Don't be a fool. You know full well (unless you're a complete moron, which I'm not ruling out) that the comparison was the punishments... your dog gets loose, attacks someone, and the punishment is fines and maybe jail time. Your kid gets loose, and is killed by their own actions or the actions of another, and you get hugs and laws named after you. When punishments for irresponsibility of pet ownership are far more severe than for failing a child (or adult) that does not have the ability to take care of themselves, and is killed because of it, then there's a monumentally disturbing problem with our societal values.

If you don't have a tracking device on your mentally challenged child, or mentally challenged adult for that matter, then you are an irresponsible person and are lying to yourself that you're doing everything possible to ensure their well being when you're (by your own admission) too busy to watch them. Your failures are not anyone else's responsibility.

Yes, I have been responsible for a person with a developmental disability -- my father's severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease that went on nearly a decade between the time he was no longer able to care for himself and when he peacefully passed. We had a team of around-the-clock caregivers for him, and also had him Lo-Jacked, so that if he somehow wandered off he could be quickly found down to any three square feet on the planet through a GPS unit. There was also an alarm that sounded if he ventured more than 100 feet from the property, including immediate (then by pager) notifications. That's called taking seriously the responsibility you've been charged with of someone that can't take care of themselves, so don't you even try another pathetic attempt to lecture me when you're admitted that you haven't even done everything possible to ensure the safety of your own brother. Apparently your inconvenience is putting him in danger and that's on you to live with. I couldn't.

Pull your head out and start paying attention. The second you take for granted that a person like that can harm themselves, or allow themselves to be harmed by a predator, then you're likely to end up with a corpse and that will be entirely YOUR FAULT.

It's you, and those like you, who sicken me.

That's not the biggest point at all. The biggest point is that this child is dead and she woudn't be if the parents/guardians had been responsible in the first place.

The laws are on the books, and the alert system is already in place (according to this story). So, logically, the problem is that the police don't know that the existing system exists so that they can use it. You don't need a new law and full-media public relations grandstanding to inform them. All you need is a memo read at the morning roll call in every precinct in the state.

This law isn't about saving lives. This law is about making the politicians look good as they desperately scramble to save their jobs in the coming elections due their years of past failures and disgraces.

PCNoWay is the prime example of the general ignorance that now runs rampant through our society, where people that don't have what it takes to make a success of themselves in life, so the look for any opportunity to profit at someone else's expense through litigation.

You are correct in your analysis. Anyone that wasn't physically injured deserves to be financially compensated for their actual losses, and maybe a little more for goodwill, but sh*t happens in life and just because you weren't able to party like a rockstar for the remainder of the planned itinerary doesn't mean you deserve a free bag of money. Anyone that thinks that they do screams loud and clear to everyone that they have no personal integrity whatsoever and that they're whores for money.

It sounds like you want your cake (or laced brownie) and to eat it, too. If such a thing comes to pass then smoke away, but if you get pulled over under the influence then I would fully support making that person's life very miserable in the court system... mandatory treatment, enough 12-step meetings to make you want to open your wrist with a butter knife, a few days in the county jail on the first offense, and a pile of attorney and court fees. Booze burns at one serving per hour. THC burns significantly slower. Don't like that? Blame the manufacturer. A DUI is a DUI.

Life needs balance and those who don't require chemicals to alter our thinking in order to function in daily life clearly understand that.

Playing devil's advocate, the danger with all of these types of alerts is that they'll eventually become white noise and their original purpose, to be a notification of special significance, will be defeated. Don't believe me? Think car alarms... when they gained mainstream popularity the 80's they caught your attention when activated, right?. Now when was the last time you heard a car alarm and gave it a second thought, or even took the time to glance in that direction, in the last decade? My money is on you instead rolling your eyes and quickly shuffling to get as far away from the noise as you could, or if it was a neighbors car you became angry and closed your window until the noise stopped. The same will be said for what I'll call a special interest alert overload. When everything, and everyone, is deemed special then nothing, and no one, is.

I hate to say it, but if you have a kid that didn't come out as you might have hoped then it's your responsibility to make sure they're monitored every minute of every day if for nothing more than to save them from themselves. In this crazy, liberal world we live in, where sociopaths and other defectives that would gladly do you harm are allowed to roam freely in society, if you don't protect your own then bad things can and do routinely happen. An example, this tragedy that could have so easily been prevented with a bit more responsibility. Don't attempt to allay the guilt of your ultimate failure to your child by furthering the sheer glut of information that people are expected to assimilate.

Answer me this: when a person's dog gets out, and tragedy strikes, that person may get a fine, jail time, and/or a civil judgment for damages for not being responsible. But, when a person's developmentally disabled child gets out, and tragedy strikes, they get sympathy and a law named after them without any other consequences? If a human life is worth more than a dogs in the eyes of many, then why the heck aren't the people that are morally, ethically, and legally responsible to be guardians for people can't take care of themselves not punished by society for their failures like any irresponsible pet owner would? That makes absolutely no sense. The parents/guardians of a person that isn't mentally capable of good judgment should be held to the highest possible standards of responsibility, and held accountable on every level if they choose to fail. And don't come back at me with something like they're suffering enough, because they should be suffering. The tragedy is their fault, but that doesn't mean that they don't deserve to answer to society for what they've done (or failed to do) in addition. And if you can't be bothered to provide that 24/7 intense commitment for care of the life that you brought in to the world then at least get your mentally challenged ward Lo-Jacked... it's not expensive.

The ultimate responsibility for your own safety, and the safety of those you care about, lays with you and you alone, so make the right decision and don't allow them to be in a situation where they could be in danger, or wander away like the story here, in the first place.

I'm not seeing a down side to prudent spending. Why we think it's a good idea to waste billions upon billions shoring up some third-world desert on the other side of the planet is beyond me. Let those people kill each other without interruption if they choose to... it's none of our business and good for the global gene pool. Until I start to see significant returns on our already trillion dollar plus investment then those insignificant countries can rot, because they're far from worth it. When I see Iraq sending over fleets of tankers filled with free oil for years to repay us then that'll be a good start...

It sounds like a case of good riddance to me... pay the homeowner and not the family that, according to the story, clearly raised a son that made bad decisions and reaped the consequences. The original stories on this site, and stories on other sites about this incident, give much more background that must be considered, so I don't see much hope that the poor, grieving parents are going to walk away with anything but a huge attorney bill.

Sorry, Tobeck family, but your kid isn't worth $20 million, not by a long shot, especially since he would seem to have brought it all on himself. Cut the old man a check for HIS suffering and emotional distress if you're going to play at that nonsense... and if you have any other kids then hopefully they will make better decisions, or you might very well be repeating this again in the future.

Good for the bull! Such a thing is barbaric.

I'm sorry, but anyone that is foolish enough to venture out in to the wilderness with bad weather approaching isn't going to receive any sympathy from me for being so utterly stupid. Hopefully they'll be found well, and hopefully they'll receive one hell of a bill for the resources wasted on saving them from their dumb decision. If they can't afford to pay it then parachute them back in to the bush country...

Another example of why our tort system needs a complete overhaul. Suing for damages when there's only been the claim of hypothetical damages is nonsense. It's time to rewrite terms of service for sites so say, and mean, 'we do our best to secure your data, but nothing is 100% and anyone with a functioning brain would understand that, so you're taking a risk, and assume equal liability, by purchasing online.' These steady stream of awards, that mostly enrich the vile lawyers, have got to stop because they don't make rational sense.