Putting on sunglasses...really?
#11
That is a ridiculous law...
All she had was remnants on cannabis in her system, that could be from weeks ago, apparently the state doesn't have to prove impairment at the time of the accident. Sorry but seven years in prison in this case is way overkill, 30,000+ people die in MV accidents every year, it happens.
All she had was remnants on cannabis in her system, that could be from weeks ago, apparently the state doesn't have to prove impairment at the time of the accident. Sorry but seven years in prison in this case is way overkill, 30,000+ people die in MV accidents every year, it happens.
#13
I hope they checked her phone for recent calls or texts.
#14
That is a ridiculous law...
All she had was remnants on cannabis in her system, that could be from weeks ago, apparently the state doesn't have to prove impairment at the time of the accident. Sorry but seven years in prison in this case is way overkill, 30,000+ people die in MV accidents every year, it happens.
All she had was remnants on cannabis in her system, that could be from weeks ago, apparently the state doesn't have to prove impairment at the time of the accident. Sorry but seven years in prison in this case is way overkill, 30,000+ people die in MV accidents every year, it happens.
#15
[QUOTE
The only two valid points you make really are texting while driving (if she was, the article didn't say, I read it as sending it before she started driving).[/QUOTE]
IMH0 Anyone that texts and drives does not care about theirs or anyone else's safety and shouldn't be allowed on the road.
I've had many young drivers overtake me on a two lane road while texting an speeding.
The only two valid points you make really are texting while driving (if she was, the article didn't say, I read it as sending it before she started driving).[/QUOTE]
IMH0 Anyone that texts and drives does not care about theirs or anyone else's safety and shouldn't be allowed on the road.
I've had many young drivers overtake me on a two lane road while texting an speeding.
#16
I've had many young drivers overtake me on a two lane road while texting an speeding.[/QUOTE]"
Texting, my ***. Cell phones, period. You get a call you have to answer, pull your *** over, if you can't ignore the call. On a scooter I check my calls when I stop and call back or not. In my truck the phone hangs on a strip of velcro so I can see who calls. If it's important, I pull over, if not I'll call ya later. There is no gray here.
Last edited by vet767; 02-09-2012 at 06:39 PM.
#17
That is a ridiculous law...
All she had was remnants on cannabis in her system, that could be from weeks ago, apparently the state doesn't have to prove impairment at the time of the accident. Sorry but seven years in prison in this case is way overkill, 30,000+ people die in MV accidents every year, it happens.
All she had was remnants on cannabis in her system, that could be from weeks ago, apparently the state doesn't have to prove impairment at the time of the accident. Sorry but seven years in prison in this case is way overkill, 30,000+ people die in MV accidents every year, it happens.
Jeez. Some people say the stupidest things. The above is one of them.
#18
Cannibis can stay detectable in your system for 6 weeks after you have, intentionally or unintentionally, inhaled it. I think she should not have walked past the smokers on the corner a month ago...or held her breath when she did. As for the sunglasses...that's why I like the flip-downs.
Just sayin'
As for texting while she was driving? I never read anywhere...other than the speculations of some posters here...that she was driving while texting. As for not feeling well enough to drive, that is an unknown. Maybe she was experiencing morning sickness. If so, then maybe the legislators will have to consider pregnancy as a debilitating disease. I don't know...does anyone else in this thread know?
I'm not in any way trying to say she wasn't at fault, but I wasn't there and haven't read anything in the reporter's article as to why she rear-ended the car...other than putting on her sunglasses. In that respect, I agree that she should have realized that the sun was going to shine in her eyes and had the sunglasses on before it actually was shining in her eyes....unless she was in a tunnel or something.
Just sayin'
As for texting while she was driving? I never read anywhere...other than the speculations of some posters here...that she was driving while texting. As for not feeling well enough to drive, that is an unknown. Maybe she was experiencing morning sickness. If so, then maybe the legislators will have to consider pregnancy as a debilitating disease. I don't know...does anyone else in this thread know?
I'm not in any way trying to say she wasn't at fault, but I wasn't there and haven't read anything in the reporter's article as to why she rear-ended the car...other than putting on her sunglasses. In that respect, I agree that she should have realized that the sun was going to shine in her eyes and had the sunglasses on before it actually was shining in her eyes....unless she was in a tunnel or something.
Last edited by arcticharleyman; 02-09-2012 at 06:59 PM. Reason: After-thoughts
#20
Stupid Bitch deserves the seven years.... plus a few more for being a dumbass.
The article plainly states she WAS texting, as late as 8:23am. The wreck happened around 8:25am, thats within a reasonable amount of time, given differences in peoples watches, dispatch calls, etc, etc, to assume she probably was texting within seconds of the crash, plus she plainly admitted reaching for sunglasses(distracted driving). high or not, doesnt matter, her actions killed that couple
"Bernard testified that sun reflecting off the passing motorcycles created a “strobe light” effect, she reached for sunglasses and rear-ended the Civic."
suppose a hunter shot a high powered rifle through a small wooded area but towards a school playground during recess, theyd be calling for a ban on hunting and guns, but its ok if some **** kills another biker, it was all that chrome reflecting in the sun that blinded her, hell the bikers pretty much asked for it right, damn scooter trash!!!
The article plainly states she WAS texting, as late as 8:23am. The wreck happened around 8:25am, thats within a reasonable amount of time, given differences in peoples watches, dispatch calls, etc, etc, to assume she probably was texting within seconds of the crash, plus she plainly admitted reaching for sunglasses(distracted driving). high or not, doesnt matter, her actions killed that couple
"Bernard testified that sun reflecting off the passing motorcycles created a “strobe light” effect, she reached for sunglasses and rear-ended the Civic."
suppose a hunter shot a high powered rifle through a small wooded area but towards a school playground during recess, theyd be calling for a ban on hunting and guns, but its ok if some **** kills another biker, it was all that chrome reflecting in the sun that blinded her, hell the bikers pretty much asked for it right, damn scooter trash!!!
Last edited by 2011RoadKing; 02-09-2012 at 07:07 PM.