Comment on Baby dies after California mom leaves him in car to get lip filler on 101-degree day, police say
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 6 days agoThe kids died because the engine auto shut off, so it’s actually an interesting question as to whether the manufacturer bears responsibility for having implemented a ‘feature’ dangerously.
MBech@feddit.dk 6 days ago
Leaving a baby in a car for 90 minutes is neglect and dangerous no matter what features that car had.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
I agree. But that doesn’t really address the issue under discussion
MBech@feddit.dk 6 days ago
It does though. Leaving the baby in the car is the issue. The car manufacturer can’t be responsible for someone being a horrible parent, no matter if their manual said not to leave a baby in the car or not. It’s common sense not to do that.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
Tragedy is not usually due to a single cause. Multiple failures have to happen for a tragedy to occur. In this case, the mum left them unattended, and the manufacturer implemented a feature in a dangerous way. It should have been obvious in the design phase that this was a risk, to pets if nothing else. The solution is also well known, there have been groups lobbying to make occupant sensors standard for literally decades. That they implemented one without the other is arguably corporate negligence for nothing more than extremely minor cost savings.
jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 6 days ago
car manufacturers should inform the users about features that are potentially unintuitive and different from previous cars (let’s say all features that weren’t commonplace 2-3 decades ago)