Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Man Tried for Friend's Drunkenness
Yahoo News ^ | 07/30/02 | JOHN CURRAN

Posted on 07/31/2002 5:47:13 PM PDT by Libloather

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 last
To: Great Dane
Obviously he was too drunk to drive, but not too drunk to remember where he hid his spare set!
61 posted on 08/01/2002 12:48:37 PM PDT by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
Being drunk does not in anyway relieve anyones responsibility for their actions.

Even if they're 16 or 17 years old - and placed behind the wheel of a car after consuming a case of beer?

62 posted on 08/01/2002 3:44:52 PM PDT by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: AdamSelene235
Still I think this guy should be prosecuted for stupidity above and beyond the call of idiocy.

But there is no law against stupidity.

63 posted on 08/01/2002 4:19:47 PM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
Obviously he was too drunk to drive, but not too drunk to remember where he hid his spare set!

Spare key's were attached to the car ...... somewhere with a magnet, good thing he left his baby daughter at our house for the night, judging him too drunk, was me, guess he was of another opinion.

64 posted on 08/01/2002 4:24:17 PM PDT by Great Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Great Dane
But there is no law against stupidity

"Stupidity cannot be cured with money, or through education, or by legislation. Stupidity isn't a sin, the victim can't help being stupid. But stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death, there is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity." - Robert A. Heinlein

65 posted on 08/01/2002 4:24:52 PM PDT by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Here in Dallas a couple of years ago, a man was charged with battery for fighting with a drunk over the car keys. It was after an office party. The men worked together. I don't remember if he was convicted.
66 posted on 08/01/2002 4:34:14 PM PDT by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zon
Are citizens compelled by law to protect other citizens?

No!

Citizens are also not allowed to put other citizens at risk. This is not a case of a toll booth operator failing to stop a drunk. This guy took the drunk to his car so that he could drive.

One has no duty to stop a bank robber. If, however, you give a ride to a bank robber assisting in his getaway, knowing he is a bank robber, you are guilty as an accessory. The key element here is that Powell knew the an was intoxicated.

67 posted on 08/01/2002 4:51:02 PM PDT by CharacterCounts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Why do you think that getting drunk relieves someone from the responsibility of their actions?

Using your logic I can have a drink and then go out and kill someone and its not my fault.

So tell me how drinking or using drugs absolves me of anything.

68 posted on 08/01/2002 7:24:42 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
Why do you think that getting drunk relieves someone from the responsibility of their actions?

Your dodging the question - nice try. The subject of this thread is about the responsibility of OTHERS besides the drunk or stoned driver

How about this one - would you be responsible if the drunk driver was your 16 or 17 years old child - placed behind the wheel of a car after consuming a case of beer at your party?

69 posted on 08/01/2002 7:35:34 PM PDT by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

The key element here is that Powell knew the an was intoxicated.

Get the ducks in a row. The first key element was that the police gave a drunk the keys to his car and sent him on his way with a friend. The second key element is that the drunk drove and got in an accident and killed people. The third key element is that the police incorporated Powell into their own on-the-job negligence. The fourth key element is Powell Powell didn't forced the Pangle to drive -- Pangle freely chose to drive while he was drunk.

One has no duty to stop a bank robber. If, however, you give a ride to a bank robber assisting in his getaway, knowing he is a bank robber, you are guilty as an accessory.

Driving the getaway car in a bank robbery is a crime. Giving a person a ride to their car is not a crime.

That said, I bet Powell in hindsight dearly wishes he would have kidnapped Pangle to keep him from driving and been happy to deal with possibility of facing kidnapping charges knowing his best friend was still alive.

70 posted on 08/01/2002 7:52:04 PM PDT by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts
Does the cab driver know he is drunk?

Here's an ever better (real world) conundrum:

In the past couple of months there was a case where a woman opted not to drive home, she took a cab.

The cab driver committed some sort of infraction and was stopped by an officer. The cab driver was not cited but the passenger was charged with PI (public intoxication) and hauled to jail to dry out.

Nothing in the report indicated that she was mouthing off to the officer. Talk about damning someone attempting to do the right thing...

71 posted on 08/02/2002 1:28:45 AM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Giving alcohol to a minor is illegal. Other than that if the minor goes out and knocks someone up or kills someone then they are respsonsible. The person that provided the alcohol will probably be sued and may even be charged criminally, but that is just the result of fuzzy, bleeding heart liberal mentality (and trial lawyer and victim greed).

I can see why you don't want drugs (and adulthood) legalized. You don't believe people are responsible for their actions. You believe that they have to have someone be responsible for them.

The question is even more important than I thought. How old are you?
72 posted on 08/02/2002 8:46:49 AM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson