It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Originally posted by MastaShake
leaving any child under like 10 outside while you go take a nap is a pretty stupid idea. hes gonna have plenty of time to nap on his choices in prison though.
under 10? seriously? There is a such thing as overprotective too you know.
Originally posted by schuyler
Originally posted by smithjustinb
If I have a dog in a fence and the dog gets out and kills someone, I should be responsible? Are you joking?
No joke. You are responsible. If you are so inept as to not be able to contain your dog, that just shows more irresponsibility. It's called "negligence." People are responsible for their pets' actions. What don't you get about that? This is a legal concept. I don't really care if you don't think you are responsible; you are anyway. I really hope you never have to find out. Perhaps this story will motivate you to take the proper action in regards to your own pets. For people who don't get it, this is your wake up call. Pay attention--and carry lots of insurance.
Originally posted by MastaShake
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Originally posted by MastaShake
leaving any child under like 10 outside while you go take a nap is a pretty stupid idea. hes gonna have plenty of time to nap on his choices in prison though.
under 10? seriously? There is a such thing as overprotective too you know.
i live in brooklyn bro, if you wanna let your 10 year old daughter walk around by herself be my guest. i however wont.
Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Originally posted by smithjustinb
If I have a dog in a fence and the dog gets out and kills someone, I should be responsible? Are you joking?
The dog owner IS responsible in the type of case you said (getting out of the fence.)
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Yeah, I understand that that's how it is, but I don't understand how its fair and just. People should not be responsible for "pet's" actions. "Pet's" should be responsible for their own actions.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Originally posted by smithjustinb
If I have a dog in a fence and the dog gets out and kills someone, I should be responsible? Are you joking?
The dog owner IS responsible in the type of case you said (getting out of the fence.)
Yeah I know the dog owner IS responsible, but SHOULD they be? I think absolutely not.
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
how you not hear it ? somethings up. the sleeping story is either a lie or he was high
hey, I know parents are awfully tired during those times, but their hearing is also very tuned in for baby noises
the baby being killed is pretty much the definition of neglect
Originally posted by MastaShake
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Yeah, I understand that that's how it is, but I don't understand how its fair and just. People should not be responsible for "pet's" actions. "Pet's" should be responsible for their own actions.
The stupidity of this post baffles me. i honestly dont know how to respond.
Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
Originally posted by smithjustinb
If I have a dog in a fence and the dog gets out and kills someone, I should be responsible? Are you joking?
The dog owner IS responsible in the type of case you said (getting out of the fence.)
Yeah I know the dog owner IS responsible, but SHOULD they be? I think absolutely not.
Simple logic here - "OWN" - that's the whole "legal" clincher in one word for you.
See also - "Responsible Pet Ownership"
Edit: You do realize the father or family did not OWN the dog in the OP story right? They were dog-sitting.edit on 2/5/2012 by Trexter Ziam because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by smithjustinb
If my dog gets out of the cage and kills someone, you shouldn't put me in jail. Kill my dog, he's the only one who commited a "crime". Yeah yeah, I know. Technically I committed the crime, but what did I really do? Its not like I let the dog out of the cage, the dog got out on its own, probably in an unpredictable way. Its just not fair is all I'm saying.
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Originally posted by MastaShake
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Yeah, I understand that that's how it is, but I don't understand how its fair and just. People should not be responsible for "pet's" actions. "Pet's" should be responsible for their own actions.
The stupidity of this post baffles me. i honestly dont know how to respond.
If my dog gets out of the cage and kills someone, you shouldn't put me in jail. Kill my dog, he's the only one who commited a "crime". Yeah yeah, I know. Technically I committed the crime, but what did I really do? Its not like I let the dog out of the cage, the dog got out on its own, probably in an unpredictable way. Its just not fair is all I'm saying.
Originally posted by Trexter Ziam
For the OP's almost identical story - if I were judge he'd get a mandatory 2 year child rearing class (local college - early childhood education) at his own expense and maybe some community service.edit on 2/5/2012 by Trexter Ziam because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by smithjustinb
Ownership is a superficial