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.
Study is for children less than five and considers presence to be touching or within reach of a child.
Acutally silly when you think about it. If you are holding the kids hand he is likely safer than if not...but it is going to get awkward when he starts dating.
Supervision of young children is vital for their survival. I hope parents take this to heart and consider this parenting responsibility seriously so that there are no more avoidable tragedies like this one.
I'm not sure what your handicap, how it would result in you falling behind the booths, or the effectiveness of your stink eye, but we can argue until the cows come home and it is still the parents' not the restaurant's responsibility to keep their kid safe.
I know. I know. There is a pinch point and there was some redesign several years ago and the courts may award a sizable sum to the parents.
It is still the parent's responsibility.
They knew this was a revolving restaurant. This was hardly a surprise.
Nerves in my lower legs are shot and one ankle droops. If I loose balance I have only 50% chance I will catch myself. I am big and when I go down it is general spectacular but harmless. But there clearly is a zone on the one set of pictures where I could go in head first and the design is almost a funnel aiming you if you are unfortunate to trip in that direction.
Yes it is the parents responsibility to rationally protect their child. So far there is no evidence they did not do so.
But it is still the task of the restaurant to make it as safe as is rationally possible. They did not do so and that is clear now.
Supervision of young children is vital for their survival. I hope parents take this to heart and consider this parenting responsibility seriously so that there are no more avoidable tragedies like this one.
We cannot child-proof the entire world.
Snowflakes think we can. Of course, we can't. But snowflakes aren't equipped to function in the real world.
Yes it is the parents responsibility to rationally protect their child. So far there is no evidence they did not do so.
Actually, there is. The police officer quoted said both that the child wandered away from the table where his parents were, and that he had lost sight of his parents.
Actually, there is. The police officer quoted said both that the child wandered away from the table where his parents were, and that he had lost sight of his parents.
In addition, I understand that the restaurant makes a full 360 degree rotation over a one hour period. That would mean it is moving extremely slow requiring at least a few minutes or more to pin the child. This would indicate that no attention was given to the wandering child for a critical period of time.
Snowflakes think we can. Of course, we can't. But snowflakes aren't equipped to function in the real world.
Your post get all the way into weird. The modern generation of helicopter mothers are vastly more involved and protective of their children than we were. My daughters claim it is because there is more crime and such then when they were young. And that of course is utter balderdash. The environment for US children is vastly safer today that it was 45 years ago as my children got into it.
And these "snowflakes" as you term them are overly protective of their children to the extent that I worry about how well they will handle the transition into adulthood.
But you think these "snowflakes" are not supervising? Weird.
In addition, I understand that the restaurant makes a full 360 degree rotation over a one hour period. That would mean it is moving extremely slow requiring at least a few minutes or more to pin the child. This would indicate that no attention was given to the wandering child for a critical period of time.
Smash a head completely in 10 seconds. Probably do fatal damage in 1/3 that time.
I think what has happened is that many kids spend the majority of their waking hours in daycare these days and many parents get so used to others watching their kids just don't key into that.
When Mothers only spend limited time with their kids, they don't develop that "I brought you into this world and I can take you out," "sit down and I mean this instant," influence.
Parents don't want to cause a ruckus in the few hours a week they spend with them, so they just put up with things and expect the rest of the world to do the same.
Your post get all the way into weird. The modern generation of helicopter mothers are vastly more involved and protective of their children than we were.
Really? They let their 5 year old wander unsupervised in a rotating restaurant, and other snowflakes jump to their defense instead of asking, "Why in the hell weren't you supervising your 5 year old."
Smash a head completely in 10 seconds. Probably do fatal damage in 1/3 that time.
How many degrees do you think the restaurant would revolve in 10 seconds considering that it completes a revolution of 360 degrees in 60 minutes?
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.
