Another rant about habitual drunk and reckless drivers. And "fuck you" to vinniepaz.

[mhendo]

A few hours after pitching six shutout innings for the Angels on Wednesday night, pitcher Nick Adenhart and two of his friends were killed by a drunk driver, driving on a suspended license (suspended for previous DUIs), who ran a red light in his van and slammed into the car containing Adenhart and his friends. The recidivist asshole then fled the scene, but was caught later by police.

Story here

Now, before anyone says anything about it, let me make clear that i don’t give a fuck about Adenhart’s status as a baseball player. That has nothing to do with it. It’s only relevant because i first noted the story while checking baseball scores on MLB.com.

I’ve ranted on these boards before about habitual drunk and reckless drivers, and about how society needs to get more serious about dealing with them before they kill someone, and this story just reinforces my belief. Suspending the licenses of these assholes is completely pointless, because the sort of selfish fuckhead who drives drunk generally doesn’t hesitate to continue driving on a suspended license.

I think we need to start throwing people in prison for drunk driving, and/or relieving them of their cars altogether. Not just their licenses, but their cars. I don’t give a flying fuck if they need to drive to work. They should think about that before getting behind the wheel loaded.

There was a 60 Minutes story a while back about a prosecutor somewhere in the north-east (NY state?) who makes a point of prosecuting drunk drivers far more harshly than most, and of pushing for murder (rather than manslaughter) charges when a drunk driver kills someone. I’ve never been a slam-the-fist, law-and-order freak, but i think this is the right solution. There is simply no need to get behind the wheel drunk, and anyone who does so should, in my opinion, be treated as if they have intentionally attacked someone with a deadly weapon. Because that’s essentially what they’re doing.

A bit of Googling has turned up the DA i mentioned above. She’s from Nassau County, NY. Here’s a description of one drunk driver that she prosecuted for murder after he killed 2 people:

Martin Heidgen, a 24-year-old insurance salesman, was driving the pickup truck. He suffered minor injuries. He had a blood alcohol content over three times the legal limit. On the night of the Flynns’ wedding, Heidgen was drinking at a friend’s party in a house on Long Island. His friends told him not to drive. He did anyway, driving for about three miles the wrong way on the parkway before slamming into the Flynns’ limousine and tearing their lives apart.

Three times the legal limit. Told by his friends not to drive. Drove anyway. Killed 2 people.

As the prosecutor said:

Asked why Heidgen fit as a murder case, Rice says, “The statute under which he was charged required us to prove that through his actions, he had a completely depraved indifference to human life.”

Heidgen was charged with murder by depraved indifference, she says, because he acted so recklessly others were likely to die.

I see no other conclusion that could be drawn from the previous paragraph describing Heidgen’s actions on the night in question. Heidgen’s lawyer said:

Lamagna’s reaction when he heard his client was being charged with murder? “I could recall saying to myself, ‘They’re not going there. They’re not charging a vehicular homicide with murder, with a life sentence, as if he’s Jeffrey Dahmer or John Gotti.’ Murder in our society, and in every state in the union, is relegated to the most dangerous, cold-blooded killers.”

Not for young men like Martin Heidgen, he says, a recent college graduate who had no previous convictions of any kind. If he’d been charged with manslaughter - not murder - he’d have been facing a possible sentence of probation to 15 years. Murder carries a mandatory penalty of 15 to life - too much, says Lamagna, for a young man who never intended to kill anyone.

Fuck that shit.

When he stepped into that car with three times the legal limit of alcohol in his blood (and it was probably more, because the police tests often can’t be taken immediately), and when he ignored his friends’ exhortations not to drive, he formed intent right then and there, IMO. Murder was precisely the correct charge in that case.

And the reason that vinniepaz is included in this pitting is his comment in the baseball thread where Adenhart’s death was first discussed. RickJay and i had each opined about the need to get serious about drunk drivers, and the need for harsher sentences, when vinniepaz weighed in with:

@vinniepaz

I find it interesting how quick everyone is to revel in the horrible fate awaiting the driver. One life has been destroyed, must we really take such glee in the administration of justice that must inevitably ruin another?

I understand why we must have strict laws as a deterrent effect, but it damn sure doesn’t make me feel good inside when the machinations of reasoned men rip the humanity from a person.

Fuck you asshole.

I was reveling in nothing; i was taking no glee in anything. I simply believe that a long custodial sentence is precisely appropriate for someone who: has a history of driving under the influence; drove under the influence while his license was suspended; ran a red light and killed three people; and then fled the scene.

[panache45]

I totally agree. I have known people who get behind the wheel while blindingly drunk, and through sheer dumb luck are still alive to do it again . . . and again . . . and again. But dumb luck doesn’t last forever, and I have no pity for them when their luck runs out.

[vinniepaz]

hey, great job keeping your head on this one.

My point was that its “interesting” that many people’s first reaction to news like this is to act as if the punishment awaiting the offender is going to make anything better. Perhaps glee was the wrong word, but it seems to me that focusing positively on the additional life that will be ruined by the system (however justified) is a starkly harsh and negative way to mourn a calamity.

thanks for just skipping to juvenile ranting there’s no way we could have had this conversation like adults.

[mhendo]

@vinniepaz

hey, great job keeping your head on this one.

My point was that its “interesting” that many people’s first reaction to news like this is to act as if the punishment awaiting the offender is going to make anything better.

Except that nobody did that, except in your fevered imagination. I’m well aware that whatever jail time this asshole gets can’t bring back the three lives he took, but that doesn’t mean that there’s no point in punishing him. And, at the very least, putting him in prison will ensure he can’t drive drunk any more.

@vinniepaz

Perhaps glee was the wrong word, but it seems to me that focusing positively on the additional life that will be ruined by the system (however justified) is a starkly harsh and negative way to mourn a calamity.

thanks for just skipping to juvenile ranting there’s no way we could have had this conversation like adults.

You accuse me of “reveling” in this guy’s punishment, and taking “glee” in it (which you have admitted was the wrong word), and then you accuse me of being a juvenile? If you wanted an adult conversation, why jump in with stupid accusations like that?

Physician, heal thyself. And fuck thyself, while you’re about it.

[vinniepaz]

Okay, well I guess it would be fair to put your quote in here so people can decide for themselves. Oh, and by the way, saying that you revel in something may be insulting, but it’s not juvenile. “Fuck you, asshole” for no apparent reason but to show the world how goddamned ANGRY you are is juvenile.

Anyway:

@mhendo

In much more sombre news, Angels pitcher Rick Adenhart was killed in a car crash, along with two others, by a guy who ran a red light while driving under the influence of alcohol, and who should not have been driving at all after having his license suspended for previous DUI infractions. Hope they throw the book at the asshole.

[Southern_Yankee]

@vinniepaz

Okay, well I guess it would be fair to put your quote in here so people can decide for themselves. Oh, and by the way, saying that you revel in something may be insulting, but it’s not juvenile. “Fuck you, asshole” for no apparent reason but to show the world how goddamned ANGRY you are is juvenile.

Anyway:

vinniepaz, do you disagree with the sentiment in mhendo’s quote? All I see is mhendo saying the drunk driver should get as much punishment as the law allows. That sure doesn’t look like “reveling” to me.

[Caffeine.addict]

My issue with this prosecution is that it might not work. What is the DA’s conviction records using this type of prosecution? What if any is the reversal rate?

Does she actually get convictions, or is this political grandstanding?

[Marley23]

@Caffeine.addict

My issue with this prosecution is that it might not work. What is the DA’s conviction records using this type of prosecution? What if any is the reversal rate?

Does she actually get convictions, or is this political grandstanding?

The DA mhendo mentioned is from Suffolk County, Long Island (NY), so that’s a separate thing from the case with the Angels pitcher and these other people. I couldn’t give you too many details about her success or failure rate, but she did get a conviction in the Heidgen case referred to in the OP. That conviction has stood, as far as I know. Heidgen was sentenced to 18 years to life.

[Frank]

I’m OK with the first drunk driving conviction being treated fairly lightly.

Once it’s repeated, or someone is hurt, throw the book at 'em. By the time someone gets up to their third or fourth conviction, they should be serving years or even decades in prison.

Oh, and no plea bargains. There has been a recent flurry here of multi-conviction drunk drivers killing people, and part of the reason they were free is that they have been allowed to plea bargain the drunk driving charge down to something that makes it difficult to trace their true history.

[RickJay]

@vinniepaz

hey, great job keeping your head on this one.

My point was that its “interesting” that many people’s first reaction…

See, this is where you’re wrong.

This isn’t my FIRST reaction; it’s an opinion formed from years and years of thinking about the issue, studying the facts, comparing the other alternatives, and examining evidence related to traffic fatalities. I’ve spoken at length with people in the business of enforcing the law on public highways and they (a) are universally frustrated with the facts that drunk driving fatalities continue to go on and (b) are amazed and bewildered that the courts won’t punish people for it.

The punishment awaiting the offender won’t bring the victims back to life, but it MAY serve as a deterrent. The fact is that people drink and drive at least in part *because they know the penalties are not severe. *

Nobody is “Reveling” or “Taking glee” in anything and it was stupid of you to assume that.

[Loach]

@vinniepaz

Okay, well I guess it would be fair to put your quote in here so people can decide for themselves. Oh, and by the way, saying that you revel in something may be insulting, but it’s not juvenile. “Fuck you, asshole” for no apparent reason but to show the world how goddamned ANGRY you are is juvenile.

Anyway:

From the quote you provided you took a giant leap to reach your conclusion. Maybe you are projecting reactions you have seen from other people on to the OP. I just don’t see it.

[Enderw24]

@vinniepaz

hey, great job keeping your head on this one.

My point was that its “interesting” that many people’s first reaction to news like this is to act as if the punishment awaiting the offender is going to make anything better.

Well, I suppose it would give a sense of justice to the families of the victims, but I don’t think anyone in this thread thus far or in the future are advocating harsher punishments for that sole reason. It’s mainly as a deterrent, and a pretty effective one at that.

If you knew that your first DUI resulted in, say, losing your license for 6 months and a $1000 fine automatically, with no possibility of a plea down to a non DUI offense,
If you knew that your second DUI was a 1 to 3 month jail sentence, three years probation and a permanent loss of license
If you knew that an accident caused to another vehicle while impaired resulted in a permanent loss of your license and mandatory jailtime
If you knew that a death caused by driving drunk resulted in a charge of murder levied against you…

Would you drive drunk?

[Giles]

I suspect that the solution is prevention more than punishment. The guy who drinks too much at a party, then drives home, isn’t going to think about the 0.01% chance that he will kill someone and spend many years in prison. What will reduce drunk driving is a bigger chance of getting caught, and that requires random tests of all drivers for blood alcohol level. That party-goer will think about a 1% chance of a $1,000 fine, because it comes into the range of what’s going to happen eventually if he drinks and drives regularly. Unfortunately, to do this you need a change to or a re-interpretation of the US Constitution.

[Ed_Zotti]

Fuck you asshole.

Mod note: We remind users of the following Pit rule:

"The following expressions should not be directed at other posters …

fuck you and variants, e.g., go fuck yourself, fuck off and die"

Your cooperation is appreciated. No warnings issued.

[SteveG1]

@vinniepaz

hey, great job keeping your head on this one.

My point was that its “interesting” that many people’s first reaction to news like this is to act as if the punishment awaiting the offender is going to make anything better. Perhaps glee was the wrong word, but it seems to me that focusing positively on the additional life that will be ruined by the system (however justified) is a starkly harsh and negative way to mourn a calamity.

thanks for just skipping to juvenile ranting there’s no way we could have had this conversation like adults.

Apparently, this guy had been caught driving drunk before. He (if allowed to) will probably do so again in the future. If this is the only way we can guarantee he never drives again, never gets a chance to kill someone else, so be it. Take his license, he will still drive. Take his car, he will just find a way to get another one. Lock him up, he doesn’t get the chance.

[Typo_Negative]

@Enderw24

If you knew that your first DUI resulted in, say, losing your license for 6 months and a $1000 fine automatically, with no possibility of a plea down to a non DUI offense,
If you knew that your second DUI was a 1 to 3 month jail sentence, three years probation and a permanent loss of license
If you knew that an accident caused to another vehicle while impaired resulted in a permanent loss of your license and mandatory jailtime
If you knew that a death caused by driving drunk resulted in a charge of murder levied against you…

Would you drive drunk?

The problem with that is that drunk people and sober people measure risks and rewards very differently.

[Some_FNG]

I live in a redneck, “fuck-authority” area with far too many habitual drunk drivers and I fully support the notion of taking their cars and throwing the cocksockets in prison.

First offense- here’s a year in jail with hefty fines. No plea bargains.
Second offense- here’s a five year stretch inside and we’ll sell your car and give the money to rehabilitate the victims of drunk driving.
Anything beyond two convictions means, to me, that the offender has no regard for human life and should be incarcerated for life.

And about the ball player- man, what a fucked up thing. To me, this situation is proof that there is no caring god.

[villa]

I got T-boned by a drunk driver who blew through a stop sign at 50 mph. Fortunately I walked away unscathed but my dear friend had 5 prior DUIs, an open bottle of gin on the passenger seat, and no insurance (which isn’t surprising with the 5 prior DUIs).

The cop then decided to lie on the stand and screw the proscution up, so the guy ended up taking a plea and getting 3 months, I think. Guess where he ended up a year later when I was trying to track him down regarding the insurance suit to reclaim my deductible? Yes indeed. In prison again, for another alcohol and driving offense. It is only sheer chance that he hasn’t killed anyone (though he may have done by now, because I can only presume Tennessee keeps handing him back his keys).

Not a lot of sympathy here for drunk drivers. Get a cab. Drink at home. Don’t kill me, please.

[Stuffy]

I disagree with Ender and Frank, first time offenders need to be treated as harshly as possible, and I don’t think anything less than mandatory jail time will do. My sister is an alcoholic who has a DUI conviction. She also continues to drive, despite having a suspended license. She’ll think nothing at all of putting her kids at risk driving around town wasted. I willing to bet you if she had had to serve 30 days or more in jail the first time, I wouldn’t constantly worry about her killing my nieces and nephew by driving drunk.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Stuffy

I disagree with Ender and Frank, first time offenders need to be treated as harshly as possible, and I don’t think anything less than mandatory jail time will do.

Does requiring ignition lock devices (like this) work? If so, that seems the best solution all around.