I just don’t understand drinking and driving

@firefly,

Your hypocrisy is shining its bright beacon once more, FF.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

Quote:
Thom was an idiot both for calling and for saying that he thought that he might have hit someone

Spoken like a true sociopath.

Are you denying that the state in this case is refusing to incentivize good behavior? The things that Thom did right have earned him zero good will with the state from appearances, this is not good policy.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

David there is also the necessary defense as in it was necessary to leaved the scene to call for help.

Not without first stopping your car to even look at the victim.

He could have flagged down another car, run to the nearest house or store, etc.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Only against self-incrimination--meaning you have something to hide.

LOL the statement to invoked the 5 amendment is to answer your question may tended to incriminate me.

Take note of the word may and only the person who invoked that right judgment matter.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

The things that Thom did right have earned him zero good will with the state from appearances, this is not good policy.

He simply spared the state the time and effort of coming after him with an arrest warrant, and he spared himself the problem of being considered a fugitive from justice. Had he not turned himself in, he might have been denied bail because he could have been deemed a flight risk.

Turning himself in does not absolve him of driving drunk, hitting someone with his car and killing him, and then leaving his victim to die.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Not without first stopping your car to even look at the victim.

He could have flagged down another car, run to the nearest house or store, etc.

So stopping on a roadway during conditions where others cars could likely run into you would be a good idea Firefly?

So instead of taking a minute to go a block to reach a phone he should wait around for another car?

Sorry but a known phone that could be reach within a minute seems a sane thing to go for.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Take note of the word may and only the person who invoked that right judgment matter.

Take note of your incoherency.

Forgive me if I don't consider your mangled and incomprehensible communications worthy of response. I'm not spending my time trying to decipher your nonsense.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Sorry you do not like the bill of rights either Firefly and would wish to repeal it as it only protect criminals.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

So stopping on a roadway during conditions where others cars could likely run into you would be a good idea Firefly?

Stopping the car, to block traffic, so that no one else would run over the injured victim, might have been a good idea, don't you think?

Simply pulling over to the curb and stopping was what Thom was required to do--and that's what he failed to do. He knew he hit someone. His continuing to drive without stopping is inexcusable.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

Turning himself in does not absolve him of driving drunk, hitting someone with his car and killing him, and then leaving his victim to die.

An the law technically allowing it does not obsolve the state of the miscarriage of justice of holding him up for 15 years for waiting a couple of minutes longer than the state would have liked to be alerted.

3 Replies

@firefly,

Not if the impact of another car would drive your car over him and harm others in their car also

It all depend on the conditions at the time and in a heavy frog conditions for example stopping in the middle of a roadway is not a good idea.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

If he did not have a cell phone in working order I do not see where he did anything wrong in dealing with the problem depending on the conditions.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

I understand why Thom feels that he needs to take a plea deal, as I predicted as much, but in this case I would like to have seen him demand a trial. I would challenge 12 citizens to line up behind the state on this fleeing the scene charge.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

If he did not have a cell phone in working order I do not see where he did anything wrong in dealing with the problem depending on the conditions.

He almost certainly did, and so what Thom did was wrong, but once the state went way overboard on the charging then I say **** it, dont penalize Thom at all for driving one block too far.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

An the law technically allowing it does not obsolve the state of the miscarriage of justice of holding him up for 15 years for waiting a couple of minutes longer than the state would have liked to be alerted.

Go read the specific statutes he is charged with violating.

The penalty of 15 years is deliberately harsh precisely to act as a deterrent--so that people will not act the way Thom did after hitting someone with their car--to just keep driving without stopping. He's the one who ignored the law. The state had every legitimate right to charge him with violating that law.That's not a "miscarriage of justice", that's the application of justice when people violate a law.

And I really do suggest you read the two specific statutes he is accused of violating--you might learn something.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

The penalty of 15 years is deliberately harsh precisely to act as a deterrent--so that people will not act the way Thom did after hitting someone with their car

It was set up to avoid people letting others die when they did not have to because no medical care was called in in a timely manor. In this case said care was called in, by THom, so setting him up for a mandatory minimum of 21 extra months for a call that came a couple of minutes too late is a mis-carrage of justice. This situation is not the kind of situation for why we made these laws, using this law here anyways is abuse at the hands of the state.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

in a heavy frog conditions for example stopping in the middle of a roadway is not a good idea.

That's probably true, Laughing

http://www.frog-life-cycle.com/graphics/Frog10.gif

Why do I feel like I am talking to a nitwit when I answer your posts?

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Sorry summing aid in the most rapid possible manner seem to be what the state would wish people to do not stand there and watch someone bleed to death for example so as not to be charge with leaving the scene of an accident.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

This situation is not the kind of situation for why we made these laws, using this law here anyways is abuse at the hands of the state.

Blah, blah, blah...

This situation is exactly why we have such laws. He hit a man with his car, didn't stop, and kept on driving. It's a clear violation of the law.

Read the specific statutes he is charged with violating.

And talk to your buddy, BillRM--I think he needs help--he seems to be suffering from brain frog. Laughing

http://cdn.graphicsfactory.com/clip-art/image_files/image/2/1346772-2650-Royalty-Free-Little-Frog-Cartoon-Character.jpg

0 Replies

Thom isn't getting out of this, he will do time. Question is how much.

1 Reply

I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know