@firefly,
DAVID wrote:Your idea of fairness is to mention the drunkeness of one of the drivers, but not the other one ?
firefly wrote:Why should "fairness" even enter into what I said?
I 'll take that as a rhetorical question; (one that
defines she who asks).
firefly wrote:That Mr. Lancaster was killed by a drunk driver is all the factual information I have.
My idea of "fairness" is not to mention something I do not know to be fact about the cyclist.
Your admitted
IGNORANCE is the foundation of your befouling the name
of one of the deceased parties to the collision, but not the other one !
firefly wrote:I have no reliable factual information about the state of his sobriety,
nor do I think it's particularly relevant regarding the manner of his death.
The moral concept underlying and motivating the legal prohibition
of driving under the influence of alcohol is that impairment resulting
therefrom will reduce the degree of skill with which a driver operates
his vehicle, thus increasing the probability of loss of control.
firefly wrote:Do you have access to Mr. Lancaster's medical records from that night?
Drunkeness has been attributed to both drivers.
So far as I 've heard,
neither side has denied that.
If u wanna take such a
radical epistemology of the situation:
I have no proof
that either one of them was under the influence.
firefly wrote:How do you know whether he was drunk?
Like Will Rogers, I only know what I read in the newspapers
(or in A2K) concerning
both of them.
firefly wrote:And what difference would it make?
It means that by his drunkeness, his negligence contributed
to his death, and very indirectly to Tom 's death.
firefly wrote:Would it change the fact that he was hit by a car, and the driver of the car was charged
with DUI manslaughter and leaving the scene, and Mr. Lancaster died
as the result of his injuries?
Maybe; we don 't know the dynamics of the collision. Being
"charged" proves nothing.
( Zimmy was
"charged" with manslaughter n murder. )
It is possible that thru his drunken mis-use of the bike,
he crashed into Tom 's car. Nothing has been proven.
It appears that
BOTH drivers were equally prohibited
from driving under the influence:
The 2013 Florida Statutes:
316.193
Driving under the influence; penalties.—
(1) A person is guilty of the offense of driving under the influence
and is subject to punishment as provided in subsection (2) if the person
is driving or in actual physical control of a vehicle within this state and:
(a) The person is under the influence of alcoholic beverages,
any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, or any substance
controlled under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that
the person’s normal faculties are impaired;
(b) The person has a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 or more grams
of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood; or
(c) The person has a breath-alcohol level of 0.08 or more grams
of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
