I just don’t understand drinking and driving

@hawkeye10,

ossobuco wrote:

Yeh, we all agree on that. But leaving in such a situation is a human tendency, and I don't take it as automatic guilt. Very well may be, but not by definition.

hawkeye10 wrote:

True, and he will not get any credit for turning himself in.

Depending on how the statute is written,
that might be legal. He identified himself to police.
Proving the DUI might be troublesome for the D.A.,
in that he was at home and possibly he might argue that his blood
alcohol level was affected by what he drank at home, after the ax.

David

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

In this case he should not be charged with leaving the scene as it made no difference

why? because the guy died later in any case? what if he'd called from the scene and the ambulance had attended earlier and there was a chance of the guy surviving?

or was it because the dead man might have been homeless?

I don't know who you are in real life, but the person you portray here is not someone I'd welcome into my home.

1 Reply

I have no sympathy for drunk drivers.
None.

there is NO excuse for that. People KNOW that drinking impairs their driving, yet they choose to do it anyway because of their cocky self centered mindset " it wont happen to me. Im not that drunk".

People who drink and drive should have their license revoked permanently the first time they are caught. No questions. YOU KNOW it removes your ability to drive safely. You KNOW it can kill someone. YOU KNOW there are very simple ways around it too. Cab, friends, buses hell.. even some insurance companies offer a break on cab fare for you. There IS NO EXCUSE.

the second time... felony prison sentence no less than 20 years.
If you are willing to deliberately do something that you know will kill someone because you are too self centered to prevent it, you do not deserve to drive . Do it again and it is a brazen disrespect and disregard for other people. Off to jail with you.

It has nothing to do with 'personal freedoms' and everything to do with an ever problematic ' im too good for things to happen to me' thought process.

but.. i REALLY REALLY have no tolerance for drunk drivers.

I know someone who is on his 9th DWI.
Yes, 9th.
Still has his license...and here in the state of texas. Go figure. Confused

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

Quote:

why? because the guy died later in any case? what if he'd called from the scene and the ambulance had attended earlier and there was a chance of the guy surviving?

Because if JC is right he called as soon as he got home, two blocks away...it made no difference in finding the perp for sure, and almost certainly made no difference in the outcome for the victim

http://www.mapquest.com/#f12bced4e94a47333865c2ac

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

In this case he should not be charged with leaving the scene as it made no difference, this is the state charging because it can, not because it should.

leaving the scene of a crime is the same rule no matter what happens.

that has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever heard you say..

0 Replies

Either way Thom is in trouble. He’s out on bail. Morgan is right, in this town there is no excuse for driving after having a few. You leave the bars and the cabs are lined up.

Just two months ago we left a friends house and were driving home, we were not drinking but I almost hit a guy crossing the road. He was an African American man and it was dark, I didn’t see him until we came within a few feet. He was crossing in the middle of the street!

1 Reply

Quote:

Weird that they think it's tragic for the guy who killed someone. I never understand that perspective.

I don't understand how it is not tragic for the guy who killed someone. His life is irrevocably changed. He may do jail time and he will live with the guilt of having killed someone for the rest of his life. This is tragic by any definition of the word?

Yes you are all correct that he is responsible for the tragic situation he is in, and it is easy to argue he deserved it (although there are many drunk drivers who don't kill anyone). And, you are also correct that there is an innocent victim who death is more tragic. But the fact is his life is ruined in a way that he didn't intend.

I had a student who himself died in an accident. The accident was caused because he was drunk. The fact it was the result his own bad decision didn't make it any less tragic. I am not saying that this guy shouldn't face the consequences of his action or that he isn't responsible for this accident and death.

How does it help to be so vindictive and unforgiving that you can't see the tragic nature of what was an unintended consequence of poor judgment?

3 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Weird that they think it's tragic for the guy who killed someone.
I never understand that perspective.

maxdancona wrote:

I don't understand how it is not tragic for the guy who killed someone. His life is irrevocably changed. He may do jail time and he will live with the guilt of having killed someone for the rest of his life. This is tragic by any definition of the word?

Yes you are all correct that he is responsible for the tragic situation he is in, and it is easy to argue he deserved it (although there are many drunk drivers who don't kill anyone). And, you are also correct that there is an innocent victim who death is more tragic. But the fact is his life is ruined in a way that he didn't intend.

I had a student who himself died in an accident. The accident was caused because he was drunk. The fact it was the result his own bad decision didn't make it any less tragic. I am not saying that this guy shouldn't face the consequences of his action or that he isn't responsible for this accident and death.

How does it help to be so vindictive and unforgiving that you can't see the tragic nature of what was an unintended consequence of poor judgment?

Well said, Max. SO STIPULATED.
We seldom agree, but this time: u got it right.

David

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

I have no sympathy for someone who appears not to have had the sense not to drink and drive.

I don't see any excuses for that behaviour. It is easy enough to avoid.

Either don't drink or don't drive. I don't care which decision they make as long as it results in not driving under the influence.

It's similar to the discussion re texting/mobile use while driving. I am simply not sympathetic to people who choose to be distracted while driving. There is no need for it.

1 Reply

@MMarciano,

Which points to it maybe not being the driver's fault.

To reiterate, I don't know, and think your surmises are likely, but there is a lot of jumping here.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

poor judgment

how very p.c. of you

I'm not liberal enough to call it anything but stupid.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

The part about him calling the cops has been left out, if true this would be so normal as the "journalists" tend to cooperate with the state in vilifying the accused. Publishing his name and address is more of the same.

That wasn’t reported in the paper. My friends told me today Thom called the police when he got home and when the police arrived he was intoxicated.

4 Replies

@ehBeth,

Well let me ask this Beth.

People have known for decades that unprotected sex comes with a risk of Aids. People suffering and dying from Aids is not tragic? What about lung cancer, or drug addiction?

I have done some stupid things in my time (including unprotected sex). Maybe that is why I can have sympathy for people who screw up their lives due to human failure.

1 Reply

@jcboy,

Quote:

The part about him calling the cops has been left out, if true this would be so normal as the "journalists" tend to cooperate with the state in vilifying the accused. Publishing his name and address is more of the same.

jcboy wrote:

That wasn’t reported in the paper. My friends told me today Thom called the police
when he got home and when the police arrived he was intoxicated.

The D.A. has to prove that he was drunk
at the time of the ax, not later at his home,
when blood alcohol tests can be administered,
in order to make out a case of DUI.
I wonder how that will develop.

David

1 Reply

@jcboy,

That'll sway my view. Of course, so could the bike rider have been intoxicated...

I don't know enough yet.

0 Replies

@jcboy,

jcboy wrote:

My friends told me today Thom called the police when he got home
and when the police arrived he was intoxicated.

Has he gotten a lawyer yet??

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

He’s out on bond, we haven’t heard if he has a lawyer or not but if not he better do so and quickly.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Nope. Not tragic.

At a push I'd say it's unfortunate.

Once someone's stupidity affects someone else's health or life, I pretty much lose even that degree of sympathy.

~~~

Your right to be stupid ends when it causes a problem for anyone else.

You get HIV/AIDS because you were knowingly lax, that's unfortunate.

Your wife gets HIV/AIDS because you were stupid, you're stupid. The outcome for her is tragic. You get no sympathy.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Interesting to see David have such a liberal view of the situation.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

That's not too difficult.

There is the evidence of the people he was with earlier in the evening.

Also, a good set of toxicology tests will be able to pinpoint when he started drinking, and if there was anything else in his bloodstream that could have impacted his ability to respond.

A sober driver, with good reflexes, can do a decent job of preventing serious injury to someone who jumps in front of a car, let alone someone on a bicycle who might have been swerving (if we believe the things posters here are trying to add to the scenario).

People have to remember that cars can be dangerous. They are weapons when they are controlled by the wrong person.

Don't drink and drive.

If you do, don't expect sympathy.

3 Replies

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know