Correlation != Causation.
Never said it was her fault.
And that’s the point of this thread. I ask why did her parents allow her to drive illegally.
Nice comeback. Any more like you at home?
The parents have the responsibility to teach their children right from wrong. If it turns out the girl was driving w/o her parent’s knowledge, I’ll apologize.
Why does it matter, when her status as a legal driver had no bearing at all on the accident?
Call it curiosity.
I’m sure the state will want to know once the accident details are ironed out.
Again, how is it likely that the accident would not have happened if someone else was driving? I’m genuinely curious why you think this…
No, you said it was her mother’s fault. How, exactly, you feel justified in hauling out the blame stick and using it on her mom given the information in this story is unclear to me.
Also, you seem to know that the daughter wasn’t taught how to tell right from wrong.
Do you have a cite for that?
What a shame. Those kids should not have been driving home. If instead they’d been on an errand to pick up pot and brown liquor for the mom, they’d all be alive today. Damned responsible parents.
Gee, playing this “What If” game is fun!
He’s saying that the kids would have been removed from the equation if they had waited for an adult that could ride along.
The “teaching right from wrong” is a general statement and does not necessarily apply to this case.
If the girl was able to get her learner’s permit, I must assume she knows the legal driving age. They do tell people that in Florida, right?
If they had waited for an adult and not ventured out on their own, they wouldn’t have been at the scene of the accident.
I’m not saying that if they did have an adult in the car that the accident wouldn’t have happened. It all would have depended on the timing.
Hey, you brought it up.
Well, make up your mind. Is it the daughter’s fault, or her mother? I can’t tell which one to be angry at.
Oh, wait…
Thank you for the time and effort you put into your post. You are a treasure to behold.
I was in a very similar accident many years ago. Good weather (crystal clear day), straight stretch of road (long straight stretch on a freeway), posted speed limit 55mph. A dog ran out onto the road and the car that was 2 cars ahead of me came to a screetching stop. The car between us swerved onto the shoulder and into the grass median, giving me plenty of room to come to a complete stop behind car number 1. I had been at a full stop for at least 10-15 seconds when I looked in my rearview mirror and saw that there was a car approaching me at full speed. She rammed into me going at least 45mph, having only made any effort to stop when she was within a few feet of my car. The force of the impact sent my car slamming into the car in front of me. Her excuse – she simply wasn’t paying attention. Period. I was damn lucky that it was a car and not a semi, and damn lucky my car didn’t burst into flames like the one in this tragedy. (The dog was not so lucky when it got to the other side of the highway.)
So who, Mr. Blue Sky, should we blame for me being in my car, at that location, at that moment? My mom, for letting me out of the house? My boss, for demanding that I be at work on time? If this and if that and if the other and if whatthehellever, I might not have been hit, so surely there must be someone other than the careless bitch behind me to blame, right?
As a general statement. Nothing more, nothing less
Speculation: the mother told the girl it was okay to drive despite the fact she wasn’t legally allowed to do so. “Mom says it’s okay, so it must be okay.” There goes that whole “right from wrong” thing you were so on about.
I don’t see why you should be angry at me, but I don’t know you or how your mind works.
My original question concerns why the girl was allowed to drive despite the fact that she was not legally able to do so. That’s it.
It has branched out to playing the blame game. I have no answer for your question.
The dog burst into flames?! :eek:
I know. 
The point is, it’s possible to think up a thousand What If scenarios in which those kids would not have been there at that time. And half of those scenarios would involve a less responsible mom. The way you seem to want to construct this is that if a mom lets her underage daughter drive, the inevitable result is that the daughter will be followed by a sleeping trucker in a semi. Every time. Life just doesn’t work that way.
And if they’d stopped a mile earlier to throw stones at passing motorists they wouldn’t have been at the scene of the accident either.
Unless the police determine that the 15-year-old driver did something wrong (which seems unlikely considering she was legally stopped when the accident occured) the fact that she was not properly licensed to drive is immaterial.
you can’t possibly know this to be true. It’s entirely possible that an adult driver had been scheduled to drive, but was unable to at the last minute due to illness or whatever. there’s any number of variable - maybe the parent was at work and chose to allow the child to provide the transportation (yea, the kid wasn’t supposed to be driving, and likely the parent knew it, but that doesn’t mean that the parents didn’t know).
I don’t see any possible way for you to assert that the kids wouldn’t have been there to be killed had there been an adult w/them. there would have been 8 deaths in the car vs. 7.
pit the truck driver. that’s the actual cause of the deaths. the driver being 15 had fuck all to do w/the causation of the accident. Hell, if they’d been driving an armored tank, they probably wouldn’t have died, either. ya gonna pit the parents for not insisiting the kid drove a tank? Or if the kid had driving over the speed limit, she’d have been in front of the bus, not behind it, dammit if only the underage driver had also been a speeder, too!
If they had not gotten in the car and gotten on the road then it would be impossible for them to be at the scene of the accident. How can this work any other way?