Britney commits reckless endangerment!

Wow, so because she thought her baby was in danger(being strapped in the backseat), she thought it wise to unstrap the baby and drive with one hand while the baby sits inches from the airbag??? Dunce.

 

I would have to think that there were some witnesses that could say if she were being harassed or not. Either way she's an idiot. Why not hand the child to the body guard in the next seat? Or, have him drive while she's in the back seat with the child?

 

If he's a professional bodyguard (versus muscle) then he shouldn't be asked to do those things. You can't protect your principal if you're occupied or distracted.

 

Great picture. Sick, but funny!!

 

Doesnt that car have a back seat? cant you put a car seat in the back seat?

 

According to the first link, the baby was removed from the back car seat while stopped & waiting at a Starbucks. (BTW, it also says the bodyguard went to get the drinks - so much for not giving errands to "professional" bodyguards). Once the papparazzi showed up, she would probably have to exit the car to put the baby back in the car seat, which would expose her even more to the papparazzi. That was the part that she was probably trying to avoid. Dumb and negligent to drive away with the baby in her lap, though. She should have just lived with the additional exposure.

 

And yet it was probably done how many times in the past 50 or 60 years? A hundred million times? It's just a whole lot of politically correct hogwash to cause a celebrity some more hassles. It's like those bicycle helmets. A hundred million kids rode bicycles for over 100 years without those stupid little helmets. And yet in today's politically correct climate, it isn't considered "proper" to show a kid riding a bike without a helmet like a hundred million kids did for a 100 years. AND like a few billion Chinese STILL do every day without one of those silly helmets. "But HORSEFLY, if you don't wear a helmet, you might get hurt in a wreck". Yeah, big deal. If you don't ride an unstable moving vehicle like a bicycle in the first place, then you won't even need a helmet to avoid getting hurt.

And if your momma had bought you a 57 Testa Rossa in 1964, you'd be a millionaire today. But your momma called and said she didn't, so you ain't got it, so deal with it and stop putting Britney down just because you weren't baggin' her back when she was hot.

 

And we all know how good she is at driving: http://lulop.com/post.php/1209

Actually, this is only part of the video. I couldn't find the rest which showed her trying to park the mercedes. It took her like 7 minutes just back into a parking space. I just hope her husband can do better, the fact that he is driving a 360 makes me very sad.

 

I'm not sure why you're spouting off at me for. It was dumb & negligent of her to drive off in front of the papparazzi with the baby in her lap. First, they love controversies, which sell more papers, and this was raw meat for them. This is the dumb part. Second, it is against the law, whether you think it's PC or not, and papparazzi take pictures. This is the negligent part.

 

No, just full of reality as always. All the Britney bashers are obviously suffering from sour grapes syndrome. They couldn't get it so now they bash it. And I suppose you were also leading the search party that was chasing Kate Moss around the globe because she allegedly had snorted cocaine at some party 6 months ago?

Excuse me while I go rip some tags off a few sofas and mattresses in defiance of the overbearing politically correct authorities.

Not spouting off, just exercising my patented biting sarcasm. As for being against the law, so is speeding. So let's park a few cop cars down the street from the next Ferrari club meeting so that we can save society by writing some speeding tickets that we all know will eventually occur SOMEWHERE along the driving route.

 

Arlie, thank you for protecting trailer trash girls. We're here to protect the offspring. I guess you forgot how many of us have mocked this pop star from the beginning.

Up through the early sixties, there weren't even enforceable seat belt laws. Just "Scream Bloody Murder" commercials.

Brittney - If you're exactly where you spent your life preparing to be, in the spotlight, there's been certain laws about safety belts and child seats in California for a long, long time.

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27315.htm
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d12/vc27360.htm

Now, you'll have to learn all this in some safety class and pay a negligible fine - probably cost Kev a 1/2 oz. of Skunk
http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/code/code.html?sec=veh&codesection=27302-27317
http://www.aroundthecapitol.com/code/code.html?sec=veh&codesection=27360-27368

 

Good question. She probably made most of that money touring - I suppose Billboard would have boxscores for her tours in their year-end reviews. I find $150m hard to believe as well.

 

How many of you have allowed your kid to sit on your lap and allowed them to "steer" your Ferrari around your block?

 

Wacko Jacko hangs his kid over a balcony and you're all worried about Britney driving her kid for half a block without a car seat. Good to know the F-chat police are on the job. The world, including Britney, will sleep better tonight.

 

Funny, you say that as if people condone what MJ did!

 

"Patented biting sarcasm"? Needs some work.

My point is that she was dumb to do it in front of the papparazzi. They take pictures. Their job is to report. In your example, it would be no different than speeding in front of the cops when you see them right next to you. DUMB. Get it?

 

Some specialists may correct me, but I believe tours are the main revenue source for artists, much more so than records.
Back in 1999 she was the shiznit and probably made more than 150Mil. A house in the trailer park can't cost more than a Navigator.

 

AFAIK, you're right. Tours are the big money. However, they don't make all of what their tour grosses (I'm guessing 50%, if that), and $150 mil is a huge, huge tour- only U2 did that last year ($260m!) with The Eagles in second at $130m and then Neil Diamond at $71m, IIRC. The older acts make the most - the Stones, McCartney, etc were up there too.

If he said Britney was worth $70m, that would sound about right - but then again I guess I might be underestimating sales of things like apparel, stickers and other merchandise that was *everywhere* in 2000.

 

Britney is not the only defect in the gene pool. In the last several months I have seen a couple of incidents like this, including one stupid mother letting her ~5 year old 'drive' thru a residential area.

 

As Wax said, she wanted to be famous, she got it, and now she must deal with the nature of fame, to whit being photographed and hounded whenever she goes out. Following from that, if you are going to break a minor law, then do it when no one is watching. If someone is always watching then be perfect, as in Caesar’s wife.
Why anyone would want such fame is beyond me......

Moving slightly off topic, from the age of four on all I wanted to do was get in the front seat of the car. The view was better and you were part of the action. Being in the back was less immediate, and that was before headrests turned the rear seat into a plush version of Lindenberg’s Ryan monoplane. I remember well the first time I got to sit on an adult’s lap and steer the car up the drive, it was AMAZING - we’re talking the ‘50s here. Today, that’s illegal, and worse still, in a modern car it can be very dangerous.

Thus, seen from my youthful perspective, I find it incredible that the front passenger seats of cars, through mandatory legislation, have been fitted with small bombs that will kill children if they go off. It sounds unreal in a way, as though the best ice-cream or cartoons could now kill children. And why are these devices fitted? Because active restraints are not allowed, the seat belts must be loose before the impact. In other words, kids can’t get involved in the driving experience because adults passengers probably won’t clinch up properly.

Is it any wonder that the standard of driving is getting worse? I mean if you are never let even sit in the front until you are 12 (?) how interested are you going to be in getting behind the wheel? By then, thanks to computer games and emerging cynicism any interest will have been burned out of you.....

 

I've done the same thing with my baby...




















...when my car's parked in the driveway. Little tyke loves to "drive" my car.