• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Teen Sentenced To Probation For Deadly DWI Crash

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the kid blew a .24 he was wasted.

I used to do this stuff for a living and if you blow a .24 you are significantly impaired. While the outward signs of a .24 are different for different people I can guarantee that your judgement will be off significantly, your responsiveness to various stimuli will be way off and your vision will be substantially impaired. With hundreds of DUI busts I can say for certain that NOBODY who blows a .24 could pass for sober.

I have no idea why the judge thought probation was a reasonable sentence. It's one of those sentences that rightfully makes sane people sit back and say "Really? How can any reasonable person consider this sentence to be 'justice' much less rehabilitative?"

I'll chime in on this if I may. I have friend in Canada who gave a clean .3 reading a few years ago and was hospitalized immediately. Drunk as far as I know is anything near .20 - This is a 16 year old boy who couldn't possibly weigh more than what? 150? Yeah, it's a miracle he didn't simply pass out and then choke in his vomit before he killed these people.
 
I just saw this on the noon news and I'll have to say it sickened me. Has this judge been bought off or something. He said the kid did it because he was spoiled and had never suffered any consequences for his actions so to fix that the judge once again lets him slide? WTF?

I saw the defense attorney use the term, 'affluenza'. Amazing.
The kid learned a lesson alright, though maybe not the right lesson.
 
I sincerely desire the total financial destruction of the family in civil lawsuits.
But I know that will never happen because money buys great lawyers, we will find that his parents are really good good good people responsible for creating jobs. And of course this offsets any bad stuff that happens
Maybe if the parents spent less time making money and more time actually parenting...

And while I am at it, I am wondering at which point, at which crime does this guy have to admit to, for his defenders to STFU about him deserving a second or 33rd chance?
 
Breathalyzers are based on junk science. Kinda like "lie detectors" and "e-meters".

And so what if he was drunk? That does not prove that he intended to get in a wreck and kill anyone.

So you have some sort evidence for this preposterous assertion about breathalyzers?
 
I had a DWI in 1985. My BAC was .13, and I was definitely impaired, and could not pass the field sobriety tests. I deserved the jail time I got.
All that anecdote means is that you're a masochist who thinks you deserve to be punished.

But, that is beside the point. The legal limit that triggers a "pro se" DWI arrest is .08. He was 3 times that. He had absolutely no business behind the wheel. He committed manslaugther.
Changing the "legal limit" doesn't make anyone any drunker or soberer. It is just an arbitrary number that kleptocrat leeches use to steal money from other, more productive people. Plain and simple.

"Field sobriety" tests are also based on junk science just as the "breathalyzer" the "e-meter" and "lie detector" tests. They should be outlawed.
 
Last edited:
All that anecdote means is that you're a masochist who thinks you deserve to be punished.

"Field sobriety" tests are also based on junk science just as the "breathalyzer" the "e-meter" and "lie detector" tests. They should be outlawed.

I suppose you believe the first moon landing was faked too. Right? LOL.
 
Breathalyzers are based on junk science. Kinda like "lie detectors" and "e-meters".

And so what if he was drunk? That does not prove that he intended to get in a wreck and kill anyone.

It's not junk science. The chemical reactions that a breathalyzer measures work the same for everyone and give a reasonable estimate of BAC. That test, especially when combined with practiced observation, can easily determine impairment and, again, I GUARANTEE that someone who blows a .24 is noticeably impaired.

As far as not intending to kill someone.....really? He wasn't on trial for murder one but vehicular homicide or second degree murder would both be reasonable.
 
It's not junk science. The chemical reactions that a breathalyzer measures work the same for everyone and give a reasonable estimate of BAC. That test, especially when combined with practiced observation, can easily determine impairment and, again, I GUARANTEE that someone who blows a .24 is noticeably impaired.

As far as not intending to kill someone.....really? He wasn't on trial for murder one but vehicular homicide or second degree murder would both be reasonable.

just out of curiosity
what would a breathalyzer indicate for someone who had imbibed say 5 minute before the test and that was their only drink?

I ask because, as a layman, I know there is a procedure to be followed and could you explain what that is, based on your experiences?
 
I'll chime in on this if I may. I have friend in Canada who gave a clean .3 reading a few years ago and was hospitalized immediately. Drunk as far as I know is anything near .20 - This is a 16 year old boy who couldn't possibly weigh more than what? 150? Yeah, it's a miracle he didn't simply pass out and then choke in his vomit before he killed these people.

Yeah. While .08 is really a little overprotective as far as I'm concerned most people are showing obvious signs of intoxication at about .125 and by .175 there is usually little question. At a .2 most people are obviously unsteady on their feet, have significantly slurred speech and can't react to anything they aren't already focused on.
 
All that anecdote means is that you're a masochist who thinks you deserve to be punished.

Changing the "legal limit" doesn't make anyone any drunker or soberer. It is just an arbitrary number that kleptocrat leeches use to steal money from other, more productive people. Plain and simple.

"Field sobriety" tests are also based on junk science just as the "breathalyzer" the "e-meter" and "lie detector" tests. They should be outlawed.

It is statements like this that make me wish for the power to send people to a parallel universe of their own design.
 
just out of curiosity
what would a breathalyzer indicate for someone who had imbibed say 5 minute before the test and that was their only drink?

I ask because, as a layman, I know there is a procedure to be followed and could you explain what that is, based on your experiences?

In common practice you wouldn't test someone who just had a drink 5 minutes ago. They would likely still have alcohol in their mouth and what you want to measure is the alcohol from deep in their lungs...where it's mixing with their blood. You'd usually wait to test someone at least until you could be reasonably sure it had been 20 minutes or so since their last drink.
 
Yeah. While .08 is really a little overprotective as far as I'm concerned most people are showing obvious signs of intoxication at about .125 and by .175 there is usually little question. At a .2 most people are obviously unsteady on their feet, have significantly slurred speech and can't react to anything they aren't already focused on.

I respectfully disagree about .08 being overprotective. At a .05, I can tell that I am slightly impaired.
 
Yeah. While .08 is really a little overprotective as far as I'm concerned most people are showing obvious signs of intoxication at about .125 and by .175 there is usually little question. At a .2 most people are obviously unsteady on their feet, have significantly slurred speech and can't react to anything they aren't already focused on.

Couldn't agree more. I think what people don't understand is that BAC is a percentage. A 0.8 on a person that weighs 240 pounds is not the same as a 0.8 on a person who weighs 150 pounds. However, these are the noticeable effects regardless of weight:

View attachment 67158205

Here is the risk of accident:

Relative_risk_of_an_accident_based_on_blood_alcohol_levels_%28linear_scale%29.jpg


You notice the same thing I do? Because I see that there is no way this 150 pound kid made a reasonable choice by getting behind the wheel and he should be held accountable for it.
 
It's not junk science. The chemical reactions that a breathalyzer measures work the same for everyone and give a reasonable estimate of BAC. That test, especially when combined with practiced observation, can easily determine impairment and, again, I GUARANTEE that someone who blows a .24 is noticeably impaired.
You have no proof of that. Your opinion in this case is totally based on unsupported assertions.

As far as not intending to kill someone.....really? He wasn't on trial for murder one but vehicular homicide or second degree murder would both be reasonable.
In other words, there was no criminal intent at all.

10 years of probation? That's just bull****. It's a very unreasonable intrusion by the govt. The criminal justice indutrial complex leeches just think daddy has a lot of money they can rip-off.
 
I respectfully disagree about .08 being overprotective. At a .05, I can tell that I am slightly impaired.

And I fully respect your disagreement.

Sure, I can tell I've had something to drink after one drink but in my experience most people who blew below a .1 were very slightly impaired. Their reflexes were still usually pretty decent and, frankly, by the time we finished checking them they were plenty sober.

As a rule of thumb an average sized male will burn off .05% blood alcohol every 45 min to 1 hour so if you have one beer an hour you should be fine under pretty much any circumstances. If you have 2 an hour you'll probably be borderline but if it takes me half an hour to test you you'll probably come in just under the .08 wire.

Now I'm not about to speak for everyone and personally I'm a little bit beyond average size but 2 beers an hour for me...I'd know I wasn't drinking iced tea but driving really wouldn't be a problem.
 
But if you are black and poor you go to prison

No ****, genius. The same thing happens when you are white and poor
 
You have no proof of that. Your opinion in this case is totally based on unsupported assertions.

In other words, there was no criminal intent at all.

10 years of probation? That's just bull****. It's a very unreasonable intrusion by the govt. The criminal justice indutrial complex leeches just think daddy has a lot of money they can rip-off.

Well, if you ever get busted for a DUI then feel free to use the "junk science" defense.

As far as 10 years probation being "bull****"....well, the kid gets to sleep in his own bed, **** i his own toilet, eat at his own leisure, enjoy the companionship of friends and family as he sees fit.....yeah, it is bull**** because it's hardly any punishment at all after leaving a trail of death and disability behind him.
 
And I fully respect your disagreement.

Sure, I can tell I've had something to drink after one drink but in my experience most people who blew below a .1 were very slightly impaired. Their reflexes were still usually pretty decent and, frankly, by the time we finished checking them they were plenty sober.

As a rule of thumb an average sized male will burn off .05% blood alcohol every 45 min to 1 hour so if you have one beer an hour you should be fine under pretty much any circumstances. If you have 2 an hour you'll probably be borderline but if it takes me half an hour to test you you'll probably come in just under the .08 wire.

Now I'm not about to speak for everyone and personally I'm a little bit beyond average size but 2 beers an hour for me...I'd know I wasn't drinking iced tea but driving really wouldn't be a problem.

Age might have something to do with it. I am 63.
 
Couldn't agree more. I think what people don't understand is that BAC is a percentage. A 0.8 on a person that weighs 240 pounds is not the same as a 0.8 on a person who weighs 150 pounds. However, these are the noticeable effects regardless of weight:

View attachment 67158205

Here is the risk of accident:

Relative_risk_of_an_accident_based_on_blood_alcohol_levels_%28linear_scale%29.jpg


You notice the same thing I do? Because I see that there is no way this 150 pound kid made a reasonable choice by getting behind the wheel and he should be held accountable for it.

Very confused. You say that BAC is a percentage then say weight matters.
It is my understanding that different amounts of alcohol are required to get to 0.08% for the 240lb guy versus 150lb guy but the the effect of 0.08% BAC is about the same for both of them?
 
Lutherf said:
I GUARANTEE that someone who blows a .24 is noticeably impaired.

You have no proof of that. Your opinion in this case is totally based on unsupported assertions.

Know the Facts Say When Better Health Channel

View attachment 67158206

Blood Alcohol

Effects of drinking alcohol Estimated blood alcohol concentration (BAC) Observable effects

0.02 - Relaxation, slight body warmth
0.05 - Sedation, slowed reaction time
0.10 - Slurred speech, poor coordination, slowed thinking
0.20 - Trouble walking, double vision, nausea, vomiting
0.30 - May pass out, tremors, memory loss, cool body temperature
0.40 -Trouble breathing, coma, possible death
0.50 and greater

Blood Alcohol Level Facts | Barnard College

BAL .20%: You feel confused, dazed, or otherwise disoriented. You need help to stand up or walk. If you hurt yourself at this point, you probably won't realize it because you won't feel pain. At this point you may experience nausea and/or start vomiting (keep in mind that for some people, a lower blood alcohol level than .20% may cause vomiting). Your gag reflex is impaired, so you could choke if you do throw up. Since blackouts are likely at this level, you may not remember any of this.

BAL .25%: All mental, physical, and sensory functions are severely impaired. You're emotionally numb. There's an increased risk of asphyxiation from choking on vomit and of seriously injuring yourself by falling or other accidents.

Alcohol and BAC Facts

BAC EFFECTS ON FEELING AND BEHAVIOR

.01 - .03 There is a mild lift in feeling. You have some loss of judgment. (1 drink within 15 minutes… BAC .03%)
.04 - .06 Most People feel high and must decide whether to continue drinking. You may get louder and have some loss of small muscle control, like focusing your eyes. (2 drinks within ½ hour… BAC .06%)
.08 - .09 Your sight and hearing are worse. It’s harder to detect danger. You have less sense of balance. (3 drinks within 1 hour… BAC .09%)
.10 - .12 Many people claim they’re not affected anymore, as if they could drink themselves sober. You are definitely not thinking straight. (4 drinks within 2 hours… BAC .12%)
.13 - .15 You have far less muscle control than normal. People feel happy even though they’re stumbling and acting foolishly. Risk of an automobile crash increases to 25 times the normal rate (5-7 drinks within 3 hours… BAC .15%)
.20 - .25 You’re confused. You usually need help doing things, even standing up. Those who drive are 50 to 100 times more likely to crash. The average alcohol-related highway death occurs at this level. (8-12 drinks within 4 hours… BAC .20%
.30 Almost nothing gets through the senses. An extremely life threatening BAC level.
.40 Your condition ranges from conscious to comatose. There is a chance of death from a ‘shut down’ of breathing.

He does now.
 
I wouldn't go as far as saying that race played a role here but I'd definitely say political influence did. If this kid were some white trash trailer park dweller, this judge wouldn't have thought twice about sending him to the slammer for a few years.

No ****, this case screams of wealth and political influence(the treatment center he's going to charges 450K). Why anyone would toss race in there is beyond me.
 
Very confused. You say that BAC is a percentage then say weight matters. It is my understanding that different amounts of alcohol are required to get to 0.08% for the 240lb guy versus 150lb guy but the the effect of 0.08% BAC is about the same for both of them?

Pretty much. Which is what people do not understand understand about the BAC. I can drink the same amount of alcohol as someone else. However, they may reach a 0.08% BAC faster if they are 50 pounds under me. However, once him and I both reach the same BAC levels, we'll exhibit some of the same issues.
 
No ****, this case screams of wealth and political influence(the treatment center he's going to charges 450K). Why anyone would toss race in there is beyond me.

I think it drives home the fact that this kid got off with a slap on the wrist for what I personally consider a heinous crime. However, there is really no need for it. The fact he got off with such a light sentence in Texas is enough to get people angry. Remember, this is the state that executes retards. This is the state that makes sure people can shoot you dead if you punch them hard enough. This is the state who's justice system has been called every kind of -ist in the book (racist, fascist, etc).

I do find of importance that if this were a Democrat's kid, a certain member in this thread would be the first to call up the lynching cavalry and then he'd call anyone who suggested he was wrong as a criminal loving libbo.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom