Falling TVs have killed 4 Chicago-area kids since October - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

whunter · #1 02-08-2012, 10:44 PM

Falling TVs have killed 4 Chicago-area children since October

TwitchKitty · #2 02-09-2012, 12:15 AM

Thanks, not at all what I imagined but I always knew TV wasn't good for you.

Air&Road · #3 02-09-2012, 08:23 AM

You don't have to watch much TV to understand what makes folks want to throw the set out the window.

aklim · #4 02-09-2012, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryBible

You don't have to watch much TV to understand what makes folks want to throw the set out the window.

Guess I haven't watched enough TV to want to throw it out the window. Perhaps simply not buying it or making a tax deductible donation would be better. Still, the article is about parents not securing the TV or watching what their kids do.

Can't Know · #5 02-09-2012, 04:07 PM

While I am all in favor of protecting kids, from reading the article I'm almost concerned that they are going to end up enacting laws for securing TVs that will sweep in everyone, regardless whether they have children, which will mean when you buy it you get some manner of securing it that you have to pay for, whether or not you ever use it.

The simple fact of the matter is that very often people don't stop to consider the potential perils to children in their home, which is why you hear about falling objects injuring kids, kids finding a gun or power tool and hurting themselves or another, kids falling from counters, window ledges, down stairs, etc. Part of being a parent is being attuned to and vigilant about these and all other potentially-injurious situations, though I can't imagine that legislation is the best (if any) solution to that.

You can't legislate "vigilance" any more than you can morals.

layback40 · #6 02-09-2012, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Can't Know

While I am all in favor of protecting kids, from reading the article I'm almost concerned that they are going to end up enacting laws for securing TVs that will sweep in everyone, regardless whether they have children, which will mean when you buy it you get some manner of securing it that you have to pay for, whether or not you ever use it.

The simple fact of the matter is that very often people don't stop to consider the potential perils to children in their home, which is why you hear about falling objects injuring kids, kids finding a gun or power tool and hurting themselves or another, kids falling from counters, window ledges, down stairs, etc. Part of being a parent is being attuned to and vigilant about these and all other potentially-injurious situations, though I can't imagine that legislation is the best (if any) solution to that.

You can't legislate "vigilance" any more than you can morals.

Why stop with the TV?
There are plenty of other objects that can be thrown out a window.
You cant legislate to outlaw stupidity either.

jplinville · #7 02-09-2012, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Can't Know

While I am all in favor of protecting kids, from reading the article I'm almost concerned that they are going to end up enacting laws for securing TVs that will sweep in everyone, regardless whether they have children, which will mean when you buy it you get some manner of securing it that you have to pay for, whether or not you ever use it.

The simple fact of the matter is that very often people don't stop to consider the potential perils to children in their home, which is why you hear about falling objects injuring kids, kids finding a gun or power tool and hurting themselves or another, kids falling from counters, window ledges, down stairs, etc. Part of being a parent is being attuned to and vigilant about these and all other potentially-injurious situations, though I can't imagine that legislation is the best (if any) solution to that.

You can't legislate "vigilance" any more than you can morals.

You can't legislate intelligence either.

I personally think most of the issue is that parents allow their kids to act like fools indoors. I wonder how many of those cases involved Wii??

cmbdiesel · #8 02-09-2012, 06:49 PM

You couldn't flip my old Trinitron with much less than a backhoe....

Kuan · #9 02-09-2012, 07:15 PM

I'm still on my 1999 32" CRT. Top of the line back then.

The bedroom still has a 1987 13".

mgburg · #10 02-09-2012, 09:02 PM

I just got done moving a 1990 32" "Flat Screen" SomethingOrOther and it took two other guys to help me get the thing into/out of the truck, then into a video stand. that d@mn thing weighed over 92#s.

There is no way that I would put something that heavy and unbalanced (Yes, it sits like a drunk on the edge of a bar stool...) on anything that couldn't support its weight plus an additional 100#s or so. The stand that it sits in right now allows very little wiggle room on the right and left sides and you can barely slide the remote control on top of the set 'cause it's so tightly in the cabinet...yet I have the unit shoved as far back and away from the front of the cabinet as posible.

The cabinet? A white oak media center, with 2' high drawers on both sides, the set is 2' off the ground and it has the kind of "doors" that pull shut from both sides like a roll-top desk. And the cabinet itself is somewhere in the neighborhood of 200#s itself. You ain't moving this mofo for your life without help.

As for the kids that passed away in Chicago 'cause their parents don't have common sense?

They're better off. Their parents didn't care about them to be sure to "child-proof" their home or where they were placed during the day.

The real tradgedy? The kids were the ones that got crushed when it should have been the adults that put the dang set on top of a pedestal or dresser.

But, if you really want to have thought for food, consider this little tidbit...right now, in all of our homes...what could possibly fall over and hurt/crush you or the ones that you love...in case there should be an earthquake event, or even a tornado/hurricane and some part of the home you're in experiences some type of hit? Even a car running off the public thoroughfairs and hitting the house or foundation can cause dressers and the like to tumble over...

Look around now and decide if the POSSIBLITY is worth the risk.

Air&Road · #11 02-09-2012, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Can't Know

While I am all in favor of protecting kids, from reading the article I'm almost concerned that they are going to end up enacting laws for securing TVs that will sweep in everyone, regardless whether they have children, which will mean when you buy it you get some manner of securing it that you have to pay for, whether or not you ever use it.

The simple fact of the matter is that very often people don't stop to consider the potential perils to children in their home, which is why you hear about falling objects injuring kids, kids finding a gun or power tool and hurting themselves or another, kids falling from counters, window ledges, down stairs, etc. Part of being a parent is being attuned to and vigilant about these and all other potentially-injurious situations, though I can't imagine that legislation is the best (if any) solution to that.

You can't legislate "vigilance" any more than you can morals.

Of course they will pass such laws. Straight from the communist manifesto. Make people dependent on the government. Get them dependent and you then have total control of them.

That's why the budget for government handouts for everything from housing to cell phones is in the $2T area.

cmbdiesel · #12 02-09-2012, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LarryBible

Of course they will pass such laws. Straight from the communist manifesto. Make people dependent on the government. Get them dependent and you then have total control of them.

That's why the budget for government handouts for everything from housing to cell phones is in the $2T area.

Right after they pass laws requiring gay marriage.