Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I like art, particularly pottery, and furnature inspired by the work of Thomas Chippendale, so call me a philistine, but I fail to see how disposing of bodies using "chemicals" is "art".
I can't believe I am going to write this, but here it goes.
The point Harrier is making is when one writes crime novels or something similar, it adds realism and substance to be truthful in certain processes - detective work, court systems or how a body could be disposed of.
It's like a painter studying the human anatomy. In order to make a painting look realistic, you must know how the muscles, bones, tendons actually work together. This makes a good artist.
So folks who are drunk know exactly what they are doing at all times and the irresponsible behavior is something they would normally do anyway? Or they just don't care because they're drunk? I guess you could say that but the government says it's ok to take something that makes you not care what you do but then punish you for it.
Logic and reason are still there. That is the point. It isn't like for instance... PCP where your faculties are at lunch, where you are legally classified as "insane".
Nobody does something while drunk that they weren't thinking about doing while sober.
The government excuses a lot of peoples actions though.
Back to the point I was discussing with nomader about I agree with you. It's legal to drink. It's legal to drive if you have a proper license yet you are punished if you do two legal things at the same time. Now if kill somebody like you say that is against the law. It is quite the odd arrangement in our legals system.
Thing is, I don't see it as unreasonable to restrict driving drunk. While all your faculties are there while drinking, your motor reflexes are toast. There have been numerous tests with a 0% success rate for people at a given point of intoxication. Now, how "much" that is really depends, so I think the legal limit as a blanket law is an issue, but the fact remains, nobody can function at normal speeds while at that point.
It isn't like talking on a cell phone, or texting, etc... which can all be done with responsible and defensive driving techniques, alcohol impairs the motor reflexes consistently.
The guys sons were killed before his eyes, so it was hardly "cold-bloodied." Try not to use words and phrases whose meanings escape you.
I get that it may be tough for you and others to understand, or that one of you might actually read the details of the incident and reach a more rational conclusion .... but the facts of the case are, the father and two sons were pushing their disabled truck down the road toward their home, late at night. So, this 20 year old guy is driving along at night on a dark road, and accidentally hits these IDIOTS pushing their freaking truck down the road, whom he probably could not see until it was too late to avoid hitting them accidentally. And for that he gets summarily executed by the idiot father who was really the cause of the entire tragedy for placing his sons and himself in such a dangerous situation, all to avoid paying $50 bucks for a tow truck to remove the road hazard in the proper manner?
Is it really that hard for you all to actually think anymore? Any one of you could find yourselves in the same situation. The bottom line is, the idiot father is actually responsible for all three deaths ... his two young sons that he stupidly put in such a dangerous situation, and the young man he executed in COLD BLOOD, for simply being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
I hope they fry that idiot's arse ... he ought to be charged with murder of the driver, AND reckless endangerment leading to the deaths of his two sons.
If you look at how, and why the accident happened, alcohol could have made no difference. The accident happened late at night, Barajas and the two Sons were pushing the disabled pickup truck.
Could the vehicle's lights be seen? I think not, with three people behind it.
We are not shown where the accident happened, or what other vehicles were around, or many other variables that could have contributed to the circumstances.
The article doesn't even say from what direction the truck was hit.
Last edited by BECLAZONE; 02-16-2013 at 07:05 AM..
No drunk gets in a car and calculates his/her odds of being involved in a fatal wreck.
Of course not. They are drunk, they are not going to be doing much calculating of anything. Nevertheless, they are behind the wheel of a deadly weapon and are responsible for the actions they take. This would be no different than if he used a firearm on the two boys. I do not know Texas law, but in Alaska, they would be charged with manslaughter. Furthermore, the adult who sold or gave the 20 year-old booze in the first place would also be charged.
I had a similar event happen to me. A friend of mine and I were walking back home from a park, when a drunk driver swerved off the road and struck my friend head-on doing about 45 mph, clipping me with the passenger-side mirror. My friend was thrown about 50 feet in front of the sedan into the middle of the road. The sedan end up in the ditch.
I ran over to help my friend, but when I picked up his left arm to take his pulse, his arm separated from his socket and came out of his short-sleeved shirt. There was very little blood, but I knew he was dead. I heard the sedan try to pull out of the ditch, and I turned around, picked up the biggest rock I could find, and threw it through the driver's side window. When I picked up another rock to throw, the sedan stopped trying to back out of the ditch.
I do not know how long I stood there. I never called the police or ambulance, but someone apparently did, because the next thing I remember is it was dark, raining, and there were police everywhere, and I was still holding a rock. I did not even know that my arm had been broken when he clipped me until the next morning.
I never did find out what happened to the driver of the sedan, I do not even know if it was a female or male, and I did not care.
If you look at how, and why the accident happened, alcohol could have made no difference. The accident happened late at night, Barajas and the two Sons were pushing the disabled pickup truck.
Could the vehicle's lights be seen? I think not, with three people behind it.
We are not shown where the accident happened, or what other vehicles were around, or many other variables that could have contributed to the circumstances.
The article doesn't even say from what direction the truck was hit.
It is possible, though that is speculating quite heavily.
If anything it might have been a crime of passion and hopefully he'll walk.
You don't walk for crimes of passion, you get a slightly lighter sentence.
And like Harrier said, did he know for a fact that the guy was drunk? For all we know, he got pissed off and shot the guy immediately. I doubt he gave him a sobriety test.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
