Big Cliff Posted June 24, 2014 Author Report Posted June 24, 2014 As much as I respect your opinion Big Cliff, I have to disagree with you on this one. The woman was directly responsible for the deaths of two people, regardless of intent. How would you suggest that the family of the victims deal with this, should she get off with a slap on the wrist. She stopped dead in the fast lane of an express way. That's negligence and it led directly to the deaths of two people. The only excuse for that action would have to be a human was on the road in front of her. We do not hold the lives of animals equally to humans... yet. HH And I respect your opinion too, but how about we also find the father guilty too! His actions contributed to the death of his 16 year old daughter. He was obviously speeding and in any rear end colision it boils down to care and control of your vechicle; The 'Rules of the Road'If someone hits you from behind, it is virtually always his or her fault, regardless of the reason you stopped. A basic rule of the road requires that you be able to stop safely if a vehicle stops ahead of you. So, as a tailing driver, if you cannot stop in time and wind up rear-ending the vehicle in front of you, you are not driving as safely as you need to be under the circumstances. If the father had proper care and control this wouldn't even be an issue and no lives would have been lost. At no time have I suggested she should get off with a slap on the wrist but I do think that the circumstances should carry some weight too.
Headhunter Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 I see your point Cliff. And I have to agree with FnS that we just don't have enough info to make a black and white assessment. HH
bushart Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 So if this "Lack of Reason" is now the precedent The next time one of the 1000's that text and drive----and when one crosses the centre line and kills an innocent person or persons They will spend a life sentence???
Terry Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 When getting a snapshot of the entire story in an news article, it is really difficult to make any decision without knowing all the evidence. The jury has seen this and with respect to our legal system, which is not perfect and has it's flaws, you have to leave it in their hands. Depending out the out come, I would expect an appeal would be launched. She was at fault for what she did but the motorcycle driver only slowed down about 8kph before impact. One would think that the motorcycle driver was distracted in some way. I would think that this was brought up at the trail at some point. I doubt very much she would get the maximum sentence but what she deserves, I don't know. In the end it will not right the wrong and bring the father and daughter back. A tragic event for all parties. I have come up on a car that was parked on the road, there were no brake lights or flashers on the car and it took my brain a while to catch on that something wasn't right, first I thought it was just going slower , by the time I figured it out I did not have time to stop and ran on the shoulder to not crash, then came to a stop..the car behind me did the same thing your brain just does not expect a car with no brake lights to be stopped on the road
misfish Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 Here's to hoping she gets 25 years. I think HH hit it. Well, the options available for restitution for the family as far as I can see are; -incarceration -monetary fines -community service -weekend time served -any combination of the above. I know that none of the above will bring back the family's lost ones, but to me, her actions were the directly responsible for the two deaths. What would you charge the motorcycle driver with, failing to yield? I suppose that could have happened, but can anyone imagine the uproar had the m/c driver be charged? HH
Big Cliff Posted June 24, 2014 Author Report Posted June 24, 2014 I have come up on a car that was parked on the road, there were no brake lights or flashers on the car and it took my brain a while to catch on that something wasn't right, first I thought it was just going slower , by the time I figured it out I did not have time to stop and ran on the shoulder to not crash, then came to a stop..the car behind me did the same thing your brain just does not expect a car with no brake lights to be stopped on the road Then you are following too close!
bushart Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 I hate to quote Rob Ford ...but... Has anyone on here ever been intoxicated and drove? Been texting and drove? Fell asleep and drove? Been High and Drove? Where do these actions fall on this now formed "Stupidity Meter" Difference is with these actions---the other vehicles or pedestrians are now playing lethal dodgeball---where in the case of the girl who admittedly made a huge mistake.....did not hit anyone---but put up a lethal barrier With often the end result being the same....death ----have these other actions warranted a life sentence-----I'm sure a little research will prove otherwise
crappieperchhunter Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 Actions like that don't deserve a second chance in my books. (Here is where we would disagree; I believe that everyone deserves a second chance when there is no malice or criminal intent.) I have an animal lover in my own family who would lay down there life for an animal, probably any animal. They even have a sign on there front door that instructs people in case of an emergency to please rescue my pets first...and then names them. I could actually see them stopping on a highway and blocking the highway with there car or themselves to stop people from hitting a defenseless animal. This is the context in which I mean the person should never be allowed to drive again. Because honestly my relative could go through this and still stop on the highway a SECOND time if the situation ever happened again. I truly believe that. They would not ever view it as a wrong decision. No malice or criminal intent. Just so wired to animals that they are negligent of any common sense. I hope that clears up my point of view Cliff and I hope I didn't offend. That was not my intention.
misfish Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) Steve There was a co-worker that swerved for an animal and plowed into another car. He was a real pain in the P3TA. Hated my guts for being a hunter. He was charged . Insurance companys will tell you to not stop,or swerve but to drive straight. Even if you run them over. Some will not cover the damage if you go out of your way to miss an animal and cause an accident. Edited June 24, 2014 by Misfish
Big Cliff Posted June 24, 2014 Author Report Posted June 24, 2014 If you can't express your opinion without personal attacks maybe you should keep them to yourself? That's the exact thing that gets threads locked. I'm sure she's been called worse than dame and I'll be Smitty55 had alternate names which he INTELLIGENTLY opted not to share. If you think calling her an Idiot dame wasn’t derogatory (and I can only assume he has never met her). If you think that insinuating that because she is female that she is an idiot “some idiot dame” is ok. (Is that what you feel is intelligent!) You and he will probably get along just fine on an extended fishing trip. Personally I tend to try to show respect to and tolerance for everyone until they give me reason not to! You see, at my age I have had time to make plenty of mistakes. When I look back on my life I have made plenty of stupid ones without ever meaning to harm a single person. Thankfully I don't think I ever have but it easily could have been different. In fact if the statement is true that; “we learn from our mistakes” I should probably be one of the smartest people in the world! Sadly I think it is pretty evident that I am not! The one thing I have learned (and I am still working on this) is to try to show compassion and understanding! Sometimes it is a very hard thing to do. I will say one thing about this thread, it has taught me a lot about how some others think and see the world. My friends will always be my friends because we can agree to disagree and at the end of the day still respect each other’s opinions. It has also taught me that there are a few here that I wouldn’t get in a boat with if it was the last life raft leaving a sinking ship! For those of you that fit into that catagory; may you live long enough to gain the wisdome you think you have!
Terry Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 Then you are following too close! 100 % not, the car was stopped it did not just stop. there were no brake lights to react too, the car could have been there for minutes I saw the car but my brain did not register that it could just be sitting there on the road in the middle of no where
Big Cliff Posted June 24, 2014 Author Report Posted June 24, 2014 I have an animal lover in my own family who would lay down there life for an animal, probably any animal. They even have a sign on there front door that instructs people in case of an emergency to please rescue my pets first...and then names them. I could actually see them stopping on a highway and blocking the highway with there car or themselves to stop people from hitting a defenseless animal. This is the context in which I mean the person should never be allowed to drive again. Because honestly my relative could go through this and still stop on the highway a SECOND time if the situation ever happened again. I truly believe that. They would not ever view it as a wrong decision. No malice or criminal intent. Just so wired to animals that they are negligent of any common sense. I hope that clears up my point of view Cliff and I hope I didn't offend. That was not my intention. Steve, you and I have been friends for a long time, long enough to know that we can have a difference of opinion without ever offending each other. I don't have any problem with anyone feeling like she did the wrong thing, clearly it probably wasn't the right thing to do considering the outcome. I just don't believe that she should be punished for the rest of her life because of an accident. Sue hit a kid many years ago, the kid came out from between parked cars, everyone said it wasn't her fault, she couldn't have stopped in time. She still has nightmares about it to this day! I just don't believe that this girl should pay for a mistake made with good intentions for the rest of her life. Nothing short of you hitting on my wife would ruin our friendship (ok well she is kind of special so I might have to reconsider that one too but Debbie would kill you anyway LOL).
davis Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 100 % not, the car was stopped it did not just stop. there were no brake lights to react too, the car could have been there for minutes I saw the car but my brain did not register that it could just be sitting there on the road in the middle of no where Agreed. Had the same happen to me. Those few extra seconds the brain needs to compute what your eyes are seeing likely made the difference between being able to avoid it vs running into it. Especially if there were other cars in front of the bike that also narrowly avoided the collision, as the various articles describe. Trying to suddenly stop a Harley doing over 100km/h without bailing is hard enough, nevermind trying to swerve. Sad story for everyone involved.
Bill Shearer Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 It's interesting to me that age and experience, more than any other factors, have tempered my reponses to the many news related events in past years. For me, the 'gray areas' have become larger. I'm much more amenable to different opinions. My instant reaction to what used to be 'black and white' is much slower, and tempered. I guess that's why judges of the law, are for the most part over 60? It takes time to see both sides to any event, and in the end, able to weigh the evidence with impartiality.
SirCranksalot Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 Steve There was a co-worker that swerved for an animal and plowed into another car. He was a real pain in the P3TA. Hated my guts for being a hunter. He was charged . Insurance companys will tell you to not stop,or swerve but to drive straight. Even if you run them over. Some will not cover the damage if you go out of your way to miss an animal and cause an accident. My wife gets upset if I don't hit the brakes for a small animal but that's a price I'll pay. I have no intentions of braking and put people in danger. Now, deer and moose is a different story of course.
misfish Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 Now, deer and moose is a different story of course. I see freezer full of meat.LOL J/K Sorta.
blaque Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 .Insurance companys will tell you to not stop,or swerve but to drive straight. Even if you run them over. Some will not cover the damage if you go out of your way to miss an animal and cause an accident. And we should always listen to Insurance Companies God help the insurance agent who tells me they arent going to cover me because i tried dodging a head on collision with an 800lb moose.
bushart Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 It's interesting to me that age and experience, more than any other factors, have tempered my reponses to the many news related events in past years. For me, the 'gray areas' have become larger. I'm much more amenable to different opinions. My instant reaction to what used to be 'black and white' is much slower, and tempered. I guess that's why judges of the law, are for the most part over 60? It takes time to see both sides to any event, and in the end, able to weigh the evidence with impartiality. You Callin me Old ,Man !! This is why some mature candidates are actually welcomed in some law enforcement as well------more real time life experiences---think 1st---drawing weapons later
misfish Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 And we should always listen to Insurance Companies God help the insurance agent who tells me they arent going to cover me because i tried dodging a head on collision with an 800lb moose. Make the call and find out.
fishnsled Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 I have come up on a car that was parked on the road, there were no brake lights or flashers on the car and it took my brain a while to catch on that something wasn't right, first I thought it was just going slower , by the time I figured it out I did not have time to stop and ran on the shoulder to not crash, then came to a stop..the car behind me did the same thing your brain just does not expect a car with no brake lights to be stopped on the road I can see that happening, I might have the same reaction as it would be the last thing you might expect to see. A buddy of mine was in that situation and hit the car. He was charged for following to closely. I guess we all need to expect the unexpected.
bushart Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 I can see that happening, I might have the same reaction as it would be the last thing you might expect to see. A buddy of mine was in that situation and hit the car. He was charged for following to closely. I guess we all need to expect the unexpected. Again---I figure that's would of what happened to me had I plowed Turkey lady's car deep into the forest primeval I may be a paranoid driver---but I'm usually expecting the opposing driver to cross the centre line----the old lady to pull onto the hwy doin 30 kmh---the deer to jump out of the swamp---the other guy to actually stop at the red light or stop sign..etc
SirCranksalot Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 I may be a paranoid driver--- even if you're not paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you!!
bushart Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 even if you're not paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you!! "Bubba knew...That I Knew....All there was to Know"
Bill Shearer Posted June 24, 2014 Report Posted June 24, 2014 Bushart; Not old.....just mature, in your thought process.
mcdougy Posted June 25, 2014 Report Posted June 25, 2014 I believe the guilty verdict is a direct result of no hazard lights activated. Stopping was a poor choice, not putting on her hazards when stopped was almost setting a trap for people. The price is unmeasurable for both parties involved and I'm sure that is how the court will handle the sentencing. I will be surprised if there is a heavy sentence for her, but do belive she is responsible for the accident.
Recommended Posts