shooting for every possible logical fallacy possible? You are a great example for many, so far.
“Mom was too busy what? Lighting up a smoke to carry the kid????”
In my generation we lit up the cigarette AND carried the kid.
I was pretty astonished myself.
But you know, I’ve concluded “good parents” as a cultural meme, are very much like “common sense.” I.e. actually pretty fricken rare!
Parents are like entrepreneurs: just because they managed to built a business that was self sustaining (didn’t kill the kid), doesn’t mean they are actually very good at running a business.
Oh, you think so?
You think asking for links to another scenario of the exact same circumstances as the one under consideration, but with a different outcome predicated on the sex of the subject is a reasonable request?
And where do you see an absurdum argument?
You use “logical fallacies” like a kid faking an accent.
Wow. Everybody! Be respectful! We are blessed to have in our company someone so powerful in their faculties that they have never and will never make a mistake of any kind! How lucky we are! We must learn from them their Jedi secrets!
I know parents that do all sorts of negligent things, like letting their kids play outdoors... Play indoors without helmets on... Play together with other kids even... It’s all so frightening out there. What kind of anti-disease masks do you use? Do you get good bulk pricing?
Yes, I'm sure that a law could fix this. People wouldn't be thoughtless if only there were more penalties for it. Since people are intentionally deciding to not think ahead... They would decide to think ahead if only the law made them do it. If the risk to their child isn't enough for people to think more clearly, the the law must be the thing that'll do it. Sheesh. (/s)
Why don't you show me how it's done?
How about logically demonstrating the rationale for giving this negligent mother a pass while justifying prosecution of a father for insufficiently securing his firearms?
Nope, sorry, epic fail on your part.
You mean you think a reasonable parent needs to use a helmet to go through Kroger?
If that makes me a Jedi, you must be Jar jar.
>>And where do you see an absurdum argument?<<
Your argument makes no sense in any way, shape or form. Thus it is an argumentum ad absurdum.
>>You use logical fallacies like a kid faking an accent.<<
The fact you don’t understand them, nor can you actually specifically cite a specific link that backs up your contention (actually, now, an assertion), is an indictment on you, not me.
Everyone reading this must note you have not even tried to rebut my specific forensic addressing of your statements.
You analogies fail. Your attempts to misdirect fail. Your ad absurdum and ad hominem fail. I ask a direct question, you cannot answer it.
Please quit embarrassing yourself. And FR.
yeah, I’d like to try locking up a few of these “mothers” that leave their kids in the car while they get mani-pedis.
>>How about logically demonstrating the rationale for giving this negligent mother a pass while justifying prosecution of a father for insufficiently securing his firearms?<<
Why don’t you logically defend the actions of the Bush Administration’s Patriot act while giving a pass to allowing Paula Dean using real butter in her cooking?
It is bad enough you use so many fallacies, but false dichotomy? God, you make it too easy. There are only 3 or 4 left before you exhaust the entire base of fallacies.
I don’t want to create new forensic theory but if you continue on this path I may need to.
(btw: if it wasn’t for the tragic life of a child you want to politicize, this would be a hoot)
I learned never to let kids stand up in a shopping cart.
reductio ad absurdum (redirected from Argumentum ad absurdum)You were saying something about "fail?"
[Latin, Reduction to absurdity.] In logic, a method employed to disprove an argument by illustrating how it leads to an absurd consequence.
Methinks you would be better served attending to how YOU look on this thread than worrying about how I look.
How would you know?
Your ignorance of the one fallacy you've referred to has now been proven beyond any dispute.
Do you now get credibility for expanding on your proven ignorance?
>>Methinks you would be better served attending to how YOU look on this thread than worrying about how I look.<<
Note you still haven’t answered my questions. And yes, your responses “illustrate how it leads to an absurd consequence.”
You have been bested in every category. Your forensic knowledge is shallow, your examples absurd, your reasoning illogical. Your entire “thesis” (I am kind in wrapping your rantings into such a cocoon) makes no logical sense and fails many, if not all, of the precepts of logic.
If I was you, I would withdraw. You don’t even have to admit defeat. Just say nothing and after some time you will have salvaged simple defeat from a thrashing.
I very nearly took a nurse apart for doing the same thing while checking my baby’s weight.
Luckily, I reached out and snatched her by the ankle before she hit the ground.
You are thrashing.
You were wrong in the one example you gave. Even so, your broader false dichotomy (If you were wrong on one, you were wrong on all) fails on its face.
Don’t try to argue logic via wikipedia. Either you know it or you do not.
You do not and your increased display of ignorance does you, me and FR no good.
I suspect your stories are... suspect.
Nurse/Drops/you as heroic “catcher”
Very, um, “convenient” to the point of discussion.
>Your ignorance of the one fallacy you’ve referred to has now been proven beyond any dispute.<<
Your misunderstanding of the fallacy at hand doth not make my analysis invalid.
>>Do you now get credibility for expanding on your proven ignorance?<<
You don’t really “get” false dichotomy, do you?
Drunk driving is a choice that one makes and it is a crime. I would liken this more to being a tired and driving. Not a good idea but you think things will be fine and you can stay awake until you find yourself drifting over the line or in a ditch.
Being sleep deprived and hormonal is a result of having a baby. It is not a choice you make. Are you a mom? If so did you deliver those babies or adopt? Pregnancy, childbirth and care of a newborn are hard on a mother both physically and emotionally. It doesn’t matter if you realize that you are fuzzy brained or forgetful, you don’t think something like this is going to happen.
When my friend was a new mother she sat her newborn’s bouncy seat on the table while she was cooking dinner. The seat fell off the table but the baby wasn’t hurt badly. They went to the hospital anyway. She did not realize that her newborn baby would be able to bounce the seat off the table. Even though the baby was fine, my friend was a total basket case. She realized what could have happened and it terrified her.
People don’t always think things through and that is why accidents happen. If we were all perfect and always thought about every possible end before we acted there wouldn’t be any such word as accident.
I left out you were the “hero” in the first story as well.
You are quite heroic when babies are around. It makes everyone wonder why babies near you are in such danger...
>>People dont always think things through and that is why accidents happen. If we were all perfect and always thought about every possible end before we acted there wouldnt be any such word as accident.<<
Sorry, Ma’am, but as you can see from the thread, pt thinks that looking away while you (or a friend) is carting your groceries to your car with your child in the child-carriage part of said cart (as he has never done) is the same as: driving drunk; leaving your child locked in in a car on a hot day; leaving weapons (for said toddler to find) loaded and unlocked.
You had better cocoon our kid, less pt and his ilk come and just arrest you for child endangerment for going to the grocery store.
There is no point in talking to those two, they are bound and determined to beleive the mother killed her child.
It’s like trying to reason with wind.
>>There is no point in talking to those two, they are bound and determined to beleive the mother killed her child.
Its like trying to reason with wind.<<
Thanks for talking me down. I can’t fight racial stereotypes.
Time to call it a night.
Take care and if you have kids, tuck them in extra tight and kiss them with all the love you have.
You are delusional. Please demonstrate how my “responses ... leads to an
Furthermore, I am under no obligation to provide you with links or answers that serve no purpose but to aid YOUR contentions.
Surely you know, despite your laughable attempts at diagnosing fallacies, denying the premise of a question is not the same thing as refusing to answer it.
I already told you I disagreed with your premise, so why do you keep insisting I won’t answer your question?
The funny thing is, I’m fascinated now. It’s like arguing with Blanche Dubois, or little kids playing “cowboys and indians.” No matter how soundly you get “hit” you rhetorically jump to the side and shout “YOU MISSED!”
For the mother to have willingly killed her newborn, she would have to conspire with the friend since the friend was the one pushing the cart. The truth is that we all do things that aren’t wise thinking that no harm will come from it.
One evening, I drove home from a friend’s house with a migraine coming on and by the time I got home it was a fullblown migraine. All I could think was that I needed to get home. That was not a very bright idea.
I also drove on a car trip without my daughters carseat strapped in. My husband had the carseat in his car and when he returned it to the minivan, he just sat it in place without strapping it. I didn’t realize it wasn’t strapped in. If I had wrecked and my daughter had been killed, I suppose some people on FR would brand me a wanton killer.
I was willing to give the benefit of the doubt earlier but then they kept posting.
Find me even one credible reference that defines "argumentum ad absurdum" as "...makes no sense in any way, shape or form" and I'll concede to you and withdraw from the argument.
(I'll be most interested to see how you weasel out of accepting THAT challenge)
I "get" that you are so vain you're actually trying to fly the idea your incorrect definition of a logical fallacy as classic as "John 3:16" is somehow a lack of sophistication on my part instead of an error on yours. ;o)
Now who's "thrashing?"
You think two anecdotes for a fifty year old father with a twenty five year marriage, who also happens to be a trained First Responder, is excessive?
You sit down and talk to even one firefighter and I guarentee you your "suspicions" will make you look as idiotic as Moira Lash attacking William Kennedy Smith's "stamina."
If the shoe fits....
We have a carseat for every car in the family, so we never have to worry about anyone being so sorry they can't strap down a carseat....if you actually could get the kid in it without noticing the problem ....
And despite the inconvenience, when my live-in MIL jumped the curb with baby in the car, Nana was no longer permitted to drive her....ever.
Lol! You sound like a real peach.
Oh my your mother in law jumped the curb! Glad she didn’t wreck and kill your baby. I guess you didn’t forsee the consequences of your action letting your daughter ride with MIL, you wanton attempted murderer. :)
Btw, no one in our family is too sorry to strap a carseat. My husband’s hands and fingers are not small/nimble enough to be able to strap it tightly so he leaves it up to me to strap the carseats down. He learned after that to lay the carseat on it’s side when changing cars.
At that age my daughter was big enough to climb into her seat by herself and buckle herself into the harness. All I had to do was check to see that her harness was tight enough and not tangled. It did not occur to me that he had moved the carseat that morning. Oh wow, I’m human!
You are one judgemental son of a gun. I really pray your sactimonious attitude never comes back to haunt you one day. I hope you can learn some grace without a tragic lesson to teach it to you.
BTW, have you or your wife ever dealt with a newborn after pregnancy and childbirth? I noticed upthread that you said you brought a baby home from China. Usually Chinese adoptions are for older babies. Just wondering.
You seem to think that women should be at peak performance three months into motherhood. Sometimes it can take up for a year to fully recover from childbirth especially if the pregnancy or delivery are complicated.
You seem to demand perfection. That isn’t humanly possibly as demonstrated by your MIL story. You learned from your mistake and corrected as did my husband with the carseat incident. Fortunately, neither of our stories ended in a death.
You are going to hang on that tiny tendril, no matter what.
You are a joke. I am sure you will say the same about me, no matter what — the difference is my logical analysis is apt and your is... um, not.
You have violated 4 logical fallacies and are hoping that the fact I pointed out the argumantum ad absurdium — your conclusion that taking a child in a cart to his car is somehow evil or bad is singularly MOST absurd — will somehow overcome your clear attempt to use a combination of that (now defeated) argument and strawmen (so many I leave it to observers to count).
It is clear you immediately said to yourself “OMG, he used Latin! Let me check on Wikipedia! OH, LOOK, I think he misused this idea! (you are wrong btw)””
Of course any 1st semester logician would see your false dichotomy (which you have forced me to point now on 2 or 3 occasions) fails on many levels.
You can’t win logic arguments if you don’t understand logic. The best you can do, as you have laughably attempted, is mimic the sounds of those who DO know logic. Like a parrot who repeats his master’s words on cue.
But I appreciate your attempts. As MTM’s Murray Slaughter said (paraphrasing) — “it isn’t so high the pig flies, it is that he tried at all.”
Your attempts to throw mud against that which you are unable to address intellectually is understandable, if pitiful.
Next time, go to DU. Those mental midgets are about your level.
Oh, and it was you who said that men and women are treated differently with the same circumstance. All your dancing, and no proof.
Yup. She wanted to treat it like nothing. Kinda like I knew you would, which is why I withheld some details, like her putting all four wheels over the curb, taking out an oak sapling, and this from pulling out of a parking space.
You see, I learned a long time ago a woman’s evaluation of any situation has more to do with her atitude toward the people involved than the circumstances in which they’re involved.
So if your husband can’t strap the carseat in “tightly” he shouldn’t do it at all?
What kind of carseat do you have anyway? I can’t imagine one that could be that difficult to properly secure AND not be obviously loose.
Finally, I just LOVE your “goldilocks” attitude! “Oh wow, Im human!” “This one’s too hard, this one’s too soft, but the one I like is juuuuuust right.”
But I’m sanctimonious....that must be it.
Didn’t you read his responses?
He is a freaking hero!
But for his heroic actions, 2 babies would be dead!
I have been around many babies and never been in the position to save any from death. Maybe I have been fortunate that way.
Either that or my self-importance-seeking imagination is lacking...
I didn’t treat the incident with your MIL as if it was nothing at all. I was using it to prove a point. Accidents happen. Thankfully (I am assuming) no great harm came to your baby and you were able to learn from the situation(don’t let Nana drive the baby).
My evaluation of the situation has nothing to do with my attitude but everything to do with common sense and logic. For there never to be an accident, people would have to be perfect and always functioning at 100%. Since that is not reality, we know that sometimes there will be accidents. Sometimes (more often than reported) women really do take the lives of their children. Sometimes though, women (and men) have to continue going about their daily tasks while they are sleep deprived, hormonal, irrational even.
The kind of carseat we have is immaterial. The fact is that because he is unable to get the car seat in properly he has given the task to me. He couldn’t have forseen the events that would unfold when he put the seat in the correct location. I was unaware that the carseat was not seatbelted in because my daughter was older and able to climb in and fasten her own straps. I checked the straps and we were on our way. The “I’m human” comment was meant to show that sometimes we forget. I have been parenting three children for 12 years and one time I failed to have my daughters car seat strapped in. I am thankful that we didn’t have a car wreck and we learned from our mistake.
I called you sanctimonious because you have made it clear that you expect perfection in childrearing. Not possible but you are obviously perfect despite the one slip up with Nana.
Have a nice night. I am signing off because hubby is home from his late night visitation to the hospital and I was only up waiting for his safe return.
‘What kind of carseat do you have anyway? I cant imagine one that could be that difficult to properly secure AND not be obviously loose.’
Before I go, here it really is. You can’t imagine a scenario in which a woman busy with packing for a trip, getting three children ready and the car loaded could overlook something. Well I did and it wasn’t with malicious intent. As soon as my oldest daughter noticed it, we pulled over and belted the carseat in.
You expect perfection. I can’t give it. God in all His wisdom decided you and I should never be married and raise children together.
Whatever “tiny tendril” could you be referring to? The one where you not only displayed your ignorance of the one “logical fallacy” you identify of the many you accuse me of, but double-down on the error?
I'm still waiting on that reference that supports your “unique” definition of a concept as well known as the Pythagorean Theorem.
I knew you would weasel out of the challenge...I didn't expect you to simply pretend it wasn't there.
As for your asinine assertion I went to Wikipedia to discover rather than cite, suit yourself: what other source would you prefer I use to prove you wrong? They'll all say roughly the same thing.
All I can say is [paraphrase] “Yes Otto, apes do read Nietzsche, they just don't understand him!”
Yeah, yeah. I know you'll try to cook up some clever way to make me the "ape," but you get the point. Besides....
I'm not the one tossing around verbage I clearly don't understand.
Not at all. What I expect is not to choke on hyperbole about "perfection" from a poster projecting themselves into a clear case of negligence, and trying to mitigate it.