Originally Posted by
drmweaver2
Your secnd paragraph illustrates where "discussions" about things like this so often go off the deep end. Your first paragraph is merely a result of your feelings expressed in the second - to me.
Get out of the emotional argument/emotional side of your brain and deal with the objective reality of the situation and you really might "understand" what the OP has said. Reality is nothing can bring a dead person back to life or even completely restore any injured person to a pre-injured state - memory of the accident itself prevents that. So one is left with "appropriateness".
"leaving the scene after an accident with injuries isn't even debatable anymore. That should be enough to convict him." No allowance for exigent circumstances not reported by the media?
"automatic lifetime ban from driving"? Really? !
"He could have afforded an alternative." Really?!
These are rational arguments? I think not.
But to each his own. I prefer rational argument and thought.
Harsh and insulting as that may sound, I really do not mean to be insulting - only direct and concise in responding to your post.
Then again, I am called a curmudgeon by "friends" and family alike.
I probably am letting my emotions get in the way.
So, to clear the air:
What charges are being pursued at this point?
If it is a plea, and I don't know that it is, What punishment will occur?
Now for more of my opinion.
I think plea-bargaining should be illegal. (If you don't have the evidence to convict, you shouldn't prosecute.)
I do believe in lifetime ban from driving. I do drive too, so I'm not anti-car.
I believe in 35mph (or lower) speed limits everywhere except freeways.
Leaving the scene of an injury accident should be a major offence (it often hides other major offenses)
Sure, much of what I posted is opinion. Our car-dominated culture usually lets drivers off easy after an accident.
Just so you know, I'm not angry at anyone in this thread, even those that disagree. I'm a curmudgeon too.
