A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Killer gets off with 1-3 years



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old March 17th 05, 03:09 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

jj wrote:
On 16 Mar 2005 09:56:43 -0800, "Maggie" wrote:



Oh, so it's about revenge then. You're just demonstrating that you


have no

regard for the law, suggesting that criminals get off because there


was no

intent and suggesting one take the law into their own hands.

jj



If this is what you want to believe, there is nothing I can do about
it.
If you believe I have a criminal past and have no regard for the law,
then you will believe it.

And you say I insulted you?

I've never even had a speeding ticket. I've never been given a ticket
of any kind in my 30 odd years of driving. I am also a notary, so I
have no criminal record.

That was a cruel thing to say in a public forum. To suggest I have a
criminal past. That is hurtful. I never knew until this moment, how
Newsgroups can possibly hurt a person.

Maggie - out



Passive aggressive much? I didn't say -you- had a criminal past. Actually I
was thinking you knew someone close to you who had committed a youthful
indiscretion.

I'm through arguing with you. On this issue you're a kook.

jj

jj,
Give up. Maggie has much more credibility here than you, and she is
correct. I was a young and very reckless driver once and would always
have had a hard time with killing someone by accident that I caused, so
I can side with her point. She is passionate about her beliefs and that
does NOT make HER the kook. I have just been watching lately and this is
one of those things that may 'possibly' be blamed on the local police
for not enforcing the speeding laws enough in the first place.
Actually they used to over-enforce the laws, once pulling me over for
doing 26 in a 25 zone back in 1965. Something has slipped over the years
and it may just be too many cars on the road to ticket them all. Again,
in 1965, my high school locker-mate was killed on prom night in that
area due to speeding. Drinking, driving, and speeding caused him to not
make a turn at 90 MPH and he hit a house and was killed in the most
horrific manner. He was cut in two by a sheet of plywood from the house
coming through the windshield and getting him at about the seat belt
line. 1965 became a very somber graduation year at Campbell high school
after that and I slowed down considerably. The summer of 1965 saw much
less than the usual teenage hot rodding since Randy was one of the most
popular guys in school and sorely missed by all. Ending the year with
his funeral had a definite dampening effect.
**** happens.
People would love to see the driver hung out to dry for 20 years but,
really, what GOOD would it accomplish, no one is coming back from the
dead, not this year at least.
Lay off Maggie, she is one of the better of the group, and not to be
insulted in our group presence.
Bill Baka
Ads
  #22  
Old March 17th 05, 03:27 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Neil Brooks wrote:
"Maggie" wrote:


I never expected you to understand the point of my argument. I don't
know how I would react if it was NOT a crime with "intent" to kill and
it was a young person. I don't know if I would get satisfaction
destroying his life as well. IF HE HAD NO INTENT!!!

I DO know how I would react if it was premeditated and with malice of
forethought. I would get revenge in any way I could. Even if I went to
jail for the rest of my life by doing it.



Intent is nice, Maggie, but there's something shy of intent that has
to be considered: foreseeable consequences.

A reasonable person could have foreseen this consequence as a risk of
this young person's behavior.

Many states have places for boy-racers to race *legally* -- stadium
parking lots, closed stretches of road . . . whatever -- where it is
sanctioned by the police and closed to the general public. When you
foist your stupidity on the general public by racing on public
streets, you bear the responsibility of your actions *regardless* of
what you "intended" to do.


Neil,
You are foisting stupidity by even implying that most states even give a
damn beyond giving out the tickets. California sure as Hell does not. We
used to have a nice parking lot "Gymkhana"(sp?) in the West Valley
shopping mall back in 1963 to about 1967 where the maximum possible
speed was about 40 MPH between turns but it got canceled. Turnout was
good but apparently there was no revenue for the shopping center and the
local authorities never organized another such event.

What your argument *seems* to miss is the general concept so readily
missed in society today: your right to swing your fist ends where my
face begins.


My fist says your face should learn to duck if you insist on opening
your mouth in such fashion. Society has changed, not for the better.

This driver, it seems, gave a damn only about what *he*
wanted; not about the impact of those desires on others around him.


This driver, like so many others, had been granted a license to drive
anything up to about 10 tons (large RV size) with only a minimal driving
test and no common sense test, not basic IQ test (really needed).

The result of that: a cyclist died.


The result of lax licensing: Many cyclists die without reason.

Responsibility for one's actions extends *far* beyond intent.


Many countries will at least administer a driving competence test that
involves handling a vehicle at speed before granting the 'privilege' of
driving a 3,000 pound piece of metal. In California I was never asked to
drive over 25 MPH and only drove around the block. Some test!
Bill Baka
  #23  
Old March 17th 05, 03:29 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What should be his punishment?

Castration to prevent stupid genes and death penalty.

  #24  
Old March 17th 05, 03:33 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

There is a difference between these crimes and hidious crimes such as

pre meditated murder, rape, child molestation, armed robbery, cold
blooded killing with no remorse, kidnapping and torturing a victim,
walking into a convenience store and shooting 10 innocent people.

Driving double the speed limit is no different than pulling a trigger.
Especially on a country road by a driver with little experience.


Make an example and it all ends???? Is it that simple??


Make an example of them all.

  #25  
Old March 17th 05, 03:37 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

GaryG wrote:

It's not intent that it as issue here...it is his "reckless disregard" for
his actions that warrant a harsher punishment. He was speeding at nearly
twice the posted limit, and had been cited previously for speeding and
racing. This little punk does not deserve any sympathy, even if he did not
have the "intent" to kill someone.

GG


The only logical conclusion to this would be to execute him in an eye
for an eye fashion. Prison time will only turn him into a criminal, and
more prison time will turn him into a more hardened criminal who will
more than likely commit crimes 'with' intent from that point on.
I have spent time in jail myself for arguing with a judge and once you
are in custody it does not matter whether it was for jaywalking or
murder, you are treated the same by the jail house police. My 2 weeks in
jail were interesting, but in no way rehabilitative. Until the
jail/prison handling of inmates according to the type of person in
custody changes, incarceration will only create more hardened criminals.
Is that what you desire?
Bill Baka
  #26  
Old March 17th 05, 03:45 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Colorado Bicycler wrote:
One of the purposes af appropriate sentencing is to set an example of
what might happen to others if they also kill someone.

This guy had an amazing record of speeding tickets and other assorted
violations, and it appears he has his hand slapped for these offenses.
So it is not as if he this was his first time with this behavior, nor
that he had not been warned before.


That is a very real problem with California law, at least where I live.
There are drivers with 3 or 4 DUI s pending that are still out driving
drunk every night and not behind bars where they should be. The law is
almost saying that they can do it until they kill someone. Many of them
never serve time but just get their license revoked for 5 to 10 years,
hence the number of idiot cyclists I deal with while on my bike. They
are sociable to me since they think I am riding for the same reason, but
the reality is quite different. I have 3 cars but at almost $3.00 per
gallon I don't want to drive unless I have to pick up people or large
items like furniture.

What other drivers who might also be prone to participate in such
behavior see right now is that killing someone by speeding and reckless
driving is a very minor offense. They will not, IMHO, be deterred from
similar behavior by this sentence.

And, no, I am not suggesting the death penalty - that wuld be
ridiculous, and is likely outlawed in this stae in any case.

I think about 15 years in prison would be an appropriate sentence, and
would have a marked deterring effect on others.


The death penalty might make more sense since 15 years in prison is only
going to turn out a 15 year hardened convict. The only trade you learn
in prison is crime, or maybe law if you are on death row.
Bill Baka

  #27  
Old March 17th 05, 03:49 AM
AustinMN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bill wrote:
"I was driving my vehicle on a road a little too fast and hit and
killed Mr. Ryan," Paniccia told the court.


When asked if he traveling in excess of 80 mph, he replied, "Yes."

Riverview Road's speed limit is 45 mph.


A little too fast? This kid was still trying to play it down when he
confessed!

Austin
--
I'm pedaling as fast as I durn well please!
There are no X characters in my address

  #28  
Old March 17th 05, 03:50 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Maggie wrote:
Zoot Katz wrote:

16 Mar 2005 08:16:49 -0800,
s.com,
"Maggie" wrote:


So you think the kid should get the death penalty?


No, he should be fed alive to alligators.
--
zk



I can always count on you to lighten things up.
Maggie

Well, Maggie, you have been the one voice of reason on this thread. This
group does have a high testosterone level, after all.
Maybe I should start up my wrong way riding thing again, which I still
do in the interest of survival on some roads with no bike lanes or
patrol cars or speed limits below 65++.
Bill Baka
  #29  
Old March 17th 05, 04:07 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

rdclark wrote:
Maggie wrote:


So you think the kid should get the death penalty?



I'll tell you what I thinK

1) Several years in the cooler, learning a trade;

Cooking drugs, making license plates, burglary?
2) Permanent, lifetime, irrevocable loss of driving privileges;

Another elite bicyclist.
3) Permanent, lifetime, irrevocable payments of 50% of his income to
the victim's family.

What income, the tax on his drug sales?

The problem with the system in the US -- and Maggie, you demonstrate it
in your opinions quite graphically -- is that we allow people to do
damage while driving cars that we would never allow them to do under
other circumstances. Every kid -- yours, mine, and this one here --
grows up knowing -- **knowing** I say -- that any "accident" they can
walk away from is not going to cost them anything permanent.


That does agree quite nicely with a news tidbit I heard Tuesday on the 5
O'clock news on KCRA channel 3 about kids getting into gangs as young as
ten. Why not? They can shoot someone and only be prosecuted as a child?

We Americans have a moral and ethical blind spot that's exactly the
size and shape of a car. This guy drove through it, and in a year or
two he'll have "paid" the price of his victim's life.


Ten of this kids lives would not be worth one of this victims.

We have change this. We as parents, we as drivers, we as voters, we as
cyclists, must work to re-invent our culture so that people are afraid
to drive not because of what might happen to them but because of what
they might do to someone else, and the price they will be made to pay
if they do.

The driver of this car willfully set out to commit a criminal act with
his car.


I don't think that he was thinking that when he 'presumably' buckled his
seat belt.

What's wrong with our culture is that we don't see that as
sufficient cause for punishing him as if he set oout to kill someone
with his car. If you pick up a loaded gun and start shooting it in
random directions, should you not be punished for killing someone just
because you weren't specifically aiming at him? Deciding to drive 80
miles an hour is exactly the same crime.


Not so. Justice is hopelessly random in this country.

When you get behind the wheel you are picking up a loaded gun. What
happens then is absolutely your responsibility.

RichC

Rewind. We need to go way back an change the inscription on the tablet
of the Statue of Liberty to read "Keep your damned useless in your
countries, because we don't want them either.". Are you old enough to
have seen what has happened here since the mid 1960s? I am
Caucasian/Native American and now a minority in the country of my
ancestors, thousands of years back. We are no longer the great melting
pot but just a kettle of crud. Harsh wording on my part, but quite
literally true.

No other civilized country has our problems, gangs, guns, repeat problem
drivers, etc. UK., Canada, Australia, N.Z., France, etc. Why is the
supposed role model country so screwed up?
Answer that.!?
Bill Baka


Did you ever hear

of the saying..."there but for the grace of God go I" or "Don't spit


in

the wind my friend". Are you a parent? Did you ever know a person
whose child was killed by a teenage driver? Did you ever know a
teenager who killed someone with his car because he was 18 and acting
like an ass. Did you ever know parents who instead of seeking


revenge,

they honored their lost child by helping educate, motivate, and


finance

programs regarding safety. Did you ever see a parent who lost a child
try to repair the life of the "criminal".

There is a difference between these crimes and hidious crimes such as
pre meditated murder, rape, child molestation, armed robbery, cold
blooded killing with no remorse, kidnapping and torturing a victim,
walking into a convenience store and shooting 10 innocent people.

Anyone who intentionally and with thought sets out to harm any human
being should be punished. A person who kidnaps a child and rapes and
tortures him or her should die a slow death in my opinion. A slow
agonizing death.

Crime is not black and white. I don't think most 18 year olds who
speed, think its "OK TO KILL SOMEONE". Do you really think the boy


in

my town or the boy in the news story actually think, or thought...it
was OK TO KILL SOMEONE?

I can't argue this, because I know some young people who have screwed
up badly and then turned their life around.

I know people who screwed up their life so badly when they were young
but because of the help they received, they are making a difference


in

the lives of young offenders. The company I work for builds the
offices in Newark for past offenders changing the lives of these


young

kids.

If you want to hang everyone, that is your perogotive. In the end, do
you really think that will solve the problem. Do you really think


that

will put an end to these tragedies. Really, is that what you believe?
Make an example and it all ends???? Is it that simple??
Maggie



  #30  
Old March 17th 05, 04:17 AM
bbaka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Matt O'Toole wrote:
Tom Keats wrote:


In article . com,



"Maggie" writes:



http://www.timesunion.com/aspstories...StoryID=342295



What are we supposed to say about this article?



Killer drivers get too much Special Dispensation.
And driving is regarded too much as a natural right
and necessity of life. The unnecessary mayhem and
carnage caused by cars & drivers is shrugged off as,
as Zoot says, 'the cost of doing business.'



The World Health Organization has some appalling figures
on traffic-related injuries and fatalities all around the
world. I'll try and see if I can find the URL again.



So to answer your question: traffic is too dangerous to
human life. And enforcement (in the judicial sense,)
which is our first-line offense against this unacceptable
state of affairs, is just too lax and lackadaisical --
possibly because it reflects the general public attitude
toward this issue.



In your opinion what
type of sentence should the 18 year old receive?



Prohibition from driving for life, for a start.
He's well demonstrated that he can't handle the
responsibility of driving without killing people.



I agree with this one. When someone comes out of jail they're starting from
scratch anyway -- let them start a car-free lifestyle.

The problem is, it's unenforceable. People with suspended or revoked licenses
drive anyway. Most are probably never caught, but plenty of them are.

I once sat in criminal traffic court as a witness. I listened to cases like
this all day. Perhaps two thirds of the defendants had been driving with
suspended or revoked licenses. I don't know about elsewhere, but in CA this
means instant jail time -- at least 10 days, but up to six months (which is no
joke in LA County, possibly one of the worst jails in the world).


Been there, done that, 2 days for traffic ticket, watching cops beat
people into the ground for not jumping when told to. Between the cops
and the gang versus gang versus real criminal stuff it is no walk in the
park, even over the weekend. One guy bitched about his handcuffs being
too tight and they choke holded him unconscious.

Still, people
take the chance. You can't keep a habitual offender from offending, without
locking them up. I'm no fan of our criminal justice system, but in cases like
this, the first consideration should be protecting the public.

I do think this sentence is too light. I also agree with the gist of this
discussion, that our society does not take car crimes too seriously -- they're
all "accidents." But I'm not faced with the same dilemmas judges are. Would it
really be better to put this kid in a jail for an extended time, and possibly
make him a worse criminal than he already is? How does that help protect
society? Yes our criminal justice system is broken, but judges have to work
with what they have.

Matt O.


Matt,
You I agree with. Jail time does just make more criminals. We need
incarceration reform before just handing out huge sentences. You just
don't stick a kid caught smoking weed in with hardened criminals and
expect him to come out a better person.
Bill Baka
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The number of years - too short? Sometimes! Maggie General 2 January 30th 05 12:37 AM
New Years Day century David Kerber Rides 6 January 8th 05 01:35 PM
Dmitri Neliubin killed on New Year's Day Carl Sundquist Racing 7 January 5th 05 06:24 PM
New Year's Day 2005 Ride Carol McLean Unicycling 13 January 4th 05 04:21 AM
"Actually you are the first person to bring up this issue" James Annan Techniques 848 April 6th 04 08:49 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.