xellil
|
posted on March 13, 2001 06:54:42 AM new
There was a man in Dallas who killed a family of 6 driving DUI -- he had 47 previous arrests for DUI. He was neither rich nor famous, but no one took much note of him until he murdered 6 people.
My husband has 13 DUIs. Luckily he never murdered anyone, but he should have gone to prison several times over. I think the most he spent was 3 weeks in a county jail. His only felony is for marijuana possesion when he was caught passed out in a library and didn't even own a car at the time.
And the mother of that boy in Florida had an opportunity to get him off in 3 years -- and refused it. Now he's got life. She's got only herself and her attorney to blame.
How many of us can honestly say we have NEVER run a stop sign by accident? Most of us are just lucky enough to not kill anyone when we do it. I was riding with a friend the other day and she turned left on a red light -- she didn't see the turn light, just the green lights for traffic going straight. We could have killed someone. She is a very good driver, but the turn light was just installed and she had driven that road for many years. We are not all perfect drivers all the time, and as teenagers most of us are pretty bad drivers.
nc
|
GrumpynAM
|
posted on March 13, 2001 06:57:58 AM new
I don't understand why at least a citation wasn't issued for running the stop sign.
IMHO teenage driver's take on an adult responsibility when they sign their driver's license and police should recognize that. It seems they don't want to further traumatize teenage driver's who have been in involved in an accident in which someone was killed. If, in fact, the driver did do something wrong they should be cited - regardless of the driver's age, experience, race, status in life, whatever. Holding these driver's accountable, IMO, would help the grief and healing process on both sides.
My 14 year old daughter was walking to her bus with a friend on the morning of January 25, 2000, a 16 year old girl hit her and killed her instantly - no citation was issued. We believe speed was a factor, my daughter was thrown 102 feet from point of impact, in a 30mph zone. When we questioned the investigator as to why a citation wasn't issued his reply was "Why do you want to put her through that, she has to live with this for the rest of her life?"
I've done a lot of research on teenage driving in the past year. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety teenage drivers (ages 15 to 20) make up only 7 percent of the driving population — but are involved in 14 percent of all crashes and in 21 percent of fatal wrecks.
|
HJW
|
posted on March 13, 2001 06:58:14 AM new
Dubyasdaman
You state,
More smoke and mirrors. "She got away with it, why shouldn't I?".
I believe,
She shouldn't get away with it and neither should I.
This is called equality.
Helen
|
december3
|
posted on March 13, 2001 07:02:20 AM new
Laws have changed since the Laura Welch incident, but it was an accident, and they still don't prosecute people for accidents. Her father was a home builder, not unbelivably wealthy, from all reports.
You can put as much spin on the story as you want, but it still has nothing to do with the murder of that little girl.
I can't believe Im agreeing with a republican, I voted for Gore.
[ edited by december3 on Mar 13, 2001 07:02 AM ]
|
krs
|
posted on March 13, 2001 07:03:04 AM new
She blew a stopsign and killed her boyfriend, Michael Douglas. He was ejected from his doorless jeep and broke his neck when he hit the ground. Laura Bush never saw him coming from the left. A tragic accident with a cause.
My daughter in law did the same thing, very nearly exactly the same thing, and wasn't charged. A tragic accident with a cause. She's got no connections.
You're all being weird about it.
|
xardon
|
posted on March 13, 2001 07:04:37 AM new
This link may be enlightening.
|
HJW
|
posted on March 13, 2001 07:10:51 AM new
Well, I'm not being wierd about it.
So, it was recognized as an accident.
What if....a poor, black guy was driving the
car and killed Laura Bush.
Would it still be just an accident.
Not very likely.
Helen
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 13, 2001 07:27:20 AM new
gravid - Sorry, obviously I did not word my post correctly. I meant an accident like Laura's is unlike an accident when drinking is involved. When drinking is involved, that is a whole nother ball game.
GrumpynAM - I am so very sorry this tragedy happened to you and your family.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 13, 2001 07:57:29 AM new
It is clear that the Laura Bush incident wasn't fully investigated and she did not cooperate in what little investigation that was done. She still refuses to comment on why she ran the stop sign. Was she trying to ram her alleged boyfriend ?
|
december3
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:09:20 AM new
Good thing she married Dubya. If she hadn't she'd be just one of the millions of other teenage drivers involved in a tragic accident. No one would have dug it up after all these years and you couldn't have started a thread about it. Or used it in the previous thread to somehow connect it to something it has nothing in common with and nothing to do with.
|
krs
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:18:46 AM new
It is NOT clear that the accident wasn't fully investigated. The investigation report is subject to freedom of information request procedures and the state attorney general will decide whether or not that report will be released to the press, and thus, to you, Reamond.
Why is the victim now an "alleged" boyfriend?
Laura HAS talked about the accident in interviews with the press.
http://www.bartcop.com/pickles.htm
[ edited by krs on Mar 13, 2001 08:23 AM ]
|
gravid
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:28:05 AM new
In Michigan they are trying to make changes to the period when a new driver starts on the road to insure they have a better chance of getting some experience behind the wheel without learning the hard way.
They have found that most accidents happen when a new driver is with other teenagers in the car distracting them and encouraging show off behavior. So the solution is to require a period of driving with adults required in the car or alone and restricting night driving which is another risk factor. Seems reasonable to me.
|
newguy
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:30:25 AM new
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000302/aponline191544_000.htm
This is not a case of someone killing a stranger, it was her boyfriend. That is the fact they are trying to overlook and whether or not they had a fight earlier.
|
december3
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:38:38 AM new
I was hit while sitting at a red light by a kid who only had her license 1 week. She had a car full of friends and the radio blaring. It was broad daylight. No one was injured. If I'd been a pedestrian I'd most likly have been killed or badly injured. No charges were filed and to this day it doesn't bother me that they weren't. It was an accident.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:46:46 AM new
newguy - Who are "they" please? Are you implying that she and her boyfriend had a fight and that she might have intentionally ran into him?
Also, I don't know when the seat belt laws went into effect, but I'd bet it wasn't required 37 years ago when this accident happened. Maybe if he'd been wearing a seat belt, or had doors on his jeep, he wouldn't have flown out of it to break his neck.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:55:27 AM new
An accident is not something for which we refuse to assign blame. An accident is an event in which it is impossible to assign blame.
Not paying attention is not an accidental event. Not paying attention is an intentional condition, unless there is a medical reason.
We seem to just throw the term "accident" out there as some sort of magical event that then requires or has no explanation. However, such is not the case.
What it seems is that we are willing to term an event an accident if; 1. It is a common event regardless of the cause; and 2. It is a situation we may easily find ourselves or someone we know placed in and receiving the possible blame.
However, these are not elements of an "accident". These are elements of empathy, and common experience.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 09:00 AM ]
|
krs
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:57:08 AM new
Nice link. Not.
Granting that there are, and always have been havens of murderous wenches in Texas, which fact I can personnally attest, in 1963 there apparently were none in Midland.
Why aren't you weird thinkers interested in the possibility that the boyfriend was placed in front of Laura's car by the Bush heavy lift black helicopter and the brakes on her car disabled temporarily by radio control in order to remove the boyfriend to clear the way for Dubya to court and later marry the girl? It was done so adroitly by daddy's CIA operatives that Laura didn't even realize that she had met GW until four years afterwards.
And what about the fact that this accident occured on Nov. 6, 1963--only 16 days before Kennedy was shot in Dallas? There must be a connection.
|
rosiebud
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:58:59 AM new
What if....a poor, black guy was driving the car and killed Laura Bush.
Sorry, I stopped playing "what if" games when I was 10.
Honestly, before this goes any further, maybe someone should pull up exactly what income range Laura Welch was in (rather her family) at the time of the incident. That way it could be determined if "family wealth" really was a deciding factor.
Otherwise, everyone is just playing a wild guessing game.
|
codasaurus
|
posted on March 13, 2001 08:59:13 AM new
I suppose this topic only goes to show that the first thing anyone should do before involving anyone else in their lives is to have a complete background check performed on the other person.
Perish the thought that someone should obtain a position of eminence or public stature and have these types of skeletons rattling around in their family closet serving as fodder for the opposition.
I suspect that the Democrats didn't try to make political hay out of Mrs. Bush's traffic record because they were simply too stupid to figure out that the voters really care about an incident in the life of a candidate's spouse that occured nearly 40 years ago.
The mention of this incident here and elsewhere only proves that some folks do care about such a total irrelevancy.
|
krs
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:01:43 AM new
Reamond,
Accidents are classified as preventable or non-preventable. This was a preventable accident. That designation does not necessarily attach individual blame.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:04:09 AM new
Or the Democrats felt it isn't fair to go after a candidates wife, like the other party did.
|
reamond
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:05:32 AM new
krs- clasiification of an "accident" is not at issue. By definition, an "accident" can not be prevented because we can not assign a cause to an individual. First we nust determin the elements to establish what an "accident" is. Nice try.
Exactly what is an "accident" is the issue.
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 09:08 AM ]
[ edited by reamond on Mar 13, 2001 09:10 AM ]
|
december3
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:12:41 AM new
codasaurus-Go away. You're making sense and there is no room for sense in this thread anymore than there was in the one yesterday.
|
bobbi355
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:13:56 AM new
*sigh* ....... just read the other locked thread and you can see where all this is stemming from.
|
krs
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:19:20 AM new
Reamond,
Those are the classifications used by the National Transportation safety Board as well as by the Occupational Safety and Health administration.
Tell them 'nice try' if you like, but before you do can your overwrought emotional/political thinking.
|
busybiddy
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:20:17 AM new
GrumpnAM
I am truly sorry to hear of your tragic loss.
We have had a bit of an uproar in my town over the death of a 3 year old boy who was run over on a sidewalk when a truck backed out of a driveway. In this case, no citation was issued or charges pressed against the driver.
As the parents and neighbors argued, the driver, while not deliberately hitting the child, nonetheless FAILED TO CONTROL his vehicle and INSURE THAT HE HAD A CLEAR PATH before proceeding across the sidewalk. Deliberate, no. Negligent, yes.
Some legal consequence should result from his poor judgment, IMO.
|
njrazd
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:20:49 AM new
codasaurus is right. You have to be pretty desperate to go back 40 years in order to find something bad about a person.
edited to add:
GrumpnAM...I am so sorry for your loss. It seems so senseless. That is the worst type of grief.
[ edited by njrazd on Mar 13, 2001 09:23 AM ]
|
reamond
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:21:26 AM new
krs- You still don't address the issue. First, how do we reach that it was an "accident".
Jumping to how "accidents" are classified is useless to the issue.
|
krs
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:23:20 AM new
I would have thought that this is obviously an accident, but you think it's a communist plot?
|
december3
|
posted on March 13, 2001 09:24:15 AM new
How do you reach that it wasn't?
[ edited by december3 on Mar 13, 2001 09:25 AM ]
|
