Absolutely absurd how close the fans are to the racing “track”. Not only that but a whole bunch of these morons run onto the dirt track to gawk at the wreck and almost get hit by the next truck going by.
How on earth can there be this much collective stupidity? What kind of parents take their kids to something this horrifically dangerous?
Yep, I’m a heartless bastard for sayin’ it. But I’m sayin’ it: If these people were that stupid to stand in such an obviously dangerous spot, then maybe its best that they are out of the gene pool so they don’t breed more idiots.
Given that genes pervasively affect behavior, and that anything that affects your chances to reproduce follows Darwinian principles I’d have to say “of course”. Then again, the same applies to difficulty in picking up girls or having bad hair; there’s nothing all that unusual about something being “applied Darwinism”.
Just to be clear, is it your position that the species would be better off if anyone who ever does anything that is obviously dangerous is killed in the act?
I think the OP was referring to the definition of “applied Darwinism” discussed on this web site, and not the actual theory of Evolution as studied by Charles Darwin himself.
[Nitpick] The trucks racing in this race are not “Monster” trucks. They are off road racing trucks. Huge difference in power, performance, size, speed etc.[/Nitpick]
I guess what galls me is all the desert racing fans lamenting about what a “shocking tragedy” this was. And saying that it wasn’t the driver’s fault.
If you go over to the driver’s facebook there are dozens of comments to this effect. Um, no it’s not shocking. Watch the videos of events like this; the only thing shocking is that this doesn’t happen more often when people act this stupidly.
And yes, it most certainly WAS the driver’s fault. Apparently the race “rules” (which obviously aren’t enforced) require drivers to keep below 15 mph when they are within 50 feet of spectators. This guy was screaming past people at well over 50 mph. And lost control. And killed people. Just because he didn’t mean to kill people doesn’t mean it wasn’t his fault.
Yet his racing buddies keep claiming it’s not his fault. Examples: (BTW, the driver’s name is Brett Sloppy, irony noted):
“There is nothing you could’ve done different sloppy.” Um, yes there was - he could have not gone that fast so close to spectators. OR, he could have kept better control of the truck.
“everything happens for a reason and some things are beyond your control.” ** See comments above.
**
“SAd this had to happen” Italics mine. Interesting choice of words.
“This was a freak accident that no one could prevent from happening.” Same comments as #1 and #2
“you did nothing wrong buddy”
**“nothing you could have done to make things turn out any better or diffrent.”
"remember it was an accident and it was out of your control. You could not have done anything to change it "**
etc etc etc.
What part of the fact that the driver was driving too fast for the conditions, too close to the spectators and did something wrong that caused him to lose control is unclear to these idiots?
Those are the only types of quotes you are going to see on that Facebook page, because you can only “friend” him by invite now. My best guess is that got some messages he didn’t like, deleted them and closed the door.
In the original post you were saying that the audience deserved to die because of what you claimed was genetic inferiority. Now you’re only focusing on the driver’s behavior and some internet comments about it. Have you changed your mind?
In any case, studies of the genome have failed to find a single gene with a statistically significant connection to intelligence. Since intelligence is not genetic, the basic premise of your original post fails.
Without knowing a lot about the race, it seems like the ultimate responsibility lies with the organizers.
Winning a race involves driving fast. Having a rule that says “slow down if there are spectators near” is inviting the drivers to push the boundaries of safety right to the limits in order to win.
People like to see action. What constitutes a safe or dangerous place to stand may not be obvious. Your common sense may tell you to stand back, but if other people are standing closer without getting run over, there’s a strong temptation to move a little closer. The result is a feedback loop in the crowd dynamics that moves everyone closer than they would be if they were watching the race alone.
The organizers, not being immersed in the heat of the race, or the psychology of the crowd, have the responsibility to designate where it’s safe for spectators to stand and where it’s not. Their (apparent) failure to do so is the primary cause of this tragedy.
The video doesn’t really show the accident, just people standing around as a couple trucks zoom by, and then later saying “oh, shit, he rolled over.”
Still–wow. I knew spectators were just standing near the track with no barrier, but I would never have imagined how narrow that track is, and how close everybody was, on both sides. Basically the setup dictates that any driver error is virtually guaranteed to cause serious injuries.
Everybody involved–drivers, organizers, spectators–deserves plenty of blame for taking part in such stupidity.
I’m baffled at the report that no criminal investigation is under way, no arrests expected, apparently because this was a permitted event (on federal land, approved by the Bureau of Land Management). The drivers who killed spectators at an illegal race in Maryland in 2008 were prosecuted, with the first conviction resulting in a fifteen-year prison sentence.
Did the BLM actually understand how the event they authorized was going to be set up? Did organizers lie about anything in securing the permit? Surely this is at least worth investigating, and it should be much too early to rule out prosecutions.
Because this was a private event, any criminal charges would be more along the line of gross negligence or something which can only come about with a complete investigation into what safety procedures were supposed to be in place, who was implementing them and how, etc.
If a baseball fan got hit by a ball and died, would you want the batter tried for manslaughter?
These folks knew what they were going to see, and they knew or should have known that it was dangerous. Certainly once they saw that there were no barriers between themselves and hurtling metal machines a scant 10 feet away, any reasonable person would know that there was a raised element of danger compared to sitting at home, and should have taken appropriate steps to remove themselves or else accept the risk and all it’s possible outcomes.
First off, Darwinism describes results, not motivation. There is nothing “better” or “worse” about specific genes, it just happens that genes that promote successful reproduction lead to more of that trait. This is a totally neutral thing. It’s not better to be “genetically fit,” beyond whatever good feelings you might have predicting that your bood line might live on.
Anyway, it doesn’t necessarily work on an individual level, either. It could be that “enjoying potentially dangerous situations” is ultimately a genetic benefit, for example it may make you a better hunter or might make a woman more likely to hang around stronger men… Just because it gets a few individuals offed now and then doesn’t mean it is an overall harmful trait.
I think it’s pretty common to automatically assume organized events are safe and not critically assess situations that would otherwise raise alarm bells if it was just you and your buddies. So I’m hesitant to point too judgmental a finger at those who were killed or injured in this accident.
I’m also dubious in the invocation of Darwin, given the fact that driving on the freeway almost certainly carries a higher statistical likelihood of injury or death than truck race attedance, even after this incident, yet as a species we manage to keep driving and propagating our genes. Occasionally at the same time.
What you fail to realize is that most of these these spectators are young, and that they represent a significant proportion of humanity. Most of us humans wouldn’t have been there. In fact most of us weren’t.
We need to realize that critical thinking increases with age. If we have a problem in our society, it is because we no longer control the activities of our young people like we used to. Sure, they are smarter than we were back in the 50s, more knowledgeable etc., but they still make stupid decisions compared to adults with regard to their safety.
It is pretty obvious that many if not most of the posters here in this thead have no idea how a desert race is organized or run.
First off for the most part there is no “track” There is a trail though the desert which a particular driver may choose to follow, or in many places he may go “off course” if there is a problem ahead with the trail, or he knows a faster way. ( I know a guy that won the Baja 500 once because he knew of an alternatre route around a gully that another race car had roll over in and blocked)
Drivers go the races early soemtimes as much as several weeks early to learn the course and alternate routes. They call this pre-running.
Secondly, if you have ever watched the Tour de France, desert racing is the automotive equivlent of the TDF as far as spectators go. With exceptions of around the start / finish, there is no regulation of where the spectators can stand. We are talkng open desert here, not the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. The course for a 200 mile race might be 40 miles to the lap, and 5 laps to the race. Not really practical to errect fences around the “track”
Next I highly doubt that there will be irregularties found in the application to the BLM. Off road racing and the BLM have a long relationship, and the racing community knows that if they were to lie about something on an application it could jepordize the entire sport in the US.
Lastly in the video I saw the truck was coming down off a jump over a rise when the crash occured. Race cars have really shitty steering while in mid air. At the point he left the ground, the driver probably could not see his landing area.