181 replies to this topic

[UnionBlondie16]

I don't think you can really compare highway driving to city driving. The conditions are completely different. That's why the speed limits are much slower in the city.

I also don't think it's fair to file a suit against the parents. They weren't driving the car. All a parent can do is hope that they've raised their child right and responsibly enough that they'll be ok to drive. This child was obviously not and I think that he should get all of the punishment. Not his parents.

And for the record, I don't think 6 months is enough. When the story first broke out, I was hoping the best for the boy. But 90 in a 45? It's absolutely unforgivable, in my opinion. How does the family feel about it?

[supermom]

I could care less about the difference between speeding and racing, but teens have to read the same drivers handbook and pass the same tests that you and I did to get their license. They are subject to the same rules and laws that you and I are. Saying that they can't be held to the same punishment standards is a monumental copout.

And anyone with even an inkling of common sense knows that doing 90 on the freeway is nowhere near the same as doing 90 on Iron Point.

True, true and true.

Except for one little detail. The way the road is designed on Iron point with the grade %, the slope and the turn prior to the place of the accident makes it impossible that the drivers could have been going 90 MPH. I believe that in the early news reports the 90 MPH estimate was dropped because of those reasons. It is believed that if the boys had accelerated to that speed; they would have had to slow down to approximately 65 MPH and the distance from there to the accident would have not been great enough for them to have accelerated much over that rate of speed. Now--my memory on this may be incorrect;; but this is just what my understanding of what happened.

Nor am I defending 65 MPH on that road. I have driven it enough to know that I do not feel comfortable going much over 45 on that road for several reasons (besides the posted limit). As I said the slope on the road from the middle section to the right side discourages a comfortable ride--the grade is inclining and the twisted turns before getting to the restaurant (as well as an upcoming light) also discourage recklessness. However, experience (a few blown tires or struts out of whack) maturity ( I really don't feel the need to test my car) and fear of consequences (tickets or harm) come into play on certain roads like this.

So, your right; the kids do take the same driving tests that we do; but, driving for many years has steadied and improved my overall driving habits and maturity level.

I think that that should definitely be taken into account when noting these boys were minors at the time of the accident.

[UnionBlondie16]

True, true and true.

Except for one little detail. The way the road is designed on Iron point with the grade %, the slope and the turn prior to the place of the accident makes it impossible that the drivers could have been going 90 MPH. I believe that in the early news reports the 90 MPH estimate was dropped because of those reasons. It is believed that if the boys had accelerated to that speed; they would have had to slow down to approximately 65 MPH and the distance from there to the accident would have not been great enough for them to have accelerated much over that rate of speed. Now--my memory on this may be incorrect;; but this is just what my understanding of what happened.

Nor am I defending 65 MPH on that road. I have driven it enough to know that I do not feel comfortable going much over 45 on that road for several reasons (besides the posted limit). As I said the slope on the road from the middle section to the right side discourages a comfortable ride--the grade is inclining and the twisted turns before getting to the restaurant (as well as an upcoming light) also discourage recklessness. However, experience (a few blown tires or struts out of whack) maturity ( I really don't feel the need to test my car) and fear of consequences (tickets or harm) come into play on certain roads like this.

So, your right; the kids do take the same driving tests that we do; but, driving for many years has steadied and improved my overall driving habits and maturity level.

I think that that should definitely be taken into account when noting these boys were minors at the time of the accident.

The car that they boy had (Dodge Stealth) could do about 90 in that turn. Maybe it was a little less. But I'm pretty sure that it is possible.

[folsom500]

Naw--that's just a person trying to justify in their own mind that it's ok for them but not for anyone else.

Really pathetic when you think about it.

Going over the speed limit is against the law. Going faster than you should is speeding.
Going fast to compete or get somewhere in a rush-hey -sorry you don't like this--but it is racing.

If you can't understand that--then how can you expect someone who is not a seasoned driver (like a teenager) to do so? How can you hold them to the same punishment standards? Experience often times dictates good choices; fear of consequences dictates caution; maturity dictates the ability to reason properly.

So if you are a speeder going 80 MPH in a posted 65 MPH or 70 MPH; I gotta wonder. Which one are you lacking: experience, fear of consequences or maturity?

Now, those of you whom want to continue to justify speeding on the freeway at 15 to 20 MPH faster than the speed limit because that is the flow of traffic--I would like to remind you that the law states going 20 MPH over the posted speed limit regardless of road conditions is reckless driving and shall being ticketed in that category.

It's amazing how some of the posters on this forum want to villify teens--yet can't cop to their own irresponsible driving. ( If you aren't one of them - then that statement shouldn't offend you).

Hey Lady - when you get real about life in the big city one might listen- guess you have not been out on 80 much or 580 connecting-- it is the reality that 80 is the Minimum speed limit often -- regardless what the sign says...... and it aint racing .... and it aint reckless---

Ever driven in LA basin where are cars are 10 feet apart and they are all driving 75 plus and changing a lane is a life threatening situation ? No ? - well that is the reality -- not punks racing for their egos but moms and pops driving home in a world of - if you don't keep up you are the problem ....

the FLOW is more important to the safety of all than the law ... and the cops all understand that as well ...

do you ?

Cheers
F500

[supermom]

Hey Lady - when you get real about life in the big city one might listen- guess you have not been out on 80 much or 580 connecting-- it is the reality that 80 is the Minimum speed limit often -- regardless what the sign says...... and it aint racing .... and it aint reckless---

Ever driven in LA basin where are cars are 10 feet apart and they are all driving 75 plus and changing a lane is a life threatening situation ? No ? - well that is the reality -- not punks racing for their egos but moms and pops driving home in a world of - if you don't keep up you are the problem ....

the FLOW is more important to the safety of all than the law ... and the cops all understand that as well ...

do you ?

Cheers
F500

I touched a nerve? Hmm...slow down....there's too many car killers out there and the fact is: the majority of them are not teenagers.

Union Blondie: don't let the city/ freeway debate get you tied up in knots. Either you follow the law and don't speed/ or you CHOOSE to break the law; and do speed. Period.

As for the boys family--I disagree with you on that as well. Whew, I'm probably gonna ruffle feathers on this one-- but here goes: Mommy and Daddy knew the boy was driving without insurance. The keys were made available. They TAUGHT their son the wrong way. They should have to pay for TEACHING their son that breaking the law was OK--and thereby their actions they were definitely culpable in this teachers death. The civil lawsuit should also paint the parents towards child endangerment or at very least gross neglect of a minor and gross neglect of their civic duties to society as a whole.

[brown]

True, true and true.

Except for one little detail. The way the road is designed on Iron point with the grade %, the slope and the turn prior to the place of the accident makes it impossible that the drivers could have been going 90 MPH. I believe that in the early news reports the 90 MPH estimate was dropped because of those reasons. It is believed that if the boys had accelerated to that speed; they would have had to slow down to approximately 65 MPH and the distance from there to the accident would have not been great enough for them to have accelerated much over that rate of speed. Now--my memory on this may be incorrect;; but this is just what my understanding of what happened.

Nor am I defending 65 MPH on that road. I have driven it enough to know that I do not feel comfortable going much over 45 on that road for several reasons (besides the posted limit). As I said the slope on the road from the middle section to the right side discourages a comfortable ride--the grade is inclining and the twisted turns before getting to the restaurant (as well as an upcoming light) also discourage recklessness. However, experience (a few blown tires or struts out of whack) maturity ( I really don't feel the need to test my car) and fear of consequences (tickets or harm) come into play on certain roads like this.

I'm not saying they were going 90 at the time of the accident. According to the article, they were doing 90 at some point, and 67 at the time of accident. But it really doesn't matter. They knew exactly what they were doing, and knew what could happen. They still chose to do it, and you can't excuse it with a lack of experience, maturity, or a fear of consequences.

[stacycam]

I defintely believe the parents are responsible, and either they, or their kid, should be taken to court and forced to pay Mr. McNew.

As for the speed, I understood that he was going over 60mph AT THE POINT OF IMPACT - which is after a fairly lengthy skid mark.

[UnionBlondie16]

I touched a nerve? Hmm...slow down....there's too many car killers out there and the fact is: the majority of them are not teenagers.

Union Blondie: don't let the city/ freeway debate get you tied up in knots. Either you follow the law and don't speed/ or you CHOOSE to break the law; and do speed. Period.

As for the boys family--I disagree with you on that as well. Whew, I'm probably gonna ruffle feathers on this one-- but here goes: Mommy and Daddy knew the boy was driving without insurance. The keys were made available. They TAUGHT their son the wrong way. They should have to pay for TEACHING their son that breaking the law was OK--and thereby their actions they were definitely culpable in this teachers death. The civil lawsuit should also paint the parents towards child endangerment or at very least gross neglect of a minor and gross neglect of their civic duties to society as a whole.

I'll agree with that. I'm guilty of 5 mph over on city streets. 10 on the highway (and I'm in the slow lane).. But I don't think you can call every person who goes 15 over on the highway immature.

Now, the whole insurance thing, I obviously missed that. No feathers ruffled at all. There's no excuse for that. I now agree with you on the suit against the parents. 100%. Thank you for setting the record straight! =)

[ChipShot]

Hey Lady - when you get real about life in the big city one might listen-

Nahhh...ain't gonna happen. It's funny...you can sure tell who HAS and HAS NOT been sheltered their whole life. Reality sometimes never finds some of these individuals. Tragically sad.

[supermom]

Huh, that's funny--- I spent my young formative years living in LA. Grew up in the Bay Area and Drove up here most every weekend from Santa Cruz to visit friends.

I still drive out to visit them; but they live in Frisco, now.

I guess the difference of what we are talking about; is that between being a teen and driving; and an adult who has driven in multiple countries (with a drivers license in those countries) is that I actually do understand things like grades, slopes; the impacts of leaves, sleet, snow, and flash flooding. I've drive 2 1/2 "deuce N halfs" during typhoons season to get fresh water and food to locals. I've driven through sandstorms; and if you think LA traffic is bad: try driving in Seoul.

Nice try.

[chris v]

The car that they boy had (Dodge Stealth) could do about 90 in that turn. Maybe it was a little less. But I'm pretty sure that it is possible.

That statement is completely unfounded and if you knew a little more about cars you would understand that the Stealth in question IS NOT capable of this. The car is a tank and cannot handle worth a crap. I have said this since the accident happened. They were not going 90 mph through that section of road. It is impossible. I have always said they were doing about 65 which in fact is almost the average speed driven on that road. It was said they were doing 67. WOW, I must kinda know what I'm talking about. Gee lets see, maybe it's the years of racing or the fact that I am an engineer and I understand how this stuff works. Just about everyone here is using their emotions to judge these kids instead of the facts. Yes, technically they were speeding and they are guilty of that just like they admitted to. Leave it at that.

Top speed is 155 mph.

Also, in a shameful act I locked up all 4 wheels at 100+ mph. I'm just being honest, and this is in my past.

[Family Friend]

Anyone know how the family of the teacher feel about the punishment. Since they're the victims in this, I'm just curious whether they feel it's a just punishment.

After the boy made his statement to the family in the courtroom they thanked him. When he was taken into custody they went over and hugged his mom.

The media reports have made so many allegations about this case that were not accurate. For example, after reporting on this case for 9 months the news used the boys name for the first time - and they even got that wrong! His last name is not Anderson.

I stated on this board all along that once the judge looks at all the facts the boys would not get a hard sentence. Most people didn't want to listen to me and claimed that I was just biased, all I was trying to do was get information out without the media hype and biased slant.

The one thing made very clear yesterday, is that everyone involved is crushed and any kind of healing is a long way away.

[UnionBlondie16]

That statement is completely unfounded and if you knew a little more about cars you would understand that the Stealth in question IS NOT capable of this. The car is a tank and cannot handle worth a crap. I have said this since the accident happened. They were not going 90 mph through that section of road. It is impossible. I have always said they were doing about 65 which in fact is almost the average speed driven on that road. It was said they were doing 67. WOW, I must kinda know what I'm talking about. Gee lets see, maybe it's the years of racing or the fact that I am an engineer and I understand how this stuff works. Just about everyone here is using their emotions to judge these kids instead of the facts. Yes, technically they were speeding and they are guilty of that just like they admitted to. Leave it at that.

Top speed is 155 mph.

Also, in a shameful act I locked up all 4 wheels at 100+ mph. I'm just being honest, and this is in my past.

I suppose I didn't think about the handling of the car. I just know the weight of the car would hold it down and the car wouldn't flip. But the statements did not say the car was going 90 at the time of the accident; but previous to it. So either way, it doesn't matter if the car could take that specific turn at 90. Iron Point is pretty straight before you get to that area. The car could easily have gone 90 before it had made it to the point the accident occured (where reports say he hit her at about 65).

[chris v]

I suppose I didn't think about the handling of the car. I just know the weight of the car would hold it down and the car wouldn't flip. But the statements did not say the car was going 90 at the time of the accident; but previous to it. So either way, it doesn't matter if the car could take that specific turn at 90. Iron Point is pretty straight before you get to that area. The car could easily have gone 90 before it had made it to the point the accident occured (where reports say he hit her at about 65).

Really though, what would it matter if they were doing 90 mph even 2 miles before it. It doesn't. All accident data is based on the last 1/4 mile before impact. The 90 mph is all allegations anyway, who clocked it?

[UnionBlondie16]

Those allegations are what the basis of the reports saying they were street racing were based on. That's all I'm saying.