• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Child Restraints?? Really???

Similar argument can be made with food and baby proofing your house, etc. it is annoying and yes a lot of us survived growing up in houses without locks in kitchen cabinets, riding in the back of a pick up truck and never using a baby seat - none of my four brothers ever used a baby seat for instance. However, some didn't survive, some kids did die, probably very few... the point of theses "modern" safety laws is to reduce the number of those deaths, not every kid is born from a smart parent and the live of our kids is not always in our hands, specially while driving.

Same thing with food, some times you hear "funny" comments like: "you worry to much about your kids food, organic?? There are kids in the ghetto that eat McDonald everyday and they are still alive"

The answer is, is been "alive" enough? Poor brain development, overweight kids, diabetics kids, etc... They grow old for sure but what a waste of live it can be .

Of course there is good enough and the there is too much too. "cumbersome to use too many straps baby seats"? It's Ok I guess. Helmet, elbow pads, knee pads, gloves while learning to ride a bike with training wheels, maybe that's too much. JMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aberdumbie
A girl I went to school with lost her little brother when he fell over on his (training wheel equipped) bike and hit his head on the corner of a raised brick flower bed. He got the bike for his birthday that morning and was just a few feet from being released by his dad when he took the tumble. This was pre bike helmet days so lack of a helmet didn't matter one way or the other, just saying. IMO safety regs, especially child safety, may seem to be an attempt to intrude into our personal decision making domain, especially when one has a long record of doing well in that area, but I also believe the vast majority of those regs were born from personal tragedy and a very well intentioned desire to save another parent from a lifetime of guilt, self recrimination, and second guessing.

When you consider the fact that Honda designed a blade clutch for their lawn mowers after losing a product liability suit to a couple of guys who lost their fingers trying to pick up a running mower to use as a hedge trimmer, the safety bar has to be incredibly high if it is going to be effective enough to save us all, but there seems to never be a shortage of starry eyed idealists foolish enough to believe we can save everyone if we just assume everyone is as thick as those fingerless, albeit wealthy sods and impose overly restrictive rules and regulations that assume the lowest common denominator is the whole of society.
 
Welcome to parenting. I think you've got two separate issues here.

First, you get to decide how much modern safety apparatus your kids need. The child seats are required by law. Bike helmets aren't. The only anecdote I can offer is that my kids have always been required to wear bike helmets, and the idea that it's an imposition on their freedom wouldn't have occurred to them at age three -- that's purely an issue for adults. Most of the kids in my locale have grown up thinking that a helmet is just a normal part of riding a bike.

Second, the judgment of the neighbors... that's been with us since time immoral.
In the People's Republic of California, bicycle riders under the age of 16 are required by law to wear helmets.
 
State by state bicycle helmet laws:
bicyclists-1024x593.jpg

Source: Bicycle helmet use
 
My kids stayed in helmets at all times until the age of 12. Even then they had to wear them for any trip that entailed going over a slow speed or rough terrain. I don't require them to wear one to travel a little over walking speed on our public bike trail taking pictures of wildlife and scenarios like that. Judging by their behavior when they don't know I'm observing I think I'm doing a decent job communicating proper safety, even in in different situations. However, if they were required at all time it would make little difference to me. I'd just do it.
 
In the spirit of the thread, if you're not wearing suitable attire; pads, an approved helmet and a chastity belt, give me back my skatie and get outta my pool.

This thread rocks. You guys ROCK! … So, rock me, Baby…. It's OK. Let 'em fly. I'm wearing adequate padding. My bubble-wrap is like a shield of steel!

But in the spirit of child protection and general safety, laws hopefully were never envisioned to encumber the good guys. We still benefit though, when things go wrong. Laws are an unfortunate complication. They are, in practical terms, most often a sledgehammer to crack open that egg of potential disaster - it's not 'the greatest good for the greatest number' but the greatest good for all. In this pursuit, we still fail - as do lots of our laws - but at least we fail to a lesser degree. Abuse is a bad, bad thing, whichever way you look at it. Always, better to be safe than sorry.

These videos have nothing whatsoever to do with the OP but everything to do with protecting our fellow citizens, and sometimes from themselves - it's evidence that the task is impossible but still fundamentally worthwhile. Note well that young Chloe was wearing a helmet, at least for a while. She needed much more help and it was not given. Why not? That's a good question.

This is serious, not in the spirit of the thread. But I understand all too well why people get so upset. Who was it said, 'this is why we can't have nice things.'? Hats off to that individualist.










 
I get it. I have raised three generations of kids. I got great grandkids. All are healthy and whole... Just struggling with all the regulation that infers I'm not adept enough to keep kids healthy.

Bluntly, get over it. It's part of life, an unfortunate side effect of those so ignorant that they need to be told how to keep a child from serious injury.
 
In the spirit of the thread, if you're not wearing suitable attire; pads, an approved helmet and a chastity belt, give me back my skatie and get outta my pool.

This thread rocks. You guys ROCK! … So, rock me, Baby…. It's OK. Let 'em fly. I'm wearing adequate padding. My bubble-wrap is like a shield of steel!

But in the spirit of child protection and general safety, laws hopefully were never envisioned to encumber the good guys. We still benefit though, when things go wrong. Laws are an unfortunate complication. They are, in practical terms, most often a sledgehammer to crack open that egg of potential disaster - it's not 'the greatest good for the greatest number' but the greatest good for all. In this pursuit, we still fail - as do lots of our laws - but at least we fail to a lesser degree. Abuse is a bad, bad thing, whichever way you look at it. Always, better to be safe than sorry.

These videos have nothing whatsoever to do with the OP but everything to do with protecting our fellow citizens, and sometimes from themselves - it's evidence that the task is impossible but still fundamentally worthwhile. Note well that young Chloe was wearing a helmet, at least for a while. She needed much more help and it was not given. Why not? That's a good question.

This is serious, not in the spirit of the thread. But I understand all too well why people get so upset. Who was it said, 'this is why we can't have nice things.'? Hats off to that individualist.













Ok... Boneheads like that have no business tending children. It's folks like this that cause the rest of us to have our better judgment preordained for us. And that in itself is my issue.

Look, yesterday I was all hopped up on cake and ice cream. A dangerous combination for an old guy. I should have never opened the door..... And really.. The bike I was talking about is for a three year old. The thing is a glorified tricycle.

I take my kids safety more seriously than most really. Just rather nauseated that I live in a world that requires that the coffee shop has to warn me that my coffee is hot and one that has people foolish enough to require that all safety concerns be legislated. That's all.

I am over the cake and ice cream rush and apologize for opening a delicate door here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhm555 and Tom Bomb
No apologies needed. You don't like safety regulations. Fine. Nobody is asking to "require that all safety concerns be legislated." That's a straw man. I think that taking those regulations personally is an overreaction. Nobody was thinking of your precious sensibilities when crafting those regulations -- they were looking at actuarial tables.

I visit coffee shops regularly, yet I've never been warned about the coffee being hot.
 
When I was seven years old, my mother was taking me to guitar lessons. A car ran a red light in front of her and she slammed on the breaks. I was not wearing a seatbelt and my head smashed the windshield.

Yes, our parents didn't use seatbelts and chain smoked in the car with the windows rolled up, but we've come a long way from that.
 
Ok... Boneheads like that have no business tending children. It's folks like this that cause the rest of us to have our better judgment preordained for us. And that in itself is my issue.

Look, yesterday I was all hopped up on cake and ice cream. A dangerous combination for an old guy. I should have never opened the door..... And really.. The bike I was talking about is for a three year old. The thing is a glorified tricycle.

I take my kids safety more seriously than most really. Just rather nauseated that I live in a world that requires that the coffee shop has to warn me that my coffee is hot and one that has people foolish enough to require that all safety concerns be legislated. That's all.

I am over the cake and ice cream rush and apologize for opening a delicate door here.
Yeah, I'm off the stuff too. Diabolical, it is. Too good.

Regarding coffee, my best friend at school had a coffee 'stain' on his upper torso that looked a lot like a topographic map of Italy. He suffered for years, those tender years of childhood, with shame and embarrassment. Awful. But I loved him anyway. He got used to it eventually.

The ones who raised him cared more about themselves than they cared about his welfare. That's a gross understatement and I can say that because I was in the fold and witnessed their true nature. His mother was a real bully. The coffee spill was accidental, I hope. The same kind of accident we see time and time again, even today. These horrendous, completely avoidable burns suffered by toddlers are not at all uncommon.

Hot things and kids don't mix. Crims and kids don't mix either yet we see these situations like the one in my post, and much much worse, wherever we care to look. This is all coming to a head and that's a good thing. I see this rubbish all the time, sometimes even from my lounge room window, and it breaks my heart every time. Spend some time in Casualty and you'll get the drift, as a visitor though. Stay upright.

Those at your coffee shop may care more about their bottom-line than they do about your welfare, but I wouldn't make that judgement on a hunch. Desperate people are prepared sometimes to hurt themselves just so they can pocket some compensation but accidents do happen. And those crappy paper-cups they dole out are a real deathtrap. I'd just be thankful that we've been warned - try and look on the bright side.

I know where you're coming from - I really do - and you have my utmost respect. Raising kids ain't easy. Childhood should be fun and hassle-free. Your childhood experiences are a lot like mine I imagine, in some ways. I was a real thrill-seeker too, often on the razor's edge, and sports obsessed.

However, one of my most vivid memories is of the sound my head made when it hit the concrete in a local park. It echoed for such a distance people 150 + yards away turned immediately towards me to see what all the commotion was about. It was like a gunshot or a thunderclap.

I'd come off the top of an eight-foot ramp, that should never have been built, at speed - a stupid, badly engineered, virtually unridable steel Council sponsored skateboard ramp, one of many that were consequently torn down not long after my undoing. This was in the latish eighties.

I determined that I'd sit up all night, bought two longnecks of beer, one for the googie egg bursting like an alien outta my skull. I was fearful that, if I went to sleep, I may never wake up again. We treat concussion differently these days - maybe we're making some progress, praise be to grog. Sleep, it is a blessed thing, especially when you've been hammered by the planet.

If it occurred today, I'd have been wearing a stack hat, without doubt - eminently sensible, trust me. And there'd be no worries, there would've been no lump whatsoever on this ol' noggin of mine, the beer would still be in the ridgy didge waiting for better daze, and nobody would be the wiser ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatSquare
It's a result of litigation. Check out a McDonald's coffee cup sometime.

Just about every warning label out there can usually be traced back to some moron that sued some company for not expressly stating "Don't do this".
What result? See post #52:
I visit coffee shops regularly, yet I've never been warned about the coffee being hot.
As for lawsuits, they are the only way for the public to enforce discipline on corporations.
 
It's a result of litigation. Check out a McDonald's coffee cup sometime.

Just about every warning label out there can usually be traced back to some moron that sued some company for not expressly stating "Don't do this".
I was all set to use the hair dryer while I was still in the shower, so I could save a couple of minutes, but then I read the warning label on the cord:D
 
+1
Over-regulation demeans us by insulting our intelligence. It robs us of dignity, as it is meant to do.

I was in an airport bar in Salt Lake, awaiting a connecting flight, when this great old cowboy stepped up to the bar. He was eighty if he was a day, but when he ordered a NON-ALCOHOLIC BEER, the bartenders requested ID.
And when I complained on Pop's behalf, as is my surly wont, I was met with major stinkeye and "Yer not a terrorist, are you, Pal?" after-glances. It is a racket, I tell ya. Junior's helmet included.

Gotta ask.....was the request for ID a law, or rather a restaurant policy? Furthermore, was the "stink eye" an inclination to believe you are a terrorist plotting the downfall of western civilization, or rather annoyance that you interjected yourself into a situation in which you didn't belong?

Around these parts, the laws vary. Everyone has to show ID to buy package beer, but restaurants and bars can use their discretion. That said, many choose to card everyone anyway and avoid the inevitable "discriminated" patron.