High school students crash near the Pentagon

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extremely sad news is not even the way to begin this. Three students were in an accident near the Pentagon, their BMW hit a Lexus. Two did not survive. I am hearing these are students from a Fairfax county high School. This is beyond tragic.

It sucks. It’s a bummer. But it’s not “tragic.” This doesn’t meet any definition of tragedy

Confirming my longstanding suspicion that some of the worst humans on earth hang out on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extremely sad news is not even the way to begin this. Three students were in an accident near the Pentagon, their BMW hit a Lexus. Two did not survive. I am hearing these are students from a Fairfax county high School. This is beyond tragic.

It sucks. It’s a bummer. But it’s not “tragic.” This doesn’t meet any definition of tragedy

Confirming my longstanding suspicion that some of the worst humans on earth hang out on DCUM.

AGREED

[Anonymous]

The gun analogy really IS perfect. A kid with a BMW has basically been given the automotive equivalent of an AR15. Just as there are many types of guns, with some of them being less-equipped for spree-killers, whereas AR15 type guns are more-equipped for mass-shooters. So it is also with cars. A BMW is much more equipped to be driven irresponsiblly than a minivan or economy car. I’d go so far as to say there’s no justification for ANYONE to own a high performance car such as these, just as there’s no justification for anyone to own an AR15 rather than a standard hunting type rifle that only shoots one bullet. Put simply, just as hunters don’t need AR15 guns, drivers don’t need the equivalent of race cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The gun analogy really IS perfect. A kid with a BMW has basically been given the automotive equivalent of an AR15. Just as there are many types of guns, with some of them being less-equipped for spree-killers, whereas AR15 type guns are more-equipped for mass-shooters. So it is also with cars. A BMW is much more equipped to be driven irresponsiblly than a minivan or economy car. I’d go so far as to say there’s no justification for ANYONE to own a high performance car such as these, just as there’s no justification for anyone to own an AR15 rather than a standard hunting type rifle that only shoots one bullet. Put simply, just as hunters don’t need AR15 guns, drivers don’t need the equivalent of race cars.

No it’s not. A newer bmw will have better safety features.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The gun analogy really IS perfect. A kid with a BMW has basically been given the automotive equivalent of an AR15. Just as there are many types of guns, with some of them being less-equipped for spree-killers, whereas AR15 type guns are more-equipped for mass-shooters. So it is also with cars. A BMW is much more equipped to be driven irresponsiblly than a minivan or economy car. I’d go so far as to say there’s no justification for ANYONE to own a high performance car such as these, just as there’s no justification for anyone to own an AR15 rather than a standard hunting type rifle that only shoots one bullet. Put simply, just as hunters don’t need AR15 guns, drivers don’t need the equivalent of race cars.

No it’s not. A newer bmw will have better safety features.

Does it have a speed governor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extremely sad news is not even the way to begin this. Three students were in an accident near the Pentagon, their BMW hit a Lexus. Two did not survive. I am hearing these are students from a Fairfax county high School. This is beyond tragic.

It sucks. It’s a bummer. But it’s not “tragic.” This doesn’t meet any definition of tragedy

It is tragic.

As a parent of preteens who knew kids who died in car crashes in high school including my best friend's bf, I am very sad for these kids and their families and friends.

No, it's not a tragedy. By definition. There's no one who's noble falling from grace, here. This is not profound human suffering. This is just some idiot teens who thought they were immortal doing stupid stuff. It's commonplace.

It's infuriating. It's sad. It's a royal bummer. It's cliched. It's criminal. It sucks for the affected families. But it is not, by any actual definition, a "tragedy."

100% agree.

And this was preventable. Let’s not lose sight of that either. Blame should be assessed here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The gun analogy really IS perfect. A kid with a BMW has basically been given the automotive equivalent of an AR15. Just as there are many types of guns, with some of them being less-equipped for spree-killers, whereas AR15 type guns are more-equipped for mass-shooters. So it is also with cars. A BMW is much more equipped to be driven irresponsiblly than a minivan or economy car. I’d go so far as to say there’s no justification for ANYONE to own a high performance car such as these, just as there’s no justification for anyone to own an AR15 rather than a standard hunting type rifle that only shoots one bullet. Put simply, just as hunters don’t need AR15 guns, drivers don’t need the equivalent of race cars.

No it’s not. A newer bmw will have better safety features.

How come these safety features didn’t stop this then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t give teens BMWs or similar. This tale keeps getting repeated with tragic results. At least this time they hurt themselves and not innocent teens walking down a sidewalk.

Kids can crash in any car. A BMW would hopefully have more safety features.

It was a BMW that destroyed the family at Pyle a few years ago.

Parents giving high performance vehicles to inexperienced teenagers are profoundly reckless and I hope every single one of them are sued into oblivion for those accidents.

I absolutely agree if the parents were negligent they should be sued but it makes no sense to blame it on “a bmw.” Kids drive way too fast and kill themselves and others in all types of cars. (-a mom who drives an old Camry)

Driving an old Camry isn't great either as it doesn't have all the safety features. You can easily make a wrong move and kill someone.

Well apparently the BMW safety features didn’t prevent it from reaching 100+ mph and then crashing into another car.

So please explain how the BMW was any safer in this situation than a 2003 Camry?


I’ll wait.

Toyotas can go 100mph too. It’s not the car or the privilege. It’s the driver. Lots of idiot teens drive fast. Rich and poor.

Well, I won’t argue with the fact that privilege plays a huge part. I say this an owner of a convertible BMW and a mom of teen who will be driving our SUV, and never my BMW.

I also grew up LMC, driving a car that was, like PP, over 20 years old. It’s laughable that you think it’s easy or fun to get an old Toyota up to these kind of speeds. The car shakes and makes all kinds of noises. It would be embarrassing and pathetic for a teen to do this in front of their friends. But getting a BMW up to peak speeds? Even adults are tempted.

[Anonymous]

I think one of the problems around here is that as soon as teenagers get their license, parents give them free range. My child recently got their drivers license, and they are only allowed to drive to and from school, places that are nearby that they’ve been before, etc.🏫 , and during daylight hours. This will keep up for a few months until they prove that they are ready for more. They also are not allowed to listen to music while they drive right now. All of the stuff is trackable and I make sure that they follow these rules. I think for the first six months parents need to be a lot more strict about what kids are allowed to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems around here is that as soon as teenagers get their license, parents give them free range. My child recently got their drivers license, and they are only allowed to drive to and from school, places that are nearby that they’ve been before, etc.🏫 , and during daylight hours. This will keep up for a few months until they prove that they are ready for more. They also are not allowed to listen to music while they drive right now. All of the stuff is trackable and I make sure that they follow these rules. I think for the first six months parents need to be a lot more strict about what kids are allowed to do.

They should have music on, from the beginning, and learn to drive while other things are happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP is a nasty POS - note how she just HAD to mention the type of car. Disgusting.

Whoa huge overreaction. Are you president of the BMW fan club? Either way your takeaway is bizarre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The gun analogy really IS perfect. A kid with a BMW has basically been given the automotive equivalent of an AR15. Just as there are many types of guns, with some of them being less-equipped for spree-killers, whereas AR15 type guns are more-equipped for mass-shooters. So it is also with cars. A BMW is much more equipped to be driven irresponsiblly than a minivan or economy car. I’d go so far as to say there’s no justification for ANYONE to own a high performance car such as these, just as there’s no justification for anyone to own an AR15 rather than a standard hunting type rifle that only shoots one bullet. Put simply, just as hunters don’t need AR15 guns, drivers don’t need the equivalent of race cars.

No it’s not. A newer bmw will have better safety features.

You can still have all those safety features in a car that doesn’t go 0-60 in 5 seconds or have a top speed of 150.

The speed limit is 70 mph or less. No one needs a car that accelerates like a dragster or can reach 100 mph.

You can still have all these safety features on cars that are slower and can only reach 70-75 mph as a max speed.


No one needs these cars. No one. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems around here is that as soon as teenagers get their license, parents give them free range. My child recently got their drivers license, and they are only allowed to drive to and from school, places that are nearby that they’ve been before, etc.🏫 , and during daylight hours. This will keep up for a few months until they prove that they are ready for more. They also are not allowed to listen to music while they drive right now. All of the stuff is trackable and I make sure that they follow these rules. I think for the first six months parents need to be a lot more strict about what kids are allowed to do.

They should have music on, from the beginning, and learn to drive while other things are happening.

They were allowed to listen to music with me when they were learning how to drive, but for the first few months of their license, there is no music

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think one of the problems around here is that as soon as teenagers get their license, parents give them free range. My child recently got their drivers license, and they are only allowed to drive to and from school, places that are nearby that they’ve been before, etc.🏫 , and during daylight hours. This will keep up for a few months until they prove that they are ready for more. They also are not allowed to listen to music while they drive right now. All of the stuff is trackable and I make sure that they follow these rules. I think for the first six months parents need to be a lot more strict about what kids are allowed to do.

I think it's easier to drive at night. The streets and highways are a lot less congested, not as many clueless through travelers on the highway, can't really see much other than the headlights around you and the street signs so less distractions. Sure late, late at night you start to deal with drunk drivers and fatigued drivers but same deal, more wiggle room when you do come across them.

My daughter I don't worry about as much, she can drive with the radio on, with friends in the car, in traffic, day or night. She can multitask and becomes a better driver with each outing. But now my son, or just about any young teen boy that he associates with... I don't think he should be allowed to drive until he's at least 25, day/night. I wouldn't want to be on the road with him and I wouldn't want to be in a car with him period. I wouldn't tell him that but it's the truth. Him I just impress that when he learns to drive he'll be in charge of a death machine and he should proceed accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure why people always share these tragedy porn stories. So distasteful.

If it bleeds it leads.