261 replies to this topic

[Steve Heard]

Those people are liberals.

HA! Those people are actually wealthy conservatives who think their kids are above the law because they come from good families, good neighborhoods, get good grades, drive good cars, and have good connections.

The liberals are more likely to defend the poor kid, from the bad neighborhood, who gets bad grades, because he 'didn't have a chance'.

I am for punishing people equally.

At the risk of hijacking the thread, but then, you were the one who steered it away from the facts and politicized it, my argument about defending criminals reminds me of something that happened in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina.

There were two photos published by the Associated Press, same subject matter, different captions, released the same day.

The first photo showed a black kid, with this caption "a young man wades through chest-deep water after looting a grocery store"

The second showed a white couple in the same circumstances, with this caption, "two residents wade through chest-deep water after FINDING bread and soda from a local grocery store"

It's all about perspective, isn't it?

[supermom]

HA! Those people are actually wealthy conservatives who think their kids are above the law because they come from good families, good neighborhoods, get good grades, drive good cars, and have good connections.

The liberals are more likely to defend the poor kid, from the bad neighborhood, who gets bad grades, because he 'didn't have a chance'.

I am for punishing people equally.

At the risk of hijacking the thread, but then, you were the one who steered it away from the facts and politicized it, my argument about defending criminals reminds me of something that happened in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina.

There were two photos published by the Associated Press, same subject matter, different captions, released the same day.

The first photo showed a black kid, with this caption "a young man wades through chest-deep water after looting a grocery store"

The second showed a white couple in the same circumstances, with this caption, "two residents wade through chest-deep water after FINDING bread and soda from a local grocery store"

It's all about perspective, isn't it?

Perhaps in one incident the news reporter had witnessed the looting and in the other incident the reporter only saw the people wading down a business street and could not in good conscience (yeah right) say that the couple had actually looted--so instead said "found". But yeah-you hijacked the thread!!

If you really wanted to punish people equally then how why do you think these kids should get jail? Rapists and murderers usually get 3 years after good behavior. Are you equating this crime to that? Speeding that got out of control and killed someone? **shrug-I don't really care-the truth is-a person is dead--but I don't think this was a crime of malice. This was a crime of true stupidity.

[Robert Giacometti]

[quote name='banana' date='Aug 13 2007, 12:59 PM' post='174185']
I too am tired of all the excuses. People seem to want to always find an excuse or reason for it to be ok for a criminal to commit a crime. Some posts here even blame the woman for pulling out into traffic! WTF? nobody should have to worry about cars going 90mph on that street!

banana, I agree with you in that we should not have to worry about cars going 90 mph on that street and I also agree with you we should not have to accept criminals committing a crime and getting away with it!

Do you really believe the boys were going 90 MPH? Do you really believe 2 cars could be racing at 90 mph side by side around that curve? Maybe you could explain how the one car, going 90 mph not only avoided the accident that occured in their lane, but managed to NOT leave any skid marks or loose control of his car while changing lanes?

Do you really believe the impact was at 70 mph and both kids were able to walk away uninjured?
If the impact was at 70 mph, why did the cars only end up 2 lanes apart?

Was the deceased wearing a seatbelt?

My comments aren't intended to take sides, but to get us all to think about the true facts, NOT comments based upon personal perceptions and not one sided studies without the benefit of questioning the methodology/information used to get the results.

My motivation is simple fairness for all! I would hope we can all agree with that?

[folsombound]

I too am tired of all the excuses. People seem to want to always find an excuse or reason for it to be ok for a criminal to commit a crime. Some posts here even blame the woman for pulling out into traffic! WTF? nobody should have to worry about cars going 90mph on that street!

banana, I agree with you in that we should not have to worry about cars going 90 mph on that street and I also agree with you we should not have to accept criminals committing a crime and getting away with it!

Do you really believe the boys were going 90 MPH? Do you really believe 2 cars could be racing at 90 mph side by side around that curve? Maybe you could explain how the one car, going 90 mph not only avoided the accident that occured in their lane, but managed to NOT leave any skid marks or loose control of his car while changing lanes?

Do you really believe the impact was at 70 mph and both kids were able to walk away uninjured?
If the impact was at 70 mph, why did the cars only end up 2 lanes apart?

Was the deceased wearing a seatbelt?

My comments aren't intended to take sides, but to get us all to think about the true facts, NOT comments based upon personal perceptions and not one sided studies without the benefit of questioning the methodology/information used to get the results.

My motivation is simple fairness for all! I would hope we can all agree with that?

It doesn't matter if it was 90 MPH or 70 MPH. 130 feet of skid marks and then still hit hard enought to kill the lady make it pretty clear that they were speeding and probably racing (by any definition). If you know all the "true facts" why don't you fill us all in? It seems to me that if they were all that innocent then they would not be plea bargaining.

• Back to top

[Steve Heard]

Perhaps in one incident the news reporter had witnessed the looting and in the other incident the reporter only saw the people wading down a business street and could not in good conscience (yeah right) say that the couple had actually looted--so instead said "found". But yeah-you hijacked the thread!!

If you really wanted to punish people equally then how why do you think these kids should get jail? Rapists and murderers usually get 3 years after good behavior. Are you equating this crime to that? Speeding that got out of control and killed someone? **shrug-I don't really care-the truth is-a person is dead--but I don't think this was a crime of malice. This was a crime of true stupidity.

That is exactly what happened. One photographer said he saw the guy take the food, the other said he didn't see his subjects take it, and the store had no doors, with stuff 'floating away anyway.'

In the days during the flood, I remember reports of cops breaking into a store to get food and water, and of people distributing food they had taken from stores.

All of these folks had one thing in common; they took stuff without paying for it. Some were portrayed as looters, some not.

Now the guy carrying the plasma TV, that was a looter. I wonder if he ever found a place to plug it in?

As for punishing equally, I didn't say that all crimes are equal, but that all criminals who commit the same crime should get the same punishment. Of course, we make exceptions if the act was premeditated, if it was hate-based, if it was a 3rd strike, etc., but I am talking about this particular issue.

All of those who race each other then kill someone should be punished equally. No breaks for being a good kid with a promising future, or a bad kid who needs a second chance.

[Family Friend]

It doesn't matter if it was 90 MPH or 70 MPH. 130 feet of skid marks and then still hit hard enought to kill the lady make it pretty clear that they were speeding and probably racing (by any definition). If you know all the "true facts" why don't you fill us all in? It seems to me that if they were all that innocent then they would not be plea bargaining.

Folsombound - Let's be clear.

The DA is not offering any plea bargain to the kids.

They will simply plead guilty to the charges.

[folsombound]

Folsombound - Let's be clear.

The DA is not offering any plea bargain to the kids.

They will simply plead guilty to the charges.

Then I'm guessing they don't think they are innocent.

[ChipShot]

This was a crime of true stupidity.

And needs to be punished appropriately. Gross vehicular manslaughter is no laughing matter. Tired of the excuses. Tired of the hand-wringing. Tired of the posturing. They need to spend at least a few years in prison to reflect upon their reckless, careless, and deadly decision to race that day. It's as simple as that.

[banana]

banana, I agree with you in that we should not have to worry about cars going 90 mph on that street and I also agree with you we should not have to accept criminals committing a crime and getting away with it!

Do you really believe the boys were going 90 MPH? Do you really believe 2 cars could be racing at 90 mph side by side around that curve? Maybe you could explain how the one car, going 90 mph not only avoided the accident that occured in their lane, but managed to NOT leave any skid marks or loose control of his car while changing lanes?

Do you really believe the impact was at 70 mph and both kids were able to walk away uninjured?
If the impact was at 70 mph, why did the cars only end up 2 lanes apart?

Was the deceased wearing a seatbelt?

My comments aren't intended to take sides, but to get us all to think about the true facts, NOT comments based upon personal perceptions and not one sided studies without the benefit of questioning the methodology/information used to get the results.

My motivation is simple fairness for all! I would hope we can all agree with that?

My answer is yes to all. As for how could one car avoid the accident, that's easy, that driver obviously had better control of his vehicle then the other driver who crashed.

Street racing is illegal and deadly. It doesn't matter if they were rich or poor, they need to be punished to the full extent of the law. Letting them off with a slap on the hands and no jail time is wrong wrong wrong and only sends a signal to all that it IS ok to street race because you won't be punished even when you kill someone.

We need to send a message to people who are out there racing and not give then anymore incentives to continue doing it.

[camay2327]

I too am tired of all the excuses. People seem to want to always find an excuse or reason for it to be ok for a criminal to commit a crime. Some posts here even blame the woman for pulling out into traffic! WTF? nobody should have to worry about cars going 90mph on that street!

banana, I agree with you in that we should not have to worry about cars going 90 mph on that street and I also agree with you we should not have to accept criminals committing a crime and getting away with it!

Do you really believe the boys were going 90 MPH? Do you really believe 2 cars could be racing at 90 mph side by side around that curve? Maybe you could explain how the one car, going 90 mph not only avoided the accident that occured in their lane, but managed to NOT leave any skid marks or loose control of his car while changing lanes?

Do you really believe the impact was at 70 mph and both kids were able to walk away uninjured?
If the impact was at 70 mph, why did the cars only end up 2 lanes apart?

Was the deceased wearing a seatbelt?

My comments aren't intended to take sides, but to get us all to think about the true facts, NOT comments based upon personal perceptions and not one sided studies without the benefit of questioning the methodology/information used to get the results.

My motivation is simple fairness for all! I would hope we can all agree with that?

---------

Bob, if the case is not going to an actual trial, we won't get the facts will we???

A VETERAN Whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a blank check made payable to "The United States of America" for an amount "up to and including their life". That is HONOR, and there are way too many people in this country who no longer understand it. -Author unknown-

• Back to top

[Robert Giacometti]

It doesn't matter if it was 90 MPH or 70 MPH. 130 feet of skid marks and then still hit hard enought to kill the lady make it pretty clear that they were speeding and probably racing (by any definition). If you know all the "true facts" why don't you fill us all in? It seems to me that if they were all that innocent then they would not be plea bargaining.

I don't know all the facts that is why I'm asking questions. In my mind there is a difference between anyone speeding at 90 mph on Iron Point and anyone speeding at 65 mph. Yes, they both are guilty of speeding but I feel there should be difference in punishiment.

If indeed the kids were truly going 90 mph, I would agree they should be charged with more than what they are. I have faith that if the DA truly believed they were going 90 mph they would have been charged with more than what they were. There are other cases were the DA has done this.

I've seen accidents with impacts at about 30 MPH that have resulted in fatalities.

I always felt the kids were speeding and should be held responsible for their actions regarding their contribution in this fatal accident.

Here is a hypothetical question to think about, at what point and time does the excessive speed weigh more than the fact the victim pulled out in front of them? Is it 55mph? 65 mph? 75 mph? This has always been my focus, not that they are punks/goodkids/ come from single parent families or wealthy families/ driving sports cars/ wanting their stereos back/etc. It has always been about how fast they were going in my mind and I'm not feeling real comfortable with the numbers we are now hearing from the police.

When I don't feel comfortable about something I always ask questions.

[supermom]

A friend of mine was driving a little sport car and was pulling out of a shopping area with a true blind spot and got wacked bad enough to completely total her car. She was ticketed for not yielding to traffic already on the road (there was no stop sign or light), she never recovered any money by the insurance, etc. The other car was defintiely excessive speeding-changing lanes and was a teen. No one killed tho. I wonder why this is any different? Is is because some one was killed and there were recent teen deaths by racing in the papers at the time? Are these kids being used for anti-racing propaganda by the city or PD? Hey, I don't know any of the people involved so I am merely thinking out loud and not attacking anyone-but I really do wonder if those teen deaths last school year played any part in this sudden hard line by the Folsom PD.

[ChipShot]

More and more of these kids think driving is some kind of video game. I hope the Folsom PD isn't afraid to come down hard on these dangerous teens. Hammer 'em hard, and even start towing cars, and the message should get around.

[supermom]

More and more of these kids think driving is some kind of video game. I hope the Folsom PD isn't afraid to come down hard on these dangerous teens. Hammer 'em hard, and even start towing cars, and the message should get around.

You did hear California legislation just posted a message to all cities that they can no longer 'take' cars for state crimes? So since speeding is a state crime on claifornia roads.....
Folsom ain't gonna get the money they wanted that way. San Francisco is a little put out about it.

[Steve Heard]

Here is a hypothetical question to think about, at what point and time does the excessive speed weigh more than the fact the victim pulled out in front of them? Is it 55mph? 65 mph? 75 mph? This has always been my focus, not that they are punks/goodkids/ come from single parent families or wealthy families/ driving sports cars/ wanting their stereos back/etc. It has always been about how fast they were going in my mind and I'm not feeling real comfortable with the numbers we are now hearing from the police.

When I don't feel comfortable about something I always ask questions.

Roberto

Isn't it a fact that the law, and insurance companies, would claim that despite this woman's car pulling into the road, the guy that hit her was responsible, in that one must drive no faster than is safe, and that if he could not stop in time to avoid the accident, then he must not have been?

Crossing that street is very dangerous. One usually has to wait a bit before an opportunity to cross presents itself. She probably looked up the hill, then down, then up, then down, and when no one was coming down, or so she thought, she pulled out. Here come two boys puttin' the pedal to the metal, having a good ol' time, and they come around that corner to see her there. Too late to do anything. Had they been going at or below the speed limit, they would have had plenty of time to avoid the accident.