Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The point is that there are other distracting things going on, including overhearing others' conversations and any thoughts the driver has about what she is overhearing.
Distracted driving is a big killer on the nations highways. I wasn't there. Neither were you. The driver was.
If the baby was out of control screaming, (which we will not know unless there is a video tape otherwise it's a "he said, she said" deal), then it's not just about this woman, it's about the other passengers on the bus.
The other passengers sympathized with the woman with the baby however...
Quote:
"The driver said, 'If you don't like it, you can get off the bus,'" Chapman said.
She and several other passengers did. Then the bus pulled up several feet and stopped again. "Every single person got off the bus, and it was a full bus, with just two empty seats," Chapman said.
The real issue, is that Trimet has a lot of grumpy, old a-holes driving their buses. They yell at you if tell them you don't need a transfer, come close to running over pedestrians and bike riders because they're not paying attention(occasionally actually running them over and killing them), don't look when changing lanes, or cause buses to be late when they take an extra 5 minute break. It's funny that a Trimet bus driver will kick off a mom with a baby, when they never have the balls to kick off the bat-s**t crazy people who smell like feces or teenage punks talking smack sitting in the back of the bus... As long as no one messes with their cushy pensions or union-mandated benefits, they could give a crap if they look like jerks.
I completely disagree. The passengers are saying it was not bothersome, how is it that the driver was so distracted by it? Yes, talking on a cell phone is distracting but so is carrying on a conversation in the car with someone else, which if I'm not mistaken, was also going on on that bus. The bus was full. It was probably pretty loud on the bus, actually. To say the baby crying was the most distracting thing going on is disingenuous.
What was distracting the driver and what was bothering a few of the passengers could have been different. None of us really know what happened. I have to see things like this discussed for that reason. We really were not there to witness how loud the baby was crying or if it was causing problems. It is all hearsay.
Public service cannot discriminate.
A crying baby is not an illegal thing.
Someone's civil liberties were refused by a public employee.
Very good acurrate point. The Mother and baby were definitely discriminated against. Why because of a screaming a baby. And how many of us in our lifetimes had screaming babies we could not handle.
If i were the Mother, i would see if there is anything she can do about this. Discrimination is exactly that. A little compassion does help in these situations, but i also know on the other hand, a screaming baby screaming at the top of his or her lungs, can also, make someone literally crazy. The bus driver could of pulled over just for a bit, and asked the Mother, if there is anything we can do to help you.
But we do not get patience and understanding today, this is what we get, no compassion at all.
Good for the bus driver. There is no reason every other passenger or the driver should have to put up with a screaming kid. Put her off...when she gets the kid quieted down she can take the next bus. Why is it an issue?
Nothing more irritating than a kid who won't stop screaming
As one who worked in a closed environment where screaming infants were the number one complaint I had to deal with (airplane flights), my sympathies are obviously skewed in favor of the bus driver.
"Sustained Exposure May Cause Hearing Loss" includes Baby Crying in the same category as Power Mower and Dog Kennel.
Obviously, the definition of "sustained" will be subjective.
The mother was insensitive in that she attempted to soothe the screaming baby but saw no reason HER travel plans should have been inconvenienced when she was unsuccessful.
As one who worked in a closed environment where screaming infants were the number one complaint I had to deal with (airplane flights), my sympathies are obviously skewed in favor of the bus driver.
"Sustained Exposure May Cause Hearing Loss" includes Baby Crying in the same category as Power Mower and Dog Kennel.
Obviously, the definition of "sustained" will be subjective.
The mother was insensitive in that she attempted to soothe the screaming baby but saw no reason HER travel plans should have been inconvenienced when she was unsuccessful.
It absolutely would be a frivolous lawsuit.
The issue would be how disruptive the baby was. Since a full busload of people got off the bus in protest of the driver's actions, it would be the driver versus what, forty people, who said the baby wasn't all that loud.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
