Diogenes_the_Cynic:
I was talking about the unattended child statutes, not neglect statutes. Your cite is off point. It is illegal in Texas to leave a baby unattended in a car. It isn’t necessary to interpret a broader neglect statute. Leaving a baby in a car is a specific, delineated crime in itself.
Funny, then, that you are again refusing to provide a cite for this Texas law, when such a cite would easily prove you right. You were asked for the cite several pages ago, and again by me, but still refuse to provide it.
Bearflag70:
When he says “illegal” now, he means an infraction under a strict liability statute, probably in the Vehicle Code. He’s moved on from murder and criminal negligence to an infraction statute with a fine of something like $100, as referenced in the other thread, because he’s got nothing else to hang his hat on at this point.
No, the statutes against leaving babies in cars were the only ones I was ever referring to. I assumed everyone knew that, and that’s why I kept asking them to cite “I forgot” exceptions. It took me a while to figure out that a lot of people had no idea the unattended child statutes existed all by themselves. The level of penalty is irrelevant. I never made a claim about the level of penalty. I just said it was illegal.
OK, Dio , I Googled the Texas law, and here it is:
Texas penal code 5-22-10:
Sec. 22.10. LEAVING A CHILD IN A VEHICLE. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for longer than five minutes, knowing that the child is:
(1) younger than seven years of age; and
(2) not attended by an individual in the vehicle who is 14 years of age or older.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
I await your retraction.
Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley:
Funny, then, that you are again refusing to provide a cite for this Texas law, when such a cite would easily prove you right. You were asked for the cite several pages ago, and again by me, but still refuse to provide it.
I provided a link to the statutes several pages ago.
What retraction? This proves me right.
Diogenes_the_Cynic:
No, the statutes against leaving babies in cars were the only ones I was ever referring to. I assumed everyone knew that, and that’s why I kept asking them to cite “I forgot” exceptions. It took me a while to figure out that a lot of people had no idea the unattended child statutes existed all by themselves. The level of penalty is irrelevant. I never made a claim about the level of penalty. I just said it was illegal.
HORSE-FEATHERS! You argued murder and criminal negligence. You didn’t change your game to other statutes until you were forced out of murder and criminal negligence.
Exhibit 1:
Exhibit 2:
Yeah, I gotta say the bullshit is deep in here.
I never argued “murder” as anything but a subjective opinion., and I never made any claim at all about the level of penalty.
Just so everyone in this thread knows your game, here is the post from the other thread.
You argued that it was murder and criminal negligence per se . You argued mental state is irrelevant to a legal discussion on this topic. You argued mental state is irrelevant to criminal negligence. You argued the act is criminal negligence regardless of mental state. You argued criminal negligence is “automatic” by statute. You were wrong.
When the infraction cites were presented, I immediately admitted I was wrong in claiming there was no crime. There is a crime: an infraction. I was right as to criminal negligence and homicide, but wrong in saying there is no crime.
Why don’t you step up and do likewise?
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
That’s not what the pitting is for, though. The pitting is because I said that it isn’t necessary for leaving the aby to be intentional in order for it to be negligent homicide. That is a factually correct statement, not an opinion. Some people want to change the laws to make it legal if they say it was an acident. I object to that.
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Plus, it’s just flat illegal to leave a baby in the car. There aren’t any loopholes or exceptions. Whether it results in death is neither here nor there. it’s negligent whether the parent intended it or not.
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
What cases would those be? Cite?
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
I am not just like them, and you do have to put parents who do this in jail or you’re just giving people a legal way to kill their kids on purpose and get away with it by saying it was an accident.
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Should it be legal to leave a baby in a car until it dies, yes or no?
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
If somebody decides they want to kill their baby on purpose, you would be in favor of giving them a free and legal way to do it?
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
If a parent leaves a baby in a car, and the baby dies, and those facts are agreed to, we have a case of negligent homicide. If you want to make an exception and let them go if the act was unintentional, somebody is going to have to PROVE it was unintentional. How do you do that? Are you going to let them go unless intentionality can also be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? In that case, you’d be making it awfully easy to get away with.
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Forgetting is not an excuse.
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
It sounds like you’re saying the state should have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the parent did it on purpose. Is that what you’re saying? If that’s the case, you’re essentially making it legal, since it would be virtually impossible to ever prove intentionality unless the person confessed to someone.
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic
This statute proves you wrong insofar as you have been arguing mental state is irrelevant and the act in question is criminal negligence per se.
Texas penal code 5-22-10intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for longer than five minutes, knowing that the child is:
(1) younger than seven years of age; and
(2) not attended by an individual in the vehicle who is 14 years of age or older.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
Forgetting negates intent and knowledge, and there must be a concurrence between the mental state and the act. In other words, you must have the requisite knowledge at the same time as the act itself.
This whole thread is about the law as applied to the facts.
You argued, “They are murderers.” Now you claim you didn’t really mean it. :dubious:
You argued, “Parents who do that crap should be jailed for life.” Now, you say you “never made any claim at all about the level of penalty.” :dubious:
.
Uh, no you didn’t. Now you’re just straight up lying. You were asked for a cite. You quoted the request for a cite and said “Google any statute. Show me one that says it has to be intentional.”
That’s it. That’s what happened. You never provided a cite. For obvious reasons, since the cite would have shown how full of shit you are.
Sure you did. Besides the calling the parents murderers, you indicated that anybody who didn’t want to throw parents in jail for leaving their babies in cars wanted it to be legal.
They’re not innocent, they killed a baby, and if you don’t want to jail them, then you’re saying it should be legal to leave a baby in a car until it dies. Why do you want to legalize that? That’s horrific.
Well, here’s the Texas Penal Code on Class C Misdemeanor, which is what intentionally or knowingly leaving a child in a car in Texas represents:
Now, how was it you were arguing for jail time for this infraction when you knew all along that there was no jail time involved?
It’s going to be very hard for you when a 6 year old child runs out between 2 parked cars and you drive over her and crush her skull and kill her. You will be blamed for not reacting fast enough and you’ll do what…? Inform all who judge you that they are not in a position to judge you and your reaction times as a driver are immensely superior to all of theirs and it is the fault of the 6 year old?
They’ll reply by saying that people who drive over 6 year olds should be jailed for life.
It must be lovely this time of year, way up there on your pedestal.
Brown_Eyed_Girl:
Well, here’s the Texas Penal Code on Class C Misdemeanor, which is what intentionally or knowingly leaving a child in a car in Texas represents:
Now, how was it you were arguing for jail time for this infraction when you knew all along that there was no jail time involved?
To be fair to Dio , if the child is injured it becomes a felony. But the maximum penalty for that is still only 2 years in jail. (According to the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services website.) Not that this excuses Dio ’s histrionics, or makes him correct about the ocean of bullshit he’s spewed in here.
Here are some options for you:
Do the honorable thing and admit you were wrong on one or more points.
Do the easy thing and quietly slither away.
Keep misrepresenting your positions and keep moving the goalposts, hoping people don’t call you out on it.
Bearflag70:
This statute proves you wrong insofar as you have been arguing mental state is irrelevant and the act in question is criminal negligence per se.
Texas penal code 5-22-10intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for longer than five minutes, knowing that the child is:
(1) younger than seven years of age; and
(2) not attended by an individual in the vehicle who is 14 years of age or older.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
Forgetting negates intent and knowledge, and there must be a concurrence between the mental state and the act. In other words, you must have the requisite knowledge at the same time as the act itself.
Forgetting does NOT negate knowledge. All those parents knew the kids were in the car.
Cartooniverse:
It’s going to be very hard for you when a 6 year old child runs out between 2 parked cars and you drive over her and crush her skull and kill her. You will be blamed for not reacting fast enough and you’ll do what…? Inform all who judge you that they are not in a position to judge you and your reaction times as a driver are immensely superior to all of theirs and it is the fault of the 6 year old?
They’ll reply by saying that people who drive over 6 year olds should be jailed for life.
It must be lovely this time of year, way up there on your pedestal.
This is a stupid analogy. This is a situation where the driver has no control. All the baby cookers had control of the situation.
So you’re saying they intentionally left the child in the car and walked away knowing they were engaged in the act of killing their child?
Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley:
To be fair to Dio , if the child is injured it becomes a felony. But the maximum penalty for that is still only 2 years in jail. (According to the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services website.) Not that this excuses Dio ’s histrionics, or makes him correct about the ocean of bullshit he’s spewed in here.
Fair enough. But I still don’t believe that **Dio **had this specific law in mind when he made all the asinine statements he’s made wrt murder and legality.