Really?? You couldn't be bothered to bathe your child and tuck him in first BEFORE you started playing around on Facebook? That's just ridiculous. You can't leave a one-year old baby alone in a bathtub and expect him to be fine.
Baby drowns in bathtub, Mother busy on Facebook
- Thread starter Boneasse
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actually I believe, though I could be wrong, that America has started to employ the "Guilty until Proven Innocent" clause instead. So actually it might be presumed that she's guilty now until her defence, if she goes for it, proves her innocent.Pirate Kitty said:
Just my two cents
Oh, get into semantics all you want, but she left a 1 year old in a tub of water alone.Pirate Kitty said:
It's neglect, and she confessed.
Plus, I mean, the situation is that a one year old baby drowned in a tub. The only scenario that absolves the one who put them in the tub from guilt is:
a: They were forcibly removed from the area.
b:medical issue, loss of consciousness, and seizure.
She's not being charged with manslaughter or murder, but neglect, yes, she was guilty of neglect.
Social Darwinism is a racist philosophy based around Darwin's work (though he disagreed with it) stating that because Whites are "more evolved" than other races, they are allowed to get away with whatever they want. It is a misunderstanding of the "survival of the fittest" term that people used to justify invading Africa. It has no connection to this story. You are thinking of "natural selection."Chibz said:
And it is very cruel to blame the baby for it's death. And to make fun of the situation.
Walking in on a dead person is the worst experience I have ever had.
Yeah...what's the significance of facebook, instead of say, pulling weeds out of the back garden?Bon_Clay said:
God fucking damn it, what is it with idiots letting their children die because they were playing one of Zangas shitty browser games?
Y'see, kinda like this. We're used to throwing around big words we saw on Law & Order, but don't know what they mean. Then we're shocked to find out there's something more complicated than "Something baaaad happened. GUILTY!!!" (and assumedly LIFEINPRISON/DEATHPENALTY!!! follows, because that's all we can think in)loremazd said:
I fail to see how Facebook has anything to do with this. Babies have drowned because of unaware parents for hundreds of years. She obviously didn't realise the need for constant supervision when a minor is in a bath. If it wasn't Facebook it could of been video games, hanging out the washing, a phone call or the television.
This isn't a case of social darwinism.Chibz said:
In fact social darwinism is a flawed theory to begin with, since it's basically a misunderstanding of Darwins theory of evolution of the species.
His theory covers competition and natural selection between different species. It does not cover the same thing between individuals, because such competition is largely based on what type of species we're talking about and only mainly applies to solitary animal species (like bears or sharks), not social animals (like ants, humans and other primates).
Bears and Sharks might have prospered because they compete for food and territory with eachother, but human beings would've never survived if they fought and competed for basic necessities when they were still a part of the natural food chain. Humans survived through altruism and cooperation.
You know that Hitler's batshit crazy philosiphy was basicly "Crude Social Darwinism", right? He believed his dreamed up race was superior and had to aquire resources and land to support it's growing needs, anyone else was sub-human, to be killed or enslaved. This lady was an idiot who let her child drown because appearantly Facebook is more important than her fucking baby, if she died, that would be Social Darwinism because she was the idiot "holding us back". It was her child who wasen't even 1 year old, no way to tell how it would have turned out.Chibz said:
Wow. Hate is such a strong word when used in it's proper context instead of used as a flipant remark which I don't think was your intended use.Chibz said:
Why hate babies? You are either seriously warped and disturbed or just a pathetic ignorant person who hates on something he can never have himself.
With that attitude I do hope for the sake of humanity you never procreate.
Agreed.Gindil said:
Then again, these things will never stop if we as a society keep insisting on that procreation is a "human right".
Perhap's it's time to actually impose some restrictions on who should be allowed to care for and raise children and who shouldn't?
That is so mean...but I still chuckled, damn.gl1koz3 said:
OT: Terrible story though, she wasn't fit to be a parent.
Ok, so there is a dead baby in a tub, the baby is one year old. How exactly is the one who put them in the tub not responsible for the baby? Unless your point is that i'm stupid or something. This is a clear cut situation as the method of death implies neglect for it to have occured in the first place.mr_rubino said:
Not only that, it's just an observation, we're saying, "given this information, and given the situation, we think if she gets formally charged will be found guilty, and if we were jurors seeing this information, we'd probably say the same." -Not- as you seem to insultingly assume, that we're detectives solving a case.
So if you have a counterclaim in that a dead one year old in a tub did not die because of neglect, then i'd love to hear it.
Ok, i'm gonna stop you here.Pirate Kitty said:
Because to be frank, there is no point in prefacing all information that you discuss with: "UNLESS THE POLICE ARE DIRTY LIARS"
So i'll restate my point in order to stop giving you inconsequential what ifs to poke at peoples statements:
"Assuming this information is has not been falsified, altered, or misleading to the reader, and assuming that no evidence is presented that counters this claim, it is my opinion that the mother neglected the child, and is responsible for its death."
It is quite a bit faster to type, "I think she's guilty," though.
That being said, I actually don't think she should be punished harshly. She made a bad judgement call and figured he'd be ok, that he was always ok before, and she paid enough for her mistake.
This was a terrible tragedy, but it's not Facebook's fault. It'd be like saying if someone went out into the alley and stabbed someone just after playing God of War or something. I wouldn't claim it was the game's fault, it's the person.
As for why she took so long to confess, I imagine she was pretty traumatized by the guilt and shame of killing her own child that she didn't want to admit it right away.
As for why she took so long to confess, I imagine she was pretty traumatized by the guilt and shame of killing her own child that she didn't want to admit it right away.