Massachusetts teen convicted of homicide in texting-while-driving case - Polidicks

[QUOTE=kidwithsword;36229223]As a resident of Massachusetts, I can attest to how terrible the drivers are here, and most teenagers are no exception. Just last week I was in a parking lot and I watched a girl my age literally park an SUV into the side of the car in the space next to the one she attempted to park in. She rolled into the other car going no faster than 1 or 2mph, crunched a nice dent in the body, and drove off. As for the case, I think it is good that the kid is being charged. To most of the people I know, driving is just a good time to have with your friends. They do not comprehend the responsibility that comes with driving a vehicle, and I am glad to see that in this case the irresponsibility that has led to the death of a person is actually being punished in a way that will permanently affect the kid's life.[/QUOTE] Amen. The fucking drivers in this state are consistently awful, and are entirely asinine most of the time.

Does america even have a points system? Or is it all just fines and having your licence revoked? [editline]7th June 2012[/editline] Also, I can't believe the learners permit age is so low in some states, there are some people I knew when I was 15 that I wouldn't have trusted with a bike, let alone a car.

[QUOTE=samframpton;36235218]Does america even have a points system? Or is it all just fines and having your licence revoked? [editline]7th June 2012[/editline] Also, I can't believe the learners permit age is so low in some states, there are some people I knew when I was 15 that I wouldn't have trusted with a bike, let alone a car.[/QUOTE] It depends on the state. Here in Illinois you get your license revoked after three tickets, it may be different elsewhere.

I want to stab him to death Yeah rate dumb, I don't care

Most teenagers (well, adults aswell) are dumb enough to think using their cellphones while driving is harmless, he fucked up badly and sounds like a douche but I still feel bad for him. Everybody does that he was just unlucky enough to figure it's fucking retarded the hard way. That's something he's gonna regret for the rest of his life, I don't think ruining his future career and studies does any good in this case, not gonna bring back the dead guy. It's not like he was wasted and driving over the limits. I don't know what the legislation is in the US, but I think the gov has the responsibility of forbidding everywhere the use of cellphones while driving and sensibilizing the crowd.

[QUOTE=kidwithsword;36229223]As a resident of Massachusetts, I can attest to how terrible the drivers are here, and most teenagers are no exception. Just last week I was in a parking lot and I watched a girl my age literally park an SUV into the side of the car in the space next to the one she attempted to park in. She rolled into the other car going no faster than 1 or 2mph, crunched a nice dent in the body, and drove off. As for the case, I think it is good that the kid is being charged. To most of the people I know, driving is just a good time to have with your friends. They do not comprehend the responsibility that comes with driving a vehicle, and I am glad to see that in this case the irresponsibility that has led to the death of a person is actually being punished in a way that will permanently affect the kid's life.[/QUOTE] I can vouch for that too. At my high school on Cape Cod in MA, two girls own Hummers and I fear for my life. One time some girl gunned it out of the parking lot so fast she ended up rear ending a guy on the main road who was going the speed limit. Another time on Facebook a guy uploaded a picture of he and his dad laughing at the truck he just flipped over onto its side somehow during the summer.

Why on earth is the driving age so low in the US?

For how awful Massachusetts driving is (I am also a native), we have also got some of the strictest driving rules in the country. We're allowed to get our driver's permit at 16; most states allow it at 15 1/2. We ban texting AND talking on the phone while driving in addition to not wearing your seatbelt. I could list all the restrictions that are currently placed on my Junior Operators License, but it would take forever.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;36242525]Why on earth is the driving age so low in the US?[/QUOTE] Lowish population density in many states.

Plus, for underage drivers, you get fined and suspended up the ass for violations. One violation, and it's a $100 dollar fine minimum plus a 60-day suspension.

[QUOTE=FFStudios;36242648]We ban texting AND talking on the phone while driving in addition to not wearing your seatbelt.[/QUOTE] Not an attack against you, but it's amazing that you even need to mention that. Two things which are obviously for the wellbeing of yourself and others, and yet are unrestricted in other states. [QUOTE=ROBO_DONUT;36242664]Lowish population density in many states.[/QUOTE] How is that justification? [editline]8th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=FFStudios;36242670]Plus, for underage drivers, you get fined and suspended up the ass for violations. One violation, and it's a $100 dollar fine minimum plus a 60-day suspension.[/QUOTE] Makes sense. At such an age for driving, it would be more of a privilege then a necessity (for commerce or travel).

[QUOTE=DogGunn;36242833] How is that justification? [/QUOTE] It has to do partly with the fact that if you are a farm family (of which there are more in the US than in Europe or Japan for example), you need a liscense to operate motor vehicles like tractors, etc. Basically it allows people who are of legal working age (usually 15-16 years old) to actually do their jobs if they job happens to involve a motor vehicles (most jobs still won't hire for such positions until you are at least 18, but still - if you are working on a family farm at 16 you can get a liscense and start legally driving tractors and such on the road etc). The farm family thing was just an example though. Keep in mind that America is also extremely suburban oriented, which means personal transportation is practically required unless you live in a big city and have easy access to the public transportation amenities. Suburbs depend on you having access to a vehicle in order to do stuff in them (because they are very spread out and not designed for regular pedestrian use), and when you can start getting jobs and becoming active independently at the age of 16, being able to drive is pretty important because of that.

[QUOTE=Skerion;36234543]Sounds like he really did regret it.[/QUOTE] That doesn't excuse anything I don't think someone would accidentally kill someone while driving and NOT regret it

[QUOTE=KorJax;36243206]It has to do partly with the fact that if you are a farm family (of which there are more in the US than in Europe or Japan for example), you need a liscense to operate motor vehicles like tractors, etc. Basically it allows people who are of legal working age (usually 15-16 years old) to actually do their jobs if they job happens to involve a motor vehicles (most jobs still won't hire for such positions until you are at least 18, but still - if you are working on a family farm at 16 you can get a liscense and start legally driving tractors and such on the road etc).[/QUOTE] I understand why you might need it, but I still don't understand the justification on the whole. If a person needs it for their work or wellbeing, then they should be able to access it. But it just seems that people are able to get their licence even though they don't need it at such a young age (either because they have access to PT), which inturn causes problems due to immaturity and inexperience. I guess I haven't lived that much in suburban America too much (more big cities / small towns during my year and a bit there), so I'm not up to scratch on how transport is around the burbs. [editline]8th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Meller Yeller;36243248]I don't think someone would accidentally kill someone while driving and NOT regret it[/QUOTE] "That text message was so worth it - no regret!"

[QUOTE=DogGunn;36242525]Why on earth is the driving age so low in the US?[/QUOTE] I think the driving age at 16 is an alright thing personally. You get stupid people doing this at every age and when they do turn 18, they'll at least have a couple years of driving experience.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;36243261]I understand why you might need it, but I still don't understand the justification on the whole. If a person needs it for their work or wellbeing, then they should be able to access it. But it just seems that people are able to get their licence even though they don't need it at such a young age (either because they have access to PT), which inturn causes problems due to immaturity and inexperience. I guess I haven't lived that much in suburban America too much (more big cities / small towns during my year and a bit there), so I'm not up to scratch on how transport is around the burbs. [editline]8th June 2012[/editline] "That text message was so worth it - no regret!"[/QUOTE] With suburbs there is no transport except your own, at least in America. I.E.: [img]http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/cityofate/dallas_suburbs_overhead.jpg[/img] There's really no way to get around a town like that without having access to a car when that is where you live. Majority of Americans live in places like that (though usually, not so "new" and lifeless as that picture is). A good chunk, but not majority live in rural areas, where it is literally impossible to get anywhere without being able to drive. Fewer than half of "urbanized" Americans (which make up 3/4ths of the population, while the last 1/4th is rural population), actually live in cities - where it is possible to get around without a car. The real issue is that there needs to be better testing to get your liscense. Getting a liscense is retardedly easy as long as you don't have a phobia of being in control of a motor vehicle and you aren't testing in an unusually strict district. The only thing they really test you on is knowing what certain signs mean, knowing to pull over for emergency vehicles, and then the actual driving test where they just grade you based on how good you can properly stop at a stop sign as they have you drive around a residential neighborhood for 5 minutes.

[QUOTE=DogGunn;36243261]I guess I haven't lived that much in suburban America too much (more big cities / small towns during my year and a bit there), so I'm not up to scratch on how transport is around the burbs.[/QUOTE] It sounds like you live in a city? Where I live, a small (agricultural) town, there is [i]nothing[/i] within walking distance from my house, aside from other houses and farmland. This is right in the middle of the most populated state in the country. We also don't have the sort of public transportation you're probably used to in the UK/Europe. So if you don't have a car, you're pretty fucked. The issue is also that, if you live in the middle of nowhere (i.e. the mid-west, where you've got single-digit populations per square mile), there's really not much damage you can do with a car. Sure, you can drive it straight into a ditch or a telephone pole, but you're really only hurting yourself at that point. Young drivers are really only a hazard to others if you do live in an urban/suburban environment. Zoom around the midwest on google maps for a bit to get an idea of just how much space a driver has.

Hey guys, I posted this on facepunch mobile while going 90 miles an hour on the highway.

[QUOTE=FFStudios;36242648]For how awful Massachusetts driving is (I am also a native), we have also got some of the strictest driving rules in the country. We're allowed to get our driver's permit at 16; most states allow it at 15 1/2. We ban texting AND talking on the phone while driving in addition to not wearing your seatbelt. I could list all the restrictions that are currently placed on my Junior Operators License, but it would take forever.[/QUOTE] It´s still not so strict compared to most European countries. 16 is too young to be driving. Technically 18 is too, the optimal thing would be to wait until 21 or so, when the brain is fully developed and mature. 18 is better than 16 though.

[QUOTE=FFStudios;36242648]For how awful Massachusetts driving is (I am also a native), we have also got some of the strictest driving rules in the country. We're allowed to get our driver's permit at 16; most states allow it at 15 1/2. We ban texting AND talking on the phone while driving in addition to not wearing your seatbelt. I could list all the restrictions that are currently placed on my Junior Operators License, but it would take forever.[/QUOTE] I thought it was you had to wait until you were 15 1/2 til you could get your permit, and you get a license at 16 in MA? In Florida we could get our permit at 15 but still only start driving on our own (with a license) at 16.

I think he should've gotten more than 2.5 years, up to 10 at least. Every day when I go downtown I see these teenagers driving like maniacs(although I see some adults driving just as bad as well). It really pisses me off. They are so careless and reckless. Just recently over here, some guy cut off a van and the van almost crashed. Even though it was his fault, the guy pulled out a gun and shot at the van, hitting the passenger in the leg before fleeing. He was arrested in a few hours. Then there was a case where a guy ran over a cop trying to pull him over, killing him. His defense was "I was not looking at the road, I was trying to pick up a water bottle and I don't have a drivers license." He got 40 years in prison. It's just a couple of many crazy shit I've seen here.

[QUOTE=H4wkeye;36259291]I'd give him 50 years in prison, make an example out of him.[/QUOTE] I'm glad you're not an actual judge. It's pretty stupid and cruel to intentionally ruin someone's life over a dumb choice that caused an accidental death, even if it's to convince others to not do it. A two and a half year sentence is good enough.

[QUOTE=Skerion;36260391]I'm glad you're not an actual judge. It's pretty stupid and cruel to intentionally ruin someone's life over a dumb choice that caused an accidental death, even if it's to convince others to not do it. A two and a half year sentence is good enough.[/QUOTE] Are you serious? He KILLED a man due to his idiocy of driving while texting, he RUINED MANY LIVES, lives of the family of the guy he killed, lives of his friends and you are saying it's a dumb choice to ruin his life? You REAP what you SOW. It's his own fault, and he should suffer the consequences of his actions. Edit: I'd like to point out that 50 years in prison was overreaction and I take that back. Like I said, up to 10 years is reasonable imo.

[QUOTE=H4wkeye;36260510]Are you serious? He KILLED a man due to his idiocy of driving while texting, he RUINED MANY LIVES, lives of the family of the guy he killed, lives of his friends and you are saying it's a dumb choice to ruin his life? You REAP what you SOW. It's his own fault, and he should rot in a cell for it.[/QUOTE]Hey accident happened, lives were ruined. Lets ruin even more, hurr. That will not benefit anyone.

Hawk, I'm so sorry for being rude and idiotic. I'm just not sure about the whole concept of "eye for an eye". It's not like it's going to actually fix anything. I believe that the teen deserves some kind of punishment, but 50 years for something unintentional? I'm just not so sure if it's reasonable. [QUOTE=H4wkeye;36260765]I do understand where you're coming from, but this was not an accident. It's a vehicular homicide. "Vehicular homicide involves death that results from the [b]negligent operation of a vehicle[/b], or more so a result from driving while committing an unlawful act that does not amount to a felony." The fault is entirely his. Now, 50 years is too much, I just randomly said that, but 2.5 years is too small. He should've gotten like 10 years. That won't ruin his life, but it will hopefully teach him something.[/QUOTE] 10 years sounds more reasonable. And again, sorry for being rude.

[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;36260552]Hey accident happened, lives were ruined. Lets ruin even more, hurr. That will not benefit anyone.[/QUOTE] I do understand where you're coming from, but this was not an accident. It's a vehicular homicide. "Vehicular homicide involves death that results from the [b]negligent operation of a vehicle[/b], or more so a result from driving while committing an unlawful act that does not amount to a felony." The fault is entirely his. Now, 50 years is too much, I just randomly said that, but 2.5 years is too small. He should've gotten like 10 years. That won't ruin his life, but it will hopefully teach him something. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Skerion;36260640]Hawk, I'm so sorry for being rude and idiotic. I'm just not sure about the whole concept of "eye for an eye". It's not like it's going to actually fix anything. I believe that the teen deserves some kind of punishment, but 50 years for something unintentional? I'm just not so sure if it's reasonable. 10 years sounds more reasonable. And again, sorry for being rude.[/QUOTE] That's alright man, no offense taken. And yeah like I said, 50 years is dumb, I overreacted I guess, but up to 10 years is in my opinion very reasonable for such a crime.

[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;36259149]It´s still not so strict compared to most European countries. 16 is too young to be driving. Technically 18 is too, the optimal thing would be to wait until 21 or so, when the brain is fully developed and mature. 18 is better than 16 though.[/QUOTE] As the others have said, it would be literally impossible to function as an adult in America like that without an entire rebuilding of our public transportation infrastructure, and the sheer size of the countryside would make that prohibitively expensive and inefficient.

[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;36259149]It´s still not so strict compared to most European countries. 16 is too young to be driving. Technically 18 is too, the optimal thing would be to wait until 21 or so, when the brain is fully developed and mature. 18 is better than 16 though.[/QUOTE] While it would probably bring down teen driver accidents and even reduce traffic, it introduces another problem. Since teens would have no transportation of their own and because of insufficient public transport, they would literally need an adult to go anywhere. I'm sure many parents would be thrilled about taking them to high school and their jobs. And if we waited until 21, an 18 year old would still need to live with his parents to be able go anyplace not within walking distance or practical on bike.