Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Drunk Driving

Loves Vintage

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
4,487
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?

I just read a news article regarding two young children who were killed in a presumed-DUI accident. The other driver fled the scene, so I do not know what evidence they have in this regard, just that it is suspected he was drunk. He did not have a license, anyway, and two arrests for DUIs in the past. First offense 30 days incarceration, $500 fine. Second offense 30 days incarceration, $500 fine. Third offense (on record) would be the accident referenced above.

This happens time and time again. I honestly don't know why there are not more severe penalties, or if it would even make a difference if there were. I'm actually surprised this guy had to do any jail time. I've heard of people walking out after first offenses, just paying fines. Licenses are suspended, except for driving to and from work.

When they used to publish arrests in our local paper, it was inevitably 80% or so DUI arrests.

Will this ever change?
 

Sponsored By:

Related topics:

perry

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
2,541
Princess and I was discussing the disconnect between seriousness of the issue and results of doing it.

In Wisconsin - if you violate the fish and game laws (say fishing without a license, or hunting without a license) the DNR can (and often do) confenscate your boat and the vehicle used to launch the boat, your fishing gear, etc (and perhaps the refrigerator and freezer in which you were storing illegal fish). For hunting voilations its the vehicle and there is at least one case where they confenscated a house and barn where a poaching operation had been cutting up deer. I.e.: violate fish and game laws and you immediately can loose (permanently) everything that you were using in the "crime". The DRN does not care that you still have to pay off your boat, that perhaps it was a freinds boat and vehicle, etc. You immediately loose the items involved in the violation - regardless of prior ownership and any monies owed.

But, kill or severely injure someone from drunk driving and it cost you $500 - $1000 for the 1st violation, and you get a probationay drivers license to boot.

Then there are the people who have lost their license and still drive. Its just another fine (which will never be paid) - and the people drive again.

I say, get picked up for drunk driving and the vehicle becomes the immediate property of the state; and insurance cannot pay you (or your friend) for the value of that vehicle if you had an accident (Insurance can pay for damage and injuries to other parties). That would change things very fast by making the drunk driver responsible for their actions. At least it keeps them from driving drunk again unless they are capable of being responsible for their actions as not only have they lost their vehicle - but few people will lend them another one (of course, some people may have several vehicles - but there is a limit to how many they loose and can continue driving).

Perry
 

packrat

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
10,615
B/c we as a people don't like to make others mad. Gosh, ya mean penalize someone for doing something wrong?? We take more pains to make sure the perpetrator is taken care of than the victim(s). B/c HEY! They have rights TOO yanno. Just b/c a person kills another person doesn't mean they're bad. Just b/c a person drives drunk and gets picked up for it 43 times doesn't mean they're out to *hurt* anyone I mean golly...

There are sooo many things that need to have stiffer penalties and they don't. And they won't. Sadly.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
26,764
Loves Vintage|1383581654|3550123 said:
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?
I'm afraid it keeps happening because alcohol makes us misjudge our capabilities.

I do wish penalties were more severe as they are in many countries, but for the reason I just mentioned I'm not sure it will help.
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,009
Most people don't realize BALs and proper serving sizes. I am sure most the people on this board have driven above a .08 at least once in their lives. Multiple OWIs/DWIs/DUIs (called different things in different states) are usually because the person is an addict and the addict brain does not think rationally or logically.
 

TooPatient

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
8,426
packrat|1383605883|3550422 said:
B/c we as a people don't like to make others mad. Gosh, ya mean penalize someone for doing something wrong?? We take more pains to make sure the perpetrator is taken care of than the victim(s). B/c HEY! They have rights TOO yanno. Just b/c a person kills another person doesn't mean they're bad. Just b/c a person drives drunk and gets picked up for it 43 times doesn't mean they're out to *hurt* anyone I mean golly...

There are sooo many things that need to have stiffer penalties and they don't. And they won't. Sadly.

This.

I've been thinking about this a lot recently as there have been several in our local news. The most recent I've read about is from an "accident" that occurred as three girls were going to a Halloween party and some "man" crossed the line and accelerated into them. One 17-year old girl died at the scene. Her twin sister is in critical condition and may not live.

Another just recently --
A "man" was sentenced to FOUR years in prison after (another) fatal DUI. He and the prosecutor had made a deal that would have let him walk out of court that day :nono: . The judge set their agreement aside and sentenced the "man" to four years.... for killing three people (in two different "accidents").
 

AN0NYM0US

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Feb 10, 2011
Messages
325
kenny|1383607500|3550444 said:
Loves Vintage|1383581654|3550123 said:
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?
I'm afraid it keeps happening because alcohol makes us misjudge our capabilities.

I do wish penalties were more severe as they are in many countries, but for the reason I just mentioned I'm not sure it will help.
Prohibition then? I'm amazed alcohol is legal when other soft drugs are demonized. Imo they are the same. I don't think alcohol should be as accessible as it is. BTW I don't do any drugs and have less than a dozen drinks a year.
 

House Cat

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,677
AN0NYM0US|1383764864|3551719 said:
kenny|1383607500|3550444 said:
Loves Vintage|1383581654|3550123 said:
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?
I'm afraid it keeps happening because alcohol makes us misjudge our capabilities.

I do wish penalties were more severe as they are in many countries, but for the reason I just mentioned I'm not sure it will help.
Prohibition then? I'm amazed alcohol is legal when other soft drugs are demonized. Imo they are the same. I don't think alcohol should be as accessible as it is. BTW I don't do any drugs and have less than a dozen drinks a year.
I don't believe in the term "soft drugs."

I've literally watched someone rationalize not feeding their kids so they could afford their next bag of weed. :((
 

lulu

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 11, 2003
Messages
2,328
Well, prohibition has been tried and was a monumental failure. People died by the score drinking illegal alcohol.

Of course, I think all drugs should be legalized.
 

House Cat

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
3,677
BTW...

This is very timely as my cousin just put up a post on Facebook complaining about how he was denied for an apartment because of a previous DUI. He is appalled! He and his friends are complaining up a storm, making comments about how "they'd better not find out about his overdue library books too!"

I'm disgusted.

I was glad he was denied. My thought being, someone has to hold people responsible somewhere! I don't mean to be terribly judgmental and actually, my cousin has a problem and really needs help (just like the rest of that side of the family.) BUT I was pleased that this apartment complex had such standards.

Now, to decide whether or not to comment on his FB post. DUI's and overdue library books aren't even in the same ballpark. Am I up for the firestorm? :twisted:
 

OreoRosies86

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
2,924
This is a deeply personal issue for me, one I have very nearly lost friendships over during heated discussions. There should be zero ZERO tolerance. :angryfire:
 

perry

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
2,541
lulu|1383772521|3551783 said:
Well, prohibition has been tried and was a monumental failure. People died by the score drinking illegal alcohol.

Of course, I think all drugs should be legalized.
Actually I agree with you.

I believe that all drugs should be available at a local pharmacy store. All recreational drugs as well - with just two restriction.

1) A person can only buy for their own use. Anyone who supplies drugs to anyone else (even a friend) is guilty of a felony. If you wish to talk your friend into using drugs - you need to take them to an approved pharmacy so they can get briefed and sign the acknowledgement/waiver below.

2) The person who buys the recreational drugs must sign an acknowledgement/waiver that they are totally 100% responsible for the results of their drug usage: Any accidents, assaults, etc while under the influence; and that all employers can terminate you "for cause" if you fail a drug test (and all employers can test all employees without any restrictions).

I believe this would:
A) Make recreational drugs much safer for users.
B) Put the illicit drug trade out of business (Drug and pharmacy companies will make a good profit - but the drugs will be 1/10 to 1/4 the cost of illicit drugs).
C) Minimize actual drug use in the long run. Few people can afford to loose their jobs over recreational drug use.

To put this all in perspective: I am random drug and alcohol tested anywhere from 3 to 6 times a year at my job (and just did it Monday of this week). Refusal to take the test, or leaving site once notified that you have been selected for testing, is instant termination. A failed test - depending on the degree and situation means either entry into a drug/alcohol treatment program or termination (there is a medical review board and you can be asked to supply a list of your prescriptions as evidence that what you were taking was a legal prescribed medication). Records are shared industry-wide such that if I loose a job at my plant due to drug/alcohol use I cannot move halfway across the country and get a job in a similar plant (or any company that works in my industry). Pot (and derivatives) are pre-defined as "illegal drugs" nationwide - regardless of any state laws.

If there is any problem at work (or any event in which you were part of the decision or work group) - everyone involved is immediately "for cause" tested prior to leaving site (or at the hospital if transported offsite due to injury or health issue). If there is any suspicion that you are somehow "under the influence" of something - you will be immediately "for cause" tested.

Have a great day,

Perry
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,009
Addiction is an illogical disease. A rational thought would be to abstain from drugs/alcohol if you are driving, caring for children, working, sick, financial problems, etc. But the obsession and compulsion of an addict will cause them to use despite negative consequences. That's really the hallmark of what addiction is. When an addict is craving he/she will say or sign anything to get their addiction fed. So taking away someone's driver's license will not *always* stop someone from driving. Personally I think there needs to be mandatory education even after the first offense. Treatment, I believe, is more effective than punishment. It is cheaper as well.

I have called 911 several times on drivers I suspected were under the influence of drugs or alcohol. I would suggested others do the same.
 

Roxy

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
1,134
House Cat|1383772369|3551780 said:
AN0NYM0US|1383764864|3551719 said:
kenny|1383607500|3550444 said:
Loves Vintage|1383581654|3550123 said:
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?
I'm afraid it keeps happening because alcohol makes us misjudge our capabilities.

I do wish penalties were more severe as they are in many countries, but for the reason I just mentioned I'm not sure it will help.
Prohibition then? I'm amazed alcohol is legal when other soft drugs are demonized. Imo they are the same. I don't think alcohol should be as accessible as it is. BTW I don't do any drugs and have less than a dozen drinks a year.
I don't believe in the term "soft drugs."

I've literally watched someone rationalize not feeding their kids so they could afford their next bag of weed. :((
What do people consider to be "soft drugs"? I'm just asking out of complete ignorance because I've never heard that term used before.
 

Amber St. Clare

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
1,625
This subject infuriates me. My son lost a friend and co-worker due to drink driving--the kid's FATHER showed up to pick him up at 1PM and was dead drunk. The boy didn't want to get in the car, and sure enough drunk dad had an accident and killed his son.

He had a plea deal for 6YEARS {i THINK} and parole afterwards. I believe I wrote a very angry post about this situtation several months ago.

Anyone STUPID ENOUGH to drive drunk should lose their driving privileges for 2 or more years.

I don't care if you drink, do drugs, sniff drano or have relations with goat. Jut don't put the public at risk.
 

Smith1942

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
2,594
Roxy|1383969683|3553202 said:
House Cat|1383772369|3551780 said:
AN0NYM0US|1383764864|3551719 said:
kenny|1383607500|3550444 said:
Loves Vintage|1383581654|3550123 said:
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?
I'm afraid it keeps happening because alcohol makes us misjudge our capabilities.

I do wish penalties were more severe as they are in many countries, but for the reason I just mentioned I'm not sure it will help.
Prohibition then? I'm amazed alcohol is legal when other soft drugs are demonized. Imo they are the same. I don't think alcohol should be as accessible as it is. BTW I don't do any drugs and have less than a dozen drinks a year.
I don't believe in the term "soft drugs."

I've literally watched someone rationalize not feeding their kids so they could afford their next bag of weed. :((
What do people consider to be "soft drugs"? I'm just asking out of complete ignorance because I've never heard that term used before.
I think it's a term differentiating things like weed from Class A drugs - the seriously scary and/or addictive kind that can permanently alter your brain chemistry and can give you hallucinations. So that would be LED, heroin, etc. Although I am firmly anti-drugs of ANY kind, and am not that keen on alcohol either, I can see that there is a huge difference between weed and those really dangerous Class A drugs. I mean, I know strong weed like skunk can do bad things and become addictive over the medium to long term, but someone having their first joint is never going to potentially end up dead like someone who goes on a bad trip the first time they use LED. Someone I know had this terrible trip - she was in her car in the supermarket car park, and she thought there was a huge tiger on her car, trying to get in and bashing the roof in with its paws. And the weird thing about LED is that you can have a trip out of the blue 20 years later. I am against weed as a drug, but it IS rather soft compared to hardcore stuff like that.
 

Roxy

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
1,134
Smith1942|1384031787|3553514 said:
Roxy|1383969683|3553202 said:
House Cat|1383772369|3551780 said:
AN0NYM0US|1383764864|3551719 said:
kenny|1383607500|3550444 said:
Loves Vintage|1383581654|3550123 said:
Why does it still happen so frequently? Why are penalties not more severe?
I'm afraid it keeps happening because alcohol makes us misjudge our capabilities.

I do wish penalties were more severe as they are in many countries, but for the reason I just mentioned I'm not sure it will help.
Prohibition then? I'm amazed alcohol is legal when other soft drugs are demonized. Imo they are the same. I don't think alcohol should be as accessible as it is. BTW I don't do any drugs and have less than a dozen drinks a year.
I don't believe in the term "soft drugs."

I've literally watched someone rationalize not feeding their kids so they could afford their next bag of weed. :((
What do people consider to be "soft drugs"? I'm just asking out of complete ignorance because I've never heard that term used before.
I think it's a term differentiating things like weed from Class A drugs - the seriously scary and/or addictive kind that can permanently alter your brain chemistry and can give you hallucinations. So that would be LED, heroin, etc. Although I am firmly anti-drugs of ANY kind, and am not that keen on alcohol either, I can see that there is a huge difference between weed and those really dangerous Class A drugs. I mean, I know strong weed like skunk can do bad things and become addictive over the medium to long term, but someone having their first joint is never going to potentially end up dead like someone who goes on a bad trip the first time they use LED. Someone I know had this terrible trip - she was in her car in the supermarket car park, and she thought there was a huge tiger on her car, trying to get in and bashing the roof in with its paws. And the weird thing about LED is that you can have a trip out of the blue 20 years later. I am against weed as a drug, but it IS rather soft compared to hardcore stuff like that.
OH! Okay Smith, thanks for taking the time to explain, I see what you're saying. I agree that it's safest to just stay away from anything that can impair your ability to think or act, and I really feel for those that are dealing with addiction of any kind.
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,009
Smith, THC CAN permanently damage your brain chemistry and cause hallucinations. I don't believe in "soft" drugs just like I don't believe in "functioning" addicts/alcoholics.
 

Smith1942

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
2,594
Tacori E-ring|1384038854|3553562 said:
Smith, THC CAN permanently damage your brain chemistry and cause hallucinations. I don't believe in "soft" drugs just like I don't believe in "functioning" addicts/alcoholics.

What's THC - does that mean pot?

I don't have that much knowledge of drugs so I'll believe that you're correct in what you say about what pot can do, and in fact I have heard stories of the damage pot can do, although I've never heard of anyone having a pot trip. However the law classifies things like pot differently from things like LED/heroin, hence the Class A designation. I believe that's a recognition that Class A drugs are infinitely more dangerous, insofar as a person can get a full-blown addiction from one hit at some of the Class A drugs and severe fatal reactions are much more of a danger at first go, with those. I know strong pot can cause all sorts of problems over the medium to long term, sure, as I said above. But I think most people, even non-drug users, are aware of how dangerous the Class As are compared to pot. I mean, remember all those terrible warning posters about the way people look after injecting Class A drugs and crystal meth etc?

Don't get me wrong, pot is a drug and therefore bad, and I don't believe in smoking tobacco OR pot, but pot is not classified as a Class A drug and there are reasons for that. I know what the poster above meant when she said "soft drugs". The Class A drugs have immediate and terrible effects, whereas I've never heard of anyone having any ill effect from a few puffs of a single joint, or heard of anyone tripping on pot. Isn't pot actually meant to be less harmful than tobacco for the health? Anyway, you may not believe in soft drugs - and I know where you're coming from, I'm zero tolerance on drugs too - but pot doesn't have the chemical powers of Class A drugs, which is why it's not a Class A drug. That's not to say it can't do some severe damage over the long term. However, the Class A drugs pose more immediate threats.

And about functional alcoholics - the UK is full of them!! I understand the term. Someone who is deeply into an alcohol addiction cannot hold a job because they are drinking all day, drinking themselves to death, like Nicholas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas. But someone who is a functional alcoholic is perfectly capable of drinking significantly more than the recommended amount, yet is able to turn up to work on time, process information, attend meetings, make sales - in short, do what they have to do to keep their job.

I know what you mean - any drug use or over-consumption of alcohol is absolutely unacceptable, and I agree. But there are objective differences between these things: there are chemical differences between pot and Class A drugs so they have very different effects on the body, with one being immediately catastrophic and the other not; and social workers would tell you there are objective differences between alcoholics who are so ill they can't work, and functional alcoholics. Basically, one can perform his ADLs (Activities of Daily Living) and the other can't.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,057
Smith1942|1384042040|3553586 said:
Tacori E-ring|1384038854|3553562 said:
Smith, THC CAN permanently damage your brain chemistry and cause hallucinations. I don't believe in "soft" drugs just like I don't believe in "functioning" addicts/alcoholics.

What's THC - does that mean pot?

I don't have that much knowledge of drugs so I'll believe that you're correct in what you say about what pot can do, and in fact I have heard stories of the damage pot can do, although I've never heard of anyone having a pot trip. However the law classifies things like pot differently from things like LED/heroin, hence the Class A designation. I believe that's a recognition that Class A drugs are infinitely more dangerous, insofar as a person can get a full-blown addiction from one hit at some of the Class A drugs and severe fatal reactions are much more of a danger at first go, with those. I know strong pot can cause all sorts of problems over the medium to long term, sure, as I said above. But I think most people, even non-drug users, are aware of how dangerous the Class As are compared to pot. I mean, remember all those terrible warning posters about the way people look after injecting Class A drugs and crystal meth etc?

Don't get me wrong, pot is a drug and therefore bad, and I don't believe in smoking tobacco OR pot, but pot is not classified as a Class A drug and there are reasons for that. I know what the poster above meant when she said "soft drugs". The Class A drugs have immediate and terrible effects, whereas I've never heard of anyone having any ill effect from a few puffs of a single joint, or heard of anyone tripping on pot. Isn't pot actually meant to be less harmful than tobacco for the health? Anyway, you may not believe in soft drugs - and I know where you're coming from, I'm zero tolerance on drugs too - but pot doesn't have the chemical powers of Class A drugs, which is why it's not a Class A drug. That's not to say it can't do some severe damage over the long term. However, the Class A drugs pose more immediate threats.

And about functional alcoholics - the UK is full of them!! I understand the term. Someone who is deeply into an alcohol addiction cannot hold a job because they are drinking all day, drinking themselves to death, like Nicholas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas. But someone who is a functional alcoholic is perfectly capable of drinking significantly more than the recommended amount, yet is able to turn up to work on time, process information, attend meetings, make sales - in short, do what they have to do to keep their job.

I know what you mean - any drug use or over-consumption of alcohol is absolutely unacceptable, and I agree. But there are objective differences between these things: there are chemical differences between pot and Class A drugs so they have very different effects on the body, with one being immediately catastrophic and the other not; and social workers would tell you there are objective differences between alcoholics who are so ill they can't work, and functional alcoholics. Basically, one can perform his ADLs (Activities of Daily Living) and the other can't.
OK, I can't stand it anymore. LED? I checked (since new drugs ARE created over time) but can find NO drug called LED. You seem to be describing LSD...
 

Smith1942

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
2,594
HAHAHAHA! So you spotted the deliberate error? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, I meant LSD. It's been a long time since I've discussed drugs with anyone, you see!

When you said "OK, I can't stand it anymore" - ROFL!!! And you went searching for a drug called LED - I do apologise! :D
 

Tacori E-ring

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
20,009
Ask their family members if they are functional. I am guessing if they are truly alcoholics, they are not functioning in all of life's responsibilities (job, home, relationships, legals, etc). If someone is coping with mind altering substances, something in their life is suffering. THC is what makes pot a drug. I have personally seen psychotic breaks caused by THC. Statistically alcohol causes the most deaths and opiates have the highest relapse rate.
 

Smith1942

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Oct 24, 2012
Messages
2,594
Tacori E-ring|1384044837|3553607 said:
Ask their family members if they are functional. I am guessing if they are truly alcoholics, they are not functioning in all of life's responsibilities (job, home, relationships, legals, etc). If someone is coping with mind altering substances, something in their life is suffering. THC is what makes pot a drug. I have personally seen psychotic breaks caused by THC. Statistically alcohol causes the most deaths and opiates have the highest relapse rate.

Yes, well perhaps you're right about that.

In college I dated a heavy drinker. As a non-drinker myself, there was a gulf between us and it was very hard.

On reflection, it wasn't just the alcohol that was the difference between us. I found his entire mindset to be different - he didn't work hard, he was TOO laid-back - just didn't bother about things - and kind of behaved as if he was permanently living at the beach (albeit we were in London) instead of being at least somewhat ambitious and hardworking as the majority of students are.

So perhaps someone who likes their substances tends to be different, at a very deep level, from someone who isn't substance-led at all. This was my experience of that relationship, anyway. Perhaps you can't really extrapolate, but I've shared offices with people who did drugs and drank a lot, and they were just different from me in many ways apart from the substance difference. I guess you can't really separate the substance from the person very easily, which is why "functional alcoholics", for example, probably do tend to have strained relationships. That was my experience with the heavy drinker, anyway.
 

TooPatient

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
8,426
Amber St. Clare|1384022678|3553450 said:
This subject infuriates me. My son lost a friend and co-worker due to drink driving--the kid's FATHER showed up to pick him up at 1PM and was dead drunk. The boy didn't want to get in the car, and sure enough drunk dad had an accident and killed his son.

He had a plea deal for 6YEARS {i THINK} and parole afterwards. I believe I wrote a very angry post about this situtation several months ago.

Anyone STUPID ENOUGH to drive drunk should lose their driving privileges for 2 or more years.

I don't care if you drink, do drugs, sniff drano or have relations with goat. Jut don't put the public at risk.

Agree 100% with the bolded!

What people choose to do at home is their own business. It is when they start endangering other people that I have issues with them. (BTW, endangering children or others at home who can't function without assistance is a problem too!) As soon as that person who has been drinking or using drugs or getting friendly with a goat (love that!) sets foot out of the house, they are impacting other people. They ARE responsible for everything they do. Period.

I am so sick of reading the local news and hearing of yet another person killed because some self-centered "person" thought went out driving after drinking or using marijuana or whatever. I am SICK of them saying it wasn't their fault. "It was the alcohol" (or drug or whatever) is NOT a valid defense for killing another person.
 

packrat

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
10,615
Ahhh but see therein lies the rub, eh? Our society is set up that way. We squawk and screech to be able to do what we want when we want as much as we want, and we can't ever tell people NO cuz that goes against our grain of freedom and the American way and staying out of other people's beeswaz...and then when something goes wrong, someone is killed/injured, we lose a job, cock up our relationships, well heeeey now, that's not MY fault omg how could anyone suggest such a thing? It doesn't matter if everything on the planet was 100% legal, it still would never be our fault.
 

TooPatient

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
8,426
packrat|1384100890|3553830 said:
Ahhh but see therein lies the rub, eh? Our society is set up that way. We squawk and screech to be able to do what we want when we want as much as we want, and we can't ever tell people NO cuz that goes against our grain of freedom and the American way and staying out of other people's beeswaz...and then when something goes wrong, someone is killed/injured, we lose a job, cock up our relationships, well heeeey now, that's not MY fault omg how could anyone suggest such a thing? It doesn't matter if everything on the planet was 100% legal, it still would never be our fault.
And people are being taught this!

You wouldn't believe some of the dumb excuses "A" has come up with as to why nothing is her fault. I know I tried some of that as a teenager, but at the end of the day I knew that I WAS responsible. It was MY fault. These are not lessons a lot of kids are getting. Of course the kids not getting the message are often learning from parents who never got the message either.
 

TooPatient

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
8,426
TooPatient|1383633787|3550679 said:
packrat|1383605883|3550422 said:
B/c we as a people don't like to make others mad. Gosh, ya mean penalize someone for doing something wrong?? We take more pains to make sure the perpetrator is taken care of than the victim(s). B/c HEY! They have rights TOO yanno. Just b/c a person kills another person doesn't mean they're bad. Just b/c a person drives drunk and gets picked up for it 43 times doesn't mean they're out to *hurt* anyone I mean golly...

There are sooo many things that need to have stiffer penalties and they don't. And they won't. Sadly.

This.

I've been thinking about this a lot recently as there have been several in our local news. The most recent I've read about is from an "accident" that occurred as three girls were going to a Halloween party and some "man" crossed the line and accelerated into them. One 17-year old girl died at the scene. Her twin sister is in critical condition and may not live.

Another just recently --
A "man" was sentenced to FOUR years in prison after (another) fatal DUI. He and the prosecutor had made a deal that would have let him walk out of court that day :nono: . The judge set their agreement aside and sentenced the "man" to four years.... for killing three people (in two different "accidents").

Sad update on this "accident" --

Janesah died in the hospital yesterday. Story
Janeah died on site.
 
Be a part of the community It's free, join today!

JEWELRY BLOG

Need Something Special?

Get a quote from multiple trusted and vetted jewelers.

Holloway Cut Advisor



Diamond Eye Candy

Click to view full-size image.
Top