This is from AP, not The Onion. I still can't get over the quote from the cop that the mother who left her 4-year-old in the car with the engine running and the vehicle unlocked did nothing wrong. Policing sure has changed!

The thief threatening to call the police about the toddler being left in the car is almost as good as drug users wanting to file a police report when they've been ripped off by their dealers.


Link


Police: Thief berated mom for leaving kid in car he stole


A car thief who found a toddler in the backseat of a stolen vehicle drove back and chastised the mother for leaving the child unattended before taking off again, police in Oregon said.

The woman went into a grocery store about 15 feet (5 yards) from the car Saturday, leaving her 4-year-old child inside with the engine running and the vehicle unlocked, said Beaverton police spokesman Officer Matt Henderson.

A store employee told authorities the woman was in the market for a few minutes before someone began driving away with the SUV.

Once the thief realized the toddler was in the backseat, he drove back, berated the woman for leaving her child unattended, told the woman to take the child and drove away in the stolen vehicle.

“He actually lectured the mother for leaving the child in the car and threatened to call the police on her,” Henderson said.

Henderson said the woman did nothing wrong and was within sight and sound of the child. He said the incident served as a “good reminder to take extra precaution” with children.

“Obviously, we’re thankful he brought the little one back and had the decency to do that,” Henderson said.

The vehicle was found a few hours later in Portland but police are still searching for the thief. The suspect was said to be in his 20s or 30s with dark brown or black braided hair and a multi-colored face mask.

Police said anyone with information on the theft should contact the department.

I wonder what the guys sheet looks like?

I ask that in all honesty as most of the thieves here are drug addicts who just wouldn’t do that.

quote:

...the mother who left her 4-year-old in the car with the engine running and the vehicle unlocked did nothing wrong...

On the face of it, I have to agree. No one should have to build their actions and behaviors around the thieves and evil people.

Yeah, I get the "Sgt. Hartman" premise that if everyone secured their footlocker, no thieves would have an opportunity, but such circle logic and misplaced blame truly pisses me off. Because it is lazy "problem solving" which never actually solves the problem.

(you didn't lock the door. OK, you locked the door, but you did not have "Ring" installed. OK, you had the door locked and Ring installed, but you did not have a security alarm. OK, You locked the door, had Ring, and a security system, but you did not have your items secured in a safe. OK, You locked the door, had Ring, a security system, and your items secured in a safe, but....) See, it never ends that the person violated is the "real reason" the thieve thieved...

We have thieves, because we refuse to put thieves to death for thieving. Stop blaming the person that has been thieved. (and, yes, in many cases, the thieve needs to merit capital punishment)

That is all.

(for now...)

quote:

Stop blaming the person that has been thieved.

Normally, I would agree with you if it's just a question of your personal property. In such instances, people should be allowed to make their own risk assessments. However, when leaving your vehicle unlocked with the engine running and a helpless toddler strapped in the back, different story.

I will not disagree that such actions are foolish, but it is not a different story. It is another part of the whole (same) story.

And that is, my point.

Think on it a bit.

quote:

See, it never ends that the person violated is the "real reason" the thieve thieved...

I'm not in any way suggesting that the woman's actions were the "real reason" the thief took her car. I'm saying that her actions needlessly put the life of her toddler in danger and she should bear responsibility for that.

The guy who stole her vehicle apparently shared that view enough to drive back, lecture her and return the toddler!

Now there's something to think on.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
I wonder what the guys sheet looks like?

I ask that in all honesty as most of the thieves here are drug addicts who just wouldn’t do that.

That would be interesting to see his sheet. I looked to see if there were any updates and perhaps he had been caught by some fluke but was unable to find anything. I suspect we'll never know.

Are 4 year olds still considered toddlers? I've always made the distinction at 3 but I don't have kids so my opinion means nothing.

^^^^

I've always thought toddler stage was ages 1-3 but I"m not sure.

quote:

Originally posted by FiveFiveSixFan:

quote:

Stop blaming the person that has been thieved.

Normally, I would agree with you if it's just a question of your personal property. In such instances, people should be allowed to make their own risk assessments. However, when leaving your vehicle unlocked with the engine running and a helpless toddler strapped in the back, different story.

No, it’s not, it’s still auto theft. Where I live we have an ordinance against leaving your car unlocked and unattended with the engine running. Haven’t had anyone issued a citation, so far as I know, that’s a different issue for another time, however the individual who stole the vehicle would still be charged with a crime, provided he’s caught.

quote:

Originally posted by FiveFiveSixFan:
^^^^

I've always thought toddler stage was ages 1-3 but I"m not sure.

With the past few generations I have considered the toddler stage to end around 26.

The mother was grossly negligent.

Yeah, I get it - I SHOULD be able to leave my home with the doors unlocked. I should be able to walk downtown at night without worrying about getting mugged. Crimes are perpetrated by criminals, and they are responsible for their criminal acts.

HOWEVER, in the real world, there are prudent steps we should take to protect ourselves and our loved ones. I NEED to lock my house doors, even when I am home. I NEED to lock my car doors, even if "I'm just away for a minute" (and the clerk said the mother was in the store for 'a few minutes,' so there is NO WAY she was watching the car constantly during that time.

This mother DID do wrong. Anybody with a brain should realize that leaving a child alone in a car, much less an UNLOCKED one, is negligent. Leaving the engine running with the doors unlocked is just BEGGING for your car to be stolen.

That carjacker was more responsible with that woman's child than the mother was. At least HE cared about the kid's safety.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:
The mother was grossly negligent.

Yeah, I get it - I SHOULD be able to leave my home with the doors unlocked. I should be able to walk downtown at night without worrying about getting mugged. Crimes are perpetrated by criminals, and they are responsible for their criminal acts.

HOWEVER, in the real world, ...

Exactly.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:
That carjacker was more responsible with that woman's child than the mother was. At least HE cared about the kid's safety.

Damn straight.

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

...the mother who left her 4-year-old in the car with the engine running and the vehicle unlocked did nothing wrong...

On the face of it, I have to agree. No one should have to build their actions and behaviors around the thieves and evil people.

Yeah, I get the "Sgt. Hartman" premise that if everyone secured their footlocker, no thieves would have an opportunity, but such circle logic and misplaced blame truly pisses me off. Because it is lazy "problem solving" which never actually solves the problem.

(you didn't lock the door. OK, you locked the door, but you did not have "Ring" installed. OK, you had the door locked and Ring installed, but you did not have a security alarm. OK, You locked the door, had Ring, and a security system, but you did not have your items secured in a safe. OK, You locked the door, had Ring, a security system, and your items secured in a safe, but....) See, it never ends that the person violated is the "real reason" the thieve thieved...

We have thieves, because we refuse to put thieves to death for thieving. Stop blaming the person that has been thieved. (and, yes, in many cases, the thieve needs to merit capital punishment)

That is all.

(for now...)

I can certainly understand the sentiment.

Saying the mom did something WRONG (in the immediate moral sense) is a milder version of the "you wouldn't have gotten raped if you hadn't dressed like a slut" accusation.

At the same time (as you later pointed out), given the world as it is, it's hard to argue that she didn't do something STUPID and risky - in the same way that a pretty girl, dressed provocatively, walking alone through a bad neighborhood at night is doing something that is stupid and risky, but not WRONG.

So what are you guys going to charge her w/?

Stupid tax. Pay the man at the window.

quote:

Originally posted by dsiets:
So what are you guys going to charge her w/?

ORS 163.545
Child neglect in the second degree

(1) A person having custody or control of a child under 10 years of age commits the crime of child neglect in the second degree if, with criminal negligence, the person leaves the child unattended in or at any place for such period of time as may be likely to endanger the health or welfare of such child.

(2) Child neglect in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §174; 1991 c.832 §2]

Yeah. Because that would accomplish what exactly? What would be learned that hasn't been learned already?

quote:

Originally posted by Expat:

quote:

Originally posted by dsiets:
So what are you guys going to charge her w/?

ORS 163.545
Child neglect in the second degree

(1) A person having custody or control of a child under 10 years of age commits the crime of child neglect in the second degree if, with criminal negligence, the person leaves the child unattended in or at any place for such period of time as may be likely to endanger the health or welfare of such child.

(2) Child neglect in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §174; 1991 c.832 §2]

You sure that that's enough? I was expecting crucifixion.
The article states, "The woman went into a grocery store about 15 feet (5 yards) from the car Saturday." I'm not sure that fits the description except where criminals are around and I don't think that's factored into this law.


Now, what are we going to award the kidnapper w/?

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
I wonder what the guys sheet looks like?

I ask that in all honesty as most of the thieves here are drug addicts who just wouldn’t do that.

My first thought was it’s a guy who realized he accidentally upgraded himself from grand theft auto to kidnapping and everything else that comes with it.