New York Judge rules 6-year-old can be sued

[Syn7]

New York Judge rules 6-year-old can be sued

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/1..._lawsuit_child

[Drake]

If you read the whole thing, it's not as far out there as the headline would convince you.

Basically, parents are responsible for their kids, and if that kid ends up hurting someone else, they are responsible. If your kid burns down your neighbor's house, do you really expect to walk away not paying a dime in restitution?

[Syn7]

If you read the whole thing, it's not as far out there as the headline would convince you.

Basically, parents are responsible for their kids, and if that kid ends up hurting someone else, they are responsible. If your kid burns down your neighbor's house, do you really expect to walk away not paying a dime in restitution?

yeah but their lawyer argued that the target should be the parents because they were the ones supervising the kids... the judge turned around and said 4 years old is enough to know right from wrong in this case... so the child is named in the suit, not the parents... even tho its the parents who will take ultimate responsibility for these actions... the argument is that it should be the parents name on the docket, not the childs...

this sets a dangerous precedent imo... next we`ll have 4 year olds being held criminally responsible for horseplay... dont you see where this is all going??? accidents will always happen. yes its unfortunate but it isnt criminal. not yet anyways. where do we draw the line?

eventually ill be able to sue a parent because their baby cried so much i went crazy and killed my dog. they would then owe me a dog and ofcourse a few bucks for pain and suffering.

[Syn7]

and lets not forget the kids were 4 at the time... not 6...

[Drake]

I'm no child pyschologist, but there is, at a very early age, a point where children know if they are doing something wrong.

HOWEVER, I agree. Kids should not be targeted. I see the appeals court setting this one straight.

[Syn7]

I'm no child pyschologist, but there is, at a very early age, a point where children know if they are doing something wrong.

HOWEVER, I agree. Kids should not be targeted. I see the appeals court setting this one straight.

word... its not that i dont agree with this ruling, per se... its the precedent it sets for future rulings that scares me... weve seen this before and we all know where its going... its just with kids this time...

[Drake]

word... its not that i dont agree with this ruling, per se... its the precedent it sets for future rulings that scares me... weve seen this before and we all know where its going... its just with kids this time...

I wouldn't worry unless the Supreme Court rules it, and all appeals fail.