Do laws prevent bad things from happening?

[alabamagal]

Does having laws against actions reduce the occurance?

www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/health/hot-car-deaths-charts-trnd/index.html

The article says that "19 states have laws against leaving kids in cars".  If all states had this law, would it decrease car deaths?

Personally, I don't think more laws will make a difference.  Child car deaths from being left alone are either a mistake, intentional criminal activity or ignorance.  Having a law doesn't help.

[giramomma]

Well, speaking from experience...

Laws didn't make the peanut sleep any more. The only thing that did was turning 13 months.

And after her, I stopped being a judgy-pants about how a sleep deprived parent could leave their kid in a car somewhere.

I was lucky in that I had two older kids that could speak for her....

[Tiny]

It might not decrease the death tolls, but it might help speed up any legal actions. 

Maybe it helps to make the "justice" more even across cases sets guidelines for punishment.  So, one parent who accidentally kills their kid doesn't get the death penalty while another parent gets court supervision and community service.   

Maybe the law is to keep a family who's kid died from suing the car manufacturer (or the parking lot owner (where the kid died) or an employer). 

ADDED:  it might also provide "good Samaritan" verbiage so someone who's trying to help isn't punished.

[midjd]

Laws only help to the extent the activity being prohibited is a conscious/deliberate decision.

From what I've read, most kids-in-hot-car cases are accidental. The ones that aren't should be covered under existing murder/manslaughter laws if intent can be shown.  

I also think any parent who has to live with the knowledge they accidentally caused their child's death has been punished enough. 

[Tennesseer]

Jun 13, 2017 15:26:46 GMT -5 midjd said:

Laws only help to the extent the activity being prohibited is a conscious/deliberate decision.

From what I've read, most kids-in-hot-car cases are accidental. The ones that aren't should be covered under existing murder/manslaughter laws if intent can be shown.  

I also think any parent who has to live with the knowledge they accidentally caused their child's death has been punished enough. 

We had an 'accidental' death here in town yesterday. A child was left on a day care van. Even though it is the law here for day care centers to have two employees check the vans to make sure the first employee didn't missed a child, a child was missed and died.

A few years ago, my city had two separate child/left in car deaths on the same day. Why these deaths continue is beyond me other than adults are careless.

[zibazinski]

How do you miss a child in a car seat ? Theyre as big as Ft Knox and practically take up the entire back seat. I don't think these are accidents at all by the parents.

[justme]

Have you never driven somewhere and once you get there wondered how the fuck you got there? Where you don't remember the ride? I've had that happen a lot and no kids.

I remember in college I was driving home after hanging out all night after a party. Sober by then but I had been up for over 24 hours. I had been chatting with my friend in the passenger seat knowing I needed to drop her off and she still had to tell at me where the hell was I going when I turned to my apt on memory instead of hers. And the yelling was after she was pointing in my face to the left as I was turning right ignoring her pointing.

Add in rear facing until 3 or beyond...

[Tennesseer]

Put one of the two shoes you are wearing in the back seat of the vehicle you are driving.  You won't forget toput on your shoe once you get to your destination.   Better yet, put it in the child's car seat. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 13, 2017 15:18:04 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

Jun 13, 2017 15:08:35 GMT -5 alabamagal said:

Does having laws against actions reduce the occurance?

www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/health/hot-car-deaths-charts-trnd/index.html

The article says that "19 states have laws against leaving kids in cars".  If all states had this law, would it decrease car deaths?

Personally, I don't think more laws will make a difference.  Child car deaths from being left alone are either a mistake, intentional criminal activity or ignorance.  Having a law doesn't help.

Considering your article says this: 

According to NoHeatStroke.org, Texas had the most such deaths from 1998 to 2015, with 100. Florida had 72 deaths, California had 44, Arizona had 30 and North Carolina had 24.

and the top 3 have laws on the books,  I'd say the laws aren't really helping. 

You could be confusing cause and effect, though. Perhaps its because hot car deaths are so common that these states enacted laws.

Also, (with apologies for mentioning the obvious) Texas, Florida, California, and Arizona are America's hottest and most populous states.

[Opti]

Laws I thought were mostly created for consequences when something bad occurs. If the law actually has any effect on the situation happening less often, that's just gravy.

And sometimes because of the consequences of a law, people do the wrong thing in hopes of avoiding them. An idiot 19 yr. old Mom left her toddlers in a car for 15 hours. She did not get help for them right away because she was worried of what might happen so bathed them or something before it got obvious it wasn't going to work. So the poor toddlers got to the hospital later than they should have and they didn't make it.

[hoops902]

In general, yes, laws against actions reduces occurrences. The caveat is that this applies likely to intentional acts, not unintentional acts.

You have to look at the law and the circumstances. If we start with the premise that nobody really intends to kill their kid like this...then laws won't help for the most part.  What it might do is help prevent a few deaths...someone sees a kid in a car alone, calls the cops or something. Those kids might get taken and placed with someone more attentive. In general though, having a law here won't do much to save lives.

For laws on things people do intentionally, then yes, I think making it illegal helps reduce the action. For example...if it were legal to punch people in the face, I'd do a lot more of it. I don't do it now because I don't want to get arrested. 

[Pants]

Look, I personally can attest that the only reason I have murdered zero people thus far in my life is that it is very illegal and I don't want to go to prison.

[swamp]

Jun 14, 2017 8:21:43 GMT -5 Pants said:

Look, I personally can attest that the only reason I have murdered zero people thus far in my life is that it is very illegal and I don't want to go to prison.

I look horrible in orange horizontal stripes.

[Pants]

Jun 14, 2017 8:23:49 GMT -5 swamp said:

Jun 14, 2017 8:21:43 GMT -5 Pants said:

Look, I personally can attest that the only reason I have murdered zero people thus far in my life is that it is very illegal and I don't want to go to prison.

I look horrible in orange horizontal stripes.

Yup. Orange is NOT my new black. 

I could get down with all the lesbianism though. TBD. 

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 14, 2017 8:21:43 GMT -5 Pants said:

Look, I personally can attest that the only reason I have murdered zero people thus far in my life is that it is very illegal and I don't want to go to prison.

I can't say for certain but I'd bet a frightening percentage of people reach at least one point in their lives where they'd assault or murder another human being if not for the consequences. For murder, I'd bet 1 in 10, if not higher.

The other obvious benefit of laws (aside from deterrence and justice for victims) is that they tell society what is right and what is wrong. The immorality of something like murder is evident to most, but we also have laws to prevent speeding, walking on grass, shoving people on the subway, etc. that not everybody considers inherently wrong. If Joe is driving too fast and I try to convince him of this, it helps immensely to say, "Look, going 60 in a 30 zone is against the law. You're going too bloody fast. This is not just my opinion."

[zibazinski]

I just don't believe people leave their children in their cars accidentally. If I'm driving like a zombie, I have no business driving period. Let alone bring responsible for another. Your back seat is clearly visible when you get out of your car. Most women put their purse in the passenger seat so there's another opportunity to notice. If parents who pull this stunt get charged with premeditated murder, because that's what it is, I think it'd curtail the "accidents" a lot. You murder your baby, your ass in in jail, period.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 14, 2017 11:05:38 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

I just don't believe people leave their children in their cars accidentally. If I'm driving like a zombie, I have no business driving period. Let alone bring responsible for another. Your back seat is clearly visible when you get out of your car. Most women put their purse in the passenger seat so there's another opportunity to notice. If parents who pull this stunt get charged with premeditated murder, because that's what it is, I think it'd curtail the "accidents" a lot. You murder your baby, your ass in in jail, period.

Read this 2009 article by Gene Weingarten (it won him a well-deserved Pulitzer). It's long and quite disturbing in places, but I implore you to read all of it.

It helped me to cement my opinion on the subject.

[naughtybear]

I've driven to work back in the day with a nine month old in the back seat. I've also got into a car accident without the kids in the back but because they mostly were I told the police officers they were.


It's conditioning, habit etc

[Deleted]

I operate on auto-pilot a lot and feel bad for the parents that forget their kids in the car.  Usually it was just due to some change in routine that led to the fatal forgetful moment.  I think there are better ways to prevent than laws.  This woman I work with has this little do-hicky that clips to her kids clothes.  There is a receiver on her car keys and if they get more than 20 feet from the clip it starts to beep. 

[muttleynfelix]

There are in my opinion 3 levels of leaving kids in the car.

1. The I deliberately did it because I am running into the gas station for a minute on a cool day and it is easier, quicker and possibly safer to leave the kids in the car. There has been a major uptick in this being classified as a crime which is ridiculous and contributes to the stress a parent feels of being judged all the time.

2. There is the deliberate for whatever reason leaving the kid in the car for longer than 10 minutes. This is a crime and should continue to be a crime.

3. Then there is the accidental parent thinks the kid is at daycare, with the other parent, etc. This law isn't going to change that. Raising awareness about how this can happen to anyone is important. The problem with parenting today is that there is no such thing as an accident, because if there is than it can happen to you. The gorilla in Cincinnati, the alligator at Disney, the first response is to always blame the parent because if you don't you acknowledge that maybe you can't keep your kids safe 100% of the time.

[thyme4change]

The biggest problem is that the main job and responsibilities our government (on all levels) is to make laws. We even call them 'our lawmakers.' And they are the only cohesive group we have. So everyone takes their problem to their representative. And if that problem is that babies are being left in hot cars, what can they honestly do? So, they do the thing their job description says - they write a law. They hope that the passing of the law will generate some press, which they can call "awareness" and then they hope a NFP will pick up the cause and continue education.

If we had a department of "things everyone should know, but appantly we have to tell people on a pretty regular basis" and we gave them a budget to do radio ads, and billboards and whatever to constantly remind people to look for a baby in their back seat, to get their colon checked, to use birth control, to eat vegetables, to lock their doors at night, etc. etc. Right now we hope some advocacy group will do all of that.

Now, if we need the government to do some education on something someone can make a profit from - then we get a lobbyist.

[tskeeter]

Jun 13, 2017 15:08:35 GMT -5 alabamagal said:

Does having laws against actions reduce the occurance?

www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/health/hot-car-deaths-charts-trnd/index.html

The article says that "19 states have laws against leaving kids in cars".  If all states had this law, would it decrease car deaths?

Personally, I don't think more laws will make a difference.  Child car deaths from being left alone are either a mistake, intentional criminal activity or ignorance.  Having a law doesn't help.

Agree with your final statement.

I think there are lots of situations where our lawmakers enact laws just to look like they are doing something.  "You pay us to legislate so we will legislate, whether the laws are effective or not". A prime example is our cellphone use restrictions while driving.  All of the analysis shows that being engaged in a conversation while driving is distracting.  But we don't restrict the distracting conversations, we restrict holding a cellphone.  But, we don't restrict holding other things, such as coffee cups or burgers, which are probably at least as distracting as holding a cellphone.  Apparently we check all rational thought at the legislative chamber door.

[tskeeter]

Jun 14, 2017 14:41:37 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

The biggest problem is that the main job and responsibilities our government (on all levels) is to make laws. We even call them 'our lawmakers.' And they are the only cohesive group we have. So everyone takes their problem to their representative. And if that problem is that babies are being left in hot cars, what can they honestly do? So, they do the thing their job description says - they write a law. They hope that the passing of the law will generate some press, which they can call "awareness" and then they hope a NFP will pick up the cause and continue education.

If we had a department of "things everyone should know, but appantly we have to tell people on a pretty regular basis" and we gave them a budget to do radio ads, and billboards and whatever to constantly remind people to look for a baby in their back seat, to get their colon checked, to use birth control, to eat vegetables, to lock their doors at night, etc. etc. Right now we hope some advocacy group will do all of that.

Now, if we need the government to do some education on something someone can make a profit from - then we get a lobbyist.

Reflects our expectation that rules can replace common sense and good judgement?

[Deleted]

Laws help keep married folks from killing one another. The fear of being locked up for life brings shivers up the spine.

[hoops902]

Jun 14, 2017 11:56:09 GMT -5 muttleynfelix said:

There are in my opinion 3 levels of leaving kids in the car.

1. The I deliberately did it because I am running into the gas station for a minute on a cool day and it is easier, quicker and possibly safer to leave the kids in the car. There has been a major uptick in this being classified as a crime which is ridiculous and contributes to the stress a parent feels of being judged all the time.

2. There is the deliberate for whatever reason leaving the kid in the car for longer than 10 minutes. This is a crime and should continue to be a crime.

3. Then there is the accidental parent thinks the kid is at daycare, with the other parent, etc. This law isn't going to change that. Raising awareness about how this can happen to anyone is important. The problem with parenting today is that there is no such thing as an accident, because if there is than it can happen to you. The gorilla in Cincinnati, the alligator at Disney, the first response is to always blame the parent because if you don't you acknowledge that maybe you can't keep your kids safe 100% of the time.

1. While I think there's nothing inherently dangerous about this situation, I understand why it's a crime. Part of the benefit of having this as a crime is that people can do SOMETHING when they see a kid left in a car alone without worrying about how long the kid has been in the car. I want people to be able to break out windows and get a kid out of a car they're in, and I don't want those people worrying that the parent has only been gone for 5 minutes and now they're going to have to pay for the window because they were trying to do something good. It also relates to point #3 in that I don't want people to be in the habit of leaving kids in a car...that simply reinforces the habit for times it becomes more dangerous.

2.  Again, I just don't like the idea of time limits.  That's too difficult to judge for parents in many cases and harder to do something about for non-lethal cases where it may have happened.

3.  There are such things as accidents...but as in most things...accidents can be prevented.  Most people are frankly just too lazy to worry about preventing them because they think they'll never happen.  These accidents happen because of habit...people get into a habit of driving somewhere without the kid and then forget them when they do have them.  People can get into different habits to prevent this if they really cared to. 

[Deleted]

Can you imagine the London terrorist attacks without gun laws? 

[billisonboard]

A potential benefit of prosecuting in this circumstance would be that it forces the person to focus on the court case in the immediate.  Finding guilty/plea bargain and imposing a community service penalty (talks with young parents on this danger?) would set up a situation in which once the hours are served "society" could say, "You have paid for what happened, it is time to move on."  Not that they necessarily would, but they might.

[Virgil Showlion]

Jun 16, 2017 11:16:32 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

A potential benefit of prosecuting in this circumstance would be that it forces the person to focus on the court case in the immediate.  Finding guilty/plea bargain and imposing a community service penalty (talks with young parents on this danger?) would set up a situation in which once the hours are served "society" could say, "You have paid for what happened, it is time to move on."  Not that they necessarily would, but they might.

I thought about that too--that completing the terms imposed by the court might bring a sense of closure. Of course, the price is having to listen to an ME describe the grizzly death of your child in clinical detail, and if that doesn't traumatize a person, I don't know what would.