[hanbura]

Leaving children in the car for short periods has occasionally practical benefits, just as with pets. And both humans and animals do just fine in cars as long as you make sure that the interior doesn't get too hot. In this instance it's more about making sure harmless behavior isn't accidentally outlawed.

>Never mind that the concept of free range parenting in America is something mostly for the white and wealthy.

How is that? The US isn't Norway, but it is still very safe. I don't see why helicopter parenting should be required?

[fzeroracer]

Because the occasional practical benefits do not outweigh some of the more irresponsible parents leaving children or pets in cars on hot/cold days. I view that as being more of a public safety issue much like seat belts.

As for your second point, it's because for a lot of the poorer parents they don't really have the ability to let their kids roam freely. Either due to proximity, lack of funds and so forth. Not to mention the institutional problems minority kids face on a daily basis (see: black children being shot by police).

It's not about requiring helicopter parenting but rather that laws like this don't really solve the actual problem for the majority of parents in the US. It's effectively lip service and I guarantee the wriggle-room left in the law will be used to harm minorities more than anyone else.

[kolpa]

Cars have air-conditioning, heaters, and openable windows.