Re: Boy, 10, gets locked in gun safe at Sam's Club

["Brian Loe" <knobdy () gmail com>]

On 8/14/07, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:

> Umm.. I see no mention of anybody writing a ticket to anybody in the actual
> article.  And my copy of Firefox's "find" function doesn't find the string
> 'icket' anywhere in the page.

There was no mention of a ticket.

> There *is* a mention of the fire department ordering the safes be taken off
> the sales floor, which seems reasonable.  For all your talk of parents
> abdicating their responsibilities, at least the fire department realizes
> that children *will* run off in the split-second the parental's back is turned
> and they *will* try stunts like that. The legal term for it is "attractive
> nuisance".

I have two children who are not allowed to "run off". How many
children do you have and how often do they "run off"?

> I'm glad to see that *your* kids are so afraid of parental retribution that
> they don't ever dare step more than 6 inches away from where they're supposed
> to be.  However, in the real world, kids *do* stop to look at stuff, and
> wander off, and all the other things that normal kids do.

Normal kids should behave their parents, normal parents make their
children behave them.

My kids will stop and look at things, as will I. That's not an issue.

My guess is that if you do have children they wouldn't last long in my
house, if not because I would beat them senseless for being
disrespectful cretins then because I have loaded guns around and your
children wouldn't understand the first thing about discipline, let
alone gun safety.


> >                                          I feel a lawsuit coming on -
> > against Sam's Club for having dangerous storage devices on the sales floor;
>
> I could see that happening, if harm had come.  Let's face it - if a store
> manager *isn't* thinking to themselves "What trouble could the average 6 year
> old that we see in this store all the time get into with this display unit"
> they shouldn't be the store manager. (The same logic applies to end-cap displays
> that are stacked high and present a collapse hazard).

And this is the problem with the legal system these days. People like
you gave us the warning signs on everything from folding ladders to
McDonald's coffee. Excuse me if I find my intelligence insulted by
such things - and feel sorry for the company, not the idiot who won a
lawsuit for being stupid.

As for harm, I have no doubt this boy is now scarred for life emotionally.

> > Winchester for making a gun safe without an internal exit handle and the
>
> This one is a definite no-brainer, given that the various companies that make
> refrigerators already went through this *decades* ago.  Congress finally
> passed the Refrigerator Safety Act, mandating that all refrigerators manufactured
> after 1958 be openable from inside with merely a push - that's why almost
> all have a magnetic seal rather than a latching mechanism.  (Yes, a lot of
> kids still got killed in the old ones after they got discarded and kids played
> with them - that's why they recommend taking the door off completely when
> tossing them).

Yeah, no brainer. Just what I want on my safe - any safe - the ability
to simply pull on the handle and have it open. What a boon to thieves
that would be. How about you not climb into a safe in the first place?
Too easy?


> >                                                         Then, after the
> > lawsuits, there will be legislation...oh boy, what fun that will be.
>
> Legislation didn't seem to hurt the refrigerator or auto industries, but it
> *did* save a few dozen kid's lives every year.

Evolution in reverse....if only you had as much sympathy for the gene
pool as you do for stupid kids and kids with stupid parents (usually
one and the same).
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.