TexasCHLforum.com

seamusTX wrote:In Galveston Sunday someone reported a vehicle driving at an excessive speed on the southbound causeway (which is an interstate, for those who have not been here). Police stopped a pickup truck and arrested the driver, a 30-year-old Hispanic man from Houston, for felony child endangerment.

The man allegedly had a 3-year-old in a car seat in the bed of a pickup truck, along with a 4-year-old and a 14-year-old "loose" in the back and four improperly restrained children in the passenger compartment.

Subscription-only link:
http://www.galvestondailynews.com/news/ ... f6878.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There must be an explanation, but I can't guess what.

- Jim

I'm certain he loves his children.

If I were LEO this would be my mission - to make the lives of irresponsible parents miserable.

Anygunanywhere

It does not seem any of them were his own children. The story says two of them were "related," which could mean nieces, nephews, cousins, or something.

If you want to do something about this kind of garbage, aside from getting a divinity degree, the place to go is the courts and the legislature. The police can only arrest someone for an obvious offense. Then "the system" kicks in, and they return the children to the same morons who abused them in the first place.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:It does not seem any of them were his own children. The story says two of them were "related," which could mean nieces, nephews, cousins, or something.

If you want to do something about this kind of garbage, aside from getting a divinity degree, the place to go is the courts and the legislature. The police can only arrest someone for an obvious offense. Then "the system" kicks in, and they return the children to the same morons who abused them in the first place.

- Jim

On multiple occasions I have pulled up to a stoplight and observed children bouncing around in a car or sitting at the window not buckled up. When I have the opportunity I compliment the driver on their beautiful children. This usually ellicits a beaming smile and a thank you.

I then ask why if they love them so much why are they not restrained per the law. The responses vary. Maybe the light goes on in a few of them.

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:When I have the opportunity I compliment the driver on their beautiful children. This usually ellicits a beaming smile and a thank you.
I then ask why if they love them so much why are they not restrained per the law. The responses vary.

I can only imagine how the responses vary, but I'll guess some involve half a peace sign.

One day I was riding my bike on the Seawall when I saw some little kids getting out of a minivan. I smiled, thinking of them enjoying their day at the beach. Then some more kids got out, and some more. It was like a clown car. There must have been something like a dozen kids in a minvan. Obviously there could not have been enough child seats or seat belts for all of them.

- Jim

anygunanywhere wrote:

seamusTX wrote:It does not seem any of them were his own children. The story says two of them were "related," which could mean nieces, nephews, cousins, or something.

If you want to do something about this kind of garbage, aside from getting a divinity degree, the place to go is the courts and the legislature. The police can only arrest someone for an obvious offense. Then "the system" kicks in, and they return the children to the same morons who abused them in the first place.

- Jim

On multiple occasions I have pulled up to a stoplight and observed children bouncing around in a car or sitting at the window not buckled up. When I have the opportunity I compliment the driver on their beautiful children. This usually ellicits a beaming smile and a thank you.

I then ask why if they love them so much why are they not restrained per the law. The responses vary. Maybe the light goes on in a few of them.

Anygunanywhere

The ones that really make me crazy are the drivers who position their children in their laps as potential "airbags." If that driver is in a fatal accident, the last thing he is going to see is his own body crushing his child's body against the steering wheel. Two deaths for the price of one. If he survives it, that impact visual will make him wish he hadn't. I just don't understand these people.

The Annoyed Man wrote:I just don't understand these people.

Many people survive day-to-day only by denying probability. If they didn't get killed yesterday doing the stupid stuff that they do, nyeh, today should be OK.

That said, my uncle, who had seven children, used to let an infant sit in his lap and steer the car. This was in the 1960s, when such things were not illegal, and seat belts were rare. I'm sure those of you who are old enough remember when most seat belts were stuffed into a crack, and some assertive libertarians would cut them out.

I also remember from that era the infant car seats that hung by a couple of bent wires over the back of the front seat of the car. The poor kid would have become a human cannonball in the event of a crash.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:I just don't understand these people.

Many people survive day-to-day only by denying probability. If they didn't get killed yesterday doing the stupid stuff that they do, nyeh, today should be OK.

That said, my uncle, who had seven children, used to let an infant sit in his lap and steer the car. This was in the 1960s, when such things were not illegal, and seat belts were rare. I'm sure those of you who are old enough remember when most seat belts were stuffed into a crack, and some assertive libertarians would cut them out.

I also remember from that era the infant car seats that hung by a couple of bent wires over the back of the front seat of the car. The poor kid would have become a human cannonball in the event of a crash.

- Jim

I remember my own dad doing that stuff........but that was back in the late 1950s/early 1960s. The Surgeon General's report on smoking hadn't been published yet. The airbag hadn't been invented yet. Seat belts were an expensive upgrade, as a lot of cars (including our '53 Merc') didn't even have seat belts, and they weren't always an available option. Automotive safety glass wasn't.......yet. Dashboards were made of metal. Earlier, cars were made with doors that hinged at the trailing edge rather than the leading edge, and it was common for drivers and passengers to be ejected forward and outward through doors that burst open. (The grandfather of a former girlfriend of mine was the automotive engineer for Dodge Motors who got that feature deleted from their catalog, way back when.) There were a LOT of poor designs (by modern standards) back then, and people did a LOT of things that were unsafe back then, either because the technology to make things safer didn't exist yet, or because existing technology wasn't very good yet.

We are now 50-60 years beyond that point. Seat belts have been standard equipment on cars for about 50 years now. We've had improved child safety seats for 2 or 3 decades now. Airbags are standard equipment. I get it that some people are just idiots. But back in the '50s and 60s, one could legitimately plead ignorance. The general knowledge simply wasn't there, and in many cases, neither was the technology. But I'd be willing to wager a significant part of my income that a LOT of these modern nimrods have web-connected smart phones, flat screen TVs, and home computers with wi-fi connections. Some cars won't even start unless the seatbelt is latched. There is no more excuse for any such ignorance, and so consequently ALL such behavior is simply due to insufficient IQ.

Sadly, they breed. That's one thing they do really REALLY well.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Earlier, cars were made with doors that hinged at the trailing edge rather than the leading edge, and it was common for drivers and passengers to be ejected forward and outward through doors that burst open.

They were called "suicide doors."

I remember in the 1970s, a man who was a licensed professional engineer (and my boss at the time) telling me that it was better to be ejected from a vehicle during a crash, because you would be "relaxed."

While he refilled his pipe. Back then people were allowed to smoke at work.

I don't know that it is low IQ, per se. Mentally retarded people tend to function by routines. They do what they have been taught, or learned works for them.

I think it's more denial.

Don't get me started about people who use high-tech stuff without having a clue how it works—oh, you did. We all do it. I'm an electrical engineer, and I don't understand the details of many things that I use. I have only a vague idea how crude oil is ditsilled into gasoline. I certainly don't understand most pharmaceuticals.

Sadly, they breed. That's one thing they do really REALLY well.

Yeah. I remember one of my friends, years ago, remarking that two yuppies (talking about himself) with fertility problems could spend tens of thousands of dollars on medical treatments, while two teenagers in the back seat knocked out a home run in one at-bat.

- Jim