Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Fatal accidents require tests

August 27, 2013

It is inspiring to see how quickly people can go from mourning the loss of a friend and loved one to helping others....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(33)

TiredOfTax

Sep-02-13 1:57 PM

In the past when things went wrong, people would talk it over and the person at fault would stand up to what they had done and take the responsibility for his actions, knowing full well the damage he had inflicted on the victims family. Today with huge insurance payouts for anything that even remotely affects someone and the lawyers that are in it to make it something bigger to increase the payout... it has all gone awry! Today there is always a lawsuit, an arrest and a huge settlement divided between the victim and the lawyers. You are told to remain silent no matter how innocent you are and you go on trial like any hard criminal would, you lose your job, your reputation and all of your money. Plus if you happen to be guilty... jail. Whatever happened to do what is right? Today you are fully protected if you are the criminal, if not you are the target!

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gville70

Sep-02-13 9:16 AM

Ed was a seasoned biker and per NYS law bikes, people, oxcarts are considered vehicles and must be afforded the same care that approaching another car dictates .. Tickets at least should have been issued for failure to keep a safe distance and passing on a solid line and causing an accident.. When was it legal to rear end another car or smash into it while passing on a solid line?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Insane

Aug-30-13 11:25 AM

193755 - What have you been smoking? Prescription drugs or any drug for that matter affects each person differenty. Testing everyone while a violation of ones rights would only tell you want drugs the person is taking not how the perosn judgement has been affected. Lets just test everyone, great idea no change of abuse there.....

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Aug-30-13 8:46 AM

Typical liberal thinking 193755, if there is the POTENTIAL for for something going wrong.. LETS MAKE A LAW that has more to do with CONTROL than safety or personal responsibility...like the money-grab 'safety' stops. One of Murphy's Laws states "if something can go wrong, it will". Are you suggesting everyone be arrested because they have the POTENTIAL to do something wrong???? Well, that includes YOU pal. So turn yourself in now and maybe they'll go easy on you.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

193755

Aug-29-13 2:40 PM

Indeed! So many people today are taking prescribed medications, some fall into the category of pain killers, which have the potential to impair judgement and reaction times - some people on these meds are just plain "loopy". Many are on high blood pressure meds, cholesterol, who knows what else. It would be a good idea to test everyone for drugs at the time of any accident, but more importantly for an accident where life is taken. The authorities need to do a better job of detecting the possibility of whether those involved in an accident might be "on something. Hope the law passes. Long overdue. People need to stop being distracted and pay attention - cars, cyclists alike.Personal responsibility and safety.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Aug-29-13 1:57 PM

I believe that the misrepresentatives have forced more than enough legislation to last many many years, lets say repeal a few times and we can talk again about REPLACING or ENFORCING the already huge number of laws already on the books!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ron1960

Aug-29-13 12:46 PM

I have not seen any evidence that the driver has a history of DWI or DWAI, I could have missed it. But what amazes me is that anytime there is an accident between a automobile and bike it is most always the fault of the driver of the automobile. It is surprising that there are not many more of these accidents because most people who ride bikes do not ride obeying the laws. Many ride on the wrong side of the road and they seldom stop for stop signs or red lights and they fail to yield and they ride on the side walks and dart out into traffic with out looking where they are going. Many of them do not have the reflectors and /or lights required by law and many do not wear their helmets. and in the evening hours they do not wear reflective clothing so they can be seen. Why?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Aug-28-13 10:51 PM

Rs, are you ashamed of what you let yourself become???? Of course you're a liberal, or do you prefer progressive or statist? Same turd, different end. The problem is that you paid people to tell you that you're intellectually and morally superior without having to first earn that status. You were duped and lied to, now you lie to me. You should try to get your money back for the nonsense you absorbed and now emit. While you're at it, you might want to ask them how you can get your credibility and reputation back too.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BillLair

Aug-28-13 6:35 PM

Dave, you continually refer to the driver's "history" of DWAI on here and elsewhere. Please tell us what that history is regarding being charged with, or convicted of, DWAI prior to the fatal accident. I have not seen any such history publicized, but I may have missed it.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

Aug-28-13 5:32 PM

swizzer, have you been watching old Nixon tapes ???

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Aug-28-13 2:20 PM

MrBoB51, I'm not a liberal.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lizzie

Aug-28-13 1:59 PM

Whever someone references the Zimmerman trial, and the "court of public opinion" that "didn't work out so well...

....it reminds me of OJ Simpson.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Aug-28-13 1:58 PM

Whoa there RS, I never and I do repeat NEVER said we were buds... even further to BFFS... you simply had ONE good post!

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

Aug-28-13 12:41 PM

ToT - re-swizzer - even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Aug-28-13 12:26 PM

Really rs, speaking for myself you may believe the second paragraph you wrote but I don't. You have demonstrated time and again your lack of knowledge of current affairs and your propensity for regurgitating liberal ideology and issuing outright lies, assumptions and indictments to those of us who challenge liberalism. You did that to yourself, now live with it.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

Aug-28-13 12:08 PM

swizzer, again you don't read correctly. I never disagreed with your position, only the FACT that a clean blood test would certainly prove the accused innocent of being under the influence.

"I still have a brain" REALLY????? "and can think for myself using logic and critical thinking skills without the need for someone to tell me what to do, say, or think." - IF you have a brain Scarecrow, you don't use it too much

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Aug-28-13 10:03 AM

TiredOfTax, not so fast. Just because we agree on one or two things doesn't mean we're bff's :).

I still have a brain and can think for myself using logic and critical thinking skills without the need for someone to tell me what to do, say, or think.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Aug-28-13 10:02 AM

drugsrus, what the h-ell are you talking about? I'm on the same 'side' with you on this proposed law.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrBoB51

Aug-28-13 8:39 AM

So dave, being guilty in the court of liberal opinion is supposed to mean something?? That did not work out so well in the Zimmerman Case did it??? It may work in backasswards places like Egypt but mob rule democracy does not fit in a Federal Republic like America. You can pervert the meaning of 'democracy' all you want, but a turd is a turd and it's still mob rule. So polish away.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

TiredOfTax

Aug-28-13 7:29 AM

RS welcome to the right side on this one! Maybe you do listen?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

drugsrus

Aug-27-13 11:02 PM

the law is a bad idea. And swizzer, what if the accused gave blood for a test voluntarily and the blood came back clean??? Somehow I get the feeling that pending charges would go away. You really need to get your head from where the sun don't shine.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rschweizer

Aug-27-13 7:17 PM

Dave, sorry but the mandatory drug test would not 'either convict him or exonerate him'. It's results could only be used at trial, not pre-trial and not for a plea. And the results themselves do not 'convict' or 'exonerate'. Juries do that.

To be quite honest, anything 'automatic' should be approached with hesitation. If the police don't have the p.c. to suspect drugs were a factor in a crash, then there should be no reason to test.

I don't see this law gaining much traction. The scores of suits will file on the grounds that everyone else here suspects in that submission to a blood test in which the police failed to provide any p.c. would be considered an illegal seizure of that blood.

Now, however, if the police responded to the scene of a fatal accident and the driver was acting erratically or had blood-shot eyes or looked like they were tweaking on some of the good ol' stuff, p.c. is established and voila, your charges are pressed.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

lizzie

Aug-27-13 4:32 PM

The Gazette editorial was better....

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DaveGibson

Aug-27-13 3:09 PM

Well, let me shed more light on it. The driver has a history of DWAI. He hit Mr. Lakata in broad daylight on a clear day, killing him. Was he under the influence of drugs? We don't know. A mandatory chemical test, costing $44, would either convict him or exonerate him. Doesn't it make sense to require it? Driving is a privilege, not a right, and a test after a fatal accident is hardly an invasion of his rights.

The petition was the result of a conversation between many people on Bill Trojann's Facebook page, of which I was only a small part. Many, many people think mandatory testing is a good idea. We reached our goal of 1,000 signatures in less than four days.

There is an "Eddie's Law" already proposed. It passes the NYS Senate, but fails in the Assembly. Our goal is to push it through the Assembly.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Scarecrow57

Aug-27-13 2:01 PM

Continued.

Perhaps Ms. Sira can convene a grand jury.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 33 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web