|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 28, 2005 11:21:41 GMT -5
Stupid and sad at the same time....
Crews look for toddler in Indiana river
GARY, Ind. (AP) — Rescuers searched the Grand Calumet River Thursday for a 2-year-old girl who flew out a car window and plunged 40 feet into the water when her mother lost control of her SUV.
Keisha Bethley said she was driving behind the SUV driven by the girl's mother, Jacqueline Greene, when she saw it strike a retaining wall of a toll road ramp over the river.
The toddler, Jatama Greene, flew out the window, Bethley said. Bethley said she immediately dialed 911 on her cellular phone, but the dispatcher accused her of placing a phony emergency call.
"She kept saying 'Quit playing around,'" Bethley said. "I said, 'I'm not playing, the baby is in the water.'"
Witnesses said the toddler was moving after she struck the water around 8:45 p.m.
A man who drove up after the accident ran down the bank, jumped in the river and tried to reach the baby, but the current was too swift, Bethley said.
Jacqueline Greene, sobbing, was restrained by a friend from descending the river bank to search the water herself. According to police on the scene, the child apparently had not been fastened into protective restraints.
Helicopters shone spotlights on the river Wednesday night to help divers from the Gary Fire Department search for Jatama, but rescuers eventually had to postpone the search until daylight. They resumed Thursday.
|
|
|
|
Post by 10point on Jul 28, 2005 13:48:50 GMT -5
Sad story.
My wife drove around for few days once not knowing that my daughters car seat had come unbuckeled. Thank God nothing happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by stealthycat on Jul 29, 2005 17:17:21 GMT -5
I'm off on vacation so won't be able to respond ......... but what about all the children that have dies BECAUSE of seat belts and air bags ?
Its a double edged sword - mandatory saftey measures. Remember, if SAFETY was the issue, we'd all have to wear helmets, auto manufacturers would build safer cars and the speed limit would be 35 mph to really, REALLY try and " save " peoples lives
I've been on both sides. One wreck I'd have been seriously injured had I WORN my seatbelt. Last summer I was in a wreck that I'd have been seriously injured in if I had NOT been wearing one
|
|
|
|
Post by greendeem on Jul 29, 2005 22:39:43 GMT -5
Its not a double edged sword for children. The only, and I mean the only place they should be is in child seat. Children are not killed by air bags and seat belts when they are positioned right.
I'll say this and take the heat from anyone who wants to argue..You are an idiot if you dont wear a seat belt. You are an idiot who should go to prison if you dont put your child in a restraint.
|
|
|
|
Post by firemanphob on Jul 30, 2005 0:08:46 GMT -5
I know that someone can site an example to disprove any law but the truth is that I have responded to hundereds of wrecks in the past 25 years and have never had to take the seatbelt off a fatality. I have also seen several fatalitys that would PROBABLY have not gotten more than a scratch if they had been belted in. Perhaps not 100% fool proof but it puts the odds in your favor. A child not belted in is simply a projectile, period!!!!!
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jul 30, 2005 6:02:58 GMT -5
I know that someone can site an example to disprove any law but the truth is that I have responded to hundereds of wrecks in the past 25 years and have never had to take the seatbelt off a fatality. I have also seen several fatalitys that would PROBABLY have not gotten more than a scratch if they had been belted in. Perhaps not 100% fool proof but it puts the odds in your favor. A child not belted in is simply a projectile, period!!!!! Mike
He said that same thing at the end of his first video.
“In my 23 years as a state trooper I never had to unbuckled a dead person”Room To Live
Sgt. Jack Ware was a Michigan State Trooper for 23 years. After his retirement in 1979 he produced his first seatbelt video, Room to Live. Since then, the Room to Live series of seatbelt safety videos has become the most popular ever produced. Room to Live is employed by major corporations and organizations throughout the country to convince their people of the importance of always "buckling-up." 33 min.A good number of fatalities happen in the second collision. Two cars collide and then one goes into another lane and strikes a third or fourth car. If a person is not wearing a seat belt they will be moved around and possibly out from under the steering wheel where they no longer have control of their vehicle.That negates the excuse some folks use that not wearing a seat belt only effects them.Room To Live III
Many think this is Sgt. Jack Ware's best seat belt video. Jack talks about the importance of seat belt use in multiple impact crashes (most auto crashes are). Room To Live III is a hard-hitting, emotional video. There's not a dry eye in the audience at the dramatic conclusion. 33 min.www.ouraaa.com/news/videos/seat_belt.html |
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 30, 2005 8:51:19 GMT -5
I'll say this and take the heat from anyone who wants to argue..You are an idiot if you dont wear a seat belt. You are an idiot who should go to prison if you dont put your child in a restraint. I'll trade a country where I'm taxed, regulated and overseen from the time of conception through the reading of the will for one where I'm FREE to be an idiot for the last thirty seconds of my life any day. And it's nobody else's business what I do with my kids. |
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jul 30, 2005 9:18:27 GMT -5
I disagree Jack , personally I would feel like a complete schittheel if one of my grandkids or even an adult passenger got killed simply because I didn't insist that they buckle up . There's no logical reason not to protect yourself , though I do grudgingly agree that making it mandatory is somewhat intrusive .
I've survived several very impressive crashes solely because I had my belt on . The only one where I got significant damage , a broken nose , was a 65 mph brody into a phone pole without the belt on . I count myself as extremely lucky to have survived that one at all , and I won't even start my car anymore unless everyone in it is restrained . Roll the dice if you want to , but sooner or later the laws of probability catch up with those who flout them .
|
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Jul 30, 2005 10:20:46 GMT -5
WHY...is it so dangerous to drive a vehicle without wearing a seatbelt, and "so safe" to ride a motorcycle without a helmet?
Where is the "helmet law"?
The seatbelt law was NOT intended to save lives....it was intended to save insurance companies money!
Reducing your intake of "red meat" would also save lives and reduce insurance claims....should we ALSO expect that to become law?
I am not sure how old some of you fellas are, but I know when I was a kid, my favorite place to ride was up in the back window.....remember that?.....NOW *THAT* was stupid!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 30, 2005 16:23:13 GMT -5
Idiot or not idiot I don't really care.
State mandated programs and laws taking away the individual right to determine their own destiny of all based on the presumption it is best to presearve idiots in the gene pool, I oppose.
It would be better if idiots did not procreate but that's not nature's way. They have the right to be an idiot so long as they don't endanger the rest.
|
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on Jul 30, 2005 16:33:16 GMT -5
Idiot or not idiot I don't really care. State mandated programs and laws taking away the individual right to determine their own destiny of all based on the presumption it is best to preserve idiots in the gene pool, I oppose.  Hence seatbelt laws and the Food Pyramid . TGIF will soon be printed on the toes of all shoes to avoid crippling injuries ... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by greendeem on Jul 30, 2005 20:16:49 GMT -5
"And it's nobody else's business what I do with my kids."
That's not true. A person might have the right to be an idiot, but they don't have the right to turn their children into victims because of their idiotacy.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 30, 2005 23:58:28 GMT -5
"And it's nobody else's business what I do with my kids." That's not true. A person might have the right to be an idiot, but they don't have the right to turn their children into victims because of their idiotacy. You nor the government have the right to tell me what does and doesn't qualify as an "idiot" so long as I'm the one putting a roof over their head and food in their mouths. I'll decide what's best for MY kids not the government, not the county, not the cops and not the DNR. If you want to see a genuine gold plated idiot just look for the person who thinks they are going to stick their nose in to the raising of my kids. They are apt to get it punched if they don't get it shot off. |
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 31, 2005 2:37:15 GMT -5
Even though fans of individual liberty often (and rightly) decry the paternalism embedded in seatbelt laws, most Americans take little offense at such state-sponsored nannying. However, nannying does not just make us less free; when it distracts law enforcement from its proper role, it can also make us less safe. When government assumes many duties, it's tougher to do the important ones right.
Government officials are more on the mark when they call for enforcement of drunk driving laws. But here again law should focus on recklessness, whether it's encouraged by alcohol, fatigue, general stupidity or high-speed lipstick application.
Until law enforcement has the man power and ability to protect the highways from drunk drivers and illegal unlicense alien truck drivers with no insurance and the DNR can eliminate the meth labs and all the pot patches from public land they don't need to worry about my kids, car seats or seat belts.
Instead of looking for "soft targets" to pump up their quota sheets they should be out there doing the job they were really hired for.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 31, 2005 2:50:04 GMT -5
www.rfmnews.com/nm/publish/news_108.html...One of the first acts of the newly created nation after the successful War of Independence, our Founding Fathers, remembering the terror of such general warrants, passed the Fourth Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights added to the newly created Constitution, which reads: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. Our Founding Fathers believed there is a certain sanctity to one’s person, the ultimate private property, as well as to one’s possessions, that shall not be violated by the government without probable cause, as directed in the due process clause of the Constitution. Unfortunately, the majority of today’s politicians no longer believe in such a sacred ideal of liberty exhibited by James Otis and our Founding Fathers. Over the last several decades, it is shocking to realize that legislators have passed laws that clearly attack or undermine our individual personal rights in the Bill of Rights. And, just as bad, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld such violations of our rights. In particular, the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2001 ruled that it was legal for a police officer in Texas to arrest, handcuff and jail a woman for merely not using a seat belt, a victimless, state created crime that hurt no one. Our Founding Fathers must be spinning in their graves! It is shocking how far afield we have come as a nation from the cry of Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death," to "Click-it or ticket," the cry of politicians who arrogantly claim the right to violate the Bill of Rights in the name of doing "good." The fact is, taking away liberty in the name of doing good has been the easy road for dictators and tyrants for centuries. The fact is, if politicians who do not respect the Bill of Rights are not voted out of office soon, someday they will be doing so much "good" for us, we will no longer have any more rights to give up. Seat belt laws and, especially, primary enforcement, are clear major steps in that direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by greendeem on Jul 31, 2005 9:58:59 GMT -5
Jack your view of this issue is restricted to your own little world. More than likely someone doesnt have the need or right to tell you how to raise your kids, but that is not true for everyone. You have your opinion on chid restraint seats for your own reasons, which have more to do with your fear of an intruding government rather than the safety of the child. I have my opinion from picking mangled children up off of the roadway because they were not restrained or out of the lake because their parents were in the trailer drinking rather than watching their 3 year old.
"They are apt to get it punched if they don't get it shot off. "
I apreciate patriotism, and every generation in my family has paid a stiff price for our freedom, but I'm about sick of violent views against Law enforcement hiding behind patriotism. The person you are threatening to punch in the nose or shoot, are not the ones making the laws, just doing what they are sworn to do. And you know what eles? Their training envolves a little more than shooting at pop cans off the back porch.
|
|
|
|
Post by firemanphob on Jul 31, 2005 13:09:10 GMT -5
I can't for the life of me understand why anyone who loves their children would not do anything possible to keep them safe. The truth of the matter though is that there are many people who have children but are not in any way parents. These are the kids that the laws are meant to protect.
and Jack, you are way late on the government not telling you what you can and can't do with or to your kids. They have been doing that for years. If you don't believe me, just try giving a kid a whipping in public. No I don't mean child abuse. There is a difference between whipping a child and beating them but it doesn't matter if the wrong person sees you. It will be the police you will be dealing with, not some do-gooder. Same with the seat belts. This is the law and can be enforced until the time the law is rescinded and I don't see that happening. I don't think you are going to be punching any police in the nose or shooting them or you won't get to spend much time with your kids at all.
I agree that a lot is wrong with our government but I think the seatbelt law is one of the laws that really needs to be there. I, as a responder, do not want to help recover children's body's because their parents are too hardheaded or stupid to keep them safe. That is when someone needs to be shot !!!!!!!
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 31, 2005 16:17:37 GMT -5
Jack your view of this issue is restricted to your own little world. More than likely someone doesnt have the need or right to tell you how to raise your kids, but that is not true for everyone. You have your opinion on chid restraint seats for your own reasons, which have more to do with your fear of an intruding government rather than the safety of the child. I have my opinion from picking mangled children up off of the roadway because they were not restrained or out of the lake because their parents were in the trailer drinking rather than watching their 3 year old. "They are apt to get it punched if they don't get it shot off. " I apreciate patriotism, and every generation in my family has paid a stiff price for our freedom, but I'm about sick of violent views against Law enforcement hiding behind patriotism. The person you are threatening to punch in the nose or shoot, are not the ones making the laws, just doing what they are sworn to do. And you know what eles? Their training envolves a little more than shooting at pop cans off the back porch. My views are based on what I believe is best for this country, not on my personal anecdotal expirience with one or two or even a dozen incidents. Giving in even an inch to the oppresion of the whole populace in order to "save" the lowest common denominator is the death knell for this country. I certainly appreciate that law enforcement get a lot more training and "indoctrination" than shooting pop cans off the back porch. I've shot with more than a few and my father is retired from the sherrif's department. And I'm MORE than a little tired of hearing how a couple years in a uniform and suddenly people who couldn't pass government in high school think they are the only rational voice on safety laws for the whole population. Safety programs and classes and rules where the state has to raise kids are all fine and dandy. LAWS to protect people from themselves are tyrany. I shoot pop cans off the front porch too. So if someone's not "invited" that's not a good choice either. The job is to serve and protect THE PEOPLE from each other and up hold the constitution. Not from themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by jackryan on Jul 31, 2005 16:25:32 GMT -5
Iand Jack, you are way late on the government not telling you what you can and can't do with or to your kids. They have been doing that for years. If you don't believe me, just try giving a kid a whipping in public. Mike Better late than never. I can't go back but every morning I wake up to a new day. ... and I've driven from Janesville Wisconsin to Gary Indiana just across the state line to do exactly that when one of my kids came home from school mocking back that kind of "...you can't, I'll tell my..." bull sht they learned in school. You can be your a$$ I never heard that line again. |
|
|
|
Post by outdoorswithdon on Jul 31, 2005 23:45:55 GMT -5
Jack, I had hoped your kind of paranoid, researched and rationalized logic had died with nuts like Ted Kazinski. God help us if the general population reads threads like this one, and thinks we all are this backwards.
Step back a minute and realize you are arguing the right to not have to protect your child. That is supposed to be your primary concern as a parent - regardless of the sacrifice you have to make. Make your political stand against oppressive seat belt laws if you wish, just leave your kids out of it. They just want to survive a crash. And by the way, your rights end when they intrude on all of ours. I shouldn't have to pay guys like Greendeam to scrape your kids off the highway, or explain to my kids why their friends are dead because of an angry parent making a political statement.
And are you saying you drove across state lines to beat your kid to prove you were in complete control? Call it what you like, but that sounds like an adult temper tantrum - and a scary one.
Your "I can do what ever I want to my kids" logic is the most outrageous statement of all. Of course you can't do whatever you want, and I sincerely hope you simply didn't think that one all the way through. I'm guessing you had no idea that that logic is the preferred mantra of some of the most evil criminals in our prisons.
|
|
