Posted on 10/23/2003 2:03:50 PM PDT by TomServo
ORMOND BEACH, Fla. (AP) - A sport utility vehicle ran over a sunbather on the beach, seriously injuring the woman, authorities said.
Glenda Willits, 52, of Ormond Beach, was pinned under the front of the car after it backed into her Wednesday, said Deputy Chief Mike Hensler of the Volusia County Beach Patrol.
Willits was listed in serious condition Thursday in the Halifax Medical Center with injuries to her hip and shoulder.
The driver, a 30-year-old woman whose name was not released, apparently didn't see Willits, Hensler said.
Investigators were trying to determine whether to file charges.
Cars are allowed on many Florida beaches, including Ormond Beach.
In February, a police officer drove over two sisters on Miami's South Beach, killing one and injuring the other. The officer was not charged, but the women's family sued the city for negligence.
And a lot of drivers in Cooper Mini-type vehicles think they're in an SUV.
Doesn't matter what stupid people are driving. I just get annoyed when they end up gumming up the tires on my SUV. ;-)
"A gun is like a rattlesnake. You can try to keep it in a cage, but sooner or later it's going to get out and hurt someone."
And guns don't even have motors and tires - Just imagine what she must think of SUVs!!!
Typical, Liberal elitist statement. Only us superior, Liberal folk can be allowed to decide what you peasants are allowed to do or have.
You sound like Hitlery.
The Driver is just a victim, afterall it was the SUV that ran over the person.
Do you think that people should be able to drive cars without being tested or getting a license first? Do you think that people should be able to drive full size busses and/or articulated trucks without being trained, tested, or licensed for vehicles that size? Do you believe in driver's licenses at all? Traffic laws? I hope not, because all of those things limit what the "peasants" are allowed to do or have.
Well, sure! Your reply seemed to indicate you assume that an SUV drives differently than any other vehicle. (Taking into account such properties as turn radius, acceleration, braking distance, roll-over characteristics, and so on.) I belive that these problems are driver-related, not vehicle specific. Publication of the vehicle type in such an article seems to be propaganda against the “horrible SUV” rather than the obvious shortcomings of the specific driver or the very weak driver's licensing requirements.
You seemed to be more concerned about the vehicle type than the gross ineptitude of the driver.
If safety were actually an issue with the government, driver licensing would be much more rigorous with "checkout rides" being required for each vehicle type the driver intends to drive. The tests would be given in normal driving conditions rather than "amongst the cones" in the parking lot.
Ah, yes. Here we have the AP pulling the Orwellian stunt of personalizing a tragedy by attributing an act of volition to an automobile.
How typical of Stalinists to mangle language for political ends, eh?
Actually, other than braking distance, those are the least of my concerns. I'm actually more concerned with visibility and blind spots than I am over an SUV owner rolling their own truck. But, no, I don't believe that a high center of gravity, increased weight, higher bumpers, darkly tinted windows, etc. are either meaningless or "driver-related".
Publication of the vehicle type in such an article seems to be propaganda against the "horrible SUV" rather than the obvious shortcomings of the specific driver or the very weak driver's licensing requirements.
The driver backed over the woman because she couldn't see her. Visibility is a problem with larger vehicles. This is why you see busses and trucks loaded up with things wide-angle mirrors and see-through vents on the doors.
You seemed to be more concerned about the vehicle type than the gross ineptitude of the driver.
I'm concerned about gross inept drivers getting behind the wheel of large vehicles. I never once said that comptent drivers should not be allowed to own and drive SUVs.
If safety were actually an issue with the government, driver licensing would be much more rigorous with "checkout rides" being required for each vehicle type the driver intends to drive. The tests would be given in normal driving conditions rather than "amongst the cones" in the parking lot.
Oh, I agree. But the voters wouldn't like that. One of the reasons that auto insurance is so expensive in "no fault" New Jersey is that bad drivers complain that their rates are too high so they wind up spreading the cost over everyone through price regulations.
Again, I am not complaining that people should not be allowed to drive SUVs. I am complaining that SUVs seem to bring out the worst in bad drivers and it would be nice to stop the bad drivers from buying SUVs.
Ok, lets start out with the retired folks and their oversized motor homes. However, I really don't think it's any of my business what people drive.
OK. Then let's shift the perspective. It may not be my business what other people drive but I think it is my business that they drive it (whatever it is) well enough not to kill me if they are sharing a road with me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.