Teen Driver Intentionally Hits Officer on 270 - October 18

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

[phone]

Would this stop other people? I hope he’s in jail forever at least.

No, I do NOT want this animal to be in jail forever. I do not want tax resources to pay one dollar for this kid who has no respect for anyone else's life. The death penalty is well deserved in this case.
And here is a thought: let's take the hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions over the course of a lifetime) that would be spent keeping this criminal in jail and instead give it to the officer who's life is now forever altered; who did nothing wrong other than their job.
I am so tired of all the resources going to the criminals and nothing being done for the victims.

Completely agree.

It takes more money to kill someone in prison (death penalty) than it does to house them for 10-20 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

[phone]

Would this stop other people? I hope he’s in jail forever at least.

No, I do NOT want this animal to be in jail forever. I do not want tax resources to pay one dollar for this kid who has no respect for anyone else's life. The death penalty is well deserved in this case.
And here is a thought: let's take the hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions over the course of a lifetime) that would be spent keeping this criminal in jail and instead give it to the officer who's life is now forever altered; who did nothing wrong other than their job.
I am so tired of all the resources going to the criminals and nothing being done for the victims.

Ok, I’m probably the biggest death penalty advocate on this board, and I cannot support capital punishment for a non-lethal offense.

Sorry, but the punishment does not fit the crime. If no one died through deliberate malicious intent, then that doesn’t deserve taking a life as punishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hate to say it, but this sounds like a road design issue.

Agree 100%. 270 should have a posted speed limit of 20 mph and have speed tables every 50 yards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

[phone]

Would this stop other people? I hope he’s in jail forever at least.

No, I do NOT want this animal to be in jail forever. I do not want tax resources to pay one dollar for this kid who has no respect for anyone else's life. The death penalty is well deserved in this case.
And here is a thought: let's take the hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions over the course of a lifetime) that would be spent keeping this criminal in jail and instead give it to the officer who's life is now forever altered; who did nothing wrong other than their job.
I am so tired of all the resources going to the criminals and nothing being done for the victims.

Ok, I’m probably the biggest death penalty advocate on this board, and I cannot support capital punishment for a non-lethal offense.

Sorry, but the punishment does not fit the crime. If no one died through deliberate malicious intent, then that doesn’t deserve taking a life as punishment.

So remove his ability to walk to even things out?

Life in jail seems fair for this repeated reckless behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting to me that hitting a police officer with a car is a crime but if some rando did this to me the police would collectively shrug.

Hardly. Hitting you with a car is a crime, too. If a car going 110mph intentionally hit you, it would still be news.

It would probably not be news, unless it killed you, and even then, it wouldn't be big news.

Also, cars don't intentionally hit anyone. Not even self-driving cars do that. The cars' drivers hit people.

I’m sorry, but that is just NOT possible.

If guns shoot people seemingly on their own with no human involvement- as must be the case based on what I read here daily, then cars definitely run over people on their own. It’s the only scenario that withstands that logical precedent.

+10000
Nailed it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

You are sick. Seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

You are sick. Seriously.

Ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you drive 136 mph on a busy public highway (which he was arrested for previously) it should be treated the same from a legal standpoint as indiscriminately firing a gun in public place like a shopping mall. This piece of sh*t should have been in prison a long time ago for his recklessness.

Yes, it should be, but it isn't.

Another question is why it's legal to have cars that you can drive 136 mph. Why aren't cars speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph?

Because it’s rare that anyone actually drives like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

[phone]

Would this stop other people? I hope he’s in jail forever at least.

No, I do NOT want this animal to be in jail forever. I do not want tax resources to pay one dollar for this kid who has no respect for anyone else's life. The death penalty is well deserved in this case.
And here is a thought: let's take the hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions over the course of a lifetime) that would be spent keeping this criminal in jail and instead give it to the officer who's life is now forever altered; who did nothing wrong other than their job.
I am so tired of all the resources going to the criminals and nothing being done for the victims.

Ok, I’m probably the biggest death penalty advocate on this board, and I cannot support capital punishment for a non-lethal offense.

Sorry, but the punishment does not fit the crime. If no one died through deliberate malicious intent, then that doesn’t deserve taking a life as punishment.

+1

These posts are a glimpse into the dark psyche of those around us. consider these people equally as deranged as this stupid criminal. I don’t want to be around people like that in my daily life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you drive 136 mph on a busy public highway (which he was arrested for previously) it should be treated the same from a legal standpoint as indiscriminately firing a gun in public place like a shopping mall. This piece of sh*t should have been in prison a long time ago for his recklessness.

Yes, it should be, but it isn't.

Another question is why it's legal to have cars that you can drive 136 mph. Why aren't cars speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph?

Because it’s rare that anyone actually drives like this.

First of all, it's not at all rare for people to drive at dangerous speeds on 270. There have been several times in just the past week where I was driving on 270 and someone zoomed past me and all the other cars on the road.

Second of all, so what? What would we lose, if cars were speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph? Compare to the police officer, who lost his legs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

You are sick. Seriously.

Ok.

Glad that you approve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you drive 136 mph on a busy public highway (which he was arrested for previously) it should be treated the same from a legal standpoint as indiscriminately firing a gun in public place like a shopping mall. This piece of sh*t should have been in prison a long time ago for his recklessness.

Yes, it should be, but it isn't.

Another question is why it's legal to have cars that you can drive 136 mph. Why aren't cars speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph?

Because it’s rare that anyone actually drives like this.

Pre-2020, it used to be (somewhat) rare. Now, it's normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you drive 136 mph on a busy public highway (which he was arrested for previously) it should be treated the same from a legal standpoint as indiscriminately firing a gun in public place like a shopping mall. This piece of sh*t should have been in prison a long time ago for his recklessness.

Yes, it should be, but it isn't.

Another question is why it's legal to have cars that you can drive 136 mph. Why aren't cars speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph?

Because it’s rare that anyone actually drives like this.

First of all, it's not at all rare for people to drive at dangerous speeds on 270. There have been several times in just the past week where I was driving on 270 and someone zoomed past me and all the other cars on the road.

Second of all, so what? What would we lose, if cars were speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph? Compare to the police officer, who lost his legs.

This idiot is orders of magnitude worse than any of the people driving faster than you would like on 270. Even the most lead footed beltway slalom driver is not well known by police because they try to instigate a pursuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is where the death penalty would come in handy.

[phone]

Would this stop other people? I hope he’s in jail forever at least.

No, I do NOT want this animal to be in jail forever. I do not want tax resources to pay one dollar for this kid who has no respect for anyone else's life. The death penalty is well deserved in this case.
And here is a thought: let's take the hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not millions over the course of a lifetime) that would be spent keeping this criminal in jail and instead give it to the officer who's life is now forever altered; who did nothing wrong other than their job.
I am so tired of all the resources going to the criminals and nothing being done for the victims.

Completely agree.

It takes more money to kill someone in prison (death penalty) than it does to house them for 10-20 years.

Prison isn't that expensive if you remove all the graft. Prisoners work and the prison gets revenue share.
Someone like this could have been incarcerated in a low security environment for a year based on the early infractions before it escalated, worked at a prison job while having access to education and mental health treatment, and exited after getting over this stupid dangerous hobby. Then he could be in probation with supervised restrictions on driving. A limited license for a car with a speed limiter, and criminal penalties for anyone who consented to him driving their car.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you drive 136 mph on a busy public highway (which he was arrested for previously) it should be treated the same from a legal standpoint as indiscriminately firing a gun in public place like a shopping mall. This piece of sh*t should have been in prison a long time ago for his recklessness.

Yes, it should be, but it isn't.

Another question is why it's legal to have cars that you can drive 136 mph. Why aren't cars speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph?

Because it’s rare that anyone actually drives like this.

First of all, it's not at all rare for people to drive at dangerous speeds on 270. There have been several times in just the past week where I was driving on 270 and someone zoomed past me and all the other cars on the road.

Second of all, so what? What would we lose, if cars were speed-limited to a maximum of 80 mph? Compare to the police officer, who lost his legs.

This idiot is orders of magnitude worse than any of the people driving faster than you would like on 270. Even the most lead footed beltway slalom driver is not well known by police because they try to instigate a pursuit.

So if you're wondering why this driver was still on the roads, driving? It's because of attitudes like the PP's towards dangerous driving.