I just don’t understand drinking and driving

@Rockhead,

Quote:

that is exactly the position you've put yourself in, championing the hawk-turd...

That's pure drivel, Rocky. I surprised at someone of your intellect being caught up in such narrow thinking.

Read my post again, this time without letting your imagination run wild.

1 Reply

@JTT,

you and hawkeye keep spouting whatever you think is so important that you are annointed the messengers for it, and I will go be productive.

toodles...

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

We dont know about the dead guy for sure because no one is talking. There is an information black out. .. The current lack of facts is offensive.

There is no "information black out". There simply haven't been any court proceedings since the bail hearing.

The most relevant fact about the cyclist is the fact that the man is dead--as the result of being hit by a drunk driver who didn't even stop to aid his victim, as is required by Florida law.

Or is the dead man also responsible for the fact that the drunk driver didn't bother to stop his car at the scene? Rolling Eyes

2 Replies

@Rockhead,

Quote:

you and hawkeye keep spouting whatever you think is so important that you are annointed the messengers for it, ... .

Gee, that would make us so unlike all the contributors to A2K, Rocky.

Don't let the screen door hit you? Smile

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

you and hawkeye keep spouting whatever you think is so important that you are annointed the messengers for it, and I will go be productive.

toodles...

Your disregard for the value of conversation speaks volumes.

1 Reply

@JTT,

does this mean I don't have to be polite any longer when you ask stupid or demeaning questions on my threads, JTT?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

my disregard for you is what speaks volumes, turd...

get it right.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

The most relevant fact about the cyclist is the fact that the man is dead--as the result of being hit by a drunk driver who didn't even stop to aid his victim, as is required by Florida law.

We are in agreement, FF.

Are you of the opinion that all those who kill, maim, destroy people's lives and property, steal their wealth, bid and support others who rape and torture them should be held accountable?

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

if you are not interested in contributing to the collective then I am not interested in being concerned about your welfare...I come from Zen where we say "no work, no eat"...

Spoken with the chutzpah of a man who hasn't worked in over ten years. Laughing

And your school age children did not require you to be sitting around the house all day for the past decade.

You also don't know diddly-squat about Zen...

You're simply a hypocrite.

2 Replies

@Rockhead,

Your choice, Rocky.

Better, to my mind, would be that you honestly address those times where you thought I was asking stupid and demeaning questions on your threads, because I can't remember doing such a thing or ever even having the slightest inkling/urge to do such a thing.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Or is the dead man also responsible for the fact that the drunk driver didn't bother to stop his car at the scene?

Would the dead guy be any less dead if the call to 911 had happened a couple of minutes earlier? The contact happened at about 215, by 243 the dead guy had been transported to the hospital and pronounced dead, there was little delay.

It is useful to go back and remember that the leaving the scene laws were originally written to deal with situations where people died because those who hit them did not give a **** about the welfare of the injured. We have in Thom a guy who cared enough to call in the incident to the police with-in minutes, and yet the state is still trying to roll him for for an extra 15 years based upon his not following the technicalities of the law perfectly. In this case this law is not being used as it was designed to be used, it is used as an excuse to take another swing at Thom. This is offensive.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

You're simply a hypocrite.

Whoa, Nelly! Now that's chutzpah, Firefly.

1 Reply

@jcboy,

jcboy wrote:

Last night we had dinner at our friend’s house just down the street. They had a few friends over and one was Eric a day bartender at Alibi.

Alibi is a large place, four bars, patio, and sports bar, video and back bar. Two bartenders at each bar. Eric told us the police have been there three times now and they know which bartender served Thom the drinks by his bar tab.

How do we pronounce that? Like Tom, or like Thread??

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

Spoken with the chutzpah of a man who hasn't worked in over ten years

We see now how little you pay attention to what you read. I have not worked for 1.75 years, with the agreement of my wife as I worked to become a businessman.
At one point in my life I did not work outside the home for 10 years because I was raising the kids and homeschooling, though I understand that according to you that was not working, you as you do having so little regard for what was once considered "women's work".

0 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

Whoa, Nelly! Now that's chutzpah, Firefly.

Not to mention, after it has been pointed out just what a huge hypocrite you are, time after time after time, also highly delusional.

2 Replies

@JTT,

Is it not the ultimate hypocrisy to criticize everyone else for the actions of their country, while keeping your own country's identity a secret?

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

I'm afraid that Hawk has got you this time, Rocky. You're getting dangerously close to sounding like Merry.

I have expressed disregard for Hawk and he for me, but that doesn't stop us from addressing the issues, unlike some others who will go unnamed.

1 Reply

@JTT,

I'm sure that he will enjoy that you think so.

may the two of you have all the fun you can stand together...

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

We have in Thom a guy who cared enough to call in the incident to the police with-in minutes, and yet the state is still trying to roll him for for an extra 15 years based upon his not following the technicalities of the law perfectly. In this case this law is not being used as it was designed to be used, it is used as an excuse to take another swing at Thom. This is offensive.

You seem to have the rather fanciful view that the exact wording of laws can be disregarded when that is not the case. When a law says you are to stop your vehicle at the scene and to offer or get immediate aid for the victim, it means exactly what it says--it does not mean that you drive home and call the police some time later (and you do not know the time interval that elapsed before Thom made that call).

Thom had fled the scene of a crime--it wasn't that he "cared enough" to call the police, he was turning himself in instead of waiting for the police to come after him with an arrest warrent. But, that doesn't change the fact that he had not stopped at the scene, he had not tried to aid the victim, and he did not remain at the scene until the police arrived. Charging him with leaving the scene is applying the law exactly as it was intended, and Thom clearly violated that law.

Quote:

Would the dead guy be any less dead if the call to 911 had happened a couple of minutes earlier?

The man might possibly have been saved if an ambulance had been summoned sooner or if some aid had been given immediately--he was not pronounced dead at the scene.

Quote:

It is useful to go back and remember that the leaving the scene laws were originally written to deal with situations where people died because those who hit them did not give a **** about the welfare of the injured.

And Thom acted like he did not give a ****--he hit the man and kept on driving.

Thom violated the law regarding leaving the scene. And the dead man certainly can't be blamed for that.

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Quote:

Is it not the ultimate hypocrisy to criticize everyone else for the actions of their country, while keeping your own country's identity a secret?

First, it's not 'everyone else', Rocky.

Nope, that's not even in the same universe when compared to the issue I've raised here which you are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at to avoid addressing.

But I acknowledge that you would rather flog this old dead horse than address the issues Hawk so accurately described as outside the "simple mind wheel-house".

Or would you perhaps want to consider describing for me how I was demeaning so that I can make proper apologies.

Or perhaps, you want a little time to disconnect the kitchen sink.

0 Replies

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know