Police smash car window to "rescue" reborn baby doll


121 Responses to “Police smash car window to "rescue" reborn baby doll”

  1. Belac says:

    I came here to post what Jeannieh said.

  2. SeamusAndrewMurphy says:

    I want one of these things, only as a life-size alligator. And leave that in my backseat with the clone baby.

    Cops in this situation are adorable, caring, human beans. Give them credit for giving a damn in a society in which that doesn’t pay.

    I still want an alligator though.

  3. padster123 says:

    #98 – post of the month. Teresa Nielsen Hayden, I salute you.

    And I still can’t really understand how, in Chroma1′s mind, we got from some public servants attempting to save a baby’s life, to the shooting of scary intruders in someone’s house.

  4. Anonymous says:

    @82: That does not cover you shooting someone for breaking into your CAR. It only covers your HOUSE. Now, I don’t know about you, but most people don’t live in their cars…

  5. dainel says:

    If you left such an expensive doll in the car, would it not be damaged by the heat?

  6. Anonymous says:

    I don’t blame the cop at all; I mean, think about it: If you saw what looked to be a dead baby in the backseat of someone’s car, would you not freak out? First, I would be alarmed, then scared, then worried, and then try to bust the poor thing out of there.

  7. Mark Frauenfelder says:

    “I think the police department/city should pay to replace it even though I don’t think they did anything wrong.”

    I don’t think the police dept. should pay for the broken window. It was very irresponsible for the women to leave this realistic doll in her car like this. She should have known better.

  8. mannakiosk says:

    How many real children die in the world every day?

    I suggest spending the $1000 on a charity for feeding or medicating or otherwise saving actual living babies instead.

  9. Cpt. Tim says:

    mannakiosk, that’s a great sentiment only if you honestly can offer up a list of your frivolous expenditures that could instead go to the needy.

  10. a2ricedgti says:

    If you have something that looks like a baby, be prepared to have people think its a baby.

    There is no embarrassment on the part of the police as they were doing their jobs.

    Re the fake IED argument…dont forget the Boston Lite-Brite scandal (I believe a traffic counter also fell victim).

    Not to mention how heads would roll if somebody thought a dieing baby was a doll and let it go.

  11. Jeff9821 says:

    The very first thought that came to me when I read the part about the one that was carried in a Hummer was “she’s obviously doing that just so she can drive in the HOV lanes.”

  12. rAMPANTiDIOCY says:

    as a caveat, i HATE police. still, in this situation, i don’t think they were altogether wrong. however, they should certainly be responsible for the repairs. if they refuse responsibility for their actions, then it’s another story altogether.

  13. mannakiosk says:

    I only buy food, cigarettes and beer. You can’t expect me to go without cigs and beer, could you?

    Well, actually, there’s plenty cigarette butts to be found on the street that I could smoke instead. I do feel a bit ashamed. I could do more.

  14. Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator says:

    Thank you, Padster.

    I think we got from police smashing in a window to save a (supposed) baby’s life, to shooting someone who’s trying to steal your car, because Chroma has been recently burgled and is still working through the anger, sense of violation, and personal insecurity backlash. I may completely disagree with the conclusions Chroma is reaching, but I have to recognize that he’s in a bad place right now.

  15. Anonymous says:

    That doll looks serious real. If you click on the link, you’ll agree.

  16. Cpt. Tim says:

    “I’d say the person who resorted to calling me a name was inflammatory”

    A sociopath isn’t a name, its a (vaguely defined by the psychological community) condition. Shooting someone for a minor offense is sociopathy.

    If i confessed a strong desire to steal someone could apply the term kleptomaniac without me getting too offended by it. In fact the term sociopath has been applied to me itself in a recent discussion where I expressed apathy at the idea of the entire human race being wiped out in defense of nature. I took it in stride because It was applicable. But if i am a sociopath i’m only one in principle, not in action, as I deplore violence.

    #73/Mark, Fair enough. Its just what I would do if i were the city. I’d give her a stern warning but i don’t think she actually broke any laws. If she didn’t get compensated i don’t think she should lose any sleep over it.

  17. chromal says:

    #83: I was more envisioning a car parked on my property, say, in the driveway… The whole point is that it hopefully would never come to violence; you tell the perpetrator that they are being placed under citizens’ arrest and if they make one move, you will be forced to assume it’s a treat and will defend yourself within the limits of the law. Ideally, the police arrive and handle the bad guys. But, yes, if they attack, I’m not going to sit there like a wet noodle while they do god knows what to me, or maybe my car if they’re the vindictive type.

    I’m honestly curious what you would do in any of these scenarios, since you seem to be full of criticism for defense of self and property, but still haven’t proffered alternatives that would come to their defense. Also, place yourself in my shoes; police response time is 45 minutes. Your answer should be most enlightening…

  18. Cpt. Tim says:

    I don’t think you’re allowed to adopt that level of sarcasm while making that dubious a claim.

  19. Cpt. Tim says:

    also i’d like to add that I don’t think Chromals comments toward me should have been disemvoweled.

    Do I think they’re ridiculous? Yes. Is he possibly trolling? maybe. But it makes for good reading, and amusing conversation. He didn’t use any hate speech and really didn’t even say anything that was patently offensive. Such censorship is gross overreaction. If I hadn’t seen his comments to me before they were mangled I wouldn’t have had the pleasure of responding to them, as i wouldn’t bother attempting to decipher them.

  20. Anonymous says:

    ok i can see y it would be considered a real baby but to tell you the truth let them get as real as they can get. make it so it crys, sleeps and even poops.and throw up Schools need more dolls like the baby new born for young girls to learn what it takes to take care of a baby. there r far too many young girls who r coming out of high school pragnent and have no idea what to do. this is not coming out of a mother, im a high school grad of 09 and i can tell you out of 300 girls there were few that havent been or were pregnent im one of the few that wasent prag. but its not the schools falt it has to do with the budget cuts to schools funding that dont alow the the schools to get the lastest in baby realisum dolls to teach young adults what it takes to cars for a infant.this just doesnt go for only girls this aplys to guy who puressure there young girlfreinds into pragnence. so like it siad make them as real as it get cause it might help schools one day in the health feild ( such as child care class, baby daycare, ectra)
    so thats my piont i wanted to make that its not so bad if there realistic.

  21. Nekura20x6 says:

    My wife just pointed out that the Today show just had a segment that recommended using these dolls as a way to not forget your real child in the car. (As part of your routine, you place a doll in the [hopefully empty] car seat every time you leave the car.)

    I’m buying stock in an auto glass place…

  22. Modusoperandi says:

    Chroma’s house was burgled by one of these creepy baby dolls. It was like that scene from Trainspotting, but with a baby burglar instead one crawling across the ceiling.

  23. padster123 says:

    So – just to wrap up, and forgive me for raking the ashes over… but if Chroma1 is slowly dying in the wreck of his car, and some cops/fire fighters arrive and start to cut the roof off the car in order to reach and save him, will be wake up, pull out his big gun, and blow the evil fascists all away?

  24. Cpt. Tim says:

    My last reply was to post #87.

    “The whole point is that it hopefully would never come to violence; you tell the perpetrator that they are being placed under citizens’ arrest and if they make one move, you will be forced to assume it’s a treat and will defend yourself within the limits of the law.”

    This is a entirely reasonable and a far cry from shooting or beating someone who has broken your car windows. Unfortunately citizens arrest still doesn’t permit you to shoot someone who is simply breaking into a car. If they didn’t obey your orders and ran, you wouldn’t be able to shoot them. In most places you could use force to restrain the felon, but you would not be able to shoot or bludgeon them unless they attacked you, and the moment the person is subdued, further attacks turn from self defense to battery.

    If you’re interested in what I would do to protect my property, If i owned a handgun, and someone broke into my house, and the threat level was nebulous, I would use lethal force to protect myself and my family. This is evidenced by an earlier statement where I admitted:

    “Now if they were breaking into your house and the threat level of the intruder was much more ambiguous, I’m willing to grant you much more leeway in terms of the level of force you’re willing to deploy. So will a court of law.”

    You either ignored or did not not understand this concession.

  25. timestocome says:

    Of course the police should have broken the window to save the doll. These decisions are made very quickly and rightly so. He/she didn’t have time for a close exam.

    The owner of the doll should be committed for a psych eval. There is something broken w/ grow ups who carry dolls around.

    What is that poem containing advice including ‘gracefully giving up the things of youth’ ? Someone should mail these folks a copy.

  26. Anonymous says:


    Try pulling a fake gun (that’s designed to look exactly like a real gun) on a cop, and see how far your logic gets you.

  27. arkizzle says:

    Is anyone else creeped out by the use of the word “Reborn” as a verb, in #84 (Angela Hoy)?

    That’s almost as icky as these dolls.. yuck.

  28. Brainspore says:

    I suspect Chromal is being intentionally provocative with his wacky statements. If not, then let us hope some cop declines to rescue him from a beatdown “just in case they were just filming a movie.”

    • Antinous says:

      I suspect Chromal is being intentionally provocative with his wacky statements.

      Or was left in a hot car too long.

  29. Anonymous says:

    Ok, now a 3-year-old having a babydoll like this, i can understand, but a GROWN WOMAN??? SOMEONE needs counseling! lol! Well, really they shouldnt make these things so realistic

  30. Anonymous says:

    As crazy as it sounds, as least we have people being aware of there surroundings. and so what if a window is broken, those can be replaced compared to if it was a real child. Good job guys!

  31. Takuan says:

    I wouldn’t have waited for the cops

  32. buddy66 says:

    Yes, Arkizzle, me! But I can’t stop thinking about the broken-hearted women who buy these dolls. What sad stories they must have. Imagine the grief! Pushes my empathy button . . . makes me want to cry a river.

  33. pollyannacowgirl says:

    There was a BBC documentary about the baby-dolls’ counterparts, the RealDolls.

    One man travels with his “girlfriend” and puts a sign on her to indicate that she is a doll and does not need resuscitation.

    After watching these people, I felt sorry for them. And relieved that they have an outlet for their pathologies.

  34. bcsizemo says:

    I’ll make sure it’s in my bag when they hall me off to my padded cell….

    I thought someone was making these in “memory” of people’s children who had died. Kind of a way to “immortalize” the child. Now that seems freakish to me.

    As a side note, wikipedia is already updated with this.

  35. buddy66 says:

    I don’t think Chroma is a sociopath, any more than I think he has a daughter or a wife. I think he’s just a hostile young man with anger ‘issues’ and dreams of violence. He doesn’t have just a chip on his shoulder; he has a wedge of take-out pizza.

  36. Anonymous says:

    OK, Fake baby… controversy… Why don’t they take these babies into school for their “Child care class” Instead of having those extremely fake babies that you have to shove a key into it’s back and twist it to make it stop crying. This would be extremely more helpful to this students. It wouldn’t be as embarasing to carry around those Reborn Babies if people actually think their real instead of the hard plastic babies who look like saten recarnated. Maybe it’s just me.

  37. chromal says:

    I have no problem with real babies being rescued, but that wasn’t the case here at all. It’s bizarro-land here to see people blaming the victims.

    f sw smn brkng nt MY cr, ‘d fl nttld t sht thm, r bt thm slly wth mtl br, r spry thm ntl thy’r skd wth mc. nd thn prss chrgs.

    How is this different from a swat team breaking into the wrong home and getting shot by a homeowner sincerely feeling threatened? The error of the authorities is no defense. The outcome, and not the intent, is what matters in principle.

  38. Anonymous says:

    The important think is that the baby is okay :) Kidding aside, some of the reborn baby dolls are really cute! Have you seen them before?

  39. prom77 says:

    What are we going to do as we approach the singularity and lifelike human simulacra become increasingly common? Soon they’ll be making Reborn Dolls that gurgle and cry.

    Problems like this are why I’ll never be able to buy an android duplicate to have se… er… science with.

  40. Nick Shogun says:

    In this situation, who pays for the mirror? I don’t think either party is really to blame.

  41. Anonymous says:

    My question is “WHY would his wife even carry this thing around with her? Why would she even own one??? WIERD!!!

  42. Jake0748 says:

    “The outcome, and not the intent, is what matters in principle”.

    So, a mistakenly broken window matters more than (for all the cops know), a dead or dying baby.

  43. Takuan says:

    how about RealDoll politicians?

  44. Cpt. Tim says:

    Buddy, as i understand it reborning is primarily a hobby of doll collectors who buy inferior dolls and painstakingly make them more realistic.

    So while collecting dolls themselves my creep you out, this process is more akin to modelers. and not a grief coping mechanism.

    I am making a balsawood TARDIS, but i never actually lost a real tardis:


  45. chromal says:

    No. A mistakenly broken window matters more than a ‘rescued’ inanimate object.

  46. Tensegrity says:

    This is nothing new–remember when the cops were prying everyone’s trunks open to save all those mother-in-laws?

  47. Clay says:

    Chromal: “WTF, you’re breaking into my car!”

    Concerned citizen: “You nutjob, you left your kid in here!”

    Chromal: “That’s my super awesome and totally convincing ReBornâ„¢ fake baby, you nitwit!”

    Concerned citizen: “How the hell was I supposed to know that?”

    Chromal: “It’s not moving, right?”

    Concerned citizen: “Neither do real babies with heat stroke!”

    Chromal: “Look, why would you think that someone left a baby to suffocate in their back seat when Occam’s razor says it’s obviously just a highly detailed and realisic dummy left in an all-too-common real-life situation?”

  48. rebdav says:

    In another life in another country I was a firefighter/paramedic and during that time served as an armed medic for SERT/SWAT team callups. While I agree that most cops are sometimes brutal and often bigoted against non mddle class WASP’s(small people with big muscles and guns). I as a (enlightened and well adjusted) medic would after a quick pull of the door handle have popped the window if that doll thing really looked like a overheated baby. Having dealt with plenty of living and too many dead babies, looking rubbery and dollish is a very serious sign. A baby in a vehicle(or even the appearance of a baby in danger) activates the common law legal concept of implied consent which means that a reasonable person in the situation would want rescue and treatment for their baby. This is what allows us to enter after a 911 call even if the door is locked or allows CPR on an unknown collapsed patient.
    The SERT team assignment was different and all the free shooting range time, Rambo tactical training, and paintball was not enough to compensate for joining a group of thugs banging in the doors of other thugs, after a few months I dropped out.

  49. buddy66 says:

    Okay. Whew. That’s a load off. There are a few things that hang me up like that. Posts about unhappy women and children really get to me. I may be a misanthrope, but that doesn’t mean I don’t feel pity and grief. Thanks for the straightener.

  50. arkizzle says:

    Cpt Tim, did you watch the Channel4 documentary, or the related BB post? They both tell quite a different tale. Neither tell the whole story of course, but neither does deciding this is all just model-making in good fun. There is definitely weirdness afoot..

  51. arkizzle says:

    Sorry Buddy :(

  52. padster123 says:

    Hmm – Chroma1. I’m playing at “guess the vowel” and I suspect you called me a “tool”.

    Rather a tool than a wannabe psychopath.

  53. wylkyn says:

    @#38: They broke a window in the hopes of saving a life. They didn’t knock down an old lady and kick her in the stomach. I think your paranoia and hatred for authority might be coloring your judgment just a tad.

  54. Anonymous says:

    Chromal, I have to disagree with you. Given that the doll looks pretty much exactly like an unconscious baby, there’s no way to tell from the outside whether it actually is one or not. As I see it, your position can be either:

    1) The police should not break car windows to rescue a baby when they cannot unambiguously say that it actually is a baby – and given that unconscious babies will be motionless, you would be saying that’s it’s understandable if one is not rescued in this situation; or

    2) The police are justified in acting as they did in the situation, in which there will be instances like the one above, but all unconscious babies will be able to be rescued.

    However, you’re trying to say that it’s okay only when it’s a real baby, but not when it’s just a doll, when in the situation there’s no way to tell with absolute certainty. As for myself, I’d rather have situation 2 happen. Given that I don’t think the police acted inappropriately in this instance, even though they were mistaken, I believe the car owner should be responsible for repairing the window themselves.

    As for blaming the victim, come on, if I left a life-like baby doll locked in a hot car on a sunny day, not only would I not be surprised if the window was broken, I would consider it a sign that people watch out for others if someone broke the window in an attempt to rescue it.

  55. Anonymous says:

    well i dont blame the policeman i mean what if it was a real baby? you can never be too careful so it wasnt really his fault or the dolls.

  56. coldspell says:

    Can she be convicted of fake child abuse?

    How many of the people who buy these things on eBay actually pedophiles sublimating their secret urges? <:\

  57. minamisan says:

    i might want to reconsider the one i have strapped to my hood.

  58. Brainspore says:

    I wonder how many dudes get both the realdoll and the reborn baby so they can have a family they don’t have to feed.

  59. axleworthington says:

    I say the police are not at fault.

  60. chromal says:

    Ww. Thr r sm srsly msgdd flks pstng hr, sdng wth bsv lw nfrcmnt. Hnstly, y ppl dsrv t b th frst gnst th wll whn th rvltn cms.

    “Plc shld hv fr pss t dstry yr prprty f thy r stpd nd wrng?” Yr tttd wll lst bt 5 mllscnds th mmnt tht prncpl s ppld t y, yr prprty, r yr lvd ns. Y sck fscks prbbly thnk ts ky t g rnd tsrng nncnts wh ps n physcl thrt, t.

    Gds, hp y mv t Rss. Y’ll lk thr thrtrn/ttltrn flr.

  61. eustace says:

    this is so obviously a case of utterly irresponsible law enforcement and disgustingly culpable dd prnts cld fxt ltmzt mr tnlltd klrmnsktz rnqd ccrkld the sun gleaming from each facet of the precious gems, scattered across the sand.

  62. Anonymous says:

    Wow. Best “comment reading” ever! There is some funny stuff here. The kind of funny that comes to mind while in public and has you laughing to yourself…out loud….anyway, seriously though…the doll comes with a warning, therefore leaving the owner of the doll responsible for any and all actions taken on the part of the realistic doll. It doesn’t take much thought to realize that. The cop was doing his civil duty. The woman was wrong for leaving the realistic doll unattended. If she is married the husband may want to reconcider having any children with her. o.O

  63. chromal says:

    Seriously, just because you disagree or uncomfortable because of some of what I’ve observed isn’t a reason to call me names like ‘dud’ or suggest I am psychopathic or sociopathic… That’s sort of juvenile, really. Rebut ideas with ideas.

    As the recent victim of a home burglary, it seems troubling the that community opinion here seems to be criminals should have free run of things. I don’t own a firearm, and even if I did, I would discharge it with extreme reluctance, and even then, I wouldn’t shoot to kill. But if you question my right to do so, or the justification of same, I seriously question your judgement in these matters. Anyone who is screwed up enough to break into your property is implicitly a threat to life and limb if in your presence.

    This is getting way off from the discussion topic, which started with police and a crowd of apologists who feel the means justify the ends. Again, I have no problem with the authorities as long as they take responsibility for the damage they caused, but absolutely question their ability to go in smashing car windows without accountability just because they have a badge and an assumption or snap judgement. With power comes responsibility, folks.

  64. angryhippo says:

    Unless it is in a child seat, how could a cop really mistake a motionless doll frozen in a position for the real thing? Of course that begs the question: Who the hell is driving around with one of these freaky things in a child seat?

  65. APOLLO says:

    * Cops mistake doll in car for unconscious baby
    * So they smash vehicle’s windows to rescue bub
    * Officers say it was frightening for police and public

    FRANTIC police smashed a window to rescue a seemingly unconscious baby from a locked vehicle in Queensland last week only to find it was an extremely lifelike doll.

    The embarrassing mistake, made in regional Gympie, is not an isolated incident and passionate creator of the “reborn” baby dolls Vynette Cernik knows just how easily they can be mistaken for the real thing.

    Ms Cernik said last week’s case of mistaken identity mirrored a similar incident in the US when the window of a new Hummer was broken by police trying to rescue a “baby” that turned out to be a doll belonging to the owner’s wife.

    Selling for up to $1000, the painstakingly hand-painted dolls were so lifelike with eyelashes, fingernails, milk spots and wispy hair that they were constantly fooling people, Ms Cernik said.

    “They’re even weighted to feel like a baby’s weight and they flop like a baby,” she said.

    The dolls can even come with umbilical cords, cord clamps and their own birth certificates.

    “They are so realistic, people do become attached to them,” Ms Cernik said.

    “You don’t stop playing with dolls because you grow old. You grow old because you stop playing with dolls.

    “People do have to be careful when they go out with them. I tell them to hold them properly, not dangle them by one leg or something, because other people do think they are real babies and become alarmed.”

    Ms Cernik said she felt sorry for the Gympie police and the members of the public distressed by the situation and suggested owners should put warning cards on the dolls.

    Gympie Sen-Sgt Phil Edwards said last week’s incident had been frightening for both police and members of the public who genuinely believed a baby was dying.

    “It was incredibly lifelike,” he said, agreeing that warning cards on the dolls might be a good idea.

    He said when the car’s owners were eventually found they were “nonplussed and apologetic.”

    Yikes! Big Mistake! D.

  66. Cpt. Tim says:

    I knew the anti police comments would manifest themselves as soon as i saw this. I can imagine the exact same attitude coming from the exact same posters if it had been a real baby and the police had not broken into the car.

    my sister is a police officer. she’s a decent individual, polite, she’s put her life on the line helping people before. She disagrees with some laws so with things like marijuana use she’ll look the other way. But there are a lot of people out there that by default, hate her.

    but i’m sure they’ve had a bad experience with a police officer before so they imagine its justified. I know race and profession aren’t on equal footing, but as an example i’ll say that I was mugged by 3 african american teens.

    I don’t hate african american teens… just 3 of them.

    Police officers are people in positions of power and power can be abused and is abused by some police. I’m wary of them but i’ve had far more good experiences with police than I have bad ones. And I have had bad ones.

    But yeah. I just can’t agree with the narrow minded reasoning at work here. As for the window. I think the police department/city should pay to replace it even though I don’t think they did anything wrong. I think the lady should take it as a lesson and not leave her creepy thing in the back seat.

  67. Antinous says:

    Click the link and look at the photo (and I don’t mean the baby) before you make your judgment. I’m giving a thumbs up to the police.

  68. mikelotus says:

    i do know that one could have much fun with one of these, now which one to choose.

  69. chromal says:

    @3: Are you insane? Jesus. Of course the police are at fault. Criminal vandalism, breaking and entering, and probably a few others. They should be charged the same as any other street punk, and they sure as hell had better pay for all damages, actual and punitive.

    • Antinous says:

      #6: Have you ever seen a dead baby? The police should charge the woman with disturbing the peace and creating a public nuisance and charge her for the call.

  70. padster123 says:

    I am generally quite suspicious of the police , but in this situation they were 100% right. Of course they were.

    And the person who left the doll in plain view in a locked car is wholly in the wrong. VERY inconsiderate behaviour. I would consider the broken window to be their responsibility, and moreoever, they might even be a justification for charging them for creating a nuisance, wasting police time etc. Idiot.

  71. Simon Bradshaw says:

    Chromal @38; so, out of curiosity, what is one expected to do on seeing an apparently unresponsive infant inside a locked and unattended vehicle?

    I’ve come across hard-line Objectivists who assert that children are the property of their parents and the latter cannot be held accountable for their welfare, but that’s a pretty extreme view even by libertarian standards. (It was years ago, online, and I suspect someone was Being Extreme To Make A Point, but even so it’s the only time I’ve seen anyone suggest that it was an invasion of privacy for the state to try to protect children at all.)

  72. bcsizemo says:

    I think if you buy one of these things you should get a years worth of psych counseling for free. That’s just disturbing.

  73. Orchestra Spy says:

    #38, or Chromal, you are a dud.

  74. Kibble says:

    “With power comes responsibility, folks.”

    That applies to people who leave very realistic baby dolls in their cars.

  75. Cpt. Tim says:

    “If I saw someone breaking into MY car, I’d feel entitled to shoot them, or beat them silly with a metal bar, or spray them until they’re soaked with mace. And then press charges.”

    I totally missed this.

    It’s okay people, he’s just a sociopath. He’ll be sharing a jail cell with the person who broke into his car in the near future…except the car thief will get out of jail sooner.

  76. Cpt. Tim says:

    “I would discharge it with extreme reluctance”

    Shooting someone for breaking a car window isn’t extreme reluctance. It’s criminal. On top of that your concession that you wouldn’t shoot to kill ( i’m assuming you would beat them savagely but not QUITE to death) doesn’t change the extreme force with which you’re meeting a non violent crime.

    Now if they were breaking into your house and the threat level of the intruder was much more ambiguous, I’m willing to grant you much more leeway in terms of the level of force you’re willing to deploy. So will a court of law.

    So yes, i do think it is right to question someones use of force based on the severity of the crime.

    “Anyone who is screwed up enough to break into your property is implicitly a threat to life and limb if in your presence.”

    That makes you come across as an awfully frightened or weak person. I have friends who are plagued by feeble homeless crackheads breaking into their cars. None of them would shoot them. No matter how much we despise crackheads.

    I’m just saying man, you shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun. If you do someday own a gun you will be well equipped to prevent loss of life or property, but based on the fact that the lower end of reasons you’d find its use justified, you will end up in prison. A court of law will not agree with your reasoning.

  77. GonzoMultiverse says:

    Wait til the day that they robotize these little creatures, er, babies. Much fun to be had by all!

  78. fnc says:

    “and they flop like a baby”

    When you shake them?


  79. jenjen says:

    Someone needs to make window decals that say “pretend baby on board”

  80. taj says:

    @4 angryhippo: “Unless it is in a child seat, how could a cop really mistake a motionless doll frozen in a position for the real thing? ”

    Babies dying of heat exhaustion tend to go motionless and lifeless as they *die*. The lack of motion would / should simply spur greater urgency, as the hopes for revival fade.

    The lack of a child seat wouldn’t stop me breaking the window. It wouldn’t seem at all incongruous to me that the kind of adults who’d leave a baby locked in a car would also be the kind of parents to fail to use a car seat.

  81. n says:

    #2: you win

  82. tomic says:

    Those dolls creep me out — I want one, to nail it to a board — BABY ON BOARD!

    In this instance I have sympathy for the cops. Most cops on the street mostly want to do Good Things.

    And who would want to later say, “but I thought it was just a doll”!

    The people with the dolls — that’s just crazy. But hey freakiness is always fun to watch!

  83. chromal says:

    #56, #57: Point taken. I don’t necessarily think the police were ‘bad,’ as long as they take responsibility for their error. Their badges should not represent a ‘free pass’ to make mistakes sans accountability. If they pay the cost of repairing the window and a little extra for the trouble they’ve caused, all is (relatively) well.

    #58: It’s kind of like how the TSA makes me throw out my bottled water to protect me. I’ll take a pass on this kind of ‘protection,’ thank you very much.

    #61: h, ky. ‘m nt, bt y r tl.

    #62: Ys, ‘m scpth bcs thnk t wld b rght t prtct myslf, lvd ns, prprty frm fln thfs nd vndls. Y srsly dsrv tst f yr wn mdcn. Jst lk pssvly n, hmmng hppy sng t yrslf, whl pnk rps yr dghtr r wf, r brks nt yr cr r hm wth nknwn ntntns. Yh, rght.

    • Antinous says:


      Your comments seem designed to inflame readers rather than discuss issues. I suggest that you take a break and have some pie.

  84. KingOfCats says:

    Sounds like Abyss Creations has some competition.

  85. Tarmle says:

    These dolls have been carefully remodelled to closely resemble a real human infant, so no one should be surprised when they are mistaken for such. It was extremely inconsiderate for the owner to leave this thing in plain sight in an unattended vehicle.

    If you leave an imitation IED visible in your back seat, have you any right to be surprised when you return from shopping to discover the Bomb Squad have destroyed your car in a controlled explosion?

    And on that juxtaposition we have the basis for a very psychological form of terrorism… or possibly a Brass Eye sketch.

  86. taj says:


    What would your reaction be if a random concerned passerby, rather than a police officer, had been the one to smash the window? Would you still think the *good samaritan wannabee* a thug?

    Like Takuan, I’d probably have smashed the window without waiting for the police. (Especially if the car were anywhere near a pachinko parlour – the number 1 hot spot for dead babies in hot vehicles here in Japan.)

  87. Peaceflag2007 says:

    That police officer did the right thing — is he supposed to say “meh, it’s probably a doll?”

    Give the guy some respect, that REALLY looks like a child!

  88. monopole says:

    You think that’s bad. Wait till they smash the window to rescue the RealDoll you left in there.

    Anyway, Hummer windows should be smashed at regular intervals on general principle.

  89. buddy66 says:

    A thief can have my car, but probably not if Greta’s in it. He can break into my house, if Greta will let him. I am rarely armed, and too old to effectively dissuade a thug; but Greta is another story…

    she’s my five-year-old Doberman. She watches my stuff.

  90. Modusoperandi says:

    Only if they’re after his creepy doll.

  91. Cpt. Tim says:

    “Yes, I’m a sociopath because I think it would be right to protect myself, loved ones, property from felon thiefs and vandals.”

    No, you’re a sociopath because you think shooting someone is an appropriate response to a non violent crime.

    “You seriously deserve a taste of your own medicine.”

    I am open to that. the next time someone breaks into my car (if i owned one) I will not shoot them. That will show me.

    “Just look passively on, humming a happy song to yourself, while a punk rapes your daughter or wife”

    I want to changing your working on this this part so it fits more in line with what were actually talking about here.

    I will just look passively on humming a happy song to myself while a punk rapes my car or my motorcyle. To be fair you are right, i probably wouldn’t be happy about someone raping my car. But i wouldn’t shoot someone either, because I am not a sociopath.

  92. dougrogers says:

    Hey, #*, BCSIZEMO:

    When you buy one of these, you should probably get a suitcase to keep it in.

  93. Nick Shogun says:

    I’d say the best solution in this situation is to cover up the Real Doll with a blanket or something if you’re leaving your vehicle unattended in public.

  94. Takuan says:

    what if someone has to break in to rescue Greta on a hot day?

  95. stratojoe says:

    She should have just put a bag over its head before she left the car – problem solved.

  96. Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator says:

    Add me to the list of people who would have phoned 911, then tried to break the window myself. Babies aren’t nearly as resilient as adults, and being left in an unventilated car parked in an unshaded area can kill anything.

    Cpt. Tim: go you!

    Coldspell @36, if there are pedophiles who are stuck having a fixation on newborns, and they’re using dolls to satisfy their urges … good!

    Silva @46, I think you’ve identified the principle. If it looks like a baby in distress, we have to act on the assumption that that’s what it is. If a middle-aged guy turns ashy pale, clutches his chest, and collapses on the floor, the EMTs are going to assume that it may be a heart attack, even if the first thing the patient says to them is “I’m not having a heart attack.”

    Chromal @6, 38, 53, 79: I’m sorry you’re unfamiliar with public safety issues, but you really are wrong about this story. There was nothing abusive about what the police did. It wasn’t criminal vandalism, or breaking and entering. People who approve their actions are not deluded authoritarians.

    There is no absolute or sacred right to property, including yours. It’s a social construct. If first responders have every reason to believe they’re looking at a life-threatening situation, or if there’s a serious threat to public safety, they can break or commandeer or even dynamite stuff.

    If your summer cabin is in the path of an emergency firebreak, they’ll regret the necessity. Then they’ll destroy your cabin anyway — and they’ll be right to do so. You should see what they’re entitled to do in case of plague.

    This principle is part of the infrastructure you’ve used and depended on all your life. If you haven’t noticed it until now, it’s not the infrastructure and public safety system’s fault.

    If I saw someone breaking into MY car,

    You yell at them, then call the police; or you just call the police. You don’t physically intervene.

    I’d feel entitled

    Nope. Your’re not in danger of life or limb. Neither is anyone near and dear to you. The property is 100% replaceable. You might have some limited rights if your car were inside your house and they’d broken in, but it would still be nothing like what you imagine.

    Basically, if there isn’t an immediate and pressing need to physically disable someone, don’t do it. Having your car broken into doesn’t qualify. And if it’s within your power to stop them without injuring or killing them, use the least harmful method.

    to shoot them,

    First- or second-degree murder, depending on how long you have to think about it before you pull the trigger

    or beat them silly with a metal bar,

    Assault with intent to commit grievous bodily harm, if by “beat them silly” you mean “keep hitting after they’re down.”

    or spray them until they’re soaked with mace.

    You can get away with a couple of squirts. If you keep squirting after they’ve gone down and are no threat to anyone, especially if you continue until they’re “soaked with mace,” it’s at minimum assault.

    And then press charges.

    You can’t. One’s dead, one has severe head injuries and cognitive impairments to go with them, and one’s in unknown condition after being wantonly over-maced. They’re in some legal trouble for attempted car theft — which, by the bye, is hardly the most serious crime in the world. You, on the other hand, are up to your eyebrows in legal troubles. A convicted car thief is going to get out of prison easily a decade sooner than you will.


    As the recent victim of a home burglary,

    I’m sorry your house got burgled. Get over it. Crimes against property can be very upsetting, but they aren’t uniquely horrible, and they don’t release you from the social contract.

    it seems troubling the that community opinion here seems to be criminals should have free run of things.

    Nobody here has ever said that. I hope you were making a mistake when you said they had.

    I don’t own a firearm, and even if I did, I would discharge it with extreme reluctance, and even then, I wouldn’t shoot to kill.

    You really and truly don’t know what you’re talking about. “Not shooting to kill” is a Hollywood convention. You don’t even point a gun at someone unless you mean to kill them. You sure as hell don’t shoot them unless you’re prepared for that outcome. If you’ve got a lot of training, you can try to not shoot to kill, but it still won’t be a sure thing.

    But if you question my right to do so, or the justification of same, I seriously question your judgement in these matters.

    Go ahead and question, then. You’ll still be in the wrong.

    Anyone who is screwed up enough to break into your property is implicitly a threat to life and limb if in your presence.

    Sorry, no. Not true in practice, and not true in law.

    A car isn’t worth a life.

  97. Sethum says:

    @ #6, there is NO WAY the police officer should be personally liable if any reasonable person under the same circumstances would think that a real baby could be dying of heat exhaustion inside a car. What, do you want to discourage police officers from saving infants from that all too common fate?

    I can see it now. Future Police Officer’s Manuel: “Before attempting to intervene and save an infant when every moment counts, stop and consider, judging from the messy interior with empty gatorade bottles and crumpled magazines strewn about, does this car appear to be owned by someone who would want to keep a disturbingly lifelike and ugly baby doll around them? If in doubt, please take the 15 minutes to run the vehicle’s license plate to determine if the owner might actually have a real child of approximately that age. Next Chapter: How to Spot a Fake Gun-Shot-Victim Doll Lying On the Sidewalk”

    Ok, perhaps the state should be required to compensate the owner, but you cannot fault the police officer for mistaken identity when life could be on the line.

  98. Orchestra Spy says:

    That doll is a freak dead clone of a baby. It does look dead, only worse, and frozen in its dead with an arm up! nd t lks lk ts crppd n ts dprs. Prhps ths dll prfrts fl dr, wth ll rlstc psh rspct, nd thy cght wnd f th ftlty f t ll.


  99. chromal says:

    @81: Interesting; but you don’t appear to know what you are talking about, legally speaking, at least in my state. Colorado Homeowner Protection Act of 1985. The law would most definitely be on my side.

  100. Nores says:

    “If you leave an imitation IED visible in your back seat, have you any right to be surprised when you return from shopping to discover the Bomb Squad have destroyed your car in a controlled explosion?”

    I suppose that depends on how loosely your local bomb squad is likely to define “imitation IED.”

  101. chromal says:

    #69: I’d say the person who resorted to calling me a name was inflammatory; I was just making some valid points. Of course, his name-calling goes un-devoweled, but my response gets mangled by an editor/moderator. Yeah, THAT’S fair.

  102. buddy66 says:

    He’ll soon learn to let dying dogs die.

  103. bcsizemo says:

    It’d be awesome if you could carefully dissect one and motorize it some. Slap in a proximity sensor, and boom, instant “Oh good googlymoogly, that baby’s in danger!”

    I guess for “safety” sake you could have the kids head spin around every 30 seconds or so. Like that wouldn’t freak people out either. They would probably break the window just to find out if it was a spawn of satan, and then hunt you down for the witch you are….

    Oh, oh, radio controlled. Now that would make a great candid camera. Or hidden video, what would you do.

  104. buddy66 says:

    He’ll wish he’d let a dying dog lie.

  105. Silva says:

    Well, I’d rather see this headline than “cop ignores baby in car; dies of heat stroke”. And I’m pretty sure anyone reasonable agrees…

    Also, this: “Gympie Sen-Sgt Phil Edwards said last week’s incident had been frightening for both police and members of the public who genuinely believed a baby was dying.” suggests me the cop was alerted to the situation by other mall-goers, and he acted in the interest of public safety. It’s true that the ye olde ACAB motto has a reason to exist, but in this case it was a perfectly valid action.

  106. slywy says:

    I don’t see that the police have anything to be embarrassed about, although an adult with one of these things probably should. ’tis better to err on the side of saving a baby than letting a doll die. Well, you know what I mean.

  107. Takuan says:

    work on that, its almost there….

  108. spokehedz says:

    I agree with the sentiment that the officer was trying to do the right thing, and not to lambaste him for it.

    The creator of the sudo-baby admits that the purpose of the dolls is to simulate a newborn in as excruciating detail as possible. Therefore, the officer was just trying to re-create the life-like saving of the almost-real infant-simulation in as excruciating detail as possible.

  109. Gilbert Wham says:

    you should keep your realdoll in a roll of stained car[pet in the trunk. Obviously.

  110. Modusoperandi says:

    Sure, they rescued what turned out to be a doll, and good for them for doing the right thing…but they left me here in the trunk.

    Thank god for 12 volt connections and wi-fi.

  111. jeannieh says:

    #38 Chromal, you’re hilarious. Please tell me you’re hilarious.

  112. Cpt. Tim says:

    I see several possibilities here.
    1. you are not reading what i am saying.
    2. you are a troll and like making people type more.
    3. you are moved to joyful tears by my posts and want more of them.

    I shall indulge you. at this point we are talking about shooting a person who is breaking a window of a car (that is not parked in the confines of your living room. Please make arguments in regards to this situation without wildly changing what we’re talking about.

    What I’m hearing from you is this:

    “I am Chromal and I would shoot or savagely beat someone for breaking my car window, and if you question my right to do so you obviously think that criminals should be able to enter my home and will and rape/murder my family members without fear of reprisal.”

  113. AngelaHoy says:

    When I was a kid, I used to have a life-size cloth doll. My friends and I would hide in the woods after dark by the road and throw the doll in front of cars to make them think they’d hit a child. That game ended one day when I threw the doll in front of a car…driven by my dad. He recognized the doll and, well, you can imagine what happened after that.

    Anyway, now I’m a mature adult and I also reborn dolls. I would never be so stupid as to leave one in my car. Reborn doll artists and collectors all know how these dolls can confuse people and the nitwit who left it in her car is 100% at fault. She should have to pay the city for the rescue personnel’s wasted time.

    Angela Hoy, Author
    How to Reborn a Doll in a Day

  114. Anonymous says:

    the people who have these sweet dolls are NOT sick, and neither are the dolls. it’s ok to walk around with a doll.

  115. jeannieh says:

    I thought the idea with these Reborn dolls is that you’re supposed to love them and care for them as though they’re an actual baby. If leaving her doll in the car is her idea of loving and caring, it’s probably a good thing that this woman went with a Reborn and not an actual baby.

  116. Modusoperandi says:

    Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator “You sure as hell don’t shoot them unless you’re prepared for that outcome. If you’ve got a lot of training, you can try to not shoot to kill, but it still won’t be a sure thing.”
    It’s like samurai and their sword; you only pull it out of its scabbard if you have a reason to.
    Nobody in their right mind shoots not to kill, anyway. Center-of-mass, as the saying goes. Shooting not to kill would be shooting to cripple, anyway, which seems worse, somehow.
    That said, I don’t own a gun or a katana. I most dissuade thieves by owning only crap. The best defense against burglary and theft is to both not own anything worth stealing and to do so in an obvious manner. That’s why white trash, present company included (you know who you are), have an old fridge and a Camaro with a tree growing out of the engine bay in the front yard. It says to criminals “See this? This is the ”good” stuff. This is the stuff I’m proud enough to show off in public. The rest of my stuff pales in comparison to this.”

  117. genericvox says:

    I’d rather them smash a window to potentially save a baby in danger, than not attempt a rescue. If I walk by a car and see what looks to be an unattended baby inside, possibly dead, I’d be concerned. These fake babies are so lifelike, I’m sure just about anyone would make the same mistake.

    Sucks that their window got busted, but they could have just thrown a towel over it or something to cover it up. And think about the price of these dolls… I wouldn’t leave $1000 in my car in plain sight, and expect it to be there when I return.

  118. bat21 says:

    Reminds me of a Far Side cartoon where a cargo ship carrying mannequins runs aground. A pair of sharks descend upon it. After trying to eat the mannequins, one of the sharks cry out, “WHAT IS THIS? SOME KIND OF CRUEL HOAX?”

Leave a Reply