- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Father (Not Guilty) of killing drunk driver who killed his sons.Update
Posted on 8/19/14 at 9:58 am to bencoleman
Posted on 8/19/14 at 9:58 am to bencoleman
quote:
Most can't seem to see that the father of the children bears the majority of the responsibility for the accident.
I'm about as overly protective of my kids as possible. And there is no way in hell I'd allow my kids within 100' of a highway at anytime, be it day or night. The dad in this situation does bear the responsibility of of allowing his kids to be in a dangerous situation. But to say the dad bears the "majority" of the responsibility is a stretch considering the driver willingly got behind the wheel and drove on that highway while drunk.
2
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:03 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
But to say the dad bears the "majority" of the responsibility is a stretch considering the driver willingly got behind the wheel and drove on that highway while drunk.
What is the driver was sober? It is possible that the alcohol had nothing to do with it.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:04 am to Huey Lewis
quote:
Yes, I think I would deserve it. I'm not saying that a person in that scenario should die. I'm saying that it's deserved in the way that if you get the answers wrong on a test, you deserve a bad grade. "But I forgot to study! I forgot the test was today! I'm normally a really good student." And all of that may be true, but in one specific moment you may specifically deserve a bad grade. That's not the same thing as saying that I'm against leniency or retests etc. See what I'm saying? In a cosmic retributive sense I think you probably deserve to die if your recklessness kills an innocent person.
In that particular situation, your response seems wholly absurd to me. That situation describes a simple mistake that leads to an accident. It is the type of thing that is in a large way out of the control of the person that got into the accident.
It's impossible to predict this small mistake of changing the radio station for example leading to the death of a child. Every person everyday makes decisions like this that just by chance don't lead to anyone's death, but they could. Small mistakes that could lead to big consequences could happen to anyone. Your standards are far too severe.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:05 am to Artie Rome
quote:
It is possible that the alcohol had nothing to do with it.
No one will ever know the answer to that because the only witness was murdered.
That won't stop people from saying that alcohol had something to do with it anyway.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:05 am to Darth_Vader
The fact that you can't say for sure that you would been able to avoid that accident under those conditions renders that irrelevant
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:10 am to BRgetthenet
Any who says he shouldn't be convicted is a dumbass
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:11 am to Macintosh504
quote:Great sentence.
Any who says he shouldn't be convicted is a dumbass
If they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in court, convict him. If not, let him walk.
Taking a stand and calling the other side dumbasses at this stage of the game is idiotic.
This post was edited on 8/19/14 at 10:22 am
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:28 am to Tigerlaff
good luck getting me to convict if I were on the jury.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:36 am to bobaftt1212
quote:
good luck getting me to convict if I were on the jury.
So you would defy the jury orders to judge guilt based on the law rather than your own sentiments? Hopefully they'd exclude you in jury selection then.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:37 am to ChewyDante
quote:Of course he does. But I also guarantee you he throws his Natty Ice at the TV when that OBAMA man makes up his own laws against the constitution!!!!
So you would defy the jury orders to judge guilt based on the law rather than your own sentiments?
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:49 am to Tigerlaff
If I were on the jury, I might have to convict just on the offered defense expressed through his learned legal counsel:
Come on man. That's no defense.
quote:
But to suggest Mr. Barajas has anything to do with it is a far stretch of the imagination."
Come on man. That's no defense.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 10:58 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
Breaking the speed limit is dangerous. If you get in a wreck going 2 miles over the limit, it is also an accident.
Do you see how dumb your logic is here?
Equating drunk driving and going 2 miles over a arbitrary speed limit? And someone else is the one with bad logic?
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:00 am to RandySavage
quote:
Equating drunk driving and going 2 miles over a arbitrary speed limit? And someone else is the one with bad logic?
Reading comprehension is your friend.
ETA: And 0.08 BAC is equally arbitrary as speed limit. Maybe even more so.
This post was edited on 8/19/14 at 11:01 am
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:04 am to lsupride87
quote:
Christ you are bat shite crazy
This thread is depressing, just like the one with the old man who shot one of the people who broke into his house and beat and robbed him.
When did we become such cowards that the "rights" of murderers and violent criminals supercede those of innocent victims?
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:04 am to RandySavage
quote:
When did we become such cowards that the "rights" of murderers and violent criminals supercede those of innocent victims?
When we decided to live in a civilized society.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:11 am to RandySavage
quote:Welcome to any civilized society Randy. There is a court of law for a reason. You can go live among a tribe in the Congo if you would like
When did we become such cowards that the "rights" of murderers and violent criminals supercede those of innocent victims?
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:11 am to LNCHBOX
lol, protecting murderers and criminals is "civilized" now? Got it, thanks.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:12 am to RandySavage
quote:
lol, protecting murderers and criminals is "civilized" now? Got it, thanks.
By law, the guy in the OP is now a murderer and a criminal. So shall we just kill him off as well?
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:13 am to Tigerlaff
Let's get this straight
-Dad has his sons pushing broken down truck down dark, narrow road.
-Truck gets hit head on.
-Dad gets gun from his house, kills "drunk driver" and hides the evidence.
-Police determine there was no way to tell the "drunk driver" was impaired at the time.
-The OT wants dad to walk free?
The POS deserves a murder charge.
-Dad has his sons pushing broken down truck down dark, narrow road.
-Truck gets hit head on.
-Dad gets gun from his house, kills "drunk driver" and hides the evidence.
-Police determine there was no way to tell the "drunk driver" was impaired at the time.
-The OT wants dad to walk free?
The POS deserves a murder charge.
Posted on 8/19/14 at 11:14 am to RandySavage
quote:Yes. Being a violent criminal doesn't deprive you of your rights.
lol, protecting murderers and criminals is "civilized" now? Got it, thanks.
Page 18 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News