Kaitlyn's Law and Tesla

[spatterso911]

Kaitlyn's Law:

It is against California law to leave a child under the age of seven alone in the car without the supervision of a person at least 12 years old if:
1. The keys are in the ignition or the car is running, or
2. There is a significant risk to the child.

Given that, how the heck does this rule apply to a Tesla Model S or Model X??
No "ignition" to put a key into...
Isn't the car always "running"??

Let's say for instance, you go through a drive through, and after driving past the window, realize that they messed up your order...

You pull into the parking lot, leave your 5 year old strapped into the rear car seat. Close the car door, turn on the A/C via remote and head into the restaurant to exchange the order. You have a direct line of sight to the car at all times while in the restaurant. Your trip takes about 5 minutes total...

So...

Did you just violate the law???

How about if it is 100 degrees outside temp versus 78 degrees??
You can't see the car?

** Please note that did NOT occur, but the possibility did spark a debate in the household, and had us both scratching our heads as to what the most reasonable answer would be... **

 

[dsm363]

It's probably one of those things that you may be right but you'd have to go through a lot of pain and expense if someone saw it and didn't know what they were looking at.

 

[MileHighMotoring]

My wife would have my head if I left my kid(s) in the car while I ran into a restaurant for 5 minutes. Kids are a hassle and a headache, but just unbuckle them and bring them in if you're going to be more than a few seconds. BTW how exactly does a kid in distress look when they're strapped into a carseat? Line of sight doesn't help much IMO.

 

[rothermel]

I agree that the perception of leaving a child in a bad situation (I have a 3 year old) from other people on the street who just do not understand, could potentially cause so much headache, that it wouldn't be worth the risk. I've woken and taken my kid out a few times, to go into a restaurant (for carry-out by the front window) for about 2 minutes, because I didnt want someone freaking out. Trying to explain that the vehicle is never "on" and never "off" isn't going to work if someone is worked up and / or trying to be a hero. Bummer. In 10 years it will be different.

 

[jerry33]

I agree it's not worth the hassle, but the dash does say "car off".

 

[yo mama]

Plus, you can monitor/control the AC from your Tesla phone app. Most folks don't know that, so they think you're some kind of a negligent monster if you leave your dog in the car when running an errand.

 

[S'toon]

Someone said in the dogs in the Tesla thread that they leave a sign saying something like "This is an electric car. The air conditioning is on. I'm monitoring the temperature on my phone. Thank you for your concern. phone number"

 

[cpa]

The general public is not aware of Tesla's features. I highly doubt our friendly law enforcement officer does either. I can only imagine the hassles someone might encounter who took the steps above to ensure their tot was safe and comfortably resting in the child seat while Mom or Dad dashed into a building for a few minutes, keeping the line of sight at all times.

I have to believe that this "crime" is considered a misdemeanor and not an infraction. (I am too lazy to check the statute--wouldn't know whether it is in the vehicle code, the health and safety code, or somewhere else.)

Child Protective Services might even be contacted (don't know, just spitballing here.) To go to court to challenge the offense might become expensive and time-consuming, not to mention having to prove that the AC (or heater) was indeed turned on and that the interior temperature of the vehicle was in a comfort zone.

Moreover, there are some wackos out there, and it only takes a few seconds to break the window and take your child.

All in all, I would take the extra time to remove my child (or grandchild) and take the infant with me to complete my brief errand and then replace the child back into the carrier when I returned to my car.

 

[yo mama]

The general public is not aware of Tesla's features. I highly doubt our friendly law enforcement officer does either. I can only imagine the hassles someone might encounter who took the steps above to ensure their tot was safe and comfortably resting in the child seat while Mom or Dad dashed into a building for a few minutes, keeping the line of sight at all times.

I have to believe that this "crime" is considered a misdemeanor and not an infraction. (I am too lazy to check the statute--wouldn't know whether it is in the vehicle code, the health and safety code, or somewhere else.)

Child Protective Services might even be contacted (don't know, just spitballing here.) To go to court to challenge the offense might become expensive and time-consuming, not to mention having to prove that the AC (or heater) was indeed turned on and that the interior temperature of the vehicle was in a comfort zone.

Moreover, there are some wackos out there, and it only takes a few seconds to break the window and take your child.

All in all, I would take the extra time to remove my child (or grandchild) and take the infant with me to complete my brief errand and then replace the child back into the carrier when I returned to my car.

The frunk is also an option. No one can see in there.

 

[NigelM]

You pull into the parking lot, leave your 5 year old strapped into the rear car seat. Close the car door, turn on the A/C via remote and head into the restaurant to exchange the order. You have a direct line of sight to the car at all times while in the restaurant. Your trip takes about 5 minutes total...

So...

Did you just violate the law???

Yes, most probably. This is one circumstance where it wouldn't make any sense to provoke a situation either. If the law is outdated the only alternative is to lobby for a change/amendment.

BTW, it's illegal in FL to leave a child under 6 in a car with the motor running. Yup, it's hot here 10 months out of 12 but the law says you can leave your child for 15 minutes only if you turn off the motor.

Also note that in many states (maybe most or even all?) law enforcement may use any means they consider necessary to protect a child. IOW, don't try claiming foul after a LEO smashes your car window.

 

[Max*]

I wouldn't leave my kids in the car. Not because I'm afraid they'll be hot, but because I'm afraid of what the nanny state wackos would do.

 

[NigelM]

.....because I'm afraid of what the nanny state wackos would do.

Dont blame "nanny state wackos", blame the parents whose actions killed these children:

http://noheatstroke.org

 

[mwulff]

Dont blame "nanny state wackos", blame the parents whose actions killed these children:

http://noheatstroke.org

Considering the population size of the United states those are some pretty low numbers. I'm impressed it's not more, but would of course prefer 0 deaths.

Still, not a number to get worked up about. I would put up signs in the car like some dog owners did.

 

[Pete90D]

Yes, most probably. This is one circumstance where it wouldn't make any sense to provoke a situation either. If the law is outdated the only alternative is to lobby for a change/amendment.

BTW, it's illegal in FL to leave a child under 6 in a car with the motor running. Yup, it's hot here 10 months out of 12 but the law says you can leave your child for 15 minutes only if you turn off the motor.

Also note that in many states (maybe most or even all?) law enforcement may use any means they consider necessary to protect a child. IOW, don't try claiming foul after a LEO smashes your car window.

FL has some crazy laws. It's like the one (from what I was told when I lived there) that if you have insurance you don't need a helmet on a motorcycle, but if you don't have insurance you have to wear one.

I think the law makers were drunk both times

 

[spatterso911]

The general public is not aware of Tesla's features. I highly doubt our friendly law enforcement officer does either. I can only imagine the hassles someone might encounter who took the steps above to ensure their tot was safe and comfortably resting in the child seat while Mom or Dad dashed into a building for a few minutes, keeping the line of sight at all times.

I have to believe that this "crime" is considered a misdemeanor and not an infraction. (I am too lazy to check the statute--wouldn't know whether it is in the vehicle code, the health and safety code, or somewhere else.)

Child Protective Services might even be contacted (don't know, just spitballing here.) To go to court to challenge the offense might become expensive and time-consuming, not to mention having to prove that the AC (or heater) was indeed turned on and that the interior temperature of the vehicle was in a comfort zone.

Moreover, there are some wackos out there, and it only takes a few seconds to break the window and take your child.

All in all, I would take the extra time to remove my child (or grandchild) and take the infant with me to complete my brief errand and then replace the child back into the carrier when I returned to my car.

In California, it is an infraction with a fine. I agree, it will take a long time before ICE drivers fully understand what the differences are between BEV and ICE cars. I guess the technical answer after consulting a few law enforcement friends is that if the temperatures are not such that the interior temp can be assumed to be dangerously high, the car is considered off and therefore does not violate Kaitlyn's law. I think the safest way to go would always be to not leave a living being in the car at any time if you aren't right next to the car. The event that sparked the discussion in my household occurred on one of my rare trips to a gas station to grab a cold drink. A woman was frantic at one of the gas station islands trying to get back in her car. She apparently left her child in the car and somehow the locks activated and the child was locked in the car. Since the car was equipped with a keypad (Late model Explorer), we tried a few combinations and got lucky. Thankfully, it was not a hot day and the child was completely unharmed, but the woman learned a valuable lesson about leaving her kid in the car and leaving the keys in the ignition as well! All the same, it got me thinking about how that law relates to a Tesla, since the car is capable of controlling it's interior temp without a key fob or "engine" running...

 

[brucet999]

Legal issues aside, it may not be a good idea to leave a child unattended in your Tesla just because any mechanical device can malfunction and any quick errand can be delayed. If the AC failed and it took too long to do that quick errand, the result could be very unpleasant or even dangerous.

 

[Alysashley79]

Really just follow the age law. As long as you remove the fob from the car once you're out of the car the car turns off. If you have a 5 year old by themselves in the car and it's locked etc and the law says 6 it's illegal regardless of they're cool or warm enough etc. the car isn't always running as most believe. Once you leave the drivers seat it turns off and you have to depress the brake pedal to turn it back on again.

 

[spatterso911]

Really just follow the age law. As long as you remove the fob from the car once you're out of the car the car turns off. If you have a 5 year old by themselves in the car and it's locked etc and the law says 6 it's illegal regardless of they're cool or warm enough etc. the car isn't always running as most believe. Once you leave the drivers seat it turns off and you have to depress the brake pedal to turn it back on again.

Well, actually the law is violated if the car is "ON" or "running" and you leave a child in the car. If the car is off and the child is not in any perceivable danger then the law is not violated.

 

[spatterso911]

Legal issues aside, it may not be a good idea to leave a child unattended in your Tesla just because any mechanical device can malfunction and any quick errand can be delayed. If the AC failed and it took too long to do that quick errand, the result could be very unpleasant or even dangerous.

+1. No piece of tech is infallible.

 

[Roaddkill]

FL has some crazy laws. It's like the one (from what I was told when I lived there) that if you have insurance you don't need a helmet on a motorcycle, but if you don't have insurance you have to wear one.

I think the law makers were drunk both times

Speaking of crazy laws I have a clause in my State Farm motorcycle insurance stating "If you sustain a gunshot wound from an uninsured motorist you are not covered". Reading between the lines I believe if the person does have insurance I am covered. Living in Maryland where insurance coverage is mandatory it seems like the slacker w/o insurance would be the most like candidate to shoot you after an accident.