In a message dated 11/6/2003 11:26:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Perhaps he should have been playing somewhere that wasn't close to a road.  Perhaps the parents should have been keeping a closer eye on their children when close to the street.  Also, regardless of whether it was an accident or intentional, the boy and/or his parents *are* responsible for the damage.  If I accidentally scratch a car in a parking lot, I'm responsible for fixing the damage even though I didn't do it on purpose.
 
If my child were playing basketball with some friends and passed the ball and it went through a window in a parked car, at the very least I should offer to pay for the damage even though it was an accident.  So yes, even if something is an accident there is always a consequence.


for one maybe he didnt live in an area that had fields or lots to play in away from traffic.  

for two how do you know it wasnt a residential area? maybe the guy was speeding.

also how much damage can  a 50 pound kid on a small bike do to a tire?

and even so why not talk to the parents instead of ticketing a small child?  im sorry but if my kids were playing and accidentily hit a car if there was damage yes we would pay for it but we wouldnt expect them to be treated like criminals and get fines for an accident 
________________________________

Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to 
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net 

Reply via email to