If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Cincinnati Enquirer)   Running over a boy while speeding and sending a text message is legal in Kentucky   (news.enquirer.com) divider line 100
    More: PSA  
•       •       •

14007 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Feb 2006 at 1:02 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-02-02 01:50:47 PM
"HAHA!! My friend texted me something funny. Hold on, let me text him back while accellerating to 10 mph over the speed limit in this quiet suburban neighborhood. Let's see: 5, 5, 5... 6, 6, 6... 5, 5, OH SHIAAAAT!!!
 
2006-02-02 01:50:58 PM
Note to self - Stay the fark away from Kentucky
 
2006-02-02 01:50:59 PM
I sense nobody posting took the time to check out other coverage that actually had some details of the case. The driver was going between 25 and 32 mph in a 25 zone. I can go that fast on a 10-speed.

The stupid farks babysitting the kid let him wander out into the street while they were unloading their car. After dark. From between two parked cars. If anyone should be punished, it's the great-uncle and his girlfriend.

I feel bad for the kid driving the Mustang. He'll have that image in his head for the rest of his life because of someone else's neglect.
 
2006-02-02 01:51:15 PM
another good example on why cell phones + driving should be banned

Not until they ban eating, drinking, changing the radio station, and reading billboards too! Just because some people are too stupid to talk and drive doesn't mean that we all are.

My son-in-law was killed in a wreck by some dumb ass using a cell phone. I caught up to this idiot in a bar one night while he was whiining about how his leg got messed up. I put his ass in the hospital for 2 weeks..... If I see him again it'll be much worse...
 
2006-02-02 01:54:23 PM
honkSigh. If it had been my kid, I'd have been tempted to follow this guy until he got out of his car somewhere . . . then run over him and claim I was fooling with my cell phone.

This is 100% the parents' fault. You don't leave a child un-attended near a road, whether there are cars coming or not. If he was going the speed limit, he would have still killed the child.... he could have been going 5 miles-per-hour and still killed the child.

I'm a delivery driver by trade, and I have come across MANY of these situations where kids run out in front of me... the thing is, I KNOW they are going to do it before-hand, because I see them in the yard or whatever... now, if the kid just 'popped' out from behind a car or something... he's dead. I wouldn't feel responsible one bit. Sad, yes, but not guilty in the slightest... someone wasn't doing their job, and the trend nowadays is to shift the blaim elsewhere.

If that guy had been indicted, society would crumble apart. You would have to outlaw talking, passengers, radios, talking on cellphones (even with headsets--because it's been proven that it's the congnative strain, not the phsyical act of holding the phone--that causes slower reactions,) billboards, sunsets, funny-looking clouds, day-dreaming, and thinking in general.

That would be the only way to fairly prosecute this guy... That little child was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time, which all could have been prevented if theiy parents were doing their job. Everyone knows how hard that is to do... I know for certain there were several times when I was a child that I could have gotten killed in a similar accident, but there were no cars present, etc... Just bad luck is all it is.

I still think we should have an IQ test as part of getting your driver's license... and maybe a multi-tasking test... if you can't do a certain number of things, with a certain profficiency, you fail, or you are RESTRICTED from having certain things in your car.
 
2006-02-02 01:54:23 PM
2006-02-02 01:21:01 PM xip_80

The driver has to live with the guilt of this whole thing anyway.

I've been following this case since it happened, and trust me, he's feeling LITTLE or NO guilt. He's said in several interviews on the local news that it WASN'T his fault.

/kids nowadays disgust me.
//glad to be back anyway!
 
2006-02-02 01:55:16 PM
Deming will have to live with that memory the rest of his life.

I am SO farking sick of hearing this as a statement arguing for any kind of mitigation of punishment. Anybody using a line like this should have the book thrown at them for conveniently forgetting that the reason they have to deal with this memory is that they GET TO HAVE A LIFE, unlike the person who's memory is supposedly going to haunt them.

If you ask me this is an argument for getting rid of grand juries, not a lesser vehicular death law. You get behind the wheel, you take on life-and-death responsibilities. You're not up to that? Don't farking drive.
 
2006-02-02 01:55:47 PM
honk: Sigh. If it had been my kid, I'd have been tempted to follow this guy until he got out of his car somewhere . . . then run over him and claim I was fooling with my cell phone.

This is 100% the parents' fault. You don't leave a child un-attended near a road, whether there are cars coming or not. If he was going the speed limit, he would have still killed the child.... he could have been going 5 miles-per-hour and still killed the child.

I'm a delivery driver by trade, and I have come across MANY of these situations where kids run out in front of me... the thing is, I KNOW they are going to do it before-hand, because I see them in the yard or whatever... now, if the kid just 'popped' out from behind a car or something... he's dead. I wouldn't feel responsible one bit. Sad, yes, but not guilty in the slightest... someone wasn't doing their job, and the trend nowadays is to shift the blaim elsewhere.

If that guy had been indicted, society would crumble apart. You would have to outlaw talking, passengers, radios, talking on cellphones (even with headsets--because it's been proven that it's the congnative strain, not the phsyical act of holding the phone--that causes slower reactions,) billboards, sunsets, funny-looking clouds, day-dreaming, and thinking in general.

That would be the only way to fairly prosecute this guy... That little child was just in the wrong place, at the wrong time, which all could have been prevented if theiy parents were doing their job. Everyone knows how hard that is to do... I know for certain there were several times when I was a child that I could have gotten killed in a similar accident, but there were no cars present, etc... Just bad luck is all it is.

I still think we should have an IQ test as part of getting your driver's license... and maybe a multi-tasking test... if you can't do a certain number of things, with a certain profficiency, you fail, or you are RESTRICTED from having certain things in your car.

If you're ready to post this as-is, click "add comment" again. If you want to make changes and preview again, check "preview before post", make edits, and then click "add comment" again.
 
2006-02-02 01:56:08 PM
Does anyone happen to have that pic of the kid on the hood of a car and in the background there's a "Your Speed" sign that says 88mph (or something like that)?
 
2006-02-02 01:56:39 PM
wow, I only hit sumbit once... why is it on there twice... neat.
 
2006-02-02 01:58:01 PM
I have a relevant story here... It's easy he place blame on people who aren't paying attention while driving or are driving too fast. But we have all driven too fast or paid less attention than we should while driving. Often, hitting someone in a case like that comes down to bad luck.

I was driving through my buddy's apartment complex last week. I had just come from the bar, but I had only drank 2 beers (with lunch) so I was well under .08. I wasn't even buzzed. Now the speed limit was posted at 10mph, because a lot of apartment complexes like to post very low speed limits just to get the point across. I usually drive through there at about 20mph, which feels about reasonable. I was coming to a T intersection where the road goes straight but there is also a left hand turn. I had to go left to get to the apartment. Right as I got up to the turn, I saw a ball roll out from behind a car and a kid run out and chase it about 15 feet in front of me. It was completely the stereotypical situation, like something you would see on TV. Since I was turning left, there was no problem. But if I had been going straight, the timing was such that the kid would have run right out in front of me before I could stop, and I would have hit him.

The point of my story is this... If I would have hit the kid, it would have been a complete accident. Nothing could have been done to avoid it. I don't feel like I was doing anything reckless. It was the middle of the day, and I was paying attention to the road. As far as the speed limit goes, 10mph is about how fast a car idles, and no one follows that limit. Like I said, the sign is there to make a point. Also, I had drank 2 beers, but I was nowhere near drunk, or even buzzed. However, if I would have been unlucky enough to be going straight instead of turning, I would have hit the kid and probably killed him. And when the newspapers got a hold of it, people would have read that I was going 10mph over the speed limit, and I had alcohol in my system. And if the story got posted on fark, everyone would be picturing me driving drunk through an apartment complex and running down some kid, and people would be saying that I should be put in jail.

Don't be judging someone too harshly just because you read a half-page article on a newspaper's website.
 
2006-02-02 01:58:41 PM
SacriliciousBeerSwiller

Some of you are misinterpreting this. There is obviously doubt as to whether or not the guy could have avoided the kid even if he wasn't texting someone.

I agree completely.

The article skews the facts. In reality, a prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. He probably wasn't trying too hard on this grand jury, because he knew he didn't have a case that the accident wouldn't have occured but for the guy's negligence.
 
2006-02-02 01:58:56 PM
diplomaticimmunity

so if you were driving through an intersection, and someone else runs their red light and hits you, and dies in the accident... should YOU go to jail? it's the same thing.. the kid doesn't know any better, (similar to an adult being drunk,) and CAUSES the accident... the driver didn't cause anything to happen.
 
2006-02-02 02:01:13 PM
ScrapMaker

I don't see any similarity to the situation. In your case, I'm presumably fully attentive and sombody's hit me, i.e. i'm not negligent in the slightest and there's no way I could have avoided an accident. In this one, I'm busy paying attention to everything but my driving, and that's supposed to be fine when I paste someone?
 
2006-02-02 02:03:49 PM
Parts of Covington are rough, there might be an "accident" in this dude's future.
 
2006-02-02 02:07:21 PM
diplomaticimmunity

there is nothing the guy could have done... the kid popped out RIGHT in front of him...

for the guy to have avoided hitting the child, you need roughly 100ft to stop... meaning you're gonna kill the kid no matter what, unless he's been out in the road for like 10 seconds... which, then, yeah the driver *COULD*(possibly) be held *somewhat* resposible for the accident... it all depends on what time of day, and visibility around a turn, etc etc... kinda sketchy from the article, but they made the point to say the kid jumped off the curb at the last moment.
 
2006-02-02 02:07:39 PM
I'm a delivery driver by trade, and I have come across MANY of these situations where kids run out in front of me... the thing is, I KNOW they are going to do it before-hand, because I see them in the yard or whatever...

That's your RESPONSIBILITY as a driver from day one, not some technique that can only be expected of career drivers. You must anticipate dangerous situations like kids playing near a road. There are situations that may be unavoidable, but if you're texting when some kids stumbles off a curb on a residencial street, you're guilty of farking manslaughter if you hit him.
 
2006-02-02 02:10:40 PM
xip_80 - Well said.
 
2006-02-02 02:11:39 PM
speeding is bad, but we all do it, so get off your damn high horses people

texing while driving is just stupid - driver should bear some responsibility

but above all...
PARENTS: HOLD YOUR CHILD'S HAND WHEN WALKING DOWN THE STREET SO THEY DON'T FALL/RUN INTO THE PATH OF TRAFFIC
 
2006-02-02 02:13:00 PM
I have always heard that pedestrians have the absolute right of way in Kentucky, and that if you hit one, you will be prosecuted. I guess I heard nonsense. There is an old saying to believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you read. Some say it is the other way around. Maybe this grand jury just refuses to do their job out of sympathy for a teen, or anger at the neglectful parents of the dead kid. It is sad that a child is dead, and reckless people responsible for it are not being punished.
 
2006-02-02 02:13:17 PM
but if you're texting when some kids stumbles off a curb on a residencial street, you're guilty of farking manslaughter if you hit him.

Not a chance... that kid on the cellphone was probably STILL more alert than an old person driving... and I bet the old person would have hit the child too... so should we ban old people from driving as well?

an accident is an accident... in this case I'd say he's not at fault... but if he were texting, and say, slammed into the back of a car, or ran a light, etc... then yeah, he's guilty.

'texting' while driving doesn't mean jack shiat... I enter texts all the time while driving, it actually takes less attention away from driving that actually having a full-blown conversation... you aren't using as much brain-power to text... but all of this is proven... it's easy to type in a few characters here and there, just the same as it's safe for you to dart your eyes at the speedometer/clock/rearview-mirror/windows/sunset/passenger/nice-looking car... etc...

just in the case you can't point blame at the cellphone without PROVING that the reason of collision was because of it. I'd say that I whole-heartedly believe the kid would have been hit no matter who was driving.
 
2006-02-02 02:14:38 PM
MerlinX

My son-in-law was killed in a wreck by some dumb ass using a cell phone. I caught up to this idiot in a bar one night while he was whiining about how his leg got messed up. I put his ass in the hospital for 2 weeks..... If I see him again it'll be much worse...

It sounds like you're more of a criminal than he is then.
 
2006-02-02 02:20:39 PM
for the guy to have avoided hitting the child, you need roughly 100ft to stop...

Wrong. You only need a few feet and 0.5 of a second to swerve.

Which brings us to another common mistake of shiatty drivers: the tendency to try to avoid a collision by just hitting the brakes and heading straight for the other object while just hoping to god the car stops before they hit it.
 
2006-02-02 02:20:43 PM
Why is a 2 and a half year old allowed in the street? Why wasn't he having his hand held as he crossed? Why was a Two-and-a-half year old even awake at 10PM??

This situation sucks for all involved but I say the parents of this poor kid are to blame for what happened.
 
2006-02-02 02:24:30 PM
the kid would have been hit no matter who was driving.

Not me, and certainly not dragged 70 feet.
 
2006-02-02 02:29:17 PM
I just read that the Maryland General Assembly is banning "carrying a concealed machete." Something they are apparently just getting around to.

So if you live in Maryland, carry your concealed machete while you still can!
 
2006-02-02 02:32:53 PM
I agree that this is just a horrible mishap.. but no blame lies on the driver...

Maybe if you accidentally ran over a few more dogs/cats you'd realize that it's impossible to avoid these sort of things...

yeah a two year-old kid in the street at 10PM that jumps out RIGHT before you get to them... and that's somehow the driver's fault? I sure as hell don't want you to be picked for jury duty. ever.
 
2006-02-02 02:36:46 PM
TickleMyElmo: Wrong. You only need a few feet and 0.5 of a second to swerve.

Which brings us to another common mistake of shiatty drivers: the tendency to try to avoid a collision by just hitting the brakes and heading straight for the other object while just hoping to god the car stops before they hit it.


and how many cars have you see flipped over because some moron swerved to miss a paper bag, squirrel, kitten, other?

i brake for anything larger than a cat. i swerve for people, cars, or animals deer sized or larger when there is no oncoming traffic. squirrels get run the fark down.

bottom line is this: if the parents/guardians of the kid had been doing their jobs, the driver wouldn't have had to do anything to avoid the kid in the first place.

as i stated above... parents need to hold their child's hand
 
2006-02-02 02:38:56 PM
My best friend and his brother got killed in a car accident where a guy slamed into their car doing 20 over and wasnt paying attention cause of an argument with his girlfriend

nothing happend legally.

something should of happend, at least a fine for causing a death?

if the kid couldnt avoid it, he should still be fined something, make him donate to a kids organization.
 
2006-02-02 02:39:52 PM
yup, swerving could have been worse... imagine if this was just an H-E-B bag floating... and he swerved to avoid... hitting an oncoming car... killing everyone involved.

would that be better?
 
2006-02-02 02:40:43 PM
romero?
 
2006-02-02 02:44:47 PM
TickleMyElmo:

Which brings us to another common mistake of shiatty drivers: the tendency to try to avoid a collision by just hitting the brakes and heading straight for the other object while just hoping to god the car stops before they hit it.

Sometimes you don't have time to swerve. Sometimes people panic and can't think of what to do. Or sometimes, there are cars in other lanes, and you can't swerve.

There's also this sad fact. (I'm applying this to accidents in general as opposed to just this one case.) If someone else does something wrong that causes you to hit them, they are responsible for paying for the damage. If you swerve to avoid something that someone else is doing wrong and you hit a pole, you are responsible for paying for the damage. And if you swerve to avoid something that someone else is doing wrong and you hit another vehicle, you are responsible for all the damage. So it's not a good idea to swerve unless you have enough time to make sure you won't hit anything.

I'll tell you right now that I have swerved and successfully missed accidents several times. However, there have also been times where I just took the hit. If I don't have time to decide whether or not the swerve will be safe, I don't do it. At least, I haven't yet.
 
2006-02-02 02:49:12 PM
The article lies.

The driver wasn't messaging when he hit the kid, he had been messaging earlier. Not a good thing to do, sure, but also not what the article claims.

And the driver was speeding, but not by 10mpg as he stated, analysis showed he was going at most 32 mph in a 25. Not a good thing to do either, but not as bad as the article makes it sound.

No links. Do your own research.

Don't speed, don't play with toys while driving. And keep your kids away from the road.
 
2006-02-02 02:52:56 PM
Don't speed, don't play with toys while driving. And keep your kids away from the road.
 
2006-02-02 02:54:26 PM
Oh noes, someone did something bad. Let's not blame the parents for negligence, nor the culprate for commiting the act, LET'S BLAME TECHNOLOGY!

/I love technology
//but not as much as you, you see
///but still, I love technology!
 
2006-02-02 02:55:31 PM
I'll tell you right now that I have swerved and successfully missed accidents several times. However, there have also been times where I just took the hit. If I don't have time to decide whether or not the swerve will be safe, I don't do it. At least, I haven't yet.

I think there's something wrong with your driving habits if you find yourself in these "swerve or take the hit" situations so often.
 
Anj
2006-02-02 02:57:58 PM
for the last time everybody...

he wasn't street racing, he wasn't speeding like 40+mph over the limit...

it was an accident..he should lose his drivers license for 5 years for being dumb enough to text message while driving...

but, to ruin his life over this? c'mon...send him prison..yep, great...now we just got another useless criminal locked up instead of maybe making something of his life...

/IMO, the uncle or whoever was negligent
 
2006-02-02 03:04:46 PM
ScrapMaker: This is 100% the parents' fault

Your post wins the thread for me. I was gonna post myself, but you said it just as well as I could have hoped to.
 
2006-02-02 03:08:19 PM
If a kid wants to drive a V8, they should be required to take further driving classes.

Oh, but a 4-cylinder AWD Twin-Scroll Turbocharged Lancer Evolution that rockets 0-60 in less than 4.2 seconds, even faster than a Mustang GT, that's okay?

If you're gonna propose asinine restrictions, at least propose a viable criterion to base it on. Using Horsepower/Torque ratings would be a start, although it would probably be better to use a power-to-weight ratio.

Also, who's to stop the teens from modding their cars? A 130hp Civic can easily push 300hp with a turbo and some bolt-ons.
 
2006-02-02 03:28:20 PM
zetec: Oh, but a 4-cylinder AWD Twin-Scroll Turbocharged Lancer Evolution that rockets 0-60 in less than 4.2 seconds, even faster than a Mustang GT, that's okay?

If you're gonna propose asinine restrictions, at least propose a viable criterion to base it on. Using Horsepower/Torque ratings would be a start, although it would probably be better to use a power-to-weight ratio.

Also, who's to stop the teens from modding their cars? A 130hp Civic can easily push 300hp with a turbo and some bolt-ons.


there is no replacement for displacement... except technology. lots of supras are pushing 1000+ hp to the wheels on an inline 6. i've seen hondas, toyotas, ford foci (focuses?) and other 4-bangers running 12 second quarters. power:weight is far more important than simple power ratings. look up the ariel atom. this car is light as hell, has 300 hp, and is faster around a track than most supercars. it's also able to outrun most sportbikes on the market.
the ariel atom on "Top Gear" (google video)
 
2006-02-02 03:49:47 PM
great power doesn't mean you are more likely to get into an accident... if anything, it means you have more EXPERIENCE driving under extreme conditions... sliding, dodging, swerving, maintaining control during adverse driving conditions.

It's the people tooling around in their Toyota Tercel with their cruise control pegged at 68MPH on the highway that you need to worry about... I can't imagine anyone more oblivious to their surroundings, except perhaps this same person, also on a cellphone...

or a woman with other women passengers...

/ducks
//still means it
 
2006-02-02 04:08:58 PM
i23.photobucket.com

Getting hit and dragged 68 feet by a car hurts.
Film at 11.
 
2006-02-02 06:24:20 PM
Khaal: You underestimate the passion, and stupidity, of human beings. If I were a single parent, and this were my only child, and I felt as if I had nothing to live for after this teen ran down my child ... yeah, I might consider doing something along the idiotic lines.


I don't necessarily mean something like this. It's just anything in general, no matter how petty it is. You can always count on that obligatory line. I'm sure I'm not the only one that's noticed it. People and their false bravado.

And to the person that would chase a person down and beat them down if a dog or something were hit; chill. The hypothetical dog should've been on a leash, and the kid should've been watched closer. I, personally, would be pretty hurt if I ran over a dog. I've never hit anything except nearly a wild turkey once. That was creepy. The thing came up from a bluff like the chick from The Ring.
 
2006-02-02 06:25:05 PM
I want to know how it took this kid so long to stop the car. He was only going 32 mph yet he dragged the kid 68 feet?
 
2006-02-02 06:35:33 PM
milo_rules:
"What do you expect from Kentucky?"

Um, Fark?
 
2006-02-02 06:54:53 PM
The first thing I thought of when I saw that headline:

"How did Heather French-Henry get her license back?"

/Kentuckians will get it
 
2006-02-02 11:24:03 PM
Talking on your cell while driving is bad enough... but TEXT MESSAGING?!?

If this farker died during the incident rather than a bystander, he would be a candidate for the Darwin award.
 
2006-02-03 12:12:07 AM
Keep your brats out of the road. The driver was not at fault IMHO. Charge those that should have been WATCHING the kid with reckless homicide if you have to charge someone.
 
2006-02-03 12:20:19 AM
Emeraldstar Of course the driver was at fault. He was farking driving.

I've avoided hitting brats in similar situations.. by ... LOOKING AT THE ROAD.

Text messaging??!? How could you possibly watch the road?

Are you one of those women who puts on makeup in the car?
 
2006-02-03 12:34:39 AM
" Cerebral Ballsy

Emeraldstar Of course the driver was at fault. He was farking driving. "

BS. If he was driving on the sidewalk you might have a point. The KID and its babysitters were at fault. The car was on the road. People do not belong in the road except at intersections. Hell if I was sat on a jury I would refuse to convict even if he were going 100 mph over the speedlimit. The kid did not belong in the road at all.(before you talk smack about how I will feel different when I am a parten .. I have 2 kids )
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report