Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: hawk220 on June 18, 2003, 09:18:18 AM
-
the saddest story I've seen in the news in years. Think before you drink and drive.
Teen killed after picking up first car, hit by wrong-way driver on I-5
By Michael Ko and Cal Blethen
Seattle Times staff reporters
Three weeks from her 18th birthday, Jessica Ketzenberg celebrated with her father by driving to a Tacoma-area dealership Monday evening to buy a red 1992 Toyota Camry, her very first car.
She didn't make it home.
A few hours later, about midnight yesterday, the young Kent woman died after her car was struck head-on by a wrong-way driver on Interstate 5, just south of Highway 12 near the Thurston-Lewis county line.
Timothy Ketzenberg, 43, who was in his pickup directly in front of his daughter, swerved to avoid the oncoming driver and witnessed the accident in his rearview mirror. They had been heading to his home in Longview.
The wrong-way driver, Tashina R. Bumgarner, 21, of Oakville, Grays Harbor County, also died in the crash. State Patrol investigators said they found beer bottles in her car and think she had been drinking.
A 31-year-old passenger in Bumgarner's car, Mark Pannkuk, of Olympia, was at Providence St. Peter Hospital in Olympia yesterday with serious injuries.
Both drivers and Pannkuk were wearing seat belts.
Bumgarner was driving her 1989 Ford Probe "well above the speed limit" on northbound I-5, said State Patrol spokesman Johnny Alexander.
Just before midnight, Bumgarner rear-ended a northbound 1990 Toyota Camry, which was driven by a 45-year-old Kelso woman, and forced it off the road, Alexander said. That woman was uninjured.
Bumgarner then crossed the grass median strip approximately half a mile south of exit 88, east of Rochester, into the southbound lanes. Bumgarner drove about one-fifth mile before the accident, Alexander said.
Timothy Ketzenberg ran to his daughter's mangled car. "He tried to get her out," said his cousin, Dena Engle. "He said he grabbed her hand, he felt a light pulse and that was it. The firefighters came and had to pull him away."
Jessica Ketzenberg's mother, still in her slippers, showed up about an hour and 45 minutes later, said Steve Gleason, 39, of Seattle, who witnessed the crash and stopped to help.
People "were holding on to her so she couldn't get too traumatized," Gleason said.
"The car behind, one of the kids (who was a part-time medic) tried to help save (Jessica). But she was jammed in so bad, and losing blood, there was no way."
Family members cried and consoled each other yesterday at Tim Ketzenberg's home.
Engle said Jessica Ketzenberg was "always shy at first, but you hang out and then she'd get to know you and she'd open up and make life fun."
For example, Engle recalled their frequent trips to the Puyallup Fair with girlfriends and relatives: "We'd be shopping, checking out guys. She'd make things fun when you were with her, looking at things through her eyes."
Engle said Jessica Ketzenberg was attending an alternative school in South King County and "loved babies"; she often baby-sat children of friends and neighbors.
The family has an annual reunion every summer at Bonney Lake. This year's is planned for August, and it will be tough, Engle said.
Investigators think Bumgarner and Pannkuk met sometime Monday night at the Oasis Bar and Grill in Centralia and left together, Alexander said. The two were thought to be headed to a mini-mart just off the freeway in Grand Mound, Thurston County, where Pannkuk wanted to be dropped off.
Bumgarner was charged with theft and alcohol possession two years ago in Olympia, before she turned 21, according to court records. The charges were dismissed last fall after she paid a fine and complied with her probation.
-
So sad. May the victim rest in peace. May the drunk driver rot in hell.
-
Must be/been real hard for her father to watch her daughter go away like that :(
-
Drunk driving penalties are way too lenient in this country. My own brother-in-law has had 5 DWI's and the most he's ever gotten for punishment is 5 days in a workhouse.
We need to throw the drunk drivers in the hooskow for a significant amount of time on the FIRST offense, if that what it takes to get people to sober up before they drive.
-
As the father of an 11 year old daughter, reading something like that makes me sick. I don't know if I could handle it. The word devastation wouldn't even begin to describe it.
-
Accident avoidance is a skill that very few young drivers are taught. Yes, the drunk driver was at fault, but I'm guessing the daughter was so excited about the new car that she may not have had her head on a swivel nor left enough distance between herself and her dad to react to unseen objects.
I've seen a lot of drivers be left hung out to dry by the car in front of them. For example:
4-lane highway - 2 lanes going your way, 2 lanes going the opposite way. You're in the left lane following a truck or van, toodling along at a safe speed. Meanwhile, in front of that van is a vehicle that's completely stopped waiting to turn left. The van drives right up to the back of the stopped vehicle, then changes lanes at the last second, leaving you to scream into the back of the stopped vehicle that you didn't see because of the van.
Vehicle ahead of you is turning left into a parking lot. You're behind it and you want to follow it into the parking lot, too. There's a pause in the oncoming traffic so the vehicle in front of you turns across the traffic into the ramp of the parking lot. You proceed to turn left, too, thinking the car ahead of you will pull on in. Instead, the car ahead of you stops at the ramp and scans for open parking spaces instead of driving forward, leaving you broadside to oncoming traffic.
Not saying that this is relevant to the accident, but I figured its worth pointing out.
-
What about a "3 strikes your out" policy on drunk driving? you get caught 3 times, you do life in prison...too extreme? Or not enough prison space for the drunks in this country?
-
we become rather numb to all the horrible things that we see daily on the news, death and destruction are the norm on the 5 oclock news.
I'm not ashamed to admit I bawled my eyes out when I saw this story. I can't possibly imagine the horror and sense of loss this father is going thru.
The drunk driver died, so there isn't even anyone this guy can vent anger at. :(
-
enjoy em while you got em
it's too late when they are gone ............
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
What about a "3 strikes your out" policy on drunk driving? you get caught 3 times, you do life in prison...too extreme? Or not enough prison space for the drunks in this country?
That is way too extreme.
IMO such laws causes only more danger - what happens when you're on your third time and realise what you've done, which means you will spend your whole life in prison - you might go berserk, since theres nothing to loose anymore.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
What about a "3 strikes your out" policy on drunk driving? you get caught 3 times, you do life in prison...too extreme? Or not enough prison space for the drunks in this country?
Well, maybe not a life sentence, but a lengthy sentence, with a mandatory session at the Betty Ford clinic thrown in for good measure.
-
"4-lane highway - 2 lanes going your way, 2 lanes going the opposite way. You're in the left lane following a truck or van, toodling along at a safe speed. Meanwhile, in front of that van is a vehicle that's completely stopped waiting to turn left. The van drives right up to the back of the stopped vehicle, then changes lanes at the last second, leaving you to scream into the back of the stopped vehicle that you didn't see because of the van.
Vehicle ahead of you is turning left into a parking lot. You're behind it and you want to follow it into the parking lot, too. There's a pause in the oncoming traffic so the vehicle in front of you turns across the traffic into the ramp of the parking lot. You proceed to turn left, too, thinking the car ahead of you will pull on in. Instead, the car ahead of you stops at the ramp and scans for open parking spaces instead of driving forward, leaving you broadside to oncoming traffic. "
You are reponsible for your own vehicle. In both cases, there is no one to blame but yourself. "You" assumed and made bad decisions. These drivers didn't "hang you out to dry" you made foolish choices.
-
It needs to be extreeme, having personnally lost a good friend to a DUI driver on his 4th! offcence to find out all 3 previous DUI's he's injured people!! Only to find out this guy never had a licence to drive. past his second offcence.
There should be no 'wiggle room' These f**** should go right to slammer. . . .
-
as far as the drunk driving LAWS are concerend ever STATE makes the own for the most part and obviously you guys making the comments never got DUI's ond how evers broter musta had one damn good lawer!
i know here in Michigan
1st offense is few days jail time ,probation(6months) and restricted liscense
2nd offense is 5-10 days jail, longer probation (1yr) and loss of licsence for at least a yr. when you get it back you have to have a breathalizer.
3rd offense is 90days-1yr jail. loss of licsense for 5 yrs.
Now drunks are gonna drive with or with out a liscense and with or with out a breathalizer.
Now the real issue is how many State/county/township officials/cops who drive drunk and get away with it!!!!!!!!!!
:confused:
-
In a related story..
BATON ROUGE, La. -- The House killed legislation to toughen Louisiana's law against drinking while driving on Monday, after successfully avoiding a yes-or-no vote on the issue until its hand was forced by the Senate.
State law already calls for a $50 fine for drivers who possess open containers of alcohol on public highways. Monday's House vote was on language expanding the law to cover passengers, as ordinances in 18 parishes and 187 municipalities now require.
House members voted 53-46 to table the issue, a motion that cuts off debate without giving the sponsor of the measure a chance to give his final argument. Before the vote, however, debate had lasted close to an hour.
The Senate had passed an identical bill early in the session and the House Judiciary Committee approved the same bill 6-3. But until Monday, opponents succeeded in getting the House to avoid a full-fledged debate by having the bill committed to another committee, setting off a series of parliamentary moves and countermoves that saw the bill through an unprecedented three different committee hearings before it was killed in the House Transportation Committee.
The bill's author, Sen. Joel Chaisson, D-Destrehan, then amended the language onto a House-passed bill by Rep. Buddy Shaw providing a $25 fine for leaving children unattended in a vehicle.
Monday's debate was on whether to accept the amendments.
Shaw, R-Shreveport, touted the amendment as a way of helping combat drunk driving. Rep. Tony Perkins, R-Baton Rouge, said current law can easily be subverted by a driver who hands a drink over to a passenger to avoid a ticket.
Opponents said there was no proof that open container laws save lives, that the legislation would be difficult for police to enforce and that it was unfair because it excludes large motor homes (longer than 21 feet) and licensed for-hire vehicles.
"Don't you think it's kind of unfair to put those exceptions in there for people who can afford it?" asked Rep. Alex Heaton, D-New Orleans.
Rep. Peppi Bruneau, R-New Orleans, was among House members complaining that the law would interfere with people who want to drink while heading to LSU football games, although Shaw pointed out that Baton Rouge, where the games are played, already has such a law.
"This bill is one of the greatest infringements on people's rights that I've ever seen," said Rep. Taylor Townsend, D-Natchitoches. He said it would lead to police pulling people over anytime they saw a passenger lifting a cup to his or her lips.
Townsend's motion to table the matter avoids the possibility of a House-Senate conference committee coming up with a compromise on the bill and mean's Shaw's original measure dealing with children left in cars is dead for the session.
However, the House will likely vote on the issue again this week. Chaisson amended the same language onto a second bill dealing with people who assault bus drivers. That bill's author, Rep. Melinda Schwegmann, D-New Orleans, said she will likely ask the House to reject the Chaisson language and send the bill to a conference committee, rather than risk losing the bill entirely.
The issue provided a tough vote for lawmakers, who were pulled in different directions by the alcohol lobby, a rich source of campaign contributions; constituents accustomed to being able to drink in their cars; highway safety advocates; and the federal government, which denies the use of some highway construction funds to states that don't pass the tougher law.
According to Jim Champagne of the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission, failure to pass the tougher open container language will cause Louisiana to lose an estimated $8 million to $10 million in federal highway construction money. Under federal law, the money will have to be diverted to safety programs.
Other legislation designed to curb drunk driving fared better, getting final legislative passage in the Senate on Monday. Those bills included measures making it a crime to refuse a blood alcohol test following an accident that kills or seriously injures someone, and another increasing penalties for drivers with a blood-alcohol level of .20 percent or greater.
[/b]
-
I don't know (and when I see cases like this don't care) how much it would cost to implement. but what I'd like to see is a drinking license.
you show your ID when you go drinking everyone gets carded no matter how old.
you get a DUI you lose your drinking license (maybe 10 yrs first offence).
you get drunk and act like an ass, tear up someones property you lose you license for a few years.
if your license is suspended and your blood alcohol level shows you've had anything to drink, you lose your license forever and some serriouse jail time
you sell or give alcohol to anyone without a license (except parents to there own kids who haven't had a license taken away) you lose your license for life.
the above punishments should go with the jail time, not instead of it.
drunk driving is a drinking problem not a driving problem.
most habitual drunk drivers cause more problems while drinking than just their driving, they also seem to be the ones that come home drunk and slap their wife around or have the 3am screaming match on the front lawn
I know a couple habitual drunk drivers(neighbors & co-workers). they all drive anyway. one hasn't had a license since he was 17 (near 40 now)and it doesn't stop him from driving.
so taking away driving privalages doesn't really mean anything. if they aren't bothered by driving drunk then driving without a license doesn't mean anything.
btw- one important thing I tell my kid about avoiding accidents on the road. try not to look at the problem ahead (in this case the drunk going the wrong way). but look for the safe way around the problem. most people especialy new drivers will automaticly stear tward whatever they are looking at. it's almost impossable to stear around a problem while staring at it.
-
I heard that the girl killed had not yet gotten a drivers licence. Having just purchased the car for her upcomming 18th birthday, she was following her father home.:(
-
I did a little digging to find out exactly what .08 is. For some reason I thought it was 2 beers. Also for some reason, this was hard to find until I got the right site. I found info that said anything from 2 beers to 4 beers for a 160lb male and most sites didn't say anything about how much ... just expounded facts and figures about why .08 is a good limit (and a few that said it wasn't low enough). Anyhow, this would seem to be a good source:
http://www.ncadd.com/08/charts.cfm
SOB
-
.08 is bull****, which is why I hate drunk driving laws. Punish people for bad driving and crashing, not for drinking.
-
Funked
does that mean if someone can drink up to a 1.10 and still drive safely they should be allowed to?
-
I think so. Frankly, if a dead person can manage to get behind the wheel of a car and drive, I say we let them!
SOB
-
Originally posted by SOB
I think so. Frankly, if a dead person can manage to get behind the wheel of a car and drive, I say we let them!
SOB
Thats how you got your license, right? :p
.
.
.
.
.
.
ooops! Sorry, I confused "Brain dead" with "Dead" (http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/images/smilies/slap.gif)
-
you hear now and again someone who says 'I can drink all night and drive just fine'.. I suppose people like that exist, tho I've never seen one.
I've also read stats that say on any given night, some percentage of folks on the road, like 10% or something is under the influence of something and 10% aren't crashing, so who knows?
-
Originally posted by funkedup
.08 is bull****, which is why I hate drunk driving laws. Punish people for bad driving and crashing, not for drinking.
main problem with alcohol, compared to most other drugs - one does not know how fried they are until the next morning - especially the "expert" drinkers ... ie the drunk driver doesn't think/know they are "driving bad" until they "crash" or a cop informs them.
ANY alcohol is too much if one is expects to get behind the wheel and drive on a public roadway IMO.
My lawyer would be talkin to the owners of the Oasis Bar and Grill.
The establishments need to be more responsible in their serving of alcohol, not just how many $8 drinks they can cram down some drunks throat ... as the drunk cannot make a sober decision.
edit:
"found beer bottles in the car" - would get the bar of the hook - this time.
-
well here in Michigan the dropped the impared to .06 drunk is now .08
used to be .08 was impared and .1 was drunk.
-
what kind of testing was done to arrive at the .06 and .08 numbers?
-
I've got no problem driving with two drinks in me, and that's where I draw the line for myself. I think a .00 limit would be rediculous.
SOB
-
Originally posted by SOB
I've got no problem driving with two drinks in me, and that's where I draw the line for myself. I think a .00 limit would be rediculous.
SOB
no matter what?
no matter how much you have eaten or not eaten?
no matter how tired/awake you are?
no matter what you may have been doing the past few hours before you drank?
how bout road conditions? weather? time of day?
this is exactly the problem - can't go by that, though we all think so, especially when you are a drinker - I did. So did my brother ...
-
Originally posted by Steve
"4-lane highway - 2 lanes going your way, 2 lanes going the opposite way. You're in the left lane following a truck or van, toodling along at a safe speed. Meanwhile, in front of that van is a vehicle that's completely stopped waiting to turn left. The van drives right up to the back of the stopped vehicle, then changes lanes at the last second, leaving you to scream into the back of the stopped vehicle that you didn't see because of the van.
Vehicle ahead of you is turning left into a parking lot. You're behind it and you want to follow it into the parking lot, too. There's a pause in the oncoming traffic so the vehicle in front of you turns across the traffic into the ramp of the parking lot. You proceed to turn left, too, thinking the car ahead of you will pull on in. Instead, the car ahead of you stops at the ramp and scans for open parking spaces instead of driving forward, leaving you broadside to oncoming traffic. "
You are reponsible for your own vehicle. In both cases, there is no one to blame but yourself. "You" assumed and made bad decisions. These drivers didn't "hang you out to dry" you made foolish choices.
Exactly. These types of scenarios aren't something most new drivers have learned. Even older drivers fall into the trap of the first scenario sometimes. Being able to anticipate and react to a sudden situation can be learned.
Back to the story: if the father had time to dodge out of the way, did the daughter who was behind him? Was she "looking ahead" of the vehicle in front of her?
-
Back to the story: if the father had time to dodge out of the way, did the daughter who was behind him? Was she "looking ahead" of the vehicle in front of her?
not necessarily, you should follow close enough to handle the car in front of you stopping without warning, or having him change lanes and surprise you with something in the road.
but a car coming at you at your same speed halves the amount of time you have to react. basically it's like having a safe distance for 60mph and then suddenly finding yourself closing on the problem at 120mph. add to that the surprise of the situation and a new driver who was likely stunned by the situation. she probably had no time to react at all by the time she registered exactly what was happening
-
Originally posted by SOB
I've got no problem driving with two drinks in me, and that's where I draw the line for myself. I think a .00 limit would be rediculous.
SOB
Did any of you get that film in Drivers Education (going back to the 70's here, bear with me) called "Two Beer Benny" ? Basically, it was a film that shows how one or two beers can make you just a tad more agressive in your driving.
-
"one or two beers can make you just a tad more agressive in your driving."
Maybe for you lightweights. Beer ain't drinkin'.
-
There ya go. Funked downs a fifth of JD before he drives. Don't 'fect him none. That boys a pro!
-
if you get a DUI i say revoke their right to drive for 10 years.
-
Originally posted by Eagler
no matter what?
no matter how much you have eaten or not eaten?
no matter how tired/awake you are?
no matter what you may have been doing the past few hours before you drank?
how bout road conditions? weather? time of day?
this is exactly the problem - can't go by that, though we all think so, especially when you are a drinker - I did. So did my brother ...
I'm sorry you were stupid when you drank and could only think in black and white, Eagler. However, we don't all share that problem. I do have the ability to gauge other factors into my decision and if, when I'm ready to go home, I think I'm not prepared to drive ... I don't. And yes, after two drinks I do still have the ability to think rationally whether my stomach was empty or full - and if I was overly tired, chances are I'd have a Dr Pepper because booze would prolly put me to sleep.
SOB
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Did any of you get that film in Drivers Education (going back to the 70's here, bear with me) called "Two Beer Benny" ? Basically, it was a film that shows how one or two beers can make you just a tad more agressive in your driving.
The only safety movies I remember from school were from Jr High, about being safe around trains. Salem has tracks running basically right through the center of town ... and they ran between the Jr High and High School too. And remember kids, playing around trains is no laughing matter! :)
SOB
-
We had "Red Asphalt"
-
Originally posted by SOB
I'm sorry you were stupid when you drank and could only think in black and white, Eagler. However, we don't all share that problem. I do have the ability to gauge other factors into my decision and if, when I'm ready to go home, I think I'm not prepared to drive ... I don't. And yes, after two drinks I do still have the ability to think rationally whether my stomach was empty or full - and if I was overly tired, chances are I'd have a Dr Pepper because booze would prolly put me to sleep.
SOB
yeah, right - stupid :rolleyes:
forgot to mention body mass - two drinks would affect someone half your size, say 150 lbs, much more
two drinks = two hours of non-drinkin b4 you get behind the wheel - sure everyone follows that rule too ....
-
Yeah, drinking too much and then driving is stupid. I thought we agreed on that point. The point I don't agree with is having this particular freedom taken away from me. And the law is not based on how many drinks one consumes, but on one's BAC. So, just what in the heck are you arguing about here? If two drinks makes someone too loopy to drive, they shouldn't drive, and if it brings them to .08 BAC then it's against the law (depending on their state). So...?
SOB
-
You take away from the tragedy when you try to make a statement about it.
1) The person that caused this was simply an idiot.
2) Argue blood alchohol limits all you want, this person exceded it
3) Stop trying to use idiots as examples for the rest of the world.
I'm very sorry that some people are simply too stupid to stay allive on this planet. I'm equally sorry that they usually take someone with them when they go. It is always a tragedy when it happens.
Unfortunately, no law in the world will prevent idiots from being idiots. Its quite simply a fact. To deny this is to deny human nature.
The drunk driving laws are there to help keep those on the border honest... not to prevent this type of thing from happening.
MiniD
-
from govt reports , it takes an avg man 4 drinks per hour to reach 1.0 bac. so even if you chuged down 2 beers you could not hit 1.0
-
Originally posted by SOB
Yeah, drinking too much and then driving is stupid. I thought we agreed on that point. The point I don't agree with is having this particular freedom taken away from me. And the law is not based on how many drinks one consumes, but on one's BAC. So, just what in the heck are you arguing about here? If two drinks makes someone too loopy to drive, they shouldn't drive, and if it brings them to .08 BAC then it's against the law (depending on their state). So...?
SOB
"discussing" the fact that once someone starts to drink -many/most of the time he/she is not able to make a fair judgement of their ability to drive...and thus should not be allowed behind the wheel.
even if you don't "feel" it - it's still proven to affect your reaction time. 99% of the time they get away with it, but right situation where lightning reflexes, thinking just a hair clearer could have avoided an accident - he/she wouldn't be able to pull it off... seen it, lived it, think about it everyday...
drive safe - drive sober
-
Originally posted by john9001
from govt reports , it takes an avg man 4 drinks per hour to reach 1.0 bac. so even if you chuged down 2 beers you could not hit 1.0
thinkin is flawed here
4 drinks an hour is one every 15 minutes ... you are talking about 2 drinks/beers in about 60 seconds .... on an empty stomach I'd bet you'd reach toxication levels for a short period of time..
-
Originally posted by Eagler
"discussing" the fact that once someone starts to drink -many/most of the time he/she is not able to make a fair judgement of their ability to drive...and thus should not be allowed behind the wheel.
even if you don't "feel" it - it's still proven to affect your reaction time. 99% of the time they get away with it, but right situation where lightning reflexes, thinking just a hair clearer could have avoided an accident - he/she wouldn't be able to pull it off... seen it, lived it, think about it everyday...
drive safe - drive sober
Ahh, I see. So, unless I got a good 8 hours of sleep, haven't had any alcohol, illicit drug, over-the-counter or prescription drug that might make me drowsy, don't have my mind on other things, have my passengers buckled in with their mouths duct taped shut, and have no thoughts of looking anywhere but at the road ahead of me (forget my gauges), etc... I shouldn't drive. That sounds reasonable.
SOB
-
Going to wade in here for just a short time. I spent some time in the DUI squad when on the department.
First thing is that most (if not all, I simply do not know) state statutes regarding DUI have an impairment clause. Impairment does not hinge on a BAC of .08, .10 or even .38% Blood / alcohol content (BAC). Impairment simply notes that if your performance is impaired you are not fit to drive. For some folks, that can be as low as .02% due to genetics and tolerance. A person drinking for the first time has a lower tolerance than an alcoholic.
A BAC level of .08, .10 or whatever is a LEGAL finding written into the code. This legal finding states that there is a PRESUMPTION of intoxication if your BAC is that level. In other words you are considered to be "legally drunk", which is in fact illegal when driving. :p
A lower BAC does NOT mean you are not impaired by that level of alcohol and hence you can still be driving "drunk" UNDER .08%.
In Arizona, if you are impaired to the SLIGHTEST DEGREE then you are guilty of driving while impaired (drunk driving if you will) and desreve to lose your driving priveledges and have other sundry sentences levied on you.
Field sobriety tests are used to determine if you are impaired. A breathalyzer or other test is used to determine how much alcohol you have in your system. The impairment also applies to drug usage. This leads to the change in the title of the charge to be driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor OR drugs. There is no diferentiation between legal or illegal drugs. If you are impaired you should not be driving. PERIOD.
Several medical factors also determine how impaired a person is at any given time. Factors such as fatigue, combination of medications, genetics, food intake, tolerance etc. all combine for each individual to determine a certain point where they would be impaired. These can change a persons tollerance to a couple drinks (the usual amount admitted to) to be very devastating to their ability to drive.
That sad fact of life, is that a significant portion of collisions ( I refuse to call them accidents) are due to impaired drivers. An even sadder fact is that they often kill someone besides themselves while impaired. It wouldn't e so bad if it was just the damn drunk that got injured or killed.
You can believe what you want but you had better believe that there are TONS of drunk drivers out there every day. It may come to pass that you might meet one of them and you just might not be able to do a damn thing about it either.
Yes I have been hit by a drunk driver. Fortunately I was lucky and got out of it with a wrecked motorcycle (with less than 500 miles on it) and some bruises.
There ain't no such thing as a "safe" driving drunk or drugged person.
-
My father was one of these habitual drunk drivers, show up at 3AM for a screaming match on the lawn.
He had so many accidents (fortunately single vehicle accidents) that I can't even remember them all.
Finally the county threw him in jail for 6 months. So far as I know he hasn't had an achoholic drink since.
I have a very[/u] hard rule that I follow. If I have had anything[/u] to drink I absolutely will not drive.
Sometimes this is annoying as I am always the driver when my friends and I go out to dinner, but I can live with that.
I'm not sure I could live with the knowlege that I[/u] killed somebody because I put myself behind the wheel of a 5,000lb battering ram when I couldn't control it. I will not let that happen.
-
Sucks to be her.
-
Nice to hear from someone with experience. Thanks for the info, Mav.
SOB
-
Karnak, same rule myself. I either drink where I will be sleeping or arange another ride home.
also from a purely economic point of view- you could get a limo to pick you up at the bar and take you home once a week for a year for the price of your first dui. and it gets more expensive as you go.
-
We need to throw the drunk drivers in the hooskow for a significant amount of time on the FIRST offense,
An good friend of mine is going to jail for six months for driving while drunk.
First time he got caught he got to do one month in jail and now the second time its six months... This is Sweden tough...