Gross Negligence, Incompetence, Stupidity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Per John's request, back on topic.

John, I find your stance on this topic to be somewhat of a double standard. In your original post you suggest zero tolerance for wrong way driving infractions. You support this argument by suggesting that better regulation is required via others (doctors, government)to weed out the offending misfits.
Quote:
those infractions that should result in mandatory license removal no matter what.


Then, when I brought up the subject of the much more prevalent cause of accidents due to drivers in inclement weather conditions you state
Quote:
The law already covers inclement driving conditions and the responsibility of the driver to adjust to those conditions.


Which is it, John? Government control and zero tolerance, or "the reponsibility of the driver".

Your stance reminds me of the double standards our country adopts regarding alchohol and drugs. For the most part, we accept, sponser, and support alchohol and all of it's expense and associated tragedy. But, on the other hand we throw people in jail for smoking marijuana.



Hi doityourself,

Thank you for addressing the original topic.

I never used the term zero tolerance. In my opinion there are infractions that warrant a mandatory loss of the driver's license. In case of a first offense with nobody getting hurt, sending the bad driver to driving school, where he has to prove himself before before allowed back on the road behind the wheel all by himself, seems appropriate. Do you consider this zero tolerance?

The weeding out process is not uncommon. Applicants for many jobs have to submit to a mandatory drug test or to a medical exam. Why should drivers of personal vehicles be excluded from having to prove their physical fitness? What anyone does on public roads affects other traffic participant.

The responsibility to operate a vehicle safely is primarily a personal responsibility, because it comes down the individual's behaviour. When personal responsibility fails it may very possibly affect other people. I would like to think this is why we have licensing processeses and laws in the first place.

Please, offer a solution or solutions other than the status quo, or a modified version of the status quo. The latter is all I am proposing!

Cheers,
-J
 
Is there a significant difference between going the wrong direction on a road and running a red light or stop sign?

Both situations intentionally put a car where it's not supposed to be and drastically increases collisions. In fact, I think it a safe bet that there are a lot more collisions due to running lights than going the wrong the way.

Should these people automatically lose their licenses as well?
 
Reconstructing a wreck where someone was going the wrong way is pretty easy to assign blame. You're also likely to have 3rd party motorists calling 911 and leaving a record of that car going the wrong way on the interstate.

A traffic light violation becomes a case of he-said, she-said where both drivers believe, or think they can convince someone, they had the green. If a license is on the line the truth will be obscured.
 
What about going the wrong way on an inner city street? I've seen that happen many times, by sheer accident.
 
Quote:
I never used the term zero tolerance. In my opinion there are infractions that warrant a mandatory loss of the driver's license. In case of a first offense with nobody getting hurt, sending the bad driver to driving school, where he has to prove himself before before allowed back on the road behind the wheel all by himself, seems appropriate. Do you consider this zero tolerance?


John, you may have never used the term zero tolerance, but you certainly implied it in your original post:

Quote:
Similar to DUI and to mixing up gas and brake, wrong-way driving is one of those infractions that should result in mandatory license removal no matter what. It's just one of those driving errors that in my opinion are inexcusable, even if caused not willingly, but merely out of negligence, incompetence, or plain stupidity.


John, you have turned your argument 180 degrees. Now, you are presenting a more reasonable approach indicating personal responsibility, some tolerance is acceptable, but we need to improve the system. Hard to argue against that and I imagine your new stance would not have riled so many feathers.

I have to admit that I have not done a written test with eye exam in about 12 years to keep my license valid in Michigan.

The solution: raise taxes so we can properly implement new regulations and properly staff the DMV offices.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Is there a significant difference between going the wrong direction on a road and running a red light or stop sign?

Both situations intentionally put a car where it's not supposed to be and drastically increases collisions. In fact, I think it a safe bet that there are a lot more collisions due to running lights than going the wrong the way.

Should these people automatically lose their licenses as well?



Hi Tempest,

Red light and stop light running should generally result in the loss of the driver's license, just like DUI, wrong-way driving, and like driving recklessly. In the case of repeat offenders, the license removal should eventually be permanent.

I am sure there are instances where mitigating circumstances need to be considered. I am not suggesting a totally inflexible and rigid system.

Cheers,
-J
 
Originally Posted By: bigmike
What about going the wrong way on an inner city street? I've seen that happen many times, by sheer accident.


Hi Mike,

As I have just mentioned in my reply to Tempest, mitigating circumstances may exist and need to be considered.

Cheers,
-J
 
Originally Posted By: doitmyself
Quote:
I never used the term zero tolerance. In my opinion there are infractions that warrant a mandatory loss of the driver's license. In case of a first offense with nobody getting hurt, sending the bad driver to driving school, where he has to prove himself before before allowed back on the road behind the wheel all by himself, seems appropriate. Do you consider this zero tolerance?


John, you may have never used the term zero tolerance, but you certainly implied it in your original post:

Quote:
Similar to DUI and to mixing up gas and brake, wrong-way driving is one of those infractions that should result in mandatory license removal no matter what. It's just one of those driving errors that in my opinion are inexcusable, even if caused not willingly, but merely out of negligence, incompetence, or plain stupidity.


John, you have turned your argument 180 degrees. Now, you are presenting a more reasonable approach indicating personal responsibility, some tolerance is acceptable, but we need to improve the system. Hard to argue against that and I imagine your new stance would not have riled so many feathers.


Hi doitmyself,

If you honestly believe that I am now suggesting a more reasonable approach, then it is simply because you erroneously read something into what I posted earlier. That is why I in an earlier post I asked you to reconsider who exactly was having a knee-jerk reaction.

While I find the red highlighted part of your quote an intolerable affront to my eyes, let me point out that nowhere do I suggest that license removal would always be permanent. Mitigating factors I did not mention, but neither did I expressly exclude them.

Reading and comprehension skills do not necessarily go hand in hand. If what I have written was indeed an incomprehensible diatribe, one would expect an outcry of concern. As it stands, only a few people appear to have an issue with my view. The rest are either not interested in the topic, or they are in silent agreement with me.

Cheers,
-J
 
Originally Posted By: John_Corey
Hi doitmyself,

If you honestly believe that I am now suggesting a more reasonable approach, then it is simply because you erroneously read something into what I posted earlier. That is why I in an earlier post I asked you to reconsider who exactly was having a knee-jerk reaction.

While I find the red highlighted part of your quote an intolerable affront to my eyes, let me point out that nowhere do I suggest that license removal would always be permanent. Mitigating factors I did not mention, but neither did I expressly exclude them.

Reading and comprehension skills do not necessarily go hand in hand. If what I have written was indeed an incomprehensible diatribe, one would expect an outcry of concern. As it stands, only a few people appear to have an issue with my view. The rest are either not interested in the topic, or they are in silent agreement with me.

Cheers,
-J

That's a bit narrow-minded.
 
Originally Posted By: John_Corey
... The rest are either not interested in the topic, or they are in silent agreement with me.

Cheers,
-J

It is possible to be in silent agreement with the ones that do not agree with you.
 
This whole thread is absurd. I'm surprised this thread is still open or the OP has not been banned yet. I'm getting my popcorn ready..
35.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: John_Corey
Hi all,

infractions that should result in mandatory license removal no matter what.

Cheers,
-J

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/13/idaho.wreck.family.killed/index.html?hpt=T2


People that can't get a license, or have had it yanked and still want to drive, just do it anyway.

A half day in any municipal court in the country will demonstrate this.

Licensing run arounds with docs that are already overworked and will only be more so under obamacare as a solution is laughable. It would just be more government meddling that will have about the same effect as other government meddling - it will cost a bunch of money, employ govt. drones, tick off the average joe, burden the docs, create a windfall for lawyers that practice administrative law to challenge the denials, and not do a darn thing to solve the problem it is supposed to solve.

You want to get these people off the road, you had best be prepared to deport them on the spot, or lock them up and toss the keys out the window.
 
Originally Posted By: John_Corey
Hi Mike,

And what exactly do you call the habit of reading with the blinders on? Narrow-eyed?

Cheers,
-J

Many people read these forums and do not comment. Who are we to know their minds? For that matter, is neutrality not an option?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom