I mean she asked Kevin where is his family and he answered. She should have stopped there. Asking him where he lives was
-
Geeky Randy — 9 years ago(December 13, 2016 06:14 PM)
by
mikeyg24
Tue Mar 24 2015 05:00:20
IMDb member since June 2006
Incorrect. Under tort law a business has what's called 'a duty of care' to anyone entering their premises not just unaccompanied minors but even adults so yes it was her business. After that there was something
obviously unusual about the scenario
and of course a responsible adult would try and get to the bottom of it whether it was their business or not.
Seeing a child buying groceries is somewhat unusual, yes, but what else was she supposed to do? Refuse him? It's not like he was buying tobacco or liquor, so she had no reason to restrict him from purchase.
Book:
http://geeksteronmovies.blogspot.com/p/the-geekster-guide.html
Votes: 3,622 -
mikeyg24 — 9 years ago(December 18, 2016 08:46 AM)
It's not like he was buying tobacco or liquor, so she had no reason to restrict him from purchase.
At what point did I say she should have restricted him from purchase? I'm sorry but I have to insist you point that out! I merely indicated that she had a right to try to get to the bottom of a suspicious situation as a responsible adult.
I'll wait for you to show me where I stated she should have refused him service but I'm sure you accept that you jumped the gun!
We have to show the world that not all of us are like him: Henning von Tresckow
. -
Geeky Randy — 9 years ago(December 23, 2016 08:49 PM)
At what point did I say she should have restricted him from purchase?
You never did. At what point did I claim you did? My pointwhich I'll reiterate out of the kindness of my angry shriveled heart even though I thought it was clear enough for an eight-year-old to understandis that there is no point of reaching enough. If she asked no questions or every question in the book, she couldn't do anything. So OP says she was too intrusive, you say she didn't do enough; I'm saying that I agree she should've been suspicious due to the oddity alone, but asking no questions or several questions would've resulted in Kevin buying groceries. So now that you've become passionate about the conversation, what would you have asked and what would you have hoped to get out of the conversation?
Book:
http://geeksteronmovies.blogspot.com/p/the-geekster-guide.html
Votes: 3,622 -
fiatlux-1 — 11 years ago(March 25, 2015 03:47 PM)
I agree, she was half-playing with him half-trying to get information.
As to why she believed him, remember this was 1990. Things were a little different then, the world was less of a nanny-state as it is now.
Second, Kevin was pretty convincing in his explanation. He didn't seem unsure of himself or scared in any way. He also gave crisp & clear answers to her questions.
3. This was likely an upscale neighborhood, another reason some people tend to 'assume the best'.
I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus.
Didn't he discover America?
Penfold, shush. -
mikeyg24 — 10 years ago(December 05, 2015 10:24 AM)
Yes safer crime wise but he's still a kid. What's to stop him getting hit by a car in the parking lot? Who do they call if he slips and falls in the store? Where is his mom parked? He doesn't have a drivers license so how do they know who he is?
I've had a lot of sobering thoughts in my time Del Boy, it's them that started me drinking! -
helkaermala — 10 years ago(December 22, 2015 04:11 PM)
An eight-year-old should know how to walk around the neighborhood without supervision. By that time his parents should have taught him how to watch out for cars ages ago. Seriously, he goes to school but he can't go grocery-shopping? I don't know how much of a nanny-state USA is but to me this seems excessive. Their neighborhood seemed calm and secure, the kid was cool as a cucumber and did not seem lost at all, so seriously, what's the big deal? Of course it's good to ask where his parents are, but I see no reason to doubt his explanation when it's given as fast and as confidently as Kevin did in the movie.