Posted on 05/22/2012 3:19:07 PM PDT by KansasGirl
Carping?
You truly do not know the history of the son. Unless the idea of good parenting is to forever hover over the children uttering continuous threats no matter how well behaved they are.
How is locking the doors hovering? If the kid was in the front seat, you grab his arm and say wait a minute son. If he is in the back seat you keep the doors locked until the car is actually parked. They are controlled at the drivers seat. You double check for approaching traffic then say okay we’re here. I am amazed at how so many people are clueless about car safety. And how few people understand what it means to be a parent. Duh, the kid won’t listen to me, Ethel. What should I do? I’m baffled. Should let him play with the chain saw? I asked him not to but you know those 5-year-olds and I don’t want to hover.
Any parent who allows a kid to jump out of a car that is not in park (automatic trans) is being negligent. This is the 21st century and car safety should not be a mystery to any one.
Gosh darn it, I don’t know how I ever lived as a kid.
This was before kiddie car seats, even before mandatory seat belts, and before doors that could be set not to open from inside.
Mom (and Dad) always said lock the doors and we did. Also before I was five, I was watching down the road as mom got ready to back out of the driveway, calling “car, car, car, car, ... clear” when any approaching car had passed. And she believed me, what am I stupid and going to say clear if we’re about to get barreled into should she back out at that moment?
I don’t know how I survived. Jumping out at an interesting spot would, at most, have been a fluke. I respected the laws of physics. But I wasn’t locked in a rubber room either.
Kids being impulsive is predictable; the manner in which they choose to exhibit impulsiveness is not.
No parent 100% can predict what their child will do on impulse 100% of the time. Not even you. I’m sure if you look back at your parenting days, more than a few examples of your parenting mistakes and failures will come to mind.
If you really didn’t think you needed to tear him down to feel better about yourself, you wouldn’t have repeatedly returned to the thread for the purpose of doing so.
I feel fine about myself.
I own up to my mistakes, don’t whine about the consequences, and I don’t make heroes out of nincompoops.
Then you wouldn’t feel the need to keep tearing him down. His mistakes truly would not bother you.
Clearly, you don’t feel fine, or else you wouldn’t feel a compulsion to tear him down.
Actually, the man’s mistakes mean nothing to me. I would point out, however, that by impugning my motives and avoiding the logical points of the discussion you are working out of the liberal playbook.
Most of my interaction on FreeRepublic is on the whimsical level. But every once in a while I come upon a teachable moment. Not that I have any illusions about changing the minds of those with entrenched positions, but rather that I find an opportunity to help clarify with logic and reason for the benefit of others who may be reading the conversation. To that end, let’s look at the facts.
1.) the man’s car ended up in the river.
2.) The man was responsible for the boy’s behavior.
3.) #1 was the direct result of his failure in #2
These are indisputable facts. It is not at all logical to compartmentalize #1 from #2 and act as if this is something that just “happened”. Further, it is absurd to label the man a hero for mitigating a problem of his own creation. If he was alone in the car and spotted a child for whom he was not responsible and the rest of the situation followed from that, he would be a hero. But he was the cause of the dangerous situation and is therefore not entitled to the label.
Acceptance of responsibility is one of the keys to maturity. It is unfortunate that the man in the article is attempting to deflect his responsibility for the accident. It is also unfortunate that the author of the article is complicit in somehow impugning the law enforcement officer’s actions based upon the man’s misapplied hero status.
The man screwed up and the consequences of his screw up are quite light, all things considered. Wouldn’t you agree?
It would be far more manly for him to shut up, count his blessings, and pay the fines.
Conservatives understand the importance of extending grace; he saved his son. Watching as his child nearly faced death and dealing with the financial repercussions of repairing or replacing his vehicle is more than sufficient.
The tickets were unnecessary and were given for the purpose of collecting revenue.
Have compassion on this man; God did (and does).
Can’t address the logical points? Oh well.
You may be wrong but you are never in doubt, are you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.