"THIS IS BULLSH*T"
#35
08-14-2007, 11:54 AM
RE: "THIS IS BULLSH*T"
ORIGINAL: CSI Topeka
I appreciate the spirit of your argument. A simple traffic violation (lets just use ROW on left turns for arguments sake) may do a total of 50,000 dollars damage to two cars, and it has the propensity to injure or kill at least two drivers. But, unless you can prove that it was an intentional act, OR the driver was acting in a manner that "shocks the consience", it does not rise to the level of a criminal offense.
Remove a car, and add a motorcycle, and there is a strong possibility that the 2nd driver will end up dead. Does that mere fact increase the seriousness of the violation? At the very least, it has increased the seriousness of the outcome, but did it make the right of way violation more serious? Some would say that yes, it does. I have read on this forum, that if a car strikes a motorycle, that the car driver should be arrested for attempted murder. (Nevermind that the murder statutes require a multitude of elements to support a murder charge, none of which are present during a mere "accident", which by definition is an unintentional act). My opinion, which is based upon the laws, as they stand right now, is No, it doesn't. It is still an accident, with a tragic outcome.
What do we as the motorcycling public do about it?(yes, I am PART of the motorcycling community) How can we get the Legislatures to draft laws that increase the seriousness of the offense, if it is a motorcycle involved, as opposed to a car? Let's assume that we have a ROW on left turn violation, but the cager turned left in front of a semi, and their passenger dies? Would that person be cited under the "less serious" side of the law, as there was no motorcycle involved, even though there was a death?
The bottom line is this: The laws need to be changed. If you are at fault in an accident, and as a result of that accident somebody is killed or maimed, you need to becriminally charged. PERIOD.It should not matter if the person killed or maimed was another cager, a biker, a bicyclist, or a pedestrian. That "black and white" mindset is already used in numerous traffic laws, such as following too close, inattentive driving, speeding and others. INTENT is not an element of the offense. Rear end somebody, and no matter what the reasoning is, you are at fault. Get caught speeding, and it doesn't matter if you were unaware of the speed limit. You were speeding, and that is all that matters.
I checked the KSDOT website, and was able to find accident statistics, and motorcycle fatalities account for about 1% of all fatals in Kansas. As of yet, I cannot find any statistics that relate to the number of citations/charges levied in car vs motorcycle accidents, but I "have people" working on it for me.
As I said: The laws need to be changed. But for NOW, we have to work with what we have.
I hope this clears things up!
On a side note: On Friday, myself and Big Dog took a short trip, to meet up with some other HDForum members, and hand off the mascot. As we were leaving Topeka, a fellow rider was losing his life, not more than two miles from my house.And when I say"As we were leaving", I mean it. My wife called my cell as I wasfilling the bike, as she drove by the wreck, and saw the aftermath. A day or two later, the guy we handed the mascot off to (Eazy) was nailed at an intersection, totalling his V-Rod. Luckily, he and his S/O were not seriously injured. So yes, those wrecks hit close to home for me to.
I appreciate the spirit of your argument. A simple traffic violation (lets just use ROW on left turns for arguments sake) may do a total of 50,000 dollars damage to two cars, and it has the propensity to injure or kill at least two drivers. But, unless you can prove that it was an intentional act, OR the driver was acting in a manner that "shocks the consience", it does not rise to the level of a criminal offense.
Remove a car, and add a motorcycle, and there is a strong possibility that the 2nd driver will end up dead. Does that mere fact increase the seriousness of the violation? At the very least, it has increased the seriousness of the outcome, but did it make the right of way violation more serious? Some would say that yes, it does. I have read on this forum, that if a car strikes a motorycle, that the car driver should be arrested for attempted murder. (Nevermind that the murder statutes require a multitude of elements to support a murder charge, none of which are present during a mere "accident", which by definition is an unintentional act). My opinion, which is based upon the laws, as they stand right now, is No, it doesn't. It is still an accident, with a tragic outcome.
What do we as the motorcycling public do about it?(yes, I am PART of the motorcycling community) How can we get the Legislatures to draft laws that increase the seriousness of the offense, if it is a motorcycle involved, as opposed to a car? Let's assume that we have a ROW on left turn violation, but the cager turned left in front of a semi, and their passenger dies? Would that person be cited under the "less serious" side of the law, as there was no motorcycle involved, even though there was a death?
The bottom line is this: The laws need to be changed. If you are at fault in an accident, and as a result of that accident somebody is killed or maimed, you need to becriminally charged. PERIOD.It should not matter if the person killed or maimed was another cager, a biker, a bicyclist, or a pedestrian. That "black and white" mindset is already used in numerous traffic laws, such as following too close, inattentive driving, speeding and others. INTENT is not an element of the offense. Rear end somebody, and no matter what the reasoning is, you are at fault. Get caught speeding, and it doesn't matter if you were unaware of the speed limit. You were speeding, and that is all that matters.
I checked the KSDOT website, and was able to find accident statistics, and motorcycle fatalities account for about 1% of all fatals in Kansas. As of yet, I cannot find any statistics that relate to the number of citations/charges levied in car vs motorcycle accidents, but I "have people" working on it for me.
As I said: The laws need to be changed. But for NOW, we have to work with what we have.
I hope this clears things up!
On a side note: On Friday, myself and Big Dog took a short trip, to meet up with some other HDForum members, and hand off the mascot. As we were leaving Topeka, a fellow rider was losing his life, not more than two miles from my house.And when I say"As we were leaving", I mean it. My wife called my cell as I wasfilling the bike, as she drove by the wreck, and saw the aftermath. A day or two later, the guy we handed the mascot off to (Eazy) was nailed at an intersection, totalling his V-Rod. Luckily, he and his S/O were not seriously injured. So yes, those wrecks hit close to home for me to.
#37
08-14-2007, 12:37 PM
Cruiser
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cave
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: "THIS IS BULLSH*T"
ORIGINAL: guitarman777
That's funny... a gal who used to go to my old church accidentally ran a red light and caused an accident that killed three people. She's serving a 35-year sentence. Didn't stop at a traffic ticket for running a red light. As much as the situation sucks and she didn't mean to run the light, wasn't impaired or anything to that nature, she's considered as criminally responsible as the person four cells down who blew away three people with a 12-guage shotgun. And the guy you're talking about gets ticketed for failing to yield? ...
ORIGINAL: Philip1228
My grandmother was killed in May of this year by a driver of a truck(she was in a truck as well) and because the driver was not impaired in anyway he was only ticketed for failure to yeild(he passed the stop sign). I thought it was BS, but the DA showed me that it was nothing more than an accident which resulted sadly in the loss of a life. If not impaired they will not charge vehicular homicide. Now in civil court he is neglegent and will have to settle up but criminally he is not. I don't like it, but that's the way it is.
My grandmother was killed in May of this year by a driver of a truck(she was in a truck as well) and because the driver was not impaired in anyway he was only ticketed for failure to yeild(he passed the stop sign). I thought it was BS, but the DA showed me that it was nothing more than an accident which resulted sadly in the loss of a life. If not impaired they will not charge vehicular homicide. Now in civil court he is neglegent and will have to settle up but criminally he is not. I don't like it, but that's the way it is.
#38
08-14-2007, 04:45 PM
RE: "THIS IS BULLSH*T"
Quote -On a side note: On Friday, myself and Big Dog took a short trip, to meet up with some other HDForum members, and hand off the mascot. As we were leaving Topeka, a fellow rider was losing his life, not more than two miles from my house.And when I say"As we were leaving", I mean it. My wife called my cell as I wasfilling the bike, as she drove by the wreck, and saw the aftermath. A day or two later, the guy we handed the mascot off to (Eazy) was nailed at an intersection, totalling his V-Rod. Luckily, he and his S/O were not seriously injured. So yes, those wrecks hit close to home for me to.
< Message edited by CSI Topeka -- 8/13/2007 6:07:22 PM >
Im sorry to here of your loss and hope your other friend is ok. From B-Dog& Family &ABADE.
< Message edited by CSI Topeka -- 8/13/2007 6:07:22 PM >
Im sorry to here of your loss and hope your other friend is ok. From B-Dog& Family &ABADE.
#39
08-14-2007, 05:42 PM
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location:
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: "THIS IS BULLSH*T"
[quote]ORIGINAL: B dog
It’s not the point of attempted murder. I truly don’t think anyone really goes out there just to plaster a biker a
ORIGINAL: CSI Topeka
I appreciate the spirit of your argument. A simple traffic violation (lets just use ROW on left turns for arguments sake) may do a total of 50,000 dollars damage to two cars, and it has the propensity to injure or kill at least two drivers. But, unless you can prove that it was an intentional act, OR the driver was acting in a manner that "shocks the consience", it does not rise to the level of a criminal offense.
Remove a car, and add a motorcycle, and there is a strong possibility that the 2nd driver will end up dead. Does that mere fact increase the seriousness of the violation? At the very least, it has increased the seriousness of the outcome, but did it make the right of way violation more serious? Some would say that yes, it does. I have read on this forum, that if a car strikes a motorycle, that the car driver should be arrested for attempted murder. (Nevermind that the murder statutes require a multitude of elements to support a murder charge, none of which are present during a mere "accident", which by definition is an unintentional act). My opinion, which is based upon the laws, as they stand right now, is No, it doesn't. It is still an accident, with a tragic outcome.
What do we as the motorcycling public do about it?(yes, I am PART of the motorcycling community) How can we get the Legislatures to draft laws that increase the seriousness of the offense, if it is a motorcycle involved, as opposed to a car? Let's assume that we have a ROW on left turn violation, but the cager turned left in front of a semi, and their passenger dies? Would that person be cited under the "less serious" side of the law, as there was no motorcycle involved, even though there was a death?
The bottom line is this: The laws need to be changed. If you are at fault in an accident, and as a result of that accident somebody is killed or maimed, you need to becriminally charged. PERIOD.It should not matter if the person killed or maimed was another cager, a biker, a bicyclist, or a pedestrian. That "black and white" mindset is already used in numerous traffic laws, such as following too close, inattentive driving, speeding and others. INTENT is not an element of the offense. Rear end somebody, and no matter what the reasoning is, you are at fault. Get caught speeding, and it doesn't matter if you were unaware of the speed limit. You were speeding, and that is all that matters.
I checked the KSDOT website, and was able to find accident statistics, and motorcycle fatalities account for about 1% of all fatals in Kansas. As of yet, I cannot find any statistics that relate to the number of citations/charges levied in car vs motorcycle accidents, but I "have people" working on it for me.
As I said: The laws need to be changed. But for NOW, we have to work with what we have.
I hope this clears things up!
On a side note: On Friday, myself and Big Dog took a short trip, to meet up with some other HDForum members, and hand off the mascot. As we were leaving Topeka, a fellow rider was losing his life, not more than two miles from my house.And when I say"As we were leaving", I mean it. My wife called my cell as I wasfilling the bike, as she drove by the wreck, and saw the aftermath. A day or two later, the guy we handed the mascot off to (Eazy) was nailed at an intersection, totalling his V-Rod. Luckily, he and his S/O were not seriously injured. So yes, those wrecks hit close to home for me to.
I appreciate the spirit of your argument. A simple traffic violation (lets just use ROW on left turns for arguments sake) may do a total of 50,000 dollars damage to two cars, and it has the propensity to injure or kill at least two drivers. But, unless you can prove that it was an intentional act, OR the driver was acting in a manner that "shocks the consience", it does not rise to the level of a criminal offense.
Remove a car, and add a motorcycle, and there is a strong possibility that the 2nd driver will end up dead. Does that mere fact increase the seriousness of the violation? At the very least, it has increased the seriousness of the outcome, but did it make the right of way violation more serious? Some would say that yes, it does. I have read on this forum, that if a car strikes a motorycle, that the car driver should be arrested for attempted murder. (Nevermind that the murder statutes require a multitude of elements to support a murder charge, none of which are present during a mere "accident", which by definition is an unintentional act). My opinion, which is based upon the laws, as they stand right now, is No, it doesn't. It is still an accident, with a tragic outcome.
What do we as the motorcycling public do about it?(yes, I am PART of the motorcycling community) How can we get the Legislatures to draft laws that increase the seriousness of the offense, if it is a motorcycle involved, as opposed to a car? Let's assume that we have a ROW on left turn violation, but the cager turned left in front of a semi, and their passenger dies? Would that person be cited under the "less serious" side of the law, as there was no motorcycle involved, even though there was a death?
The bottom line is this: The laws need to be changed. If you are at fault in an accident, and as a result of that accident somebody is killed or maimed, you need to becriminally charged. PERIOD.It should not matter if the person killed or maimed was another cager, a biker, a bicyclist, or a pedestrian. That "black and white" mindset is already used in numerous traffic laws, such as following too close, inattentive driving, speeding and others. INTENT is not an element of the offense. Rear end somebody, and no matter what the reasoning is, you are at fault. Get caught speeding, and it doesn't matter if you were unaware of the speed limit. You were speeding, and that is all that matters.
I checked the KSDOT website, and was able to find accident statistics, and motorcycle fatalities account for about 1% of all fatals in Kansas. As of yet, I cannot find any statistics that relate to the number of citations/charges levied in car vs motorcycle accidents, but I "have people" working on it for me.
As I said: The laws need to be changed. But for NOW, we have to work with what we have.
I hope this clears things up!
On a side note: On Friday, myself and Big Dog took a short trip, to meet up with some other HDForum members, and hand off the mascot. As we were leaving Topeka, a fellow rider was losing his life, not more than two miles from my house.And when I say"As we were leaving", I mean it. My wife called my cell as I wasfilling the bike, as she drove by the wreck, and saw the aftermath. A day or two later, the guy we handed the mascot off to (Eazy) was nailed at an intersection, totalling his V-Rod. Luckily, he and his S/O were not seriously injured. So yes, those wrecks hit close to home for me to.
#40
08-14-2007, 07:33 PM
Advanced
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: "THIS IS BULLSH*T"
Just my 2 cents. IMO I really don't believe in traffic "accidents". I am not saying the driver causingan accident had willful intent to do harm but in most cases the accident could have been avoided with proper attention to all vehicles in the immediate area. Driving an automobile these days, particularly on conjested roads, needs to be taken with alot more seriousness and self discipline than most people employ. We have turned autos into rolling entertainment outlets with DVD players, bluetooth phones which work through our 10" navigation screens, etc. There are far too manytoys within the drivers reach distracting them from their primary job.......drive the two ton death machine safely. We usually hear the excuse "I did not see the bike" but what it possibly boils down to isthe driver not yielding was looking for a two ton car/SUV....not a motorcycle. With that said, I believe we need to up the ante concerning "accountability" for those who cause "accidents" due to clear inattention. Particularly when a life is taken.