Posted on 07/31/2002 5:47:13 PM PDT by Libloather
Mr. Pangle himself was responsible for this accident. He alone was driving that car.
You can bet your ass that had Mr. Pangle survived the accident, he would be the one being prosecuted. The fact that he died necessitated the requirement to find another perpretrator. Absent the loaning of the vehicle, our friends in the law rackets would have attempted to hang this on some other entity, such as the maker of the vehicle involved.
His BAC reading was .26 following the fatal accident - what was it when he was originally arrested and when he was released to the friend???? Isn't there a possibility he stopped somewhere andhad a few more belts between the time he got back in his car and the time he wrecked??
I am not defending drunk driving, I'm generally pro-police, and I'm not a conspiracy theorist - but I think the friend is the least guilty of anyone here.
Something is missing from this whole story.
Don't forget to sue the brewers/distillers, whatever. And the poor slob who owns the bar.
Apparently not. A Liberteen pal of yours, AdamSelene235, said,"But as long as loons don't harm anyone or threaten anyone, I think they should be left alone."
Isn't a drunk driver a threat? And isn't the one getting him or seeing him becoming drunk more responsible than the drunk driver?
And would a libertarian policeman have been more likely to set the drunk free, knowing he would be on public thoroughfairs threatening innocent bystanders? Drink all you want in your home, but not on the road.
The problem is that a drunk person is by definition incapable of making appropriate decisions about his behavior.
Perhaps the silliest thing about the whole "drunk driving" idea is the theory that someone will drive somewhere, get blasted and then be clearheaded enought to decide whether he should drive home.
Personally, if I plan to drink, I take a cab to the bar or party. Then I have no choice but to take one home or catch a ride.
How is having a .26 alcohol level NOT a threat? Why don't you just admit you don't have a clue what libertarian thought is about, since there is logic involved.
Oh, Bubbaloo, you have soooooo much to learn. How old are you?
He said it was wrong to hold Powell accountable when State Police had implicitly given their approval by releasing him and giving him his keys back.
According to this logic the State Police should be on trial. The only one guilty here is the drunk guy. I live in Salem County and would love to know which prosecutor thought this nonsense up.
Is the "drunk fool" responsible for what he does?
(Liberteens, pay close attention...)
We had a case here, at an office party some lady drank too much, her boss offered to call a cab for her, she turned the offer down, drove to a bar and had a few more drinks...... the boss was held responsible to the tune of a quarter of a million bucks.
To the underaged, please back away from the table...
No one forced him to get drunk.
Prosecute everyone! Everyone everywhere! Somehow everyone is responsible for everything everyone else is doing! I, myself, am responsible for the Ted Bundy murders!
Good God.
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.