Snake Kills Baby

[jimmyj]

This is why more laws are needed - to protect those who can't protect themselves against stupid people.

Well said Don.

I hate to judge people who've lost a child but what in the heck were they thinking. Why have a python and a baby!!!

 

[20 20]

Are more "laws" really needed? Maybe more people with common sense would be better. Even with all the laws in the world it still won't help with idiots.

 

[wvpolekat]

Ok, for the "Why would anyone have a python and a baby" crowd.

Let me ask you this....

How much damage do you think Fido could do to the baby if left unsupervised?
How about the garbage disposal?
Your tractor?
Your car?
Your rifle/pistol?
Your kitchen knives?
Your meat grinder?
Your table saw?
Your wifes curling iron?

Since all of these items could potentially cause harm to a baby if not supervised, they should be banned, right? And we should have more laws about the safe storage and use of all of these right? I would argue that as a general rule, most of these are MORE dangerous than the python.

There are already laws about every bit of this, it all falls under "Child Endangerment".

More laws are very seldom, if ever the answer. We already have a law for just about everything you can possibly imagine. Just like more gun laws don't reduce gun crime, the person committing murder does not care if it is "more illegal" because of a gun law, they are already committing murder.

 

[polo1665]

You think that Fido could not do the same thing, if not worse if left unattended with a small child?

What, constrict the kid to death? No I don't think fido could do that. If you keep a dog around the house that is likely to do such a deed, I would suggest that you get rid of it. That type of animal does not fit under my description of "fido".
Heck, why not load your house up with tarantulas and scorpions, they're kinda cute, and surely no more dangerous than your average poodle.


Mark

 

[jimmyj]

Hey all. I took it that Don was being sarcastic. For the record, I completely do not support more nanny state laws. Sorry did not mean to get into the realm of politics.

Everything is dangerous, but a snake that is not secured and a baby is a crazy combination. I agree the dog is risky too and certainly child proofing is smart.

Too bad for the poor child.

 

[polo1665]

Ok, for the "Why would anyone have a python and a baby" crowd.

Let me ask you this....

How much damage do you think Fido could do to the baby if left unsupervised?
How about the garbage disposal?
Your tractor?
Your car?
Your rifle/pistol?
Your kitchen knives?
Your meat grinder?
Your table saw?
Your wifes curling iron?

Since all of these items could potentially cause harm to a baby if not supervised, they should be banned, right? And we should have more laws about the safe storage and use of all of these right? I would argue that as a general rule, most of these are MORE dangerous than the python.

There are already laws about every bit of this, it all falls under "Child Endangerment".

More laws are very seldom, if ever the answer. We already have a law for just about everything you can possibly imagine. Just like more gun laws don't reduce gun crime, the person committing murder does not care if it is "more illegal" because of a gun law, they are already committing murder.

First of all, I do not advocate more laws. I do advocate common sense, and keeping a python in an unsecure environment around a two year old child just don't get it. If you want to own a python that's fine, if you don't manage it properly and it causes this kind of grief, then you ought to be punished severily.

Oh, by the way, none of the inanimate objects that you mentioned are likely to escape from where they are kept and slither around looking for a meal. That is a significant difference to me. Nothing like a dog either, unless you keep hungry wolves around.

Mark

 

[/pine]

Even laws can't protect innocent children from stupid parents...

It is now being reported that they (parents) did not hold the required permits to keep the snake...now was there a required lock on the snake's enclosure

and BTW, the father is to be charged

 

[Sigarms]

It is now being reported that they (parents) did not hold the required permits to keep the snake...now was there a required lock on the snake's enclosure

Isn't it ironic that you needed a permit to keep the snake, but didn't need a permit to have children?

 

[txdon]

You are right. There already is a law for this: Murder

To put to a large animal known to kill for food, unsecured inside a house near food (a child).

IMO This goes beyond Child Endangerment.

This is like putting a loaded gun with the trigger pulled back into a kids toy box.

 

[wvpolekat]

Isn't it ironic that you needed a permit to keep the snake, but didn't need a permit to have children?

Well, not everyone doesn't need one. Took us almost a year of work to get our foster parent license and adoption homestudy done. I never want to repeat that.