The Nanny State

[todster]

Maybe with all the new media,dedicated news channels,internet etc they are just producing more crap stories.
Like the Sunday paper if nothing happens Saturday no news

 

[Happy]

That tax on 'alcopops' was absolutely rediculous!

...

Tax should not be used purely to reduce consumption.

But responsible drinking should be executed, to the point that person drinking is 100% responsible for actions.

Like say detah penalty for drink driving fatality - (hope you get my drift)

 

[Julia]

With my apologies to those on the PEN thread, I responded to gg's suggestion that, if his trade was less than successful, he'd seek solace with some cask wine and a cigar, with the following. I just can't believe the level governments will go to. If you disagree with this proposal, maybe send your local MP an email. Hard to know whether the suggestion derives from 'experts' who seem to imagine alcoholics won't drink cask wine if it's more expensive, or if the drive for this comes from a government anxious to rake in any tax from any source.

Make the most of being able to access that cheap cask, gg. The nanny state appears to be about to introduce a floor price on alcohol which will render the now cheap casks about three times more expensive.

The reason for this is the asinine suggestion that the aborigines specifically and other alcoholics will immediately desist from consuming this cask wine, their alcoholism magically having disappeared as a result of the price rise.

More likely they'll switch to other forms of alcohol which will, in quantity, be more harmful, or even seek solace in metho.

Meantime, many pensioners and others on low incomes, or for that matter just those who are happy to drink cask wine, will find it priced out of their budgets.

What elitist, illogical utter nonsense.

 

[breaker]

Maybe one should dust the still off

 

[Logique]

Maybe one should dust the still off

He he good on you Breaker. An experienced home brewer can produce a delicious sparkling ale for 10 to 15% the cost of the let's face it, fairly ordinaire mass production beers out there. One batch after another, cookie-cutter style, simple as.

I recently bought a couple of bottles of a market leader best cold beer, but tipped most of it out, it just tasted odd.

Julia, prohibition has never worked, nor wowserism in Australia. Pretty insulting to the Aboriginal community too. I suppose going down to the TAB and getting on the punt will be next.

 

[Calliope]

Most people think wandering children are a parent's responsibility.

Wandering boy died in man's pool - is this manslaughter.

THE mother took her eyes off her toddler for a second. But it was enough time for the two-year-old boy to wander away, fall into a swimming pool and drown.

Now, in what is believed to be a nationwide first, Philip John Cameron, 61, has been charged with manslaughter because he did not adequately fence his pool.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/wandering...anslaughter-20120704-21hs6.html#ixzz1ziJDAbmR

 

[CanOz]

Lets think of it differently. What about instead of a pool it was a large pit, a dozen meters deep with no barricade. Perhaps instead of a child it was an adult. The adult was walking home in the dark and took a short cut though this mans property. They fell down into the pit and suffered fatal injuries. Trespassing or the owners liability?

To a child, a pool looks inviting. In reality it is a death trap that by law, is to be fenced and LOCKED.

At 61 he'll probably get a suspended sentence, but the message must go out, fence your 'death trap' and lock the bloody fence.

CanOz

 

[prawn_86]

Lets think of it differently. What about instead of a pool it was a large pit, a dozen meters deep with no barricade. Perhaps instead of a child it was an adult. The adult was walking home in the dark and took a short cut though this mans property. They fell down into the pit and suffered fatal injuries. Trespassing or the owners liability?

To a child, a pool looks inviting. In reality it is a death trap that by law, is to be fenced and LOCKED.

At 61 he'll probably get a suspended sentence, but the message must go out, fence your 'death trap' and lock the bloody fence.

CanOz

But what if, in this case it was only an inflatable pool that he had just put up for his teenage kids party and was still out the following day? The toddler could still wander in and drown in that...

 

[Julia]

Lets think of it differently. What about instead of a pool it was a large pit, a dozen meters deep with no barricade. Perhaps instead of a child it was an adult. The adult was walking home in the dark and took a short cut though this mans property. They fell down into the pit and suffered fatal injuries. Trespassing or the owners liability?

Trespassing.

To a child, a pool looks inviting.

Sure. So the parent has to be properly vigilant.

Manslaughter? For god's sake!

 

[prawn_86]

Trespassing.

Agree.

I saw an interesting quote the other day (i think it was in Wired magazine, but could be wrong), where as a society we have gone from everything being legal except for that explicity stated as illegal, to a society where everything (especially new things/ideas) is implicity illegal/against the law until you can prove it is legal.

IE it used to have to be proved it was illegal, whereas now you have to prove what you were doing is legal

 

[CanOz]

Certainly the parents still have a responsibility for the child, however kids are not kept on a leash. We would expect a playground to be safe for children and at the same time if a child wanders away a few meters they should be prevented from entering into a death trap. If it is the LAW that the pool is fenced and LOCKED, as it is in Canada then the owner takes on the responsibility for the death if they chose to break the law. This isn't something new, the law in Canada (and Australia and Canada are very similar for civil law) has been around since 1980 ish.

Perhaps manslaughter is a bit harsh but they would certainly be open to a civil suit if the law didn't punish accordingly.

If it were my child I'm sure I'd be looking for some punishment. If they had just fenced their pool that child would be alive. How many parents out there can admit losing their kid for 5 minutes while they unpacked the groceries, or answered the phone. Does that make the parent irresponsible?

The LAW is there for this reason specifically.

Prawn, if it were a small wading pool it may not be illegal but it would certainly get the lawyers interested in a liable suit I'd reckon.

My opinion, i agree the punishment should be severe enough to send a message, nothing will ever get that kid back.
CanOz

 

[basilio]

I think your being a bit rough in this case.

Passing a law to force people to properly fence their pools was a response to regular tragedies of children falling into backyard pools and drowning. I havn't got the figures but there would have many, many heartbreaks in the past.

Kids are curious, very quick to disappear and love water. Our community decided that we owed them some protection from their own vulnerability.

The tragedy of the childs death in the pool highlights what happened on a regular basis before mandatory pool fence laws were passed.

I feel for the guy and hopefully some "sensible "outcome eventuates. But I don't believe we should condemn or abandon compulsory fencing of pools.

______________________________________________________________________________

On a similar note its can you remember the carnage on our roads around schools before we had lollipop people escorting children across the road? Similar problem and an interventionist solution to protect children.

 

[CanOz]

I think your being a bit rough in this case.

Passing a law to force people to properly fence their pools was a response to regular tragedies of children falling into backyard pools and drowning. I havn't got the figures but there would have many, many heartbreaks in the past.

Kids are curious, very quick to disappear and love water. Our community decided that we owed them some protection from their own vulnerability.

The tragedy of the childs death in the pool highlights what happened on a regular basis before mandatory pool fence laws were passed.

I feel for the guy and hopefully some "sensible "outcome eventuates. But I don't believe we should condemn or abandon compulsory fencing of pools.

______________________________________________________________________________

On a similar note its can you remember the carnage on our roads around schools before we had lollipop people escorting children across the road? Similar problem and an interventionist solution to protect children.

Well said....

CanOz

 

[prawn_86]

I'm not against the law fencing pools, but what is the penalty if you dont? Whatever the penalty is, then that is what he should be charged/fined.

Yes he broke the law by not having his pool fenced, but none of his actions had anything to do with the child wandering into his yard.

 

[CanOz]

I'm not against the law fencing pools, but what is the penalty if you dont? Whatever the penalty is, then that is what he should be charged/fined.

Yes he broke the law by not having his pool fenced, but none of his actions had anything to do with the child wandering into his yard.

Prawn, he's been charged with manslaughter. He hasn't been convicted yet.

The prosecutor will try and send a message, but the judge and or jury will decide his fate.

CanOz

 

[CanOz]

I'm not against the law fencing pools, but what is the penalty if you dont? Whatever the penalty is, then that is what he should be charged/fined.

Yes he broke the law by not having his pool fenced, but none of his actions had anything to do with the child wandering into his yard.

Prawn, he's been charged with manslaughter. He hasn't been convicted yet.

The prosecutor will try and send a message, but the judge and or jury will decide his fate.

Perhaps we should start a poll and see how the majority feel about what the punishment should be?

CanOz

 

[moXJO]

Pool had a fence but both pool and fence were in bad condition

Mr Cameron was inside his Armidale home watching television one afternoon this year when the boy wandered through his backyard and fell in the pool.

Mr Cameron's unkempt pool, described by one neighbour as ''a bit of a cesspit'', had a fence around it that was dilapidated.

''We believe he's committed an offence by not adequately fencing the pool as he's required to do by law,'' he said. ''We'll allege the fence was there but not in a state that would stop people getting in.''

 

[McLovin]

I'm not against the law fencing pools, but what is the penalty if you dont? Whatever the penalty is, then that is what he should be charged/fined.

Yes he broke the law by not having his pool fenced, but none of his actions had anything to do with the child wandering into his yard.

Manslaughter (and murder) can be either by doing something or not doing something which causes the death of someone. Not having the pool fenced or having the fence is disrepair caused the death of the child, it would seem.

Extending the argument you are making, one could say if you drive around with bald tyres, lose control of your car in the wet and kill someone, should you only have to pay the penalty for having bald tyres?

NB: I'm not debating whether or not there should be laws for swimming pool fences, just providing the legal basis for the charge of manslaughter.

 

[prawn_86]

Extending the argument you are making, one could say if you drive around with bald tyres, lose control of your car in the wet and kill someone, should you only have to pay the penalty for having bald tyres?

If the other person had drifted into your lane after not paying attention, then yes. If you lose control of your car that is your fault, meaning you are responsible for the tyres. If they drift into your lane and you have bald tyres then the tyres had nothing to do with it.

My understanding for manslaughter was that you had to be involved in some way, not just negligent in another area. I'm far from a legal expert though

 

[wayneL]

Manslaughter (and murder) can be either by doing something or not doing something which causes the death of someone. Not having the pool fenced or having the fence is disrepair caused the death of the child, it would seem.

The question to me is 'what constitutes manslaughter?'.

man·slaugh·ter
   [man-slaw-ter] Show IPA
noun
1.
Law . the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought.
2.
the killing of a human being by another; homicide.

Where do we extend the boundaries to?

Is have a roof that someone fell off and died manslaughter?

How about having a knife in your drawer that your depressed brotheri n law topped himself with?

How about owning a car that the drunken knucklehead step out in front of and got squashed by?

How about building a city next to a beach where people drown at? Who do we charge with manslaughter there?

I find it deeply concerning that the charge is manslaughter, perhaps negligence causing death (if there is such a statute), but not manslaughter.