Family of Braylon Meade says justice was not served in deadly drunk driving incident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

Lots of people do it! He’s a teenager! Most times drunk driving doesn’t result in an accident! People are talking so mean about him!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The drunk driving apologist who seems intent on telling us it’s not unusual for teens to drive almost 3 times the speed limit while under the influence on a residential road in Arlington, and also that there was no reason for the driver to expect it to cause a fatal accident, … do you really believe this? I’m being serious. The level of speed we’re talking about here is the guy flying past you in the passing lane on 95. It’s the speed of a police cruiser in a car chase. Nothing even remotely normal. The concept of drunk driving being fatal is a pervasive message in our society, yet you are telling us this kid was just like, hey, never saw that consequence coming. Who could have guessed? I mean who among us hasn’t gone 90 on a residential road in the middle of the night while drunk and high. We do it all the time and it’s fine. Give me a break.

Correct, I don’t think this kid thought about the consequences.

And, no, his behavior was not “fine”.

He may not have thought about the consequences, but that makes it worse not better. I’m not quibbling about legal standards here. I’m just talking about basic common sense information a 17 year old is equipped with, and basic judgment calls every 17 year old is faced with every day he gets behind a wheel or considers taking a drink. There is nothing normal about what happened, and trying to put it all to rest by framing it under legal intent standards that absolve him of certain legal culpability because he didn’t directly set out to kill another person changes nothing. He made choices that we all know - including him - can cause a fatal accident. The law may draw a line in the sand keeping him out of jail because he didn’t set out to kill, but his reckless indifference to the consequences of his actions have left a deep wound in this community, and it’s unrealistic to expect the community to just shrug off the lack of serious penalty, even if the laws were all properly applied, because it really does not feel like justice was served.

We have become a nation of “feels” over a nation of laws. We are F’ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

Are you an adult? You need to find another way to engage on public policy topics like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

The killing of Braylon was not premeditated. Literally no one except you is using the word premeditated in this discussion.

Deviant behavior is outside the norm or acceptable standards. Even had he not killed anyone, driving 94 mph while drunk is deviant. It’s criminally abnormal. There is no community in which this is just run of the mill teen hijinx.

But lemme guess you’re going to just keep responding with your tag line about premeditation because it’s the only point you have to make.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

He behavior was terrible, but the PP is mischaracterizing it. It wasn’t premeditated.

I think we should have constructive, rational conversation about sentencing and prevention. Not doxxing and misdirecting anger.

Okay, anger police. I’m glad we have you moderating our opinions and reactions.

When your misdirected anger hurts people then maybe it should be moderated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

Lots of people do it! He’s a teenager! Most times drunk driving doesn’t result in an accident! People are talking so mean about him!

We were discussing his intention. Not excusing his behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

Lots of people do it! He’s a teenager! Most times drunk driving doesn’t result in an accident! People are talking so mean about him!

We were discussing his intention. Not excusing his behavior.

Omg his parents have hired some kind of pr goons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

Lots of people do it! He’s a teenager! Most times drunk driving doesn’t result in an accident! People are talking so mean about him!

We were discussing his intention. Not excusing his behavior.

The lawyers on here need to recognize the non-lawyers don’t care about the application of the law. Equal justice under law, no. It’s equal justice by demand!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

Lots of people do it! He’s a teenager! Most times drunk driving doesn’t result in an accident! People are talking so mean about him!

We were discussing his intention. Not excusing his behavior.

Omg his parents have hired some kind of pr goons.

Or there are just some bored lawyers having at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

The killing of Braylon was not premeditated. Literally no one except you is using the word premeditated in this discussion.

Deviant behavior is outside the norm or acceptable standards. Even had he not killed anyone, driving 94 mph while drunk is deviant. It’s criminally abnormal. There is no community in which this is just run of the mill teen hijinx.

But lemme guess you’re going to just keep responding with your tag line about premeditation because it’s the only point you have to make.

Because it wasn’t premeditated or even intentional.

It was not like “shooting a gun into a crowded room”.

It was unacceptable and criminal but not “deviant”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Well plenty of us in the community think the *increase* in the likelihood of killing someone while drunk and speeding at nearly 100 mph is a pretty egregious risk and causes an absolutely unacceptable and foreseeable chance of harm. You must have your personal reasons for trying to justify the driver’s actions because even most posters who agree with the decision to try him as a minor realize that his actions were incredibly reckless with a good chance of someone being hurt/killed. Why you’re bending yourself into a pretzel to deny otherwise is beyond me.

You know what else doesn’t always lead to death … taking drugs. But we know overdose is a predictable outcome. Shooting a gun into a crowd won’t always kill someone. But again, pretty predictable and foreseeable that it would.

When we tell kids not to drink and drive, and/or speed, it is entirely because someone may be making a U turn, or a kid may fall of their bike, or whatever at the intersection ahead of you that you weren’t expecting. Driving requires the ability to stop at a reasonable distance so stop trying to sneak in blame an unexpected U turn.

And I haven’t seen many (or any) posters call it murder. But it’s homicide, which often carries harsher penalties. That is where the public outcry is coming from. Also you claim drinking and speeding is “common” but I would say it’s only common but so is robbery, rape, etc. Normal, good people are not committing any of those acts. Only a certain criminally aberrant demographic of teen engages in the type of drinking/speeding the killer engaged in. He is a deviant outside the social norm for people his age.

I’m not justifying his behavior at all. Just responding to some of the hysterical, over-the-top comments.

My point was the killing wasn’t premeditated or intentional. Another poster keeps insisting that it was intentional and did call it murder. It was nothing like “shooting a gun into a crowd” - don’t be ridiculous.

And “criminally aberrant demographic”? Please. Risky teen behavior is unfortunately common.

How, exactly, is it different? Or tossing rocks onto a highway off an overpass? Or operating drunk?

Who are you arguing with? This is settled law.

It’s not settled law that driving 100 mph drunk “is nothing like shooting a gun into a crowd.” In fact Alec Baldwin was charged with involuntary manslaughter for discharging a gun on the set or rust. Many other negligent shootings are charged similarly. Same as DUI manslaughter.

Recklessly shooting a gun and driving 100 mph while drunk are absolutely similar in that maybe the person didn’t intend to kill, but they intended to do something so utterly stupid that you can’t justify the behavior as something a normal, reasonable person would ever do. Once you cross that line, you are a deviant.

A “deviant”? Are you just trolling now?

If you can’t see the difference between “shooting a gun into a crowd” and a kid drinking & driving fast then we aren’t going to have a rational conversation. Rage on.

It is deviant. And “omg you’re so mad about a teenager being killed by a drunk driver” is not the duck burn you think it is. I am genuinely wondering if you’re the drivers mom or aunt. Regardless of whether sentencing was appropriate his behavior is abhorrent.

The posters trying to justify his behavior as just stupid teen antics are the same people who claim “boys will be boys” when they commit date rape. Full stop, it’s the same line of toxic excuse making that is generally bestowed upon white males from privileged families.

No one is excusing his behavior.

It’s just not premeditated.

People (person?) are definitely excusing his behavior.

No one is excusing his behavior.

Lots of people do it! He’s a teenager! Most times drunk driving doesn’t result in an accident! People are talking so mean about him!

We were discussing his intention. Not excusing his behavior.

The lawyers on here need to recognize the non-lawyers don’t care about the application of the law. Equal justice under law, no. It’s equal justice by demand!

I’m not a lawyer but obviously intentions matter when looking at the “severity” of a crime.

It was not like “shooting a gun into a crowd”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Public outcry often is the first step in changing policy, which I’m sure you know-I’m sorry you don’t like that people find the driver’s action revolting and his behavior to be a moral outrage but they do and will continue to do so no matter how much you normalize it. Even if his sentence is light because he’s a juvenile, the moral judgement will follow him for the rest of life and no amount of shaming his victim’s family will stop it. Hopefully he will try to make a decent life for himself but even if he does, that’s a heavy burden to carry and it should be. Source-I know a guy who is the driver 20 years from now. Neither he nor anybody he meets who finds out (which is essentially everyone he meets) think it’s a “dumb accident.” They think it’s an appalling and catastrophic and that he’s trying to cobble together some type of normal life despite of it with only middling success.

You’ll have to work on your message if you actually want change.

The drinking and speeding was horrible. Terrible, reckless decision. But the kid didn’t intend to kill anyone.

His actions had catastrophic consequences but it wasn’t premeditated or intentional.

I guess some of us disagree then. Because if I got wasted and then got behind the wheel of a vehicle and floored the accelerator through a residential area, you can bet that I knew people would probably die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve said it once already on this thread, but it’s worth repeating. Railing against supporters of the grieving family is a losing battle on a thread like this. No matter how right you are on any legal or philosophical level, you always look bad if you rail against the sympathetic victim. No matter what the legal consequences, I think there’s general consensus that it is the driver who committed the bad act. The victim’s family wouldn’t have to say anything at all if the driver hadn’t killed their son. They are not in this position voluntarily. If the law says the driver’s parents can’t be held liable, that will sort itself out in the courts or in a lawyer’s office. Trying to litigate the issue here just makes the driver and his family look worse, even if they’re not the ones initiating the posts. If you stop defending the driver’s side in your posts, you’ll stop prompting all of the outraged responses and the thread can die.

The kid committed a crime and should face consequences. He’s a minor though and doesn’t fit guidelines to be tried as an adult. It wasn’t intentional, just a reckless dumb accident that he caused. His sentencing isn’t out of the ordinary. If you don’t like it, work to make systemic change.

The family could also sue the parents - they are responsible for their son.

With all due respect, isn’t public outcry the first step towards making systemic change? Also, this is a little closer to murder than just a “dumb accident” in most people’s eyes. Referring to it as a dumb accident is in poor taste. It ignores the intentional acts that led to the predictable horrific outcome. Did the prosecutor view this as just a dumb accident? Maybe that’s why the family is so frustrated.

The “public outcry” is misdirected if the goal really is changing the system.

Drinking and speeding is common and while they do *increase* the risk of an accident (sometimes fatal), that usually doesn’t happen. It wasn’t predictable. And it’s absolutely not “murder”. The driver didn’t intend to kill anyone. A stupid, reckless kid accidentally ran into something. He wasn’t expecting anyone to be making a u-turn in an intersection. Unfortunately, that accident resulted in the death of another kid.

Public outcry often is the first step in changing policy, which I’m sure you know-I’m sorry you don’t like that people find the driver’s action revolting and his behavior to be a moral outrage but they do and will continue to do so no matter how much you normalize it. Even if his sentence is light because he’s a juvenile, the moral judgement will follow him for the rest of life and no amount of shaming his victim’s family will stop it. Hopefully he will try to make a decent life for himself but even if he does, that’s a heavy burden to carry and it should be. Source-I know a guy who is the driver 20 years from now. Neither he nor anybody he meets who finds out (which is essentially everyone he meets) think it’s a “dumb accident.” They think it’s an appalling and catastrophic and that he’s trying to cobble together some type of normal life despite of it with only middling success.

You’ll have to work on your message if you actually want change.

The drinking and speeding was horrible. Terrible, reckless decision. But the kid didn’t intend to kill anyone.

His actions had catastrophic consequences but it wasn’t premeditated or intentional.

I guess some of us disagree then. Because if I got wasted and then got behind the wheel of a vehicle and floored the accelerator through a residential area, you can bet that I knew people would probably die.

Maybe you should run for CA or for Favola’s seat. Many of us are sick of your obsessive hate-mongering.