"Not guilty" plea for running over a motorcyclist ....

[gtc]

If I am not mistaken, pleading guilty can have serious ramifications, especially for one's occupation / employability.

[Zeke]

Originally Posted by gtc

If I am not mistaken, pleading guilty can have serious ramifications, especially for one's occupation / employability.

And being convicted can't? Hey, if I were the stupid one, I'd get smart and take the plea bargain. Your life is effed anyway.

If I'm alive and able when and if this ever happens to me, the other driver is gonna get taken down right at the scene.

[Brando]

At the least she should be convicted for manslaughter with a sentence in prison.

When one operates a vehicle they assume all of the risks and liabilities of their personal actions. Stupidity is not a defense for being stupid.

I would also like to point out the amazing difference between driving styles of those who are vigilant riders and those who are not. Riders (when in car or on a bike) have significantly more situational awareness and don't get distracted by things like text messaging, eating, etc. Those who do not ride usually have the phone to their ear, text, read, eating, etc. Part of this I think is due to the habit of not being able to access those things while you're on the bike.

People need to be deprived of these things while operating a vehicle. If this were doable I believe the number of collisions would drop tremendously.

My roommate is actually thinking about making a hand-held EMP/HERF that puts out a small enough discharge to only disable small electronics. Person on a cell-phone riding your tail? *KZZZEERRRRT* no more cell phone.

[Geronimo '74]

Originally Posted by Brando

My roommate is actually thinking about making a hand-held EMP/HERF that puts out a small enough discharge to only disable small electronics. Person on a cell-phone riding your tail? *KZZZEERRRRT* no more cell phone.

KZZZZEEERRRRRTTTT, no more pace maker either.....

[Porsche-O-Phile]

The underlying problem (I mentioned this above) is that driving is such an utter waste of time now, largely due to the process being dumbed down for the lowest common denominator. Stop signs and lights at every friggin' intersection, idiotically low speed limits, etc. are half of this problem. The second is the lax "standards" for issuing and renewing driver licenses. If we took this seriously (like a lot of European countries do) and only issued licenses to people who regularly proved their competence and skill, you'd get a LOT of people off the roads which would increase the efficiency, decrease the perception that driving is just going to be a time-suck (like it currently is) and contribute to overall safety.

The problem is (as usual) - "follow the money". Governments make FAR too much off of handing out licenses like candy to ever have incentive to meaningfully restrict them. License fees, vehicle fees, sales taxes, gas taxes, kickbacks from their insurance industry buddies, you-name-it - government LOVES it when people drive, cause they make a mint off of it.

The other half of this problem is that we've become conditioned in America to believe driving really IS a right. If gov't ever moved to restrict it, there'd be riots. Look no further than the kicking and screaming fight being put up by AARP over manadatory retesting for elderly drivers. Common sense be damned, they'll have this tied up in courts for years.

Also, to meaningfully restrict license issue, you'd need to greatly enhance alternatives/public transportation options. These currently are terrible in most areas/cities and given the current public sentiment against government spending, is unlikely to change anytime soon.

Simple problem to identify, no real easy solution though.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Brando

My roommate is actually thinking about making a hand-held EMP/HERF that puts out a small enough discharge to only disable small electronics. Person on a cell-phone riding your tail? *KZZZEERRRRT* no more cell phone.

EMP is bad, it would also disable the cars running around you, right?

But there are cell phone jammers (illegal in the US). One of those would be great.

http://www.phonejammer.com/home.php

http://www.thesignaljammer.com/

http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/reviews/celljammers/index.shtml

[Dantilla]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

The other half of this problem is that we've become conditioned in America to believe driving really IS a right. If gov't ever moved to restrict it, there'd be riots.

Also have to consider our suburban lifestyle, and lack of public transportation. Most Americans don't have a local market within walking distance, but need to drive a few miles to the nearest Safeway. Take grandma's car away, and she will starve.

Of course, if Americans were willing to walk a bit farther than 50 feet, maybe a few more could survive just fine without driving.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Also correct - most cities/suburban settings are modeled on vehicular transport scales, much unlike European cities or even the older core areas of American cities, which are far more pedestrian in scale.

It's easy to live without a car in New York, Boston, Chicago, etc. but not so much if you're in the "newer" outlying suburbs of those cities, or in Denver, L.A., etc. San Fran is a bit of an anomaly here but why anyone would want to live there anyway is beyond me...

[Zeke]

It wasn't that long ago the people got around on horses or horse drawn buggies. I guess you had to plan your moves a bit more in those days.

I have been working in this quiet neighborhood for enough time to witness several residents' driving habits. I swear this one cell talking mom leaves and returns to her house in a huge diesel 4x4 van 5 times a day. She's not the only one, but she's the queen so far.

I'd like to just kick her head. She's sorta cute, though.

[MotoSook]

This is rich....she's too dumb to keep out of prison.

Driver: I stopped nail painting before crash :: Herald News :: Local News

In a written statement following the May 2, 2009, crash, Hunt had written that "when I glanced up, I saw I was hitting a two-wheeled motorcycle."

But Hunt testified Wednesday that she meant she glanced up into her rearview mirror to see what she had struck, not that she glanced up from doing her nails.

Either of those statements (pick one) means she never saw "Zaffke, who was wearing a fluorescent safety jacket, or the motorcycle" and ran right over her going 50 MPH.

Prior to Hunt's testimony, defense attorney Jeff Tomczak had requested Judge Fred Foreman to reach a directed verdict of not guilty to end the jury trial, claiming that the evidence the state had presented about the fatal crash did not prove "willful and wanton" behavior on Hunt's part.

Foreman denied the motion.

Closing arguments in the trial are expected today, with jury deliberation to follow.

[MotoSook]

GUILTY!!!

Unfortunately, the time she may spend in jail will be minor compared to the loss of a mother and wife.

Woman found guilty in fatal 'nail polish' crash - Chicago Breaking News

[Noah930]

Tomczak said that in his 25 years of practicing law he has never had a more remorseful client.

"If she could, she would give herself up for Anita Zaffke," he said.

Hunt, whose sentencing date hasn't been set, could receive anything from probation to 5 years in prison.

What a load of lawyerly garbage. Granted I'm not inside the nail polishing woman's mind. But she's going to prison for maybe a few years. And she's crying over that (as the article mentioned)? If she truly felt like she'd rather be the one who's dead (trade places) she should be overjoyed (or at least emotionless, 'cause no one wins in this case) that all she's getting is a comparative slap on the wrist.

Flame away at my contempt of the defendant's side of things and quickness to judgement. I wish people would be more honest with their words in situations like this.

[island_dude]

There are no winners in this one. What a waste of a life. I hope that stories like this might convince people to pay attention, but I doubt it.

[Scuba Steve]

They should throw the book at her for being so irresponsible.