Father charged with "headshot" killing of drunk driver that killed his 2 sons

[Ackmed]

What the fuck are you people bitching about? Back on topic. A thug who robbed a store just prior to the incident, has pictures online of him holding a gun, a wad of cash, and alcohol, and assaulted a Police Officer was killed. All in all, seems like a win for humanity.

 

[smackababy]

What the fuck are you people bitching about? Back on topic. A thug who robbed a store just prior to the incident, has pictures online of him holding a gun, a wad of cash, and alcohol, and assaulted a Police Officer was killed. All in all, seems like a win for humanity.

What the fuck are you talking about? Wrong thread much?

 

[clamum]

What the fuck are you people bitching about? Back on topic. A thug who robbed a store just prior to the incident, has pictures online of him holding a gun, a wad of cash, and alcohol, and assaulted a Police Officer was killed. All in all, seems like a win for humanity.

Indeed, but wrong thread brah.

 

[highland145]

What the fuck are you talking about? Wrong thread much?

Indeed, but wrong thread brah.

Understandable though with the distance this one has gone off the tracks.

 

[MetalMat]

Understandable though with the distance this one has gone off the tracks.

 

[highland145]

😀

 

[ch33zw1z]

What the fuck are you people bitching about? Back on topic. A thug who robbed a store just prior to the incident, has pictures online of him holding a gun, a wad of cash, and alcohol, and assaulted a Police Officer was killed. All in all, seems like a win for humanity.

looool....

 

[ThinClient]

So, Alcoholemyst defends drunk driving, denies he was drunk at 0.16+ % BAC after having 6 beers after an 8 hour game, and now I find a thread where he's defending speeding in the rain.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2208262&highlight=speeding&page=6

Start from post 136 and read to the end.

With any luck, Alcoholemyst will get drunk again, go speeding in the rain, and solve all of our problems for us in one swift stroke.







Wishing death on another member isn't allowed here, ever.




esquared
Anandtech Forum Director

 

[Dari]

LOLWUT?!? I was at two universities not just "Junior College", University of Florida for Pharmacy and Biology/Chemistry B.A., and Florida Atlantic University for my Comp Science B.S.

Bob Cooper was my professor, one of the original Bell labs guys. I also had Solomon for Database design.

Queuing Theory I (Intro to Queuing Theory)
http://www.cse.fau.edu/~bob/publications/IntroToQueueingTheory_Cooper.pdf

Queuing Theory II (Queuing Theory)
http://www.cse.fau.edu/~bob/courses/map6264/

They are both taught together actually, the exams for the second class much harder.

So the first link is to a book titled "Queuing Theory" and the 2nd link is to a course, admittedly titled "Queuing Theory" and they are two courses? Makes no sense. But, this course is a CS one so I guess it does exist.

 

[Craig234]

People drive far more affected everyday that someone (an average person) at 0.08%. It's far too low a marker for something to arrest for especially if that person wasn't even driving.

The funny thing is the masses are those mostly for stricter and stricter laws, while many of the advocates that have been affected by this don't believe these lower limits help anything by the MADD lobby grow.

Statistically, at less than 0.10 there was not a major reduction in fatalities. Just a major increase in arrests and revenue generation. DUI arrests are very profitable.

Anyone dying is a terrible thing, however; many of these late night accidents that had 0.08 readings had no fatalities, were not caused by the DUI driver and/or probably could not have been avoided anyway. Just the fact that one of the drivers was DUI makes it now a DUI crime that skews the statistics further.

The real fatalities are caused by those way over 0.10%. I think 0.10% is a better limit, but I don't agree with road blocks nor arresting someone that only had potential to commit a crime.

You've still said nothing that has any merit to defend your claim that the .08% standard, at which a driver is several times more likely to have an accident, is ok.

I guess at this point, instead of having you say the same thing not proving your point again, I'll try helping you a little.

You can't defend your statement. But if you want to argue that the policies regarding more heavily inebriated drivers are not what they should be, make that argument, with clear and supported points. If you want to argue that while there is no defending .08 drivers driving, but there is something wrong or excessive about our policies, make clear arguments and support them.

I have no idea what you're talking about arresting .08 people who aren't driving for drunk driving.

Just ranting how you hate MADD and asserting they're somehow getting bad laws enacted is not proof of anything.

You try to change the topic from '.08 several times more likely to have an accident' to the number of fatalities not being what you think is very high for that group. I'm not persuaded.

Nothing in that argument defends why it's ok to put people in danger by your choosing to drive impaired so that you have several times higher more chance of causing an accident.

If you're 4 times more likely to cause an accident, the chances are still low you will have one. That doesn't make it ok. Tell the people who are hit, who are injured and killed, because of that unnecessary increase in danger how it's ok because you don't think it's that many people.

You have not proven your point that it's ok to drive at .08 when that makes you several times more likely to cause an accident.

 

[alkemyst]

I read through http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/808-893.pdf quickly.

At best, it did seem to have little affect on reducing the numbers by any great amount, which you'd expect. Also, they even go on to say and show that only 40% of even the most educated people even know what the new BAC limit was.

Essentially, people didn't even change their drinking habits to meet this new law, so naturally the stats didn't change much.

Anyway, why don't we just meet in the middle? I'd be for raising the legal limit to .10% if anybody caught .10% or higher loses their license permanently and gets a felony, and mandatory jail regardless if first time or not.

That is utterly insane.

 

[alkemyst]

You've still said nothing that has any merit to defend your claim that the .08% standard, at which a driver is several times more likely to have an accident, is ok.

I posted up some decent papers that explain what you are claiming is simply not true. If you choose not to read them (or have read, but do not understand them) then there is no debate that can be sanely had.

Also any kind of thing has a 'weight' that could contribute to an accident.

Dirty Windshield/Faulty Wipers, Improper alignment/tire pressure/condition, etc.

You are a victim of the propaganda to promote even lower BAL levels in order not to save lives but to generate more revenue.

The facts are people at 0.08% really aren't the ones getting into accidents nor fatalities.

I guess at this point, instead of having you say the same thing not proving your point again, I'll try helping you a little.

You can't defend your statement. But if you want to argue that the policies regarding more heavily inebriated drivers are not what they should be, make that argument, with clear and supported points. If you want to argue that while there is no defending .08 drivers driving, but there is something wrong or excessive about our policies, make clear arguments and support them.

I have no idea what you're talking about arresting .08 people who aren't driving for drunk driving.

Try to help yourself, rather than me understand...it's clear you do not understand what you are arguing.

Many people are arrested for DUI at 0.08% that were not driving their vehicle. They didn't have an intention to drive. There is a huge gray area in the law that allows for an arrest simply if you have your keys X feet from your vehicle.

To me that is way beyond any fair law.

Likewise, arresting people for doing the right thing and just sleeping in their car is equally crap.

Just ranting how you hate MADD and asserting they're somehow getting bad laws enacted is not proof of anything.

You try to change the topic from '.08 several times more likely to have an accident' to the number of fatalities not being what you think is very high for that group. I'm not persuaded.

Nothing in that argument defends why it's ok to put people in danger by your choosing to drive impaired so that you have several times higher more chance of causing an accident.

If you're 4 times more likely to cause an accident, the chances are still low you will have one. That doesn't make it ok. Tell the people who are hit, who are injured and killed, because of that unnecessary increase in danger how it's ok because you don't think it's that many people.

You have not proven your point that it's ok to drive at .08 when that makes you several times more likely to cause an accident.

I don't hate MADD, I am just explaining they aren't about saving lives either and that is why the founder stepped down (or was fired for not cooperating depending on what story you believe).

 

[alkemyst]

So the first link is to a book titled "Queuing Theory" and the 2nd link is to a course, admittedly titled "Queuing Theory" and they are two courses? Makes no sense. But, this course is a CS one so I guess it does exist.

The first link should go to Intro to Queuing Theory, don't know what's going on with that. (edit: the intro course is replaced with Stochastic Models for Computer Science it appears)...

Intro to Queuing Theory and the Queuing Theory class were taught together. The Intro class focuses on the basics so the homework and tests are easier (the class is still very difficult).

Once you move on to the second course you get more in depth and have to figure out more complex scenarios.


Again I really have no need to make up shit I have done/not done.

 

[alkemyst]

So, Alcoholemyst defends drunk driving, denies he was drunk at 0.16+ % BAC after having 6 beers after an 8 hour game, and now I find a thread where he's defending speeding in the rain.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2208262&highlight=speeding&page=6

Start from post 136 and read to the end.

With any luck, Alcoholemyst will get drunk again, go speeding in the rain, and solve all of our problems for us in one swift stroke.

I never defended speeding in the rain. I did not endanger anyone as the roads were clear and my vehicle plus myself (I used to race when I was younger and still have tracked a few times recently) were more than skilled.

It's sad you are so angry over me.

I am glad the moderators said something. You should stop embellishing things as well hoping to amp up the members here to your lolcause.

 

[alkemyst]

Thanks for confirming everything I said.

wow...I could have posted anything obviously and you would have replied the same.

Sorry, I can't pay a $36,900 car in cash and at 3% interest why would I want to?

I must really be a scrub I had to finance my $26k Mazda 3 as well.

 

[Dari]

The first link should go to Intro to Queuing Theory, don't know what's going on with that. (edit: the intro course is replaced with Stochastic Models for Computer Science it appears)...

Intro to Queuing Theory and the Queuing Theory class were taught together. The Intro class focuses on the basics so the homework and tests are easier (the class is still very difficult).

Once you move on to the second course you get more in depth and have to figure out more complex scenarios.


Again I really have no need to make up shit I have done/not done.

I don't know. You come across as weird. You said you went to "pharmacy school" (not sure what that is) but, here you are, taking CS courses. Not any CS courses, but those that have to do with statistics. Then there are your stories. Every single story I've read from you here has you as either the victim or savior. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. If you're not strongly either of those, then you're a badass. Oh, you're also a ladies man and bouncer when not taking hardcore math and science classes. It's too fucking weird. The stories and the psychology simply do not match. The narrative is fucked up, confusing, and overly dramatic. Then we have you here bragging about your drunk adventures in a thread about a man that lost both his sons to a drunk driver. All this tells me is that you are an attention-whore.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Biochemistry (dropped out before finals due to ex-wife breaking her neck on spring break when someone hit her at a red light)

Really? By "before finals" do you mean any point of time between the first day of class and finals? Because I'm pretty sure most schools won't let you drop just before finals, and if something like that came up I'm pretty sure you could get an incomplete and take the final a bit later.

EDIT: nvm, you said spring break. I guess that could be just in time to drop, although that means you only took about half of the class.

 

[alkemyst]

Really? By "before finals" do you mean any point of time between the first day of class and finals? Because I'm pretty sure most schools won't let you drop just before finals, and if something like that came up I'm pretty sure you could get an incomplete and take the final a bit later.

EDIT: nvm, you said spring break. I guess that could be just in time to drop, although that means you only took about half of the class.

Jesus.

She was in a hospital for 3+ months and then another 2+months.

She had what Christoper Reeve did, but extra space at birth. She was also an Eventer/Horse Rider.

My leave was a problem though, I got calls I had to fill my slot.

My final in biochem was when it happened, I took short semesters often.

It was also for a genetics class and something else I can't remember off the top of my head.

 

[alkemyst]

I don't know. You come across as weird. You said you went to "pharmacy school" (not sure what that is) but, here you are, taking CS courses. Not any CS courses, but those that have to do with statistics. Then there are your stories. Every single story I've read from you here has you as either the victim or savior. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE. If you're not strongly either of those, then you're a badass. Oh, you're also a ladies man and bouncer when not taking hardcore math and science classes. It's too fucking weird. The stories and the psychology simply do not match. The narrative is fucked up, confusing, and overly dramatic. Then we have you here bragging about your drunk adventures in a thread about a man that lost both his sons to a drunk driver. All this tells me is that you are an attention-whore.

Go back and read my posts then.

You have a really wrong perspective.

I was going to be an engineer because being a doc was too much. I interned in that.

Then picked pharmacy. Interned in that at it was boring right when my ex-wife broke her neck.

I was an athlete, and my IQ was at genius level.

I like to go out and fuck, drink, etc. I am safe when I do.

You are an attention whore. If you weren't you'd contribute to the forum.

I am just me.

 

[02ranger]

 

[steve wilson]

Either Alkemyst is the best troll ever or the stupidest man alive. I have no idea which.

 

[DaTT]

Go back and read my posts then.

You have a really wrong perspective.

I was going to be an engineer because being a doc was too much. I interned in that.

Then picked pharmacy. Interned in that at it was boring right when my ex-wife broke her neck.

I was an athlete, and my IQ was at genius level.

I like to go out and fuck, drink, etc. I am safe when I do.

You are an attention whore. If you weren't you'd contribute to the forum.

I am just me.

You make far too many grammatical errors to have anywhere near a genius IQ level. Oh yeah, and you just make up words that don't exist in any language.

If anything, you're of average intelligence with a dash of pathological liar.

Spoiler

Queue the muscle car comment and the Canadian comment

 

[Vapid Cabal]

What is going on here?

 

[z1ggy]

That is utterly insane.

Why? I'm agreeing with you here, there probably isn't a HUGE difference in being .08, .06 or .04, etc as far as your likelihood to cause fatalities while driving. But, you yourself said there is a distinct difference once you reach .10% and above. So doesn't it make sense to let people who pose "little" risk have little consequence but people who actually are the [potential] killers behind the wheel severe consequences?

You blew a .168%. According to the wiki on BAC, you had about a 15% chance of causing an accident. Driving, not driving...Keys on the floor... Where ever they may be, you could choose to operate the vehicle.

If I walk into a school accidentally carrying my pistol and I am caught, would you not expect me to go jail? I am a good person, I obviously made an innocent mistake...But I still had the potential to kill people and I was breaking the law.

What are you refuting here? We both want the same thing. You just think your DUI cost too much because you think you were innocent, when you weren't, and you're pissed.

 

[ninjazed]

Wow. This is a long ass thread. Sorry I didn't read every response but I must add to the conversation with reference to DUI issues. I am very familiar with the enforcement protocols for a voluntary condition that kills and maims too many people each year on our roads.

First of all, refusing the field sobriety tests will not increase your odds of beating a charge since the Officer is supposed to make a determination of your condition by the way you are driving. And refusing the test at the station will fare you no better. Most states have amended their laws where a refusal gets you almost the same penalty as a DUI conviction. No easy out there. As far as the testing machines, they are very accurate with many safeguards built in so errors are almost non-existent. They test the hell out of these things regularly too. The ones in my state are even operator idiot-proof. Once a sufficient sample is received the machine tests it electronically by two separate methods simultaneously. Blood, cough drops or nothing else will give false readings as the machine tests BAC in the deep lung air. That's why most PD's mandate a minimum 20 minute "observation" period to avoid any raw alcohol from mouthwash or recently consumed beverages.

Look, I'm not against alcohol but anyone who gets tagged for drinking and driving should look at their own actions first before attempting to damn the system or find fault with the equipment used. Good luck Alkemyst. Win or lose, just think of how much money you would have saved by just not drinking and driving at all. Forget splitting hairs about this or that. It's 2014 and the attitudes towards those who would still take this kind of risk are predominantly NOT supportive.

On the original topic of this thread I feel for the "defendant" in this case. If he did shoot the drunk driver then he ruined the rest of his life but how would anyone here feel or react if they witnessed two of their children mowed to death by a drunk driver? Life is not always fair but this issue of drinking and driving is like playing Russian roulette. It's a personal decision that's made before any shit hits the fan so doesn't it make sense to just play it safe?