SparrowsNest
-
Posts
307 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by SparrowsNest
-
-
I loaded the groceries in the car, buckled him in the car, and left the cart beside my car rather than walk away from it. I did this because of potential demented busy body weenies
One board I frequent had an enormous, huge, in-your-face, made-enemies-of-former-friends blow-up over people who leave their shopping carts in the lot without returning them to the cart bins.
You'll tick people off if you leave your child in the car while you return the cart, and you'll tick others off for not doing so.
I loaded the groceries in the car, buckled him in the car, and left the cart beside my car rather than walk away from it. I did this because of potential demented busy body weenies
Also, I don't think it has to be an us vs. them thing. I have waited in my car beside a car where a baby was unattended. I looked at the clock, decided to wait 10 minutes before calling the police, kept my eye on the baby, and was happy to drive away when the Mom came out of the store in less then 3 minutes. On the other hand, I have called the police when I found a toddler alone walking on a sidewalk. The child couldn't talk and it wasn't clear what house they 'belonged' at. So I stayed with the baby and call the police. Before the police got there, the Mom came out.
So while I have argued that it is not unreasonable to leave a child in a locked car for that quick pay-for-gas-type errand, I am also cautious when I see people doing it, because some people don't return in an appropriate amount of time. And that is totally inexcusable.
It seems to me that there's a lot of area between an alarmist, mommier-than-thou "Oh I would NEVER NEVER NEVER take my eyes off my baby for ONE SECOND IN THE CAR!" and a "Leave 'em as long as you want, I don't care" attitude.
-
In one, the mother left the children inside while she went in the store. In the other, she left them while she went to pick up a child from inside the kindergarten. Note that these were primarily very young children, strapped in their car seats.
It doesn't require 110 degrees or hours. It can take seconds at any temperature.
But again, it is an issue of risk assessment. There is a risk to carrying your child. There is a risk, a quantifiable risk, of a fall killing you and your child. And my strong suspiscion, given that risk for spontaneous explosion of cars isn't quantifiable and falls are, that you are at more risk of a deadly fall at any given moment than you are of a spontaneous car explosion.
-
Oh, that's wonderful! :)
-
I just don't buy the excuse that "It has to do with brain chemistry, evolution and, yes, testosterone."
It's a worldview issue. This is the strict materialist/everything we do has a biological root leading to a "he's not bad, just sick" mentality. A prescient CS Lewis writes about this idea that we are not responsible moral agents, just 'patients' whose brain chemistry is 'different.' Scary stuff, seeing it unfold before our eyes.
-
(1.3 per 10,000
So, the risk of carjacking on any given day is 1 in 3.6 million.
According to this site: http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm
The yearly risk of falling to your death are 1/502,837, or a daily risk of about 1/182 million.
But I bet you're more likely to fall in icy weather. Maybe 10 times more likely? So let's say 1/18.2 million.
So now it's clear. She should've taken the 1/18.2 million risk of falling and dying with the baby in her arms over the 1/3.6 million risk of carjacking! Which means, at least to me, that she should *definitely* go to jail for taking a 1/3 million risk with her child! ;)
-
And I did say I agreed with this (so give me my cookie now)...;) I just also added that *I* don't feel she used common sense.
White chocolate chip or macademia nut? ;)
-
A child under the age of 8 years and out of sight (in a dwelling, building, enclosure, or motor vehicle) of the person charged with his/her care must be left with a reliable person at least 13 years old.
So, if your 3 year old is napping, and you step out on the front porch to shake a rug, are you violating a law?
-
On the risk of carjacking vs. falling - I lived in Baltimore for 11 years, where carjacking is a common occurrence. I've fallen with a baby in my arms, but I was never carjacked. I've personally known lots of people who fell in bad weather, but not a single one who was carjacked. So it's only anecdotal, but I do think falling is much more common than carjacking, even in areas where carjacking is common.
Same is true for me when we lived in DC. I slipped several times, but was never highjacked.
Of course without real data, it's just conjecture, which is why I still think it's impossible to say whether she made the best decision. She made the decison she thought best at the time between two very, very small risks. It doesn't require a cop's intervention on any level, and it certainly does not require taxpayer's money to go to trial!
-
Only lastly are red lights "popular"(on your red light issue, not gas stations and only to show it's more of a concern outside a walmart than a red light).
But, as they didn't provide data, you are assuming that they were listing the popular spots in decending order of frequency. Maybe, maybe not.
-
GothicGirl, I am not saying that no dangers exist. I am saying there are always dangers, and we have to weigh them before making a choice.
We don't know about this woman's car. You said in essence that her car was running and therefore there was more danger. I have a car with a remote start, and if she did lock and alarm a running car, it's not unreasonable to suspect that she had a remote access of some sort as well. I did not say that what my car does is what all cars do (anecdote = data), only that my car functions this way and thus hers may have as well -- you are the one who made assumptions as to what running cars can and cannot do and how they will and will not react.
-
And this argument is simply a strawman/red herring or one of them. Of course there is risk in everything we do. That still does not justify what she did or the risk she took.
The argument is perfectly relevant. She had to weigh the risks of whichever course of action she took. You have argued that she took the least sensical course. I am saying that when the risks are so small, it is often darn near impossible to know which risk is greater. I am also saying that we always take all sorts of small risks, so taking a small risk does not demonstrate lack of common sense, else there wouldn't be such a thing as common sense at all.
-
a
running car already facing an exit type direction with keys inside (they'd have to be, car is on) and it is unattended OR a parked, not running car for which you not only have to wrest the keys out of the owners but start the car, reverse and then exit?Not true. My car has a remote start, and if someone gets in without the keys and tries to put it in gear, it shuts off immediately. Also, it can be locked, and the remote start ignited, such that the car is running with the doors locked and the car alarmed.
-
You honestly have to ask a question like that? You honestly have to question what could happen? Remote possibility or not--things CAN and DO happen.
*Things* can happen in or outside of a car. There is risk inherent to life. The question is which risk do you choose? Do you choose the risk of walking in wet/slippery weather or the risk of leaving a sleeping child in a locked car 10 feet from you? Do you choose the risk of going outside, where you could die from a bee sting, lightening, a car accident, a terrorist attack, or do you never leave your house, where statistically most accidents occur? You cannot eliminate risk.
-
I would not bet on this one. We've more carjackings in front of community service officers/cops in parking los than one thinks. Maybe ancedotal, but I would certainly not bet on this being more true over something else.
But the fact is that all these are very remote chances statistically. What is the likelihood that she is holding the sleeping child, slips, falls, and the child suffers a head injury? What is the likelihood that a carjacker happens upon her car *at that moment* and in spite of the lock and alarm, makes off with the car? What is the likelihood that a meteor hits the WalMart parking lot in the fire lane? The point is they are all remote possibilities, and so choosing to take one risk (i.e., whatever risk there is to having a child sleeping in the carseat for 5 minutes without supervision) instead of another (taking child out in cold, slippery parking lot) is not an unreasonable course of action.
10 feet is far enough away for something to happen.
What? What exactly is the risk to a child sleeping in a carseat? And also, how is it worse than whatever level of risk there is to my Cecilia right now who is napping in her crib. I am downstairs, so more like, oh, 60 or 80 feet from her. I check on her every 20 minutes or so, which is longer than it took this woman to drop off the money. Why is what I am doing OK but what she did wrong?
-
For going somewhere in the sleet? __________________
This is probably the next law. Cold weather and dangerous driving conditions. Scandal! Driving in the rain! The horror! Obviously children shouldn't be let outside their home unless it is between 65 and 80 degrees.
-
Well, I haven't homeschooled anyone yet, heh heh. Next year is a trial year for us and we will see how it goes. I'm not pinning my success as a woman, mother, or human being on this endeavor. If it works, it works. If not, we've got decent public schools, a quasi-classical Christian school, and a college prep school which are all options, and I will have enjoyed spending a year with my second son.
-
Actually, the more I think about this the angrier I get. Are we to believe that her children are better off in foster care? That they are better off without their Mom for however-long she has to serve her 'sentence?' Ridiculous.
-
I have often weighed in my mind the danger of having 5 children under the age of 10 exit a vehicle and navigate through the traffic of a parking lot versus leaving them, buckled, in a locked car, and frankly I think they are safer in a locked car. I cannot have my hands on all 5 of them, because I have, well, two hands. I don't need a law telling me which risk is more acceptable to them. My 3 year old is a darter, and just today as my 13 year old got him out of the car, he ran around the car and to me before my 13 year old could grab him. Riskier than sitting in his seat which he can't get out of of? Heck, yeah.
-
I totally agree with them. My son's 2yr ss teacher had not been in an adult ss class in 30years. She more than served her time. I feel if every parent would volunteer where their children are the older generation would be more than happy to sub once in a while when those volunteers need a Sunday off.
This isn't the kind of person Jackie has in mind.
In fact, I am wondering if Jackie went to my old church in Texas. We asked some of the older ladies if they would come read to the babies in the nursery. Once a year. For 15 minutes. To the last one, the answer was "No. I've raised my children. Church is MY time. They're YOUR babies. YOU read to them."
Thankfully we have found a truly covenantal church where all the members understand that we are to point one another to Christ all our lives, young and old, and that church and, indeed, all our lives are not "our" time, but rather "God's time."
-
I have thought about blogging, but, I don't know exactly, I just never have taken the leap.
For one, I am afraid it will become one more thing on my 'To Do' list that goes undone.
For two, I already spend (more than) enough OL time -- am I being a good steward of my time if I commit to even more?
Third, what will I get out of blogging?
Fourth, even if blogging builds friendships, etc., isn't that time better spent investing in people in 'real life' as it were?
And fifth, I have security concerns. Are they valid?
Sixth, what if no one reads my blog? LOL
Seventh, what if people read my blob but are critical?
So for those of you who blog, I guess the pros outweigh the cons for you. Could you elaborate?
And for those who don't blog, I guess the cons outweigh the pros. I'd love to hear from you as well!
~Marcia, Mom to Six Terrific Kids
-
I don't even remember where I heard this, but a while back someone said/I read/in a sermon/wherever that the purpose of the worship service wasn't to cater or to pander to *our* preferences, but rather to gather the body of Christ together to glorify God. So the question isn't "Did I like the service today?" but rather "Was God glorified?" Asking that question when I have felt like grumbling about preferences/little things/the way our worship leader strums his guitar while he's talking ;)/etc., has helped me to realign my spirit with the Big Picture.
So for me, if my church is theologically sound and I believe that Christ is being glorified, I tend to think the rest is non-essential. I don't always like our music choices. I don't always like the way our preacher uses 'edgy' terms to be 'relevant.' I wish we could kneel. But, at the end of the day, the issue for me would boil down to what is at the core of your church. If it is a heart seeking to glorify God, preach the Gospel, feed believers, and take God's love into a dying world, then I could personally overlook music I didn't care for and a church-building drive. But what I think I am hearing from you is that that heart for God's glory may not be there, and that you are concerned that "church for church's sake" may be driving these activities. In that case, we would probably talk with the leadership first and, if you are not satisfied, we would probably look for a place of worship where Christ, and not the church, was at the center.
-
Looking at the pictures of her, she looks completely devastated. My guess is that she's on auto-pilot right now, and for her that probably means going where she's told to go, standing for pictures, etc.
On the other hand, I don't know anything about their situation. I would never blame the faithful partner for an unfaithful partner's infidelity, and yet at the same time I think situations like this spring from already dysfunctional relationships. That's not to excuse him -- obviously we all have some level of brokenness in our relationships (being fallen creatures and all), but I'm just saying we don't know the total picture here. It wouldn't mean his infidelity was therefore "OK" of course. It's hard to know what was going on in their marriage, what problems they had, what issues were unresolved. Maybe he is just a self-absorbed, power-hungry, I'm above the law kind of guy and she's a completely innocent victim, or maybe there were pre-existing conditions in their marriage which made this type of scenario more likely. It's just heartbreaking all around. :(
-
I took a year of Latin in Jr. High, and intend to start LC with my ds10 in the fall. I am jumping right into Henle this spring for myself, and hoping to work through the first half or so, then work alongside him during Latin time. We'll see how that goes!
-
Two families (out of about 20 total) are now upset over a few things.
Two families should not set the agenda for the 20. The two families should raise their concerns and then submit peacefully (without complaint) to the decision of the leadership or else find a new church home. If these issues are deal-breakers for those two families, they will probably be happier at a church that jives more with their views.
My personal opinion (as a Reformed Christian attending a PCA church):
I love easter Egg hunts.
I agree that daycare (if indeed it is true daycare, although I have nothing against a mother's morning out type program) is not ideal, but that should've been worked out prior to the merge.
I think Sunday School is terrific. We believe that all of God's people are in a covenantal relationship and share in the responsibility for the education of covenant children. Obviously this falls primarily on the father and the family, but it is also part of the responsibility of the body of believers. Just because something *can* be abused is not a compelling reason to eradicate it completely.
Wow -- I guess this makes me think twice about how I return grocery carts
in General Education Discussion Board
Posted
Kelli, I am not saying this to be argumentative, but in my opinion (and this isn't hypothetical -- I have six children, too) -- walking around a parking lot is more dangerous than sitting strapped in a carseat. Since 1994, 500 children have been killed in backover accidents. Most of these in their own driveway, but of course parking lots carry that risk as well. How many children have been killed in carjackings in that time? By cars spontaneously exploding?
I choose, purposefully, to minimize the amount of time my children spend in parking lots. I have 2 hands and five children. When we get to the car, they get in and buckle up. I lock the car and return the cart. However, I also make it a habit to park near a cart bin thing. I try to minimize risks, but hereagain there is no way to eliminate risk completely. This is what I do because it's what I am most comfortable with. You might be more comfortable taking yours with you and that is fine, too. All the risks we are talking about are low, but when you spread them over a large population like ours in the US, you will find isolated incidents of them occuring. It's sad, but you cannot eliminate these risks. While googling, I ran across a story of a woman whose child was shot during a carjacking while she was putting the child in his carseat. There is no way to eliminate all risk to yourself and your sweet babies. Sad, but true.