Leaving a two-year-old alone in a car for 30-60 minutes (he doesn’t even know how long he was gone) isn’t criminal in and of itself regardless of the weather.
… ummmm, yes it is. Leaving a toddler unattended for an extended period of time is literally multiple crimes.
They knowingly left their 2 year old alone for 30-60 minutes. That’s already illegal.
Fine, but this was in England, where there are speedlimits everywhere and there is an ocean channel between it and the closest place without speedlimits.
This is the one that always gets me about “small government” people. They talk about inefficiencies and say, “the private sector can do it better,” which is debatable because comparing money and service is subjective (IMHO, they’re still wrong, but that’s besides the point). Yet most of them don’t want to properly fund tax administrators, when time and time again, they’ve shown they’re a money multiplier. If you want a more basic, striped down tax code, I once again disagree, but fine, that’s your opinion. However, in our current tax system enforcement is underfunded, and I think it just shows their true intent to enrich the wealthy.
That’s very different though. This article states he “knowingly left the 2-year-old in the car”.
IMHO, you shouldn’t be able to permanently disable it. We are in a climate crisis.
As a Canadian, I read 141 and thought, “141 km/h is pretty fast, but that’s not international news fast.” Then I saw it was mph!
Driving that fast on a closed course while sober with complete focus is dangerous. Yet this guy was drunk and texting on public roads.
“Sometimes mistakes happen," he said. "But I’m not a bad person.”
AFAIK, no mistakes happened, those were all choices. And by making those choices, yes, you are a bad person.
My 2020 VW Golf definitely turns itself off when in park, but also has the button to disable it.
It will even require a manual restart if it’s been parked long enough, which gets annoying when I spend a little too long dropping off/picking up something, and don’t notice the message, put it in drive, see the message and try to start the car, but can’t until I put it back in park. /rant
The dad went into the house, and when he returned to the car between 30 and 60 minutes later
This is the part that really confuses me, they were home. I get that parents sometimes need a break from their kid but:
I know it’s not the point of the article, but I’m also annoyed at the idea of someone intending to run their car for 30-60 minutes for no reason. I will admit I’ve left my car running just for the comfort of A/C while I’m waiting, and I don’t live in Arizona heat, but dude was home.
Most modern cars have an auto-off feature. Some have a button to temporarily disable it.
I don’t have a source, but it wasn’t that Netflix didn’t lose subscribers, it was that their revenues grew. Part of that was charging subscribers more, but a lot of that was the new ad-supported plans netted them more money than basic ad-free plans. Which is probably why they’re now sunsetting the basic ad-free plans.
Just a minor nitpick: the acronym is SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States), like POTUS.
This is really interesting in contrast to where I live in Ontario, Canada. A municipality wanted an injunction to make it crystal clear they could evict a homeless encampment on municipal property. Instead, they got a judgement that doing so would violate those people’s Charter rights. This ruling means basically every municipality in the province now legally has to do something about the homelessness crisis.
I think you watch too many movies. From my experience serving in the CAF alongside the infantry, all the actions you describe would not be condoned and anyone taking those actions would be charged. Maybe I’m biased, but I was always told the goal of our operations were “capturing hearts and minds” which would be in direct conflict with taking terrorist actions.
Russia and the US have committed war crimes in their invasions of Ukraine and Iraq respectively, but the general consensus is that their militaries are still not terrorist organizations.
War Crimes != Terrorism. Some acts qualify as both, but words have meanings, and I think it’s important we recognize that. I don’t think the actions of the US in Iran would make a reasonable person say the US Military is a terrorist organization, though they are definitely harbouring some war criminals.
I think the other thing is asking, what’s the value in labelling an organization? Telling your friend with a substance problem that they’re an addict/alcoholic might just drive them away and towards worse influences. Or telling off your toxic coworker might be cathartic, but it’ll probably just make the situation worse.
PS I’m pretty sure labelling the IDF as “similarly abhorrent” isn’t very helpful.
I’m not sure what you mean by “spreading terror”. IMHO, most actions that would meet those requirements are war crimes.
We can debate whether pretty much any law is moral in our own opinion. However, I think laws are a good place to start with what rules should be followed. They can be changed/updated as necessary.
I think the big difference is whether the force follows the rules of war or not. Obviously the CAF has had some violations, but not on an organisational level like the IRGC.
There should be a penalty for prosecutors who torture people to force them to make false confessions.
I think you mean police? Prosecutors generally don’t question the accused, except maybe in a trial.
That’s pretty standard for the BBC. They know where most of their audiences are, so they rarely mention the local currency.
I’m not saying that. However, it’s highly recommended that toddlers have baby monitors with them while they sleep. So even if the parents were sleeping, their child’s distress should wake them up. This child was unattended, unobserved, etc.