View Single Post
Old November 12, 2011, 03:46 PM   #56
Senior Member
Join Date: May 4, 2010
Posts: 4,082
yes, it is applicable to the post.

Attractive hazard is older than I am. I believe that the idea goes back to the fifties, when men who had gone through the war began to see all of the dangers that their precious children faced every day. Nothing was more important to them than their children; raising them strong and safe. When they saw unfenced pools, it bothered them. That generation of parents, who had seen millions of war dead and horrors beyond imagination, began to fight back against death and pain.

Dragging the law into it and allowing the lawyers to warp the concept to their own benefit is where it went wrong.

The girl found a "toy." an attractive hazard. if it had been a pink ladysmith, it would have been an even more attractive hazard.

M, if your point is that the homeowner should not be held accountable for the death of his guest because of an act of minimal negligence, I agree. I'd like to see the other kid held accountable, but not to the point of prosecution.

Can I point out that for generations, even up to current times, the family deer/home defense rifle hung over the fire place, often loaded?
briandg is offline  
Page generated in 0.05040 seconds with 7 queries