What the hell?

[conuly]

Since when is it "abduction" to help a little kid find Mommy? Note: The mommy in question isn't the one pressing charges. There is some sanity left in this world.

Comments

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

I'm thinking this has something to do with a legal technicality... It sounds like the police officers thoroughly understand the situation, but that there's some law saying that under no circumstances are you supposed to take a child around with you that isn't related to you, and the only legal action is to turn them over to the closest thing to an "authority", and employees are the only ones legally permitted to do that sort of search with a child. I dunno... All I'm saying is I don't think anyone actually thinks the child was "abducted", as such; the police are just bullheadedly pursuing the fine-print of the law, and in doing so creating a disturbing precedent.

[leora.livejournal.com]

But by their interpretation you also violate the law if you take the child to the authorities, because they are saying you cannot lead a child anywhere for any length of time unless you have a clear legal right. Their argument is just as valid if they arrested him for taking the child to a store employee.

Of course, if you're going to nitpick the law like that, you can probably arrest the mother or at least get child protective services involved for neglect.

I really don't think these laws were ever meant to be used in those ways.

[flamingtoilet.livejournal.com]

Ah yes, no good deed goes unpunished.